Loading...
EAC Agenda 04/05/2006 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA April 5,2006 9:00 A.M. Commission Boardroom W. Harmon Turner Building (Building "F")—Third Floor I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of March 1,2006 Meeting minutes V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences VI. Land Use Petitions A. Site Development Plan No. SDP-2005-AR-8088 "The Reserve at Eden Gardens" Section 31,Township 46 S, Range 29 E VII. Old Business A. Update members on projects VIII. New Business A. Outstanding Advisory Council Member Nominations B. Environmental Advisory Council Absences C. Meridian Village PUDZ-2005-AR-8126 Appeal D. Listed species compensation -USFWS E. Estuary Report Card update-Conservancy of Southwest Florida F. Landfill gas monitoring—Solid Waste Management Department G. Further Discussion of CCME Objective 2.1 (Watershed Management Plans). IX Subcommittee Reports X. Council Member Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment ******************************************************************************************************** Council Members: Please notify the Environmental Services Department no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 31, 2006 if you cannot attend this meeting or if you have a conflict and will abstain from voting on a petition (213-2987). 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. March 1, 2006 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Naples, Florida, March 1, 2006 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: William Hughes Terrence Dolan William Hill - Absent Lee Horn Judith Hushon Iry Kraut Erica Lynne - Absent Nick Penniman Michael Sorrell ALSO PRESENT: Stan Chrzanowski, Planning Review Steve Griffin, Assistant County Attorney Susan Mason, Senior Environmental Specialist Bill Lorenz, Director of Environmental Services Barbara Burgeson, Sr. Environmental Specialist Eugene Calvert, Stormwater Management Department 1 March 1, 2006 Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chairman William Hughes at 9:07 AM. II. Roll Call A quorum was established with Terrence Dolan and Lee Horn absent at the time of roll call. III. Approval of Agenda Ms. Mason noted that"VII. New Business, B. Landfill gas monitoring— Solid Waste Management Department"has been rescheduled for the April 5th meeting. Dr. Hushon expressed concerns about Marisol. The Core had turned down the permit but now South Florida Water Management has agreed to build the canal. She would like to have it as a discussion item. Mr. Griffin replied that it can be requested to come before the Committee again. Mr. Penniman moved to approve the agenda. Second by Mr. Kraut. Motion carries unanimously 5-0. IV. Approval of February 1,2006 Meeting minutes Dr. Lynne submitted corrective changes to the minutes in writing including- "page 6: in section on disclosures during recess. Erica Lynne also spoke to Dr. J.P. van Dongen.; page 9: in the motion denying conditional use of CU-AR 7181, second line: "with concern to carrying capacity..." Dr. Hushon moved to approve the February 1, 2006 minutes as amended. Second by Mr. Penniman. Motion carries unanimously 5-0. V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences None addressed. VI. Land Use Petitions A. Special Treatment Permit No. ST-2005-AR-8267 "Irvin Dock" Section 24,Township 51S, Range 25E - Presenters were sworn in by Mr. Griffin. -No disclosures addressed. 2 March 1, 2006 Mr. Dolan joined the meeting at 9:14 AM. Tim Hall, Terrell & Ass. noted that there are no objections to staff stipulations to the project. The project is to access the property. The dock is on the inside of the property which allows for weather protection. Mr. Hughes brought out that the dock comes out over a shoal. Mr. Hall added that the pathway is such so that there are no impacts to the wet lands due to pedestrian traffic. Mr. Griffin swore in the property owners. The property owners then agreed that the project and land is for personal use. Mr. Hughes suggested that a deed restriction be added to prevent commercialization. Dr. Hushon moved to approve the dock as presented. Second by Mr. Dolan. Motion carries unanimously 6-0. Mr. Dolan apologized for being late due to traffic. VII. New Business A. Outstanding Advisory Council Member Nominations Dr. Hushon moved to nominate Dr. Erica Lynne. Second by Mr. Hughes. (A vote was never taken.) Lee Horn joined the meeting at 9:27 AM. Mr. Hughes added that Dr. Lynne is a hero to him and others and thanked her for her service. Dr. Hushon added that she performed above and beyond what was called for. Mr. Hughes would like someone with a background in biochemistry, flora and ecology to apply for her replacement position. Mr. Hughes spoke on being out in the coastal and back areas over the past three years doing photography. He has developed a deep concern on the rate of development as far as shock to the environment. He proposed to consider a limitation on controlling human development pertinent to an environmental aspect. Dr. Hushon brought up that Collier County is looking into running a boat from Tin City to Kewaydin Island. The subject should be brought up because it is so close to the issue discussed at the previous meeting. The Conservancy already runs a beach shuttle with no facilities. Ms. Mason will contact the 3 March 1, 2006 appropriate people from Parks and Rec to send a representative to address the n issue. Stan Chrzanowski introduced Eugene Calvert from the Stormwater Management Department. The meeting recessed at 9:35 AM reconvening at 9:48 AM. B. Landfill gas monitoring—Solid Waste Management Department Rescheduled for April 5th meeting. VIII. Old Business B. Continuation of Review of EAR amendments David Weeks, Comprehensive Planning Department addressed that the Housing Element and Immokalee Area Master Plan still need to be reviewed. Housing Element Document Review(see attachment): Dr. Hushon suggested the language "Demolition of substandard construction"under the fifth bullet on the first page of the Housing Element Document. Public Speaker- Bob Krasowski mentioned that he listened to the Governors Energy Conference where solar water heaters and heat exchange were discussed. Mr. Hughes added the use of condensation from air conditioners can be used as a water supply. He would like there to be more efficiency in utilizing energy and resources. Michelle Mosca, Comprehensive Planning Staff reviewed changes to the document. EAR-IAMP FINAL Document Review(see attachment): Dr. Hushon noted the following changes to the EAR-IAMP: - Page 5, Policy 1.4.1: Add bus service. - Page 7, Policy 2.2.2: There is a language problem that needs to be reedited. - Page 15, 2. : She believes that the density should not go above 16 units. VII. New Business 4 March 1, 2006 C. South Florida Water Management District presentation regarding storm water Damon Meiers, Deputy Director of Environmental Resource Regulation Department gave a Power Point Presentation(see attachment). Dr. Hushon suggested dry detention areas in order to utilize the land for other purposes during the dry periods. Mr. Meiers replied that the water table is too high to make it successful. Lake systems are used instead. Dr. Hushon brought out that lakes have anaerobic degradation below 5-6 feet. Mr. Meiers replied that there is continuing research on water quality of lakes and possible aeration. Mr. Meiers continued his Power Point Presentation. Dr. Hushon would like the run off of water to be reused on landscaping since it already contains nitro. She would like this to be a requirement. Mr.Meiers continued his Power Point Presentation. Open discussion ensued on water boundaries being seamless throughout Florida and the effects of Lake Okeechobee. Mr. Hughes gave kudos to Mr. Meiers. He would like to see testing added to their procedures, and to have more on surface flow directly affecting the subsurface flow. He then addressed protection of existing resources. Dr. Hushon mentioned that about six months ago the Committee realized that large projects use the Harvey Harper Model. It has been criticized, and there are problems with the model. She expressed concerns about following the Harvey Harper Model; adding that lakes fill in after they are constructed which is not taken into consideration within the Model. Mr. Meiers replied that they do not rely on the Harvey Harper Model. The model is being revised by Harvey Harper. The monitoring of new developments is a large issue. The problem is who will do the monitoring and how good the data will be. It was suggested to set up a separate entity to do the monitoring. Mr. Penniman feels that there is problem with lake siltation due to the types of materials at the bottom of the lake; some material may create an impervious service. Mr.Meiers addressed the Marisol project bringing out that Marisol will probably continue with the project without building a flow way. 5 March 1, 2006 Mr. Sorrell commented that protection of resources can not be set up without monitoring. Funding needs to be looked into for monitoring. Mr. Hughes would like Mr. Meiers to give a report every 6 months to the Environmental Advisory Council. Mr. Dolan recognized that development companies would probably support a centralized water quality monitoring program. Mr. Sorrell would like to have the Stakeholder meeting notifications given to the Environmental Advisory Council. Public Speakers- Jennifer Hecker, Conservancy of Southwest Florida would also like to mention that the issue is an economic issue. More storm water needs to be retained and treated within the basin from which it originates. Issues need to be addressed now so that communities do not have to be retro fitted and to prevent exacerbation and compounding of the problem. She suggested that the Environmental Advisory Council consider drafting a resolution for the Commission that would support the underline intent of addressing the need of more stringent water quality certification standards that would incentivice prevention and provide additional treatment other than just wet detention. She then encouraged each Council Member to participate in the Stakeholder Group. Mr. Hughes asked Ms. Hecker to forward her ideas for the resolution. Mr. Meiers mentioned that the Governor is not allowing staffing increases at this time that would cover monitoring. He would also support a resolution. Dr. Hushon moved to generate a supportive memorandum for a watershed management plan and one for the Southwest Florida Basin Rule with appropriate monitoring. Second by Mr. Hughes. (No vote was taken, though the Chairman asked if the Members agreed with no verbal response to the positive or negative.) The meeting recessed at 11:45 AM, reconvening at 12:05 PM. VIII. Old Business A. Update members on projects Mr. Penniman addressed the Drafted letter 2-23-06 (see attachment)to send to the Board of County Commissioners on the lack of a water shed management plan. The project could occur by the Board of County 6 March 1, 2006 .-� Commissioners hiring a private consultant; which might not be the best idea. The best way would be to have the Environmental Services staff perform the work, or to form a commission to make it a public process with stakeholders. Dr. Hushon suggested additional language to the letter(see attachment). The revised letter will be prepared for the next meeting. Mr. Penniman suggested prioritizing the water sheds starting with the most critical. Mr. Lorenz added that the water shed plans have a projected cost of $700,000-$1,000,000 each. B. Continuation of Review of EAR amendments Mr. Lorenz reviewed"Proposed Changes to 02-07-06" (see attachment)to Policy 6 of the EAR made by Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee including suggested language changes. Dr. Hushon would like the language "as specified" added to the document regarding the Land Development Code. Speakers- Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida brought out five points: - A water shed management plan is 6 years overdue therefore the prioritization of the water sheds should commence now.. - What is to be done between now and when the water shed management plans are completed due to documents referencing them? - Policy 2.1.8 states that the County will not take lead in preparing the water shed management plans. The County needs to take the lead. - Policy 10.2.3 states that development density is set at four units per acre while another location had stated one unit per five acres. This is probably a mistake that needs to be changed. - Storm water areas and preserves should not be on the same land. This was not originally an EAR based amendment. The policy should be pulled and have a letter sent regarding the issue. Mr. Lorenz replied that the DCA wanted very specific criteria with thresholds and standards. Some specificity can be backed out. Ms. Burgeson noted the Board of County Commissioners meeting on Monday April 18th will review the documents. 7 March 1, 2006 Rich Yovanovich, of Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson for Collier r••N Enterprises suggested having Policy 6.1.1 specified in the Land Development Code, and only referenced in the EAR. He feels there are duplications of efforts between Federal, State, and County. There needs to be a cost analysis of the documents program changes. He would like to know why some changes have been made due to the fact that they deter small developers. Conversation ensued on whether or not the language within the EAR should be simplified. Brad Cornell, Collier County Audubon Society and Audubon of Florida pointed out that how to preserve, protect and restore the wetlands and existing systems should be the Counties priority. The water shed management plans were to have started 6 years ago, so the language should say immediate commencement. He concurs with Ms. Ryan on Policy 2.1.8 that it is the Counties responsibility to take a lead in the water shed management. Under Policy 6.1.1 the word"lots or" should be removed in the sentence "Notwithstanding the ACSC requirements,this policy shall apply all non- agricultural development except for single-family dwelling units situated on individual lots or parcels...". Policy 10.3.8 and Policy 10.6.1 are not congruent. Dr. Hushon suggested the following changes: - Page 5, Objective 2.1: Adding the language "By January 2008 the County shall complete a Watershed Prioritization and begin the process of preparing Watershed Management Plans that will contain appropriate mechanisms to establish... by 2012". - Page 6, Policy 2.1.4, b.: Switch the word"unacceptable"to "degrade". - Page 7, Policy 2.1.8: Change the language to read "Collier County shall take the lead and promote intergovernmental coordination."And"The County will take the lead and oversee the preparation of the necessary Watershed Management Plans, and rely upon the work performed..." - Page 16, Policy 6.1.1. (5) b.: Not allowing storm water discharge areas to be the same as the preserve areas. Ms. Ryan commented that she would like this section to be removed along with Policy 6.1.1 (12 & 13). Mr. Lorenz stated that he would not be in support of removing the language within 6.1.1. (5); he does agree that Policy 6.1.1 (12 & 13) could have less specific language. Mr. Dolan explained that wetland drainage was created to re-hydrate drained wetlands. 8 March 1, 2006 Dr. Hushon changed her mind on opposition to the deletion of the language after hearing further explanation of why the language exists and the explanation that will exist under the Land Development Code. Bob Krasowski brought out that .6 of an acre should be kept in an urban area for preservation. Dr. Hushon continued reviewing her suggested changes: - Page 17, Policy 6.1.1. (10): Dr. Lynne submitted a written suggestion- "Onsite preserves of native vegetation shall always be required where there are plant or animal listed species on-site, subject to receiving technical assistance from the wildlife agencies..." Collier County should not defer protection of plant and animal species to federal and state agencies, which can be affected by swings in political power. Mr. Lorenz added that the language should be simplified. Mr. Griffin read the Policy aloud, noting that the details can be managed in the Land Development Code. - Pages 17, 18, and 19, Policy 6.1.1 (10)(11)(12) & (13): Should be collapsed to headings. Mr. Lorenz noted that once the document has been modified it will be emailed out to the Council. - Page 19, Policy 6.1.1. (13) a., 2.: The language should read "Administrative variances may be granted where any of the following conditions exits:" - Page 23, Policy 6.1.8: Revise language. Mr. Kraut left the meeting at 1:54 PM. - Page 25, Policy 6.2.3: Dr. Lynne submitted a written suggestion- "Last two lines of first paragraph again puts control of Collier County wetlands into the hands of federal and state agencies. Collier County should reserve the right to protect wetlands above and beyond state and federal regulations when the local situation indicates protection is warranted." Mr. Griffin noted that it is bound by State and Federal agencies. - Page 36, Policy 10.1.3 (e), (0, and(g): Dr. Lynne submitted a written suggestion- "in order to minimize destruction or disturbance of native vegetation communities the following priority ranking of shoreline development shall apply:"Under what conditions would"viable, unaltered...uplands and wetlands be developed? Shouldn't this be at least made more restrictive, if not prohibited? - Page 38, Policy 10.3.8: The units per acre need to be corrected. 9 March 1, 2006 Mr. Penniman asked how Policy 6.1.1 (5) b. page 16 can be enforced. Ms. Burgeson replied that up until recently staff has not permitted any water into preserve areas with the exception of wetlands where it will be a benefit. Dr. Hushon moved to accept the amendments with the offered suggestions and to be referred to the Planning Commission, along with a letter for a watershed management plan. (Discussion ensued on additions to the motion and letter.) Mr. Sorrell mention page 41 not having a permitting process for vehicles to go on the beach. Ms. Burgeson addressed the question replying that a permit process does and has exited for some time. Mr. Penniman then gave a second to afore mentioned motion. The motion passed unanimously 6-0. IX. Subcommittee Reports None X. Council Member Comments None n XI. Public Comments Bob Krasowski brought out that the State Legislature passed legislation that is favorable and encouraging toward incineration. If proper applications occur for recycling and diversion it is unnecessary. He will continue to update the Council on the subject. He also suggested having ambient air quality monitored and a standard set. Mr. Hughes replied that he can see the smog layer developing in the area. Mr. Hughes then asked Mr. Lorenz to call Waste Management to have them replace his garbage cart; after numerous persons contacting Waste Management not having received a response. There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chair at 2:15 PM COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Chairman William Hughes 10 Item VI.A. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF April 5, 2006 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: SDP-2005-AR-8088 Petition Name: "The Reserve at Eden Gardens" Applicant/Developer: Eden Garden Apartments Limited Partnership &Beneficial Investments, Inc. Engineering Consultant: Consul-Tech Development Services, Inc. Environmental Consultant: Consul-Tech Development Services, Inc. II. LOCATION: The subject property, containing approximately twenty acres, is located east of Carson Road, south of Westclock Road, and north of Curry Road, in Immokalee, Section 31, Township 46, Range 29, Collier County, Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: The subject property and the surrounding properties to the north, east and south are zoned Village Residential (VR). The property to the west is zoned Agricultural (A). The subject property is undeveloped, and has native and exotic vegetation covering the site. The properties to the north and east primarily consist of developed single-family residential lots. The properties to the south primarily consist of a large undeveloped tract and two developed single-family residential lot to the eastern edge. The property to the west is existing agricultural fields. IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed development consists of 88 multi-family units and four single family units, with an amenity center (2692 SF). The residential units have been approved for an Affordable Housing Density Bonus. The residential units will be rented to persons and families with annual family incomes of less than 50 percent of the average family income in Collier County. The project is proposed to be developed in three phases. EAC Meeting Page 2 of 10 V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: The subject property is identified as an Urban Designation, in a Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, in the Immokalee Area Master Plan (TAMP). The TAMP designates the subject property as a Low Residential District. The VR zoning for the property allows for multi-family residential uses, at a density of 14.52 units per acre. The proposed residential development is designed with 4.52 units per acre. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: The subject property is in a well field protection area. The southeastern corner of the subject property is in a well field protection zone #1, and the zones lessen to a zone #4 toward the western limits of the property. A wetland area exists in the southwestern quadrant of the property. The plan proposes to establish a preservation area over the limits of the identified wetlands area. Objective 2.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan states "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards. To accomplish that, policy 2.2.2 states "In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge)to the estuarine system. This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing interconnected dry detention areas and a wetland to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation during storm events. Policy 6.1.1 states that native vegetation shall be preserved on site through the application of the following preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria: For residential development less than 20 acres but greater than 5, a minimum of 15% of the native vegetation present shall be preserved on site. This project has a preservation requirement of 2.43 acres. The proposed plan exceeds the acreage of preserve however, the selection is not in compliance with Growth Management Plan (GMP) or Land Development Code (LDC) requirements. This EAC Meeting Page 3 of 10 project needs to comply with both the GMP and LDC since it is an SDP and must comply with the underlying zoning. The LDC requirements will be discussed in more detail in the"Major Issues" section. Policy 6.1.1 (4) of the GMP states: Selection of preservation areas shall reflect the following criteria in descending order of priority: a. Areas known to be utilized by listed species or that serve as corridors for the movement of wildlife shall be preserved and protected in order to facilitate the movement of wildlife through the site, consistent with the requirements of Policy 7.1.1 of this element. b. Onsite wetlands preserved pursuant to Policy 6.2.4 of this Element; c. Upland habitat shall be part of the preservation requirement when wetlands alone do not constitute all of the requirement. Upland habitats have the following descending order of priority: 1. Any upland habitat that serves as a buffer to a wetland area, 2. Listed plant and animal species habitats, 3.Xeric Scrub, 4. Dune and Strand, Hardwood Hammocks, S. Dry Prairie, Pine Flatwoods, and ,--., 6. All other upland habitats. The selection of a melaleuca wetland and poor quality marsh does not meet these ranking requirements. Indeed, the wetland has more than 75% melaleuca and therefore does not qualify as native vegetation according to our definition. The highest priority vegetation on site is that containing listed species which is the scrubby upland containing the greatest number of gopher tortoise burrows that also qualifies as scrub jay habitat. Selection of preserve must follow the rankings listed above. Conservation easements dedicated to Collier County prohibiting further development of the approved preserve area will be required prior to SDP approval. This SDP will comply with policy 6.1.4 which requires removal of all prohibited invasive exotic vegetation in new developments. Removal and maintenance of prohibited exotic vegetation in all areas of the development will be required in perpetuity. Policy 6.1.8 states that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required for this project. One has been prepared and will be included in the record file for this project when all required changes have been made. EAC Meeting Page 4 of 10 This project complies with policy 6.2.1 which requires verification of jurisdictional wetlands lines at the time of project permitting. The applicant has supplied approved jurisdictional lines. Policy 6.2.4 requires the appropriate jurisdictional permit prior to issuance of the final development order. Staff will not approve this SDP until the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) has been issued and construction plans match this permit. Policy 6.2.5 requires habitat management and exotic vegetation removal/maintenance plans at the time of Site Development Plan/Construction Plan submittal. Preserve areas shall be required to be maintained free of Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. Acceptable plans will be required prior to SDP approval. Policy 7.1.2 requires development be directed away from listed species and their habitats and that the guidelines and technical assistance from Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). A wildlife survey for listed species is included in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). However, these surveys are inadequate and more information is required. Please see listed species section under "Major Issues" in this staff report. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Site Description: This project must comply with all requirements of both the GMP and LDC. The parcel consists of an approximately 19.65 acre rectangular parcel of land. An aerial photograph with FLUCFCS mapping is included in the EIS as Exhibit 7 and includes off-site habitats 200' from the property line. However, the coding shown does not delineate an open area largely devoid of pines that has scrub oaks. Areas that qualify as native vegetation for calculations are coded 411- pine flatwoods, 414-pine-mesic oak, and 641-freshwater marsh. There are a number of All Terrain Vehicle (ATV) trails across the parcel. These trails have resulted in continuing damage to some native vegetation areas. Stormwater: The only remaining Engineering Review stormwater related issue on this project is the SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit. The applicant has designed a system that routes the runoff into a series of interconnected Dry Detention Areas (DDA) that discharge into an onsite wetland EAC Meeting Page 5 of 10 through what appear to be grassed swales, which spread out the discharge. This is preferable to a point discharge. Judging from the topography (attached) the flow continues offsite to the south and west toward Lake Trafford. Wetlands: Approximately 4.06 acres of SFWMD/Collier County jurisdictional wetlands have been identified on site. The wetland lines were verified by SFWMD staff March 24, 2005. The project as designed does not impact existing wetlands and proposes some enhancement, though not enough to increase the UMAM scores to 0.7 or better. The meleleuca area is virtually 100%melaleuca with minimal understory and only widely scattered native vegetation. A good example of this area is shown in the EIS in Appendix B, photographs 4 and 8. This area does not meet the GMP or LDC definition of native vegetation and also does not meet the native vegetation retention requirements. The freshwater marsh area contains a significant amount of primrose willow and meleleuca is encroaching into this area. This is a low quality wetland. This area does meet the definition of native vegetation, however it does not meet the ranking requirements of the GMP and LDC, which specifies that the first priority is to be areas known to be utilized by listed species or that serve as corridors for the movement of wildlife. Preservation Requirements: The site currently supports approximately 18.77 acres of native vegetation. Fifteen percent, or 2.82 acres, of native vegetation is required to be preserved on site. This SDP proposes 4.07 acres of preserve, however only 1.51 acres of this meets the definition of native vegetation and this marsh area does not meet the ranking requirements of the GMP, as previously discussed, or section 3.05.07 A 3 of the LDC which are as follows: Preserve areas shall be selected in such manner as to preserve the following, in descending order of priority, except to the extent that preservation is made mandatory in sections 3.05.07 F.3.and 3.05.07 G.3.c.: a. Areas known to be utilized by listed species or that serve as corridors for the movement of wildlife; b. Onsite wetlands having an accepted WRAP score of 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Score of 0.7; c. Any upland habitat that serves as a buffer to a wetland area, d. Listed plant and animal species habitats, EAC Meeting Page 6 of 10 e. Xeric Scrub, f Dune and Strand, Hardwood Hammocks, g. Thy Prairie, Pine Flatwoods, and h. All other upland habitats. i. Existing native vegetation located contiguous to a natural reservation Even if gopher tortoises currently on site are relocated off- site with required permits and any impacts to scrub jay habitat have been permitted by both FWC and FWS, the preserve selection does not comply with GMP and LDC rankings. The uplands on site would still have a higher ranking since low quality wetlands are not included in the hierarchy. Listed Species: Gopher tortoises and their burrows have been observed on site. An off site relocation site in Lee County has been selected and correspondence from FWC staff(Attachment A) indicates the agency will accept the relocation site. Collier County Environmental staff supports off site relocation due to the isolated population on this parcel. One little blue heron was observed in the marsh area and no nesting was observed on site. This parcel is less than 5 miles from numerous scrub jay colonies as shown on Figure 16. The GMP requires that staff evaluate sites for scrub jay habitat using Ecology and Development-Related Habitat Requirements of the Florida Scrub Jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), Technical Report No. 8, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1991. Type I habitat is defined as Upland plant communities, assessed in 1 acre plots, with greater than or equal to 15% cover of scrub oak species. The EIS underestimates the scrub oak canopy. The following photos of this area were taken on March 14, 2006. EAC Meeting Page 7 of 10 „ ttr.--'-'N .04 ; *4 410i ' ,. . 'oma '✓�1 } a EAC Meeting Page 8ofl0 Staff's professional opinion is this area qualifies as Type I Habitat and has received technical assistance stating the call survey in the spring or fall as required by Technical Report No. 8 is required. Technical assistance from FWC staff indicates that all scrubby area on site must be preserved until required surveys have been performed and permits and compensation for proposed impacts have been completed. Please see attached email marked "Attachment B" and portions of the technical report marked "Attachment C". The EIS also contains a reference that another FWC staff member has stated no notice or authorization for scrub jay habitat is necessary. Please see the email marked"Attachment D" from the FWC staff member disputing this statement. County staff has asked that this and other statements be removed from the EIS resubmittal. The environmental review comments for this project are attached labeled as"Attachment E". VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Environmental: Environmental staff recommends denial of SDP-2005-AR-8088 "The Reserve at Eden Gardens" due to inconsistencies with the GMP and LDC requirements for native preservation selection and listed species protection. Staff also recommends that this EIS and petition be brought back before the EAC after corrections have been made to the EIS and appropriate preserve selection has been incorporated into the SDP. Stormwater: The applicant must obtain an Environmental Resource or Surface Water Management permit from the SFWMD prior to final SDP approval. EAC Meeting Page 9 of 10 PREPARED BY: ("le ,, AN CHRZA •4 KI, .E. DATE ENGINEERING REVIE % MANAGER ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT SAN ► ASON DATE SEN e ' ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST IRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT 1 AI >/ M CHAEL J. DE' ' , C.F.M. DA E PRINCIPAL PLA R DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW EAC Meeting Page 10 of 10 REVIEWED BY: 73f2A-Lebt z"-- , 2 Laly,-7 o'-- 3-1(i - Cal& BARBARA S. BURGESON DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST // �•r i tj 3' 2,-: ,_‘, 't ILLIAM D. ORE , Jr., P.E. DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ill l V1 ZO G 1111 1 ST .VEN GRIFFIN 1Is D TE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTO' EY OFFICE OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVED BY: A - .,,i_,,,..„i ,....3/../a4, • EPH K. SC "' T DATE IPOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR lN® O0DI®I>g i 5, i . 4114 . . ... _ ...,.. , , s .. t ...,.„._., . ...... ..... .. ... .. . . . r 'AT, . :,:!..,.21..i.. ,Ekt”.'"'-''-' - wiRilitr c I I ID 11111$1 y. EDEN Gardens Page 1 of 1 mason_s From: Zambrano, Ricardo [Ricardo.Zambrano@MyFWC.com] Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 10:10 AM To: Beever, James; Walsh, Joe; mason_s Cc: Taylor, Lee; Hood, Sharyn Subject: RE: Eden Gardens, Collier County Jim et al: Eden Garden applied for a 5 or fewer gopher tortoise relocation permit last September. Because of questions on their removal technique and because of hold-ups on their end, the permit is yet to be issued by us. Our records also show that they submitted an Environmental Impact Statement and Wildlife Survey to Kristin Child on 9/13/05. Kristin no longer works for us but we checked her old files and find no record of a hardcopy or electronic copy. Again, I do not recall ever seeing this document much less commenting on it. Ricardo Ricardo Zambrano Regional Nongame Biologist Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 8535 Northlake Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33412 (561) 625-5122/fax: (561) 625-5129 ricardo.zambrano@myfwc.com Visit us at MyFWC.com Eden Gardens Page 1 of 3 errs D masons From: Beever, James [james.beever@MyFWC.com] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 1:56 PM To: mason_s Subject: RE: Eden Gardens reply Follow Up Flag: Follow up Due By: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 12:00 AM Flag Status: Red On-site only. James W. Beever III Fisheries and Wildlife Biological Scientist IV Habitat Conservation Scientific Services Division of Habitat and Species Conservation Florida Fish and Wildife Conservation Commission 3941 Tamiami Trail Suite 3111 Punta Gorda, Florida 33950 941-575-5784 SUNCOM 765-5784 FAX 941-575-5862 From: mason_s [mailto:SusanMason@colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 1:43 PM To: Williams, Angela; Beever, James Cc: Taylor, Lee; Walsh, Joe; Zambrano, Ricardo Subject: RE: Eden Gardens reply The full project name is "The Reserve at Eden Gardens" but was originally just called "Eden Gardens". The consultant is David Bishof with Consul-Tech and the Property Owners are Eden Gardens Apartment Limited and Beneficial Investments. Please let me know if you need other information. Jim-If they do not do a scrub jay call survey, does 100% of the habitat need preserved on site or is off site an option FWC can accept? Thanks, Susan From: Williams, Angela [mailto:Angela.Williams@MyFWC.com] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 12:48 PM To: Beever, James; mason_s Cc: Taylor, Lee; Walsh, Joe; Zambrano, Ricardo Subject: RE: Eden Gardens reply Hello Susan, I could not view the map file. Do you have a project, developer or consulting firm name for this site? this information is necessary in order for me to determine whether or not an application has been received. Eden Gardens Page 2 of 3 Thanks, Angela T.Williams Protected Species Permit Coordinator FL Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Division of Habitat and Species Conservation Species Conservation Planning Section 620 S. Meridian Street, Mail Station 2A Tallahassee, FL 32399-1600 Phone (850)921-5990, choose option 3 "Permits" or enter ext. 17310 to speak with my Assistant Ms. Jo Barnhart Fax: (850) 921-1847 From: Beever, James Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 1:30 PM To: mason_s Cc: Taylor, Lee; Walsh, Joe; Williams, Angela; Zambrano, Ricardo Subject: RE: Eden Gardens reply This e-mail confirms our conversation and recommendations concerning Florida scrub jays at the interagency project review committee with regard to this project. - I will check with our Tallahassee office regarding the question concerning gopher tortoises. We have not heard form the applicant with regard to gopher tortoise relocation for this site. Off-site relocation is reviewed and permitted through Tallahassee FWC. Thank you James W. Beever III Fisheries and Wildlife Biological Scientist IV Habitat Conservation Scientific Services Division of Habitat and Species Conservation Florida Fish and Wildife Conservation Commission 3941 Tamiami Trail Suite 3111 Punta Gorda, Florida 33950 941-575-5784 SUNCOM 765-5784 FAX 941-575-5862 From: mason_s [mailto:SusanMason@colliergov.net] Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 1:01 PM To: Beever, James Subject: Eden Gardens .-� Good afternoon, This email is to request confirmation of the technical assistance FWC has given the County at various Interagency meetings regarding the scrub jay habitat located on this project in Immokalee. Eden Gardens Page 3 of 3 This is the project located between Lake Trafford Road and Westclox in Twonship 46, Range 29 and Section 31 of Collier County. Here's a map showing the project and the jay locations: <<Scrub Jay- Immokalee.JPG>> This project is approximately 0.25 and 0.3 miles away from the closest scrub jay locations. My understanding is that they need to preserve 100% of the scrub jay habitat(on site or is off site an option?)or they may be eligible to decrease the preserve to either 25% on or off site if they perform a "call" survey in April or May and no jays are observed. Has anyone from the applicant contacted your agency to arrange for off-site relocation of the gopher tortoises on site? Have locations been approved? Thank you for your help. Susan Mason Senior Environmental Specialist Collier County Environmental Services Department 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 239-213-2987 Fax-239-643-6968 ., tt4 -ift,d m..e/t+ C; ECOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT-RELATED HABITAT REQUIREMENTS OF THE FLORIDA SCRUB JAY (APHELOCOMA COERULESCENS COERULESCENS) NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 8 .4, N,,,10\ \:-N-‘k, , ...... \ - -'*:' ,\*02.!.. *,,,,-„, , — --. , \s*.%*. • .,.. - N\ 4, \ ' N,X `� ,lig f --'PAS 1 \l'i-'/ ,:. 4i4( I 1 JOHN W. FITZPATRICK, Ph.D i. GLEN E. WOOLFENDEN, Ph.D MARK T. KOPENY, Ph.D OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FLORIDA GAME AND FRESH WATER FISH COMMISSION 620 S. MERIDIAN STREET TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-1600 APRIL 1991 i J DEFINITIONS The following terms are used throughout this section. COMPENSATE OFF-SITE, OFF-SITE COMPENSA- when jays are on-site or 2) in the absence of territory TION.To contribute land or money for the purchase of refuges when jays are not onsite, but occur within land in lieu of on-site protection of habitat for jays.Off- normal dispersal distance of Type I habitat. The pri- site compensation may he accomplished through par- mary purpose of establishing satellite refuges is to secure ticipation in a mitigation park program,or by convey- a portion of the unoccupied scrub that is potential scrub ance of property or property rights to an appropriate jay habitat and is of critical importance in maintaining private conservation organization or state agency. local jay populations. JAY,SCRUB JAY.Synonyms for Florida scrub jay. SCRUB OAK SPECIES.Any of the following stunted,low- JAY GROUP.One or more jays occupying a territory.A growing species of oak that occur on sandy soils within the jay group may be composed of a breeding pair of adults, range of the Florida scrub jay; Quercus geminata, Q. with or without helpers and young of the year,or may chapmanii, Q. inopina, Q. myrtifolia, Q. minima. Taxo- consist of a single,unpaired,territorial individual that nomically confusing scrub oaks related to Q.geminata are is not a member of other jay groups on-site. sometimes lumped under the name Q. virginiana. OFF-SITE. Outside the boundaries of a proposed devel- TERRITORY REFUGE.A protected area established on- opment site. site in Type I,Type II,and/or Type III habitat.Territory ON-SITE. Within the boundaries of a proposed devel- refuges are established on-site when one or more jays opment site. occur on-site.The primary purpose of territory refuges PRESERVE, PRESERVATION. To contribute habitat is to provide permanent habitat and other resources for for the Florida scrub jay,either on-site(i.e.,protection) each jay group onsite. or off-site (i.e.,compensation). TYPE I HABITAT.Upland plant communities,assessed PROTECT ON-SITE, ON-SITE PROTECTION. To in one-acre plots, with greater than or equal to 15% establish one or more refuges for the Florida scrub jay on cover of scrub oak species. a proposed development site. TYPE II HABITAT.Plant communities,assessed in one- SATELLITE REFUGE.A protected area established on- acre plots, with percent cover of scrub oak species site in Type I habitat.Satellite refuges are established greater than zero but less than 15%. when there is a large amount of Type I habitat on-site TYPE III HABITAT.Native and improved uplands and compared to the number of jay groups on-site.Satellite seasonally dry wetlands within 1/4 mile of Type I or refuges are established I) in addition to territory refuges Type II habitat. 3 ""p SUBSECTION 1.2 PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING IF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL NEGATIVELY AFFECT SCRUB JAYS HABITAT INVENTORY AND MAPPING Grid the vegetation map in 1-acre units.Label each acre The primary objective of these procedures is to develop that,upon field inspection,is identified as Type I,Type II, a vegetation map that depicts all plant communities on- or Type HI habitat.Qualitative field inspection normally site that are used by the Florida scrub jay or have the will be adequate for distinguishing Type I from Type II potential to be used by jays.Map plant communities either habitat. If a quantitative approach is desired,we recom- mend a 7.5'USGS topographic map or on an aerial photo- mend that Breininger's (1981, 1989) modification of graph at a scale of no more than 400 feet per inch.The Canfield's(1941)line transect method be used.Because of vegetation map must show all forms of existing develop- the difficulties involved in successfully designing and ex- ecuting(e.g.,roads,buildings).The vegetation map 1)pro- ecuting a quantitative habitat analysis in scrub vegetation, vides information needed to survey the site for jays,and, we strongly recommend that sampling design,data collec- tion,provides information needed for planning refuges, if tion,and data analysis be developed with the assistance of any are to be established on-site. a plant ecologist experienced in quantitative techniques. Use the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classifica- tionSystem(Florida Department of Transportation 1985) SURVEYING FOR SCRUB JAYS to map the entire proposed development site.The following classes are especially important in identifying potential Searching for Scrub Jays On-site. habitat of the Florida scrub jay (number in parentheses The primary objective of these procedures is to obtain represents hierarchical designation in the classification an accurate count of the number of jay groups on-site. system): Improved, unimproved and woodland pastures Secondary objectives include mapping the location of (211,212,213),citrus groves(221),rangeland(310-330), each jay group and estimating the size and age constitu- pine flatwoods(411),long-leaf pine-xeric oak(412),sand ency of each group. pine (413), sand-pine plantations (4411), forest regen- eration areas (443), sand other than beaches (720),dis- turbed rural land in transition without positive indicators tape recording of Florida scrub jay territorial scolding in an of intended activity(741),disturbed burned areas(745). attempt to attract the jays.The recording should include Add a second level of information to the vegetation clear examples of all typical territorial scolds, including map.For purposes at hand,consider three types of habitat the female "hiccup" call. Copies of taped vocalications for jays.Two of these habitat types,collectively, include may be obtained from Archbold Biological Station,P.O. any and all areas where one or more species of scrub oak are Box 2057,Lake Placid,FL 33852. present,even if only vestigially represented: Survey Design. Establish parallel line transects, and TYPE I HABITAT.Any upland plant community in playback stations along each transect,on the vegetation which percent cover of the substrate by scrub oak map developed earlier.Space the transects and playback species is 15%or more. stations so that all Type I,II,and III habitat onsite will be TYPE II HABITAT.Any plant community,not meet- sampled for jays (i.e.,so that the taped calls unquestion- ing the definition of Type I habitat,in which one or ably will be effectively broadcast across areas of concern). more scrub oak species is represented. Distances between transects,and between stations along In most instances,Type 1 habitat is easily recognized as transects,depend on many factors,including the power of xeric oak scrub, scrubby pine flatwoods, scrubby coastal the speaker used for broadcasting the calls, topography, strand, or sand pine scrub. Conventional classification and the density of the surrounding vegetation.Adequate schemes are of less value in identifying or predicting the spacing between transects can be estimated roughly as the presence of Type I1 habitat;the presence of scrub oaks is distance at which a person listening to the tape directly in the key indicator. front of the speaker perceives the"bird"to be no more than The third habitat type includes a variety of plant about 100 meters away.A distance of 100 to 200 meters communities where scrub oak species are not represented, between transects and between stations is generally ad- but that are nearby or adjacent to Type I or Type II habitat: equate when using a good-quality, hand-held cassette TYPE III HABITAT. Any upland or seasonally dry player broadcasting at full volume. wetland within 1/4 mile of any area designated as Surveys should be carried out on calm,clear days about Type I or Type II habitat. one hour after sunrise,and should terminate before midday 13 heat or wind.Surveys should not be conducted in winds different times of day.Numbers will shift as groups arrive and depart. Often it is possible to watch where the jays stronger tchar a moderate breeze(g 8t mph),in mist or fog, s are turneto as a If a quo ion exists i to how —� exceedingalight,intermittent drizzle. come fromoor return to as a means of determining m or in praecipitation cia ywind many groups to h ecially wind lowers the tendency for to many groups of scrub jays are on-site,we strongly Heat nd to distant involved request permission y retm- d respond over which territorial scolds,canabe wind heard.reducesuthe mend that the review agency windydays regardless of from the land owner to conduct an independent survey distance recordings Further- more,jays are reluctant to flyon-site. are 1)a complete hour or season. 1) spring (espe- The key products of this procedure when count of all jay groups on-site, and 2) an approximate SurveysMarch),should fallbe conducted and P g map or home range center for each .The ciallyrit are (Septemberst and Octobervigorous,and, territory mid s m displays(July) wens young oft and year are indepen map shown in Figure 1.13 using ato took ely a few l drive velhicle roSucs of a min-summer(July) when b ne ge The poorest work to comp timesden e but stillyeadistinguishable la by P jays are most map allows developers and land-use planners dacreage accurately the localities where preserving a given ntify y tofo fly far f sr food,d are late wining when hyoung are populationras likely to fly for and spring when the will result in saving the largest possible quiet and the adults are occupis. ed with molt and feeding fledglings. — _; IAKE Survey Protocol.Transects may be driven or walked.If 3 ANNE the vehicle at each y 3 step out of or stand atop 1 F-.---7,—L,..______. , ) driven, s _' playback station.Broadcast the calls at each station for at 2 3a 3 , least 1 minute in all four directions around the playback g \334 , ' : 4 2 station,emphasizing any direction in which low-gr 4 j % • I oak scrub is the predominant vegetation.On the vegeta- , sizes of all MAIN ` tion map,plot the locations and indicate eif irstgroup seen or heard. STUDY I Florida scrub jays where they I Distinguish adult-plumaged jays from Juvenal-plumaged TRACT jays whenever possible. At localities with car trails,large areas of scrub can be ' surveyed with a vehicle in one day.On foot,the process is _ Iia 'tial= more laborious because of the relatively large size of = t a ,1 i = territories(often 10 to 40 acres).Once a group is located, S 3s °i: a' stop broadcasting at that station.Remaining at this station briefly should result in the assembly of theientire none group. 3—E This allows one to estimate group =, J mid-summer,to distinguish young of the year from adults. lay I1 ,, a i i �' a Sometimes two or more groups will be attracted to one a, a Ib station,usually from different directions.Observers should : 1 1 plot each group where it was first _ be careful,therefore,to were 1 = a spotted or heard, not at the site to which the jays i :3 I: attracted.In rare circumstances,especially at sites where =i = ♦I, I �I numerous groups congregate at artificial food or `ter 3= _` II= 1— 1 rpt sources, it may be difficult to differentiate groups. _ I; especially true where the jays have become habituated and D, =i, 2 y ;', ' tame to human approach. Again, in such cases careful 3 2 :i important.Studies of such con- , .a=i observation is extremely imp jayshave confirmed that i gregations using color-marked consist of members of different family ` almost always they Figure 1.13.Example of a census map obtained by systematic traversing mayhave crossed several territory Figure opatchy 1.13.oak scrub Example phabitat in southern obtained by Hif ghlandss tion ng n groups. Often they dear spring mornings in map Detailed extremely accurate for estimating boundaries to reach the neutral feeding or drinking area. See text for methods.Each number designates the impression of extremely high jay 1986 proved that this map k The result gives a false territory density. ��r location of a jay group and estimates group size. density. I!' It is essential that the subject area be visited aoIf review or regu- ' necessary to establish an accurate count of jay groups. Survey Report.Provide the appropriate more than 8 to 10 jays are encountered at a sing playback latory agencies with a final report that includes the stationduring a fall or spring survey period,the jays at this applicable: 'j' site should be monitored carefully over several visits and follow- ing,as app Ili 14 ll ,i 1) 018Thomasville FloridaFloridaNatural Areas Inventory.A. An information sheet including: Rd.,Suite 200-C,Tallahassee,FL 32303. 1. Dates and starting and ending times of all sur- 2) Florida Breeding Bird Atlas.Florida Audubon So- vey conducted. ciety, 1101 Audubon Way,Maitland,FL 32751. 2. Weather conditions during all surveys,includ- 3) Cox, J•A• 1987. Status and distribution of the erature,windspeedanddirec Fla. Ornithol. SoSpec. E tion,visibility,and Florida scrub jay. tion,visibility,and precipitation. Publ. No. 3, Florida Ornithological Society, { 3. Total number of jay groups found, number Gainesville, 110 pp. of jays in each group and number of juvenal- 4) Regional Planning Councils whose jurisdiction in each of these groups. either includes all or part of the proposed devel- plual photograph maged jays depicting: proposed B. An aerial ph ire area ofor interest,vegetation map pl g' opment or is within five miles of the 1. The entire area including all Type development. I, 11,and Ill habitat. 5) County environmental agencies whose jurisdiction either includes all or part of the proposed development 2. Transect ines and playbackostations.erdevelopments. 3. Locationstigthe u all jays seen or heard while con- or is within 5 miles of the proposed ducting survey or at any other time. 6) Regional Offices of Environmental Services,Florida boun q, Approximate p orted suspectedterrt ory home ags range Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission,whose between jay groupsjurisdiction either includes all or part of the pro- centers for each group. posed development or is within five miles of the proposed development. were documented ' Consulting Sources for Documentation of Scrub Jays within Presume that any areasoin which jays within 5 miles of Type I habitat on-site since 1975 are cur- Dispersal Distance of Important Habitat On-site. The developer may want to inves- mendedrentl inhabited by jays. s if it seems likelywant o the cur- Habitat j preservation are not the Florida scrub jay is normalrecomti ate for present occurrence of jay local jays in question have been extirpated since that time. if jays are not on-site, but are within tigate following dsource(5 Flori a Tyub I ayhrecotat doo-oite.The records of occur- Submit a report of the entire investigation to the reviewtng rence soues on Florida scrub jay agency,which may want to conduct an independent inves- tigation of the records as well as field for jays in the should(confirmedeconsulted observations or museum specimens) Type I habitatd surveyson-sif be in order to determine if jays have been 5-mile area surrounding Yp e. documented within 5 miles of Type I habitat on-site. I , 11 i11i i It '' I°': 15 EDEN Gardens Page 1 of 2 a P mason_s From: Zambrano, Ricardo [Ricardo.Zambrano@MyFWC.com] Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 2:53 PM To: mason_s Subject: RE: EDEN Gardens Follow Up Flag: Follow up Due By: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 12:00 AM Flag Status: Purple Susan, I do not recall ever stating to any applicant that no scrub jay habitat is required to be preserved on site. I usually defer scrub jay habitat calls to the USFWS. Jim Beever seems to be more knowledgeable on this topic than I so I will also defer to his recommendations. Ricardo Ricardo Zambrano Regional Nongame Biologist Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 8535 Northlake Boulevard West Palm Beach, FL 33412 (561) 625-5122/fax: (561) 625-5129 ricardo.zambrano@myfwc.com Visit us at MyFWC.com From: mason_s [mailto:SusanMason@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 1:49 PM To: Zambrano, Ricardo; Beever, James Subject: EDEN Gardens Importance: High Hi Ricardo, Your name is mentioned in the Eden Gardens EIS as stating to the applicant that no scrub jay habitat is required to be preserved on site. Jim Beever has told me at Interagency meetings that they need to do a call survey in April or May. And that if no call survey is done, they need to keep 100% on site. If survey done, and no response-25% on or off site required. If jays respond to the calls-the preserve requirement is 100%-Does all of this need to be on site? The applicant is disputing my previous responses and this is the first I have heard that other FWC staff has told them they do not need to preserve any scrub on site or offsite. Ricardo-have you given them any assistance in writing? They have not provided any. EDEN Gardens Page 2 of 2 Please confirm what is allowed or not allowed on this site. David Bishof with ConsulTech refers to methodologies by Fitzpatrick(1991)-is this the call surveys? These were conducted on Dec 17. Jan 11 and Jan 16. Is this helpful. I have requested an electronic version of the EIS to send the wildlife protions and can get you that when I receive it. Thanks for all your help. Please call me if necessary and we can summarize the discussion in an email if needed. Susan Mason Senior Environmental Specialist Collier County Environmental Services Department 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 239-213-2987 Fax-239-643-6968 Checklist Print CDPR1014 - Checklist TITLE: R.PL3.SDP 111 ��1 DFSCRIPTION: DEPT REV SITE DEV PLAN A 8,088 Project THE RESERVE AT EDEN GARDENS STATUS: INCM STATUS DATE USER ITEM YES MASON S 1. Submit a current aerial photograph and clearly delineate the subject site boundary lines. If the site is vegetated, provide FLUCFCS overlay or vegetation inventory. (LDC 10.02 .03 .B.1.d-e) Aerial supplied in construction plans is of poor quality. Unable to see details. Please provide good quality, preferably color aerial in site plans. 2nd REVIEW: Better quality aerial provided. NO MASON S 2 . Provide a clearing plan on site plan (LDC 10.02.03.B.1.i.xii, 4.06.04) No clearing plan provided. Plan must show acceptable preserves consistent wit preservation ranking requirements in GMP/LDC. 2nd REVIEW: clearing plan provided on C-6, however, plan is phased? Is this allowed in SDPs-check with planner. Include acreage of total clearing under this SDP. Only infrasturcture can be cleared as part of this SDP. Remove all residential housepads and any other areas that are not part of infrastructure. This clearing is part of building permit. Pd $1000 is clearing fees. Unknown if correct since no acgeage given. Correct legend-preserve hatching says to be left undisturbed. Not correct exotic removal and replanting this area is required. Remove note. 3rd REVIEW: Clearing plan modified showing footprint of buildings and propose preserves shown as not being cleared. In future submittals, please show areas to be cleared with hatching that describes reason rather than just hatching areas to remain uncleared. This comment remains on reject due to the conflicts this clearing plan contain regarding LDC and GMP preservation requirements. N/A MASON S 3 . Up to 25 acres may be cleared to store excess fill generated by lake excavations within the project. Provide the calculations to justify clearing for storage of excess lake material (LDC 4.06.04) INFO MASON S 4. Provide the applicable clearing fee for removal of any vegetation. (LDC 10.02 .03 .B.1.i.xii. ) Clearing fee paid but amount make change based on final clearing plan. 2nd Repeated comment-no acreage of clearing given -unable to verify fee. 3rd Review: Fee may change based on final approved plan. May require payment or refund based on final clearing plan. YES MASON S 5 . Provide notes on plan indicating methods of barricading to be used to protect vegetation to remain and specify that it will remain in place until completion of construction. (LDC 3 ,.04) YES MASON S 6. Provide the following exotic vegetation removal note on site plan: "All prohibited exotic vegetation shall be removed from the site and it shall be maintained free of exotics in perpetuity. " (LDC 3.05.10.B.2) CDPR1014 - Checklist NO MASON S 7. Provide a complete and sufficient EIS and the required review fee. (LDC 10.02.02) CDPR1014 - Checklist $2500 fee provided. Please correct the following deficiencies in the EIS and supply a total of 3 copies of the resubmittal. Technical asssitance may be requested from FWC. 1. Preserves must be changed to preserve listed species habitat on site. Ame ^ EIS and construction plans. Please be sure EIS and construction plans are consistent with all required changes. See preserve comments to follow. 2 . Provide topographic map of site. Please overlay with FLUCFCS codes 3 . Please address whether there are any adjacent offsite preserves 4. Give more detail on how this project is consistent with GMP policies- specifically: a. 6.1.1 - preserves must be changed to meet GMP ranking shown in this section. GT area is first priority and required perserves must contain GT burrows and surrounding habitat. b. 6.1.8 c. 6.2.4 - provide SFWMD permit, exhibits and staff report. d. 7 .1.2 5. pg 6 Native Vegetation section of EIS - Removal of exotic vegetation is not enhancement. Exotic removal is required by the county. Please amend this section of the EIS 6. Native vegetation section. Maleleuca wetlands proposed for preservation do not meet the definition of native habitat therefore they do not qualify as a preserve area. Revise this portion of EIS to discuss preservation areas as ranked in GMP/LDC. 7. Provide transect map of wildlife survey. 8. GT management plan just addresses relocation and exotic removal. Please elaborate on this plan to discuss management of the preserve long term includi supplemental plantings, possible manual removal of native vegetation to keep area open for foraging (requiring a VRP) , etc. 9. Figure 2 was inserted upside down. Please correct. 10. figures 7 & 8 - Please correct legend - what is AT? Active? Legend says Active is AC but no burrows are marked AC 11. Are UMAM scores accepted? Proof of accepted scores is required. 2nd REVIEW: Please include $1000 EIS resubmittal fee. Repeated comments or new comments based on new info. Please make the following changes, additions and corrections to the EIS. Plea be sure EIS and construction plans are consistent with all required changes: 1. Listed species survey needs to include dates, time and weather of survey. Please include supplied information about scrub jays in area and any new info obtained from FWC. Were survey dates, time and weather appropriate for scrub jay surveys? Include listed plant survey results. Does survey comply with FW and FWS guidleines? Explain. 2 . 2nd submittal of ElSsome exhibits are unreadable- a. Fig 11-remove burrow markings-unreadable. No transects in wetland. The areas need included in survey. Please provide results of adequate survey including wetland. ,..� b. Fig 12 - Unable to see and easily read burrows shown on map. Please correct. 3 . Give more detail on how this project is consistent with GMP policies- Crea GMP section of EIS and address ALL relevent sections of GMP CCME including: a. 6.1.1 - preserves must be changed to meet GMP ranking shown in this section. High quality wetlands existing? If wetland is to meet GMP/LDC requirements, it must be restored and included in calculations of native veg o CDPR1014 - Checklist site. Correct all calcs. Further outline GT relocation. Give info on site and evidence it is acceptable to the FWC, meets county LDC requirements and recipient. b. 6.1.4 - Does this project comply with exotic removal? state in EIS. c. 6.1.8 - EIS d. 6.2 .1 - verified JD lines. e. 6.2 .4 - provide SFWMD permit, exhibits and staff report. SDP can not b approved prior to verifying all permits match county plans. f. 6.2 .6 - Conservation easements are required over all preserves. CE mu be approved prior to SDP approval. g. 7.1.2 - including scrub jays and GTs. 4. Increase in UMAM scores based on proposed restoration appears to be too great. Information requested from SFWMD staff to confirm this great an increa will be reached. Provide any correspondance to support thees numbers. Includ in EIS. 5. Pg 2 of EIS refers to 92 units and pg 6 refers to 95 . Which is correct? Be consistent in EIS and construction plans. 6. pg 2 - states hydrology will be maintained. Is any improvement expected? Include in EIS 7. Pg 2 - EIS states that aerials indicate formerly cleared pasture-What time period was this used? Include in EIS 8. pg 5 - if wetland is to be included as native and meet preservation rankin supply plant list based on existing conditions AFTER exotic removal and replanting. 9. pg 6 - update wetlands section based on existing conditions after exotics removed and replanted. 10. pg 6 - correct the following typos - 10th line from bottom of page - remo "exceeding" . 6th line from bottom - "buy" should be "by" 11. pg 8 - management plan-remove all references to exotic remaining in preser - county regs don't allow. 12 . Pg 8 - refers to native veg debris in preserve. why would this be there? falling from natural causes? if so, describe and state this shall remain. 13 . Remove reference to GT preserve since it will not exist if GTs are relocated off-site. 14. Pg 9 - address status of positive GTs. If positive, what site will they to? Healthy GTs can not be relocated to reserve having sick GTs so testing wi be required. 15. Fig 3 - include acreage of preserve calcs showing required and provided. Also include in narrative. 16. Fig 8 - topo map provided does not contain any measurements. Please provide map with elevations. 3rd REVIEW; Please provide $500 EIS review fee for next submittal. Please make the following changes to the EIS for final copy for records. This project will be heard at the April 5, 2006 EAC. As previously requested via emails, please submit 14 complete application sets for review by the EAC and other staff. Please be prepared to address all of the following comments at t ..� EAC meeting. 1. FLUCFCS map does not accurately reflect areas containing scrub oaks on sit currently coded as 411-Pine flatwoods. a. Provide correct coding of this are to 421 or 428 with myrtle oak canopy with next submittal. b. BP is not comon in 411 areas; please change to occasional. 2 . Please see other comments regarding preserve selection and make all CDPR1014 - Checklist necessary changes to native veg cals. and preserve selection according to LDC and GMP requirements. 3 . EIS still does not adequately address GMP requirements. As previously requested-CREATE GMP SECTION OF EIS AND ADDRESS ALL RELEVENTSECTIONS OF GMP CC including: a. 6.1.1 - preserves must be changed to meet GMP ranking shown in this section. Correct all calcs and show acceptable preserve. b. 6.1.4 - Does this project comply with exotic removal? state in EIS th exotic removal complies with 6.1.4 c. 6.1.8 - EIS-include statement that this EIS complies with 6.1.8 d. 6.2.1 - verified JD lines. JD lines have been verified. Simply state in EIS that 6.2.1 has been complied with. e. 6.2 .4 - provide SFWMD permit, exhibits and staff report. SDP can not b approved prior to verifying all permits match county plans. 6.2.4 requires th County to accept SFWMD approved impacts to wetlands as meeting GMP requirement however this does not obligate the County to accept these areas as preserves. Please remove this statement from EIS. Please remove this statement from EIS. f. 6.2 . 6 - Conservation easements are required over all approved preserve CE dedicated to Collier county must be approved prior to SDP approval.-state that this requirement shall be met prior to SDP approval. g. 7 .1.2 - including scrub jays and GTs. 1. Offsite GT relocation permit shall be required prior to pre-construction meeting. Provide detailed relocation management plan as part of EIS and in SDP construction plans. 2 . Clarify scrub jay surveys. Was the required call survey perform during the appropriate months othe year. Provide details including times, dates, where tape played, any responses, weather, etc. Provide more info as described above for surveys conducted in Dec and Jan. 3 . Pg 11 refers to Richardo Zambrano-FWC staff-stating no jay habita compensation needed. Staff has received email from him stating he has not giv any technical assistance regarding this. Please remove from EIS. 4. Correct both EIS and construction plans: Under management plan-remove all references to allowing any percentage of exotics to remain. County Code requir all exotics to be removed and maintained in perpetuity. Clearly state that al Cat. 1 exotics shall be removed and maintained in perpetuity. 5. Pg 7 of EIS-portions of property may have been used for Ag. or other uses but have not been in this use for decades and all areas (except Mel. wetlands and eucalyptus areas) are currently vegetated with native vegetation. Native calcs. must be based on existing conditions. Also if this section remains, correct typo (1989 rather than 1689) . 6. UMAM scores for recreated areas are too high based on staff assessment and consultation with SFWMD staff. SFWMD staff does not review/accept UMAM scores for recreated preserves, only for impacts to wetlands. Staff has stated they will not be approving/accepting any scores for this property. 7. pg 10 - management plan-remove all references to exotics remaining in preserve - county regs don't allow. Also correct in construction plans. 8. GT management plan in EIS and construction plans must include details on excavation of all burrows and relocation methods. Qualified staff to supervis methods, etc.Please include. 9. Pg 12 - address status of positive GTs. If any positives found, what site will they go to? Please explain in EIS. 10. Fig 8 - topo map provided does not contain any elevations. Please provid map with elevations. Figure 2 does not contain enough detail. Please provide .-� topo map that contains detailed elevations for this parcel. 11. Include information in EIS and on construction plans regarding relocation of listed plant species in areas to be cleared to portions of project with appropriate habitat on site. Pg 13 refers to State rules. elaborate-explain what these are and how this project complies with State rules and county requirements for protection of listed species. CDPR1014 - Checklist N/A MASON S 8. Comply with environmental zoning overlay requirements (i .e. ST, ACSC-ST, SRA etc) (LDC 2 .03 .05-08; 4.08.00) N/A MASON S 9 Comply with specific requirements per PUD document. (LDC 10.02 .13; 2 .03 .06; 4.08.06) YES MASON S 10 . Wetland line shall be approved by SFWMD and delineated on the site plan. (GMP Policy 6.2 .1) copy of approved JD supplied NO MASON S 11. Provide wetland permits from the applicable agencies. (GMP Policy 6.2 .4 (2) ) Provide copy of SFWMD permit, staff report and exhibits. Project must be consistent with all the requirements of the permit, including impacts adjacent to jurisdictional wetlands on site. 2nd REVIEW: Repeated comment: Provide copy of SFWMD permit, staff report and exhibits. Project must be consistent with all the requirements of the permit, including impacts adjacent to jurisdictional wetlands on site. Unable to approve SDP prior to receiving and confirming all required wetland permits. construction plans show alterations w/i 10 ' of preserve. Must be part of ERP. 3rd REVIEW: Repeated comment: Provide copy of SFWMD permit, staff report and exhibits. Project must be consistent with all the requirements of the permit, including impacts adjacent to jurisdictional wetlands on site. Unable to approve SDP prior to receiving and confirming all required wetland permits. construction plans show alterations w/i 10 ' of preserve. Must be part of ERP. NO MASON S 12 . All principal structures shall have a minimum setback of 25 ' from the boundary of any p7^cerve. Accessory structures and all other site alterations shall have a minimum 10-foot s Jack. (LDC 3.05.07 .H.3; 6.01.02 .C. ) Included the following setbacks in the Development Standards table on sheet C- Preserve area setbacks: 25 ' for primary structures 10 ' for alterations and accessory structures Include cross sections showing these setbacks have been met for County require preserves. 2nd REVIEW: Primary structures included in table showing required and provide Table shows required accessory setback but does not give provided or address alterations. Alterations must also meet 10 ' setback. Provide info in table a show cross sections showing alterations and accessory structures have been met 3rd REVIEW: Repeated comment: Table shows required accessory setback but does not give "provided"or address alterations. Alterations must also meet 10 ' setback. Provide info in table and show cross sections showing alterations a accessory structures have been met. May include comment regarding impacts permitted by ERP. county staff will verify when issued. NO MASON S 13 . Provide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained and the maximum amount that is to be re-created. Clearly identify the location o both on the site plan. (LDC 3 .05.07.B-D, F, H.l.d-e) CDPR1014 - Checklist Include as part of land usage table on sheet C-2 acres of required preservatio ( 2 .43 acres) and amount supplied. wetlands shown as preserved on site do not meet county requirements of native preservation. GT preserve must be expanded to required minimum of 2 .43 acres. 2nd REVIEW: Per meetings on Nov 4 and Nov 30 - native calcs must be corrected to include 424 area after exotics have been removed and wetlands restored. correct EIS and construction plans. 3rd REVIEW: Repeated and new comments based on info provided and existing conditions on site: Per meetings on Nov 4 and Nov 30, applicant was to re-cre high quality (>0.7) wetland in Melaleuca and poor quality marsh wetland on sit to enable staff to accept this as existing native vegetation on site and a hig quality wetland. No work has been done. Existing melaleuca wetland on site does not qualify as native habitat and marsh wetland is not high quality (0.7 better) and therefore does not meet LDC/GMP requirements. Technical assistance received from FWC since initial submittal indicates this area is scrub jay habitat 100% of habitat on site must be preserved until FWS and FWC permits or exemption has been received and any required compensation f 1 impacts to scrub jay habitat has been completed. Provide native calcs. based on existing native vegetation. Exclude melaleuca wetlands and eucalyptus areas since applicant has not re-created a high qualit 1 wetland on site. NO MASON S 14. Preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in Policy 6.1.1 (4) of the GMP and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors. (GMP Policy 6.1.1 (9) ) CDPR1014 - Checklist Listed species habitat is the highest ranking on site. Required County preservation must in highest GT area and surrounding habitat. 2nd REVIEW: New comments based on new info and change in plans. Provide location of off site GT relocation, proof of the recipient properties acceptance and FWC's acceptance of GT relocation area. If not provided, provi a minimum of 1 acre of GT habitat on site. As discussed in the Nov 30 meeting, an email was sent to SFWMD staff on Dec 1 requesting confirmation that the proposed exotic removal and replanting will boost the UMAM score for the wetland preserve area to 0.7 or better to comply with required rankings after the listed species is properly relocated offsite. Provide evidence they agree with this large increase in score. A meeting to discuss time-line of work was held on Dec 2 with the County attorney's office. Wetland must exist as 0.7 or better to qualify for GMP/LDC ranking. signed contracts or bonding do not meet letter or intent of regs. Existing conditions on site in the wetland must be 0.7 or better to qualify fo preservation. 3rd REVIEW: Repeated comments: Preserve selection is not consistant with LDC and GMP or technical assistance from FWC. Please see previous comments regarding preservation of scrub habitat on site. Wetlands on site do not qualify for preservation. Mel. is not native and marsh is low quality. As stated in LDC 3 .05.07, Preserve areas shall be selected in such manner as to preserve the following, in descending order of priority, except to the extent that preservation is made mandatory in sections 3.05.07 F.3. and 3 .05.07 G.3 .c a. Areas known to be utilized by listed species or that serve as corridors f the movement of wildlife; b. Onsite wetlands having an accepted WRAP score of 0.65 or a Uniform Wetlan Mitigation Assessment Score of 0.7; c. Any upland habitat that serves as a buffer to a wetland area, r-� d. Listed plant and animal species habitats, e. Xeric Scrub, f. Dune and Strand, Hardwood Hammocks, g. Dry Prairie, Pine Flatwoods, and h. All other upland habitats. i. Existing native vegetation located contiguous to a natural reservation b. and c. above do not apply to this project. Please correct EIS and construction plans to show appropriate native vegetation preservation selectio YES MASON S 15. Preserve areas and created preserves shall meet the minimum width requirements. (LDC 3 .05 .07 .H.1.e) Avg of 30 ' minimum of 20 ' N/A MASON S 16. WHERE CREATED PRESERVES ARE APPROVED, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN SHALL RE-CREATE A NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITY. THE PLAN SHALL SPECIFY LARGER PLANT MATERIAL AND SPACING REQUIREMENTS. (LDC 3 .05.07.H.1.E.II) NO MASON S 17. All preserve areas shall be identified as "Preserve" on separate tracts and protected by permanent conservation easement to prohibit further development. (GMP Policy 6.1.1(3) ) CDPR1014 - Checklist Once preserve area is accepted by County staff. Supply CE and needed exhibits for county preserves. Protective language must be included in construction plans along with sketch and legal description. Include the following statement, amended to apply to your specific site, : DEDICATE TO THE (NAME OF HOA) : 1. TRACTS ("P-1" AND "P-2" ) AS PRESERVE AREAS SUBJECT TO A CONSERVATION EASEME AS DEPICTED HEREON, WITH PERPETUAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. THE PRESERV AREAS AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT MAY IN NO WAY BE ALTERED FROM ITS NATURAL OR PERMITTED STATE. ACTIVITIES PROHIBITED WITHIN THE PRESERVE AREA AND CONSERVATI EASEMENT INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, CONSTRUCTION OR PLACING OF BUILDINGS ON OR ABOVE THE GROUND; DUMPING OR PLACING SOIL OR OTHER SUBSTANCES SUCH AS TRASH; REMOVAL OR DESTRUCTION OF TREES, SHRUBS, OR OTHER VEGETATION WITH THE EXCEPTION OF EXOTIC/NUISANCE VEGETATION REMOVAL; EXCAVATION, DREDGING OR REMOV OF SOIL MATERIAL DIKING OR FENCING; ANY OTHER ACTIVITIES DETRIMENTAL TO DRAINAGE, FLOOD CONTROL, WATER CONSERVATION, EROSION CONTROL, OR FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION OR PRESERVATION. DEDICATE TO COLLIER COUNTY: 1. ALL CONSERVATION EASEMENTS (C.E. ) AS DEPICTED HEREON AND PURSUANT TO SECTIO 704.06 FLORIDA STATUTES, WITHOUT RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. To request approved template and needed exhibits email: susanmason@colliergov.net 2nd REVIEW: Repeated comments: Once preserve area is accepted by County staf Supply original signed CE and needed signed and sealed exhibits for county preserves. Protective language must be included in construction plans along with sketch a legal description.-language included but describes "Tract 4"-nothing is labele tract 4. Please correct to describe correct area. To request approved CE template and required exhibits email: susanmason@colliergov.net Approval of CE is required prior to SDP approval. 3rd REVIEW: Repeated comments: Once preserve area is accepted by County staf supply original signed CE dedicated to Collier County and needed signed and sealed exhibits for county preserves. To request approved CE template and required exhibits email: susanmason@colliergov.net Approval of CE is required prior to SDP approval. Recording is required within 90 days of approval of SDP or prior to first CO, whichever comes first. Protective language on plans is correct. NO MASON S 18. All necessary documentation to record conservation easements over the preserves (GMP Policy 6.1.1 (3) ) shall be provided prior to SDP approval. See previous comment 2nd REVIEW: Repeated comment-see above. Approved CE required prior to SDP approval 3rd REVIEW: Repeated comment-see above. Approved CE required prior to SDP approval NO MASON S 19. A Preserve Area Management Plan shall be provided on the site plan identifying methods to address control and treatment of invasive exotic species, fire management, and maintenance of permitted facilities. (GMP Policy 6.1.1(6) ) CDPR1014 - Checklist As part of construction plan set, include preserve management plan. The Preserve Management Plan shall include the following elements: i. General Maintenance. Preserves shall be maintained in their natural sta and must be kept free of refuse and debris. ii. Exotic vegetation Removal, Non- native vegetation , and Nuisance or Invasive Plant Control. exotic vegetation removal and maintenance plans shall require that Category I Exotics be removed from all preserves. All exotics within the first 75 feet of the outer edge of every preserve shall be physical removed, or the tree cut down to grade and the stump treated. Exotics within t interior of the preserve may be approved to be treated in place if it is determined that physical removal might cause more damage to the native vegetation in the preserve. When prohibited exotic vegetation is removed, but the base of the vegetation remains, the base shall be treated with an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved herbicide and a visual tracer dye sha be applied. Control of exotics shall be implemented on a yearly basis or more frequently when required, and shall describe specific techniques to prevent reinvasion by prohibited exotic vegetation of the site in perpetuity. Non- native vegetation and nuisance or invasive plants shall be removed from all Preserves. iii. Designation of a Preserve Manager. A Preserve Manager shall be identified as the responsible party to ensure that the Preserve Management Pla is being complied with. The individual 's name, address and phone number shall listed on the Preserve Management Plan. The same information shall be provided regarding the developer. Both parties will be responsible until such time that the homeowners association takes over the management of the preserve. At that time, the homeowners association shall amend the plan to provide the homeowner association information and information regarding the person hired by the association to manage the preserve. The homeowner's association and the preser manager shall be responsible for annual maintenance of the preserve, in perpetuity. At a minimum, the Preserve Manager shall have the same qualifications as are required for the author of an EIS, as set forth in secti 10.02 .02 A.3 . iv. Habitat Management for gopher tortoises. Habitats must be managed with regards to the species utilizing them, Wildlife Habitat Management strategies are required to provide for specialized treatment of the preserve. Where protected species are identified, management strategies shall be developed and implemented in accordance with section 3 .04.00. Where site conditions require prescribed burns, a fire management plan will be developed and implemented. v. Protection During Construction and Signage After Construction. The Preserve Management Plan shall address protective measures during construction and signage during and after construction that are consistent with section 3 .05.04. Include sign locations and detail of signage. 2nd REVIEW: New comments due to new material. Correct on both construction plans and EIS: 1. Remove Salix and Andropogon glomerus from plant list as discussed in meeting. Remove Ficus unless you can demonstrate it is not too cold for its long term survival. 2 . In Notes (1) Correct typos - Physically and Discretion - Include "aproval Collier County" regarding whether killing in place is appropriate. 3 . CE language decribes "Tract 4" Preserve is not decribed as Tract 4 anywhere. Please correct reference. 4. Remove vegetative monitoring plan. Not part of County requirements, too faint to scan. 5. Under management plan-remove all references to allowing any percentage of �..� exotics to remain. County Code requires all exotics to be removed and maintain in perpetuity. 6. Include the following is still not included in the management plan: a. Category I Exotics be removed from all preserves in perpetuity. All exotics within the first 75 feet of the outer edge of every preserve shall be physical removed, or the tree cut down to grade and the stump treated. - include this language. CDPR1014 - Checklist b. a visual tracer dye shall be applied with approved herbicides-add language c. A Preserve Manager shall be identified as the responsible party to ensure that the Preserve Management Plan is being complied with. The individual 's name, address and phone number shall be listed on the Preserve Management Plan. The same information shall be provided regarding the develope At a minimum, the Preserve Manager shall have the same qualifications as are required for the author of an EIS, as set forth in section 10.02 .02 A.3 . - Provide this info d. The Preserve Management Plan shall address protective measures durin construction and signage during and after construction that are consistent wit section 3.05. 04. Include sign locations and detail of signage.-Provide Detai including showing locations. 7. WHERE CREATED PRESERVES ARE APPROVED, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN SHALL RE-CREATE A NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITY. THE PLAN SHALL SPECIFY LARGER PLANT MATERIAL AND SPACING REQUIREMENTS. (LDC 3 .05.07.H.1.E.II) 8. Please see LDC 3 .05.07 for all preserve requirements. Address removal of fence from preserve. 3rd REVIEW: All of the follwoing comments may be changed based on correct preserve selection. Mangement techniques for upland preserves are different. Repeated coments: Please make the following changes/additions to the presreve management plan in EIS and on construction plans: 1. Under management plan-remove all references to allowing any percentage of exotics to remain. County Code requires all exotics to be removed and maintain in perpetuity. Clearly state that all Cat. 1 exotics shall be removed and maintained in perpetuity. 2 . Include the following is still not included in the management plan: a. Include preserve manager's phone number r 3. Address removal of fence from proposed preserve. N MASON S 20 . Provide a wildlife survey and include the wildlife habitat management plan on the site plan. (GMP Policy 7.1.2) Survey provided. Please see previous comment regarding habitat management pla as part of the preserve management plan. This must be included in EIS and on construction plans. 2nd REVIEW: See comments regarding management plan. Survey needs to include dates, time and weather of survey. Please include supplied information about scrub jays in area and any new info obtained from FWC. Were survey dates, time and weather appropriate for scrub jay surveys? As requested in EIS section-include info on listed plant species, too. does survey comply with FWC/FWS guidelines? 2nd submittal of ElSsome exhibits are unreadable-Fig 11-remove burrow markings-unreadable. No transects in wetland. These areas need included in survey. Please provide results of adequate survey including wetland. Fig 12 - Unable to see and easily read burrows shown on map. Please correct. 3rd REVIEW: Please see previous comments and include detailed management plan for GT relocation, scrub jays, etc. as part of construction plans and EIS. NO MASON S 21. Provide USFWS and FFWCC agency permits for protected species. (LDC 10.02 .03.B.1.j .viii. ) Copy of FWC GT relocation permit shall be a stipulation for approval of SDP. Based on new information: Offsite relocation permit shall be required prior t pre-construction meeting. Provide GTrelocation management plan as part of EIS and in SDP construction plans. Copies of FWS and FWC permits or letters of exemption for impacts to scrub jay habitat on site must be provided prior to SDP approval. CDPR1014 - Checklist N/A MASON S 22 . Provide a calculation table showing the required area in square feet for the LSPA in each lake. (LDC 3 .05.10.A.7 . ) N/A MASON S 2''Provide a plant list of 3 species, no one shall constitute more than 50% coverage; at 1. -dt one should be herbaceous. Incl. the appropriate rge. of elev. for each specified plant species, spacing req. & plant size. (LDC 3 .05.10.A.5; 3.05.10.B.10) N/A MASON S 24. Provide a X-section of the LSPA showing the avg 8:1 slope, the max.water depth and number of months of flooding for the range of planted elevations within the LSPA. Include control elevation and DSWT elevation. (LDC 3 .05.10.A.3-7) N/A MASON S 25. Locate the LSPA adjacent to a preserve and away from residential. If possible, near the control structure no closer than 20 ' on the sides and not in front of the structure. (LDC 3 .05 .10.A.2) N/A MASON S 26. Provide details and specify locations of a minimum of 2 signs that should note that the posted area is a Littoral Shelf Planting Area and provide protective language. (LDC 3 .05.10.A.6) N/A MASON S 27 . Place the following note on the site plan: "Eighty percent vegetative coverage of the LSP. is required within a 2-year period following the initial planting and shall be maintained in perpetuity. " (LDC 3 .05.10.A.5, B.1) INFO MASON S 28 . Additional Comments: Project will need to be heard before the EAC. FLUCFCS map does not accurately reflect areas containing scrub oaks on site. currently coded as 411-Pine flatwoods. Provide corrected map in EIS at next submittal. Plat submitted with the 3rd submittal has not been reviewed as part of this SD This will be reviewed if submitted as a final plat or with construction plans. INFO MASON S 29. Stipulations for approval: Copy of GT relocation permit shall be required at pre-construction meeting. Relocation must take place prior to any site work and according to approved relocation management plan. . All scrub jay compensation must be completed prior to SDP approval. Provide permits from FWC and FWS. Recording of approved Conservation Easement is required within 90 days of approval of SDP or prior to first CO, whichever comes first. f - uTech ,, t C R P R i S E J N c.. February 3, 2006 ��msul-Tech ('nn,tntetinn Jlan,igcmrnr. Inc. Ms. Connie Whiteway email-Tech Collier County Development Services I')r\rl prem tic niccc, Inc. 2800 North Horseshoe Drive (.„m,u1-Tech Naples, FL 34104 ninccring.Inc. l'nn,nl-Tech tiunccing s Jla15pi115-:• Inc. RE: SDP-AR-8088 ---THE RESERVE AT EDEN GARDENS t' ,n,ul-1cch I i.tn,porratinn. Inc. In regard to your comments dated December 12, 2005 we offer the following responses: • DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING-MICHAEL DERUNTZ Standard Checklist Item: B. Review FLOOR PLANS showing building use by floor area(sq ft) and ELEVATION showing building height Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Bonita Springs 8/31/05 Not provided +'�'I t/Id1 Road Bonita Springs. FL. 34135 11/30/05 the floor areas provided are inconsistent, and the maximum '.19)947-1)20, elevation of buildings are identified as "min. provided F.vx(73'))')47-1>73 Carolinas Response: Please find attached copies of the architectural floor plans 04)243-1700 and elevations. FAX(704)243-1790 Jacksonville (904)630-0450 DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING F•.vx(004)630-9455 Standard Checklist Item: D. Review coversheet for compliance with LDC Sec. 10.02.03.B.1.b.i as Miami ()I))50)-3141 follows: FAX x(ills)599-3143 Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8-31-05 SEE COMMENTS LISTED BELOW Miami Gardens 11/30/05 See comments Listed Below 115)556-0"8 F.Ax(3n;)550-5154 DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Miramar Standard Checklist Item: r` D.3. On coversheet, identify LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property '+'+;S43nu r:vs c)4)43`f-1433 and property ID/folio #(s) Orlando Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 11 )0+9-8"+ F.AX(407)649-`(I'SO 8/31/05 - The Range was incorrectly labeled 31 and should be 29, REVISED APPROVED 11/30/05 Sarasota - The warranty Deed for 00073361103 was not provided, 11,'30/05 NOT (,)41;556-11110 PROVIDED r.\\041)550-1195 ';'est Palm Beach i=,011 059-5050 I x(;('I)659_7105 www.cte.cc • Tech Ms. Connie Whiteway ^ . February 3, 2006. Pae Response: Please find attached copies of the Warranty Deed for 00073361103. Please note that this ID# corresponds to the parcel owned by Eden Gardens Apartments, LP. DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: E. Review site plans for compliance with LDC Sec. I0.02.03.B.1.b.ii as follows: Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 SEE COMMENTS LISTED BELOW 11/30/05 See Comments Listed Below • DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING • Standard Checklist Item: • E.1. On site plan, provide SCALE, NORTH ARROW, and ZONING & LAND USE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 11/30/05 the Table identifies the property to the south as "A" Agricultural and it should be "VR"Village Residential Response: The table in sheet C-2 has been revised accordingly. Please see revised plans. DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: E.3 On site plan, provide PROJECT SUMMARY in chart form, including the following: Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 SEE COMMENTS LISTED BELOW 11/30/05 See comments Listed Below DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: E.3.a. For residential projects: total number of units, units per acre, unit breakdown by square footage & # of bedrooms, & minimum square footage required by zoning district &proposed Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 Not provided in chart form, 11/30/05 - The units per acre per residential type was not provided, - There is a discrepancy of the minimum square footage of the residential unit Response: The table in sheet C-2 has been revised accordingly. Please see revised plans. DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: E.S. On site plan, in chart and on drawing, show all SETBACKS, required by zoning district & • provided, for principal and accessory structures :Tech Ms. Connie \ 'hitewav February 3, 2006 Page 3 Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 - Not providing single-family residence requirements, REVISED APPROVED 11/30/05 - Need to label duplex and multi-family category. REVISED APPROVED 11/30/05 - Not showing or meeting the front setback requirement, FRONT SETBACK FOR DUPLEX AND MULTI-FAMILY MEASURING 33' &31' / MIN. 35' 11/30/05 SETBACK FOR AMENITY CENTER NOT PROVIDED Response: The location of the duplex and multi-family buildings have been revised to provide a min. of 35 ft. front setback. • DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING • Standard Checklist Item: E.6. On site plan, in chart and on drawing, show SEPARATION between structures, required by zoning district & provided, for principal and accessory structures Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 Not providing separation between structures 11/30/05 - REMOVE THE REFERENCE FOR MH - MINIMUM SEPARATION FOR S/F IS 10' (5'+5') Response: The reference for MH has been removed from the table in sheet C-2 and the single family buildings provide for min. separation of 10 ft. Please see revised plans attached. DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: E.7. On site plan, in chart form, show maximum BUILDING HEIGHT permitted by zoning district and height proposed Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 Not provided 11/30/05 MINIMUM PROVIDED NOT PROPOSED Response: The table in sheet C-2 has been revised to show proposed heights. Please see revised set of plans. DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: G.5. Bike rack (as applicable, per LDC Sec 4.05.08) Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 Not provided 11/30/05 5 RACKS ARE SHOWN WHILE 3 ARE IDENTIFIED, AND 4 SPACES ARE SHOWN AND THEY ARE LABELED FOR 3 Tech Nis. Connie W'hiteway -xry February 3. 2006 Page -t Response: The bike racks have been revised accordingly. Please see revised set of plans. DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: H. On site plan, show location of TRASH container(s) or pad(s); if enclosed, show minimum enclosure dimensions of 12 X 12 ft. per LDC Sec. 4.02.01.13 Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 Detail, dimensions, and materials design not provided, 11/30/05 DETAIL NOT PROVIDED Response: A detail of the trash container is now shown in sheet C-8. Please see revised set of plans. DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: H.1 On site plan, for multifamily residential developments, give means of disposal (dumpster, curbside pickup, compactor) and, if applicable, number of containers approved by Utilities Billing Dept. Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 Not provided, EXPLANATION PROVIDED 11/30/05 DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: I. On site plan, show location of proposed ground or pole SIGN(S) & FLAGPOLE(S) with setbacks & note on plan that these are to be approved separately Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 not provided, 11/30/05 THE MINIMUM SETBACK FROM BOXWOOD DRIVE SHALL BE LABLED AS 10' Response: The proposed sign at the entrance has been located to maintain a min. setback from Boxwood Dr. of 10 ft. DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: J. On site plan, identify proposed walls or fences, indicate height &material Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 not provided, 11/30/05 NOT IDENTIFIED ;Tech Ms. Connie Whitewav February 3, 2006 �-� Page 5 Response: There are no proposed walls or fences for this project. The existing fences within the project area will be removed as noted on sheets C-1 and C-6 of the revised set of plans. DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: Add additional comments: Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/31/05 - Landscaping Plan has the incorrect total site area., REVISED APPROVED 11/30/05 - The Aerial Photo is not legible- and include the access road, REVISED APPROVED 11/30/05 - include the interconnection with Marion Lane, NOT PROVIDED 11/30/05 11/30/05 - LANDSCAPING NOT IDENTIFIED ALONG BOXWOOD DRIVE, - PROVIDE FOR FUTURE ACCES TO THE PROERTY TO THE SOUTH, - PROVIDE SNAITARY SEWER CONNECTION TO ADJOINING PROPERTY Response: The plat has been revised to provide a 30' easement at the northeast corner of the property for future interconnection with Marion Lane. The landscape plans have been revised to include the area along Boxwood Drive. The plat has been revised to extend the access easement from Boxwood Dr. to the south property for future interconnection. Please note that based on conversations with Immokalee Water & Sewer the property to the south has a nearby manhole near their southeast corner of the property and they didn't require a connection from this parcel. ( Please see existing utility layout in the Engineer's Report) DEV REV ADDRESSING-PEGGY JARRELL Standard Checklist Item: VERIFY BUILDING NUMBERS Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: NEED BLDG NUMBERS 2ND REVIEW-NEED BUILDING NUMBERS ON THE SITE PLAN LOOKS LIKE MULTIPLE BUILDING NUMBERS DEV REV ADDRESSING Standard Checklist Item: BUILDING NUMBERS NEED TO BE SUBMITTED Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 2ND REVIEW-NEED THE BUILDINGS NUMBERED ON SITE PLAN AND ARE THE UNIT NUMBERS FOR THE BUILDINGS ALSO HAVE THE BUILDING NUMBERS AS r . PART OF THERE SUITE NUMBERS??? DEV REV ADDRESSING : Tech Ms. Connie Whiteway February 3, 2006 Page 6 Standard Checklist Item: VERIFY UNIT/SUITE NUMBERS Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: NEED UNIT/SUITE NUMBER 2ND REVIEW- HAVE FOR ONE OF THE BUILDINGS 12105- DOES THIS MEAN UNIT 12105??? Response: The building numbers have been revised accordingly. Please see revised set of plans. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING-SUSAN MASON Standard Checklist Item: • 2. Provide a clearing plan on site plan (LDC 10.02.03.B.1.i.xii, 4.06.04) Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: No clearing plan provided. Plan must show acceptable preserves consistent with preservation ranking requirements in GMP/LDC. 2nd REVIEW: clearing plan provided on C-6, however, plan is phased? Is this allowed in SDPs-check with planner. Include acreage of total clearing under this SDP. Only infrastructure can be cleared as part of this SDP. Remove all residential housepads and any other areas that are not part of infrastructure. This clearing is part of building permit. Pd S1000 is clearing fees. Unknown if correct since no acreage given. Correct legend-preserve hatching says to be left undisturbed. Not correct exotic removal and replanting this area is required. Remove note. Response: The land clearing plan (Sheet C-6) has been revised as requested changing the wetland area from undisturbed to native vegetation preserve. Please see revised set of plans. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: 4. Provide the applicable clearing fee for removal of any vegetation. (LDC 10.02.03.B.l.i.xii.) Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Clearing fee paid but amount make change based on final clearing plan. 2ndRepeatedcomment-no acreage of clearing given -unable to verify fee. Response: Note that+/-13 ac. will be cleared and a $900 clearing fee should be required. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: • i`Tec Ms. Connie Whitewav February 3, 2006 Pa;e 7 7. Provide a complete and sufficient EIS and the required review fee. (LDC 10.02.02) Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: S2500 fee provided. Please correct the following deficiencies in the EIS and supply a total of 3 copies of the resubmittal. Technical assistance may be requested from FWC. 1. Preserves must be changed to preserve listed species habitat on site. Amend EIS and construction plans. Please be sure EIS and construction plans are consistent with all required changes. See preserve comments to follow. 2. Provide topographic map of site. Please overlay with FLUCFCS codes 3. Please address whether there are any adjacent offsite preserves 4. Give more detail on how this project is consistent with GMP policies- specifically: a. 6.1.1 - preserves must be changed to meet GMP ranking shown in this section. GT area is first priority and required preserves must contain GT burrows and surrounding habitat. b. 6.1.8 c. 6.2.4 - provide SFWMD permit, exhibits and staff report. d. 7.1.2 5. pg 6 Native Vegetation section of EIS - Removal of exotic vegetation is not enhancement. Exotic removal is required by the county. Please amend this section of the EIS 6. Native vegetation section. Maleleuca wetlands proposed for preservation do not meet the definition of native habitat therefore they do not qualify as a preserve area. Revise this portion of EIS to discuss preservation areas as ranked in GMP/LDC. 7. Provide transect map of wildlife survey. 8. GT management plan just addresses relocation and exotic removal. Please elaborate on this plan to discuss management of the preserve long term including supplemental plantings, possible manual removal of native vegetation to keep area open for foraging (requiring a VRP), etc. 9. Figure 2 was inserted upside down. Please correct. 10. figures 7 & 8 - Please correct legend - what is AT? Active? Legend says Active is AC but no burrows are marked AC 11. Are UMAM scores accepted? Proof of accepted scores is required. 2nd REVIEW: Please include S1000 EIS resubmittal fee. Repeated comments or new comments based on new info. Ms. Connie Vv litteway .. .� February 3. 2006 Page S Please make the following changes, additions and corrections to the EIS. Please be sure EIS and construction plans are consistent with all requiredchanges: 1. Listed species survey needs to include dates, time and weather of survey. Please include supplied information about scrub jays in area and any new info obtained from FWC. Were survey dates, time and weather appropriate for scrub jay surveys? Include listed plant survey results. Does survey comply with FWC and FWS guidelines? Explain. Response: Please see Appendix E for wildlife survey dates and weather. The listed plant survey results are found in the Flora section of the Environmental Impact Statement. The wildlife survey methodologies are consistent with guidelines published by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Please refer to the Wildlife section of the Environmental Impact Statement for details. As we have indicated previously the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has reviewed the gopher tortoise survey as part of an application for relocating the tortoises and has indicated that they are prepared to issue a relocation permit. This would only happen if they were satisfied that the survey was done in a manner consistent with there guidelines. �., 2. 2nd submittal of EIS some exhibits are unreadable- a. Fig 11-remove burrow markings-unreadable. No transects in wetland. These areas need included in survey. Please provide results of adequate survey including wetland. b. Fig 12 - Unable to see and easily read burrows shown on map. Please correct. Response: Figure 11 was a response to a request to show the gopher tortoise transects. Wildlife transects have been conducted in the wetland area and have been added to a revised Figure 11. The burrow markings have also been removed from Figure 11. In order to make the text more easily readable the background aerial on Figure 12 has been removed. 3. Give more detail on how this project is consistent with GMP policies- Create GMP section of EIS and address ALL relevant sections of GMP CCME including: a. 6.1.1 - preserves must be changed to meet GMP ranking shown in this section. High quality wetlands existing? If wetland is to meet GMP/LDC requirements, it must be restored and included in calculations of native veg on site. Correct all calcs. Further outline GT relocation. Give info on site and evidence it is acceptable to the FWC, meets county LDC requirements and recipient. Response: Please see the Native Vegetation section of the revised Environmental Impact statement for the native vegetation preserve calculations. The Applicant is seeking Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission authorization to relocate the gopher tortoises offsite. A copy of the Florida Fish Tech Ms. Connie \\'hitewav February 3, 2006 Paeee 9 and Wildlife Conservation Commission authorization will be forwarded to Collier County. b. 6.1.4 - Does this project comply with exotic removal? state in EIS. Response: Yes, please see the Environmental Impact Statement Native Vegetation and Native Vegetation Management Plan sections and Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans as well as the landscape plans. c. 6.1.8 — EIS Response: Please see Environmental Impact Statement. d. 6.2.1 - verified JD lines. Response: Collier county Growth Management Plan Policies 6.2.1 and 6.2.2 do not require that the landward extent of wetlands be verified by the South Florida Water Management District.. Pursuant to Section 373.421, Florida Statutes, the landward extent of wetlands shall be delineated in accordance with the Uniform Wetland Delineation Methodology established in Chapter 62-340, Florida Statutes, this methodology shall be the sole method within Florida to delineate the landward extent of the onsite wetlands. On August 12, 2004, Consul-Tech Development Services delineated the landward extent of wetlands in the field utilizing the Uniform Wetland Delineation Methodology and has surveyed the wetland lines, which have been depicted on the site plans. On March 24, 2005 Laura Layman from the South Florida Water Management District confirmed the field delineation lines established by Consul-Tech Development Services. Accordingly, pursuant to Collier County Growth Management Plan Policy 6.2.1, the delineation of the landward extent of wetlands on the project site has been field delineated using the Uniform Wetland Delineation Methodology. e. 6.2.4 - provide SFWMD permit, exhibits and staff report. SDP can not be approved prior to verifying all permits match county plans. Response: A copy of the Environmental Resource Permit issued by the South Florida Water Management District, along with the staff report will be submitted to the County when it is issued. f 6.2.6 - Conservation easements are required over all preserves. CE must he approved prior to SDP approval. :Tech Ms. Connie Whitewav February 3, 2000 .-� Page 10 Response: The draft conservation easement is included with this submittal. When the conservation easement is approved by the South Florida Water Management District a copy of the approval will be provided to Collier County. g. - including jays scrub a s and GTs. Response: Please see the Native Vegetation section and the Wildlife section of the Environmental Impact Statement. 4. Increase in UMAM scores based on proposed restoration appears to be too great. Information requested from SFWMD staff to confirm this great an increase will be reached. Provide any correspondence to support these numbers. Include in EIS. Response: On November 18, 2005 the Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method (UMAM) scores were provided to the South Florida Water Management District in support of the proposed wetland impact mitigation plan. Verification of the acceptability of the scores will take the form of an Environmental Resource Permit issued by the South Florida Management District. When the permit is issued a copy will be submitted to the County. 5. Pg 2 of EIS refers to 92 units and pg 6 refers to 95. Which is correct? Be consistent in EIS and construction plans. Response: The correct number is 92 and is reflected in the construction plans and in the Environmental Impact Statement. 6. pg 2 - states hydrology will be maintained. Is any improvement expected? Include in EIS Response: Please see the discussion of hydrology in the Native Vegetation section of the Environmental Impact Statement. 7. Pg 2 - EIS states that aerials indicate formerly cleared pasture-What time period was this used? Include in EIS Response: Please see the Site Description section of the Environmental Impact Statement and Figures 13 through 15 of the Environmental Impact Statement. Ms. Connie \Vhitewav Tech February 3, 2006 Pagel I 8. pg 5 - it wetland is to be included as native and meet,preservation ranking, supply plant list based on existing conditions AFTER exotic removal and replanting. Response: Please see the Native Vegetation section of the Environmental Impact Statement and Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans. 9. pg 6 - update wetlands section based on existing conditions after exotics removed and replanted. Response: Please see the Wetland section of the revised Environmental Impact Statement. 10. pg 6 - correct the following typos - 10th line from bottom of page - remove "exceeding". 6th line from bottom - "buy" should be "by" Response: Please see the revised Environmental Impact Statement. 11. pg 8 - management plan-remove all references to exotic remaining in preserve - county regs don't allow. Response: Please see the Native Vegetation Preserve Management Plan in the Environmental Impact Statement and Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans. 12. Pg 8 - refers to native veg debris in preserve. why would this be there? falling from natural causes? if so, describe and state this shall remain. Response: Vegetation produces litter which will naturally accumulate in areas that are not maintained in the manner of a lawn, garden or agricultural field. Since the native vegetation preserve is proposed to be maintained in a natural state removing all vegetative debris would be inconsistent with that goal. However the debris from exotic/nuisance vegetation is proposed to be removed as part of the preserve management. The statement was inserted in the management plan to clarify that the preserve will be maintained in a natural condition while still having the debris from nuisance vegetation cleaned up. Please see the revised Environmental Impact Statement and Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans for details of the maintenance activities. 13. Remove reference to GT preserve since it will not exist if GTs are relocated off-site. Response: Please see the Gopher Tortoise Management Plan section of the revised Environmental Impact Statement. s:Tech \Is. Connie Whiteway February 3, 2006 r� Page 11 14. Pg 9 - address status of positive GTs. If positive, what site will they go to? Healthy GTs can not be relocated to reserve having sick GTs so testing will be required. Response: Please see the Gopher Tortoise Management Plan section of revised Environmental Impact Statement. 15. Fig 3 - include acreage of preserve calcs showing required and provided. Also include in narrative. Response: Please see Figure 3 and the Native,Vegetation Section of the Environmental Impact Statement. 16. Fig 8 - topo map provided does not contain any measurements. Please provide map with elevations. Response: The United States Geological Survey Topographic Map shown in Figure 2 rte. contains elevations and is drawn to scale. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: 11. Provide wetland permits from the applicable agencies. (GMP Policy 6.2.4(2)) Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Provide copy of SFWMD permit, staff report and exhibits. Project must be consistent with all the requirements of the permit, including impacts adjacent to jurisdictional wetlands on site. 2nd REVIEW: Repeated comment: Provide copy of SFWMD permit, staff report and exhibits. Project must be consistent with all the requirements of the permit, including impacts adjacent to jurisdictional wetlands on site. Unable to approve SDP prior to receiving and confirming all required wetland permits. construction plans show alterations w/i 10' of preserve. Must be part of ERP. Response: A copy of the Environmental Resource Permit issued by the South Florida Water Management District will be submitted to the County when it is issued. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: Tech Ms. Connie Whiteway February 3, 2006 Page 13 12. All principal structures shall have a minimum setback of 25' from the boundary()Carly preserve. Accessory structures and all other site alterations shall have a minimum 10-foot setback. (LDC 3.05.07.H.3; 6.01.02.0.) Response: Please see the revised project plans. Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Included the following setbacks in the Development Standards table on sheet C-2: Preserve area setbacks: 25' for primary structures 10' for alterations and accessory structures Include cross sections showing these setbacks have been met for County required preserves. 2nd REVIEW: Primary structures included in table showing required and provided. Table shows required accessory setback but does not give provided or address alterations. Alterations must also meet 10' setback. Provide info in table and show cross sections showing alterations and accessory structures have been met. Response: Please see Sheets C-2 and C-3 of the project plans. Please note that the spreader swale within 10' of the preserve area is part of the storm water management system that is being permitted through South Florida Water Management District and will be part of the Environmental Resource Permit. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: 13. Provide calculations on site plan showing the appropriate acreage of native vegetation to be retained and the maximum amount that is to be re-created. Clearly identify the location of both on the site plan. (LDC 3.05.07.B-D, F, H.1.d-e) Response: Please see Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans. Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Include as part of land usage table on sheet C-2 acres of required preservation ( 2.43 acres) and amount supplied. wetlands shown as preserved on site do not meet county requirements of native preservation. GT preserve must be expanded to required minimum of 2.43 acres. 2nd REVIEW: Per meetings on Nov 4 and Nov 30 - native calcs must be corrected to include 424 area after exotics have been removed and wetlands restored. correct EIS and construction plans. Response: Please see ENV-1 of the project plans and the Native Vegetation Section of the revised Environmental Impact Statement. .;Tech Ms. Connie Whiteway m , February 3, 2006 Paue 14 DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: 14. Preservation areas shall be selected based on the criteria defined in Policy 6.1.1(4) of the GMP and shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors. (GMP Policy 6.1.1(9)) Response: Please see the Native Vegetation Section of the revised Environmental Impact Statement. Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Listed species habitat is the highest ranking on site. Required County preservation must in highest GT area and surrounding habitat. 2nd REVIEW: New comments based on new info and change in plans. Provide location of off site GT relocation, proof of the recipient properties acceptance and FWC's acceptance of GT relocation area. If not provided, provide a minimum of 1 acre of GT habitat on site. • Response: Please see the Gopher Tortoise Management Plan in the revised Environmental Impact Statement. As discussed in the Nov 30 meeting, an email was sent to SFWMD staff on Dec 1 requesting confirmation that the proposed exotic removal and replanting will boost the UMAM score for the wetland preserve area to 0.7 or better to comply with required rankings after the listed species is properly relocated offsite. Provide evidence they agree with this large increase in score. Response: On November 18, 2005 the Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method (UMAM) scores were provided to the South Florida Water Management District in support of the proposed wetland impact mitigation plan. Verification of the acceptability of the scores will take the form of an Environmental Resource Permit issued by the South Florida Water Management District. When the permit is issued a copy will be submitted to the County. A meeting to discuss time-line of work was held on Dec 2 with the County attorney's office. Wetland must exist as 0.7 or better to qualify for GMP/LDC ranking. signed contracts or bonding do not meet letter or intent of regs. �.� Existing conditions on site in the wetland must be 0.7 or better to qualify for preservation. • Tech Ms. Connie Whiteway February 3, 2006 Page 15 Response: Collier County Growth Management Plan Policy 6.1.1(4) provides the criteria by which the onsite areas of native vegetation must be selected for preservation. Pursuant to Collier County Growth Management Plan Policy 6.1.1(4), the onsite areas selected to meet the native vegetation preservation standards shall reflect the following criteria in descending order of priority: 1) areas known to be utilized by listed species or that serve as corridors for the movement of wildlife through the site, 2) onsite wetlands preserved pursuant to Collier County Growth Management Plan Policy 6.2.4, 3)upland habitat (six specified in descending order of priority), and 4) exemptions to these priorities as noted in Collier County Growth Management Plan Policy 6.1.1(7). In the proposal, onsite wetlands are preserved to constitute the native vegetation preserve. Wile the wetlands do not currently, at the time of submittal of the Environmental Impact • Statement, have a Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method value of 0.7, there is • no requirement in the Collier County Growth Management Plan or Collier County Land Development Code that the wetlands be improved to a certain Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method value at or before the time of submittal of the Environmental Impact Statement. As provided above, the Collier County Growth Management Plan does not even reference Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method scores, and while the County Land Development Code does reference Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method scores, Collier County Land �.., Development Code section 3.05.07 simply provides that if a wetland has a Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method score of 0.7, that wetland must be preserved. As further support of the fact that the wetlands need not have a Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method score of 0.7 in order to be used as a native vegetation preserve, Collier County Land Development Code section 3.05.07(H) requires mandatory removal of non-native vegetation from preserves and allows for supplemental planting to be added to preserve areas where the removal of non-native and/or nuisance vegetation creates open areas with little or no native vegetation coverage. As such, the Collier County Land Development Code contemplates the exact type of non-native vegetation removal and supplemental planting in this proposal, and the Collier County Land Development Code and the Collier County Growth Management Plan do not mandate that such removal and plantings occur prior to submittal of the Environmental Impact Statement. It should be noted that this proposal provides that the wetlands preserved will have increased functionality and will result in a 0.07 Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method score after all work has been completed. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: 17. All preserve areas shall be identified as "Preserve" on separate tracts and protected by a permanent conservation easement to prohibit further development. (GMP Policy 6.1.1(3)) Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: . :Tech Nis. Connie Whitewav "- _ February 3, 2006 Page 16 Once preserve area is accepted by County staff. Supply CE and needed exhibits for county preserves. Protective language must be included in construction plans along with sketch and legal description. Include the following statement, amended to apply to your specific site, : DEDICATE TO THE (NAME OF HOA): 1. TRACTS ("P-1" AND "P-2") AS PRESERVE AREAS SUBJECT TO A CONSERVATION EASEMENT AS DEPICTED HEREON, WITH PERPETUAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. THE PRESERVE AREAS AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT MAY IN NO WAY BE ALTERED FROM ITS NATURAL OR PERMITTED STATE. ACTIVITIES PROHIBITED WITHIN THE PRESERVE AREA • AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, CONSTRUCTION OR PLACING OF BUILDINGS ON OR ABOVE THE GROUND; • DUMPING OR PLACING SOIL OR OTHER SUBSTANCES SUCH AS TRASH; REMOVAL OR DESTRUCTION OF TREES, SHRUBS, OR OTHER VEGETATION WITH THE EXCEPTION OF EXOTIC/NUISANCE VEGETATION REMOVAL; EXCAVATION, DREDGING OR REMOVAL OF SOIL MATERIAL DIKING OR FENCING; ANY OTHER ACTIVITIES DETRIMENTAL TO DRAINAGE, FLOOD CONTROL, WATER CONSERVATION, EROSION CONTROL, OR FISH AND WILDLIFE .-. HABITAT CONSERVATION OR PRESERVATION. DEDICATE TO COLLIER COUNTY: 1. ALL CONSERVATION EASEMENTS (C.E.) AS DEPICTED HEREON AND PURSUANT TO SECTION 704.06 FLORIDA STATUTES,WITHOUT RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE. To request approved template and needed exhibits email: susanmason@colliergov.net 2nd REVIEW: Repeated comments: Once preserve area is accepted by County staff. Supply original signed CE and needed signed and sealed exhibits for county preserves. Protective language must be included in construction plans along with sketch and legal description.-language included but describes "Tract 4"-nothing is labeled tract 4. Please correct to describe correct area. To request approved CE template and required exhibits email: susanmason acolliergov.net Approval of CE is required prior to SDP approval. Response: Please see copies of the proposed Plat and copy of the conservation easement. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: ,,••� 18. All necessary documentation to record conservation easements over the preserves (GMP Policy 6.1.1(3)) shall be provided prior to SDP approval. Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Tech Ms. Connie VVhitewav � February 3, 2006 Pave 17 See previous comment Response: Noted. 2nd REVIEW: Repeated comment-see above. Approved CE required prior to SDP approval Response: Noted. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: 19. A Preserve Area Management Plan shall be provided on the site plan identifying methods•to address control and treatment of invasive exotic species, fire management, and maintenance of permitted facilities. (GMP Policy 6.1.1(6)) Response: Please see Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans. Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: As part of construction plan set, include preserve management plan. The Preserve Management Plan shall include the following elements: i. General Maintenance. Preserves shall be maintained in their natural state and must be kept free of refuse and debris. ii. Exotic vegetation Removal, Non- native vegetation , and Nuisance or Invasive Plant Control. exotic vegetation removal and maintenance plans shall require that Category I Exotics be removed from all preserves. All exotics within the first 75 feet of the outer edge of every preserve shall be physically removed, or the tree cut down to grade and the stump treated. Exotics within the interior of the preserve may be approved to be treated in place if it is determined that physical removal might cause more damage to the native vegetation in the preserve. When prohibited exotic vegetation is removed, but the base of the vegetation remains, the base shall be treated with an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved herbicide and a visual tracer dye shall be applied. Control of exotics shall be implemented on a yearly basis or more frequently when required, and shall describe specific techniques to prevent reinvasion by prohibited exotic vegetation of the site in perpetuity. Non- native vegetation and nuisance or invasive plants shall be removed from all Preserves. iii. Designation of a Preserve Manager. A Preserve Manager shall be identified as the responsible party to ensure that the Preserve Management Plan is being complied with. The individual's name, address and phone number shall be listed on the Preserve Management Plan. The same information shall be provided regarding the developer. Both parties will be responsible until such time that the homeowners association takes over the management of the preserve. At that time, the homeowners association shall amend the plan to provide the homeowner association information and information regarding the person hired by the association to manage the preserve. The homeowner's association and the preserve manager shall be responsible for annual maintenance of the preserve, in perpetuity. At a minimum, the Preserve Manager shall Tech Ms. Connie Whitewav �"�- = . February 3, 2006 Page 1S have the same qualifications as are required for the author of an ES, as set Earth in section 10.02.02 A.3. iv. Habitat Management for gopher tortoises. Habitats must be managed with regards to the species utilizing them, Wildlife Habitat Management strategies are required to provide for • specialized treatment of the preserve. Where protected species are identified, management strategies shall be developed and implemented in accordance with section 3.04.00. Where site conditions require prescribed burns, a fire management plan will be developed and implemented. v. Protection During Construction and Signage After Construction. The Preserve Management Plan shall address protective measures during construction and signage during and after construction that are consistent with section 3.05.04. Include sign locations and detail of signage. • 2nd REVIEW: New comments due to new material. Correct on both construction plans and EIS: 1. Remove Salix and Andropogon glomeras from plant list as discussed in meeting. Remove Ficus unless you can demonstrate it is not too cold for its long term survival. Response: Salix caroliniana and Andropogon glomeratus have been deleted from the planting plan. Please refer to the Florida Department of Environmental �-� Protection publication Florida Wetland Plants: An Identification Manual for a distribution map that demonstrates the Ficus aurea occurs many mile north of Immokalee in Florida. The web site of the Institute of Systematic Botany (http://www.plantatlas.usfedu/maps.asp?plantID=2466) provides a map of vouchered specimens of Ficus aurea which also shows its surviving in areas with significantly cooler winter temperatures than found in Immokalee. 2. In Notes (1) Correct typos - Physically and Discretion - Include "approval of Collier County" regarding whether killing in place is appropriate. Response: Please see Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans. 3. CE language describes "Tract 4" Preserve is not described as Tract 4 anywhere. Please correct reference. Response: Please see the proposed plat in the project site plan. 4. Remove vegetative monitoring plan. Not part of County requirements, too faint to scan. ,.� Response: The South Florida Nater Management District requires monitoring of wetland mitigation. In order to maintain consistency with the set of project plans provided to the South Florida Water Management District the monitoring plan Tech Ms. Connie Vhitewav February 3, 2006 Page 19 is shown on the project plans but has been relabeled for South Florida Nater Management District only. No copies of the monitoring reports will be sent to Collier County. 5. Under management plan-remove all references to allowing any percentage of exotics to remain. County Code requires all exotics to be removed and maintained in perpetuity. Response: Please see Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans, and the landscape plan. 6. Include the following is still not included in the management plan: a. Category I Exotics be removed from all preserves in perpetuity. All exotics within the first 75 feet of the outer edge of every preserve shall be physically removed, or the tree cut down to grade and the stump treated. - include this language. Response: Please see Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans. Also please note that the plans require removal of exotic vegetation from the entire preserve not just the outer 75 feet. b. a visual tracer dye shall be applied with approved herbicides-add language Response: Please see Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans. c. A Preserve Manager shall be identified as the responsible party to ensure that the Preserve Management Plan is being complied with. The individual's name, address and phone number shall be listed on the Preserve Management Plan. The same information shall be provided regarding the developer. At a minimum, the Preserve Manager shall have the same qualifications as are required for the author of an EIS, as set forth in section 10.02.02 A.3. - Provide this info Response: Please see Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans. d. The Preserve Management Plan shall address protective measures during construction and signage during and after construction that are consistent with section 3.05.04. Include sign locations and detail of signage.-Provide Details including showing locations. Response: Please see the Erosion Control and Clearing Plan (Sheet C-6) and Sheet C-2 for details of the protective barriers to be used during construction and the signage. • Tech FIs. Connie Whitewav February 3, 2006 Page 20 7. WHERE CREATED PRESERVES ARE APPROVED, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN SHALL RE-CREATE A NATIVE PLANT COiIMUNITY. THE PLAN SHALL SPECIFY LARGER PLANT MATERIAL AND SPACING REQUIREMENTS. ([.DC 3.05.07.H.l.E.II) Response: Please see Sheet ENV-1 of the project plans. The wetlands preserve is not a created preserve because, pursuant to Collier County Land Development Code Section 30.5.07 H.l.f, the preserve is considered an existing site area with supplemental plantings that were only necessary due to the removal of non- native and/or nuisance vegetation that created open areas with little or no native vegetation coverage. The regulations regarding creation of a preserve do not apply to this project because no preserve areas are proposed to be created. • 8. Please see LDC 3.05.07 for all preserve requirements. Address removal of fence from preserve. Response: A portion of the existing section of stock fence that is located within the proposed native vegetation will be removed by hand without the use of vehicles, operating within the preserve boundaries. Please see the land clearing plan for details of the proposed fence removal. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING Standard Checklist Item: 20. Provide a wildlife survey and include the wildlife habitat management plan on the site plan. (GMP Policy 7.1.2) Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Survey provided. Please see previous comment regarding habitat management plan as part of the preserve management plan. This must be included in EIS and on construction plans. 2nd REVIEW: See comments regarding management plan. Survey needs to include dates, time and weather of survey. Please include supplied information about scrub jays in area and any new info obtained from FWC. Were survey dates, time and weather appropriate for scrub jay surveys? As requested in EIS section-include info on listed plant species, too. does survey comply with FWC/FWS guidelines? Response: Please see the Gopher Tortoise section, the Florida Scrub Jay section, Figure 16 and Appendix E of the Environmental Impact Statement . The time of year, time of day and weather during the Florida Scrub Jay survey events were consistent with recommendations found in the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission guidelines (J. W. Fitzpatrick, et. al., 1991). Please see the Flora section of the Environmental Impact Statement for information on listed plants. The gopher tortoise survey was conducted in a manner consistent with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission guidelines which • • :Tech Ms. Connie Whitewav February 3, 2006 Paze '1 reference: Auffenberg, W`"., and R. Franz. 1982.. The status and distribution of the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus). Pages 95-126 in R. B. Bury, editor. North American tortoises: conservation and ecology. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wildlife Research Report No. 12. 2nd submittal of EIS some exhibits are unreadable-Fig 11-remove burrow markings-unreadable. No transects in wetland. These areas need included in survey. Please provide results of adequate survey including wetland. Response: Figure 11 was a response to a request to show the gopher tortoise transects. • Wildlife transects have been conducted in the wetland area and have been added to a revised Figure 11. The burrow markings have also been removed. Fig 12 - Unable to see and easily read burrows shown on map. Please correct. Response: In order to make the text more easily readable the background aerial in Figure 12 has been removed. DEV REV ENGR H2O MGMT-STEVE SEAL Standard Checklist Item: PROVIDE A COPY OF SFWMD PERMIT Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Response: A copy of the SFWMD Permit will be provided upon issuance. DEV REV ENGR H2O MGMT Standard Checklist Item: Submit ROW permit application number Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Response: The ROW permit application number is # 24400-E DEV REV ENGR 1120 MGMT Standard Checklist Item: Erosion control details & access & silt fence location must be shown on separate sheet Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Provide a reduced map showing the location of the silt screen on the Erosion Control Detail Sheet. 11/23/05: Revise Erosion Control Sht. to include Temp. Const. Access Detail to be a min. 6" #1 FDOT Course Aggregate and to extend a min. 50' into the project Tech Ms. Connie Whitewav � -- February 3, 2006 Pa,e 22 Response: The Erosion Control Plan and Clearing Limits have been revised accordingly. Please see sheet C-6 of the attached set of plans. DEV REV ENGR 1120 MGMT Standard Checklist Item: Provide lighting plan (multi-family) Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Must be signed and sealed 11/23/05: Lighting Plan must be a separate plan to include a Pole Detail and must be signed and sealed by a Electrical Engineer in the State of FL. Response: A lighting plan signed and sealed by and Electrical Engineer is attached to the revised set of plans. DEV REV ENGR 1120 MGMT Standard Checklist Item: Enter additional comments here: Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 1. Sidewalk parallel to a drive and abutting curb must be grade separated with an unmountable curb or face of walk must be a min. 6' from EOP. Revise Type. Roadway Section Sht. C-7 accordingly. Also, revise Section to show subgrade to extend a min. 12" beyond BOC. OK 2. Revise C.S. Detail Sht. C-8 to show bleeder invert to be a min. 12' above the structure bottom and the baffle dia. to be called out (must be a min. 18" half-round) and baffle must extend from a min. 6" below the bleeder upward to the 25Y elev. 11/23/05: Provide the elev. of the baffle bottom at a min. 6" below bleeder Response: The CS Detail in sheet C-8 has been revised accordingly. Please see revised set of plans. 3. Provide a cross section of the entrance road from Westclock Rd. 11/23/05: Revise Section G-G Sht. C-3 to show sidewalk at a min. 6' wide where abutting raised curb. Response: Section G-G on sheet C-3 has been revised accordingly. Please see revised set of plans. Tech Ms. Connie \V'hitewavFebruary 3. 2006 Page 23 4. 11123/05: Revise Typ. Roadway Sections R-R1 and R-R2 to show min. crown elev. at the 25Y elev. which is above 11.0 as shown. Clarify where these sections were taken. Response: The above referenced sections have been revised accordingly. Please see revised set of plans. 5. Typ. Roadway Section R-R2 shows V/G. You stated that all curb was Type "F". Please clarify. Response: The above referenced sections have been revised accordingly. Please see revised set of plans. • DEV REV ENGR TRANSPORTATION-RUSS MULLER Standard Checklist Item: Right-of-Way Considerations Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: A note on the plans says the access road will be dedicated to the County. Please contact Transportation for particulars. Response: The plat now shows the 60' ROW access road dedication to Collier County. Please see attached copies of the plat. DEV REV ENGR TRANSPORTATION Standard Checklist Item: Sidewalks/Bike paths Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Sidewalks need to be out of the clear zone or 6' from travel lane for<25 MPH. Need to provide a minimum of 23' from back of walk to face of garage. Sidewalks need a minimum 2' shoulder on both sides. Need to provide 2 curb ramps at each corner of an intersection. Need to connect sidewalk to the edge of pavement of Westclox. Need to add a note to the plans that they meet ADA requirements. Review 2: There is sufficient room to separate the sidewalk from the back of the curb and still maintaining the 23' from the garage. The proposed sidewalk on the back of F curb is problematic in several ways. The driveway sections will need to be at grade with a 2% cross slope and running slope can not exceed 12% which is a ramp under ADA requirements. An additional concern is the placement of mailboxes where the mailman will not have to driveon to the sidewalk to deliver the mail. Need to provide a detailed drawing showing how the ADA slopes will be met. I could not locate the note on the plans stating ADA compliance. • Tech Ms. Connie Whiteway February 3, 2006 Paye 24 A section still shows no shoulder on the sidewalk. Response: The sidewalk in the single family area has been revised as requested and a detail of the driveway is now shown in sheet C-8 of the attached plans. DEV REV ENGR TRANSPORTATION Standard Checklist Item: Signing/Striping Requirements Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: The crosswalk to the amenity center should not be stop controlled. The crosswalk needs to be 10' wide per FDOT Index 17346. • Need to show detail sheet numbers corrected because C-5 and C-6 are incorrect. Need to show handicap parking detail. Review 2: The crosswalk is still stop controlled. Response: The crosswalk has been revised accordingly. • DEV REV FIRE Standard Checklist Item: Review comments: Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: Hold, 11/23/05, Ken Abler 1. Per local ordinance #2005-32 section 13.3.2.1.1. All new residential occupancies containing more then 4 living units shall be provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system. There shall be a 4-hour fire wall, meeting requirements of NFPA 220, used to divide the five unit buildings so not to need fire sprinkler protection. Response: Please note that a 4hr. fire wall in accordance with NFPA 220 is proposed in the multi-family buildings dividing the building in 3 and 2 units. Based on this and the attached fire flow results there is sufficient flow for fire protection and automatic fire sprinkler systems are not necessary. 2. Items #3, #4, and #5 are still applicable. Note: No Engineer's report was provided with revision #2. Response: Please see attached copy of the Engineer's report. Tech Ms. Connie Whiteway — February 3, 2006 Page 2� Hold, 8/24:05, Ken Abler 1. Per 18.2.2.5.1.1 NFPA 1, Florida Edition 2003 - Fire department access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less then 2Oft. and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less thenl3ft.6in. (14ft. local) Minimum width may be reduced to meet special access with approval of the fire official. IE: Entrance roadway from Westclock Road. Response: The entrance roadway from Westclock Road is 20 ft. wide. 2. Per local ordinance #2005-32 section 13.3.2.1.1. All new residential occupancies containing more then 4 living units shall be provided with an automatic fire sprinkler system. • Response: Please see note that the building has been divided using a 4hr fire wall and based on existing fire flows automatic fire sprinkler systems are not necessary. 3. Show locations of PIV's, FDC's and backflow devises. Response: Please see previous response. 4. Provide a plan showing the water supply piping, from point of connection, for the entire site showing hydrants, PIV's, FDC's, and backflow locations. Response: Please see previous response. 5. Provide a hydraulic modeling, starting from the hydrant flowed on Curry Road, using the available water as shown on flow test of 8/22/05, to throughout the entire project. 6. Response: A hydraulic modeling is attached to the Engineer's Report. cc: Immokalee Fire District DEV REV ENGR UTILITIES-WES HILL Standard Checklist Item: Not in Collier County water and/or sewer district. Reviewer Remarks to Checklist Item: 8/24/05 Submit approval from the Immokalee water/sewer district Ord 2004-31 Section 7.1.4. 11/23/05 Approval from Immokalee Water/sewer district still required. Response: Please note that changes to the offsite improvements have been incorporated to this set of plans per comments from Immokalee Nater & Sewer review. The • tech \Is. Connie Whiteway February 3, 2006 Page 26 approval from Immokalee Water & Sewer District will be provided prior to the start of construction. The folloivin'continents were received. are informational and/or mat• include stipulations: DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING FOR ALL RESUBMITTALS: If plans resubmitted, have any changes that would require review by any department or reviewer who has already approved a prior submittal, notify Engineering Dept. tech and request distribution to appropriate reviewer(s) DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Verify D.U. and/or•sq. ft. is consistent with computer records and notify Christine Willoughby of any discrepancy. DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Change in use, notify Christine Willoughby DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Resubmittal resulting in increase/decrease of D.U., sq. ft., or change in use will need to be re- reviewed by Transportation; coordinate with Connie Whiteway: DEV REV CURRENT PLANNING Compare site plans with computer records. Notify Christine Willoughby of any changes to sq. ft., #of buildings, or residential D.U. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING 21. Provide USFWS and FFWCC agency permits for protected species. (LDC Copy of FWC GT relocation permit shall be a stipulation for approval of SDP. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING 28. Additional Comments: Project will need to be heard before the EAC. DEV REV ENVIRON. PLANNING 29. Stipulations for approval: Copy of GT relocation permit shall be required at pre-construction meeting. Relocation must take place prior to any site work. DEV REV LANDSCAPE PLANNING n Stipulations for approval: Tech Ms. Connie V hiteway February 3, 2006 ,—� Paae '7 The Landscape and Irrigation Plans are approved with the stipulation that a minimum of 35% of the Type B hedge plants planted in the north buffer are a native plant species such as Viburnum obovatum. DEV REV ENGR 1120 MGMT Provide C.O.A. DEV REV ENGR 1120 MGNIT Stipulations for Approval Letter Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a Performance/Maintenance Bond must be submitted based on the estimated cost of the paving and drainage improvements. We trust this information meets your needs. Please contact us if you have any questions or require additional information. Very truly yours, Cons 1-Tech Development e ' 's Inc. db. ` a.riel E. Olivare '.E. Director of Engineering Cc: Don Paxton/ Beneficial Communities Kristina Ramsey/Broad&Cassel Douglas Rillstone/Broad& Cassel CTE File No. 04081040 Enclosures: Ten (10) signed& sealed sets of construction plans Five (5) signed & sealed landscape& irrigation plans Five (5) signed & sealed lighting plans Five (5) copies of architectural floor plans and elevations Five (5) copies of plat Two (2) copies of Recorded Deed for Parcel ID#00073361103. Three (3) signed& sealed copies of revised Engineer's Report Three (3) copies of revised EIS. One (1) draft copy of Conservation Easement Agreement. One (I) copy of Resubmittal Explanation of Fees One (1) copy of fire flow test results for Ken Abler f 1 n a n n {i� � �� 4 0 5 5 0 0 , t fV[\ �� ♦ — — 'A 7 "� & 2 M 4 �T{ rr+r..a ^% 4 z W �_ + z ° ° : o,� O\' $ R ^- ti < % m Rm ♦ a 01 v <. .... ., n ?14�„ mL'L' a { 4 N iIIMPI 4 3NV, NOf2lW �( ui - _. r - m_ . ,'#� 0. ar1 a.. j Mrs 4` r . i � ,li ii IH III 1 Obi fit,i1 biz mil= ____ .r..,.�. +�o�''.'r ' .. .SP1 Ilam i- i F' g' II'IG1 L m1. 1� �,s i #r �, �" ,, �� ���f PI V2 i r-' CO i i`ml. i. I�y I if 1� 1111.31,1 i ,d CM 'riff 1 4"Ilr§. I i 1)tir' 0 16 i ---————-—----—------"7 r-—:1' 0 ,`+ • + +s e 94 vEr Y s w+ w ---- war 4 A lar ' .... kir AVM 37136 a R `-'1,,,, � / �--------7----------' 11111211011 I ' 1.1 7..,,,, in T.. * ION e -. lung N illignagglOCIONINESIMEMNIO i'-' J dM 3JN71031,d ®a g >n ± F-- taw.i3aau n Page 1 of 2 RollinsCheri From: lorenz_w Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 9:42 AM To: RollinsCheri Subject: RE: ***Include Rick's and my e-mai train as back-up for this Agenda item, Thanks****EAC changes to CCME EAR amendments From: lorenz_w Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 9:49 AM To: 'NGPIV@aol.com' Cc: Schmitt]oseph; burgeson_b; RollinsCheri; mason_s Subject: RE: EAC changes to CCME EAR amendments Nick, Sure, we can add this to the agenda. The basic staff concern is the cost of the effort in the absence of Board direction. The CCPC has so far approved the following language: Objective 2.1: [Revised text, page 5] By January 2999 2008, the County shall complete the prioritization and begin the process of prepareing Watershed Management Plans, which will ad drew contain appropriate mechanisms to protect the County's estuarine and wetland systems. The process shall consist of(1) an evaluation of areas for which Watershed Management Plans are not necessary based on current or past watershed management planning efforts. (2) an assessment of available data and information that can be used in the development of Watershed Management Plans, and (3) budget authorization to start the first Watershed Management Plan by January 2008. A funding schedule shall be established to ensure that all Watershed Management Plans will be completed by 2018 2010. In selecting the order of Plan completion, the County shall give priority to watersheds where the development growth potential is greatest and will impact the greatest amount of wetland and listed species habitats. The schedule and iriorities shall also be coordinated with the Federal and State a•enc flans that address Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). By copy of this e-mail, I am asking Cheri to add the following item to "New Business"to the April 5th EAC agenda:Further Discussion of CCME Objective 2.1 (Watershed Management Plans). Bill Lorenz Collier County Environmental Services Director 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 Tele:(239)213-2951 Fax: (239)213-2960 E-mail: Williamlorenz@colliergov.net From: NGPIV@aol.com [mailto:NGPIV@aol.com] Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 9:26 AM To: lorenz_w 3/21/2006 Page 2 of 2 Subject: Re: EAC changes to CCME EAR amendments Bill - I think it would be helpful if the staff objections to AD 2012 could be discussed at the next EAC meeting. While the EAC is aware of budget and staffing issues, we feel an obligation to place pressure on the BCC. Plus, there may be more than one way to skin that cat and it would help (me at least)to have a fuller appreciation of the staffs objections. Thanks, Nick Pennkiman 3/21/2006