Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
EAC Agenda 08/01/2007
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA Wednesday, August 1, 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 July 11, 2007 meeting minutes (minutes not available at present time, will be available prior to August 1st meeting) V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences VI. Land Use Petitions A. Planned Unit Development PUDZ-2005-AR-8416 "Pezzetino Di Cielo RPUD" Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East VII. Old Business A. Update members on projects B. Update members on upcoming presentation scheduled C. Staff time assigned to the EAC D. Mission Statement VIII. New Business A. FFWCC New Proactive Approach towards Wildlife Conservation within Land Use Planning and Development Activities—Joe Walsh with FFWCC IX Subcommittee Reports X. Council Member Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment ******************************************************************* Council Members: Please notify Summer Araque, Environmental Services Senior Environmental Specialist no later than 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, July 26, 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. July 11, 2007 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Naples, Florida, July 11, 2007 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 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: William Hughes Lee Horn Dr. Judith Hushon Roger Jacobsen Nick Penniman Michael V. Sorrell Dr. Llewllyn Williams Richard Miller William W. Hill ALSO PRESENT: Jeff Wright, Assistant County Attorney Susan Mason, Principal Environmental Specialist Summer Araque, Senior Environmental Specialist Robert Wiley, Principal Project Manager, Engineering Services 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA Wednesday - July 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 June 6,2007 meeting minutes V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences VI. Land Use Petitions A. Conditional Use CU-2004-AR-6904 "S.R.846 Land Trust" Sections 35&36,Township 47 South, Range 27 East Sections 1 &2,Township 48 South, Range 27 East B. Planned Unit Development Amendment No.PUDZ-A-2006-AR-9374 "Naples Reserve RPUD" Section 1,Township 51S, Range 26E C. Site Development Plan SDP-2006-AR-10397 ,..-•\ "Germain Automotive Dealership Inventory Storage Lot" Section 16,Township 48 South,Range 25 East VII. Old Business A. Update members on projects Item VIII.A. (below)to be heard no later than 9:30 a.m. and before Land Use Petitions, unless otherwise noted. VIII. New Business A. Presentation about Team OCEAN—Jennifer Rogers of Marine Resource Conservation Partnership B. Update members on upcoming presentation scheduled IX Subcommittee Reports X. Council Member Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment Council Members: Please notify Summer Araaue. Environmental Services Senior Environmental Specialist no later than 5:00p.m. on July 6, 2007 if you cannot attend this meeting or if you have a conflict and will abstain from votinc 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. , July 11, 2007 I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chairman William Hughes at 9:00 AM. II. Roll Call A quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda Add under New Business,VIII C, a discussion relating to an addition to the Land Development Code on an emergency basis. Mr. Hill moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Seconded by Mr. Penniman. Carried unanimously 9-0. IV. Approval of June 6, 2007 meeting minutes. Page 4 "question" should read "questioned." Page 8, "Dr. Judith" should read "Dr. Judith Hushon." Mr. Jacobsen moved to approve the Minutes of June 6, 2007 as amended. Seconded by Mr. HilL Carried unanimously 9-0. V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences Mr. Hill stated due to his family situation it had been necessary for him to miss ,..� two meetings, his ability to attend council meetings regularly may be influenced in the future and he may submit his resignation. Mr. Hill expressed his gratitude for the service and cooperation of staff and thanked the Council. Chairman Hughes stated working with Mr. Hill has been an honor and recommended the door be left open for his return to service on the Council. VIII. A. Presentation about Team OCEAN-Jennifer Rogers of Marine Resource Conservation Partnership Ms. Rogers gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding how the Marine Resource Conservation Partnership came into being and how to join the partnership. (See attached) • Programs were being developed to address the impact of the large increase in boaters • Memorandum of Understanding had been signed by Florida Fish& Wildlife Conservation Commission and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection with a mutual goal of effectively managing marine resources in Florida Discussion: • There should be funding sufficient to support programs without user fees • Private foundation funding was welcome 2 A. July 11, 2007 • Environmental Council could allow participation by such entities as Parks &Recreation and Coastal Zone Management • Input was welcome from all stakeholders • Would be helpful if Collier County formally supported the program • Everglades Park system changes/closures would be more closely examined regarding the impact on boaters in Collier County • Size of boats should be limited in shallow waters • Focus of the program was on education • City of Naples was not signed on yet but was active Mr. Penniman moved that the EAC recommend to the BCC their consideration of full partnership within the MRCP program. Seconded by Mr. Miller. Discussion: • Recreational and commercial fishermen should be involved • Collier County should offer some staff time • EAC was a venue for the public to address its government and the concept of the program should be supported Motion carried unanimously 9-0. VI. Land Use Petitions A. Conditional Use CU-2004-AR-6904, "S.R. 846 Land Trust," Sections 35 & 36,Township 47 South, Range 27 East, Sections 1 & 2,Township 48 South, Range 27 East Presenters were sworn in by Assistant County Attorney Jeff Wright. Ms. Mason stated an error on the Staff Report was corrected as follows: Applicant/Developer was changed to read "Mining Ventures, LLC" and the Engineering Consultant was changed to read "Wilson Miller, Inc." Bruce Tyson of Wilson Miller gave a PowerPoint presentation on the conditional use application. (See attached Staff Report) • Concept was to expand the existing mining activities at the Jones Mine on Immokalee Road north of Orange Tree Road • Current access point will stay in the same location during the expansion • In 1999 conditional use was approved for the mining project • In 2006 the BCC modified the conditional use to allow blasting, deeper excavation and processing of the rock on-site for the boundaries of the existing mine site in the Phase I area • Phase II area would function exactly the same as the Phase I area • Phase II area had been cleared or disturbed in the past Andy Woodruff, Senior Ecologist,Passarella and Associates, Inc.,continued the PowerPoint presentation. 3 July 11, 2007 • Dominant habitat on the Phase II site included pasture and sod farming, mining, wetlands including cypress, freshwater marsh and prairie • Proposed expansion for new mining limits were primarily located in areas that were previously disturbed • 192 acres of wetland habitat had been identified on the property • No wetland habitats were located within the new proposed expansion area • Listed species surveys were conducted on the property in September and October of 2004 and six listed species were found to be utilizing the property including the American Alligator, Gopher Tortoise, Snowy Egret,Noble Heron, and the White Ibis. None of the listed species were found to be utilizing the proposed expansion area for the mines • No Red Cockaded Woodpeckers were found utilizing the project site • Burrowing owl burrows were found on the east side of the existing mine operation • Burrowing Owls have not decreased in numbers since the commencement of mining activities • Canals provide barriers to block gopher tortoise migration; a tortoise fence was suggested • Each Gopher Tortoise had two acres each of habitat provided • Project was located in an area identified as providing potential habitat for the Florida Panther, and the U.S. Fish&Wildlife Service will help in determining mitigation needs • Project plan provided 15%preservation of existing native habitat on the property with 138 acres being set aside for conservation • Management plan had been prepared to address the long-term preservation of habitats • Blasting had potential to adversely affect the eggs of burrowing owls; the effects of blasting on eggs of burrowing owls was undetermined • 200 foot setback was being provided between the mining and the wetland limits; any wetland buffer area that did not meet the minimum 25 feet of native vegetation would be replanted as part of the excavation permit • Close-out of mining would occur up to a maximum of 15 years • Land development opportunities were among future use considerations • Mining activities could drain the wetlands, making it more open to future development Gail Murray-Doyle, Professional Geologist, President and Owner of Murray Consultants, Inc., explained as follows: • Planning has been done to avoid breaching the aquifer, excavating depth would be limited in confining layer 4 July 11, 2007 • Water from the mining operations would go into a recharge ditch and would act as a hydraulic buffer to draw-downs • Draw-down in the mine was permitted 40 feet below land surface; that depth had never been reached, depth of 10 to 12 feet had been reached • Monitoring programs for levels in wetlands were in place • Backhoes would not be used, draglines would be used and should not go further than 10 to 12 feet • Process on paper appeared to be dry, there was potential to go to dragline,wet mining process Discussion: • Littoral shelf of 15 to 25 feet was recommended to provide habitat for fish and birds • Littoral shelf would help maintain water quality of lake, shoreline and was an element of good lake design • Current plans have been submitted and have been recommended for approval • EAC's position was to review anything impacting environmental resources in Collier County Don Barber, Manager of Mining Venture,LLC,discussed Applicant's plans as follows: • Mr. Barber is a principal of BCB Planning Company and Boran, Craig, Barber, Engel Construction Company and has been in the community for 40 years • There were 10 feet of pure white silica perc sand and fill dirt that had already been mined from the site during Phase I • Site had been excavated down to 10 feet below the surface, ground level in the area was about 20 feet above sea level, 10 feet was around the natural ground water table • Some de-watering had been done to dry up an area only about one to two feet below the rock shelf where the equipment was working; no area had ever been pumped below a working level of the equipment which consisted of a big backhoe • Draglines were being used to get material out,working on upper rock shelf area where there is no need to dry it up • It would be difficult to dry up a hole • Natural berm had been created that muffles noise • Petitioner agreed to assist in putting some littoral shelves in • Phase III would probably involve a land use plan,possibly low density housing with water features Discussion: • It would be possible to destroy the ecology of a wetland in 30 days /-•\ 5 July 11, 2007 .--. • If wetlands were destroyed during the mining operations,permits for development would be much easier to acquire • Blasting would adversely affect the eggs of the burrowing owls Jeffrey Straw,Vice-President and Area Manager of Geosonics, Seismologist, Vibrations and Acoustic Consultant discussed blasting at the mine site. • Every blast was monitored to determine vibration levels and noise levels • No adverse effects on the eggs of the Burrowing Owls had been detected,probability of future adverse effects were considered limited • Blasting could be scheduled around the nesting season Discussion: • Nesting season for Burrowing Owls lasts five months out of the year • There were approximately ten complaints regarding blasting during the past year • County must be advised if blasting noise exceeds limit;penalties could be incurred beginning with a Notice of Violation all the way up to lose of permit • Existing lakes would protect Burrowing Owls from noise and vibration generated by Phase II blasting • Sonic imaging was not done Susan Mason,Environmental Services, stated the main concern regarding blasting was with large mammals such as bears and panthers. EAC would hear application for excavation permit and more information and stipulations would be available prior to the hearing. Ms. Mason stated she would seek more information from the wildlife agencies regarding the effects of blasting on the eggs of Burrowing Owls and there is a period of time when any movement could have an extremely significant impact on the development of the embryo and could result in its death. Exotics would be removed from the area where the excavation was going to be in the preserve; the Growth Management Plan and staff required the 12 primary exotic vegetations to be removed from the entire conditional use site. Ms. Mason will obtain information on how excavation affects the surrounding wetland systems. The conservation easement would be required to be approved by staff prior to the conditional use approval. (See attached staff report) Discussion: • Mitigation plans for Black Bear and Gopher Tortoise would be a state issue and other species were regulated by the U.S. Fish&Wildlife Service • Minimum wetlands preservation requirement had been met Melissa Zone, Principal Planner,Department of Zoning and Development stated the applicant had been required to come back every two years to make sure 6 July 11,2007 they were meeting the conditions of approval. If violations occurred,the Board of Zoning Appeals could come back and require mitigation by the applicants with more stringent conditions of approval. Ms. Zone stated that staff requested that conditions of approval stay on so that every two years the applicant would have to come back to staff to report. Discussion: • Mitigation had already been done regarding complaints that came in • Engineers recorded blasting and the numbers had been well below what was required by Collier County • Work on Phase I and Phase II would overlap • More time was needed to evaluate the impact Phase I would have before addressing Phase Il • No data is currently available regarding salt water influx but salinity should not be a problem • Application was made for a level of up to 45 feet or to the confining layer, whichever was more shallow • There were grave concerns with this project regarding environmental damage • More data was needed • Land in question was designated as receiving land, the proposed use was a permitted use and there was adequate monitoring in place • Application was for a conditional use as opposed to a permitted use meaning the use was not permitted as a matter of right but rather with permission from government • Littoral shelf could be put in but when was an unknown • Littoral shelf should be created upon completion of sections • Littoral shelf would provide a safety feature Mr. Penniman moved to recommend accepting the recommendations of staff and pass those along to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners with the addition of No. 6 which was that we establish a minimum 24 foot littoral zone with a minimum 10% of the circumference of the mined area, a 1-8 slope littoral zone around the lake with a 10% vegetative planting. Conditions that were in place with the original conditional use permit would remain in place and the addition of No. 7 that there be recorded monitoring of the water table in the designated wetland areas and reported back to Community Development Environmental Division for the first five years at six-month intervals in March and September. Seconded by Dr. Hushon. Motion carried 6-3 with Mr. Jacobsen, Mr. Horn and Mr. Hill opposed. (Lunch break- 11:47 AM) (Mr. Horn left the meeting at 11:47 AM.) (Reconvened- 12:33 PM.) B. Planned Unit Development Amendment No. PUDZ-A-2007-AR-9374, "Naples Reserve RPUD," Section 1,Township 51S,Range 26E 7 July 11, 2007 Presenters were sworn in by Assistant County Attorney Jeff Wright. Disclosures: Mr. Jacobsen had visited the site but did not speak to anyone. Bob Mulhare,RWA,representing the applicant gave an overview of the project to date via a PowerPoint presentation. (See attached Executive Summary) • Property had existing PUD zoning • Property was designated as urban and receiving lands • Three issues of concern included the format of the EIS,the fact that the property was formerly agricultural land, soil testing needed to be done and there were concerns with listed species and primarily the Florida panther and black bear • EIS format had been revised and Executive Summary had been provided • Soil testing had been conducted, results were included in the ground water report of June 7, 2007 and the analytical report dated June 26, 2007 and the studies revealed the site was suitable for human habitation • There were no telemetry points on the property in question • Mitigation strategies had changed over the past two years, permits were being reviewed and changes could be made if needed • Original conditions of the permit for panthers would be honored r-� Tom Missimer, President, Missimer Scientific,discussed the analysis of the ground water stating an environmental site assessment was done on the property many years ago and nothing was found in the ground water. Mr. Missimer also discussed testing for chemicals in the ground, and stated there were no areas of concentrated chemical buildup found on the property. Emilio Robau of RWA, Inc. discussed aeration of the lakes stating long, skinny lakes helped with the fetch formula that Collier County currently used in its excavation ordinance. • Lakes would have interconnects and best management practices were being used • Small mammal crossings would be put under roads • Irrigation water for development would come from the lakes • There would be connectivity between projects, location unknown Mr. Jacobsen moved to recommend acceptance of the proposal with the staff recommendations. Seconded by Mr. Sorrell. Motion carried 8-0. C. Site Development Plan SDP-2007-AR-10397, "Germain Automotive Dealership Inventory Storage Lot," Section 16,Township 48 South, Range 25 East Presenters were sworn in by Assistant County Attorney Jeff Wright. 8 July 11, 2007 Disclosure: Mr.Jacobsen stated he spoke to Mr. Fred Reischl, one of the agents who gave him permission to walk the entire property. Mr.Hughes stated he had a conversation with one of the advisors on the project pertinent to scheduling before the EAC. As a result,Mr. Hughes raised issues formally last month to have the Department review its policies pertinent to fees and the ability to move timely and judiciously on requests such as this. Chris Thornton, Esq.,Cheffy Passidomo Wilson &Johnson, representing the applicant stated the Germains have operated the facility at the corner of Wiggins Pass Road and US 41 since 1990. The Germains had recently purchased an adjacent parcel just to the south on US 41 to expand the auto dealership operations. No vertical improvements were proposed and the property would be used as a parking lot for storage of vehicles. Property was rezoned in 2004 to C-4 zoning. The project had received South Florida Water Management District permits and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits. Project had also received the approval of the Florida Fish& Wildlife Conservation Commission and the U.S. Fish &Wildlife Service with respect to issues raised with a Bald Eagle. The eagle had moved and built a new nest on the subject property with the new nest being closer than 100 feet to the existing pavement of the Toyota dealership. The new nesting area was closer to the Toyota lot than it was to the new proposed �.� storage lot. Mr. Thornton requested approval of the proposed site development plan. Mr. Thornton stated the Petitioners would like to complete the project prior to the next eagle nesting season. (See attached Staff Report) Discussion: • EAC bases its decisions on the welfare of the environment rather than on financial considerations • If the project cannot be finished prior to eagle nesting season,postpone the start of project until after eagle nesting season • Conservation Collier property drains to the southwest and should pose no storm water runoff problem Jeff Wright, Assistant County Attorney, stated the Bald Eagle was taken off of the listed species list four days after the Staff Report was signed. Mr. Wright stated he is unsure as to whether any precedent would be set by approving the application and the LDC and GMP were written with the Bald Eagle being a listed species and provisions were tied to that fact. Mr. Wright recommended deferring to federal and state authorities. Discussion: • Project would be a passive use Mr. Miller moved to approve the Petitioner's application as recommended by staff with the stipulation that if construction could not be completed by October 1 that the 9 July 11, 2007 Petitioner would initiate an eagle watch program and if eagles returned before construction was completed the Petitioner would have to seek permission from U.S. Fish and Wildlife and Florida Fish and Wildlife as well as from Collier County to continue. Seconded by Mr. Sorrell. Motion carried 8-0. Mr. Hughes directed staff to have the written document available by Friday morning. (Chairman Hughes left the meeting at 1:30 PM.) (Vice-Chairman Dr. Judith Hushon presided over the meeting during Chairman Hughes'absence.) VIII. B. Update members on upcoming presentation scheduled Ms. Araque stated the five-year review of the RLSA by the Comprehensive Planning Department had been changed from the special session for next July 2008 to March 5, 2008, as part of the regular meeting and there would be no special session in July 2008. Ms. Araque also stated the Pollution Control Department had requested to make their presentation in November 2007 and in August 2007 Florida Fish &Wildlife Conservation Commission would give their presentation. (Chairman Hughes entered the meeting at 1:40 PM.) Dr. Hushon discussed the following: • Three local entities, Sarasota, Sanibel and the City of Naples have all enacted ordinances on the application of nutrients to landscaping • In order for Collier County to have a similar ordinance,the BCC would have to give their approval for staff to expend time to look into the creation of an ordinance and move forward on it • Dr. Hushon would write a request letter to submit to the BCC Mr. Jacobsen moved that Dr. Hushon would write a letter to the BCC supporting the fertilizer program similar to that of Sarasota, City of Naples and Sanibel. Discussion: • Collier County should have its own version of the ordinance suited to the needs of Collier County (Mr. Miller left the meeting at 1:45 PM.) Seconded by Mr. HilL Motion carried 7-1 with Mr. Sorrell opposed. C. Addition to the Land Development Code on an emergency basis Dr. Hushon stated an active Bald Eagle's nest located on private property was cut down in North Naples without a permit and that changes were needed to the LDC in the vegetation permit removal section to prevent removal of trees with active 10 July 11, 2007 eagle nests without a permit. Dr. Hushon requested this be done in the current round of the LDC amendments. Public Speakers: Nicole Ryan of The Conservancy of Southwest Florida stated she agreed that additional language should be added. Dr. Hushon moved an emergency action to the Collier County vegetation permit third section of the Land Development Code be included in the current LDC cycle that a Collier County permit requires a U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission permit before dead trees used by listed and protected species are removed. Seconded by Mr. Sorrell. Motion carried 7-0. Mr.Jacobsen asked staff to find out when Fishermen's Village went before the BAC. VII. Old Business Update members on projects Ms.Araque stated Manatee Road was approved, Keewadin Island Naples Bay Resort beach shelter would be going to the CCPC next week and she would bring the mission statement at the next meeting to be worked on. IX. Subcommittee Reports None X. Council Member Comments None 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 2:25 PM. COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Chairman William Hughes These Minutes were approved by the Chairman on , 2007,as presented , or as amended 11 ..R Item V.A ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF August 1, 2007 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT Petition No.: PUDZ-AR-8416 Petition Name: PEZ/.HTTINO DI CIELO RPUD Applicant/Developer: DISTINCTIVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT LIVINGSTON, LLC Engineering Consultant: Q GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES Environmental Consultant: BOYLAN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. II. LOCATION The subject property is located immediately East of Livingston Road and approximately 1/4 mile south of the Lee County line, in the North lh of Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES The subject property is surrounded by Mediterra PUD, which is an in-fill project to be developed on 1,696 acres located in north Collier County and south Lee County. Approximately 1,168± acres of the project are in Collier County. Mediterra PUD is a golf course community that includes a range of single-family and multi-family housing along with a Village Center that will provide a maximum of 20,000 square feet of floor area of commercial uses to be designed as a small scale neighborhood retail goods and services land use. ZONING DESCRIPTION N - Mediterra PUD Residential S - Mediterra PUD Commercial/Residential E - Mediterra PUD Residential W - Mediterra PUD Road ROW (CR-881 Livingston Road) &Residential • • EAC Meeting Page2of7 IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Rezone the subject ±16.76 acre site from "A" (Agriculture) to a Residential Planned Unit Development to be known as Pezzettino Di Cielo RPUD, to permit 43 detached dwelling units at a density of 2.57 units per acre. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY A. 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 four residential units per gross acre and recreation and open space uses. This project does not qualify for any density bonuses and is not subject to density reduction. FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible with the surrounding area. Comprehensive Planning leaves this determination to Zoning and Land Development Review staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety. 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. Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes that the proposed rezone is consistent with the FLUE. B. 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 storm water runoff, storm water 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 ti EAC Meeting Page 3 of 7 � I interconnected dry detention area(s), lake(s) and a wetland(s) to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation during storm events. This project is consistent with Policy 6.1.1 as the requirement to preserve 15% of the native vegetation on a 5 to 19 acre non-coastal residential development has been met by providing 0.82 acres of native vegetation. The property contains approximately 5.48 acres of native vegetation on site. The total site preservation meets that required by the PUD. In accordance with Policy 6.1.1. (2), preserved native vegetation will include canopy, under-story, and groundcover. The preserve areas have been designed to accommodate the onsite wetlands. All three strata of the existing native vegetation will be preserved, and exotic species will be removed. In accordance with Policy 6.1.1. (4), the preserve has been selected to preserve areas in accordance with the descending order of priority as noted in the LDC and GMP. It was noted during an initial survey that the potential for fox squirrel may be present, due to the presence of stick structures located onsite. This area incorporated both the 630-Mixed Hardwood Wetlands, and the 411-Disturbed Pine Flatwoods area. A follow-up survey was conducted, following several major storm events to recertify the location of these structures. The results found no nests or structures present. Preservation of habitat known to be utilized by listed species is a priority in preserve selection. In addition, preservation of wetlands and uplands which buffer wetlands, are also criteria which follow in descending order the priority for protection. This project proposes to preserve both a portion of the wetland and adjacent upland habitat which may be utilized by listed species. This project is consistent with Policy 6.1.1. (9) whereas there are no adjacent preserves, conservation acquisition areas, flow ways or potential wildlife corridors exist in this area or around the project site. Roads and development exists along the north, west and south boundaries of the site. The east consists of undeveloped residential lands. The preserve area has been designed to best accommodate the onsite wetlands and upland areas. In accordance with Policy 6.2.1., the wetlands have been field verified and approved by the SFWMD and are delineated on the plans accordingly. In accordance with Policy 7.1.2, a listed species survey was conducted on the property and no species were observed, however possible Big Cypress Fox Squirrel nests/daybeds were found on the property. A Big Cypress Management Plan has been provided. The project is consistent with the Objectives and Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. EAC Meeting Page 4 of 7 VI. MAJOR ISSUES A. Storm water Management Pezzettino Di Cielo sits within the Imperial Drainage Outlet Basin, therefore the maximum allowable amount of water that the site can discharge is 0.15 cfs per acre as per Collier County Ordinance 90-10. The Basin drains toward the west and eventually out to Wiggins Bay and Wiggins Pass. The proposed Water Management system for this project consists of a series of inlets connected with drainage pipes and connected to wet detention areas. The system will be sized to achieve the proper water quality retention and peak flow attenuation. Discharge through the drainage control structure will be to the Livingston Road Right-of-Way drainage system. The sfwmd.gov website shows that an ERP for this site was applied for through the SFWMD on April 11, 2006 and a Request for Additional Information (RAI) was sent back to Davidson Engineering on May 11, 2006. 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 except to evaluate the criteria for allowing treated storm water to be discharged into Preserves as allowed in Section 3.05.07." B. Environmental 1. Site Description The project site contains 0.96 acres of wetlands, 0.11 acres of man-made water bodies (surface waters) and 16.45 acres of various disturbed uplands. There is one jurisdictional wetland onsite, a mixed hardwoods wetland(0.96 acres) near the northern portion of the property. The majority of the remainder of the site comprises disturbed and forested pasture areas, low density residential, and warehouse/storage facilities, abandoned citrus, and trails. 2. Wetlands The project site contains approximately 0.96 acres of Wetlands all classified as Mixed Wetland Hardwoods (630e3). A mixture of cypress and melaleuca n dominate the wetland canopy. While ground cover was sparse, swamp fern can be found around the outer edge of this wetland community. A site inspection has EAC Meeting Page 5 of 7 been conducted with the SFWMD, and the lines have been verified according to the applicant. This project proposes to preserve 0.67 of the 0.96 acres of the mixed hardwood wetlands onsite. Overall the project is preserving approximately 70% of the onsite wetlands. Wetland 1 will have 0.29 acres of wetland impacts. These impacts will be mitigated for onsite. Wetland impacts will be addressed with South Florida Water Management District during the ERP process. 3. Preservation Requirements The property contains approximately 5.48 acres of native vegetation communities. Fifteen percent of the native vegetation is required to be preserved in order to meet Collier County preservation requirements. That equates to 0.82 acres of native vegetation required for preservation. The project proposes to preserve 0.82 acres, which meets the required amount. Staff worked with the environmental consultant to include a combination of Pine Flatwoods (0.15 acres) and Mixed Wetland Hardwoods (0.67 acres) for preservation. 4. Listed Species No protected species were directly identified on site. However, four stick nests ^ were observed during the initial survey. These stick nests have the potential to possibly be Big Cypress Fox Squirrel daybeds. A management Plan for the Fox Squirrel is included with the EIS. Prior to clearing or construction, the site will be resurveyed for nests. If any Big Cypress Fox Squirrels are actively nesting, a 125-foot buffer will be placed around these nests and no development will occur in these areas until after nesting. VII. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of PUDZ-AR-8416 Pezzettino de Cielo RPUD. n s ' i EAC Meeting Page 6 of 7 PREPARED BY: 010air 7//6/ ? § I R ARA DATE SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT "SenylkiLIVal Cr 7p7/07 STAN CHRZANOWSKI P.E. DATE ENGINEERING REVIEW MANAGER ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT . 6/ oo7 MELISSA ONE ATE PRINCIPAL PLAN DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW EAC Meeting Page 7 of 7 REVIEWED BY: BARBARA S. BURGESON DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT 0746_c7 LIAM D. LOR` Z, Jr., P.E. DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR "7/4/a JEFF " ' H DATE ASSIST- T COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVED BY: a irEPH K. SCHMITT I A MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT &ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DMINISTRATOR Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A. Civil Engineers • Land Surveyors ■ Planners ■ Landscape Architects LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Date: July 10, 2007 Project: AR-8416, Pezzettino Di Cielo RPUD Location: Livingston Road, Collier County, Florida TO: Summer B. Araque Senior Environmental Specialist Collier County Environmental Services Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 Items transmitted via: Hand Deliver We are sending you the following items: 16 copies— EAC packets Remarks: Signed: Sharon Umpenhour cc: 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs,Florida 34134 (239)947-1144 ■ Fax(239)947-0375 SFRPUD SA 7-10-07 T.doc _Juyo)4± 16-f EAC DISTRIBUTION Copies needed Agenda: 25 - /1 (137*1) Minutes: 20 ifit i�(� n7( P Staff Report: 20 '"J/O '/_/J Back-up: 11 Petition Packet 12qh1/0 11 E A em•ers Full packet — 6 �'' , Send all back-up and extra material to the following staff: Barbara Burgeson Full Packet ?�r�I/o Jeff Wright., Attorney Full Packet J"VLUU4 Susan Mason Full Packet Bill Lorenz, Natural Resources Agenda, i inute staff report 1/i9/ �1 - • BCC Office Agenda, i = -.Aa'. '71191°7-need. Communications & Relations Agenda, message to post on 1st floor- .4-12-44-4- 7/MI67 For Meeting 4 copies of Agenda, staff report In Folder for meeting 10 copies of Agenda EAC Public Notebook Binder 1 whole packet (Originals) Send E-mail to the Following people-See Barbara Burqeson for list Joseph K. Schmitt Susan Murray Stan Chrzanowski Laura Roys Tom Kuck July Minor Judy Puig Maura Kraus Mac Hatcher Steve Lenberger Rebecca Jetton John Boldt, Water Management Dept Bob Mulhere Steve Seal Ray Smith, Pollution Control Dept. Dir Ellie Krier Jean Merrit, Human Resources Dept Director of Public Information Maureen Kenyon, Minutes & Records Jim Delony and Ron Novell Eric Staats, Naples Daily News Public Utilities Admin Karen Johnson, SFWMD Margaret Embildge, Bonita Bay Properties cpeck(a�sfwmd.gov Nancy Payton fwf@peganet.com RvalerSFWMD.gov Nicole Ryan nicolerconservancy.org Petitioner's Agent, see staff report Agenda, staff report Notice to Property Owners Agenda, staff report MEMORANDUM TO: ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL FROM: SUMMER ARAQUE SUBJECT: PEZZETINO DI CIELO PUDZ AR-8416 DATE: 8/14/2007 CC: SUSAN MASON,BARBARA BURGESON,BILL LORENZ,MELISSA ZONE,CAROLD MENDICINO(FOR EAC PUBLIC NOTEBOOK BINDER) The enclosed is information you requested from Wayne Arnold with Q. Grady Minor & Associates at the August 1, 2007 EAC meeting. Please review the attached information and e-mail me (SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net) your comments by August 23, 2007. In your response please provide the following: 1. What further information,if any is needed from the applicant? 2. Advise if the applicant needs to come before the EAC is September for further questioning from the EAC. 3. Please provide any further comments that need to be passed along to the Zoning Department Planner that should go into the staff report for the Planning Commission. If you have any questions please contact me at 239-530-6290. Summer B. ..i Y"aque Senior Environmental Specialist Collier County Environmental Services Department 2800 N Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-530-6290 My Desk Fax: 239-530-6719 PEZZETTINO DI CIELO Residential Planned Unit Development Conceptual Surface Water Management Report Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East Collier County, Florida Prepared by: Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Fl 34134 (239) 947-1144 G:\PROJ-PLANNING DOCS\PEZZETTINO DI CIELO RPUD-SFRPUD\RPUD Application\Water Management Report.doc n I 1. Project Description: Pezzettinno Di Cielo is a 17.5 acre residential planned development, located on Livingston Road in northern Collier County. Pezzettinno Di Cielo will be a gated private community, consisting of a maximum of 43 detached villa homes, constructed on individual lots. 2. Property Condition: The subject property has been utilized for residential and limited agricultural purposes. The site's natural topography and natural vegetation have been altered by the prior residential and agricultural activities on the site. At the present time, less than one acre of jurisdictional wetland vegetation exists on the site, and the balance of the site consists of disturbed uplands, pasture areas, a residential home and storage building. No apparent surface water management system or structures exist on the site. The property is completely separated from any off-site surface water flows due to the construction of a vegetated berm on the adjacent Mediterra community. 3. Surface Water Management Pezzettino Di Cielo lies within the Imperial Drainage Outlet Basin. This basin drains toward the west with ultimate discharge to Wiggins Bay. In accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 90-10, a maximum discharge rate for this basin is 0.15 cfs per acre. Due to the presence of a small jurisdictional wetland on the site, an Environmental Resource Permit will be required by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The surface water management system for the site will also be reviewed and approved by the SFWMD as a component of the Environmental Resource Permit. An Environmental Resource Permit application has been filed with SFWMD (Application#060411-2). The proposed water management system for Pezzettinno Di Cielo will consist of a series of catch basins and inlets, designed to accept yard and roadway drainage. The catch basins will be connected to two manmade wet detention areas (lakes) which will be interconnected through a series of underground drainage pipes. Water quality and quantity will be achieved through the lake system consistent with the requirements of the SFWMD. The drainage outfall from this site will be through a control structure to the Livingston Road right-of-way. G:\PROJ-PLANNING DOCS\PEZZETTINO DI CIELO RPUD-SFRPUD\RPUD Application\Water Management Report.doc Presently, the poor quality wetland receives water from direct rainfall and limited sheetflow from only portions of the 17.5 acre site. No off-site flows reach the wetland due to the prior construction of a berm along the common property line with the Mediterra Community. No physical connection between the wetland and the adjacent lake is required. The conceptual water management plan proposes to rehydrate the wetland by establishing a control elevation for the lake at the natural wet season water table (this shall be determined by taking survey readings in the wetland at top of normal pool). The lake will reach control elevation early in the wet season. The proximity of the lake and preserve area allows the preserve to be hydrated by surface flow and subsurface migration of water (transmissivity) through voids in the earth from the lake to the preserve. We would estimate the surficial aquifer would be above the ground surface in the preserve for at least a month near the end of the wet season. Although we have not yet established a control elevation the existing grade in the preserve area is about 12.0'. We expect the control elevation to be 12.5' to 12.7' based on experience. SFWMD has not yet made this site visit to approve wetland high water indicators. Once this is complete, we will survey in the nails set in the trees indicating high water. This will then be the final and approved control elevation. The water table would then fluctuate seasonally. We are not proposing any direct hydraulic connections between the lake and preserve. G:\PROJ-PLANNING DOCS\PFZ7ETTINO DI CIELO RPUD-SFRPUD\RPUD Application\Water Management Report.doc — - -- §o 14,U 1 '� :c.,, g;S 3i ;• u D i iK F.3 -tij : i � —T— µ p F °I;y 4. 0 4 4I_ € y c::: 12' o Z �z' 1 / gl 1 04 u Ia I. �' r J„ r g If 11 li AO :p .. Sl NmZ C7 F — - - - x 0 73 Z 133 M m o 7J D o LIVINGSTON ROAD m Z m wpm ua/pary < 04'0Z, 0103 d03 ,Z£'8S9 M „0L,LS.00 N (rso 'trs!'vosao) O.' o'0A,Z ,Z 04'0,Z 0r0 p ,Z ••0,ad iwuiaso3 ADM/a 7,10/21,OS .:.::0103 te- o M 9 M0.B .8Z2S9 M.005.00 N liblia._ 2� d3ddne 0 3dAl ,Oz 1 N8 S d33dne U 3dAl ,Oz __ __ __�—— —� T li i9. Go I / i ili 0; .'I� °' ti rao !/ rn cDij� ~� m5 m ;I; i I Iio R I i II ;Z 1 L Lli N ill'- I 1 1} m 73r_o r r- co �1 I I� � m I, �mA m .� � I? -- ) •� 71z o— I m Z 11 i M ;i ;' Z �� I iii (' ) • . * I o il III lip I' 1 0 0 70i 1 E--1, .._ v 1-- __ . iti m b > FIs I 11 \� .. O x N i I i �.0 0 m z Co �i t ii 1� i ` P v III \ 1 •. o 11 I� i \ Z 2 c R Z o v = t> I o �? Il N • Z. G) o . �i N Ili E ii u 0 73 o !1 ! \ n m c m co is \ • \\I ..(-7. \ , 23 ) .1. =I W7-:- 0 ----: I \\ \:\ d A • 4, o?m it \ - F.;> \ \\ ,. I \n KO I • K m o � i \ ' IS I I.N iI! 3 INi�mm <A 8 1. (1 I ;axi ayx`�'i - I i1 mAy• m ma ri I8 i _ ill i��v ma rni D gi A D c0 —r'3-7--- w0 1^w "ml (.b 1 K-::- ROW _ 'I DIi ti cry D //i D b 1 DC7 \ _ -I N (� M \ o N 1 II f li Dy f • ,Ii m p „mum II1 /`� III az .-0 oZo� •I y F. g > b F. :: 11 > +. r�na" .) m.2m; �_• Z NZ�Z li' I, t7 ti �Nm li �...... Zo z ci y).• S 00 53'36„ E 657.34' m W -O 60 33w D5i 1– u Z' b 4 ZONING:PUD-MEDITERRA a ENVIRONMENTAL RISKDEME �T, INC. . Licensed Engineering and Geology Firm R Assessment& Remediation Consultants4' PHAI EVM SITE SE ASSESSMENTNIRONENTAL 3 Parcels in Collier County Naples,Florida Folio No. 00147840000,00147240008, 00146680009 3 11 r T. 41 . .'fi t.�. A -, -,:,4-,:-.d 4k4 f-.''''-.wi R ii — .-_ '1,.. -...IIIII,r'-I' k I''''''''-,:::f..77:-':-I:'''44:-:--•"-:!'" '''' :-'-'.''''''''''r"I',11e'I'I:'Y'::,71.,..,..1,7 _.„ PREPARED FOR: Mr. Steve Fiterman Distinctive Communities, Inc. 6967 Verde Way Naples, Florida 34108 PREPARED BY: Environmental Risk Management, Inc. ERMI File No. Cl 143A September 15, 2005 Headquarters 4 15248 Tamiami Trail South #800 Fort Byers, Florida 33908 1-888-ENV-luiGMT(1-888-368-6468) Fax 1-888-368-6329 www.ermi.net .f ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT INC, ,„7z,.4,- Licensed Engineering and Geology Firm°Assessment & Remediation Consultants September 15, 2005 Mr. Steve Fiteinian Distinctive Communities, Inc. 6967 Verde Way Naples, Florida 34108 RE: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 3 Parcels in Collier County Naples,Florida Folio No.00147840000,00147240008,00146680009 ERMI File No. C1143A Dear Mr. Fiterman: Environmental Risk Management, Inc. (ERMI) has completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the referenced property according to our Contract Agreement, dated August 29, 2005. We investigated the land use history, site activities, and regulatory involvement of the property in the site vicinity according to American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) designation E1527-00, "Standard Practice For Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process". The purpose of the investigation was to determine if evidence exists to suggest the impact or potential impact of hazardous substances and/or petroleum hydrocarbons to the subject property. As recommended, the report is presented in the ASTM Standard. For a concise review of the findings, please refer to Section 1.0 of this report. Please call us at 1-888-ENV-MGMT (1-888-368-6468) or locally at 239-415-6406 if we can clarify the findings, further explain the significance of this document,or be of additional service to you. Sincerely, ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT,INC. K--1q63 - ' q-15-03 Barton J. Baker, CI-EA, REPA Stanley J. Rutka . Project Manager Principal Geologist Headquarters - 15248 Tamiami Trail South#800 .' Fort Myers, Florida 33908 1-888-ENV-MGMT(1-888-368-6468) Fax 1-888-368-6329 4 www.ermi,net TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Comments on Risk Management 1 1.3 Potential Sources of Impact 1 1.4 Opinion 1 1.5 Recommendations 1 1.6 Conclusions 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.1 Purpose 1 2.2 Detailed Scope-of-Services 1 2.3 Significant Assumptions 1 2.4 Limitations and Exceptions 1 2.5 Special Terms and Conditions 1 2.6 User Reliance 1 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 1 3.1 Location and Legal Description 1 3.2 Site and Vicinity General Characteristics 1 3.3 Current Use of Property 1 3.4 Description of Improvements 1 3.5 Current Uses of the Adjoining Properties 1 4.0 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION 1 4.1 Title Records 1 4.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations 1 4.3 Specialized Knowledge 1 4.4 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues 1 4.5 Owner, Property Manager, and Occupant Information 1 4.6 Reason For Performing Phase I 1 5.0 RECORDS REVIEW 1 5.1 Standard Environmental Record Sources 1 5.1.1 National Priorities List (NPL) 1 5.1.2 CERCLIS 1 5.1.3 Handlers with Corrective Action Activity (CORRACTS) 1 5.1.4 RCRA Notifiers with Treatment, Storage and/or Disposal Activities (TSD) 1 5.1.5 RCRA Notifiers with no Treatment, Storage and/or Disposal Activities (NON-TSD) 1 5.1.6 Emergency Response Notification System(ERNS) 1 5.1.7 FDEP Petroleum Contamination Tracking System Report (PCTS) 1 5.1.8 FDEP Storage Tanks Report (TANKS) 1 5.1.9 FDEP Solid Waste Facilities (SLDWST) 1 5.2 Additional Environmental Record Sources 1 5.3 Physical Setting Source(s) 1 5.4 Historical Use Information on the Property 1 5.4.1 Directories 1 5.4.2 Aerial Photographs 1 5.5 Historical Use Information on Adjoining Properties 1 6.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE 1 6.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions 1 6.1.1 Methodology 1 6.1.2 Limiting Conditions 1 6.2 General Site Setting 1 6.3 Exterior Observations 1 6.4 Interior Observations 1 7.0 INTERVIEWS 1 8.0 FINDINGS 1 9.0 OPINIONS 1 10.0 CONCLUSIONS 1 11.0 DEVIATIONS 1 11.1 Exceedances 1 12.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES 1 13.0 REFERENCES 1 14.0 SIGNATURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS 1 15.0 QUALIFICATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS 1 15.1 Resume of Stanley J. Rutka, P.G. 1 15.2 Resume of Barton Jet Baker, CFEA, REPA 1 15.3 Statement of Qualifications 1 16.0 APPENDICES 1 ii o 0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 INTRODUCTION Environmental Risk Management, Inc. (ERMI) has investigated the land use history, site activities, and regulatory involvement of the property located within the site vicinity according to American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) designation E1527-00, "Standard Practice For Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process". The purpose of the investigation was to determine if evidence exists to suggest the impact or potential impact of hazardous substances and/or petroleum hydrocarbons to the subject property. This assessment has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. 1.2 COMMENTS ON RISK MANAGEMENT ASTM Standard E1527-00 defines "Recognized Environmental Conditions" (REC) to include both actual and potential conditions. ERMI wishes to emphasize the distinction between a potential environmental concern and an actual environmental condition. A potential environmental concern does not necessarily mean that an economically significant environmental condition exists. It is ERMI's policy to outline each potential concern and provide opinions regarding the risk, but ultimately, the level of diligence necessary to proceed with the project is a decision that each client will need to make based on their individual level of risk tolerance and their understanding of the potential concern. We strive to educate our clients regarding environmental issues so informed decisions can be made. In many cases, further investigation is necessary to provide additional assurance to clients that the potential environmental risk will not lead to actual liability. 1.3 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF IMPACT No evidence was identified in this investigation to indicate the presence of environmental impact to the subject property. 1.4 OPINION Based on research conducted in this investigation, it is ERMI's opinion that an economically significant source of impact has not been identified. 1 7"i /1 S� 1.5 RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendations to consider regarding environmental management at the site include a policy to prevent discharges of hazardous materials or petroleum hydrocarbons into the environment. If any such materials are introduced to the site, a control policy of spill, release, and discharge prevention should be implemented. 1.6 CONCLUSIONS Based on ERMI's observations and the results of this investigation, no evidence of environmental impact has been identified. Further investigation is not considered necessary at this time. 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 PURPOSE The objective of this investigation is to use reasonable judgment in assessing the evidence obtained to identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. The term recognized environmental conditions means the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the property. The term is not intended to include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material risk of harm to public health or environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. Conditions determined to be de minimis are not recognized environmental conditions. In the opinion of Environmental Risk Management, Inc., the performance of an environmental site assessment in accordance with ASTM Practice E 1527-00 constitutes good commercial practice. The methodology is summarized in our contract agreement dated August 29,2005. A copy of the contract agreement is provided in Appendix 16.5. Conformance with this method represents appropriate inquiry to deteimine the location and existence of potential sources of environmental impact without intrusive testing. The intention of this diligence is to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner defense to CERCLA (42 USC 4. 9601 (35)(B)). 2.2 DETAILED SCOPE-OF-SERVICES The scope of services conducted by ERMI includes the following: 1. A review of reasonably available historical documentation, including, but not limited to United States Geographical Survey (USGS) maps, topographic maps and aerial photographs. 2 2. A review of local, state and federal regulatory agency records to identify registered hazardous waste generators, waste storage disposal facilities, registered aboveground and underground storage tanks, and complaint files concerning the subject property and surrounding properties within 1 mile of the subject property. 3. The performance of a site reconnaissance on September 2, 2005, of the subject property located on Hardesty Road in Naples, Florida for the assessment of: • Toxic or hazardous materials storage, use and disposal. • Bodies of water with sheens, odors or evidence of pollution. • Aboveground or underground storage tanks. • Pad or pole-mounted electrical transformers for evidence of Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB). • Stressed vegetation. • Pools of liquids. • Storage containers and/or 55-gallon drums. • Floor drains. • Source of potable water supply. • Sewage disposal system. • Hills, mounds or evidence of burial. .-. • Solid waste disposal, garbage or dumping. 4. The performance of a drive-by of the area within a '/4 mile radius of the site to identify any potential sources of contamination. 5. Interviews with current and past owners and local historians. 6. Interviews with as many people as deemed necessary to achieve the purpose of this investigation. 7. This report, which is intended to document our findings from data research and to present our environmental recommendations and conclusions. Please refer to the contract agreement presented in Appendix 16.5 for more details. 2.3 SIGNIFICANT ASSUMPTIONS ERMI assumes that: 1) The client has provided any pertinent information or documentation relative to this assignment. 2) The results of interviews are reliable. 3) Information obtained from various references and records are reliable. ERMI Fite:Vo. C1143A 3 4) The user of this report has a general understanding of the inherent limitations to the assessment process, understanding that environmental assessments are simply risk management tools for use in decision making regarding involvement with real property, and that ERMI is not responsible for liabilities caused by any decisions made by the user of this assessment. If any of these assumptions are incorrect, please contact ERMI immediately for clarification. 2.4 LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS This environmental site assessment report is limited to the investigation of the potential impact of hazardous substances or petroleum hydrocarbons to the subject property. Additional environmental services, including, but not limited to: asbestos containing materials, radon, lead-based paint, lead in drinking water, wetlands, cultural and historical resources, industrial hygiene, health and safety, ecological resources, endangered species, indoor air quality, and high voltage power lines are not included in this report. The investigation is limited to the scope of work defined in the contract agreement. The following standard sources of historical data were not available, not provided, or not obtainable within the time constraints of this report: • Fire Insurance maps • Land Title Records Consequently, historical data for the purposes of this report was limited to available aerial photographs, complaint files review, Polk City Directories and client provided information. No environmental site assessment can wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the potential for recognized environmental conditions in connection with a property. Performance of this practice is intended to reduce, but not eliminate, uncertainty regarding the potential for recognized environmental conditions (REC's) in connection with a property. ERMI recognizes, based on experience, that with any facility that has historical land use(s) where underground storage tanks were utilized, there is the possibility that unregistered, underground storage system(s) could have been in use prior to installation of the current or former registered underground storage system(s). The Phase I ESA process, conducted according to ASTM Standard E 1527-00, limits the historical investigation to aerial photographs, city directories, interviews, and observations made during a site reconnaissance. ERMI recognizes that unregistered underground storage tanks could go undetected even with a diligent investigation by these processes. An unregistered tank would be a hidden condition as described in our contract agreement. r.., Subsurface testing and sampling procedures were beyond the scope of services of this investigation. For additional confidence regarding environmental impact to the property, further study involving subsurface testing and analysis would be required. Such testing to ER:JI1 Fife\o. CI143,1 4 4 } provide further assurance is an option that is always available to the client upon request at this level of investigation. Section 3.2 and many of the conclusions of this report are based on the site reconnaissance, that was conducted September 2, 2005. If further assurance regarding environmental impact on the subject property subsequent to the site reconnaissance is desired, ERMI or another environmental consultant should visit the site, and update the report. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is addressed without written consent of ERMI. It is intended to be used in its entirety. Neither all nor any part of the content of this report, or copy thereof, shall be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or any other media without written consent and approval of ERMI. Acceptance of and/or use of this assessment constitute acceptance of all provisions and limitations stated in this report. ERMI liability shall be limited to injury or property damage caused by the negligence of ERMI. ERMI has neither created nor contributed to the creation or existence of any hazardous, radioactive, toxic, irritant, pollutant, or otherwise dangerous substances or conditions at the site, and its compensation hereunder is in no way commensurate with the potential risk of injury or loss that may be caused by such substances or conditions. 2.5 SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS The terms and conditions of this report are provided in the contract agreement, which is provided in Appendix 16.5 of this report. 2.6 USER RELIANCE ERMI certifies this report to Steve Fiterman of Distinctive Communities, Inc.. The report was prepared for the exclusive use of the above entity, whom may solely rely on the report contents. Reliance on this report is contingent upon unconditional acceptance of all terms and conditions of the contract (please refer to Appendix 16.5) and all limitations contained in this report. As described in the contract agreement, if additional parties request additional reports or reliance on this report in the future, current client permission will be required and additional fees may apply. 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 3.1 LOCATION AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject property is located at on Hardesty Road in Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. The legal description, information from the 5 .'.r Collier County Property Appraiser's office, and a Site Location Map are provided as Appendix 16.1 of this report. 3.2 SITE AND VICINITY GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS The study area is defined as all property within a one-quarter mile radius of the site. A vehicle search of the area was conducted to determine conservative boundary limits and to create a list of facilities within this area that appeared to have the potential to impact the subject property. The entire study area consists of commerical and residential land uses. No dumping, landfills or improper disposal of waste was observed. Adjacent properties generally represent the greatest off-site environmental threat to a site. The adjacent and surrounding properties observed during the study area search were: • North: undeveloped residential parcels • South: residential parcels • West: Livingston Road, Medeterra Residential Community • East: undeveloped and residential parcels No evidence was discovered during the study area drive-by to indicate that any of the adjacent or nearby properties are currently sources of environmental impact to the subject property. 3.3 CURRENT USE OF PROPERTY _ The subject property is developed � » ��� with a private residence and a 1 ; -hitt "` portion of the site maintains a small ' ` scale cattle grazing operation. The current owner of the property also . sells hay from the property. 3.4 DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS A small residential home was observed to have been built on the subject property in the mid 1970's g r 74,1 (right). The observed structure is wood framed with wood siding. = > `` Also, a metal barn was observed on the subject property (above right). There were two manufactured 6 homes observed on the subject property. 3.5 CURRENT USES OF THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES The property adjacent north was observed as undeveloped residential land. The property adjacent south was observed to be Tuscany Reserve, a residential development. The property adjacent east was observed as undeveloped residential land. The property adjacent west, across Livingston Road, was observed to be Mediterra, a residential development. 4.0 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION 4.1 TITLE RECORDS Title Information concerning the subject property has not been provided to ERMI as of the date of this report. Title Information can be reviewed to identify former owners, leases, easements, and land uses of the site and to determine if any environmental cleanup liens have ever been placed on the property. If requested, ERMI will review this document and provide the results as an addendum to this report. 4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS OR ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS Based on information obtained from this assessment, there are no environmental liens or activity and use limitations at the subject property. 4.3 SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE The user of this assessment has no specialized knowledge or experience that is material to recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. 4.4 VALUATION REDUCTION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES The user of this assessment was not aware of any environmental issues in connection with the subject property that have reduced the purchase price of this property. 4.5 OWNER,PROPERTY MANAGER,AND OCCUPANT INFORMATION The property is currently owned by Lynn Hardesty, according to information obtained from the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office. Please refer to Appendix 16.1 for additional information. ERMI Fiir.\o. CI1 �,i r� 4.6 REASON FOR PERFORMING PHASE I This assessment was conducted with the intention of satisfying one of the requirements to qualify for the innocent landowner defense to CERCLA liability and to assess business risk. Refer to Section 2.1 for more information. 5.0 RECORDS REVIEW 5.1 STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SOURCES 5.1.1 National Priorities List (NPL) The National Priorities List (NPL) is a listing of facilities and/or locations where environmental contamination has been confirmed and prioritized for "Superfund" cleanup activities. This "Superfund" was initially established under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liabilities Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and reinstated under the Superfund Amendments and Re- authorization Act of 1986 (SARA). There are no facilities listed in this database within one mile of the subject property. 5.1.2 CERCLIS The Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) is the EPA Office of Emergency and Remedial Response database. Over 25,000 sites nationwide are reported to the agency as having potential environmental problems. The EPA or the appropriate state agency determine if hazardous substances are present in sufficient quantity to justify placing the site on the NPL. The facility would then be prioritized, according to the degree of environmental health and safety concerns, to determine the ranking of its federally regulated cleanup. There are no facilities listed in this database within one-half mile of the subject property. 5.1.3 Handlers with Corrective Action Activity(CORRACTS) The USEPA Corrective Action (CORRACTS) data is a listing of hazardous waste handlers that have undergone some type of enforcement and corrective action activity to address non-compliance with RCRA regulations. This infosuiation is compiled by the EPA Regional and State RCRA program personnel, as well as the RCRA facilities themselves, into a national information system referred to as RCRAInfo. There are no facilities listed in this database within one-half mile of the subject property. 8 7 a$ j 5.1A RCRA Notifiers with Treatment, Storage and/or Disposal Activities (TSD) The USEPA Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) identifies those facilities or locations that have notified the EPA of their activities relative to the handling of hazardous waste transportation, and hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal, as defined by federally recognized hazardous waste codes. Generators are typically divided into large-quantity and small-quantity generators (LQG and SQG, respectively). Hazardous waste facilities involved in the Treatment, Storage and Disposal are often grouped into a "TSD" category. There are no facilities listed in this database within one-half mile of the subject property. 5.1.5 RCRA Notifiers with no Treatment, Storage and/or Disposal Activities (NON-TSD) The USEPA Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) identifies those facilities or locations that have notified the EPA of their activities relative to the handling of hazardous waste transportation, and hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal, as defined by federally recognized hazardous waste codes. Generators are typically divided into large-quantity and small-quantity generators (LQG and SQG, respectively). Hazardous waste facilities involved in the Treatment, Storage and Disposal are often grouped into a "TSD" category. There are no facilities listed in this database within one-half mile of the subject property. 5.1.6 Emergency Response Notification System(ERNS) The Emergency Response Notification System(ERNS) database contains a listing of facilities that have been reported to the EPA as having released potentially hazardous material. The listing includes information such as the date of the incident, the response by those involved, the hazardous substances involved, and the reported location of the incident. The subject property is not listed in this database. 5.1.7 FDEP Petroleum Contamination Tracking System Report(PCTS) The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Petroleum Contamination Tracking System(PCTS) list is a subset of the FDEP Storage Tank and Contamination Monitoring Database and identifies facilities and/or locations that have notified the FDEP of a possible release of contaminants from petroleum storage systems. There are no facilities listed in this database within one-half mile of the subject property. 9 ,17 5.1.8 FDEP Storage Tanks Report (TANKS) The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Storage Tanks Report identifies those facilities or locations that have registered aboveground and/or underground storage tanks pursuant to the notifications requirements found in applicable chapters of the Florida Administrative Code. This Report is generated from the FDEP Storage Tank and Contamination Monitoring Database. The subject property is not listed in this database. 5.1.9 FDEP Solid Waste Facilities (SLDWST) The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Solid Waste List (SLDWST) identifies locations that have been permitted to conduct solid waste landfilling activities or other waste handling activities such as those conducted at transfer stations. In addition, sites handling bio-hazardous wastes are also included on this list. There are no facilities located within one-half mile of the subject property. Regulatory research produced no evidence to indicate environmental impact to the subject property from facilities and/or activities in the study area. 5.2 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD SOURCES Local records reviewed include: • Collier County Pollution Control and Prevention Department (CCPCPD) • FDEP SW District, Hazardous Waste File Review • OCULUS - FDEP website consisting of a database of regulatory documents. Since no suspect facilities were identified, OCULUS and local regulatory file research was not considered necessary. 5.3 PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE(S) The USGS 7.5 minute topographic map (see Appendix 16.1) of the study area was reviewed and indicated that the topography of the study area is relatively flat with no large hills or valleys that might aid in the potential migration of hazardous substances and/or petroleum hydrocarbons. No potential sources of impact to the subject property were identified from the topographic map review. 5.4 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION ON THE PROPERTY 5.4.1 Directories The Polk City Directories for Naples, Florida were referenced for the subject property for determination of current and former land use. ER;VII File No. (1143A 10 ae 'L?ta•irtrnrr?e;?tctt iPe.l sessnrettt +,;e!° ,l; ,,, ,;, ,,� i;)t. J EA IRl0_\'</ \'iAL I�/in..1,/AAA' GEL'1E;VT. IVC:. s 5e,re,nber 1.>. 201)' Based on business name and inferred business practices, Polk City Directory research has not revealed any former land uses that represent a potential environmental concern. 5.4.2 Aerial Photographs Aerial photographs of Section 12, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida were observed to identify the extent and nature of recent land uses. The aerial photographs are public documents available from the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office and the Collier County Natural Resources Conservation Service office. Aerial photographs, with a north arrow and a second arrow to depicting the subject property location, are provided below. z a Land clearing activities are =`_- u' rr 1975 observed on the subject - � -z &.: 4 4s, �_, ! 4.7 s. o1 property. t ate•. I Continued land clearing 1981 activities are observed on the subject property. ERMI File At). C1143-1 11,r, :f(,rill Ul1 \116 era, t E\ TR \AG sei?Tetiii)ei 20( ()%111. i Ris„ 15 g'i=1A=e4f-.14'71stp= 7:•••,••-r' 7,1'4 21:1, - t 1985 There are no significant changes to report. • 1`. Land cleanng activities are „, a observed east of the subject 1989 property. The barn structure ;is observed observed on the subject s-tsj property 4 = 4_ 1993 There are no significant changes to report ERMI File Vo. Cl I431 12 4 i LtSj 1996 There are no significant changes to report. 1 r The adjacent property to the : 2002 - - _. F west has been developed. it -.X „..,,4 ,,,e• ,, E�'�Ho .�; f fy 4l�gq r.; i riy 3[ _..... _ _ �W E The subject property and ` �_ r .+ I ' F 2004 adjoining properties appear as !,. . ."ti., _ , 1,:1;,,,--,-,,,i they do today. �� ;<� ;` k pk ! s t i Based on the land use history investigation, former study area activities are not considered to represent potential sources of. environmental impact to the subject property with the exception of former agricultural land uses, which represent a potential concern. No tanks or maintenance areas were observed in aerial photographs. Based on the lack of evidence to document a specific source area, ER%1I File!a. CII-13-1 13 t ERMI considers this to be a low risk. Sampling would be necessary to verify that the site is not impacted. Without a specific area of concern, such sampling would need to be random. Please refer to Section 5.4 of this report for more information. Based on these photographs, there is evidence that land-clearing activities took place between 1975 and 1981. Heavy equipment was most likely utilized during this project. The petroleum products used at that time to fuel and maintain the equipment are a potential source of environmental impact. As described above, no evidence of impact was observed, but the current vegetation or development may have hidden any such evidence. If an environmental condition exists from the land clearing activities, which ERMI considers to be unlikely, it would be a hidden condition as described in the contract agreement. As stated, ERMI considers impact from this remote concern to be unlikely. As described in the limitations section, sampling would be the only means to rule out the concern. The subject property was observed to be undeveloped in the 1975 aerial photograph. Aerial photographs prior to 1975 were not readily available for review and, thus, not considered necessary during this investigation. Based on the land use history investigation, former study area activities are not considered to represent potential sources of environmental impact to the subject property. 5.5 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION ON ADJOINING PROPERTIES Please refer to Section 5.4 and 3.5 for information on adjoining properties. 6.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE 6.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions 6.1.1 Methodology e Coordinate access to the site. • Check in with site manager/personnel. ® Perform room-by-room interior inspection. • Perform grid pattern exterior observation. ® Sketch site plan. ® Document site conditions using one or more of the following (photographs, notes, video, audio recorder, etc.). 6.1.2 Limiting Conditions ® Dense vegetation. I-1?III I';l„ 14 4. i Pavement, concrete, or buildings on site, may hide or obscure evidence of impact that may have existed on the site prior to development. * Hidden conditions (see Terms and Conditions in Appendix 16.5). 6.2 GENERAL SITE SETTING The total subject property consists of 17.00 acres. of zoned agriculture. The property was observed to be fenced and separated into two sections. The northern section was observed to be cattle grazing area. The southern section was observed to be residential. ERMI personnel gained access to the subject property form the eastern side of Livingston Road North. Portions of the property were observed to be densely vegetated. No soil staining or distressed vegetation was observed during the site reconnaissance. DESCRIPTION OF ON-SITE STRUCTURES A small residential home was observed on the subject property. The home structure was observed to be in a state of disrepair. Also, a metal barn was observed on the subject property. The barn structure was observed to be used for hay storage and minor equipment repairs. There were two manufactured homes observed on the subject property (below). One of the manufactured homes was observed to be in a state of disrepair. ..., 111Ki - -- -' -- -,.., -zi.. 1:----1, „c"-)., a- , , -kms -„.4, i [.-1 - , 1 , !,.,,_., --„,.'.--f---,---7----'-',•----,.;_-.7--,-,:-:,,,-,,,,' ',i,..vx-,,-4f,„5-„rA-----Aro:T- �] ^ft .1`e% + 'w,-.1-' , fit' q.� .. $W6 "x t�3.''; SURFACE DRAINAGE No amenities for surface drainage were observed during the site reconnaissance. PUBLIC UTILITI{-"S, POTABLE WATER SUPPLY & SEWER SYSTEMS The subject property has access to municipal sewer and water, but is serviced by private well and septic tank. 15 -7- 6.3 Exterior Observations UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS None were observed during the site reconnaissance. ABOVEGROUND STORAGE TANKS None were observed during the site reconnaissance. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL None were observed during the site reconnaissance. PAD OR POLE-MOUNTED TRANSFORMERS (PCB's) None were observed during the site reconnaissance. HILLS, DEPRESSIONS OR SIGNS OF BURIAL None were observed during the site reconnaissance. LAKES, PONDS, BODIES OF WATER None were observed during the site reconnaissance. STORAGE CONTAINERS / 55 GALLON DRUMS None were observed during the site reconnaissance. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORAGE, USE OR DISPOSAL None were observed during the site reconnaissance. 6.4 Interior Observations HAZARDOUS CONTAINERS None were observed during the site reconnaissance. FLOOR DRAINS None were observed during the site reconnaissance. 16 F i CHEMICALS USED None were observed during the site reconnaissance. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORAGE, HANDLING OR DISPOSAL None were observed during the site reconnaissance. Based on site observations, no evidence was discovered to indicate that the site has been impacted by petroleum or hazardous substances as a result of current site activities. No tanks, soil stains, distressed vegetation, or other evidence to indicate the presence of contamination on the property from current or former land uses was observed. 7.0 INTERVIEWS ERMI personnel contacted Mr. Steve Hardesty, son of the owner Lynn Hardesty. Mr. Hardesty stated that his father has owned and homesteaded the subject property since the early 1970's. The subject property, he stated has been a residence and small scale cattle operation the entire time. He also stated that no storage tanks or cattle dip vats were present on the subject property. ERMI Personnel contacted Ms. Ruth Buchanan. Ms. Buchanan stated that there was no record of contamination at the DEP. 8.0 FINDINGS Please refer to Section 1.0. 9.0 OPINIONS ERMI has no professional opinions regarding the environmental quality of the site other than those presented in Section 1.0. 1 0.0 CONCLUSIONS Please refer to Section 1.0 for more information. DEVIATIONS Any deviation from ASTM standard E 1527-00 that is not listed will have no bearing on the results of this investigation, based on the knowledge and experience of ERMI. Further Phase I ESA research services are not considered necessary to achieve the purpose of this Phase I ESA investigation. ERMI File \o. Ci 143A 17 The search radius conducted in this assessment is considered sufficient by ERMI to achieve the purpose of this Phase I ESA. The search radii outlined in ASTM E 1527-00 are considered to be excessive for the region, and were not precisely followed in this investigation, as outlined in the table below. Record Sources ASTM ERMI Search Search Distance Distance State leaking UST lists 0.5 miles .25 miles This opinion/judgment is based on the slow flow rates of groundwater migration, the liability protections afforded to "innocent landowners" in s.s.376.308, F.S., and 15 years experience in the region. 11.1 EXCEEDANCES None for this investigation. 12.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES None for this investigation. 13.0 REFERENCES • Collier County Property Appraiser's Office Aerial Photographs • Interviews WEBSITES • Collier County Property Appraiser's Office Owner Information; Maps • FDEP Petroleum Storage Tank Discharge Databases;Facility Information • OCULUS Assessment, Ranking And Status Reports • The Right-To-Know Network Hazardous Waste Databases • Terra Server Aerial Maps 18 P.tlae 1 t)it:.fromnet!tUt Site.Assessment P(r_.C: ; ' f,ifici.r !win + ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT, INC. 4Septeitthe, 15, 20( r 140 SIGNATURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS The undersigned certifies the information contained in the above report and the statements made herein below are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. 1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. 2. The reported analyses, opinions and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and our personal, unbiased professional analysis, opinions and conclusions. 3. We have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved or their representatives. 4. Our compensation is not contingent upon the attainment of a stipulated result or finding. 5. The environmental report was performed in accordance with ASTM standard practices. • aqtl>• Stanley J. Rutka, P.G. Principal Geologist ER.1I1 File No. ('1143.-1 19 15M QUALIFICATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS 15.1 RESUME OF STANLEY J.RUTKA,P.G. EXPERIENCE Mr. Rutka serves as ERMI's Principal Geologist and has been responsible for a wide range of hydrogeologic investigations in Florida. He has performed and managed over 1,200 Phase I Environmental Site Assessments throughout Florida. In addition to his education, licenses and certifications, he has more than 15 years of experience working on a variety of environmental investigations throughout Florida. He has developed detailed knowledge of various Federal, State, and Local environmental regulations and has been practicing as a licensed professional geologist within the State of Florida for the past 8 years. Furthermore, Mr. Rutka has designed, performed and managed all activities associated with storage tank closures, groundwater monitoring plans, site/contamination assessments, and soil/groundwater remedial cleanup projects associated with a broad range of contaminant parameters. As a certified asbestos and lead paint inspector/supervisor, Mr. Rutka has designed, performed and managed numerous asbestos and lead paint surveys of commercial buildings, apartment complexes and single family residences. EDUCATION State University of New York at Cortland, Bachelors of Science, 1989 Dual Major—Geology & Geography, GPA 3.5 (Major Coursework) Successfully completed over 80 credit hours in the Geosciences CERTIFICATIONS • State of Florida Professional Geologist—License#PG-1963 • CFEA & REPA Environmental Property Assessor Certifications • FDEP/EPA Certified in Hazardous Waste Management a FDEP/EPA Certified in Managing Underground Storage Tanks • AHERA Certified Asbestos Building Inspector& Project Designer • EPA Certified Lead Paint Inspector, Risk Assessor& Supervisor • OSHA Certified Hazardous Site Safety Supervisor • State of Florida Certified in Respiratory Protection 20 15.2 RESUME OF BARTON JET BAKER, CFEA, REPA CERTIFICATION • Certified Florida Environmental Assessor (CFEA) #327 * Registered Environmental Property Assessor (REPA) #6024 • Certified Indoor Environmentalist (CIE) o Certified Mold Remediator (CMR) PRIOR EXPERIENCE • University of Florida, Soil and Water Science Department Bachelor of Science Graduate • University of Florida, Treeo Center Water Analysis Training CURRENT EXPERIENCE: Environmental Risk Management, Inc. e Environmental Consultant/Project Manager • Staff Geologist e Indoor Air Quality Consultant * Petroleum Forensic Analyst • Soil and Groundwater Sampling Procedures (DEP SOP) Report Writing Experience and Technical Reviewer of: L Site Assessment Reports (SAR) 2. Remedial Action Plans (RAP) 3. Phase I ESA's 4. Phase II ESA's 5. Monitoring Reports 6. Tank Closure Assessment Reports (TCAR) 7. Indoor Air Quality Assessments 8. Mold Remediation Plan (MRP) Barton Baker has completed over 100 projects for Environmental Risk Management, Inc. including Site Assessment Reports (SAR), Remedial Action Plans (RAP), Phase I ESA's, Phase II ESA's, Monitoring Reports, Tank Closures Assessment Reports (TCAR), Indoor Air Quality Assessments, and Mold Remediation Plans (MRP). ER.411 File No, CI!-Li:,i 21 15.3 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS SEE WEB SITE FOR DETAILS Environmental Risk Management, Inc. (ERMI)manages environmental risks to maintain or restore property value and provide economic benefits to our clients. Services Phase I/II Environmental. Site Assessments Insurance Claims Services Site Assessment Reports Funding Allocation Agreements Remedial Action Plans Real Estate Brokering Site Remediation Mortgage Brokering Innovative Remedial Technologies Asbestos, Lead Paint, Mold Services Tank Closure Industrial Hygiene/Indoor Air Quality Conditional No Further Action Litigation Support/Expert Witness Risk Based Corrective Action Brownfield Designation/Services Hazardous Waste Compliance Audits New Release Investigations Insurance Coverage Professional Liability: $2,000,000 Pollution Liability: $2,000,000 General Liability: $2,000,000 Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 Representative Client List Florida Department of Environmental Protection AIG Technical Services Florida Department of Transportation Hendry County Florida Department of Corrections Glades County Zurich U.S. Environmental Claims Department El Paso Corporation References Melanie Anderson, InterBank (863) 763-5535 Dawn Hiestand, Zurich U.S. Environmental Claims Department (847) 605-7734 Jeff Gould, FDEP Administrator, South District (239) 332-6975 Lester Baird, Hendry County Administrator (863) 675-5220 Carter McCain, MacFarlane, Ferguson & McMullen (813) 273-4226 Insurance Reference: Patricia Schmaltz (813) 248-1135 Contact Information Environmental Risk Management, Inc. Website: www.ermi.net 15248 Tamiami Trail South, Suite 800 Email: bbaker@ermi.net 22 PfltHe sire 1.Y.Nosinent EVIIROA ,IF.N'T-1/,RISK NIANA GEMENT, INC. SepteinbeiI 2O Fort Myers, FL 33908 Phone No. 1-888-ENV-MGMT (1-888-368-6468) 1 6.0 APPENDICES 16.1 Site (Vicinity) Map 16.2 Site Plan 16.3 Site Photographs 16.4 Database Report 16.5 Contract Agreement ERMI File No. C/143A leFew.ermi.itet 23 1 r_ 1 16.1 Site (Vicinity) Map � I i is ,E a 11 ifl I Print Map Page 1 of 1 "` Subject Property 11 ; 4.11 S 7! • , *ii i - TM�' • , N¢ 1, ,,:, -,:: -, -.-,,,...2-.-- ...--:,.-;: . . - - ,- - „:__,..=4--: _ ...--ir*--,:— ! .m,-=, i F T ` ;..44,.:. 1 1 :'1,0 '-, :':,,-;:::.i-ii4iiite-:::: _ - - '.--..J t�," � - -Tx y � /° ar t. ..,. mo - _ 1 3v ©2004.Collier County Property Appraiser.While the Collier County Property Appraiser is committed to providing the most accurate and up-to-date information,nc for the data herein,its use,or its interpretation. r-. lhttp://maps.collierappraiser.com/webmap/mapprint.aspx?title=Subject%20Property&orient... 9/1/2005 Print Map Page 1 of 1 . Subject Property , t., - � ��� `s T krkf 3 I' 7 � A i ,= ` i. , j 6° j y — u -',;- i ' -k.iit;;*,..:t-, , 0, „, , j. �� .,r �, v ,u° 0 66t- ©2004.Collier County Property Appraiser.While the Collier County Property Appraiser is committed to providing the most accurate and up-to-date information,nc for the data herein,its use,or its interpretation. httn•//manc roll iera nnraiser.com]webman/mannrint.asnx?title=Subiect%20Property&orient... 9/1/2005 Print Map Page 1 of 1 �~ Subject Property -4,:' - i--,-,',:'-'il '''''' I i ,' . .. - ( . 47 —-.4L: lf e>5ir�� i{i ,� .<� — W 1 _ -i-,; .t.„, r ',',_'. -44,. 3 „ L ,,€k eta tr,A�7-a flims vs Ll': -a. .--0-;:_. ',. - - -- - �� ©2004.Collier County Property Appraiser.While the Collier County Property Appraiser is committed to providing the most accurate and up-to-date information,nc for the data herein,its use,or its interpretation. --•_.-------__• _- L a .�,7r;tlo—C ,1.;,r+0/1nprnr,ariZ,R,nrir�nf Q/1/9005 Details Page 1 of 1 Current Ownership Folio No. 00147840000 Mao Property Address NO SITE ADDRESS Owner Name HARDESTY TR, LYNN L Addresses LYNN L HARDESTY REV INV TRUST UTD 1/28/92 2500 HARDESTY RD City BONITA SPRINGS State FL Zip 34135-6947 Legal 12 48 25 THAT PORTION OF W1/2 OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4 OF NE1/4 DESC IN OR 1774 PG 2054 AND E 1/2 OF E1/2 OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4 *For more than four lines of Legal Description please call the Property Appraiser's Office. Section Township Range Acres Map No. Strap No. 12 48 25 15.91 3Al2 482512 022.0003Al2 Sub No. 100 ACREAGE HEADER " Millage Area ° Millage Use Code 60 AGRICULTURAL 97 12.8115 2005 Preliminary Tax Roll Latest Sales History (Subject to Change) If all Values shown below equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll Land Value $2,329,510.00 Date Book-Page Amount (4-)Improved Value $42,585.00 12/1992 1774-2054 $0.00 (_)Market Value $2,372,095.00 (-)SOH Exempt Value $0.00 (_)Assessed Value $2,372,095.00 (-)Homestead and other Exempt Value $2,023,006.00 (=) Taxable Value $349,089.00 SOH="Save Our Homes"exempt value due to cap on assessment increases. • The Information is Updated Weekly. 1-.44w•��.x ns nsr nn11;nr7rsr1ra/c r T rrY1/12 P!`llrliflP'fa 11 aerl7FnlinTF rfl nnnnn147 R40000 9/1/2005 Details Page 1 of 1 Now Current Ownership Folio No.l 00147240008 Map Property Address NO SITE ADDRESS Owner Name LONG BAY PARTNERS LLC Addresses 9990 COCONUT RD STE 202 City BONITA SPRINGS State FL Zip 34135-8488 Legal 12 48 25 COMM SW CNR OF SW1/4 OF NE1/4,N 660FT,E 162FT TO POB,E 132FT,S 330FT,W 132FT,N 330FT TO POB 'For more than four lines of Legal Description please call the Property Appraiser's Office. Section Township Range Acres Map No. Strap No. 12 48 25 1 3Al2 482512 009.0013Al2 Sub No. 100 ACREAGE HEADER Millage Area Millage Use Code 99 NON-AGRICULTURAL ACREAGE 97 12.8115 2005 Preliminary Tax Roll Latest Sales History (Subject to Change) If all Values shown below equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll Land Value $136,505.00 Date Book-Page Amount (+°)Improved Value $0.00 07/2000 2694-2772 $0.00 (_)Market Value $136,505.00 07/2000 2694-2771 $45,000.00 (-)SOH Exempt Value $0.00 03/1979 801 -897 $0.00 (_)Assessed Value $136,505.00 (-)Homestead and other Exempt Value $0.00 (_)Taxable Value $136,505.00 SOH="Save Our Homes"exempt value due to cap on assessment increases. The Information is Updated Weekly. bttre•//upaiw rnllierannraicrr rnm/Rer.nriiDetai1 acn7FnlinTD=0O00f0014724000X 9/1/2005 Details Page 1 of 1 Current Ownership Folio No. 00146680009 Map Property Address NO SITE ADDRESS Owner Name LONG BAY PARTNERS LLC Addresses 9990 COCONUT RD STE 202 City BONITA SPRINGS State FL Zip 34135-8488 Legal 12 48 25 N1/2 OF SW1/4 OF NE 1/4 LESS LIVINGSTON RD AND N 1/2 OF SE1/4 OF NE1/4 LESS CONSERVATION EASEMENT DESC IN *For more than four lines of Legal Description please call the Property Appraiser's Office. Section Township Range Acres Map No. Strap No. _ 12 48 25 0.09 3Al2 482512 001.0003Al2 Sub No. 100 ACREAGE HEADER Millage Area J5.1. Millage Use Code 99 NON-AGRICULTURAL ACREAGE 97 12.8115 2005 Preliminary Tax Roll Latest Sales History (Subject to Change) If all Values shown below equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll Land Value $6,750.00 Date Book-Page Amount (+)Improved Value $0.00 07/1998 2442_f_1273 $3,093,000.00 (_)Market Value $6,750.00 05/1998 2415-585 $0.00 (-)SOH Exempt Value $0.00 (_)Assessed Value $6,750.00 (-)Homestead and other Exempt Value $0.00 (=)Taxable Value $6,750.00 SOH="Save Our Homes"exempt value due to cap on assessment increases. • tr The Information is Updated Weekly. bttn•//za w\s1 ml ii ernnnrcuicer rnm/Rernrdf?etaII asn?FnlioTD=O0000OO1466S0009 9/1/2005 OVDELORME Street Atlas USA®2003 Plus -'—'—': 61°46.5"' _ -'W81*4V 1 ? } ! i W81°45.5'04DLN 1 45' Wei.44.5. >NELL Ira ,I 11 IEANt. I x m, j i I I I –11 +.-Ss O CARL IR iF li I 1q I MCKENNA AVE i CARPENTER LN I w`+ ,8 - j o /._,,? ¢. O +n J '0 ,m l 1PENOLETON S7I TAT 't } _p 4 Fi j '.� pi ?TANGERINE DR 2 9 1 LI z Z co, aV 'm VO m I OtANGE BLOSSOM OR p� + ! �� '. 1 �' n }� O�" A , o } 1 , T. I 1 o to 'o A O�Q- { rte_ EONI-4 9 'CH PD-..,; +A R ,O 3 GOOMEROIAL I i e 'p��t 1�1 trI �, , �Lq�SE I sEl DR j � � y = 44 } I - '--P 2 i' I WORTHMGTON VA! e., ,,..,' rn O4} ANGLERS DR n REDBUD LN �— ; ; 1 SUNRAY DR �r TO v , Ic COMPCASJD RD W K NINE DR MEADOW LN n 0 T 1 f ter` 77���,, ,{,{[55Rm771I�Z ika T' 1 DELLWOOC L' ' Oy 4tij 4 Z 1EMTERPRISE AVE "� ¢J .\111\ m m T) w y • o 6 O �uI I �d SILVERTHORN c Nn \ ---,---,...---,,--.--,-.Z f 1 BURNHAM RD 7s CI---.71 C O O 2 p Subject Property U1 W m N z s, b m° l 75 O?. Nsi k P bo � 1 Vt.N`NpOD DR 71 THREE IRAN 1"-----1 1 � EN -455 e. I F i Lu V U \ CI & AMBERWI"D DR 0 w0 JASMINE LAKs GIR a ti - a n OO 1• pSNf'',W aq, = z ; JO i z OOJ ��� pJ'AE� 0 ,D y-^�,� O w OCC'../'!' 3 ? 0 ‘CZ-:\ a I ?E�\py O'' 4czz t, MARBLE CT: PA 40 X `+7, \l� lam' Q��Ci4+� .11 ,e IAS"_3 `3 i{ ! 1 i CJ3 / TI AGARDEN l N 7 I ; ~ �'U IMPERIAL DRE IMPERI,rJ.,-IR /1 t NUE.LES,,/y{ W a11 POMPANO DR 0 s r rHEDOLN OeP_RSWAYr 1 —1— 00 e- `w w iZ1 v;f e 1 _ e Y + — f'r1 I ©2002 DeLorme.Street Atlas USA®2003 Plus. TN Scale 1 :25,000 www.delorme.corn 0 6 +zoo 18011 0400 woo m MN 141'MN 0 200 000 600 000 +000 1"=2080 ft sIt f Street Atlas USA®2003 Plus W81'I 50' '..f': 7� P 81'48' W81'46'''>- W81'44' W81'42' -.--�a..„.. /.� 33928 75 ri j j 1. r ` t 1 ,1-', 1 - - , ',-.11 r i a i 1 ii; I ( i i , 1 ,_ _� i, i { 1 ; ' i1 ` � ' 1 ! il f \x fl i I I / ,AMP 3 ] 1 1 r 1, r `r°i ')34 34 ',,_1' ''.',,,,:'°\': v. • r ...r h 11111* la { - I, ;x 4 i .�itlfk.L ,��,. ■I eon; ,VAI '.'''\IP : * e • t 1 :.I '.ii!.nnontiel — 1 1 4,1 SWIM % c-/A , 1...'- ,i1.14.0.,....1t2 ' 11.14 g 1 1_4- z ! .-s - O 7:1''',.:; ,.._,r- •AN ,.. al �1'\'irk ..iiminrwil moo: , rSbiect Proporty I • .. ` a....--.L 1, ,r 4,...-1 a• 11111z '^'b i' 34110 4 in ' ` � Mai Igili 41 ea r1 ,-�i PI II 1 '+, tit i I f.\ s' i - } 1...‘ ' 1 , I ,-,, - '1/4 II,E, —= la - t ., .........._ ri, " mil ., _ .1 = - \Iir_i � Iii`J 1 t ( �1�� .34119 i t_. ll( , 34 i ` �i 11, it 1 11111 I �� i' 1 Iz I L -- ' ? 1 33103r/71174 ,.../:x j 75 a 6�--- ©2002 DeLorme.Street Atlas USA®2003 Plus. TN Seale 1 :100,000 www.delorme_com * o z 1 I, 2IN MN(0.2°W) 10... -- 2 Grn V.=1.58 ma TopoZone - The Web's Topographic Map Page 1 of 1 $0pOZtt(l@ , -,5,4.1.e4.3"3dip,a a, nE.,.L v c 1 _ () is 1 _L _CO .. 1- - m _ I { - y.. _ �. , 1 ' i • } • 1 -n � i.. — t [41, 0 0.:3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 km 0 0.1 0.2 0,3 0.4 0.5 mi Map center is UTM 17 424284E 2910351N (WGS84/NAD83) Bonita Springs quadrangle h1=-4.664 Projection is UTM Zone 17 NAD83 Datum G=-0.336 1,44."..•//..n.,.a, 4nr.n,nnr rnmint-int AQn97=1 7R1n=)9101 1 00000241&e=424283.999999985&... 9/14/2005 16.2 Site Plan "t\i' ir H =N o c Q NM y' c d L Z ~ � U ILL 6) in ll ,Iz1< m to liV 7 I IIM I 1 c I U y iii m 11 �o i -a e c 'c E =1 imo E I C3 11 2 2 i rz�a _ E x a .5t' LEI �_ 0 Imo 0 " LL II cn , O -�m z 0 U b H, 0 "Zi CI:. Uv, • -1.) m U z � al 4 II m Q" 9 a M m w 47 a � U _ 0 m I Em a m 4 1 II I I it 1 � II i 1 h ' 1 v iii C, I, V ;i'l t: I [ti i1 €�' fil 1Ip : 1 i 16.3 .; Site Photographs i it F il t r- ot 11,E Ilk 1 t 7 lj a .S.4,, n '' '" :t..1i-, ,.. _,....,,-.-0.-1,-4kuar -'. -,.--f .,'.-. 0 At ... 4.., tA .., . . ..,, . .,„.. , i , ,.,. , .; , . 1 ... . , r- • 4 - I i ii T,.. , ,. , i ..„8, , Above:A view of the property adjacent south from the subject property. y. -441Lit.._ -• x .. --•max f z �, �>'fig, .� 4 - �. *^ ' •,••' " • , i Above:A view of the storage shed on the subject property. r. VI p; t;'I '4 s I r k i' I 16.4 Database Report ,I ti 1. 11 p.. _.. ,.. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Custom Data. Research 2500 Hardesty Road Bonita Springs, Florida 34135 Client Project #: S1143A Prepared For: Environmental Risk Management, Inc. 15248 Tamiami Trail Suite 800 Fort Myers, FL 33908 Prepared By: ENVIRONMENTAL DATA MANAGEMENT, INC. 14100 Walsingham Road, Suite 31 Largo, Florida 33774 Wednesday, September 07, 2005 Ild,Iiironiliental Data Nianeement,14 I��c Largo Wialsdill Road.Suite 1 Largo,Florida[lorid �"-"4 ( )595-800 Fax C1271595-861)6 -861) hnt;:i,`w vw.ednrnet.com Wednesday, September 07, 2005 Client Project#: S1143A Lance Scoogin Environmental Risk Management, Inc. 15248 Tamiami Trail Suite 800 Fort Myers, FL 33908 Subject: Custom Data Research--EDM Project#: 17158 Dear Mr. Scoogin: Thank you for using Environmental Data Management, Inc. The following report provides the results of our environmental data research that you requested for the following location: 2500 Hardesty Road Bonita Springs,Florida 34135 The following is a summary of the components contained within this report: • Executive Summary -.a listing of the databases searched, search distance criteria and the number of sites identified for each database. • Map(s)of Study Area- show the location of sites identified relative to the subject property. These sites are labeled with Map ID Numbers,used to correlate the map symbols with data detail within the report. A non- mapped option is available. • Summary Table - summary information concerning the records identified within your study area. The table provides corresponding Map ID numbers, the site's Permit or Facility I.D. Number, the site's name and address and the government database(s) on which the site was listed. • Site Detail Reports—data detail for each record identified. Grouped by database listing or by Map ID. • Proximal Records Table—summary information listing potentially relevant sites identified just beyond the search criteria. These records may account for instances where a regulated site's boundary extends into the study area but its address is outside of the search radius or where the site is mis-mapped slightly. • Non-Mapped Records Table-lists those government records that do not contain sufficient address information to plot within our GIS system,but may still exist within your study area. • Ancillary Information —may include Title Search Report,City Directory Records or other additional research records. At EDM we take great pride in our work, and continually strive to provide you with the most thorough and comprehensive service available. We accomplish this by manually screening your report against both computerized and hard copy maps, as well as additional address sources. This manual effort may add more time and effort to your report preparation, but we think a more thorough and accurate result is worth it. After all,what's the value of inaccurate information? Thank you again for selecting EDM as your data research provider. Should you have any questions regarding this report or our service,please feel free to contact us. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you and look forward to working with Environmental Risk Management,Inc. in the future. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA MANAGEMENT,INC. Agency List Descriptions US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Coratyeheris.i e Env Response, Compensation & Liabiiit ' information Sy steiriL.st( ERCLiS) The US EPA Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation,and Liability Information System(CERCLIS)is the Superfund database used to track facilities and/or locations that the USEPA is investigating to determine if an existing or threatened release of hazardous substances is present. Agency File Date: 7/5/2005 Received by EDM: 7/21/2005 EDM Database Updated: 7/23/2005 RCRIS Handiere with Corrective Action(CORRACTS) The US EPA Corrective Action Sites(CORRACTS)database is a listing of hazardous waste handlers that have undergone RCRA corrective action activity. This information is compiled by the EPA Regional and State RCRA program personnel,as well as the RCRA facilities themselves. Agency File Date: 5/20/2005 Received by EDM: 6/6/2005 EDM Database Updated: 6/16/2005 RCRA-L QG,SQC,CESQG and Transp.orters(WONTSD The EDM NONTSD list is a subset of the US EPA RCRIS list and identifies facilities that generate and transport hazardous wastes. These facilities may be Large Quantity Generators(LQG), Small Quantity Generators(SQG),Conditionally Exempt SQG's(CESQG) as well as"Non-Notifiers"and"Non- Handlers". Agency File Date: 5/20/2005 Received by EDM: 6/6/2005 EDM Database Updated: 6/9/2005 Nationa! Priorities List(NPL) The US EPA National Priorities List(NPL)contains facilities and/or locations where environmental contamination has been confirmed and prioritized for cleanup activities. The NPL was devised as a method for the EPA to prioritize these sites for the purpose of taking remedial action as funded by the Hazardous Waste Substance Superfund program. Agency File Date: 4/27/2005 Received by EDM: 7/4/2005 EDM Database Updated: 7/4/2005 RCRA-Treatment, Storage and/or Disposal Sites(TSD) The EDM TSD list is a subset of the US EPA RCRIS list and identifies facilities that Treat,Store and/or Dispose of hazardous waste. Agency File Date: 5/20/2005 Received by EDM: 6/6/2005 EDM Database Updated: 6/9/2005 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Leaking Underground Storage Tanks List/LUST) The FDEP LUST list identifies facilities and/or locations that have notified the FDEP of a possible release of contaminants from petroleum storage systems. This Report is generated from the FDEP Storage Tank and Contamination Monitoring Database(STCM). Agency File Date: 6/6/2005 Received by EDM: 6/16/2005 EDM Database Updated: 6/17/2005 Solid Waste Facilities List(SLDWST) The FDEP SLDW ST identifies locations that have been permitted to conduct solid waste handling activities including Landfills,Transfer Stations and sites handling Bio-Hazardous wastes. Sites listed with"##"after the GMS ID Number are historical locations,obtained from documents on record at local agencies. Agency File Date: 6/6/2005 Received by EDM: 6/6/2005 EDM Database Updated: 6/16/2005 State Sites List(STCERC) The STCERC is a historical listing of sites that the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation(FDER)compiled to track suspect contamination sites. This list was known as the Florida SITES list and was last updated by the FDER in 1989. Agency File Date: 12/1/1989 Received by EDM: 4/1/1995 EDM Database Updated: 4/25/1995 State Funded Action Sites(STNPL) TheFDEP SFAS list contains facilities and/or locations that have been identified by the FDEP as having known environmental contamination and are currently being addressed through State funded cleanup action. Agency File Date: 3/22/2005 Received by EDM: 6/26/2005 EDM Database Updated: 6/27/2005 Underground/Aboveground Storage Tanks(TANKS) The FDEP Storage Tank and Contamination Monitoring(STCM)database contains sites with registered aboveground and/or underground storage tanks containg regulated petroleum products. Please refer to the"Explanation of Florida Tank Codes" insert to interpret tank construction,monitoring and piping codes. Agency File Date: 8/14/2005 Received by EDM: 8/29/2005 EDM Database Updated: 9/1/2005 /1 EXPLANATION OF FLORIDA TANK CODES CONSTRUCTION TYPE CODES LEAK MONITORING CODES A=BALL CHECK VALVE 1 =CONTINUOUS ELECTRONIC SENSING EQUIPMENT B=INTERNAL LINING 2=VISUAL INSPECTIONS OF PIPING SUMPS C=STEEL 3=ELECTRONIC MONITORING OF PIPING SUMPS D=UNKNOWN 4=VISUAL INSPECTIONS OF DISPENSING LINERS E=FIBERGLASS 5=ELECTRONIC MONITORING OF DISPENSER LINERS F=FIBERGLASS-CLAD STEEL 6=EXTERNAL PIPING MONITORING G=CATHODIC PROTECTION-SACRIFICIAL ANODE 7=AUTOMATICALLY SAMPLED WELLS H=CATHODIC PROTECTION-IMPRESSED CURRENT 8=MANUALLY SAMPLED WELLS I=DBL WALL/SINGLE MATERIAL A=SITE SUITABILITY PLAN J=SYNTHETIC LINER IN TANK EXCAVATION B=SITE SUITABILITY PLAN EXEMPTION K=AST CONTAINMENT:CONCRETE/SYNTHETIC MATERIAL AREA C=GROUNDWATER MONITOR PLAN L=COMPARTMENTED D=SPCC PLAN M=SPILL CONTAINMENT BUCKET E=INTERSTITIAL MONITORING UST LINERS N=FLOW SHUT OFF F=INTERSTITIAL SPACE-DOUBLE WALL TANK 0=TIGHT FILL G=ELECTRONIC LINE LEAK DETECTOR W/FLOW SHUTOFF P=LEVEL GAUGES,HI LEVEL ALARMS H=MECHANICAL LINE LEAK DETECTOR Q=OTHER DER APPROVED PROTECTION METHOD I=NOT REQUIRED-SEE RULE FOR EXEMPTIONS R=DBL WALL/DUAL MATERIAL/(TANK"JACKET) J=INTERSTITIAL MONITORING-PIPING LINER S=OTHER DEP APPROVED SECONDARY CONTAINTMENT SYSTEM K=INTERSTITIAL MONITORING-DOUBLE WALL PIPING T=SMALL USE TANK L=AUTOMATIC TANK GAUGING SYSTEM(USTS) U=FIELD ERECTED TANK M=MANUAL TANK GAUGING SYSTEM(USTS) V=PIPELESS UST W/SECONDARY CONTAINMENT N=GROUNDWATER MONITORING SYSTEM W=BUILT ON SUPPORTS 0=VAPOR MONITORING SYSTEM X=CONCRETE P=VAPOR MONITORING W/DILUTION PROCEDURES Y=POLYETHYLENE Q=VISUAL INSPECTION OF AST SYSTEMS Z=OTHER DEP APPROVED TANK MATERIAL R=INTERSTITIAL MONITORING OF TANK BOTTOM S=STATISTICAL INVENTORY RECONCILIATION(SIR/USTS) PIPING TYPE CODES T=ANNUAL TIGHTNESS TEST WITH INVENTORY(UST) U=BULK PIPING PRESSURE TEST A=ABOVE GROUND-NO CONTACT W/SOIL V=SUCTION PUMP CHECK VALVE B=STEEL OR GALVANIZED METAL W=FIBER-OPTIC TECHNOLOGIES ,-� C=FIBERGLASS X=NONE D=EXTERNAL PROTECTIVE COATING Y=UNKNOWN E=CATHODIC PROTECTION(SACRIFICIAL ANODE/IMPRESSED Z=OTHER DEP APPROVED MONITORING METHOD CURRENT) F=DBLWALL/SINGLE MATERIAL G=SYNTHETIC OR BOX/TRENCH LINER H=AIRPORT/SEAPORT HYDRANT SYSTEM I=SUCTION PIPING SYSTEM J=PRESSURIZED PIPING SYSTEM K=DISPENSER LINERS L=BULK PRODUCT SYSTEM M=DOUBLE WALL/DUAL MATERIAL(PIPE "JACKET) N=APPROVED SYNTHETIC MATERIAL 0=SEVERE VIOLATION P=INTERNAL PIPING WITHIN INTERNAL SUMP RISER V=VIOLATION X=NO PIPING ASOCIATED WITH TANK Y=UNKNOWN Z=OTHER DEP APPROVED PIPING MATERIAL Executive Summary I /'\ Client Information Project Information Lance Scoogin Custom Data Research Environmental Risk Management, Inc. 2500 Hardesty Road 239-415-6406 Client Job No# S1143A Bonita Springs, Florida 34135 1 Client P.O. No EDM Job No# 17158 i The following table displays the databases that were included in the research provided,the respective search distance for each database, and the number of records identified for each database. Search Greater Radius From From From From than 1 Totals (Miles) 0-.13mi .13-.25mi .26-.5mi .51-1.0 mi Mile EPA DATABASES National Priorities List(NPL) 1.00 0 0 0 0 N/A 0 Comprehensive Env Response, Compensation&Liability 0.50 0 0 0 N/A N/A 0 Information SystemList(CERCLIS) RCRIS Handlers with Corrective Action(CORRACTS) 1.00 0 0 0 0 N/A 0 RCRA-Treatment, Storage and/or Disposal Sites(TSD) 1.00 0 0 0 0 N/A 0 RCRA-LQG,SQG,CESQG and Transporters(NONTSD) .125 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 FDEP DATABASES State Funded Action Sites(STNPL) 1.00 0 0 0 0 N/A 0 State Sites List(STCERC) 0.50 0 0 0 N/A N/A 0 Solid Waste Facilities List(SLDWST) 0.50 0 0 0 N/A N/A 0 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks List(LUST) 0.25 0 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 e---.` Underground/Aboveground Storage Tanks(TANKS) .125 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 *•*Disclaimer*** Please understand that the regulatory databases we utilize were not originally intended for our use,but rather for the source agency's internal tracking of sites for which they have jurisdiction or other interest.As a result of this difference in intended use,their data is frequently found to be incomplete or inaccurate,and is less than ideal for our use.Additionally,limitations exist in mapping data detail and accuracy.Our report is not to be relied upon for any purpose other than to"point"at approximate locations where further evaluation may be warranted.No conclusion can be based solely upon our report.Rather,our report should be used as a first step in directing your attention at potential problem areas,which should be followed up by site inspections,interviews with relevant personnel and regulatory file review.Readers proceed at their own risk in relying upon this data,in whole or in part,for use within any evaluation.The EDM Service Request Form,signed by all of our clients before EDM issues a report,contains more detailed language with regard to such limitations,the terms of which the reader must accept in their entirety before utilizing this report.If the signed contract is not available to the reader,EDM will gladly furnish a copy upon request. ED1VICopyright©2005 Environmental Data Management, Inc. For further information please contact us at 800-368-7376 /'.\ Use of this information is strictly limited by EDM's authorization agreement,signed by our clients for each report. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA MANAGEMENT ** Custom Data Research Sep 07.2005 SUMMARY TABLE Page 1 of 1 REGULATORY LISTS N'CCTNIS SIS LT P E O S O T TIL U A L R R D NIN, CID S N ICR :TPE44WTK ILIA S `LRIS S S C Dj CIT T S i MAPID# FACILITY ID NUMBER, NAME AND LOCATION I I % No Data Found I I ' DISTANCE FROM SUBJECT PROPERTY(mi) DIRECTION FROM SUBJECT PROPERTY I I ` EDMEDS �{ Copyright©2005 Environmental Data Management, Inc. For further information please contact us at 800-368-7376 Use of this information is strictly limited by EDM's authorization agreement,signed by our clients for each report. PROXIMAL RECORDS TABLE �-` Sep 07, 2005 The Proximal Records Table includes mapped facilities that appear outside of the study area, but in the proximity of the research boundary. They are provided in a summary fashion to allow one to determine potential interest. Generally, these sites may be of potential interest for three reasons: R 0 1.) The location occurs so close to the research boundary that it merits inclusion in the evaluation. X 2.)The site may be expansive with regard to the property boundary. The physical address of a landfill for example may occur outside of the research boundary, but the landfill boundary may extend into the research area. Large industrial complexes may also fall into this category. M 3.) The U.S. Census Bureau data, from which our maps are created, is not always precise with A regard to address information. A facility may therefore appear on the map outside of the research L area,but actually fall within the research area. These inaccuracies are typically less than 500 feet. If you observe any such inaccuracies, we ask that you please notify us of the more precise location and we will use this information to improve our product. R If more specific information relative to one or more locations included in the Proximal Records E Table is desired, please feel free to contact us and we will send you this information as an addendum to this report. 0 R EDM D Copyright©2005 Environmental Data Management, Inc. For further information please contact us at 800-368-7376 Use of this information is strictly limited by EDM's authorization agreement,signed by our clients for each repori. ** ENVIRONMENTAL DATA MANAGEMENT ** Custom Data Research Scp 07.2005 PROXIMAL RECORDS TABLE Page 1 of 1 REGULATORY LISTS N C C T NIS SIS L T P E G S O1T TIL U A L RRDNNCIDSN CR TPEWTK LIA SLRS S SC DI CT T I S I MAPID# FACILITY ID NUMBER, NAME AND LOCATION I I No Data Found I 1 EDMEDS y,�' Copyright©2005 Environmental Data Management, Inc. For further information please contact us at 800-368-7376 Use of this information is strictly limited by ED M's authorization agreement,signed by our clients for each report. NONMAPPED RECORDS TABLE Sep 07, 2005 The Non-Mapped Records Table is a listing of database records that lack sufficient address information to be placed within our mapping system,but may exist within your study area. These records have been manually screened,using two primary criteria. The first screening criteria is whether the non-mapped record can be N identified as existing within your study area,and then adding it to the map and body of the report. The second criterion is whether the listed facility can possibly exist within the study area. If the site can be Q conclusively identified as existing outside of the study area, it is excluded from the report. All remaining, screened records are provided on the EDM Non-Mapped Records Table within this report. N The Non-Mapped Records Table consists of sites identified as possibly existing within your study area(e.g. M a valid street name,but no street number), or a listed address that is unrecognized. For your convenience, we A have categorized these screened records into three groups: I.)Non-mapped records that contain a Zip code equal to the subject property and surrounding area. Because we extract all of the zip codes listed within records mapped within your study area (to help p identify historical zip codes),you may see zip code values in this portion of your report that are unexpected. 2.)Non-mapped records that contain no Zip code information but are listed within the same City as the subject property. Adjacent City data may also be provided if the subject property is located very near another city boundary. 3.)Non-mapped records that contain no Zip code or City information but are listed within the same County as the subject property. Adjacent county data may also be provided if the subject property is located very near a county boundary. C If more specific information relative to one or more locations included in the Non-Mapped Records Table is 0 desired, please feel free to contact us and we will send you this information as an addendum to this report. R.D S ED Copyright©2005 Environmental Data Management, Inc. For further information please contact us at 800-368-7376 Use of this information is strictly limited by EDM authorization agreement,signed by our clients for each report. ** ENVIRONMENTAL DATA MANAGEMENT ** Custom Data Research Sep 07,2005 ZIPCODE PORTION OF THE NON-MAPPED RECORDS TABLE Page 1 of 1 REGULATORY LISTS N CCTNISS1SLT P E0SOTT1LUA L R R D N N CID S 'N CR T.P EIW T K, U A SLRIS S S C D CIT T I � MAPID# FACILITY ID NUMBER, NAME AND LOCATION S j For Zipcode of: - 9047480 I X FISHER AUTO BROKERS-USE#9046342 I UNKNOWN UNKNOWN,FL.- i I � X 9047461 7-ELEVEN FOOD STORE#27123 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN,FL.- Far Zipcode of: 33923 •_-- 00089584 X MODERN RECYCLING INC.OF FLORIDA I BONITA SPRINGS,FL.33923 I ii I 1 i _ D ,/( Copyright©2005 Environmental Data Management, Inc. 1 V 1 For further information please contact us at 800-368-7376 Use of this information is strictly limited by EDM's authorization agreement,signed by our clients for each report. ** ENVIRONMENTAL DATA MANAGEMENT ** Custom Data Research Sep 07,2005 CITY PORTION OF THE NON-MAPPED RECORDS TABLE Page 1 of REGULATORY LISTS NCCTNSSIS LT PEOSOTTLUA LRRDNNCDSN CR TPEWTK LIA SLRS S SC D CT T S MAPID# FACILITY ID NUMBER, NAME AND LOCATION For City of: No Data Found 1 j ' /M Copyright©2005 Environmental Data Management, Inc. �D1 V 1 For further information please contact us at 800-368-7376 Use of this information is strictly limited by EDM's authorization agreement,signed by our clients for each report. ** ENVIRONMENTAL DATA MANAGEMENT ** Custom Data Research Sep 07,2005 COUNTY PORTION OF THE NON-MAPPED RECORDS TABLE Page 1 of 1 REGULATORY LISTS NCCTNIS S(SLTi PE0SOTT1LUA LRRDNNCDSN CR TIPEWTK LIA SLRS S �S C D CT T S I MAPID# FACILITY ID NUMBER, NAME AND LOCATION For County of: LEE NONE 368 X OHIO MEDICAL PRODUCTS TO BE DET ,FL. NONE 363 X STEEGO PARTS CO TO BE DET ,FL. X. NONE 362 SHULNBURG TO BE DET ,FL. 9047480 X FISHER AUTO BROKERS UNKNOWN UNKNOWN,FL. 9047461 X 7-ELEVEN FOOD STORE#27123 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN,FL. EDMCopyright©2005 Environmental Data Management, Inc. For further information please contact us at 800-368-7376 Use of this information is strictly limited by EDM's authorization agreement,signed by our clients for each report. [121 1(43) Contract .Tiff,aenroviRS [.1 1,F[i [A ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT, INC Licensed Engineering and Geology Firm• Assessment & Remediation Consultants August 12, 2005 Mr. Steve Fiterman Distinctive Communities, Inc. 6967 Verde Way Naples, Florida 34108 VIA EMAIL: sfiterman@mac.com RE: Proposed Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 3 Parcels in Collier County Folio No.00147840000,00147240008,00146680009 Naples,Florida ERMI File No. C1143A Dear Mr. Fitennan: Environmental Risk Management, Inc. (ERMI) proposes to conduct a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the referenced property. We propose to provide assessment procedures as described in the attached scope of services form. The purpose of the proposed research is to determine if any evidence exists to suggest the presence of environmental impact to the soil and/or groundwater of the site. The specified level of diligence is in accordance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Standard. The limitations of Phase I ESAs are documented in ASTM Designation E 1527-00, "Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments." Matters outside the scope of this investigation, include but are not limited to: asbestos containing materials, radon, mold, lead-based paint, lead in drinking water, wetlands, regulatory compliance, cultural and historical resources, industrial hygiene, health and safety, ecological resources, endangered species, indoor air quality, and high voltage power lines. Please contact us if you are interested in adding any of these matters to the scope of work for this project. We propose to you a fixed fee of s for our services (full report) according to the attached schedule of Terms and Conditions dated January 1, 2004, which is made a part of this agreement as if fully contained herein. ERMI will provide two copies of the final report unless other written arrangements are made. Please provide the following information to ERMI: ▪ legal name(s) of all entities to which the report should be certified. • reliable documentation indicating the subject property boundaries, and a legal description of the property. Headquarters 15248 Tamiami Trail South#800 Fort Myers, Florida 33908 1-888-ENV-MGMT (1-888-368-6468) : Fax 1-888-368-6329 ..a www.ermi.net Mr. Steve Fiterman Page 2 of 3 Proposed Phase I ESA August 12,2005 • if available, title information as outlined in the attached Scope of Services form. • The name of any party which should be contacted for site access. • Property owners name, address and phone numbers ERMI can provide the following follow-up services after completing this project: • Additional bound copies of the report. • Additional certifications for reliance on the report. • Updates to the report after report submittal. • Additional fees may apply. We trust this proposal is responsive to your needs. If acceptable,please so indicate by signing and returning one copy of this proposal, receipt of which shall constitute our Notice to Proceed. ERMI presumes that by authorizing this contract, you have obtained permission for ERMI to perform these services on the subject property. Final payment will be due upon receipt of the report. This proposal will become null and void if not accepted within 30 days of its date. Sincerely, ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT,INC. Barton J. Baker, CFEA, REPA Project Manager Enclosure: Terms and Conditions Scope of Services Statement of Qualifications Environmental Risk Management,Inc. ERMI File No. C1143A € 8/29/05 FON 15:20 FAX 763 546 7321 GROUND DEVELOPMENT INC. X001/001 Mr.Steve Fitem Page 3 of 3 Proposed Phase I ESA. August 12,2005 ?RQPOSAL ACCEPTANCE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am.the Owner of?Agent for the Owner of or have a valid"Contract to Purchase"with the Owner of;the property which is the subject of this Proposal. I hereby authorize the performance of the services as set forth in this Proposal,and agree to compensate the firm of Environmental Risk Management,Inc.,with monetary disbursement,for said services. I understand the result of any financing or real estate transaction will not effect payments due. Payment is due upon completion of the final project report and will be required prior to release of the report unless other written arrangements are made. I also acknowledge that I have read,understand and agree to the terms and conditions set forth in this Proposal,or attached thereto. I warrant and represent that I am authorized to enter into this agreement and agree to be personally responsible for the payment of all fees. Ihois Pro is accepted this day Z 4kt.cti,-)A. 2005. Authorized Representative kr- Printed Name,Title,Company Name Please indicate below which payment method Lc preferred: CHECK Wailed prior to delivery of`report OR W be picked up upon delivery). VISA or MASTERCARD(Will be charged when the fuurl report is marled or delivered). Credlt Card No. Expiration Date of Credit Card Please indicate if`the comppaunyfindividiud&address being invoiced Zr different from the information that appears on the front of this proposal t Fax Nater orEmail Address rte, Environmental Risk Management,Inc, Erm File No.C 1143A Mr. Steve Fiterman Page 3 of 3 Proposed Phase I ESA August 12,2005 PROPOSAL ACCEPTANCE I HEREBY CERTIFY that I am the Owner of, Agent for the Owner of, or have a valid "Contract to Purchase" with the Owner of, the property which is the subject of this Proposal. I hereby authorize the performance of the services as set forth in this Proposal, and agree to compensate the firm of Environmental Risk Management, Inc.,with monetary disbursement, for said services. I understand the result of any financing or real estate transaction will not effect payments due. Payment is due upon completion of the final project report and will be required prior to release of the report unless other written arrangements are made. I also acknowledge that I have read, understand and agree to the terms and conditions set forth in this Proposal, or attached thereto. I warrant and represent that I am authorized to enter into this agreement and agree to be personally responsible for the payment of all fees. This Proposal is accepted this day of, 2005. By: Authorized Representative Client: Printed Name,Title, Company Name Please indicate below which payment method is preferred: CHECK (Mailed prior to delivery of report OR to be picked up upon delivery). VISA or MASTERCARD(Will be charged when the final report is mailed or delivered). Credit Card No. Expiration Date of Credit Card Please indicate if the company/individual& address being invoiced is different from the information that appears on the front of this proposal. Fax Number or Email Address Environmental Risk Management,Inc. ERMI File No. C1143A ; 11110 ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT, INC.iir . Licensed Engineering and Geology Firm•Assessment& Remediation Consultants ' TERMS AND CONDITIONS 9 January 1, 2004 Payment: Payment is due upon completion of the final project report and will be required prior release of the report unless other ' written arrangements are made. If payment terms are extended beyond the project due date, the client agrees to carefully read the invoices and promptly notify us, in writing,of any claimed errors or discrepancies within 15 days after the date of the invoice. If we do not receive such notice, it is presumed that you agree with the accuracy and fairness of the invoice. Invoices shall be considered past due if not paid within 30 days after the invoice date. Late payment charges of 1.5%per month of the balance due on the account shall be applied on all past due invoice. If any portion of an account is unpaid 90 days after the invoice date,the client shall pay the d cost of collection,including reasonable attorney's fees. Hidden Conditions: A structural condition is hidden if concealed by existing finishes or is not ascertainable by reasonable visual ; observation. For example, an unregistered underground storage tank with no visual evidence to indicate its existence is a hidden ' condition. Similarly, soil or groundwater contamination existing in an untested location, with no reasonable visual, regulatory, or historical evidence to indicate its existence is a hidden condition. Provided ERMI conforms to the Standard of Care as outlined below and the Scope of Work defined in the Contract Agreement, ERMI will not be responsible for any liability associated with hidden conditions. Standard of Care: ERMI represents that the services performed in this project will conform to the standard of care,skill,and diligence ' exercised by other similar professionals performing the same or similar services in the area. ERMI will render qualified opinions pertaining to the objectives of this project,based on data obtained in the investigation. An assessment of this nature does not include any guaranty regarding the conclusions of the final report because even the most diligent investigation has limitations. Reliance and Use of Reports: The client is entitled to rely on the information presented in the final report.No other parties are entitled to rely on the report unless additional written arrangements are made. If a successor or assignee of the client, or another third party, requests the ability to rely on the report, the party must agree to the terms and conditions of this contract agreement. Additional charges may apply for reliance letters. ERMI will provide one original and one copy of the final report to the client unless otherwise specified in the Scope of Work section of the agreement. Additional charges may apply if the client desires additional copies of the final report. 3 Site Safety: ERMI's site responsibilities are limited solely to the activities of ERMI. These responsibilities shall not be inferred to mean that ERMI has responsibility for the safety of any person not employed by ERMI. Termination of Services: The result of any financing or real estate transaction will not effect payments due. If the client desires to terminate this agreement for any reason, and ERMI has rendered professional services toward completion of the project, a fee of $750.00, or fees on a time and materials basis, will be charged, whichever is greater. The termination notice must be submitted in writing to the project manager. Indemnifications: ERMI agrees to indemnify the client from liability caused by ERMI negligence arising from the services provided by ERMI in this project. Client agrees to indemnify ERMI from liability caused by the client, the property owner, or the facility operator at the subject property,and to indemnify ERMI from liability associated with real estate transactions or financing. Mediation: In an effort to resolve any conflicts that may arise from this project, client and ERMI agree that all disputes shall be I submitted to non-binding mediation,unless the parties mutually agree otherwise. Applicable Law: This agreement shall be governed by the laws of Florida, and venue of any proceedings shall lie exclusively in Lee County Florida. Attorney's Fees: In connection with any litigation that may arise from this project, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover /-t reasonable attorney's fees from the other party. Headquarters .415248 Tamiami Trail South#800 = Fars Myers,r's, Florida 33908 1-888-ENV-MGMT(1-888-368-6468) 4 Fax 1-888-368-6329 www.ermi.net T ,.� ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT, INC. Licensed Engineering and Geology Firm•Assessment& Remediation Consultants STANDARD SCOPE OF SERVICES Based on the present professional environmental assessment Standard of Care in Florida,the following procedures represent appropriate inquiry to investigate property in an attempt to determine the location and existence of potential sources of environmental impact without intrusive testing. Land Use History Investigation 1. Title information to the subject property should be reviewed or provided by the client(i.e. Abstract of Title or 50 year chain of Title)to help identify the former owners, former land uses, and legal history of the site. If sufficient evidence to develop a history of previous study area land uses defined in Section 7.3 of ASTM E-1527-00 is obtained, the title information will not be necessary. 2. A series of historical aerial photographs, USGS Quad Maps, city directories, and property cards are reviewed to gather data on former study area land uses. 3. Property owners, site tenants, local historians or area residents are interviewed (if necessary) to obtain supplemental information concerning the land use history. Site and Study Area Observations 1. A limited field investigation is conducted for nearby properties. Facilities with land uses suspected as potential sources of environmental impact are listed,observed,and researched through interviews and/or regulatory investigations. 2. The site reconnaissance includes the completion of an environmental site observation guide to determine the potential for environmental impact on the site and in the study area. This standard form also encourages the observation of site-specific characteristics to promote a comprehensive site observation and verify the evidence collected from the public records. "-Ns\ 3. Color photographic documentation is collected. Regulatory Agency Review 1. A compilation of federal, State, and local regulatory databases are reviewed for suspect facilities identified within the study area. State and local files are researched for documentation verifying potential environmental impact in the area. 2. Federal and State government databases are reviewed to identify contaminated or potentially contaminated facilities.For each database, the respective search distances from the site appear in parenthesis. The lists includes the following: Federal NPL site list (1.0 mile), Federal CERCLIS (0.5 mile), Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list (property and adjoining properties), Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list(1.0 mile),Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list(0.5 mile), Federal RCRA generators list(site and adjoining properties), Federal ERNS list(property only), State lists of hazardous waste sites identified for investigation or remediation: State-equivalent NPL (1.0) mile, State-equivalent CERCLIS (0.5 mile), State landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists(0.5 mile), State leaking UST lists(0.5 mile),and State registered UST lists. 3. If necessary, county pollution control depaittnent officials are interviewed and regulatory files are reviewed to supplement the regulatory data collected. Evaluation 1. Collected data is documented and described in a report with sections devoted to the research elements described above. 2. The findings, including potential sources of environmental impact to the subject property,are summarized in the conclusions section for convenient reference in the report. 3. Recommendations are made based on evidence from data collected in an investigation. Client Communication 1. These services are generally completed within two weeks of ERMI's authorization to proceed. A verbal report or a report summary letter can be provided upon request. Headquarters 45248 Tamiami Trail South#800 Fort Myers, Florida 33908 1-888-ENV-MGMT(1-888-368-6468) 4 Fax 1-888-368-6329 4 www.ermi.net ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT, INCs = } Licensed Engineering and Geology Firm• Assessment & Remediation Consultants Statement of Qualifications Environmental Risk Management, Inc. (ERMI) manages environmental risks to maintain or restore property value and provide economic benefits to our clients. Services Phase I/II Env. Site Assessments Insurance Claims Services Site Assessment Reports Funding Allocation Agreements Remedial Action Plans Real Estate Brokering Site Remediation Mortgage Brokering Innovative Remedial Technologies Asbestos, Lead Paint, Mold Services Tank Closure Industrial Hygiene/Indoor Air Quality Conditional No Further Action Litigation Support/Expert Witness Risk Based Corrective Action Brownfield Designation/Services Hazardous Waste Compliance Audits Insurance Coverage Professional Liability: $2,000,000 Pollution Liability: $2,000,000 General Liability: $2,000,000 Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 Representative Client List Florida Department of Environmental Protection AIG Technical Services Florida Department of Transportation Hendry County Florida Department of Corrections Glades County Zurich US Environmental Claims Department El Paso Corporation References Melanie Anderson, Regions Bank (863) 763-5535 Dawn Hiestand, Zurich US Environmental Claims Department (847) 605-7734 Jeff Gould, FDEP Administrator, South District (239) 332-6975 Lester Baird, Hendry County Administrator (863) 675-5220 Carter McCain, MacFarlane, Ferguson & McMullen (813) 273-4226 Bank Reference: Kent Anderson (239) 594-5900 Insurance Reference: Patricia Schmaltz (813) 248-1135 Contact Information Environmental Risk Management, Inc. Website: www.ermi.net 15248 Tamiami Trail South, Suite 800 Email: bbaker(Cbermi.net Fort Myers, FL 33908 Phone No. 1-888-368-6468 Contact: Barton J. Baker, CFEA REPA Fax No. 1-888-368-6329 Headquarters 45248 Tamiami Trail South #800 Fort Myers, Florida 33908 1-888-ENV-MGMT (1-888-368-6468) . Fax 1-888-368-6329 www.ermi.net