Loading...
EAC Agenda 01/11/2007 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA January 11,2007 9:00 A.M. Commission Boardroom W. Harmon Turner Building (Building "F")—Third Floor I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of December 6, 2006 meeting minutes V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences VI. Land Use Petitions A. Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ 2006-AR-9577 "Della Rosa RPUD" Section 13,Township 48 South, Range 25 East B. Rezone No. RZ-2005-AR-7445 "Copeland Area Rezone" Section 12& 13, Township 52 South, Range 29 East C. Residential Planned Unit Development "Faith Landing RPUD" Section 32,Township 46 South, Range 29 East VII. Old Business VIII. New Business A. Discussion of EAR-based GMP amendments for the Transportation Element B. Presentation about Section 24 by Bill Lorenz C. "Terafina" PUD Extension, PUDEX 2006-AR-9610 at the request of the EAC D. Four-year review of the EAC by the BCC IX Subcommittee Reports X. Council Member Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment ******************************************************************* Council Members: Please notify Summer Arague, Environmental Services Senior Environmental Specialist no later than 5:00 p.m. on January 5, 2007 if you cannot attend this meeting or if you have a conflict and will abstain from voting on a petition (530-6290). General Public: 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 proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. December 6, 2006 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Naples, Florida, December 6, 2006 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: William Hughes Terrence Dolan James Harcourt William Hill (absent) Lee Horn (absent) Judith Hushon Iry Kraut (absent) Nick Penniman Michael Sorrell ALSO PRESENT: Stan Chrzanowski, Planning Review Marjorie Student-Stirling, Assistant County Attorney Barbara Burgeson, Sr. Environmental Specialist 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA December 6, 2006 9:00 A.M. Commission Boardroom W. Harmon Turner Building(Building"F")—Third Floor I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of November 1,2006 Meeting minutes V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences VI. Land Use Petitions A. Rezone No. RZ-2005-AR-7271 (2nd hearing for EAC, no backup material) "Public Facilities Rezone" Section 10,Township 51 South,Range 26 East B. Site Development Plan No.SDP-2005-AR-8865 "Immokalee Regional Airport—Phase I SDP" Sections 34 and 35,Township 46 South, Range 29 East&Sections 2 and 3 Township 46 South, Range 29 East C. Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2005-AR-7820 "Kaicasa RPUD" Sections 12 and 13,Township 47 South Range 29 East VII. Old Business A. Update members on projects VIII. New Business A. Roberts Rules of Order Presentation—Sue Chapin B. Form subcommittee for 2007 LDC cycle C. 4-year review of the EAC by the BCC IX Subcommittee Reports X. Council Member Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment ************************************************************************** ****************************** Council Members: please notify the Environmental Services Department no later than 5:00 p.m. on December 1,2006 if you cannot attend this meeting or if you have a conflict and will abstain from voting on a petition(403-2424). General Public: 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 proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. December 6,2006 Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chairman William Hughes at 9:12 a.m. II. Roll Call A quorum was established with Judith Hushon absent at the time of roll call. III. Approval of Agenda Mr. Penniman moved to approve the agenda. Second by Mr.Dolan. Carries unanimously 5-0. IV. Approval of November 1,2006 Meeting minutes Mr. Penniman moved to approve the November 1, 2006 minutes. Second by Mr. Sorrell. Carries unanimously 5-0. V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences Mr. Penniman will not be able to attend the meeting in January. Barbara Burgeson will check on other possible dates in January to verify a quorum can be present. VI. Land Use Petitions A. Rezone No. RZ-2005-AR-7271 (2"d hearing for EAC, no backup material) "Public Facilities Rezone" Section 10,Township 51 Range 26 East - Presenters were sworn in by the Assistant County Attorney - No disclosures. Dominic Domico,Representing Collier County Utilities gave a presentation including the following points: - The water system project is needed in this location as laid out in the Growth Management Plan. - The goal is to have it on the public record that a public facility will be on this site;which is why they would like to have the rezone at this time. - The project will not be built for another 5-10 years. - He gave a power point presentation(see attachment) demonstrating the site location and the potable water pump station and the ASR project currently located on the site. 2 December 6, 2006 Alicia Abbott, Collier County Public Utilities Engineering addressed Committee questions noting that the site will probably have a membrane plant. The discharge water will not affect the Henderson Creek or any other aquifers in that area. Pam Libby addressed Committee questions that the site is currently fenced around the portion that is in use. Dominic Domico continued his presentation: - The site will be rezoned for essential services only which would limit the site more than it is currently set up for. - Essential services can include- water lines, sewer lines,natural gas lines, telephone lines,communication towers, electrical transmission and distribution lines, substations and emergency power structures, sewage lift stations,water pumping stations,essential service wells and any other well that has been permitted by the Water Management District. Marjorie Student-Stirling,Assistant County Attorney reported that there are two classes of essential services-permitted and conditional. Mr. Penniman moved to recommend approval of Rezone No. RZ-2005- AR-7271, "Public Facilities Rezone", Section 10,Township 51 Range 26 East. Second by Mr. Dolan. Motion carries unanimously 5-0. Mr. Hughes invited the Water Utility Department Management Staff to give a presentation on corrosion control within the distribution grid. B. Site Development Plan No. SDP-2005-AR-8865 "Immokalee Regional Airport—Phase I SDP" Section 34 and 35,Township 46 South,Range 29 East& Sections 2 and 3 Township 46 South,Range 29 East - Presenters were sworn in by the Assistant County Attorney - No disclosures. Theresa Cook, Executive Director with the Collier County Airport Authority introduced presenters. Luke Carrier demonstrated an aerial photograph of Phase I which covers approximately 165.4 acres of the 13,000 acre site. Lena Hoffman, Passarella& Associates demonstrated an aerial photograph of the proposed development. There are 1.15 acres of South Florida Water Management District jurisdictional wetlands and 10.69 acres of other surface waters. Nine gopher tortoise burrows were located; two active, and seven 3 December 6, 2006 inactive. A scrub jay and a little blue heron were observed. An incidental take permit for gopher tortoise was issued by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission in 1999. Only tortoises within the construction area will be relocated to the permanent upland preserve of 145 acres that were placed in a conservation easement to serve as a relocation area. There will also be an additional 3 acres of preserve to meet the needs of the LDC code specifically for this SDP. The County Staff had recommended that a relocation permit is needed on top of the take permit that has already been issued,but the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission will not issue another permit. The scrub jays should move themselves to the preserved lands as the Airport develops. The water flow of the property was reviewed. Mr. Hughes mentioned that he would like to know what the soil chemistry is since the facility had been set up by the military. Public Speakers: Joan Yasharian, Economic Development Council reported that a number of companies have plans to develop in the area and they hope for a positive outcome. Ralph Carter,President of C-Tech Manufacturing Florida,LLC is a company that plans to relocate within Phase I. They are looking to build a 200,000 square foot affordable housing and housing manufacturing plant which should create 200 jobs. Brad Cornell,Collier County Audubon Society asked questions for clarification. Mr. Dolan moved to approve Site Development Plan No. SDP-2005-AR- 8865,"Immokalee Regional Airport—Phase I SDP",Section 34 and 35, Township 46 South,Range 29 East& Sections 2 and 3 Township 46 South, Range 29 East with the staff recommendations excluding the need for a valid relocation permit. Second by Mr. Harcourt. After open discussion Mr. Dolan amended his motion to include the deletion of the storm water management component because they already have the permit. Mr. Harcourt amended his second. Motion carries unanimously 5-0. The meeting recessed at 10:29 a.m. reconvening at 10:45 a.m. C. Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2005-AR-7820 "Kaicasa RPUD" Sections 12 and 13,Township 47 South Range 29 East 4 December 6, 2006 - Presenters were sworn in by the Assistant County Attorney - No disclosures. Laura Spergen, Senior Planner with Johnson Engineering representing Habitat for Humanity gave an overview of the project demonstrating maps. There will be 400 affordable housing units. Twenty-two and one half acres of wet lands are proposed to be preserved. They request that they provide the base flood elevation approval from FEMA by the final development approval and that there be a deviation for only one sidewalk running along the street where there is no housing. Peggy Grant,Ecologist for Johnson Engineering demonstrated and reviewed the wetland site design. There will be mitigation of wetland impacts on and off the site. Panthers have been located in the area. Panther mitigation has already been set up and addressed. Management plans will be included within the SDP. Additional acreage above the required amount of land will be preserved. Chris Haken,Johnson Engineering addressed the water flow. Laura Spergen demonstrated the location where the single sidewalks are proposed for land preservation. Mr. Hughes expressed concerns with warding off animals prior to construction. Public Speakers: Brad Cornell, Collier County Audubon Society pointed out that the majority of Panthers do not have collars. He suggested being proactive with addressing wildlife conflict issues through a living with wildlife education and outreach program. He recommended land mitigation be like lands mitigated for like lands. Stan Chrzanowski mentioned that Collier County is having their FEMA maps reevaluated. The petitioner has requested that their current FEMA elevation be guaranteed. This could cause a problem for them if the base flood elevation is higher; their insurance rates could be very high. Steven Linberger,Environmental Services Department reported that staff has found the petition consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; they recommend approval with the stipulation in the staff report. Stan Chrzanowski reviewed the Basin and Lidar maps. 5 December 6,2006 Mr. Penniman moved to recommend approval of Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2005-AR-7820,"Kaicasa RPUD", Sections 12 and 13, Township 47 South Range 29 East with the conditions as set forth in the staff recommendations with the exception of #2 under Engineering Storm Water Management which is the sidewalk deviation and#5 under Environmental which is also for the sidewalk deviation. Second by Mr. Dolan. Motion carries unanimously 5-0. VII. Old Business A. Update members on projects Terrafino has been continued. VIII. New Business A. Roberts Rules of Order Presentation—Sue Chapin Sue Chapin gave a presentation on Roberts Rules of Order(see attachment). Dr. Hushon joined the meeting at 11:50 a.m. Barbara Burgeson reported that the next Environmental Advisory Committee meeting can be conducted Thursday January 11th from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Staff will contact the Committee to verify the date and time. Dr. Hushon noted that she will not be able to attend the meeting during January. B. Form subcommittee for 2007 LDC cycle Dr. Hushon and Mr. Harcourt volunteered to serve on the subcommittee. The first meeting should occur in early February. C. 4-year review of the EAC by the BCC Barbara Burgeson reported that staff is working on the review. Barbara Burgeson demonstrated the results of the reorganization recommendation(see attachment). Concerns were expressed by the Committee about departments with environmental issues being moved to departments that would not carry staff with environmental knowledge that is necessary to carry out duties properly (specifically the code enforcement movement). 6 December 6, 2006 Mr. Penniman moved to respectfully suggest to the Board of County Commissioners that this board and others be given time to review these recommendations for reorganization and come back with concerns. Second by Mr. Hughes. Motion carries unanimously 6-0. Marjorie Student-Stirling reported that the Environmental Advisory Committee is not purvey to internal reorganization, so discussion and motions should be limited to environmental issues. Dr. Hushon moved to object as a Board to the moving of Code Enforcement out of CDES to the Sheriffs office; Environmental Code Enforcement can not successfully function in that office. Second by Mr. Sorrell. Motion carries unanimously 6-0. IX. Subcommittee Reports None X. Council Member Comments It was requested to address the issue of Terrafina. Ms. Student-Stirling recommended having discussion after it is publicly noticed for the January meeting and the applicant is present. XI. Public Comments None ***** There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chair at 12:37 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Chairman William Hughes 7 Item V.A. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF January 11,2007 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: PUDZ-2006-AR-9577 Petition Name: DELLA ROSA Applicant/Developer: PAGE VI LLC Engineering Consultant: DAVIDSON ENGINEERING Environmental Consultant: BOYLAN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. II. LOCATION: The subject property, consisting of 15.38 acres, is located on the east side of Livingston Road, approximately 2 miles north of Immokalee Road, in Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: ZONING DESCRIPTION N - (A) Agricultural Vacant S - (A) Agricultural Vacant E - (A) Agricultural Vacant W - (A)Agriculture Livingston Road and undeveloped agricultural land. IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The petitioner is Page VI, LLC, represented by Tim Hancock, of Davidson Engineering, Inc., and they are requesting a PUD Rezone for a residential development to be known as the Della Rosa RPUD. The rezoning request is to rezone from 15.38 acres from A (Agriculture) zoning district to the RPUD (Residential Planned Unit Development) zoning district. The RPUD is proposing a density of 7 units an acre, for a ,..1 total maximum of 107 residential dwelling units. The subject property, consisting of 15.38 acres, is located on the east side of Livingston Road, approximately 2 miles EAC Meeting Page 2 of 9 north of Immokalee Rd, in Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: The subject property is designated Urban (Urban - Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict), as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the County's Growth Management Plan (GMP). Relevant to this petition, this Subdistrict permits residential development (variety of unit types) at a base density of (4) four residential units per gross acre and recreation and open space uses. This project is relying on the Residential In-fill provision of the Future Land Use Element for an additional (3) three units per acre to achieve a density of 7 units per acre. Base Density 4 du/a Infill Bonus 3 du/a(one (1) du/a shall be transferred from Sending Lands) Total Eligible Density 7 du/a The Residential In-fill provision states: "To encourage residential in-fill in urban areas of existing development outside of the Coastal High Hazard Area, a maximum of 3 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be added if the following criteria are met:" a. The project is 20 acres or less in size; (The project is 15.38 acres) b. At time of development,the project will be served by central public water and sewer; (Provided for in Section 5.4, C of the PUD.) c. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses; (The site is located in the Urban Residential Subdistrict which is identified as an appropriate location for residential land uses d. The property in question has no common site development plan with adjacent property; (The property has no common site development plan with adjacent property). e. There is no common ownership with any adjacent parcels; (The properties to the north, the east and south are currently undeveloped and Livingston Road lies to the west of the site. According to the Property Appraiser's records there is no common ownership with any of the adjacent properties.) f. The parcel in question was created prior to the adoption of this provision in the Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; (A copy of the Collier County Property Appraiser's card was provided showing the property was in existence prior to 1989.) EAC Meeting Page 3 of 9 g. Of the maximum 3 additional units, one (1) dwelling unit per acre shall be transferred from Sending Lands. 1) The applicant's Evaluation Criteria Narrative provides that the applicant has obtained the rights to purchase TDRs to facilitate the additional requested density. 2) Section III of the PUD provides, approval of this PUD authorizes a base density of 4 units per acre for a total of 62 units. For each TDR that is purchased and transferred to this project, an additional two units may be added for a total of 3 units.) 3) The result is that the approved density "floats" between 62 and 107 units,to be determined later in the development approval process. Similarly, the number of TDR Credits required would be deferred to an unspecified time/process,potentially being deferred to the building permit review stage. This is not acceptable. The administrative process for TDR Credit Redemption is not linked to building permit reviews. The petitioner provided for the specified number of TDR credits in the PUD document(15.). However there was no provision made for the redemption of those TDR Credits at the time of subdivision plan approval (for single family lots) and at site development plan approval (for multi-family development). h. Projects qualifying under this provision may increase the density administratively by a maximum of one dwelling unit per acre by transferring that additional density from Sending Lands. (The project proposes to obtain TDR credits.) ,-� The applicant is encouraged to implement appropriate Policies under Objective 7 of the FLUE that support smart growth, including walk ability and interconnections with adjoining communities. (The applicant proposes no interconnections to any of the adjacent properties. Pursuant to the applicant's response "The adjacent properties to the North and East are un-zoned and un-developed at this time. Additionally, the amount of uplands on this parcel are limited to the North and West portions of the site and as such would require an extensive and lengthy connection to properties to the East and South. Lastly, the property immediately south of the subject property is planned for a Fire Station which does not qualify as an adjoining community." ** Review of the PUD Document and Master Plan: 1. Add TDR Credit Redemption details, as described above (g)to Section III of the PUD. 2. Add the following underlined language to the Statement of Compliance#6: The Urban Residential District allows for a base density of 4 units per gross acre. Additionally, the residential infill provision contained within the Future Land Use Element allows for a maximum of 3 additional residential dwelling units per gross acre subject to additional requirements, including the requirement to acquire TDR credits for the first of the three bonus units per acre. EAC Meeting Page 4 of 9 CONCLUSION Based upon the above analysis, staff cannot determine the proposed rezone is consistent with the FLUE as more information is needed, as noted above; also,the PUD document needs to be revised, as noted above. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: Objective 2.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan states "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards. To accomplish that, policy 2.2.2 states "In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water(discharge)to the estuarine system. This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing interconnected dry detention area(s), lake(s) and a wetland(s) to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation during storm events. The Project as proposed is consistent with the Policies in Objective 6.1 and 6.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, for the following reasons: • Policy 6.1.1 requires a residential development in the non-coastal area equal to or greater than 5 acres and less than 20 acres shall preserve 15% of the onsite native vegetation. The project proposes to preserve the required 15 percent, a total of 2.31 acres. • As required by Policy 6.1.1, the preserve areas will be placed under conservation easements granted to Collier County without responsibility for maintenance. • Uses in the preserves have been defined in the PUD document to be consistent with the passive uses allowed in Policy 6.1.1 without impacting the minimum required native vegetation preservation. • Consistent with Policy 6.1.1, a preserve maintenance plan will be required as part of the SDP/Construction Plan. Preserve areas shall be required to be maintained free of Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. • As required by Policy 6.1.4, prohibited exotic vegetation will be removed from the entire development during construction and will be maintained exotic-free in perpetuity. .-� • Littoral shelf planting areas (LPSA) within wet detention ponds required by Policy 6.1.7 will be required at the time of SDP/Construction plan approval. EAC Meeting Page 5 of 9 • The requirement for an EIS pursuant to Policy 6.1.8 has been satisfied. • In accordance with Policy 6.2.6, required preservation areas are identified on the site plan. Allowable uses within the preserve areas are included in the preserve agreement that is part of the construction plans. Uses within preserve areas shall not include any activity detrimental to drainage, flood control, water conservation, erosion control, or fish and wildlife conservation and preservation. In accordance with Policy 7.1.2, a listed species survey was conducted on the property and no listed species were identified In compliance with Policy 7.1.4, this PUD requires that development comply with applicable federal and state agencies regarding species protection. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Stormwater Management: Section 8.06.03 0.2. of the Collier County Land Development Code states, "The surface water management aspects of any petition that is or will be reviewed and permitted by South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) are exempt from review by the EAC." The Della Rosa project sits near the east side of the "Imperial Drainage Outlet (EDO) Basin." Mediterra and Tuscany are just north of Della Rosa at the north end of the EDO basin. The flow in the basin goes toward the west into a creek/canal that flows west along the south side of Imperial Golf Estates and the north side of Collier's Reserve (Tract 22). The western end of the creek is called Horse Creek on some early maps. The creek empties into the Cocohatchee River which flows into Wiggins Bay and out Wiggins Pass into the Gulf of Mexico. As per Collier County Ordinance 2001-27, the maximum allowable discharge for the site will be limited to 0.15 cfs per acre. According to the EIS,the Water Management system will be a combination of dry pretreatment and lake detention areas sized to SFWMD criteria as per code requirements. Also according to the EIS, it appears as though the wet and dry season water table elevations have not yet been finalized with SFWMD, which is normal for this stage of the review process. The Conceptual Water Management Report assumes a control elevation (WSWT) of 12.0 NGVD. Please remember that the attached LiDAR topography is done to NAVD and that 12.0 NGVD is 10.7 NAVD, so the assumed control elevation(WSWT) looks reasonable. EAC Meeting Page 6 of 9 From the topography, it appears that the flow from this particular area historically continued south to southeast in a sheet flow across other properties. The design for this project will send the flow west through a control structure. Without the control structure to limit the amount of flow, the flow would go into the lake and overflow the lake bank uncontrolled toward the south. Since the wetland appears to have historically received flow from the northwest, this may have some impact on the wetland. It is unavoidable. Environmental: Site Description: The property totals 15.39 acres and includes 3.20 acres of uplands and 12.19 acres of various quality wetlands. The proposed project will impact approximately 9.88 acres of wetlands and preserve approximately 2.31 acres of wetlands. The property is about 79%wetland. The Protected Species Survey indicated no known FWC/FWS listed species inhabiting the site. The listed species which have the highest likelihood of occurring on the property are the listed air plants and the Big Cypress fox squirrel. Runoff from the project will be treated in stormwater lakes prior to discharging into the wetland. The rate of post-development will not exceed the pre- development rate. All water management designs will be reviewed by SFWMD for compliance with their water quality standards. Wetlands: There are 12.19 acres of jurisdictional wetlands on the property. Wetland lines will be verified by the SFWMD during the ERP review process. Please note that a letter was sent by SFWMD on December 6, 2006 requesting the applicant to reduce wetland impacts that are currently proposed. Please refer to the attached letter from the SFWMD to the applicant. In regards to preservation, the requirement to reduce wetland impacts will only increase conservation areas and it is not anticipated this will affect the County preserve requirements. Following are a description of the wetland communities identified on the property. 6259E2 Hydric Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed (25-49% Exotics) This wetland community occupies approximately 2.96 acres and is co-dominated by slash pine and melaleuca. Melaleuca coverage averaged about 50 percent. Brazilian pepper is common. Myrsine, cabbage palm, blue maidencane, and swamp fern are also present in the wetland. EAC Meeting Page 7 of 9 6219E1 Cypress,Disturbed (1-24% Exotics) This wetland community occupies approximately 9.23 acres and is dominated by tall-statured cypress trees with widely scattered red maple and dahoon holly, and melaleuca occurring around the edge. Myrsine and swamp fern are also common in the understory. Brazilian pepper is common with coverage in most areas up to 60 percent. The center of the cypress area was open and contained willow, fire flag, and mikania. Note: these wetland areas have not been verified by SFWMD staff. The SFWMD does not perform jurisdictional determinations unless the request to do so is accompanied by a permit application. Preservation Requirements: The property contains approximately 15.39 acres of native vegetation; 15 % is required to be preserved in order to meet Collier County preserve requirements. This equates to 2.31 acres needed for preserve. The project proposes to preserve 2.31 acres which meets Collier County requirement. Listed Species: No listed species were identified on the property but it is suspected that some of the listed air plants would be present on the property. An additional wading bird survey was conducted on-site. No wading birds were identified on-site. VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Environmental and Engineering Staff recommends approval of PUDZ-2006-AR- 9577 "Della Rosa RPUD" with the following stipulations. However, Comprehensive Planning staff cannot recommend approval at this time until the issues pertaining to the petitioner purchasing the necessary TDR's is resolved. Stormwater Management Stipulation: 1. The project is presently being reviewed for an Environmental Resource Permit by the South Florida Water Management District, which exempts this project from stormwater review by the EAC, so Engineering staff has no recommendations. Environmental Stipulation: 1. The project must obtain an environmental Resource Permit from the South Florida Water Management District prior to issuance of any site plan approvals. EAC Meeting Page 8 of 9 PREPARED BY: !ra , 18 Da. OG STAN CHRZANOWSKI1 '.E. DATE ENGINEERING REVIE MANAGER ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (4/1/Vig alla(P-e A 20 1/06 SUMMER ARAQU DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT dr / 0 MELI A ZONE, Al DA E PRINCIPAL PLA 1 ER DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW EAC Meeting Page 9 of 9 REVIEWED BY: `13tc., — 4f `ISA,Gt./1�at-- 4 l fl- (-)e BARBARA S. BURGESON 4" DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT 4 .;, - ‘ i I 4. (Z.49-0‘ I / LIAM D. LO' NZ, r., P.E. DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR 'ThCell -Th , fir(— LZI 1811°(' Adak . S ceMf- i13 DATE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVED BY: Ai ,,,,iii. s—.."—,—..............e" /41/76 i• EPH K. SCHMI T DA 1 •MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT &ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR Item VI.B. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF JANUARY 11,2007 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: Rezone No. RZ-2005-AR-7445 Petition Name: Copeland Area Rezone Applicant/Developer: Collier County Community Development and Environmental Services Division Planning/Engineering Consultant: Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. Environmental Consultant: Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc. II. LOCATION: The town of Copeland is located adjacent to State Road 29, approximately three miles north of U.S. 41 in Section 12 & 13, Township 52 South, Range 29 East, Collier County,Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Most of the land surrounding Copeland is owned by the State of Florida as part of the Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve. Properties surrounding the area encompassed by the Rezone include the following. ZONING DESCRIPTION N- CON-ACSC/ST Former Quarry S - CON-ACSC/ST Undeveloped E - VR-ACSC/ST Partly Developed R.O.W. Jane's Scenic Drive W - CON-ACSC/ST Undeveloped IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The purpose for this rezoning petition is to bring the northwestern half of the designated Urban Area of Copeland, as identified by the Future Land Use Element EAC Meeting Page 2 of 7 (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) to the Village Residential - Area of Critical State Concern/Special Treatment <4> (VR-ACSC/ST<4>) zoning district. The Copeland area was originally developed as a logging camp by the Collier Company in the 1890's. After the logging activities had terminated a remnant of the residences remained, and through time additional residences were developed in the Copeland area with a number of them being mobile homes. The urban designated area of Copeland, as identified on the Growth Management Plan's Future Land Use Map, has two separate zoning district classifications: Village Residential (VR) and Conservation (CON). The development of the Copeland area is a mix of single-family and mobile home residential units. The existing zoning boundary lined between the two zoning districts subdivide several of the existing lots in the community, creating problems with obtaining building permits and confusion among the County and individual property owners. It should be noted that mobile homes are not a permitted use in the CON Zoning District but are permitted in the VR district. The area that would be rezoned to the VR zoning classification would be limited to a density of four units per acre. The Copeland Civic Association has requested that this discrepancy be abated. At the request of the Board of County Commissioners, the Operations Support and Housing Department submitted this petition which would amend the zoning map to correct this discrepancy, and limit the density to four residential units per acre. The community has also identified additional desired land uses and other unique characteristics, which are not allowed under the current codes. A Land Development Code (LDC) amendment for the Copeland area has been submitted for consideration in the 2006 Cycle 1 LDC Amendments, which would create a new Zoning Overlay that would provide uniformity in land use regulations within the Copeland urban designated area. One of the characteristics of the overlay is the prohibition of multi-family residential structures within the overlay area. The EAC reviewed this Copeland Overlay at their June 14, 2006 regular meeting, and recommended its unanimous approval. The Board of County Commissioners approved the Copeland Overlay on December 7, 2006. The affective date will be at the end of the December. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: The subject property is designated Urban (Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict) as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan and is within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern. Relevant to this petition, the Urban Residential Subdistrict permits residential development (variety of unit types) at a base density of 4 dwelling units/acre. EAC Meeting Page 3 of 7 Review of the Density Rating System deems this project is eligible for a base density of 4 dwelling units/acre and no density bonuses are applicable. Base Density 4 dwelling units/acre Density Bonus 0 Density Reduction 0 Total Eligible Density 4 dwelling units/acre The subject property is within the Area of Critical State Concern Overlay. The Overlay is the same or similar to the ACSC regulations contained in Florida Statutes and in the LDC's (Land Development Code) ACSC-ST Overlay. Certain development restrictions apply, such as a limitation on the amount of site alteration allowed, and all development orders approved within the ACSC are rendered to, and subject to appeal by the Florida Department of Community Affairs. Review for compliance with ACSC standards will occur at time of subsequent development order submittals (plat, SDP, building permit, etc.). FLUE Policy 5.4 provides that all new development must be compatible with the surrounding land uses. Comprehensive Planning leaves the determination of compatibility to Zoning and Land Development Review staff as part of their review of the petition on its totality. Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed uses and density for the subject site can be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: In accordance with Policy 6.1.1 of the Conservation & Coastal Management Element, Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC) standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element shall apply for all development in the ACSC. The proposed Rezone will have no effect on the site alteration criteria/limitations for the ACSC. Pursuant to Policy 6.1.4, prohibited exotic vegetation shall be removed from all new developments. The requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to Policy 6.1.8 has been satisfied. Jurisdictional wetlands have been identified as required by Policy 6.2.2. Pursuant to Policy 6.2.4, the County shall require appropriate agency permits prior to the issuance of a final local development order permitting site improvements. EAC Meeting Page 4 of 7 A wildlife survey for listed species in accordance with Policy 7.1.2 is included in the EIS. Wildlife habitat management plans for listed species are required at the time of Site Development Plan submittal, for development other than single- family residences. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Environmental: Site Description: The town of Copeland was cleared and farmed historically as evident from the 1940 aerial included in the EIS. Several historic aerials are included in the EIS documenting some of the development of Copeland. The town of Copeland is clearly visible by the time the 1953 aerial photograph was taken. The Copeland Zoning Overlay and adjacent surrounding area were mapped according to habitat type (FLUCFCS Codes). Native habitats within the area include: Mixed Wetland Hardwoods (FLUCFCS Code 617), Cypress (FLUCFCS Code 621), Freshwater Marsh (FLUCFCS Code 641), Willow (FLUCFCS Code 618) and Oaks (FLUCFCS Code 427). Altered habitats occur mostly in the area of the Copeland Zoning Overlay and along the major roadways in the area. Large man-made lakes are also present at the north end of town, from the quarry that existed in the area. Preservation Requirements: Site alteration within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern Special Treatment Overlay (ACSC/ST) is limited to ten percent of the total site size, and installation of non-permeable surfaces may not exceed fifty (50) percent of any such area. However, a minimum of 2,500 square feet may be altered on any permitted site (4.02.14.C.1 LDC, GMP-FLUE (V. Overlays and Special Features), Chapter 28-25 F.A.C.). No development is proposed with this Rezone. The Rezone does not exempt land owners from complying with ACSC/ST requirements, including those for site alteration. Wetlands: Jurisdictional wetlands were mapped by the environmental consultant for the project but were not verified by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), since no application for development is associated with this petition. EAC Meeting Page 5 of 7 During review of the EIS, it was found that several of the lots of record within the Rezone and Copeland Zoning Overlay consist entirely or almost entirely of wetlands (see jurisdictional wetland map with lot lines superimposed on it, in the EIS). Elevations for the area are also provided on the LIDAR maps contained in the EIS. County regulations for the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern Special Treatment Overlay (ACSC/ST) prohibit site alteration within jurisdictional wetlands (4.02.14.C.1 LDC, GMP-FLUE (V. Overlays and Special Features)). State regulations within the ACSC/ST prohibit impacts to mangroves and six species of salt marsh grasses (Chapter 28-25 F.A.C.), but not to other jurisdictional wetland vegetation (wetlands). ACSC/ST regulations contained within the LDC and GMP-FLUE do not provide flexibility with regards to this requirement, thus rendering parcels largely or completely covered with jurisdictional wetlands, unbuildable. These lots are unbuildable whether the Rezone is approved or not. Listed Species: The project site is located in the south east portion of the Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, a preserve known to be inhabited by a number of listed plant and animal species. Listed plants identified in the project area occur in Mixed Wetland Hardwoods (FLUCFCS Code 617) and Cypress (FLUCFCS Code 621) environments. These include several species of airplant (Tillandsia spp.), butterfly orchid (Encyclia tampensis, royal palm (Roystonea regia) and royal fern (Osmunda regalis). A list of listed plants known to occur in the Fakahatchee Strand is also included in the EIS. A list of the wildlife seen on-site is included in the EIS for the project. No listed wildlife species was observed during the survey. Florida black bear and Florida panther telemetry data is included in the EIS and both species are known to inhabit the area. VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of Rezone No. RZ-2005-AR-7445 "Copeland Area Rezone". EAC Meeting Page 6 of 7 PREPARED BY: -11d4" WZO4CC1 STEPHEN LENBERGER DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT /0.-/e0/07 MICHAEL DeR Z, CFM DAT PRINCIPAL PL R DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: a, arta J ;13,c tti ,-- /d BARBARA S. BURGESONC7 DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT ,2 -z,.., Wr I IAM D. LOR 4IFZ, Jr, P.E.) DIRECTOR, DATE VIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT EAC Meeting Page 7 of 7 1 .rte -n-Aa /0 - 4 R(2 /c MARJORENT-STIRLING DATE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVED BY: 7.-----‘ / O'EPH K. SC I ITT, AD I ISTRATOR, DATE C G MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT &ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Item VI.C. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF January 11,2007 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2004-AR 6921 Petition Name: Faith Landing RPUD Applicant/Developer: Habitat for Humanity Collier County. Engineering Consultant: RWA, Inc. Environmental Consultant: Passarella and Associates, Inc. II. LOCATION: The project is in Immokalee and is located east of Lake Trafford Pine Estates, approximately 1/8 mile north of Lake Trafford Road, and approximately 1/4 mile south of Westclox Street Extension, in Section 32, Township 46 South, Range 29 East. Collier County,Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: North:Vacant, zoned Agriculture-Mobile Home Overlay(A-MHO) East: Residential, zoned Residential Single-family(RSF-3, RSF-4 and RSF-6) South:Residential, zoned Residential Single-family(RSF-4) West: Residential, zoned Village Residential and A-MHO IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Faith Landing RPUD is being developed by Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc and all the dwelling units will be sold as affordable housing which will consist of single-family and two-family dwelling units. A maximum of 175 residential dwelling units at a density of 4.98 dwelling units per acre shall be constructed and the gross project area is approximately 35.11 acres. The entire project is intended to be platted and sold fee simple for each unit. The dwelling unit's will be served with potable water, sanitary sewer, and electric power and telephone lines. EAC Meeting Page 2 of 10 The petitioner wishes to Rezone the 35.11 acres subject property from RSF-4 district to RPUD to allow a maximum of 175 housing units. As part of the rezoning action, the petitioner is also seeking approval of an Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement authorizing an Affordable Housing Density Bonus, at a gross density of 4.98 dwelling units per acre. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: The subject property is within the Immokalee Urban area, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The northern portion of the subject property(21.9 acres) is designated High Residential District on the Immokalee Future Land Use Map. The High Residential District reads, in its entirety: "The purpose of this designation is to provide for a district of high-density residential development. Residential dwellings shall be limited to multifamily structures and less intensive units such as single-family and duplexes provided they are compatible with the district. Mobile home developments shall be permitted only in the form of mobile home subdivisions or parks as defined in the Land Development Code. A density less than or equal to eight (8) dwelling units per gross acre is permitted." The southern portion of the subject property (13.2 acres) is designated Low Residential District on the Immokalee Future Land Use Map. The Low Residential District reads, in its entirety: "The purpose of this designation is to provide for a low density residential district. Residential dwellings shall be limited to single-family structures and duplexes. Multifamily dwellings shall be permitted provided they are within a Planned Unit Development. Mobile home developments shall be permitted in the form of mobile home subdivisions or parks and as a mobile home overlay as defined by the Land Development Code. A density less than or equal to four (4) dwelling units per gross acre is permitted." The proposed RPUD provides for single-family structures and duplexes, which are specifically identified in the Districts above. Under the Affordable Housing Density Bonus provision in the Immokalee Area Master Plan, both of the aforementioned districts would be eligible for an additional eight (8) dwelling units per gross acre above the maximum density of the district, up to a maximum density of 16 units per acre. When added to the respective base densities, the following densities would be allowed: EAC Meeting Page 3 of 10 High Residential District(21.9 acres) Base Density 8 du/a Petitioner is requesting 3.83 du/a,which is well below the density cap of 8 du/a. Low Residential District(13.2 acres) Base Density 4 du/a Affordable Housing Density Bonus up to + 8 du/a Total Maximum Density 12 du/a Petitioner is requesting 6.89 du/a based on a base of 4 du/a and affordable housing density bonus of 2.89 du/a as reflected in the companion AHDB Agreement. Future Land Use Element: In order to promote smart growth policies, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects,where applicable. Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. (As depicted on the Master Plan, the project does not abut an arterial road, but the project roads connect with local roads that connect to Lake Trafford Road,which is a Collector Road.) Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. (As depicted on the Master Plan, the project provides internal accesses and loop roads within the development.) Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection point with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. (As depicted on the Master Plan, the project provides connections to adjacent developments.) Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. (As depicted on the Master Plan, the project provides sidewalks, lakes and open space areas as well as affordable housing and is within walking distance to the Neighborhood Center located at the intersection of Lake Trafford Road and S.R 29.) CONCLUSION: Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed uses and density for the subject site can be deemed consistent with the Immokalee Area Master Plan and the Future Land Use Element. EAC Meeting Page 4 of 10 Conservation & Coastal Management Element: Objective 2.2. of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan states: "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards." To accomplish that, policy 2.2.2 states "In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge)to the estuarine system." This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing lakes and interconnected wetlands to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation during storm events. This project is consistent with Policy 6.1.1 regarding the selection of preserves. A minimum of 7.87 acres of native vegetation must be preserved to meet the minimum requirement of 25% on site. The site plan provides 8.42 acres in two preserves. Preserve location is also consistent in that the majority of the xeric oak community that is both gopher tortoise and scrub jay habitat is being preserved. This area is adjacent to an offsite scrub jay preserve owned and managed by the County and consistent by ranking and allows for off site connection. The wetland preserve in the north connects offsite to wetlands on undeveloped lands. This area also ranks high and provides foraging habitat for woodstorks and other wading birds. As required by Policy 6.1.4, prohibited exotic vegetation will be removed from the site and maintained in perpetuity. Policy 6.17 requires littoral plantings within wet detention ponds. All lakes in this PUD will be required to comply with the GMP CCME and LDC requirements at the time of the next development order. The EIS required by Policy 6.1.8 has been prepared and is supplied as part of the review packet for this submittal. Jurisdictional wetland lines have been approved and provided on site plans as required by Policy 6.2.1 and 6.2.2. EAC Meeting Page 5 of 10 The high quality wetland connecting Camp Keais/Lake Trafford system referred to in Policy 6.2.4 (4) is shown on the Immokalee Area Future Land Use Map in the GMP. This project is not within that system. As required by Policy 6.2.6, preservation areas are depicted on the RPUD master plan and shall be either platted or protected by a separately recorded conservation easement at the time of the next development order. As required by Policy 7.1.2, a listed species survey was conducted on the property and is contained in the EIS. Habitat management plans are provided and will be implemented as part of the next development order Consistent with Policy 11.1.2, correspondence was sent to the Florida Department of the State Division of Historical Resources (DHR) regarding possible archaeological or historical sites within the Project area. In a letter dated January 13, 2005, the DHR stated that no cultural resources are known to exist in the project boundary and that no cultural resources should be affected by the construction. If, during the course of site clearing, excavation, or other constructional activities, an archaeological or historical site, artifact, or other indicator is discovered, development activities at that specific archaeological site shall be immediately stopped and the appropriate agency notified. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Site Description: Native vegetation communities on site include pine flatwoods, xeric oak, hydric wax myrtle/willow and wetland shrub. The wetland in the northern portion of the property extends off site to undeveloped agricultural zoned land. The large pine flatwood area in the center is largely intact except for some perimeter invasion of exotic vegetation, especially Brazilian pepper. There are numerous trails existing through the flatwoods and into the scrub area in the south. The scrub area is immediately adjacent to a County owned scrub jay preserve to the west and scrub that is undeveloped to the south. Of the 35.11 acres of the project site, 31.48 acres qualify as native according to the definition in the GMP and LDC and has been verified by staff on site. The EIS underestimates the amount of native vegetation existing on site. Staff requested the changes during the review process, however no changes have been made to the EIS information. The PUD document contains the correct required acreage. EAC Meeting Page 6 of 10 Ii Stormwater Management: Section 8.06.03 0.2. of the Collier County Land Development Code states "The surface water management aspects of any petition, that is or will be reviewed and permitted by South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), are exempt from review by the EAC." The Faith Landing project sits near the northwest corner of the "Urban Immokalee Basin", which shows on the Collier County Drainage Atlas as being at the northwest end of the Barron River Canal basin. The BRC appears to start a few miles north Immokalee and flows south for about 40 miles mostly along the east side of SR-29 toward Everglades City. The flow in the basin goes past some farmworker housing and some groves and farms just south of Immokalee, and down the Okaloacoochee Slough, under CR 858 (Oilwell Road), past the Sunniland quarries, through the East Hinson Marsh under I-75 and through a succession of prairies, past the Deep Lake area just west of Bear Island, under Route 41, and it empties into the Barron River and the 10,000 Islands near the Everglades City, Plantation, Chokoloskee area. A good map of the area (USGS) can be found on www.topozone.com. From the topography, it appears that the drainage atlas may not be entirely correct and that some or all of the offsite flow might go toward the northwest toward Lake Trafford and then south down Camp Keais Strand through the Fakahatchee Strand Basin along the west side of SR 29 and then down to the Ten Thousand Islands just west of Everglades City. It is also possible that the flow finds its way down both basins through the path of least resistance depending on local rainfall. As per Collier County Ordinance 2001-27, the maximum allowable discharge for the site will be limited to 0.15 cfs per acre. According to the EIS, the Water Management system will be a combination of dry pretreatment and lake detention area sized to SFWMD criteria as per code requirements which discharge into existing jurisdictional wetlands north of the project.. The Conceptual Water Management Report doesn't address wet or dry season water table elevation. Please remember that the attached LiDAR topography is done to NAVD and that 30.0 NGVD is 28.7 NAVD. From the topography, it appears that the flow from this particular area historically continued north to northwest in a sheetflow across other properties. The design for this project will send the flow north through a control structure. The wetland appears to have historically received flow from the upland. EAC Meeting Page 7 of 10 Preservation Requirements: Faith Landing RPUD contains 31.48 acres of native vegetation on site. The GMP and LDC require a minimum of 25%, or 7.87 acres, of this vegetation be preserved. The PUD document and master plan provide 8.42 acres of preserve and satisfy this requirement. Selection of preservation areas is consistent with the GMP and LDC requirements in that xeric scrub utilized by listed species and high quality wetlands are retained on site. The scrub preserve connects with an adjacent off-site preserve and both preserves offer potential for connection as adjacent parcels are developed. Listed Species: Gopher tortoise burrows have been observed in the southern portion of the property and wading birds observed foraging in the wetland to be preserved. Surveys for scrub jay, Big Cypress fox squirrel and red cockaded woodpecker have been performed. No evidence of these species was observed during the surveys. Management plans are provided as part of the EIS (exhibit E) and will be updated as needed and be included as part of the construction plan approval process. Wetlands: SFWMD staff approved the jurisdictional wetland lines during a site visit on January 23, 2004. Approximately 6.31 acres of jurisdictional wetlands exist on site. The master site plan results in approximately 1.43 acres of wetland impact. The impacted wetlands are limited to mostly lower quality wetlands. The higher quality portion of the northern wetland will be preserved and protected by a conservation easement dedicated to Collier County. EAC Meeting Page 8 of 10 VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2004-AR 6921,Faith Landing RPUD with the following conditions: Stormwater Management: 1. As with all projects containing wetlands, this project is required to obtain a permit from the South Florida Water Management District. Environmental: 1. Compensation for loss of suitable Florida panther within the Florida panther consultation area through preservation and restoration of appropriate offsite habitat will be required to be addressed prior to SDP/PPL final approval. 2. An updated gopher tortoise survey must be provided prior to SDP approval. The relocation permit shall be required at the pre-construction meeting. EAC Meeting Page 9 of 10 PREPARED BY: //, , STAN C WANT , �.E. DATE ENGINEERING REVIE ANAGER ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT _Aid1 I Z K=Uc, d SAN i'ASON DATE PRIN i'AL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST IRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT f ire -" M ISSA ZONE. DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW EAC Meeting Page 10 of 10 REVIEWED BY: /36744/ u' f `4 C yZ —l- Oi BARBARA S. BURGESON DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ♦ 0 , ` /Z--i9 6 Y LIAM D. LORENZ, Jr., P.E. DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR t cIA-1-1-- kr t 'l MARJ• I STUD NT—STIRLING UUJ DATE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVED BY: /l * J1OS r PH K. SCHMITT E ► MUNITY DEVELOPMENT &ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 0111 INISTRATOR wil E II=11111111- ;2 I leek 006 006 6 066 0 s r O i , r ,.-,.,.._.... 301 .. 7:Millimil ti' 1. � !■ ❑ Ur:" . ❑ MISNIHNJ_ ,1:11—� 11 lit- 11111 ftIII�� Lif.'7:'- '�1 Ng me a.�� _ _-4 ,,, mh, `:i.'-far le 7 IQ =n„. ! min ,i ®�1Iv � d i� OE II / il ills se I !IN m s � 1 r -1 ��� ili���� imp' v �` r'll Fr in mill ni s — �. ; : Flu"l'api.!, ! r�a���i i -�. M. '� ` iemn ,...,,,,.-,*_.,..c. ,__Tir,„.,, �` _ 1 4 \ Ammi— - - - , ILI-DEMI .. e: L Hlg— ]T r a' Cl4y y0-J:1YNI'3Nt/l - I:. , #: [41 Ii , .,.......;Alia I-1_1r in ,---...„ _ s -1 ell- ` .. Jy WI..j43. -4114111111 - .. 1 1 i cn R. Z H 4 it .mom.. ., 1: I y I MI I MEMORANDUM From Collier County Transportation Services Division Nick Casalanguida,Planning Manager Subject: Proposed amendments to the Transportation Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Comments: Attached is a copy of the proposed amendments to the Transportation Element of GMP;Add new Policies 3.5;3.6;3.7 and 3.8 under Objective#3. Existing: E. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL 1: TO PLAN FOR, DEVELOP AND OPERATE A SAFE, EFFICIENT, AND COST EFFECTIVE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THAT PROVIDES FOR BOTH THE MOTORIZED AND NON-MOTORIZED MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE AND GOODS THROUGHOUT COLLIER COUNTY. OBJECTIVE 3: The County shall provide for the protection and acquisition of existing and future right-of-ways. Policy 3.1: The County has implemented an advanced Right-of-Way Preservation and Acquisition Program. (III) Policy 3.2: The County includes in its annual Capital Improvement Element funding specifically earmarked for use in an advanced Right-of-Way Acquisition Program. Studies shall be conducted periodically to identify the long range right-of way needs of the transportation system based on buildout. Following their, completion, the Transportation Administrator will present a program of funding in actions to protect and acquire needed right-of-way. (11)(111) Policy 3.3: The County shall acquire sufficient amount of right-of-way to facilitate no less than a cross section of(6)traffic lanes, appropriate turn lanes, medians, bicycle and pedestrian features, drainage canals, and shoulder sufficient for pull offs and landscaping areas. Exceptions to the right-of-way standard may be considered when it can be demonstrated, through a traffic capacity analysis, that the maximum number of lanes at build-out will be less than the standard. (Ill)=Plan Amendment by Ordinance No.2002-60 on November 19,2002 (111) Policy 3.4: Collier County shall acquire rights-of-way for transportation improvements in fee simple, unless otherwise determined appropriate by the BCC based upon recommendation of the Transportation Administrator. Proposed: Policy 3.5: Within one year of the effective date of these amendments,Collier County shall prepare a Thoroughfare Corridor Protection Plan(TCPP) through the adoption and implementation of Transportation Corridor Preservation Maps (TCPMs), Corridor Preservation Tables (CPTs), Critical Intersection Tables (CITs) and Ordinance(s). The maps and tables shall be the culmination of significant efforts in order to satisfy the County's goal in which to provide for the protection and acquisition of existing and future corridors while minimizing the impact to the individual land owners. Adoption of the maps, tables and ordinance(s) provides the legal basis for initiating the TCPP and enhances the ability of the County to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the community, as well as to assist in meeting established community goals and preserving the quality of life of Collier County. Policy 3.6 Within one year of the effective date of these amendments, Collier County shall prepare, development regulations, consistent with Chapter 163.3202, Florida Statutes, that identifies the corridors necessary to develop the roadway network shown on the locally adopted Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), including the adoption of TCPMs, CPTs, CITs and Ordinance(s)to limit the uses of land within the required corridors prior to the development of land within the corridors shown on the maps and identified in the tables. The TCPP shall allow for certain uses of such property that do not conflict with the plan prior to the construction of the facilities. The maps and tables shall be updated annually or as needed. New or expanded facilities that must be protected may be approved by the Board of County Commissioners at any time provided that the comprehensive corridor study or traffic analysis has been completed.This thoroughfare protection is required to ensure compliance with the long-range plan and maintain the adopted level of service standards. Any corridors protected under the plan may be dedicated to Collier County and shall not be subject to time limits. The corridors necessary to provide a viable community transportation network shall be protected. The protected thoroughfare shall include: 1) required corridors on either side of the centerline of an existing or planned roadway. 2) required corridors for roadway or alternative transportation networks for which no centerline has been established. 3) corridors for future roadways or alternative transportation networks which have been identified through corridor studies. 4) protected areas at critical intersections including but not limited to proposed grade separated intersections. Policy 3.7 Within one year of the effective date of these amendments, Collier County shall adopt a Thoroughfare Corridor Protection Plan Ordinance implementing corridor management techniques using the most efficient and cost effective means that allow for the development of land within or adjacent to the identified transportation corridors as depicted on the TCPMs and described on the CPTs and CITs. The ordinance shall allow the property owners within or adjacent to such corridors the ability to use the land for a limited range of interim uses that will not hinder the future development of the transportation network. The ordinance shall provide for waivers,pre- existing non-conforming status and/or variances to existing structures that may be adversely impacted by the future corridor preservation area. In the case where an existing or proposed development is willing to dedicate by donation or in exchange for , at the county's discretion, roadway impact fee credits, or convey at fair market value land identified by the preservation plan, the ordinance shall provide a means to modify or reduce the requirements for setbacks, open space, buffering, native vegetation retentions preserves or any other requirements of the Growth Management Plan or Land Development Code. Any corridors protected under the plan may be dedicated to Collier County and shall not be subject to time limits. Any modifications or reductions that conflict with any other requirements of the Growth Management Plan must be brought to the Board of County Commissioners for interpretation and approval. Policy 3.8 In the event of any form of right-of-way acquisition or reservation for all necessary purposes included for the construction of transportation facilities by any federal, state, or local transportation department, authority, or agency, the requirements for buffering, native vegetation retention, preserve, setback and open space or any other requirements set forth in the Growth Management Plan or Land Development Code for any sub district or as otherwise required by the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, Future Land Use Element, Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element, or Immokalee Area Master Plan Element of the Growth Management Plan that would be affected by such right-of- wav acquisition or reservation may be modified, reduced or eliminated: Any modifications or reductions that conflict with any other requirements of the Growth Management Plan must be brought to the Board of County Commissioners for interpretation and approval. Preserve areas reduced or eliminated by the acquisition of right-of-way shall be compensated for equally within twelve months of the acquisition of the existing or proposed preserve, consistent with Conservation and Coastal Management Element 6.1.1(9).