Loading...
EAC Agenda 03/02/2005 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA March 2, 2005 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 February 02, 2005 Meeting minutes V. Land Use Petitions A. Special Treatment Permit No. ST-2004-AR-6229 Site Improvement Plan No. SIP-2004-AR-6189 "Haldeman Creek Restoration Project and Dredge Disposal Site" Sections 10, 11, 13, 14 & 15, Township 50 South, Range 25 East B. Site Development Plan Amendment No. SDPA-2004-AR-6611 "Ritz Carlton Naples Beach Pavilion" Section 32, Township 48, Range 25 n VI. Old Business A. Update regarding Listed Species Workshop VII. New Business A. LDC Amendments B. Outstanding Advisory Committee Member Nominations VIII. Council Member Comments IX. Public Comments X. Adjournment Council Members: Please notify the Environmental Services Department Administrative Assistant no later than 5:00 p.m. on February24, 2005 if you cannot attend this meeting or if you have a conflict and will abstain from voting on a petition (403-2424). General Public: Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto; and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. ilUegüag EAC Advi oxu Nitettibet6: Ike Ritz Cwdttt Knpe Beach Pnuilnt Packet. toff he sent out lit a oepanate xuuFiug on Ward de1uekecL. Ik4xk yLUL. Atteuticx EAC Ad& vtq Ktendtet : Euee4 p(eose 6hut the Ritz Cwd1tou Kap(et Beach PauiQiøu Packet aPoag with the K(uwteo 6fulat We Jaiwwuj 5• xwxfiay. You'FE atm bind a ct of We LDC amwadmeufo. The ai6onigafiox ill the eaxe as iu the packett fuvwt Post week. ttaweue the nut ixaunfa kis* Ray SKáth axd 8at4ata Bwtget wen intteL in We ixconnect peace. Madan, I'ue got this packet in the connect under axd you eau dinegati th paste 6Itant tot weeks xtaiGxg. i6 you Wage pxy yuentioso. peea glue we a can @ 403-2424 — Cke'ti. Tkak you. February 2,2005 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Naples, Florida, February 2, 2005 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Alfred Gal Erica Lynne,Ph.D. Iry Kraut Michael Bauer Judith Hushon Ken Humiston, P.E. Michael Sorrell .-� William Hughes Lee Horn ALSO PRESENT: Marjorie Student,Assistant County Attorney Mike Bosi,Zoning and Land Development Review Page 1 February 2,2005 r-� CHAIRMAN GAL: Can we have the roll call,please. MS. MASON: Mike Sorrell? MR. SORRELL: Here. MS. MASON: Judy Hushon? MS. HUSHON: Here. MS. MASON: William Hughes? MR. HUGHES: Here. MS. MASON: Alfred Gal? CHAIRMAN GAL: Here. MS. MASON: Erica Lynne? DR. LYNNE: Here. MS. MASON: Lee Horn? MR. HORN: Here. MS. MASON: Ken Humiston? MR. HUMISTON: Here. MS. MASON: Iry Kraut? MR. KRAUT: Here. CHAIRMAN GAL: Next item is approval of the agenda. I have some changes to it. Before we discuss the land use petitions, our county attorney is going to make an announcement as to how the public discussion is going to proceed and how we're going to hear the petitions. And after, Marjorie will have staff explain just a brief overview of items 5(B), (C)and(D) and how they relate. Any questions? (No response.) MS. STUDENT: You want me to -- DR. LYNNE: The LDC amendments have been moved,too. CHAIRMAN GAL: Sony. Go ahead. MS. STUDENT: Okay,thank you. For the record, Marjorie Student, assistant county attorney. Items Roman numeral 5(B), (C) and (D), (B) being the Coconilla PUD, (C), the conditional use for the Wiggins Pass Hotel, and (D) for Cocohatchee Bay PUD are, you know, different petitions. (B) and (C) involve the same property. (D)involves different property. I understand the question's come up for some members of the public wanting to address, one, the item having to do with one piece, and then just saying well,that carries over into item(D) as well. Because they're separate pieces of property, we have a record on each petition, and so we would advise that members of the public present their issues on items (C) and -- or (B) and (C), and then later -- and (D), to preserve the record and make sure that the record is, again,preserved appropriately. Then I understand that items (B) and (C), because they involve the property -- and this is up to the council to vote on it -- because they involve the same property, they may be heard together. They're mutually exclusive. The Board of County Commissioners in the one case could deny the rezone, then the board sitting as the Board of Zoning Appeals could also deny the conditional use. So they are-- involve the same piece of property, but they're a different type of petition. And it's up to the council if they want to hear those two together, since they involve the same piece of property. And I don't see any problem with that. So I just want to put those things on the record. CHAIRMAN GAL: This is how we will hear it, just for the public's knowledge. We'll hear land use petition identified as (A) first, have public comments on it. We'll vote on it. And then we'll have (B) and (C), we'll hear that petition, one after another. And then we'll have public comments on (B) and (C), and then we will make separate motions-- Page 2 February 2,2005 r� MS. STUDENT: That's correct,you need separate motions. CHAIRMAN GAL: --on(B) or(C), approval or denial. And after that, we will hear petition (D) and we'll have public comments as to (D). And then we will have our discussion and make our motion. Under new business, item(B), LDC amendments, is that still on the agenda? MS. MASON: No,that will need to be moved to the next month's meeting,the March 2nd meeting. CHAIRMAN GAL: And also for the public's knowledge,you need to sign up if you want to speak, and we will impose a five minute time limit on the speakers today. MS. STUDENT: Mr. Chair, I'm going to need a motion on the LDC amendments to -- because they do appear on this agenda,to --to formally move them to the next meeting. MR. HUGHES: I make a motion to move that to the next meeting. MS. HUSHON: Second. CHAIRMAN GAL: All those in favor, say aye. MR. SORRELL: Aye. MS. HUSHON: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. DR. LYNNE: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. HUMISTON: Aye. MR. KRAUT: Aye. CHAIRMAN GAL: Aye. All those opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN GAL: That motion passes unanimously. A motion to approve the agenda. DR. LYNNE: Iso -- MR. HUGHES: So moved. DR. LYNNE: Second. CHAIRMAN GAL: All those in favor, say aye. MR. SORRELL: Aye. MS. HUSHON: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. DR. LYNNE: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. HUMISTON: Aye. MR. KRAUT: Aye. CHAIRMAN GAL: Aye. All those opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN GAL: Motion passes unanimously. Next item is approval of the January 5th, 2005 meeting minutes. Are there any changes? DR. LYNNE: Yeah, I've got one. On -- when we were discussing the -- the school and moving the -- let's see, which project is it here? The Seacrest Country Day School. I was suggesting that the school rescue the plants, the listed species plants in the areas that are going to be destroyed and put them in the preserve area. Page 3 February 2,2005 In the minutes, it seems to indicate -- it just says Ms. Lynn suggested it would be a good project for the school, but it doesn't say what project. In fact, previous to that it just mentions destroying the plants species. So I would prefer if that was clarified. My suggestion -- Dr. Lynne suggested that listed plants located in natural areas slated for destruction be rescued and transplanted into the preserve area, and that this could be a good project for the school to undertake as a learning and environmental exercise. CHAIRMAN GAL: I need a motion to approve the minutes as amended. MR. HUGHES: So moved. CHAIRMAN GAL: Is there a second? MR. SORRELL: Second. CHAIRMAN GAL: All those in favor? MR. SORRELL: Aye. MS. HUSHON: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. MS. LYNNE: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. HUMISTON: Aye. MR. KRAUT: Aye. CHAIRMAN GAL: Aye. All those opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN GAL: Motion passes unanimously. ,..� Our next item is the land use petition Triad RPUD. Are there -- does the board have any ex parte communications to disclose? MR. HUGHES: Just reception of e-mails pertinent to the entire group. CHAIRMAN GAL: No, I'm talking about the first-- MS. HUSHON: The first one we haven't got e-mail. CHAIRMAN GAL: Does anyone have a conflict of interest? (No response.) CHAIRMAN GAL: All those who are going to testify as to this petition, please raise your hand be to sworn in. (All speakers were duly sworn.) MR. NADEAU: Chairman Gal, members of the council, good morning. My pleasure to be before you this morning. Today we're going to be looking at a small residential infill type of a project. It's currently known as the Triad RPUD residential planned unit development. And it is PUDZ-2004-AR-6015. What we're proposing to do is to use the incentives within the Growth Management Plan to convert some commercial zoning where it's found to be inappropriate for commercial land uses, and we're going to convert that to a residential development. The comp. plan, or Growth Management Plan provides for a density of up to 16 dwelling units per acre for that conversion of commercial. The petition, as advertised, is requesting 14 dwelling units per acre. The -- there will be some significant decrease in the density on that project, given some negotiations that are ongoing with the residents of the neighborhood. We've been in very diligent discussions to try to appease their concerns, and we feel it's going to be finalized probably tonight. So we can present that to the planning commission tomorrow. You will see some densities that are less than 14 dwelling units per acre in this presentation. They are part Page 4 February 2,2005 of the discussions. They have not been finalized yet,but I can assure you, it will be something less than 14. The subject property is located on the north side of Radio Lane, and it's adjacent to Palm Springs Boulevard, approximately one-quarter mile east of the intersection of Radio Road and -- Radio Road and the intersection with Davis Boulevard. The product type that's proposed on the project is going to be an upper entry level or a second home. There will be condominiums. They won't be for rent,they'll be a for sale condominium product. With regard to the biotic character of the property, I'll turn your attention here to this vicinity map. Subject property lies right here. All the historic hydrological connections have been lost through the impoundment of the property by Palm Springs Boulevard, I-75, the Radio Lane improvements, and the improvement of water management of the Saddlebrook Village PUD that lies immediately to the east. The project is primarily disturbed lands. It's a pine canopy with some Palmetto understory and some emergent wiregrass. There was a small depressional area approximately two-tenths of an acre that was claimed by the South Florida Water Management District as their jurisdictional wetlands. You can see it up in the top left, or middle left portion of the project site. The project site has -- of the 10.75 acres of the project, only 8.92 acres is defined as native vegetation, pursuant to our Land Development Code. And the LDC requires that a minimum of 1.34 acres of the native vegetation be retained. Being conscious with compatibility with our neighbors to the north, we have designed the project to provide for a 1.6-acre native preserve area, which, if you take a look at the next side, there is a 15-foot separation from the project boundary to the preserve area, and that would allow any further compatibility buffering in the forms of berming and walls that would not encroach into the conservation area. Access will be from Palm Springs Boulevard, with an opportunity for construction access coming off of ,-� Radio Lane, so as to lessen the impacts on Palm Springs Boulevard. There is adequate roadway capacity for the project. There are--utilities are in place with sufficient level of service. And our--the project sponsor, Palm Springs, LLC has made a concerted effort to be conscientious of both the disturbed site, the need for native vegetation, the incorporation of that native preserve on the north boundary to ensure compatibility with the neighborhood. And with that, if you have any specific questions related to the biotic character of the site, I have Mr. Mike Myers, vice president of Passarella and Associates, a very qualified ecologist, that would be able to answer any questions that you may have on that. With that, council members, I humbly request your unanimous recommendation of approval to the board for the adoption of this PUD. DR. LYNNE: Could somebody from staff remind me why we give a density bonus for conversion from commercial to residential? MR. BOSI: Good morning, council. Mike Bosi, zoning and land development review, principal planner. I'm charged with shepherding this project to the board. The reason why the Growth Management Plan allows for a density bonus of conversion of commercial to residential is in the category of intensities of different land uses, commercial is a much higher intensity compared to residential, in terms of impact upon surrounding areas, impact upon the systems and the infrastructure that makes--that supports various land uses. And when you go from the higher intensity to a lower intensity residential, with the recognition of the downgrading or the lessening of the intensity of the project,therefore a higher number of residential units is allotted for that conversion. It rewards that type of downzoning with a higher density. DR. LYNNE: Thank you. MR. NADEAU: If I may also add to Planner Bosi's explanation to you, Council Member Lynne,the --the C-1 property does not meet the locational requirement of the Growth Management Plan for commercial, so Page 5 February 2,2005 that's why the incentive is also included in the Growth Management Plan. MS. HUSHON: I'd like to ask your representative,your environmental person, a question. MR. MYERS: Good morning. MS. HUSHON: Good morning. MR. MYERS: Mike Myers for the petitioner. MS. HUSHON: Okay. This has a pine canopy,you said, over most of the property? MR. MYERS: That's correct. MS. HUSHON: That's correct. Okay. I assume that you have inspected the property and there are no hollow old pine trees? MR. MYERS: Yes,ma'am. MS. HUSHON: You're in RCW territory, so -- MR. MYERS: That's correct. We had done --performed a 13-day RCW survey on the property and none were found. MS. HUSHON: Okay. You just had the right environment that might have a tree. MR. MYERS: Well,the trees are younger, so it's-- MS. HUSHON: Younger, okay. Okay,thank you. DR. LYNNE: It looks to me from your diagram here that the little wetland area is not going to be in the preserve. MR. NADEAU: A portion of it will be in the preserve, Council Member Lynne. We will be going through the environmental resource permit process with South Florida Water Management District. It is a -- it's a small depressional area. Could be from scouring, some fill. Don't really know. But we will be required to go through the ERP process with the district. ,-� DR. LYNNE: But you couldn't have designed it -- I mean, it looks to me like you've got the preserve practically wrapped around that little wet area. You couldn't have designed your project to incorporate that into the preserve area? MR. MYERS: The wetland is very small. Its functional value is so limited that the South Florida Water Management District allows for the fact that anything under a half acre in size, typically it doesn't even require mitigation. So they recognize the fact that areas this small and isolated and disturbed, you know, are--we can impact them. MS. HUSHON: This was an already disturbed site and that was probably just the lower area. It isn't a true natural wetland. It's sort of a created wetland by accident,probably. MR. MYERS: It's a small remnant area. It has very little value. CHAIRMAN GAL: Comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN GAL: Make a motion? MS. HUSHON: Move we approve this PUD, Triad PUD. MR. HUGHES: I have one more question, if I may,before we do that. Would the county staff, in their congruency of these preserve areas, the location of this preserve area make sense for future development on the other side of that property line, and would they be contiguous? MS. SANCHEZ: Cristina Sanchez, Collier County Environmental Services. I don't recall what's next door. I'm trying to find a -- there's single-family homes to the north of the site. There's Palm Springs Boulevard to the west. And there is a preserve area to the east that I think will be recreated. Right now it's just cleared area with a lake. I think given that the existing road that goes through the property, it made more sense to preserve the area that's already vegetated on the north side of the property. And it just made more sense to preserve that area, as opposed to trying to recreate the road and recreate the area that's already cleared along the east side,just Page 6 February 2,2005 to join up with an area that's already cleared. And also, although there's pine canopy throughout the site, that north area of the site had more diversity in the ground cover vegetation than the area along Saddlebrook Drive. It seemed to have a bit more diversity. It just seemed to make more sense to preserve that area. MR. HUGHES: All right. So we've done the best that we can with the layout. The area is so busy, noisy with traffic and everything else, and the site is so small, it's almost negligible what it would provide anyway. MS. HUSHON: That's right. MS. SANCHEZ: I feel that the area that was chosen to be preserved made sense out of the whole property. I'm not sure if that's answering your question,but-- MR. HUGHES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GAL: There's a motion to approve the petition. Is there a second? DR. LYNNE: I'll second it. MR. HUMISTON: Second it. CHAIRMAN GAL: All those in favor, say aye. MR. SORRELL: Aye. DR. HUSHON: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. MS. LYNNE: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. MR. HUMISTON: Aye. MR. KRAUT: Aye. .-� CHAIRMAN GAL: Aye. Those opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN GAL: Motion passes unanimously. MR.NADEAU: Thank you, council members. CHAIRMAN GAL: The next item will be(B),and then item(C)on the two petitions. First,has anyone from the board had any ex parte communications with respect to items(B)and(C)? MR. HUGHES: E-mails. DR. LYNNE: E-mails. CHAIRMAN GAL: Let's--we'll-- MR. HUMISTON: I have. The applicant, Ecco Venture Wiggins Pass is one of my clients, and, in fact,I'm involved in this project. It's in the design of the boat basin and the marina. So I will abstaining from voting on this item. But I would like to be able to partake in the discussion. CHAIRMAN GAL: Okay. Did you say you had-- DR. LYNNE: I've spoken to -- Nicole Ryan has spoken to me about this project. And then, historically speaking, I've been to meetings in the North Naples property owners association where these projects were discussed. I've also signed a petition to save the bald eagle nest. CHAIRMAN GAL: I spoke with Nicole Ryan regarding the letters she had written and delivered to us, and I had a conversation with Joe Moreland,who is the president of the Estuary Conservation Association, Inc. MS. HUSHON: And I've spoken with Nicole Ryan. MR. HUGHES: Yes, same thing. I've had contact with Nicole Ryan pertinent to this issue, several e-mails, and I visited this site approximately one year ago. CHAIRMAN GAL: Why don't we swear in the witnesses. (All witnesses were duly sworn.) Page 7 February 2,2005 n CHAIRMAN GAL: Could I just ask from staff for just a brief overview of the relationship between Coconilla, Wiggins Pass and Cocohatchee Bay PUD? MS. MASON: Both of these petitions will be presented at the same time. The Coconilla PUD would be a rezone from C-4 to a residential PUD, and the second petition is a conditional use that's allowed under commercial, which would be for a hotel and the amenities associated with that hotel. They are two completely separate petitions and need to be treated as such. MR. YOVANOVICH: Good morning. For the record, Rich Yovanovich,representing the petitioner. I think your question was between Coconilla and Cocohatchee Bay. And they're totally unrelated, separate developers,no interrelationship between the developers. They're totally separate projects. Again, I'm Rich Yovanovich with the law firm of Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson. I'm the land use attorney on this particular matter. With me today are Ed Oelschlaeger and John Demilio, both from EcoGroup; Bob Mulhere from RWA, who's the planner on the project; Andy Woodruff from Passarella and Associates,who is our ecologist; and Jo Tucker with Mactec -- I was worried about her new firm name, I forgot her last name -- Jo Tucker with Mactec, who can answer some of the contamination questions we have on the property. I'm going to briefly talk about the proposals. Bob's going to into a little more -- Ed is going to go into a brief overview of EcoGroup,because some of you were here about last year when we came through with a different proposal, but some of you were not, so we thought it would be important if you get to be familiar with the developer. Then Bob will take you through the two proposals in a little bit more detail. Andy Woodruff will address the environmental concerns and questions,and so will Jo Tucker. It might be helpful if you can hold your questions until we make our presentation, and then if we didn't cover your issue,please feel free to ask any questions. We'll do both. We'll talk about both petitions at the same time, but as Ms. Student pointed out, they're totally separate petitions. One's a rezone, one is a conditional use. The board can approve one or approve neither. The board will have that decision. The two proposals generally are, one is a 95-unit residential PUD that will be two 10-story mid-rise buildings, with a maximum height of 120 feet. There will be 29 marina slips, a fueling station and a ship's store. The second alternative is a conditional use. The property is already zoned C-4. As your staff report pointed out, in C-4 to do a hotel you must go through the conditional use process. This was a change that occurred in the Land Development Code a few years back. If you're not in an activity center, you must go through the conditional use process. The destination resort hotel would have 230 rooms with your typical accessory uses for a resort hotel. There will be a restaurant, there will be a lounge, there will be meeting space and ballroom space. There will be retail shops, there'll be a spa, there'll be a 47-slip marina, and there will also be the fueling station and ship's store. Similar to the petition you had before you,this property is located in an area that when the 1989 comp. plan was put forth and ultimately adopted, it was not a location that commercial was encouraged to be located. In fact, commercial was encouraged to be located in activity centers. However, there was an existing marina on the property at the time, and that's why the commercial use was grandfathered in. The comprehensive plan talks about converting those types of commercial that are in locations where the county didn't want them to be to residential, and they offer a density bonus to entice a property owner to give up the valuable commercial rights and convert it to residential rights, which the board determined was more appropriate in those locations. That's what the first petition before you does, it converts commercial to residential, at a density less than the Page 8 February 2,2005 .-\ maximum of 16 that we could do. The -- as your staff report points out, our eagle management plan and everything else concerning this project is consistent with the comprehensive plan. We'll get into the details about that. But at the end, we're going to request that you transmit your recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners consistent with your staff report, recommending approval of both projects,which ultimately they'll --the board will ultimately vote on. With that, I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Oelschlaeger to give you a brief overview of EcoGroup and then we'll continue on. MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Good morning, council members. For the record, I'm Ed Oelschlaeger,the head of EcoGroup, Inc. My wife and I have had a home here in Naples for the last 17 years and currently still do. I wanted to just take you through very quickly what we've done in this community. We're quite proud of the projects that we have developed, and this project, whichever way it goes, whether it ends up being a residential property or the hotel property, the standards by which we run our company and the projects that we produce will be similar to the standards that we've adhered to for everything that we've done. The first project that you may be aware of is Pelican Isle Yacht Club, which happens to be a neighboring property to the former marina site. This property was 136 units and three 10-story buildings over parking, 190 boat slips and a 20,000 square foot yacht club. We also did Barefoot Beach Club on the north end of the county. This was back in the early Nineties. Sancerre is the most recent project that we completed a year ago down on Gulfshore Boulevard in the City of Naples. Small 23 unit,very high-end project. Sanibel Golf Village on Sanibel Island, also a relatively small unit,project of 36 units. Vizcaya on Longboat Key. This was also a very high-end project. At the time it was the highest end project on Longboat Key. Again, a 36-unit project. And lastly, The Tides Beach Club in our sample here is a project we did on the beach up in North Redington Beach in Pinellas County. With that, I will just simply ask you for your support on both of these petitions. The county commission will be the ones that determine -- ultimately determine which project they choose to approve. And thank you for your time. I'll be followed by Bob Mulhere. MR. MULHERE: Thank you. Good morning. For the record, Bob Mulhere with RWA. I'm going to go over both of the petitions fairly briefly and try to explain some of the differences in the site development plan between the residential proposal and the conditional use for the hotel. And I think I'm going to use this power point program here, as soon as I get to the -- well, I don't want to take too much of your time. Okay, I'm just going to leave that rendering up there. I think as Rich indicated -- first of all, I assume that everyone is familiar with the location of the project. If not, it's at the terminus of Wiggins Pass and Vanderbilt Drive, and so it's directly on the Gulf of Mexico. It's the site of the former Wiggins Pass Marina, which had up to 450 dry boat slips. Quite a bit of activity at that marina. As Rich indicated, in terms of the residential PUD, the proposal is for up to 95 dwelling units. Rich indicated that it was less than the maximum lot bonus that we could ask for, which is 16 units per dwelling acre. The actual density per acre in the residential component is 9.5 dwelling units per acre. Interestingly enough, that number was arrived at actually by the staff in a previous application, and basically they took the base density of three dwelling units per acre and then took -- subtracted that from the bonus of 16, came up with 13, and reduced that by half, six and a half plus three, nine and a half. Our ,...� actual density is slightly less, 9.48 dwelling units per acre. The residential PUD will also contain a marina with 29 slips. Page 9 February 2,2005 I'd like to step over to the board here,talk a little bit about some of the setbacks and other issues. Are we on? No. That's working, okay. The residential PUD provides for a very generous setback from Vanderbilt Drive. The -- there are water features that you can see perhaps better in the rendering,but we can go back to that. And they're substantial building setbacks from Vanderbilt. This building,which is the closest point, is over 200 feet from Vanderbilt Drive. I did want to point out this public use tract,which you'll see on the PUD master plan. The public use tract is intended to be dedicated to the county. And we will develop, through the site development plan, a revised parking and traffic flow pattern for the county park to increase the number of boat trailer parking and vehicle parking spaces. Initial indications are that we can increase significantly those parking spaces by in excess of 50 spaces,but we haven't done a detailed site development plan for that yet. The other benefit is that the public will be able to access the light at Wiggins and Vanderbilt. Presently it's a little bit difficult to get out of the park when you're trailering a boat and you want to head north. It's an unprotected turn. So obviously being able to access that light will be a benefit. I'd like to move on to the conditional use and discuss that briefly. Figure out how to end this--minimize it maybe? Okay,there we go. Thank you. Talking about the hotel, as Rich has indicated, 230 rooms. Slightly more boat slips, up to 47 boat slips. The hotel will contain all kinds of typical uses that you would normally see in an upscale resort, destination resort hotel: spa, ballroom, restaurants, shops. Both of the options will have a fueling components and a ship's store. I want to step over to the board here, if this microphone works, and discuss a little bit about the conditional use site plan. �-•, I think you can see that the hotel site plan actually has greater lot coverage than does the residential. Nevertheless, of course, there will be very generous landscaping along the perimeters in order to make it a very attractive,tropical looking resort. Parking is located primarily under the building. There is some surface parking. I should mention to you that the site is entirely cleared. I think you saw that indicated in the staff report. The primary differences between the hotel and the residential use, and I think the differences that probably folks that live in the neighborhood will potentially address for you and for others,the planning commission and the board, I think are that the residential use generates significantly less traffic. The hotel use will generate about the same traffic that was previously generated by the marina. The residential use will generate significantly less; no more than about 25 percent of the traffic than previously was generated. I think some of the other issues are that the hotel as a use generally will attract -- will have some other components that the residential use will not. Obviously there will be, in addition to the greater traffic, restaurants and the types of impacts associated with the restaurant,the spa and those types of things. The difference again is that the hotel is a permitted use in the C-4 zoning district. And just to give you a little bit more information on a conditional use, a conditional use is a use that is permitted and generally would be permitted in that district, but may not be permitted without some further review, based on conditions associated with that use. For example, traffic may be an issue, or there may be some environmental issues. So a condition for -- hotels are deemed to be permitted by right in activity centers, and conditional uses when located outside of activity centers in the C-4 district. I think following me Andy Woodruff will discuss the environmental issues. I'm certainly not qualified to discuss those with you. I think basically there are two issues related to the site: One is manatee protection i-.\ and the other one is the bald eagle's nest. We are located partially within a secondary zone. And I'd let Andy Woodruff speak to those issues. Page 10 February 2,2005 And we're happy to answers questions, I think, collectively at the end of this presentation. Thank you. MR. WOODRUFF: Good morning. It's on now? Okay. Good morning. I'm Andy Woodruff with Passarella and Associates. We're the environmental consultant for both of these petitions. We are responsible for preparation of the environmental impact statement that you all have copies of The project site, as Bob alluded to, abuts the Cocohatchee Bay PUD, which is located to the north of us. Undeveloped lands are located to our west side. The Pelican Isle Yacht Club and the Cocohatchee River Park are located to our south, and Vanderbilt Drive is located on our east. The site is, as you can see, the site of the previous Wiggins Pass Marina, and is entirely developed in its current state. It has approximately 10 acres of uplands on the property associated with the previous marina, and approximately four-tenths of an acre of open water that were used for docking and launching of vessels in the marina. There are no native habitats located on the property in the uplands, and there are no sea grasses or mangroves located in the open water habitats on the property. Both of the proposed projects are fairly similar with regard to impacts on the project. For the residential, there is a small amount of dredging associated, maintenance dredging associated with the existing marina basin, and also some configuration of the existing seawall. There will also be an expansion of the boat basin. That boat basin will be expanded into the upland areas adjacent to that boat basin. And then similar to the hotel and spa, there is some associated dredging and realignment of seawalls in the existing boat basin, and there will be an expansion of the boat basin into the uplands a little bit larger in size than associated with the residential component. The project site doesn't provide any nesting or foraging habitat for listed species. Manatees are known to occur in waters -- in the open waters of the project and adjacent in the open bay. And we do have eagle nest 19,which is located approximately 830 feet northwest of the project site. With regard to the manatee, the applicant has prepared a Manatee Protection Plan in accordance with Collier County standards,to increase boater awareness for the projects. With regard to the bald eagle, the bald eagle's nest has been documented since 1990 by the Florida Fish & Wildlife Commission. That nest has been active, for, I believe, all but one out of the last 14 nesting seasons, and it has produced young, either one or two, for most of the years that it has been active. So it has been a very active nest. The eagles have demonstrated a tolerance to the activities and development that has encroached into its secondary zone. We've got Vanderbilt Drive on the east, we've got the Wiggins Pass Marina, which is the development -- the redevelopment that we're proposing. And that marina's been there for, I believe, over 30 years. And then you have Arbor Trace,which is located partially within the secondary zone further to the north. And there's also been some recent clearing associated with the Cocohatchee Bay PUD, which you can see on this aerial,that occurred up to the 750 primary protection zone. Our project is located entirely within the secondary protection zone, and also outside of the secondary protection zone as well. The project will occupy, like I've said, an existing developed site. It's not located within the primary protection zone. And if you look at a percentage-wise of the occupation in the secondary zone, it's about seven percent of what exists there in the secondary zone for the existing marina. The applicant is proposing to do construction during the nesting season. The nesting season is October 1 to May 15. Non-nesting is approximately four and a half months out of the year. To try to construct -- deconstruct a project that's existing and redevelop within that time frame is just not an economic feasibility to do. Page 11 February 2,2005 We have prepared bald eagle management plans for the project to try to address construction activities during the nesting season, and some of those proposals that we've prepared for this project have included monitoring eagle behavior during the nesting season, in accordance with the U.S. Fish& Wildlife Service guidelines; removing the existing buildings, the existing Wiggins Pass Marina buildings during the non-nesting season; erecting cranes that would be used for construction activities during the non-nesting season; limitations on building heights -- and I can talk about that in a little bit; using auger cast piles for construction of the building foundations, as opposed to doing pile driving activities, which are particularly troublesome around eagles' nests; and limiting the excavation of the upland marina basins and limiting the pile driving activity for the docking all during the non-nesting season. We're also proposing to shield our exterior lights on the north side of our project from the nesting zone. As you're aware, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has issued a biological opinion for this project that allowed exterior construction activity to occur during the nesting season. The U.S. Fish&Wildlife Service based that opinion on a project that we brought before you a year ago that included a residential building to 22-story over parking and a 52 wet slip marina. Both the building height and the marina wet slips have both been reduced in the current residential plan and in the hotel and spa plan,which represents a further minimization of the effects to listed species. The county bald eagle protection plan that we've prepared that's in your EIS for both of these petitions includes all of the protective measures that were included in the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service bald eagle plan, as well as providing additional protective measures. And it's more restrictive on the building height that was proposed in the U.S. Fish&Wildlife Service biological opinion. Furthermore, I've passed out, I believe, to most all of you, a copy of a December 15th letter from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service regarding construction activities that they are allowing to take place now within the secondary protection zone. And if you can refer to that document for just a second. It's entitled Clearance to Proceed with Construction Activities Adjacent to Bald Eagle Nests. If you don't have a copy, I can provide one to you. And this letter is directed toward both individual single-family homes and any project in the secondary zone of a bald eagle's nest. About midway through the first page of this document it states: This letter provides applicants guidance and subsequent clearance to proceed with construction for the following types of activities within a bald eagle nest territory. And the second item underneath that says: All development in the secondary protection zone, 750 to 1,500 feet of bald eagle nest trees,which is our proposal. It goes on to make some recommendations as to how they would prefer you to do that activity within the secondary zone. And it says: We recommend that exterior construction activities and site work in the primary and secondary zones be conducted outside of the nesting season. And then it says: In the event that site work and exterior building construction in the secondary zone is not completed during the nesting season, the Bald Eagle Monitoring Guidelines, September, 2002, should be initiated. Those are monitoring guidelines that we've already agreed to adhere to as part of our bald eagle management plans. It also goes on to say that we discourage heavy construction activity during the nesting period, which we've also agreed in our management plans, by deconstructing the existing buildings during the non-nesting, the use of auger cast pilings, restricting our pile driving activity, padding the lids of our dump trucks that will be utilizing the site. That concludes my presentation. I do have questions on the staff report, which we can either get into -- do it later? Okay. At this time I'll pass it on to Jo Tucker, who will be discussing some of the hazardous waste issues on the project. MS. TUCKER: Good morning, Council. I'm Jo Tucker with Mactec Engineering. The Wiggins property was a full service marina for over 30 years. And this type of land use can and Page 12 February 2,2005 ,-� frequently does lead to some negative environmental impacts, from activities of concern, including boat repair and engine repair work, forklift maintenance and forklift use, the general use and storage of petroleum products and other chemicals, boat cleaning and painting, which occurred on this site, drips and leaks from boats that are stored both indoors and outdoors on pervious surfaces, and stormwater runoff from contaminated areas. A number of these activities did lead to contamination on the site. We have--is that on? Yeah. We have soil contamination by petroleum hydrocarbons and metals in the area of the boat painting, which was on this part of the site; in the areas within and around the boat barns, the three boat barns; in the area next to the existing shop, which was the building in the central part of the site; and in the areas that captured stormwater runoff from these other areas,which were down here along the marina basin. We have an area of groundwater contamination back here east of the existing shop where the groundwater's impacted by MTBE, which is a fuel additive. And we have some concentrations, relatively low but existing, in the sediment just adjacent to the seawalls. EcoGroup is proposing to remediate the site. The state defines the remediation goals in terms of the proposed land use of the site. There's a different goal for soil cleanup for residential land use than there is for commercial land use. And the standards are quite different for some of the compounds that we're dealing with at the site here. As an example,the standard for copper, if you are dealing with a residential site, is 150 parts per million in soil. If you have a commercial site,the standard jumps up to 89,000 parts per million in soil. The same kind of difference occurs for total petroleum hydrocarbons, and there are differences, some more, some less for some of the other metals that we're dealing with at the site here. So depending on whether the project goes forward as a residential project or a commercial use, we will have different cleanup goals to apply to the site. Many of the on-site areas that are contaminated are in between the two sets of goals. So if we went forward as a commercial land use, the cleanup would not be as strict at the site as it will be if we go forward as a residential land use. So from an environmental point of view, the residential land use has some advantages in terms of the ultimate outcome of the site for remedial purposes. Thank you. MR. YOVANOVICH: We did have a couple of comments to the staff recommendations, and I'll deal with the Page 8 of 10 on the residential staff report first. Comment number four would require us to go back and modify our biological opinion to address, you know, .8 acres of mangroves. What we're not proposing is -- in your staff report,we're no longer proposing to do those improvements. There is no need for us to go back and modify our biological opinion to delete that from our overall project. So we don't believe that that's an appropriate requirement for us to go forward with our residential project. And if you need more detail on that,Andy Woodruff can address that. Jumping over to the resort hotel staff report on Page 7, again, the first recommendation is that we go forward and modify our biological opinion to address the .82 acres that we're not going to create anymore. And again,we don't think that that's necessary. And then on stipulation No. 5 that deals with the removal of the underground storage tanks, the last sentence says: Any required mitigation shall be completed prior to SDP approval. We don't think that's necessary. There are already regulations in effect on how we need to remove this stuff. It makes no sense to tell us we can't go forward with some of our other work on the site while we're addressing these situations. There are already adequate safeguards in place and rules and regulations to address this issue. This requirement, from our perspective, makes absolutely no sense, and it's an onerous requirement, and further delays our ability to go forward with the project. Page 13 February 2,2005 n So with those two modifications--you got some more--is that in there? I didn't see it. And Ken Humiston can probably handle this question better. The draft issues with the boat, we addressed that last time. We'll do appropriate notification as to what is appropriately dredged for and what size boat vessels can use the pass, and we'll comply with the design levels and make sure that people know about that. I'm not really sure what the goal of this draft restriction language was in the staff report. But we addressed that last time and we'll have appropriate signage for people to know what type vessels can safely navigate in that area, similar to the regulations that are in place for Pelican Isle Yacht Club,right next door. So with that, we're comfortable with your staff report. Your staff obviously is recommending approval of both projects. We're available to answer any questions, and obviously we'd like the ability to respond to any public comment that may come after our presentation and after the staffs presentation. CHAIRMAN GAL: I had a quick question. MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN GAL: You had the two issues with the stipulations in the Coconilla staff report? MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct. CHAIRMAN GAL: And then were there any in the--I don't have Wiggins Pass. MR. YOVANOVICH: They're the same. And when I talked about--the second one, Mr. Gal,was when I was talking about the resort hotel. That's where the stipulation was that we couldn't go forward with our SDP until we had cleaned -- until we addressed all the storage tank issues. That doesn't appear in the residential,but it does appear in the hotel. But other than that,the comments I made apply to both staff reports. CHAIRMAN GAL: Any public comments? Questions? MS. HUSHON: I would like you all to address what happens if the Audubon observer says that the nest is being adversely affected at the time when you have decided to continue construction during the nesting season. MR. WOODRUFF: If I could direct your attention to the bald eagle management plan. You can pull either document out. They should be fairly identical. And I believe it's item 14 on that management plan. MS. HUSHON: Which appendix is that,please? MR. WOODRUFF: I can find that for you in one second. Exhibit F. I'm in the RPUD. Page F-3. Item 14, it states: If the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service approved monitor observes any construction related activities that elicit an abnormal behavior of the adult eagles or their chicks, that construction activity shall immediately cease and will not reinitiate unless the construction activity is modified to the extent that it no longer elicits an abnormal behavioral response or the chicks are capable of fully sustained flight. MS. HUSHON: May I ask who that monitor reports to? MR. WOODRUFF: The monitor reports to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. The monitoring reports, we've also agreed to provide copies of those to the Collier County chapter of the Audubon Society. CHAIRMAN GAL: I had a quick question while you're up there. There's a letter, a biological opinion from the Fish & Wildlife Service dated January 27th, 2004. And it had, under item called terms and conditions, it says: In accordance with the inter-agency cooperation regulations, these terms and conditions must be complied with to implement the reasonable and prudent measures. And it has as number two: The applicant must make every effort to conduct construction activities that are closest to the nest tree during the non-nesting season. I don't see that in the bald eagle management plan. MR. WOODRUFF: It's part of our permit that we have to get for the project, so -- CHAIRMAN GAL: So construction activities will occur first closest-- Page 14 February 2,2005 MR. WOODRUFF: That's what they've requested that we do. CHAIRMAN GAL: --during the non-nesting season-- MR. WOODRUFF: During the non-nesting season, correct. CHAIRMAN GAL: And then what happens when -- like, for example, on the residential, the Coconilla project,there were two buildings. There was a northern building. How long would that take to construct? MR. WOODRUFF: Twenty-four months,both buildings constructed at the same time. CHAIRMAN GAL: How long would it take for the outer shell of the buildings to be constructed? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: This is Ed Oelschlaeger, for the record. I'm not quite certain,but my estimate there would be that that would probably be about 12 to 14 months. MS. HUSHON: Would any activity on that outerior(sic) shell cease during nesting season, or are you not anticipating stopping it at all? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: We would not anticipate stopping, other than the activities that were previously described that we would not do during nesting season. That would be the dredging activity and driving of pilings. But the construction activity, in terms of the rest of the activities would need to proceed unless we ended up with a disturbance, and then we would adhere to what the management plan said. One other thing, if I might comment. Some of the provisions of this eagle management plan are very unique in what we worked out with the Service. And that is, we are going to do things that have not been done before; most notably, working with the subcontractors and all the employees that will be on this job with an educational and training program to make them aware of the sensitivity of noise and what that does to the wildlife. The other thing that -- there was one other -- oh, the one other thing that is a major issue is dump truck tailgates. And we have --because it sounds like a rifle shot, and that's what we're told by the biologist. But we have agreed to pad those tailgates to prevent that type of noise from occurring. So there's some unique things that are being done here in response to protecting the eagles. MS. HUSHON: Will you be attempting to have more of your loading, unloading, heavy construction type things occurring on the southeast portion of the site, which is furthest from the eagle's nest? Are you going to -- MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Yes,ma'am. MS. HUSHON: --do a staging that will help you to protect the eagle in that way? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Indeed we will. That's correct. CHAIRMAN GAL: Any questions? MR. SORRELL: I have a question. It was stated earlier that the normal nesting season runs from October to May? MR. WOODRUFF: That's correct. MR. SORRELL: Typically what months is the heavy use in the nesting season in this nest? MR. WOODRUFF: Well, if you're talking about having birds actually on the nest? MR. SORRELL: Yeah. MR. WOODRUFF: Typically, they may be laying eggs end of November, into December. You may--you have chicks hatching end of December, into January. And then you're three months with birds on the nest. MR. SORRELL: When do they start reconstruction of the nest? MR. WOODRUFF: Reconstruction can start -- typically, it starts any time after October 1 and through November,they can be reconstructing. MR. SORRELL: Were we going to finish with our questions? DR. LYNNE: What do you want-- I mean, I've got a whole list. Do you want to hear the public first? Do you want to have our questions? I can wait,but-- CHAIRMAN GAL: Then let's hear public comments first. Page 15 February 2,2005 n DR. LYNNE: Okay. MS. MASON: Bill Eline. The next speaker will be Nicole Ryan. MR. EL1NE: Commissioners, good morning. My name is Bill Eline. I'm a resident on Gulfshore Drive. I've been a citizen in this county since 1989. And I do operate and have operated a 30-foot boat with less than 36 inches of draft in the area that we're talking about. My comments today are just some thoughts that I hope you'll consider. I'm concerned about the eagle. And I'm concerned about nature. Now, this area we're talking about is one of only four entries into the Gulf of Mexico in Collier County. I trust you know that. I'm sure when folks in your position with gray hair like I have now, when they made the decision to zone this land commercial, it was so that they could build the marina and the public would have access to this beautiful area. I doubt very much if they ever thought what is happening in Collier County on development would have occurred. Because I was here and helped build the airport at Fort Myers. I stayed at the LaPlaya Hotel. It was me and the pelicans, a lot of bald eagles, and a lot of seals. None of us ever dreamed what was going to happen has happened. I wish you'd keep that in mind. Number two, this land is next to a historical waterway. It's history. It's a haven for manatees. We have oyster bars that feed our fish, mangroves where the young fish begin to develop. Now it is being proposed that there will be 40 to 50-foot boats anchored at these marinas. And I want to give you some numbers to think about. The Dunes is now petitioning for 40 slips for boats up to 45 feet. This development is 39 slips and they forgot to mention 40 to 50-foot boats. We have the LaPlaya making a petition for 30 to 40 slips, boats up to 50 feet. A 50-foot boat normally will have a five-foot draft. The plan by the Corps of Engineers for this waterway are slips that will hold boats of 10 meters. And the reason for 10 meters -- that's 33 feet, plus or minus -- and the reason for that, that is a design of a boat that is built almost by all boat makers. It also says that the draft for those boats should not be more than 36 inches. Now, I told you I had a 30-foot boat, and I had not more than 24 inches. At low tide I could drag that boat on the bottom. And if you think of two 50-foot boats passing between Pelican Isle on the east side and the oyster reefs on the west side, nothing will be saved. You'll lose your oyster beds. If there's a manatee there, no hope. So I think this whole program that they're proposing is an environmental disaster, and I would urge you to say no way. And the last point I'd like to remind you of, this is a hazard coastal area. And according to your own plans, four units per acre, not more. And after our summer here, I think we ought to start getting tough on that. It's a big problem. Thank you. MS. MASON: Nicole Ryan. The next speaker will be Joe Moreland. MS. RYAN: Good morning. For the record,Nicole Ryan. And I am here on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. The Conservancy has concerns with the proposed project before you, because of its proximity to an active bald eagle's nest and the fact that the proposal would continue construction within the eagle's secondary zone throughout the nesting season. The Conservancy is not opposed to the development concept involved with residential or hotel, or commercial for that matter. Our opposition is due to the likely impacts on eagle nest CO-19. We ask that if you recommend approval of this project, that you add the stipulation of no construction during the eagle nesting season. The Conservancy believes Collier County has the authority and the obligation under the Growth Management Plan to protect this nest, even though the Fish&Wildlife Service seems willing to sacrifice it. Page 16 February 2,2005 Authority is in the conservation and coastal management element, goal seven, which states: The county shall protect and conserve its fisheries and wildlife. Objective 7.1 goes on to state that the county shall direct incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. Of course,this leads to the much debated policy of 7.1.2,paragraph 3. One sentence in paragraph three,the second sentence, states that whatever the agencies says will be deemed consistent with the growth plan. However, the first sentence, and the Conservancy believes the most important sentence, states that the county has to be consistent with applicable GMP policies. We believe the policy of directing incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats is an important and applicable GMP policy. You as a recommending body to the board may feel the same way, since you passed what was, I guess, a resolution last year stating that Collier County should have an active role in protecting listed species. And you furthermore reinforced this motion on January 21st of this year when you voted to recommend that the county look at criteria for when a take should maybe not be acceptable. Well, if you place your emphasis on the first sentence of Policy 7.1.2, paragraph 3, which deals with being consistent with diverting uses away from listed species and their habitat, then you do have the ability to look at whether a take is consistent with your growth plan. And there are many unanswered questions out there that should be factored into the examination of this take. For example, what's a minimum viable population of eagles for Collier County? How many nesting pairs do we need in order to have eagles in this region? Also, what behavioral changes might be expected as a result of this action? Will the home rage of these eagles change? What if these eagles leave their nest; will they then go into the territory of other nesting eagles in the area? Could it constitute a loss of both nests? Also the question of the Audubon monitor and the monitor looking at when stress may occur and stopping activity once stress has occurred. Well, how long is an eagle stressed before it exhibits that stress? And if it has exhibited the stress, is it too late then? These are some very important questions, and we believe that you really can't accept a take without knowing the true ramifications of these. And what we're looking at here is likely going to cause negative impacts to the eagles. The petitioner has offered to do a number of things, but regardless of this, according to the biological opinion, it states, and I quote: There are no known beneficial effects to the bald eagle from the proposed activity. It goes on to state: the bald eagles occupying the action area are likely to be adversely affected from the proposed action. It also states: The applicant has agreed to implement a variety of measures to avoid potential disturbance to the eagles during nesting season. But then it goes on to state that: However, the impacts may be sufficiently adverse as to result in nest site abandonment or loss of or reduced productivity. So, to conclude, the Conservancy believes the county has both the authority and the obligation to deny rezones based upon the applicant's failure to direct incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitat, and we ask that this petition before you be denied or approved only if construction is prohibited during the nesting season. And one last thought, because the density issue was brought up by the previous speaker, and I realize that there is the ability for commercial to residential conversion to receive up to 16 units per acre, but you do have the policy in CCME, 12.2.2, that does limit residential in the coastal high hazard to four dwelling units per acre, and I'm a little confused as to how these two policies really mesh together. Thank you. MS. MASON: Joe Moreland. The next speaker will be Jim Owens, Sr. MR. MORELAND: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is Joe Moreland. I'm the current president of the Estuary Conservation Association. The mission of our charter and bylaws is to monitor,watch and urge improvements and maintenance of the Page 17 February 2,2005 .-� Wiggins Pass estuary and the estuarial waters to include the flora and the fauna on both long and short-term bases. My organization in past testimony before this and other commissions has made the point for the most part, which Nicole has just briefed on behalf of the Conservancy. Our board of directors stands behind those positions, as previously expressed. But we distinguish that from the current situation in part. And that part is we do have new proposals to be entertained here. And we have not in the past expressed a view with respect to the isolated--the new element in the decision to be made here, which is to zone or not to zone the change from commercial to residential. And that's a terribly important point. And it's the point to which I would like to address some very obvious short point comments. It is our view that between the proposals that you were briefed on this morning and that are the subject of your agenda, to choose between a conversion to residential, as proposed, or to commercial, as proposed, that there is very little room for reasonable doubt as to which of those two proposals would not only in the short term, but in the long term be most beneficial to the overall health, welfare of Wiggins Pass, its estuarial waters and the flora and the fauna in them. There are two critters living there, both of which are currently under the protection of various regulations. Both of them have been addressed. They're the manatees and they're the eagles. Now, one of those is much more contentious under the current state of affairs than is the other. The contentious one is the eagle. There is perhaps a legitimate position that only a court can decide what is the applicable law. There are those who would argue that you can't do a certain thing with respect to eagles, the others say you are (sic). They say there's flexibility, some say there isn't. I cannot adjudicate that in the role of the organization that I represent, other than to say we certainly want a full, honest and fair and balanced approach to that, and preservation of the eagles' health is of prime concern. The manatee. The manatee is more focused and currently under scrutiny for protection, I believe, than is the eagle itself. Those of us and those of my friends who live in the estuarial area there, since the closing of the Wiggins Pass Marina, have witnessed the increase in manatee life in and about the old marina, as well as that marina that is at the Pelican Isle facilities. Under a residential development, yes, there will be boats there. Yes, they are apparently of the 45, 50-foot potential. That's what the slips would have. But they're a great many less than were there previously, although those previous boats were smaller. Still, volume counts. Size is important also, but not as frequently. The end result is that under the residential approach, once construction is completed, I think is much more suitable for short and long-term health,welfare and return to nature of the pass. There have been observed the red -- I hope I have this right--the red breasted hawk, which is a new arrival into that area, and is seen there now frequently since the marina itself closed and all of that kind of activity occurred. So to take a decision on residential is in no way to be construed as an abandonment of environmental expectations for the life of the flora and fauna there. It isn't Utopia, but we don't live in Utopia, and you're not going to create Utopia through administrative controls either. That's the reality of it. What are we dealing here with real? Well, what we're dealing with is an extraordinarily valuable piece of real estate, in the economic sense. Extraordinarily valuable. We're also dealing with a piece of real estate that is of extraordinary value which lies dormant and is n deteriorating. It's an eyesore. It's unreasonable, some might say,to expect that that facility will lie that way indefinitely and let nature reclaim it. That's probably not a reasonable expectation. Page 18 February 2,2005 Probability is that something will be developed there. Consideration has to be of course at this point in time with the proposals you have before you. Not the ones that you-- some may hope and speculate might come before you, which might be better than what is there. That may or may not never, ever happen, but one thing is certainly true, the cost, economics involved in the use of that land for highest and best use will be -- speak with a louder voice than any one of us, in all probability. That may not be the desired outcome, but ifs perhaps the reality of the marketplace. Hence, our position on the singular question of the highest, best and most friendly use to the environment is for a residential development, as proposed for the most part. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GAL: Why don't we give the court reporter a break and take five minutes. (Brief recess.) CHAIRMAN GAL: The meeting is back to order. Can everybody please take their seats. Could everybody take their seats,please. My understanding is that there are -- people have just signed up to speak. If those people have not been sworn in, ask them to do that,to please stand up and raise their hand to be sworn in right now. (All speakers were duly sworn.) MS. MASON: Okay,the next speaker will be Jim Owens, Sr., followed by Bonnie Karkut. MR. OWENS: Hi. My name is Jim Owens, and I'm speaking for myself. I am a resident at Pelican Isle, which is just south of the proposed development property. And I would ask that the committee consider voting in favor of both projects, the residential and the hotel project. However, if it came down to my personal preference of the two, I certainly would prefer residential. And the main reason for residential is so that we can protect the estuarial water area from that garbage dump that's next door. Because obviously residential cleans it up much,much better than commercial. And that would be my main purpose. Thank you. MS. MASON: Bonnie Karkut. And the following speaker will be Richard Ryder. MS. KARKUT: Members of the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council, thank you for the opportunity to say a few words today. I am Bonnie Karkut. My husband, Dr. Joseph Karkut and I have been full-time residents of Collier County since 1985. We presently reside in Tarpon Cove. I am on the board of the North Bay Civic Association, which was organized in 2001. However, today I speak for myself, as well as many of the residents within the boundaries of North Bay Civic Association. At present our boundaries are from 111 on the south,to Bonita Beach Road on the north,41 on the east and the Gulf of Mexico on the west. Our volunteer work is dedicated to preserving our coastal Florida lifestyle for future generations. In 2003, I spoke to you, the EAC, on this very issue of the possibility of rezoning the Coconilla PUD Wiggins Marina Property from C-4 commercial to C-3 residential. Fortunately the property remained C-4 after hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. Now, we face the process again. The developer, Ed Oelschlaeger, CEO of EcoGroup, says, and I quote from the Naples Daily News: He is giving the EAC, the planning board and the BCC, the commissioners, another chance to get it right. Is he being diplomatic or is he insulting our intelligence? I mentioned speaking for many of the 3,000 residents within the NBCA area. We polled the residents last season with three petitions and sent letters this year asking for support of the present C-4 zoning of the Coconilla PUD. Petition one was on limiting density. The growth management policy 12.2.2 limits new residential to a maximum of four dwelling units per acre within the coastal high hazard area. Petition two was regarding saving our eagles. State and county ordinances do not allow for development to occur in areas where bald eagle nests are located. We must look to the state and local laws and not allow Page 19 February 2,2005 the taking of any of our North Bay eagles. Petition three, we oppose any residential use that would allow buildings to be constructed above the 75-foot C-4 commercial limit as the property is currently zoned. Signatures of residents on these petitions were approximately totaled 3,500. Petitions were submitted to the Board of County Commissioners in 2004. Now the residents of North Bay Civic Association area face again a choice of rezoning the marina property from C-4 to C-3 residential. If the property remains C-4, EcoGroup plans to build an upscale (sic) hotel with boat slips,restaurants, ship's store and a few transient slips. We were told at a public meeting in January of 2005, and I quote: EcoGroup does not have to rebuild a marina on this property. This of course is true. But certainly very possible. However, with the closing of Boat Haven and the marina at Wind Star, more and more water access is lost to the public. I have thought all of the above is not a matter of life or death. Why am I speaking again and again on the Coconilla PUD? Well, because it is a matter of death. Death to our coastal Florida lifestyle. If a hotel is our only hope of rezoning for C-4 zoning to remain, then I must support the hotel. To lose the C-4 zoning would close any hope of public water access for future generations forever. Thank you. MR. HUGHES: Quick question. Ma'am,you're speaking on behalf of yourself? MS. KARKUT: And residents in reference to the petitions. It was in reference to the petitions, would be including residents within our area. The North Naples-- MR. HUGHES: You have--officially have that position from your association? MS. KARKUT: Yes,I do. MR. HUGHES: Okay. MS. KARKUT: Thank you. MS. MASON: Richard Ryder. The following speaker will be Cam Gleason. MR. REDFIELD: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Richard Ryder. I live in Cove Towers. The marina property is presently zoned C-4 for public and mixed use. It's one of the very few remaining mainland Collier County areas so designated. A rezone at this time would further and forever deny future generations of citizens and visitors access to the shorelines and Gulf of Wiggins Pass. Condo density exceeding four units per acre in coastal high hazard areas, as requested for rezone, is illegal per the county and state statutes. Please advise against this rezone. Thank you. MS. MASON: Cam Gleason. The next speaker will be Carl Redfield. MS. GLEASON: Good morning. I'm Cam Gleason. I live at North Shore Lake Villas. Since I moved here five years ago, 12 high-rises have been approved for my area. The developer of this project is asking the county to add yet another two high-rises in the last parcel, which would support a water dependent use. In return, he is not adhering to GMP policy 12.2.2 of four units per acre in the coastal high hazard area. He will not agree to suspend construction during the eagle-nesting season, even though that construction is predicted to take the neighborhood pair of eagles away. And I understand this morning from his environmental consultant that he would not decontaminate the land under 200 hotel residents to residential standards,just because he's not required to do so. I urge this board to realize that this project is environmentally insensitive both to people and to eagles. Thank you. MS. MASON: Carl Redfield. Followed by John Findley. MR. REDFIELD: Good morning. My name is Carl Redfield, and I just want to make it clear that I do support residential, but I also support doing anything it takes to clean up that eyesore, that environmentally unsound marina property that existed. It is awful there. If any of you walk it, you can smell the pollution. And I think it needs to be cleaned up. But I do prefer residential. Page 20 February 2,2005 And why do I prefer residential? Because a hotel is nothing but transients. Transients that come and go. They're not stakeholders in the neighborhood, they're not stakeholders even in the property. You've all been at hotels. No matter how nice a hotel, whether it's the LaPlaya, as one gentleman mentioned, or the Ritz, you don't own any of that, you don't really care about that property. Residents do. And homeowners are the residents that I'd rather have as neighbors. I'd like pleasant neighbors. I'd like neighbors that won't get drunk, you know, by the shore and go out of the parking lot and hit me when I'm riding my bike or walking. And that's an area I do walk. I'm immediately next-door. My opinion and others like myself must weigh more than people who are half a mile away that are part of this so-called civic association that has never asked me for my opinion. Never. They do not represent me. Although I pay the money. I tried joining. But I do not get asked for an opinion. I get things just shoved down my throat. So I ask you to please allow my backyard to be cleaned up and nice neighbors to come in. One last thought about the eagles. When the marina existed, you know, I heard about -- when the marina existed, I moved in in about'97, '98, and I heard about the eagle. And I went to watch the eagle. And I was amazed at the noise coming from the operation, the day-to-day operation of that marina. The forklifts that were banging, the noise in general coming from people shouting at the docks and having a good time, and boats coming in and out, high volume of boats, not like Pelican Isle has today, where most boats don't move more than once a month, in some cases,you know,but--including mine. This noise never bothered the eagles. I was able to watch them through binoculars, with chicks or fledglings, whatever they're called, you know, and they were never perturbed. Maybe they're born deaf here, I don't know. They--they don't get bothered by all this noise. And one last little comment. This notion of boats that are big having a lot of draft, that's an old-fashioned kind of attitude. I have a 44-foot boat. It draws 27 inches,which by the way is just a little over my knee. It doesn't bother anything. So please approve -- either project is better than leaving it the way it is. But residential is far superior. Thank you. MR. HUGHES: Sir, quick question. You say you smell it? MR. REDFIELD: If you go around, you can still smell a little bit of the oil, the diesel, a diesel kind of smell. MR. HUGHES: So you smell hydrocarbons. MR. REDFIELD: Yes,hydrocarbons. Yes. MS. MASON: John Findley. The next speaker will be Doug Fee. MR. FINDLEY: Thank you. My name is John Findley, I'm a certified marina manager. I'm a Level 4 HAZMAT certified first responder under OSHA and the State of Florida. I've been managing, running marinas for 18 years in the State of Florida. And there's a lot of different options that you can go to. And from--types of marinas,from transient,which a hotel would be,as far as what it could accommodate. I ran South Seas Resort and Yacht Harbor for 14 years on Captiva. At that facility we had over 14 -- actually, it was 120 groups a year, in excess,water-related groups coming in and out from power squadrons to cruise clubs to yacht clubs, that went in and out of that facility. As many as sometimes 100 boats plus a day in and out. Having a hotel with those types of docks will create these types of traffic. Huge numbers. The marina facility before only accommodated probably--there was 450 boats there,but only about 300 of them happened to come from Collier as residents. Because the owner -- I spoke to the general manager, and that facility, only about 20 percent were from Bonita. They had members there, people that kept their boats there from Immokalee,Fort Myers Beach, Fort Myers, Marco, other areas. This project for the residential does offer mitigation to give more parking, which has been in the Page 21 February 2,2005 newspapers, one of the number one problems with the county that they cannot accommodate trailer boats. Another 50 spaces would -- if you do the math, 50 times 365 days a year will free up a lot of parking spaces and more than benefit the loss of those 300 spots that went to original upper class people that could afford a private facility. It was not a public facility,you did have to pay to keep your boat there. You had to be able to afford to keep your boats there. Commissioner Halas said at a conference that I was at, at South Seas on Captiva, boating and water access conference, he made the comments that went door to door fighting and lobbying for to save the marina. But he was amazed at how many people didn't know or even care that the marina was going away because they kept their boats in their yards. These are the people in the neighborhoods that would benefit from the expansion of the trailer. And if you've ever been in there on a holiday weekend and you see the policemen giving tickets up and down the road, it's going on. It's going around us. There's actually ramp rage, similar to road rage, that's going on on a regular basis. This maybe isn't an environmental issue, but it's a safety issue, and it does affect the people. This property in the Fifties was owned by Ben Hoag. It had five homes and cottages on it. And I've spoken to some of the original employees that worked there when they illegally tore these homes down and constructed the first barns that created the marina. A man mentioned the decision to make this commercial and what was on record. Well, I've done research, I can find nothing on record that this was ever permitted to become commercial. It was originally residential, and it was illegally made a marina at that time. And then it was just adopted later on. I don't know if they had to pay penalties down the road, but it was residential. Currently there's -- the residential project proposes 29 slips. The in-water slips that they did not mention that already exist with the current marina will accommodate more than 40 vessels there. So the actual -- this is a reduction from even the current marina's in-water, let alone what was in the storage barns. The Harbor Trace,which is to the north there, I believe, or the towers to the northwest is just on the edge of the secondary zone. Did not phase the eagles. But there's been a lot of talk about the eagles,but manatees is in my opinion much more endangered,higher on this -- that. There's a lot of different species in the water that should be concerned with the smaller vessels. There's a conference on February 8th in Tallahassee, urging people from the county levels and the marine industry to come to a workshop on saving the grass beds. The number one threat to the estuary system is our grass beds that feed thousands and thousands of creatures, including the oysters and the fish, and the fish that the eagles eat. And those are at threat. Those are being threatened by boats 26 feet and less. Unfortunately you can't say get rid of these boats. But this project bringing in some of the bigger boats that do not go up the inland waterways or on the inside up to Fort Myers Beach and travel out of the channel, because the channel has not been dredged, it is not at a safe standard, are not tearing up the grass beds. This is an ongoing problem that the county has to recommend. Lee County is dredging all their back bay channels and has permitted every one of them at this time to take them between five and six feet at a minimum of five feet, and they are calling it best management practices to protect their grass beds. We have not done that. And I urge this council at another time to promote the dredging of the channels and the back bays to protect our grass beds. I'll give you further feedback if I can make this conference on February 8th. The reduction I've heard at some of the past environmental meetings, they were talking about paints and things like that and tribunal tins. Those are all illegal in the State of Florida now. Nothing goes on a boat that stays in the water that isn't approved by the State of Florida and the federal government. So you have a Page 22 February 2,2005 reduction of what is in the water. And having 29 slips versus the 50-some slips of the hotel, I feel has to be the best effort of the--or the best interest of the-- of the estuary system. The -- as I said,the transient is a huge number of boats that you're going to produce,more so than the actual marina facility was that was there. The other thing I would just say is just think about the long-term consequences. Anything that goes in there is going to affect the eagles. It doesn't matter what is built there. Whether it's a shopping center, whether it's a hotel, whether it's a condominium project that goes in, they're going to all disrupt the eagles. So it doesn't matter,you're going to have to prove something. And the economics to allow nothing to go in there eventually could--there could be some ramifications from that to do nothing. Thank you. MR. HUGHES: Quick question, if I may. MR. FINDLEY: Yes, sir. MR. HUGHES: You've managed marinas for an extended period of time. MR. FINDLEY: Yes, sir. MR. HUGHES: People that live in condominiums with a marina, how -- in your opinion, how often do they take them out? MR. FINDLEY: Well, the ones that are the snowbirds, which Pelican Isle is next door to this facility, I actually currently am the marina manager of Pelican Isle. I ran South Seas for 14 years then I ran Moss Marina on Fort Myers Beach, a full service marina. At all those facilities, you have a certain amount of snow birds that are only there probably 30 percent of the year. And you're talking, I guess the nesting season is when those boaters are around there, during the shorter time when the birds are there. But it is probably your January through April time frame. Income tax time, they all disappear. Probably less than 25 percent of the boats go out even during the summer months at Pelican Isle. So going to that type of facility is a huge,huge reduction of traffic on a residential. Now, you have a hotel, it's year round and it will not stop. A full service marina, it's year round and the boats do not stop,they keep coming and going. And the other thing I think the developer spoke about,the truck lids. In some of the conferences and things I've heard, the truck beds dropping. Well, trunks of cars slamming is the same effect, it makes the same noise that goes through. You put a hotel with outside parking, people getting in and out of their trunks every day, in and out, in and out, in and out, it's going to be a constant sound that's going to go, you know, every day with a hotel. So that's something to think about. And shopping center, same thing. If that goes in down the road you're going to have trunks of cars opening and shutting all day that are going to constantly disrupt those eagles. MR. HUGHES: All right. So in your opinion, approximately 75 percent of the vessels stay in their slips all the time. MR. FINDLEY: All the time. There's no doubt about that. Thank you. MS. MASON: Doug Fee,and the next speaker will be B.J. Savard-Boyer. MR. FEE: First of all, I'd like to say I've given to Susan Mason some e-mails that came over the past few days, people who could not attend here. They're e-mails that came to North Bay Civic. They represent-- I didn't actually count, but there's obviously a great deal of opinion in those, and so we wanted to submit those into the county record. Good morning, Council. For the record, my name is Doug Fee, president of the North Bay Civic Association. I thank you for this opportunity to speak. In July, 2002, almost three years ago, it was announced that Wiggins Pass Marina would be sold and that a rezone from commercial to residential would take place. Over those three years, the North Bay Civic n Association, with our members, collectively have spent hours, hundreds of hours, trying to be informed on all the issues surrounding this rezone. Page 23 February 2,2005 We have attended public meetings on this project. We have listened to all sides, and gathered as much information as we could in deciding where we stand. We have respected the process that citizens are afforded. We certainly understand the differing opinions in the neighborhood on the matter. But having said this and with the law in mind, I'm here asking you to say no to the residential rezone before you, and I have three main reasons. First of all, I've handed each of you the motion that was made and forwarded to the BCC by the planning commission on November 6th, 2003. The reason I believe the current proposal for residential is very similar to what was heard on that date,there are a few changes, and certainly the height has changed. In this motion, the planning commission singles out GMP policy CCME 12.2.2, which clearly limits residential density in the coastal high hazard to four units per acre. The petition before you today is asking for approximately 9.48 units, over twice the stated limit in this policy. The developer is relying on a density bonus for commercial conversion and asking for this amount of density. The bonus is discretionary and not an entitlement, as the staff report points out. The North Bay Civic has sought legal advice on this matter, and those opinions given clearly feel the more specific policy of four units per acre controls over the more general policy. The second reason we feel you should vote to deny this rezone and accept the residential conditional use has to do with the question of what is better for the neighborhood, residential or commercial. You have heard from some of the audience who urge you to vote residential. I'm here to tell you that this is a mixed use neighborhood. And I have here a zoning map, which is on Page 6 of what I've handed out, of the general vicinity of Wiggins Pass Road and Vanderbilt Drive. And I'll put this on the monitor. Obviously I'm not working the lectern very well. But you can see here that you have RT zoning at this very corner. You will see here that we have of course the marina property, which is commercial. You have a parcel across the street, which is commercial. You have a golf course and a public park, which has thousands coming to this area to launch their boats. And most importantly, I point out to you that we have three parcels that are zoned residential tourist. Many in the audience who will want to rezone this property of residential actually live in zoning that allows a hotel and a motel,which that is on Page 7 of what I handed out. As you know, scheduled behind this petition is a second petition for a conditional use for a resort hotel. We believe the petitioner has made his own case that a resort hotel would be appropriate to the neighborhood. Finally, the question of the environment, which is primary to the discussion today. The North Bay Civic Association has collected names on a petition that are in the rezone matter records. We know the two sentences in GMP policy 7.1.23 almost by heart and have been involved with the stakeholder meetings since they began. As an association, we support the county having a say or possibly final say on the projects that affect known listed species, like the pairs of eagles that are located in the North Bay area. In your handout I have some transcript from some of the hearings in regards to the glitch amendment. And Marti Chumbler, in one of the proceedings -- Marti Chumbler is the outside counsel for the county. And she stated on the record that due to the two sentences, staff doesn't actually know what that means. In other words, there's inconsistency; therefore, the glitch amendment was needed. You voted earlier for a resolution urging the commissioners to support the county's role in listed species matters. We also have a concern about the permits. Obviously you have before you a biological opinion, and I think in this rezone matter, I'm not sure if the applicant actually has the Army Corps permit, but we would also have a concern that we do feel the state should be involved in this. There -- you know, there should be permits from the state. There are permits on the gopher tortoises, so I believe that there should be permits Page 24 February 2,2005 .-� on the eagle. I'm not an expert on that,but I just want to raise that issue. I encourage you to stipulate that the boats that are used on either project should be limited to a three-foot draft or less, as stipulated in the county's Manatee Protection Plan. And possibly use lifts. We also encourage you to stipulate that the cleanup of the marina property be to the highest target levels possible so that when the state issues its final order, that -- the way I understand it is there can be deed restrictions. And maybe Ms. Tucker can address that. And that is my comments. Thank you very much. MS. MASON: B. J. Savard-Boyer,and the following speaker will be Gary Edson. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Good morning. B. J. Savard-Boyer. I live at Vanderbilt Beach. Most of what has been said about keeping the property commercial, I agree with. What Cam Gleason said and Bonnie Karkut. I agree that we need to have a safety of the eagles and the manatees. However, what about the people? In recent years, the citizens of Naples have lived with the privatization of our beaches and access to the Gulf through the building of condominiums, reducing public access. It would seem to me that the public has a right to retain these uses. Why continue to vote for use to a select few? Your vote is very important to the commissioners, and they will have the final say. I'd like to talk about the difference between residential and commercial and a hotel. I live on the last canal street in Vanderbilt Beach, and several years ago, on the corner of Vanderbilt Drive and Vanderbilt Beach Road, when I first became a member of the association, they were talking about a hotel on that corner. I don't know if any of you remember that piece of-- parcel of land. A hotel seemed like they've painted it today, as a very commercial, lot of traffic, lot of busy, busy, busy. So it was said, well, let's go to condominiums. Well,we have condominiums on that corner called Regatta. Now, the Regatta condominiums are not housed by one resident in each condominium. They're rentals. n And they are rented weekly. I didn't come here to talk about Regatta, because I didn't think I'd have to. But when I hear all of the negative about hotel, these people that are living in Pelican Isle have no idea how much noise is going to come from a hotel condominium. Now, it depends on the bylaws of these condominiums. If they're going to say that they can only rent these units 30 days three times a year or four times a year,that makes a big difference. But if they're going to rent them like the Regatta rents theirs, by the week -- they also have boats. Now you can't use the slips unless the boat slip is owned by a unit owner(sic)--I mean, an owner uner(sic). Sorry about that. You still have boats coming and going. Because if the unit owner rents to somebody that has a boat, I believe they can use the boat slip. These units are rented year round. Now, they bring their pets. Have you ever lived across a bay of water and listened to pets that are left on the lanai during the day while the people go to the beach? We've called code enforcement, we've called police,we've called everybody. Now, I know this has nothing to do with you and the environment. But what it has to do with your idea of the difference between a hotel and a residential condominium. I would like it to be left commercial, let's have a hotel. It's a lot easier to live with. Thank you. MS. MASON: Gary Edson. The next speaker will be Brad Cornell. MR. EDSON: Good morning. My name's Gary Edson. I'm a five-year resident, full-time here in Glen Eden,which is catty-corner from the proposed development. We're talking about eagles, access, density and cleanup. Over and over and over again. Your tolerance is remarkable. And we've done it twice now. I'd like to speak first to the question of density. We've talked about 12.2.2.2 which is a new residential site. I'd like to quote to you one of the nation's preeminent experts on land development, which-- Tom Pelham. He's spoken here before in December, 2003. I was sufficiently impressed with his presentation to obtain a transcript. And here's part of what he had to say regarding the density issue: Quite frankly, I think this Page 25 February 2,2005 county has a ticking time bomb here with regard to the densities permitted in your coastal high hazard area. It, in quotation marks, meaning the Growth Management Plan, indicates that it is limited to four acres per unit. We've heard this before. But Mr. Pelham continues to remind the commission that it's not legally tenable for county staff to ignore an expressed density limitation, because the applicable rule of interpretation is, and once again,I'm going to quote: A specific provision controls over a general provision. The specific provision here is the provision in your coastal high hazard element that says the maximum density in your area is four units per acre. The density rating system that you find in your future land use element is a more general provision. So with regard to coastal high hazard area,that specific provision in the coastal element controls as a matter of law. Counties are required -- and I'm out of quotations here -- counties are required by state regulation to limit coastal density. Now, the GMP policy 12.2.2 is in response to that requirement. Having said that, I'd like to speak to two other issues. The hotel could potentially be the best of both worlds. We've heard two things by the developer. One is that if you get -- if you get the hotel, I'm going to give you-- if you get the residence, the condo, I'm going to give you a place to put trailers. Well, why not put the hotel up and give a place to put trailers? That would be a nice compromise. It's a matter of economics. But I wonder. The economics have changed significantly. We originally looked at 22 stories and we were told that was the only way it could be built. But all of a sudden it can come down. And we went from hundreds of units down to 90 units. Now I'm -- and we can't even do 90, if you follow the code. But there's a possibility there for some compromise. We've talked about constant noise. Hotels produce noise in blocks of time. We've been told that by various people. I'm sorry, I can't quote those people, but I think a little analysis will find that the noise level in a hotel comes and goes. My hope is that if we have to have something on there, I would like to maintain as much public access as I can. If it means that we have to have a hotel, then so be it. But I want to be able to go down there like I at one time could go down to the Vanderbilt Inn. I would like to be able to have dinner. I would like to be able to walk along the water's edge. I would like to be able to have my mother come over and stay near my home --it's a selfish request. But it would be a nice thing. I'm going to be denied that, like I'm denied being able to see the water as these high-rises go higher and higher. We've got to remember what we had here and hope to preserve what little we have left. The clock is ticking. The clock is ticking on our ability to be residents in the paradise that we have come to know and love. Thank you so much for your time. And I hope that you will consider the hotel as your primary consideration. MS. MASON: Brad Cornell, followed by John W. Lawrence. MR. CORNELL: Good morning, council members. Brad Cornell, on behalf of the Collier County Audubon Society. I want to say first that we object to any activities which will harm the Wiggins Pass eagles. However, I also want to say that we are opposed to any activities which will threaten the continued existence of eagles in Collier County in general. And I will point to a lack of comprehensive habitat conservation policies in this county that is the cause of the second of these situations. We're concerned -- Collier County Audubon Society is concerned about opposing the Fish and Wildlife �..� Service's biological opinions on CO-19 -- the eagle nest CO-19, because it may threaten the Board of County Commissioners' support of comprehensive policies to protect the eagles in Collier County. And Page 26 February 2,2005 this is a political problem, but we recognize it as something that we need to consider in looking at these individual project-permitting issues. Another issue that weighs heavily on us is that whether or not this -- these projects or other projects in the Wiggins Pass area and along the coast all the way up to Angler's Paradise are built now or in the future, when this nest is gone, or after this nest is gone, naturally, the impact is going to be the same. And we still have the larger problem of how are we going to keep eagles in habitat in Collier County. This --we are not going to address that in what we're discussing today. And that's the unfortunate circumstance that I want to raise to your attention and say we've got to do something about that now. And I call upon you, as the Environmental Advisory Council, to lead, along with the county and for the county, an effort promptly to develop effective local listed species policies, including incentives, regulations, and mitigation county-wide. These may likely take the form of a federal habitat conservation plan for multiple species, but without such policies comprehensively, the current project-by-project permitting that we're doing right now in looking at these projects and any other projects that come before you is going to doom our listed species in general and even specifically. So I appeal to you to look beyond the project-by-project approach that we're now ensconced in and find a way to lead, as your charge is as an Environmental Advisory Council, to lead in the policy development that this county needs comprehensively. Thank you. MR. HUMISTON: Question, Brad. Have you seen this letter from the Fish & Wildlife dated December 15th that basically seems to relax the restrictions on activities in the secondary zone over the restrictions that are in the 1987 guidelines? MR. CORNELL: I have seen the relaxation of those guidelines,yes. MR. HUMISTON: The question I have is, is it says in here in recent years we found that certain exceptions are -- exceptions to the'87 guidelines are acceptable. And that's the basis for relaxing the restrictions in the secondary zone. Is -- being with the Audubon, are you aware of any case histories or any basis for them making that decision? MR. CORNELL: Well,there's a sense in the Service, and in general amongst ornithologists,that there may be some type of mechanism in eagles of urbanization, where they become acclimated to human activities in the proximity of their nests. I think this is a highly individual case, and it's not something that's very predictable or even well understood in any particular pair of eagles, including this nest here. So we don't know what's going to happen if we allow encroachment in the primary zone, or even the secondary zone. And therein lies a problem. We're not really able to protect these eagles in permitting relaxation of those guidelines. So we're not supportive of that while that nest is there. At the same time, we recognize if we hone in on just this specific nest and give up the effort politically and scientifically to support comprehensive policies, then we've done a disservice to both these eagles and eagles in general in Collier County. So if that answers your question. MS. HUSHON: Do you know of any levels, decibel levels which in the vicinity of an eagle's nest would be considered negative? In other words, is there a -- has anyone studied noise as a function of eagle happiness? MR. CORNELL: I'm not a scientist, and I'm not aware of the literature relative to specific decibel level in disturbance of eagles. I do know that anecdotally sharp, loud noises such as the gates of dump trucks banging are problematic. And I would distinguish those from the trunks of cars slamming. But nevertheless, it's sudden, loud, surprising noises that would be a disturbance to eagles on a repeated basis. And that would be something that would perhaps elicit disturbance behavior from an eagle pair and perhaps abandonment of a nest during a particular period of time. Page 27 February 2,2005 But no, I'm not aware of what the specific decibel levels would be. And so if you're driving toward can we put a decibel level restriction-- MS. HUSHON: Right. MR. CORNELL: -- on a project, I think that what the developer has proposed in the way of monitoring is about as good as we can get if we're going to have a project in a primary or secondary zone. MS. HUSHON: And are you all--is Audubon ready to supply those monitors? MR. CORNELL: They're -- we are not able to. The Collier County Audubon Society--well, we have had a lot of discussions with this developer about this -- well, actually the previous iteration of this project. And ultimately we are not -- we have not been supportive of the project. However, they've also been talking with Audubon of Florida. There is a program called Eagle Watch that is currently in effect and does monitor this nest, as well as other folks who monitor it, but we would not be in a position to supply that monitor on a professional basis. And that's what you need. You need a professional biologist who can monitor, has been certified to monitor eagle behavior, recognizes what disturbance behavior is and could be and what activities might elicit that. So they have to be pretty alert. We're not ready--we can't do that and we have not committed to do that, but-- MR. HUMISTON: But you think this person needed to be on-site full-time? Is this a full-time type position? MR. CORNELL: They would at least need to be there when routine disturbance activities would be taking place. Typically when trucks are unloading, when there would be some type of construction activity like pile driving or--they've said that they're not going to do that during nesting season, so that's good. But, you know, the expected disturbance activity, somebody's got to be there. And my understanding is in construction projects, that's kind of periodic. It may not be the whole day through. But if it were, they'd have to be there all day long,yes. MR. SORRELL: Brad, I have a question. Where do these eagles go during the time it's not October to May,not the nesting season? MR. CORNELL: Well, again, I'm not a biologist, and I'm not an expert. Some eagles are migratory and actually leave the area, may even leave the state. Others just hang around in the area and they just -- they feed in the local waters and roost in the local, typically, pine trees or snags or whatever the tallest structure is so they can keep an eye on things. For instance,the pair of eagles that's nested at CO-19 for a long time likes to roost or used to like to roost in a tall Norfolk pine that was right near the marina. That Norfolk pine was cut down last summer. But they would find another tall tree. So some are migratory, some are not. I'm not sure where this pair goes. And I'm not sure anybody knows, because they're not banded, I don't believe, and they don't have any radio transmitter on them, so -- but studies show that some of them migrate to other places and some stay local. Thank you. MS. MASON: John W. Lawrence, followed by Gary Mullennix. MR. LAWRENCE: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I'm John Lawrence. My wife and I have a part-time owner -- a full-time ownership or part-time residence at Pelican Isle, here five months out of the year. We love this place as a neighborhood for the last eight or nine years. First of all, yes, we support both of the petitions today. If this were the final approval authority, I guess we --I'm sure we would go with the condominium for the reasons cited. Let me mention one other brief comment. Since we do live on the eighth floor of a building in Pelican Isle, we look right out at the beautiful scene in front of us and we see this being ruptured regularly by boats, small boats, going through the oyster pad. It just happens. It happens all the time. And the county should do more on signage,and-- in my opinion,and buoy markers in that area. Page 28 February 2,2005 What I really wanted to talk to you about was this eagle thing. I served in the business end of a forestry company that owns over 200,000 acres in South Georgia, right along the Okefenokee Swamp. It's obviously a very environmentally sensitive area. I am not a forester, but I've worked and become friends with foresters in that South Georgia area. I've talked with them a long and many times about the question of the red-cockaded woodpecker,the eagles that we're talking about here today. When I've explained the concerns that were voiced very well here today, and I respect that, they shake their heads in wonderment about what's so different about the bald eagles here than the bald eagles up there. We have to watch what we're doing, and all of these people I'm talking about are rural; they live, work and play right in the woods. They love the nature around them. But they don't see this disruption that has been cited on the bald eagles, when very loud logging equipment comes nearby. We don't cut down trees, we don't -- we're not rapists of the forest, none of that. But we simply don't understand. And admittedly it's a very remote area. We don't have any high-rises, but we do have logging operations making considerably more,higher levels of decibels than anything that I usually associate with construction. I'd urge that you go ahead with the approval of this. Thank you. MS. MASON: Gary Mullennix, followed by Linda Roosa. MR. MULLENNIX: Thank you very much. And good morning, Commissioners. Just a couple of anecdotal comments on my part. I am Gary Mullennix. My wife and I live at Pelican Isle on the eighth floor, looking west. And we've been there for six years now. I have some experience. I have a 34 -- I mean I have 33-foot boat with a 34-inch draft, so I'm safe under some of these restrictions. But I don't use mine very much. In fact, almost always when I look out, none of us have moved our boat from the slip, hardly at all. I didn't know that as a novice moving into Florida that if I bought a boat, I wouldn't be using it during the winter months, because they're the winter months. And even here it's winter. It's cold, it's windy. My wife doesn't like waves. Anything over three feet is just absolutely forbidden. And so mainly we don't go out. I use the Wiggins Pass Marina as a place to store my boat. I had the bottom painted there. I would pick up my boat there. I had the engine replaced there. It was a filthy place, reeking of hydrocarbons. And all of that would of course run off. When I filled up my gas -- my tank with gasoline, myself and others habitually watched large pools of gas floating throughout the marina area from overflows from gas and diesel being filled up. That thankfully has stopped, since nobody seems to be doing that much of anymore. Then as we sat out there and watched the activity, we normally would see daily, especially during the warmer months, the rapacious use of the land by the small boats, those that either got them out and moved them out of the barns or the people that came in and dropped them down the ramp. And I want to tell you that jet skis and small boats exploding through those mangroves and over those oyster beds at high speeds, the noise that's with them is extraordinary. The larger boats go out very naturally and very slowly,non-wake out in the manner in which they're supposed to go out. I am convinced they cause substantially less damage than the small boats that the public uses. The public does not adhere to boating laws worth a damn, from my own perspective, at least. If it were me, I would hope that we would go with the residences, because the logically -- it seems that me that that is the best choice for the following reason: It offers the best cleanup there. The tolerances you've heard are substantially less. And that ought to be done. It promises by far the least use of the land by the residences. And it promises the most amount of real estate taxes to be gained by the county for the support of all the other infrastructure needs of the county. Thank you. MS. MASON: Linda Roosa, followed by the final speaker on these items,Peter Franck. MS. ROOSA: It's still morning. Hi, how are you? My name is Linda Roosa, and I live at Barefoot Beach, Page 29 February 2,2005 which is an Ed Oelschlaeger EcoGroup project that I'm very proud of. They did a beautiful job. My husband and I boat from Pelican Isle Yacht Club. We do own a slip there. And we have a larger boat,plus a jet ski. We realize at this point that there is going to be development on the property. And we use Vanderbilt Road, we use the pass. And again, we're associated with Pelican Isle Yacht Club, another excellent project by the developer. Since it's getting down to residential versus commercial, and I do hope you approve both of the projects, I, like many other people, definitely support the residential. I have been a member of the North Bay Civic Association. Sometimes I get e-mails from them. Most times I don't. I've never been polled by the North Bay Civic Association as far as my opinion, so I'm speaking for myself And I hope North Bay Civic Association is listening,that not all of their members are in agreement with what they are proposing. With the residential, of course that would be my preference. I just think it would be a better selection, since we already have approval adjacent to that property for Signature, which will be residential. I do believe that Ed Oelschlaeger and EcoGroup have demonstrated here in our county, as well as other counties in Florida,that they do upscale building,they do take in consideration environmental impact. It sounds like from what I've heard today that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife have submitted a new ruling out. Ed has said that he would already demonstrate doing different and special building rules that have not been used anywhere else. Because of his reputation and because of what he has already been able to fulfill for Collier County,I think we can rely on EcoGroup to do an outstanding job. So thank you very much. MS. MASON: Peter Franck. He's the final speaker. MR. FRANCK: Thank you very much. Good morning. My name is Peter Franck, and I live on Pelican Isle. Been there for about seven years. And I am an endangered specie. I'm being endangered by the fact ,_• that the pollution that still leaks out at the old marina building is not going to be cleaned up properly if you only approve the commercial aspect and go ahead with the hotel. What we need for the short and the long term is a cleanup to the extremest standards it could possibly apply to get rid of the pollutants that are surrounding us. We don't want to lose the residential nature of our neighborhood. We don't want a hotel. And I'm also being endangered by the fact that the North Bay Association,through its board of directors, is telling you that they're speaking for me. That is not the case. I have not been polled, and as Linda said also, she hasn't been polled either. So I urge you to go to the residential side,because I live there and I don't want a hotel. Thank you. MS. MASON: Excuse me, it was just brought to my attention,there's one more speaker. A.K. Brown. MS. BROWN: Good morning. My name is Anita Brown. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to say something. I don't belong to any association,I speak for myself I'm living here since 1989, so -- I need my glasses. I don't want to admit it,but I have to. And I'm a very strong opponent against the Coconilla project, as well as the Signature project. The reason is the following: We all know, I don't need to repeat this again, it's a very sensitive, environmental sensitive area. And it is the last property on the Gulf in our area. We are, let us say,framed with high-rises. Unfortunately not the nicest looking high-rises. I feel already being in the second Miami where careless, reckless developer buy everything they can get, develop it, make the money, don't care and go. This will happen here,too. It's a piece of land you cannot replace. You cannot replace bald eagles or other creatures depending on the paths and on this area. It's not a car, it's not a furniture. And also, you cannot replace the rights of the people to have access,the last access to the Gulf n Let us become leader again. We are leader in many things, sir and madam. We are leader in abortion, we are leading in poisoning our coastal and other water resources. We are leader in, let us say, all negative Page 30 February 2,2005 r� parts you can't hardly imagine. I don't want to put them up now because it's so frightening, some people would maybe leave this room. It's time to be a leader in a positive sense again. Make them an end. You have the power, you have the strength to make a change. You have the public behind you. But not all the public can fit in this little room. You know that most people by heart, and I know and I'm sure about it, you too, by heart and later, maybe by facts, know that this is wrong to say yes to either/or because the public has no, no access, no enjoyment anymore of this paradise. People came here, when I came, for paradise. Where is the paradise? All the environmental, the subtropical environmental is disappearing on a daily basis. I cannot count the species which are gone on a daily basis, I'm not a biologist, I don't know all the names. But I know sooner or later that manatees will be gone, the eagle will go very soon, and on the end of this chain, we will go. At least the people who can afford to go, what do we then? We have concrete left. Can you restore it? No, you cannot. Because my generation, the following generation and the other generations don't want to pay the price for the mistake knowingly, knowingly done. We know it better. We feel it. We have the knowledge, we have the technology,we have the facts. We know it is wrong. And don't say I don't, and turn the back on the public, I'm sorry, I didn't know better. We try now to flood an area which is dried out from the states which belong to Barron Collier to make room for development. It will not replace what we have lost already. It will create problems. And we cannot print the money so fast to try to replace what is lost. Because you cannot buy it. There is not another space. We have only one planet. Yes, we go to Mars, we have seen there is helium, wonderful. Maybe in some million years we are able to breathe there. But at the moment, we are here on this planet, this only one. And we all have the right to enjoy what the Creator has given us. And we have -- we have the absolute must to protect this from people who think money can buy everything. When the last tree is fallen,the last fish is caught,you cannot eat money. And Mr. Oelschlaeger, your residential buildings are nice from the outside, but with all the money you have, when everything is destroyed, you will not survive a week. Like all other people here, too, we have responsibilities. And the responsibility starts now from this moment on. And in my opinion, please, I can only urge you, say no to both. Buy the property, you have the money, we are taxpayers, most taxpayers are willing to pay for it. I'm sure, you should only ask them. Nobody has asked them this yet until now, this question. Sony, German and English is coming a little bit in confusion here. I'm willing to do it. I'm willing to pay an entrance and drive with a, let us say, pontoon boat, enjoy the sunset. I could enjoy the sunset last week still. But in few months, it will not be able. I will not be able to see the sunset anymore when the high-rises are up. Like many other people,too. Don't make the mistake again. You know it. The eagle cannot talk. The eagle cannot read the construction or instructions to fly to the artificial tree what they have offered in previous hearings. No, it's an animal. And there is a little bit what is a difference between humans and animals. We can read. They don't. We have to protect them. They need us. And they have the right to live here, as well as we have. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN GAL: Go ahead. I guess you have some comments too? MR. YOVANOVICH: Oh,just a few. I'll just try to hit the highlights. First of all, the last speaker made a comment about an artificial tree. That's associated with another petition, which you'll be hearing about shortly. I just want to -- there are a lot of points and comments raised about our--the county comprehensive plan. I want to start with first of all, let us all not forget that this is private property. Nobody in this room has the Page 31 February 2,2005 right to go onto that property unless you're invited to go onto the property. So nobody has the right to enjoy that property today without the property owner's consent. It is not public property. So we have to go from that as a basis. We have C-4 zoning on the property today. That allows for a myriad of uses. Not-- and most of those uses will not include the public's enjoyment of the waterfront. So you have to go from that basis first. What's the existing zoning and how are the people going to get to the water that they so --that they claim they want to get to and enjoy,which they have no right to enjoy right now. Look at the two alternatives that you have. You have the residential alternative and you have a hotel alternative, both of which provide public access to the water. Now, which one of those provides more public access to the water? If you look at the residential, and I don't know if you were provided a copy of the entire PUD document, but the PUD document talks about a public-private partnership in addressing needs for the public to access the water. One of the public private-partnerships is a contribution of a million dollars to assist in obtaining property for trailer parking for people to use the adjacent park. It also includes the reconfiguration of the park parking lot to provide additional parking. So as one gentleman pointed out,just those 50 spaces that we can create, forgetting the additional parking that can be purchased with a million dollars, will provide -- if everybody used it 50 times, 50 times 365, it's a big number. That is a lot of public access to the water that isn't enjoyed today, even if the marina were up and running. That's only 450 people would enjoy the waterfront if you brought back the old marina. We're providing other people an opportunity to get to the water. There's also another contribution of a million dollars towards beach access. Again, those are two critical things that the public claims they want: Access to the beach, access to the water for boating. The residential alternative addresses that need. It more, more than compensates for the impact that this project will have on both of those,I'll call them level of services, but they're really not truly level of services. The Pelican Isle Yacht Club, if you saw on the RT map I think that Mr. Fee has up there right now, if you'll look at the zoning, it says RT and in parentheses 11. Well,that 11 stands for 11 units per acre. We're right next door to that piece of property. We're asking for nine-and-a-half units per acre. That is what your staff has said is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Now, they've gone over the glitches and all that other stuff, and the gentleman brought up that the Policy 12.2.2 limits density to three units per acre. Well, let me read you Policy 12.2.2: The calculated needs for public facilities will be based on the adopted level of service standards and future growth projections within the coastal high hazard area. The future land use element limits new residential development, and then in parentheses, thus obligation to infrastructure expenditures, end of parentheses, to a maximum of four dwelling units per acre within the coastal high hazard area. Someone find for me where in the future land use element it says you can't have more than four units per acre in the coastal high hazard area. If you can find it, show it to me. It doesn't exist. So that policy incorrectly references a limitation in the quote, future land use element. So you have to go back to the future land use element to figure out what density exists on this piece of property. There is no limitation on that conversion of commercial paragraph in the future land use element, the density--the density calculation provisions in the future land use element. There is no limitation in the future land use element that supports that policy. You've got to go and you've got to rely on the future land use element. And I will point out, since we're going to bring up history about the discussions that occurred the last go round when we were talking about a 21-story building, when we got to the Board of County Commissioners, four out of five of them, not one of them mentioned the concern with the density provision Page 32 February 2,2005 we were asking for of nine-and-a-half units per acre. Not one of them, four out of the five never said that's inconsistent with our comprehensive plan. So I know that's not binding, we'll go back up, but that at least ought to give you some indication of what the board was thinking at the time,that that was not an issue for them. Now, the Conservancy says they want you to read the first sentence in Policy 7.1.2(3). They want you to just read the first sentence and ignore the second sentence. Well, you can't legally do that. You have to read all the sentences. And the second sentence reads: It is recognized that these agency recommendations on a case-by-case basis may change the requirements contained within these wildlife protection policies, and any such change shall be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan. They specifically -- your comprehensive plan specifically recognizes that the agencies may come up with different permit conditions to change their general regulations, and that is deemed consistent with the comprehensive plan. That is in fact what happened here today. We have a biological opinion that addresses this particular pair of eagles and how we are to go forward with constructing our project. It is 100 percent consistent with your comprehensive plan. Your staff reporter even acknowledges that. You can't just pick and choose the sentences you want to enforce. And the Conservancy is talking about policy level decisions. These are future changes to the comprehensive plan. You're not allowed to apply policies that don't exist yet. There may be better policies within the comprehensive plan that the stakeholders group is coming up with. Those are for future projects. You have to apply the laws that exist today. And again, we are 100 percent consistent with the conservation element of the comprehensive plan. Florida Audubon appeared at the previous hearing. Florida Audubon preferred residential over commercial. Florida Audubon was actually the author of padding the dump trucks to help avoid that impact, which was the gunshot, as they described it, that would potentially scare off the eagles. That is -- that was -- we've been working with Florida Audubon to come up with appropriate measures. They will provide the monitor. We have agreed there's issues with the eagle and if the monitor says we need to stop, we will stop. That's in our eagle management plan. We have gone above and beyond to address every one of those issues. I need to point out that, you know, C-4 zoning, this is really the public's last opportunity to have some say-so in what's going to happen on this property. We have C-4 zoning as a matter of right. If these two proposals are not acceptable to the public, then we'll have to go forward with something else, and they'll have no say-so in what that something else is. We have come forward with two -- and we're proud of both projects -- two very sensitive projects to the environment, as well as to our neighbors. And they're residential neighbors. We prefer the residential alternative. We believe that that is in the best interest of the people who live there, it's the best interest of the public,because of the public-private partnership, and in the best interest of the environment. That's our first priority. That's what we really would like to see happen. If that's not approved, we would like to build this nice hotel. This nice hotel is also compatible with the neighborhood. People who are saying that this hotel is not being designed to be compatible with the neighborhood, well, that's just not true. The hotel is sensitive to the neighborhood. It's not as sensitive to the neighborhood as the residential. The two-neighborhood -- I'm sorry, we had one neighborhood information meeting. And my -- when I came away from that meeting, because I was the first back when we were doing a 21-story building and these two 10-story buildings -- I thought the public viewed both of our petitions very well. They liked both the residential and the hotel. I think the preference, the clear preference, was for the residential alternative �...� to go forward to being developed. The public would be fine with the hotel, but it was clear from that neighborhood information meeting that they wanted the residential to be developed. Page 33 February 2,2005 I think I've addressed all the major points I wanted to address from the public. The developer has proven himself in Collier County, he's proven himself with the project right next door. This is going to be essentially just like the Pelican Isle project. The Pelican Isle project is 10 stories,we're 10 stories. We are requesting that you follow your staffs recommendations with a couple of changes I've made, pass this on to the Board of County Commissioners with the -- both petitions on to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. And I'm here to answer any questions, and so are all the other consultants, if you have any questions. CHAIRMAN GAL: What are the uses in C-4 as it currently is right now? It's commercial— MR. YOVANOVICH: Well it's as highest, well there's C-5 which is almost -- it's just below industrial. The C-4 is the most intense commercial you can have, that's the shopping centers -- the most intense commercial uses you can have. (Court reporters changed.) MR. YOVANOVICH: Recently we made a presentation to the North Bay Civic Association, and I forgot to tell you the results of the vote. The first vote, there were 37 people who voted, 20 were in favor of the residential and 17 were in favor of the hotel. They took another vote after some people voted and the vote flip-flopped, and it became 20 for the hotel and 15 for the residential. Keep in mind that included the directors of the association in that vote. So you can see there's not this unami --I could have said that word until B.J. Said it. Unam -- unami -- whatever, there was unanimous support for doing nothing and leaving as it is. It's an issue that it has been divided, and it's not that clear-cut as, you know, maybe North Bay Civic Association is representing that the commercial alternative of the hotel is the better of the two choices. CHAIRMAN GAL: The question has been raised whether we take a break or not; if we do, how long a break? Any response one way or the other down there? MS. HUSHON: I'd like to get through the questions. MR. HUGHES: You want to throw one out so if they do take a break,they have time to prepare for it. CHAIRMAN GAL: Let's talk about this first. I think the questions are probably going to take a while to get through every question. Can we take a short break and skip lunch? Is that acceptable with everybody? MS. LYNNE: How short is short? CHAIRMAN GAL: What do you mean? Ten minutes? What we're going to do is,we're going -- MR. HUGHES: Just one thing, if while we're on break, the county -- our staff could look into how the zoning was originally set, because 30 years ago, there were questions on zoning and how they were properly done. MR. MASON: We can see what we can find out. CHAIRMAN GAL: We're going to take a 15-minute break, we'll reconvene here at 12:15 and then we'll start up with our questions. (Whereupon, a short recess was taken.) CHAIRMAN GAL: We'll call the meeting to order. I neglected to say prior, that the public hearing is closed and now we will take council member comments and they will ask questions. And are you from--you're from the staff, correct? MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, from Zoning Land Development Review. I just was going to address Council Member Hughes'question. This property -- MS. HUSHON: Would you repeat the question? MR. BOSI: When the zoning of the property was designated commercial -- and to the answer of that question, I do not know. During the 1982 into 1974 (sic) zoning reevaluation programs initiated by the county, this was commercial. At those times before that date, I'm not sure when the actual designation of commercial before '74 was placed upon the property. I don't have an answer to that,but I know for over the past 31 years, it has been designated commercial. Page 34 February 2,2005 CHAIRMAN GAL: One additional housekeeping measure. What we're going to do is finish up with these two petitions, we're going to take a lunch break, and then we will -- after the lunch, we'll hear the Cocohatchee Bay petition. Are there any other questions? MS. HUSHON: Yes, I have one. I would like a little more description on the hotel. We saw a brief picture, which is really the only thing we have seen, except for a footprint on the hotel. We saw a footprint. How many stories? How many rooms? Could you give us a little bit of background on the hotel plan? MR. MULHERE: For the record, Bob Mulhere. I think I indicated 230 rooms. The C-4 district limits height to 75 feet, measured in the same way it would be measured for any other building, from the FEMA elevation. And this hotel would utilize all of that 75 feet in height. MS. HUSHON: And that's about half of the height of the two -- MR. MULHERE: 45 feet -- there's a 45-foot difference. The residential structures are limited to 120 feet, also measured from FEMA. 75-, 120-, 45-foot difference in height. Just a little bit more description. Am I right? Was my math wrong? CHAIRMAN GAL: No. MR. MULHERE: As I said, up to 47 slips. Obviously, the marina basin is configured differently. This portion of the property -- there's really more property available for the marina configuration in the hotel plan than the residential because of the two buildings. And again, the separation to two buildings was a direct response to issues of concern relative to the original height in the previous petition, which was 22 stories. Twenty-one over parking. That was in a single building at the time with some town homes. So, again, the two ten-story buildings, mid-rise buildings, were designed to address concerns over that height. Again, a typical hotel, resort hotel, in terms of the other kinds of ancillary uses that you would find here, you know, you have an entry feature here. And under the building, as I said, the majority of the parking will be located. There's a little bit of parking down here. And I think that there is some room for some additional service parking over here, although it's not shown on this plan. But, you know, your amenities. Sort of a swimming pool with a couple of spas and some sunning areas and some function areas for hotel functions that would occur through their, I guess, banquet facility-type things, whether it be a wedding or meeting facility, or something along those lines. And the hotel will include a spa, and, again restaurant. One or two restaurants, a lounge, and some retail space. There's not a whole lot of retail space. MS. HUSHON: It looks like a lot of your hotel activity is not facing the eagles' nest. You're actually facing away from that-- for most of your parties or luaus or whatever we're talking about. MR. MULHERE: You know, that's correct. And I'd have to be honest to say, that's really a function of a couple of things. There was actual consideration to directing that away from that. But also, obviously, there's an amenity here in terms of the marina function and the water. So the more that the public viewing space could be directed towards that, really I think the better it is in terms of the aesthetics of the hotel and the reason why people would come there. MR. SORRELL: Question. Why not include the private/public involvement here as well as in the residential? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: For the record, Ed Oelschlaeger. The economics of a hotel are substantially different than the economics of a condominium project. And consequently, it's just not available. It's not financially feasible to do so. MR. SORRELL: Any transient slips, and is the boat store open to the public in the hotel as well as-- MR. OELSCHLAEGER: In the hotel there will be -- we've designated three transient slips, but I can tell you, as the case in most marinas, when it will be set up on this basis that when other boaters that have those slips are gone, they will be available for transient, for people to come in, either overnight. If they're gone �..,� overnight or for lunch, or whatever it might be. There will be a host of transient slips. MR. SORRELL: The fielding station on both will be public? Page 35 February 2,2005 .-� MR. OELSCHLAEGER: That's correct, sir. MR. SORRELL: Ship store? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Ship store is also open to the public. MR. SORRELL: When we're talking about the cleanup, the previous owner, didn't he have environmental damage insurance as part of a marina? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Environmental damage insurance? MR. SORRELL: Right,that would help in the cleanup? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: To my knowledge, no, but I'm not the person to ask about that. I'm not familiar with that. I can tell you that in our cleanup activity, under the residential, it's going to be to the tune of $300 to $350,000. MS. HUSHON: Since you have some contamination on site,which the state, obviously, would have some, you know, concern over,have they raised any concerns about the fact that you may have to clean up to fairly high levels because you are in a sensitive area where the likelihood of that contamination moving off your site is very high? MR. OELSCHLAEGER:. I will ask Jo Tucker to respond to that. I have my opinions, but I'm not the expert. MS. TUCKER: The cleanup,whether it be to residential or commercial standards,whatever cleanup we do there, or whether it be to standards that protect the groundwater, which is another layer of standard, would be done under the auspices of Collier County Pollution Control and/or the DEP. And all of the programs under which the cleanup would be done do take into account health and risk factors to both the public and the environment. MS. HUSHON: Because you have contaminated soil, it's sandy soil, and, in fact, with rainwater you are flushing-- MS. TUCKER: It can lead-- MS. HUSHON: -- contamination with a fairly high potential to flush to the marina area-- MS. TUCKER: Correct. MS. HUSHON: --as you're going to develop it? MS. TUCKER: Correct. MS. HUSHON: And you're increasing the marina frontage, which means that more -- there's a higher potential to reach flowing water. Because you have water deeper,nearer more of the property. MS. TUCKER: Yeah. I think in the scheme of things,the cleanup would be affected before-- MS. HUSHON: I understand, but you're talking about two different levels of cleanup, depending on two different uses. What I'm suggesting is that, in fact, your level of cleanup -- the state may look at this and say, your level of cleanup needs to be higher than the standard commercial because you are in a sensitive coastal area, where the potential for that contamination to reach the ocean, or the bay water, is very high. The gulf water. I mean, it's a very quick calculation to say, yes, it probably could reach there, and it will reach there in 20 years or ten years, or something. They may well find that to be an unacceptable level. It would be an environmental concern, not a human health concern. Your other standards for the on site are human health driven, in general,your residential for commercial? MS. TUCKER: Yes, correct. MS. HUSHON: It tends to be human health? MS. TUCKER: Uh-huh. MS. HUSHON: So, the only other area that you'd have concern over is if you have a tot lot or something. That level will have to be -- even if it's commercial, will have to be cleaned up to a level, a residential ,...N level? MS. TUCKER: Correct. I understand what you're saying. And I think if the state or the county,you know, Page 36 February 2,2005 wants additional evaluation beyond what the current state target levels would mandate, then we would do such evaluation and work with them on that. MR. KRAUT: I have a question for Ms. Tucker. Iry Kraut, for the record. Looking within the -- deep within the documents, and probably items that are unknown to many of the people that are here today, are some fairly high levels of metals such as arsenic, chromium, lead, and copper that are on site. What's your management, environmental management scheme to remove those, and how long of a period of time will it take, and do you plan to just meet state regulatory guidelines or to exceed them? MS. TUCKER: A remedial plan, work scope, hasn't really been finalized at this point, but, it is likely that we would excavate the contaminated soils, which are mostly surficial. They're in the upper one to two feet for the most part, and remove them from the site. From the laboratory data that we have at this point, if we removed the upper one to two feet of soils in the places that-- let's just say we're using the residential target level -- if we remove the upper one to two feet,we will be below the target level. So we would have met or exceeded the state target levels. MR. KRAUT: And that would be under residential, and so I guess the follow-up questions,perhaps for the developer more than you, since we're responsible for stewardship of the environment for the citizens of this county, I think it would be most appropriate that those most stringent residential levels also be applicable to the commercial development should this go hotel rather than residential. It should not be any less than that. And the question therefore, for the developer, is whether or not they, or he, would agree to those more strict levels of environmental cleanup, should it go commercial hotel versus residential. MR. OELSCHLAEGER: As a practical matter, the answer to that is yes, we would do that. It's an environment that we're all concerned about. I live right next door to it as well and that would be the standard. MS. LYNNE: So what happens,you remove the top couple feet of soil and then what do you do with it? MS. TUCKER: It can be land filled in a proper landfill. Sometimes it can be incinerated. We haven't made that choice yet,but there are various options. MS. LYNNE: And when you take the soil off -- and I'm having trouble seeing how you're going to dig more of the marina and not get contaminants into the estuary. If there's contamination on site, you're going to excavate the marina larger, how are you going to avoid getting those contaminants into the water when you're doing the excavation? MS. TUCKER: Well, some of the areas that are contaminated are not adjacent to the water. They're back on the interior of the property. But I think in general, the answer would be that, when you do an excavation that's going to impact the surface water adjacent to the land, you have safeguards to protect the surface water. That's standard with any construction at the water line. MS. HUSHON: Also, you're doing site remediation prior to any marina construction, correct? You'll do site remediation first? MS. TUCKER: I think that would be-- MS. HUSHON: That's the normal -- MS. TUCKER: -- objective and the normal thing to do,yeah. MS. HUSHON: You have to get a clean-- I want to say clean bill of health on the site before you can actually start developing, the state usually requires that, but I haven't worked in Florida to know whether that's their procedure. MS. TUCKER: I mean, I could see that some parts of the excavation of contaminated soil say it could be done immediately before other site work, so, you know, almost a sequential activity, but it would make complete sense to get rid of the contamination before you try to do other construction on the site. ,.� MS. LYNNE: Is that the plan then, that all of the contamination would be gone before the other construction starts? Could you put it on the record,please? Page 37 February 2,2005 MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Yes. And I would also,just before -- my understanding is yes, but I would also ask Ken Humiston, who is the consulting engineer on this, if that, in fact, is the case as it relates to dredging of the basin and the connect with the existing waterway. MR. HUMISTON: Yes, I think it is. I mean, I would agree entirely with what Jo has said. E In removing the contaminants from the upper couple of feet, you would not be down into the water table at that point. But that excavation could be the first step in actually excavating the basin, except that first step would be completed before any further evacuation of the basin took place. The sea wall would be left in place, so that the whole site would be contained until the final excavation was completed. So I don't think there would be any leeching of contaminants during construction. MS. TUCKER: May I add one caveat to that? We're talking soil contamination here. With groundwater contamination, it sometimes takes months and months to remediate it. MS. HUSHON: I understand that. MS. TUCKER: And it might not be necessary to wait for the other-- MS. HUSHON: I'm not sure whether they will require you to do that remediation or not -- MS. TUCKER: We don't know how long it will take, if it does have to happen. And so, it's entirely possible, and it's done all the time, that construction occurs on a site that's being actively remediated for a groundwater issue. MR. HUGHES: You're assuming that the cap rock approximately three feet under the surface is impervious? MS. TUCKER: I don't think we have cap rock three feet under at this site. MR. HUGHES: You say the contamination runs to three feet. MS. TUCKER: I'm saying that we've tested at the surface, we've tested a couple feet down. The contamination levels diminish with depth, so it's mostly a surficial contamination. MR. HUGHES: Have you forged deeper than that? MS. TUCKER: Yes. MR. HUGHES: How deep is your deepest pour? MS. TUCKER: Probably three or four feet. And at that depth we have -- we've met target levels. It's diminished to the point where it's really not there anymore. MR. HUGHES: And the geology is --how is the structure? MS. TUCKER: It's sandy soils. I think we have some weathered limestone at 15 to 20 feet below the surface. MR. HUGHES: That far down? MS. TUCKER: Uh-huh. MR. HUGHES: We don't have a hard panel there? MS. TUCKER: I don't recall anything like that at this site. We've done some geotechnical borings there too, and to best of my recollection is, we didn't hitch anything until we got down 15 or 20 feet. MR. HUGHES: So if this is the case, and all contaminants are contained within, let's say, the first three feet of the surface, when you do the remediation, you will be removing all of the contaminants as a standard procedure,period. MS. TUCKER: Right. MR. HUGHES: You're going to box it up and haul it away. MS. HUSHON: And you'll be just testing after you've removed? MS. TUCKER: Right. We would test to confirm that we've met the target levels at the bottoms and sides of the excavations. �..\ MR. HUGHES: And you're going to contain and box and ship --which I used to do so I'm quite familiar-- most of that$300,000 is going for the landfill to park it in. Page 38 February 2,2005 MS. HUSHON: That's right. MR. HUGHES: So, that's essentially what you're doing. You should leave the site clean, period; is that correct? MS. TUCKER: Yeah. And then the groundwater has to be addressed also. MS. HUSHON: That's a separate issue. MS. TUCKER: That's a different matter. MR. HUGHES: That's my concern, how do you get groundwater contamination without some kind of perforation? MS. TUCKER: Groundwater, if there's -- there's a localized, we believe, zone of contaminated groundwater near the shop. And you can extract that from the ground with an extraction well and process it through a treatment system. And then either put it back or dispose it to the sanitary sewer. MR. HUGHES: What is the contaminant at that point? MS. TUCKER: MTBE. MR. HUGHES: Is that where the tank was buried? Is there a buried tank there? MS. TUCKER:No. MR. HUGHES: So to be that deep,there was some kind of construction that disturbed that area? MS. TUCKER: We don't know how it got there. MS. LYNNE: There are some buried tanks there,aren't there? MS. TUCKER: There are tanks. The existing -- the most recently operated fuel tanks are quite a ways from that spot. They're over near the shoreline. And it's my understanding they've recently been removed. There was a waste oil tank not too terribly far from this groundwater problem. It's been closed for some time. I guess it's a potential source,but we don't really know for certain. MR. SORRELL: How many samples were taken, soil samples,on the property? MS. TUCKER: I don't remember offhand without counting. Three or four dozen. Maybe more. MR. SORRELL: In ten acres? MS. TUCKER: What we do, when we do this kind of assessment, is go to the places most likely to be contaminated based on our research into how the site was used. So there were some areas where there was no reason to think any kind of an environmental impact had occurred, and we wouldn't have sampled there. There were other areas we took numerous samples in because there was a probable source. MR. SORRELL: Fourteen? MS. HUSHON: Fourteen. MS. TUCKER: I think it's probably more than that. There are two different-- MS. HUSHON: Table two. MS. TUCKER: Two different reports. MS. HUSHON: This is table two. There actually are more. It's a question whether the soils are set-- MS. TUCKER: There's a report--there's a table. MS. HUSHON: Eight more. There are 14 plus eight, 22. MS. TUCKER: Okay. MS. HUSHON: I don't know which once. This table does not appear to have your sediments in it. MR. HUGHES: So if we go and remove the surface and we have deeper contamination, you're proposing to use extraction methods to do that?Flush it out, activated carbon and absorb-- MS. TUCKER: If it's a groundwater issue,we may have to do that. MR. HUGHES: And that would continue until the contaminants are low? MS. TUCKER: State target levels. �..,� MR. KRAUT: Ms. Tucker, will it be a requirement that you achieve from the State, or the Federal Government, a temporary hazardous waste generators permit during this operation? Page 39 February 2,2005 /..-N MS. TUCKER: I don't know if we will be doing anything that actually generates a hazardous waste. If we do then we'll have to have a temporary ID number. So far I haven't measured any levels that are hazardous waste levels. MR. KRAUT: In the act of providing the structure of the waste removal from the site, is that going to be done through your company, MACTEC, or will there be somebody charged with the responsibility for the environmental cleanup at the early stages? MS. TUCKER: I think the plan is that we would oversee it and do it. We might hire subcontractors to do part of it. MR. SORRELL: Where is the irrigation water going to come from when the project is finished? MR. MULHERE: There is water available at the site through county utilities. There is no ability to reuse water at that site, so -- MR. SORRELL: Right,I didn't. You wouldn't be permitted to drill a well, so -- MR. MULHERE: No. MR. SORRELL: So no chance you're going to pull out the contaminants and irrigate the property with it? MR. MULHERE: Yeah, it would be-- MR. HUGHES: My next question is pertinent to the building itself, the architecture. The height of the residential would be approximately 100-- MR. OELSCHLAEGER: 120 feet from FEMA. MR. HUGHES: Now you indicate you're going to put your parking garage below grade, is that what you're saying, or is that above grade? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Part of it I think is below grade. Let me just check something. I stand corrected, it's at grade. MR. HUGHES: So it is a different -- current grade. So we don't run the risk, like several others that have been built,that they flood at high tide or when the first wind blows? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Right,no, it's at grade. MR. HUGHES: That's good. CHAIRMAN GAL: I have a question about the building also. It goes back to that biological opinion of the Fish and Wildlife Service. When they said that the applicant must make every effort to conduct construction activities that are closest to the nest tree during the non-nesting season, and you had said you're going to build as far--this pertains to the residential project? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN GAL: The two buildings at the same time. Couldn't under your -- seems to me if you're making every effort, as required by the permit, that you'd be building the building closest to the nest first, and then the one furthest away second. MR. OELSCHLAEGER: I think as a practical matter, to build them both at the same time, and as quickly to reduce the period of time of disturbance,probably makes the most environmental sense. CHAIRMAN GAL: Has anyone thought, or mentioned to you, about building the northern building first, working on the interior during the nesting season -- I guess you're going to overlap a little during the nesting season--and then the next year building the southern building that's further away from the nest? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: No, we haven't had that discussion because we felt, again, that if we can build them both together, that is best for the neighborhood, it's best for the birds, it's best for everyone. Because again,the activity is reduced. The construction activity period is substantially reduced. CHAIRMAN GAL: In the two-year time frame that was given before I asked, is that for the shell of the building or is that from beginning to end? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: That's beginning to end. CHAIRMAN GAL: So, do you plan on constructing the shells of both buildings first at the same time and Page 40 February 2,2005 n then you go into the interior? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Correct. CHAIRMAN GAL: Okay. MS. LYNNE: I fail to see how building both of them at the same time benefits the eagle. MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Only in -- you know, other experts can give their opinion -- and this is just my personal opinion-- is that that disturbance -- have one disturbance instead of two disturbances. In other words you run the risk -- what the incidental take permit says, what it really means is, in my opinion, is that they're running potential risk of missing a successful nesting season. So,to the extent that chicks do not get produced in that one season, that is in the long-term interest-- based on what the Fish and Wildlife Service is saying -- is that that is an acceptable risk, because of the long-term benefits. But if you were to do that in two stages, you would have run the risk of in two nesting seasons as opposed to a single nesting season. So,I can guarantee you that the Service would tell us one time is better than two times. MR. HUGHES: I have another one. This probably would go to Stan and the county staff. This is in a coastal hazard zone limited to four, that would wipe out their project, correct? That would wipe you out, number one? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: I'm sorry, sir. I didn't hear your question. MR. HUGHES: In the coastal hazard zone, if you really were limited by the intent of that law, that clause, this project would be done,wouldn't it? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Yes. MR. HUGHES: There's no money. MR. OELSCHLAEGER: That's correct. MR. HUGHES: And that's the gamble you're still playing? MR. OELSCHLAEGER: That's correct. I can tell you on that point, we did meet with the Department of Community Affairs and have an opinion from them, that it is not, or is appropriate for the density transfer in the coastal high hazard area. I think I've stated that right,Rich? MR. YOVANOVICH: The Department of Community Affairs essentially said that, you know, it's staffed -- they don't disagree with staffs determination. They're to interpret their own document. It's not a violation of any state law to allow more than three units per acre in a coastal high hazard area, as far as DCA is concerned. MR. HUGHES: Right. It's just an intent to reduce our exposure and our risk in these coastal areas. MR. YOVANOVICH: And if I can point out -- and, you know, this was brought up at the last go-round, the county zone emergency person, Dan Summers, said to the Board of County Commissioners, he's not concerned with hurricane evacuation for a couple of reasons. One, most of these people are not going to be here during hurricane season; and, two, we've become pretty sophisticated in the warnings that we have now that people can start to leave sooner. And we had a good example of that last season. I don't think we had any issues with evacuation. MR. HUGHES: Which brings up a question I have for the general welfare of everybody in this county. What is a building like that designed for in a wind speed; 135, 138 miles an hour? MR. MULHERE: I can't 100 percent attest to this. I believe the new statewide building code requires design to 150 mile an hour wind load. MR. HUGHES: 150? MR. MULHERE: Yes. MR. HUGHES: So if this gets built, 150 mile an hour storm? MR. MULHERE: That's correct. �.r MR. HUGHES: Perfect. CHAIRMAN GAL: Question, you had stated before that the staff's recommendations are consistent with Page 41 February 2,2005 the growth management plan as the policy states now. If the staff had decided that this project was not consistent with the growth management plan because of the construction in the secondary zone, under the existing policy still, wouldn't that have been consistent because the policy, as it's written, is ambiguous? Doesn't the policy say that the staff can take and use those recommendations, but they could apply a stricter standard? MR. YOVANOVICH: No, it doesn't say that. The words they use -- it says, that the -- consider and utilize the recommendation. The word utilize can only mean one thing. It can't mean ignore. It says to utilize them. And then it goes on to say these recommendations will be consistent with the comprehensive plan. I honestly don't see the ambiguity. CHAIRMAN GAL: Your position is that if, whatever the Fish and Wildlife Service says, then the county must-- MR. YOVANOVICH: The county has-- CHAIRMAN GAL: -- follow those recommendations. MR. YOVANOVICH: And you need to understand why. The county will tell you, they don't have the expertise. They don't have the scientific knowledge to really make these decisions. They've deferred to the agencies that have the scientific knowledge. If you want to bring the people onboard and pay the people you need to implement a county program, that's fine, but we don't have one right now and they've deferred to the people who know the business, and who's responsible for these listed species. That decision was made in the comprehensive plan. And there's discussion about maybe changing that, but there have been no changes at this point. MS. LYNNE: But we have some documents in here that indicate that Marti Chumbler, who is legal counsel--outside legal counsel -- does see it as being ambiguous. n MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. And we just went to the Board of County Commissioners, and the Board of County Commissioners decided they didn't need to change the language. We went through that. The glitch amendment did not pass. I'm just telling you, we've already had the decision. The Board of County Commissioners made the decision to not change the language. MS. LYNNE: That doesn't mean it's still not ambiguous. MR. YOVANOVICH: The Board has basically said we're going to continue to delegate to the State and Federal agencies. CHAIRMAN GAL: Any other questions? MR. HORN: Sir, earlier you had said you were opposed to staff recommendation number four in reference to the .82 acres of mangroves? MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct. MR. HORN: I was just curious as to the reason why. Was that a financial complaint or another reason? MR. WOODRUFF: The .82 acres of mangrove, that was never a part of a requirement of the biological opinion that was written by the U.S. Fish& Wildlife Service. That was a part of a site plan that included a 21-, 22-story building that was denied in the past petition. But it was never a requirement, it was just part of that particular site plan. And Ken Humiston can talk a little bit to you about why it was designed that way, but I can tell you that the mangroves themselves, the petitioner's reason for planting the mangroves had nothing to do with the creation of those basins. That was something that he took upon himself to do entirely separate from what they were actually designed to do. COMMISSIONER HUME: I've got comments on a couple of staff recommendations, and that was one of them. It's item number four under the environmental recommendation and the PUD rezone petition, and it's, I believe it's item number one in the conditional use. I just wanted to kind of clarify the reason that n those mangroves were planted there. The dimensions of the basin in the original plan were such that the horizontal distance from the opening of the basin to the far back end of it was such that the natural tidal Page 42 February 2,2005 action would not flush it very efficiently. The .82 acres was actually part of the basin that was excavated only down to the main low water elevation. It was not actually part of the basin that boats would be in. What that did is, it created a shelf in the far reaches of the basin that would be dry on a low tide, and then it would fill up with water on a high tide. So, what it essentially did, was create a flow through the basin to improve the flushing. The mangroves were simply added more as an aesthetic enhancement really. Putting some clusters of mangroves in that area would make it look more like the surrounding waterway, but it was not a requirement of a permit for mitigation. It was not a requirement of the Fish and Wildlife Service. And I believe the only reason it's in the biological opinion, is in the part of the biological opinion where they're describing the project. So I think it's -- I do think that's unnecessary as a requirement of either the PUD or the conditional use. MS. LYNNE: Can we have some staff comments on that? MS. MASON: It was staffs opinion that, since this was part of their original submittal to the Wildlife Service that there was no way we would know if this was taken into account when they issued their biological opinion, whether or not it would have influence. So, until it was modified, we would use the entire biological opinion that was issued and not just parts of it. MS. LYNNE: So they submitted a proposal that includes the mangroves? MS. MASON: Yes, they did. And that biological opinion, they didn't request a modification when they reduced the height of the building, or made the other changes to the site plan. So the only biological opinion we have, is the one that shows the mangroves. COMMISSIONER HUME: The situation with the --particularly with the PUD rezone,the basin is quite a bit smaller, so it does not have the shelf in the back for the purposes of flushing, so there would actually not be a place to plant the mangroves. The mangrove planting really becomes irrelevant with this plan. I think ,.� with the conditional use plan that's -- the site plan actually shows a longer basin, and it does show part of that original flushing area there, although I don't think the square footage or acreage of that has been determined. It's something that would be resolved during the DEP permitting process. That's where this came out of, was the DEP water quality permitting process, rather than the biological opinion. Are we ready? CHAIRMAN GAL: I guess not quite yet. We're always asked, it seems like, to take an economic impact into account also, whether we voted no, whether this would be taking property rights issues here, future lawsuits. CHAIRMAN GAL: I'm just trying to think through ramifications of the no vote versus the yes vote, and the yes vote is, you know, residential or hotel and spa. And I guess my question is is, are you currently the owner or is the property under contract? If this project is denied by the Board of County Commissioners, is your contract void--maybe it's not even --. MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Let me see if I can respond to that because that's a very important question as to what is going to happen in the event that both of these were to be denied by the Board of County Commissioners. I have it under contract. I have had it under contract for almost three years now. We're going to purchase this land one way or another. If both of these proposals are denied, what is going to happen to that property has not been finally determined, but something will happen. And it won't be anything that comes back through this process. It's going to be something under C5. And it's, in my view, it's either going to be a retail commercial center, or it is going to be a very large boat club concept, or something like that with much more intensity than either one of the two alternatives that we're trying to seek approval for. And that's not meant to be a threat at all. It's just a practical understanding of what uses are permitted on the property today that we're asking for permission to change it. CHAIRMAN GAL: Right. My thought, as it relates to the eagles' nest is, if under any scenario, it sounds like construction is going to happen in the secondary zone, and then the issue is, what sort of construction, Page 43 February 2,2005 how long is that construction. MR. OELSCHLAEGER: That is correct. And as a matter of fact, since the letter in December from the Fish and Wildlife Service, what they've really done -- and, again, this is layman's terms -- they've really deregulated the secondary zone. The secondary zone of protection used to be it wasn't prohibition of construction. It was regulating that construction activity. What they've done now is deregulate that activity. Statute hasn't changed so there is still some criminal penalties and so on with respect to harassing of eagles, and none of that changed, but the controls that we've agreed to from the biological opinion and the negotiations on the eagle management plan and manatee protection plan, those things would not be in place at all when we go forward with whatever the other alternatives may be on this property. So they've really deregulated the secondary zone. That's the practicality of it. MS. LYNNE: If you're still planning other uses for this property,why didn't you just duel it? Why are you still under contract? I mean, still being under contract implies that you-- MR. YOVANOVICH: At this point it doesn't matter. MS. LYNNE: It does matter. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, actually, it doesn't. With all due respect, the economics of this and his contract negotiations, and when he's going to close on the property have no -- have nothing to do with the environmental concerns that you're charged with. Because he negotiated the ability to delay a closing, it has absolutely nothing to do with what this board is charged with. MS. LYNNE: It has to do with what he's saying he has plans to do with it and he's not going to bring it back for environmental review. MS. STUDENT: I just want to remind this Board that pursuant to the land code, there are certain duties and responsibilities outlined for the EAC, and they directly relate to preservation, conservation and environmental considerations. I just wanted to remind the Board of that. ,.1 MS. LYNNE: Well, if something is not coming back before us,that's something we need to be aware of. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, you know, if you understand, we've been here a couple of times. Why would we want to come back, if these two are denied? You know. COMMISSIONER HUME: You're having fun,right? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, you know, I'm getting grayer. You know, we believe -- you know, in all sincerity, we believe we have worked with the neighbors around us to come up with two very attractive proposals. The residential is clearly what the people living nearest to this project want. We worked hard to protect the environment and we think these projects are worthy of a recommendation of approval. CHAIRMAN GAL: Comments? COMMISSIONER HUME: I have one other comment on another one of the staff recommendations on the environmental area, which would be item number one under the PUD rezone, and item number two under the conditional use, which has to do with draft restrictions. It refers to the manatee protection plan. And someone else here referred to the inlet management plan and the three-foot draft restriction which, in fact, is not a restriction. Both of those documents, the manatee protection plan and the inlet management plan, refer to the Corps of Engineers design criteria. When the Corps did their original design for the waterway, the three-foot draft was simply one part of a criteria that they use, which included low tide plus a two-foot allowance for wave conditions. That would be two feet below the drop of the waves, so you're actually talking about a four-foot wave, which is a pretty rough condition for somebody to be navigating that inlet. In fact, those kinds of conditions only occur about three percent of the time. We've looked at this pretty carefully. The rest of the time there's plenty of water, even at low tide, there's water there for a five-foot draft boat, and I don't think there are any five-foot draft boats in there. You might consider the analogy to the question was raised before about what buildings are designed to withstand turns of wind velocity, and n maybe it is 150 miles per hour. You know,that might be a storm that you would expect to occur here every 50 or 75 years or something like that. There is a possibility we could get a storm here with a Page 44 February 2,2005 �.� 200-mile-an-hour wind. Probably wouldn't occur but every 100 or 200 years, but there is a possibility, so why not design the building to withstand the 200-mile-an-hour wind. It would be a lot more expensive,but it would not be justified cost wise. And that was the same consideration the Corps of Engineers looked at when they used the three-foot draft in their extreme design conditions. They knew that there were boats of four-foot draft, or even greater, in the waterway at that time, but it was not economical to try to maintain a waterway of a depth that would allow a greater draft boat to pass through there, when the majority of the boats were three-foot draft or less. But there never was any intent for it being a restriction to a three-foot draft. We have another inlet in Collier County, Gordon Pass, which is also a Corps-designed project, and there's no draft restriction there. MS. HUSHON: My experience with the Corps and with these waterways is that what happens is, you dredge it and gradually it gets stretched every two years. I'm not sure what the cycle is for that pass, but towards the end of that two-year period,you're not going to get a five-foot draft boat through because it will of silted in to the point where that boat won't make it successfully. Maybe at very high tide kind of thing it might get in,but on a daily basis,you are not hopefully going to bring in and out a five-foot draft boat. COMMISSIONER HUME: That's correct. And that's true probably of any tidal inlet of a sandy coast, because the channel shifts around, the shore will shift around, and a certain amount of local knowledge is required, particularly when it gets toward the end of that two-foot dredging cycle. But I don't think that imposing a draft in a PUD document is appropriate. I think that it will be ill-advised. I don't know of any inlets that have an actual draft restriction. CHAIRMAN GAL: Any other comments? MS. HUSHON: Are you ready to accept changes to the staff recommendation? CHAIRMAN GAL: I'm sure you can make-- ,� MS. HUSHON: I'd like to make two changes to the staff recommendations. This one I'm looking at, it says revised 12505 HEMVB. It's for Coconilla PUD -- PUDZ. And I would like to add to number two that we need to add a procedure to the Eagle Management Plan to cover actions to be taken if an eagle problem is suspected or observed. This is a specific set of actions. Who will be notified? What will happen? Who will reach a decision? What I'd like to be able to do is have this go into effect if a problem is suspected. Then it's time to diagnosis, is there a problem? But meanwhile you're not making it horribly worse. If it looks like they're not feeding their chicks, maybe we need to be quiet for a few days. It may not need to be quiet forever, but we -- you may benefit from a few days of relative quiet to let those eagles kind of settle back down again and restart feeding those chicks. So I would like to add -- it isn't a big deal to add this to your eagle management plan, but I think you need to think through from the beginning what you're going to do if there's a problem. You need to anticipate that there might be. We all say there could be. So let's just put in the specifics of who gets called. Who meets. Who goes out and inspects. You know, do you call in people from Audubon at that point and get a whole crew in there to observe? Maybe you do. I don't know. But this is--we need that in the eagle management plan. MR. YOVANOVICH: Is that a -- you're just asking to add the concept and we'll flesh out the details by the Board? I mean, right now, the way it's written. Is the monitor who's from Audubon will let us know if there's a problem. It's a question of who the us is. Obviously, he's going to tell us, the developer. You're saying add the county? MS. HUSHON: Add the county and add a procedure to it that you're going to follow. This may be six or eight lines. I'm not talking about a big deal, but the fact that work will stop immediately until you figure out if it really is a problem. What I'm trying to say, if you even suspect a problem, I don't want it to happen after they've stopped totally feeding these chicks. Then it is a real problem. I want it when they think �..\ there's -- when this observer thinks there may be a problem, I want that person to be able to stop you temporarily until we get multi heads observing the problem-- Page 45 February 2,2005 MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure. MS. HUSHON: -- and get the county involved, yes, absolutely, no question about that. And potentially more,Audubon,the Audubon person may want to bring in more Audubon observers. CHAIRMAN GAL: Does the authority--does the county have the authority to stop the project, or does the Fish&Wildlife Service,or who would have the authority to issue a stop work order? MS. MASON: If they violate their eagle management plan,the county could stop work, and we would rely on the monitor coordinating with the Wildlife service to come up with an acceptable way to remedy that. CHAIRMAN GAL: Who would the monitor call, in the event that there's a-- MS. HUSHON: That's what we're saying, we need that flushed. MR. YOVANOVICH: So, you're saying right now it says that, you know, we basically stop it if we elicit abnormal behavior? You want it to say elicit or is suspected to? MS. HUSHON: I want a procedure that if we suspect something, I want a procedure -- specific procedure that will be followed. Who will be called? The county will be called,you'll meet,you'll observe and things will be shut down for a day or two until you figure out if there really is a problem. You may decide to shut down work for a week or two weeks during a very critical time for that eagle's nest. CHAIRMAN GAL: I think there needs to be someone outside from the developer that tells them to stop work. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well,Audubon is independent of us. But Audubon will be monitoring the nest? CHAIRMAN GAL: Yes,they're monitoring,but if they said stop work now,they couldn't. MR. YOVANOVICH: What they need to do is -- you're right -- and we can add that they'll notify the county and we'll stop. MS. HUSHON: And I would like to add, if there is a problem is--what did I say? Suspected or observed. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. MS. HUSHON: That's two additional words that makes it a little bit-- MR. HUGHES: May I interject more on that point,just because it's relative to my technology. And I've heard issues all day that not just affect this project, but other projects because these same issues. If you're going to be that close to this nest, and you have that kind of a site, a good high-definition zoning video camera head with a nice long lens, aim it at that nest,record the thing 24 hours a day.Not only can we have this alert that she's asking for, which I agree with, we might actually develop a precedence base as to what noise happens when something actually occurred. So that benefits not only you guys, it benefits the other developers. MR. YOVANOVICH: And, of course, we don't have any problem with that. We're happy to put up whatever the best technology is to focus on that so you can see it and observe the behavior. We're fine with that. MR. HUGHES: We're helping each other at that point. MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Just a quick question. I've known Mr. Oelschlaeger a long time and I trust him and I trust Rich and I trust Bob. But Margie, how easy is it for us to go out and just shut someone down? Real easy? MS. STUDENT: Well,there's procedures in the code for the county manager to be able to do that if there's a violation. And I have to review those procedures in the code,but there are procedures to do that. MR. CHRZANOWSKI: So it's not something where we can just go out and give them a red tag and say you're shut down. MS. STUDENT: Oh, it may be because code enforcement -- I'm just thinking of the example that we have about historical or archeological assets -- if you want to call them that -- on a site. And we always have specific provisions in the PUD that say, if one of those is found, the code enforcement is immediately contacted, and then whatever remedial actions. So I think it's something that can be done fairly easily. Page 46 February 2,2005 n MR. YOVANOVICH: I mean, you red tag people frequently in construction. It would be the same concept. You have to stop,then if you don't,then you've got problems with law enforcement. MR. CHRZANOWSKI: And a lot of times we're told to call the police. And the police don't want to come out and enforce a construction site. I'm just asking a question. I trust you guys more than most. I was just curious because everybody made it sound so easy, and it's not. MS. HUSHON: Okay. Let me give my second change. That was the first change. The second change was to number five. And I would like to add right at the beginning, that contaminant removal shall be performed to a residential standard due to the proximity to the gulf sensitive environment. MR. YOVANOVICH: And that's for the commercial? I mean, for the hotel alternative? MS. HUSHON: Yes, sir. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. MS. HUSHON: He agreed to that. MR. YOVANOVICH: No, I'm with you. It's unstated obviously for the residential. I just wanted to make sure you were talking about that. MS. HUSHON: I just put that in there. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. MS. HUSHON: Those are my changes. MR. YOVANOVICH: And we had brought up the draft restriction language about deleting that. CHAIRMAN GAL: Is that in Coconilla? MR. YOVANOVICH: That's in both. It's number two on the hotel,and number one on the residential. MS. LYNNE: The most recent letter from the Fish & Wildlife Service still states, even though they say that you can do your building, it still says, in all cases, we recommend that exterior construction activities and work site in the primary and secondary zones be conducted outside of the nesting season. So we're still, if we go through with this the way we have, we're still talking about approving something that is not recommended. They're saying okay, you can do it, we're de-regulating this, but it's not something that they recommend. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, if we can continue on with the letter. In the event the sidewalk and exterior building construction is secondary zoning is not completed during the non-nesting season, the bald eagle management guidelines, September 2002, should be initiated. So they recognize that there are going to be cases where we don't finish, and they're telling us what to do when we don't finish. So you have to read the entire letter to understand what they're saying. They're not saying you can't do anything exterior. They're saying there are these guidelines that we need to follow, and our eagle management plan follows the guidelines. We shouldn't be treated any differently than anybody else. And that's with the draft restrictions as well. If you have a private home that uses that inlet,there's no draft restriction on you. There's no reason to put a draft restriction on us, if it's not going to be a draft restriction that applies to everybody who uses it. MS. LYNNE: The next paragraph does say that if it's not completed -- but one could also say that that's assuming -- I mean, you are intending, you already know. You're not planning something that you hope will be completed during that off season,you're planning something that you know is going to go into there. And I think it pretty clearly says that they would prefer that that not happen. I under--you know. MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't think that this language is saying if by accident you missed your construction schedule, you get to complete. I think it recognized that there are some construction activities that will go into the nesting season. And we have procedures to safeguard and address those situations. MS. HUSHON: I think this does, however, behoove the builder to plan and do very careful planning so that you are optimizing your time on site and having things staged and ready. You don't want to be n worrying about where your concrete is coming from because there's a shortage of concrete, or the I-beams couldn't come in because something. You want to be really -- I don't know how you say -- up front and Page 47 February 2,2005 planned. And all we can do is encourage you to do that in this, is to do proper prior planning up the wazoo on this project. This project is more sensitive than probably anything else you've built. And that's why. There's a reason behind requesting it properly. Also, I think we would request that you complete the further building to the extent possible. You stage that and move this way as much as you can do so. That you do the closer building,to the extent that you can do that one as the lead, the noisier one. Get that out of the way during the non-nesting season as you're moving down. MR. OELSCHLAEGER: As we're moving from south to north. MS. HUSHON: North to south. North is more sensitive than south. So you would want to stage your activities, but I'm just saying, we would want you to stage your activities so that during your non-nesting season, you do as much work as you absolutely can on that north building and then move towards the southern one -- MR. OELSCHLAEGER: I understand. MS. HUSHON: --as necessary. You're optimizing your work on the north building. MR. OELSCHLAEGER: Understood. MS. HUSHON: Lagging on the south-- if you have to lag on something, let it be the south building. MR. OELSCHLAEGER: We will do that. MR. HUGHES: And you're protecting yourself. Bottom line. MR. YOVANOVICH: The last thing we want is -- this has got to be the most watched eagle in the county. There's no question. So, going to be --there's hypersensitivity to this. And people are going to be watching, if we're doing anything to affect the behavior of that eagle. And we've got a provision in here that says, if we are,we've got to stop. Even if it's suspected,we've got to stop. MR. HUGHES: So the camera, it behooves you to have that camera as well for your own defense? MR. YOVANOVICH: Oh,we agree. Oh, we agree. MR. KRAUT: As a suggestion to that camera is something that could be done that would really, I think, please the citizenship is something that's being done in the county now at Vanderbilt Beach and on Fifth Avenue. And that is, they have that camera on connected to the Internet so that anybody, any citizen can click right on that and observe. MR. YOVANOVICH: If that's feasible, sure. MS. HUSHON: May I? Is it time? MR. SORRELL: I have one more question. Did I understand correctly, when you were talking about the standards of the soil decontamination, that you were going to hold the residential -- the commercial up to the residential standards? You shook your head,but I don't think-- MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. And that was one of the revisions that was requested that,for the commercial, we meet the residential cleanup standards. MR. SORRELL: Okay. MR. HUGHES: For the sake of everyone here, these issues are terribly hard. This is the democracy. This country is formed on our freedoms, our individual freedoms, as long as we don't step in our neighbors' yards and make a mess in their house. Under the current laws that we live with, these gentlemen have every right to do what they propose to do. The question is, if they cause any damage to affecting the rest of us. All of us are concerned with the development in Collier County that we don't develop into a megalopolis city of all high-rises. It is up to us -- we the citizens of this county to be -- not only to be politically active, but financially active in order to create funds in order to buy projects such as this project site so that they don't ever become developed. Otherwise, under our current law, this gentleman has a great amount of money already spent, and a lot on Page 48 February 2,2005 r� the line within his legal right. So, we have no choice. I propose that we accept his plan for construction of a residential zone change, with the stipulations as stated previously. And if not, now the camera as well, because of the dual purpose of that camera, not only to highlight us to any problems occurring, but to develop a database in this county that allows us firsthand knowledge as to the effect on these animals. CHAIRMAN GAL: I just want everybody to remember, we're going to make two motions. One on Coconilla and then one on the hotel. MR. SORRELL: We're going to do the residential first,correct? CHAIRMAN GAL: We're doing the residential first. Motion has been made. MS. HUSHON: Second. MR. SORRELL: I second. MS. LYNNE: The property owner isn't entitled to the nine units per acre. You said property rights. That's not a guaranteed entitlement. He's only entitled to four units. MS. HUSHON: That's true. MS. LYNNE: So-- MR. YOVANOVICH: And that's a Board of County Commissioner decision. The density is not an issue for the EAC. CHAIRMAN GAL: I also just want to comment,that the way I vote on this particular petition isn't-- and I don't construe the vote of anybody to set precedent, or to -- I don't think you can form some sort of interpretation to policy 7.1.23 of the way we vote. MR. SORRELL: I didn't understand what you -- MS. HUSHON: I agree with what you just said. CHAIRMAN GAL: There's been a question as to this policy of whether it's ambiguous, what it says. It's not ambiguous at all. And my vote,in particular, is not being interpreted as meaning one way or the other. There's a second to the motion on the floor. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MR. SORRELL: Aye. MS. HUSHON: Aye. MR. HUGHES: Aye. CHAIRMAN GAL: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN GAL: All those opposed say nay. MS. LYNNE:Nay. MR. KRAUT:Nay. CHAIRMAN GAL: Let's take a roll so we know who voted and how. MS. MASON: Michael Sorrell. MR. SORRELL: I voted for it. MS. MASON: Judith Hushon. MS. HUSHON: For. MS. MASON: William Hughes. MR. HUGHES: Aye. MS. MASON: Alfred Gal. CHAIRMAN GAL: Yes. MS. MASON: Erica Lynne. MS. LYNNE: Against. n MS. MASON: Lee Horn. MR. HORN: Yes. Page 49 February 2,2005 .. MS. MASON: Ken--oh,you're abstaining. MS. MASON: Iry Kraut. MR. KRAUT: Against. MS. HUSHON: Let's vote on the second one. MS. STUDENT: So what's the tally from staff? MS. MASON: It was six four and two against. CHAIRMAN GAL: So that is an agency action. MS. MASON: Sony, five to two. Excuse me. Five to two. Still agency action. MS. HUSHON: Let's go ahead and do the second vote on the property,please. CHAIRMAN GAL: I need a motion on the hotel,please. MS. HUSHON: Which is going to have -- by the way -- some of the same restrictions in it, the one that I put in on the eagle, will also appear in that restriction,just maybe --the suspected or observe in the camera will go in on that one as well. But that one will already have in it the assumption of meeting residential standards. MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. MS. HUSHON: Just for clarification. CHAIRMAN GAL: Is there a second to your motion? MR. SORRELL: That was her motion. MS. HUSHON: I'll move that we accept. MR. SORRELL: With your stipulations? MS. HUSHON: With those stipulations. MR. SORRELL: I'll second. ,-� MS. HUSHON: Which would be for the hotel. CHAIRMAN GAL: All those in favor of the motion--why don't we just make a roll. MR. SORRELL: I'm for it. MS. HUSHON: For. MR. HUGHES: For. CHAIRMAN GAL: Against. MS. LYNNE: Against. MR. HORN: Against. MR. HUMISTON: Abstain. MR. KRAUT: For. MR. YOVANOVICH: So that was five two two also? MS. LYNNE: Yes. MS. HUSHON: Different five two. MR. YOVANOVICH: I just got to get the five. MS. MASON: Can I ask for some clarification. I know the stipulations were amended on the staff report, and there was some discussion about the draft restriction. My understanding it's to remain as stated? CHAIRMAN GAL: Yes. MS. MASON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GAL: We're going to take a lunch break,half hour. Is that sufficient?Adjourned. CHAIRMAN GAL: I'm going to call the meeting back to order. The next item on our agenda is the Cocohatchee Bay PUD. Are there --have there been any ex parte communications by the board regarding this project? �..� (No response.) CHAIRMAN GAL: I have -- I had conversations with Nicole Ryan from the Conservancy and Joe Page 50 February 2,2005 Moreland from the Estuary Conservation Association. Are there any other-- MS. HUSHON: I talked to Nicole. MR. KRAUT: I talked to Nicole as well. DR. LYNNE: I talked to Nicole and I signed a petition to save the bald eagle. CHAIRMAN GAL: Does anyone have a conflict of interest in this matter? MR. HUMISTON: On the advice of assistant county attorney, I'm going to excuse myself from this one as well,because the issues are so closely related to the previous one,which could affect my client. MS. STUDENT: It would impact his client. I would like to put another item on the record, if I could. And I've spoken with the applicant and the attorney for the applicant. And this is merely housekeeping. But in the PUD document under the environmental section in 6.9, and there's a reference to conservation areas,and that they have to be platted. Well, under our current procedure, if you just do a site plan,they're not platted, because it would be silly to make somebody do a plat when we can get a conservation easement and have the area designated on a site plan and then the easement would be conveying that interest, you know, to the county with no responsibility for maintenance. So all I want to do in the appropriate portions of 6.9, and I believe it's in B and C, include the reference to the conservation easement, conveyance of a conservation easement to the county, or platting as the case may be, in the appropriate places. That's all,just housekeeping. CHAIRMAN GAL: Okay. MS. STUDENT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GAL: For all those who are going to testify on this petition, if you'd please stand up and be .-\ sworn in. (All speakers were duly sworn.) MR. YOVANOVICH: Are we ready? CHAIRMAN GAL: We're ready. MR. YOVANOVICH: All righty. Good afternoon. For the record, for the record, Rich Yovanovich, with the law firm of Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson,representing the petitioner. With me today also are Don Corace, who's a principal with the petitioner, and Steve Godly, who is our eagle expert. And you will hear in great detail from Steve about our permit and how we got to where we are and what our requirements are. I just want to start out with first of all,we believe that the existing PUD document required us to come back on an informational basis to advise you as to the changes to the eagle management plan. Staff has taken a different interpretation. We don't agree with that interpretation, but we're moving forward,nonetheless. Your staff report recommends approval of the -- of our proposed changes to the eagle management plan. And I just want to make sure it's clear on the record, we're not here to talk about what's been approved as far as the zoning standpoint goes. That decision's already been made. What we're here today to talk about is what amendments are to be made to the eagle management plan that was attached to the PUD document. We're not here to discuss whether we're going to move buildings, reduce density. None of that is part of today's discussion. It's simply to discuss and focus on the eagle management plan. You'll probably hear some historical comments from speakers, and we'll address those as they're made, and we'll do that later on. r Just want to briefly take you through where we are. The original PUD on the visualizer, you can see the yellow boundaries. The property is located on Vanderbilt Beach -- not -- Vanderbilt Drive and Wiggins Page 51 February 2,2005 ,-,N Pass. You can see the outlines. You can't tell from where I'm pointing, but Wiggins Pass is the east-west running road and Vanderbilt Drive is the north-south running road. We're on both sides of Vanderbilt Drive. From the graphic, you can see there's a golf course to be constructed on the east side of Vanderbilt Drive and residential community to be constructed on the west side, with a clubhouse for the golf course also on the west side. The original zoning allowed for 1,758 units. The current PUD allows -- and that was on 532 acres. The current zoning allows for 590 units,which is a reduction of 1,168 units. The project, it calls for five high-rise condominium towers. The condominium tower to the north is 15 stories, and the remaining four are 20 stories over parking. I already mentioned the golf course. That has already commenced construction. The clubhouse will be basically adjacent to the condominium buildings. The change we're making to the bald eagle management plan is to make it consistent with our Army Corps of Engineers'permit and our U.S. Fish& Wildlife biological opinion. We have discussed earlier today, and just for the record I'm going to discuss it briefly again, what the county's comprehensive plan says. And the county's comprehensive plan clearly states that the county is going to defer to U.S. Fish& Wildlife Service for the regulation of eagles in Collier County. I'm going to briefly go through what the Corps of Engineers permits us to do and what it does not permit us to do. And then I'm going to have Steve get into the greater details. First of all, we do not have any authorization to cut down that tree or take the eagles. The tree will remain --when we're done,when we build our project,that tree will remain. It will not be cut down. Prior to any construction, we're to obtain habitat for eagles in Southwest Florida. So we will have to mitigate for any potential impact prior to any construction. The sequencing of our construction is as follows: We can commence the clubhouse and the first high-rise building, which is -- Jim, we've got a better graphic that shows numbers, don't we? On this graphic, the most northern building is building number five. We can start the clubhouse and building number five in the first non-nesting season and can continue on with construction through the nesting season. We then go to building number four,which is the building just to the south of building number five and can commence construction of it during the next non-nesting season. We then move to building one, which is the building that is the most southern building, and can construct it during the third non-nesting season. And then we can choose whether to go with building two or three on the subsequent non-nesting seasons. We would anticipate that -- you know, obviously the market's going to dictate how quickly we move forward with the buildings, but we would anticipate that it would take four or five years to build out the entire project. Again, I mentioned we have mitigation that's required that we -- are suitable for eagles in Southwest Florida. There's also, and I need to point out, and Steve will I'm sure reiterate this, is that we volunteered to provide mitigation in the form of getting mitigation lands. It was not required, it was a volunteer--voluntary effort on the behalf of the developer. We also have the ability to construct an artificial tree, that Steve will get into greater detail, that will hopefully serve to attract the eagles into this area, and the eagle will relocate. And if not that pair of eagles, another pair of eagles. So we view this as an enhancement to the scientific study of the eagle and perhaps will lead to other efforts to provide artificial nesting areas for the eagle. We don't agree with one recommendation in the staff report, and that's the revision to Section E of the bald eagle management plan. I'm sure you have our proposed bald eagle management plan, so I'll just read into Page 52 February 2, 2005 ,•.N the record what we believe the appropriate language ought to be. With the sentence starting with should the current eagle pair or a second eagle pair build a new nest within the PUD boundary, any revisions to the above described terms and conditions required by the agencies listed above shall not require an amendment to this bald eagle management plan. Any such changes will be processed administratively by the planning director and shall become conditions of this bald eagle management plan. That's what we believe is consistent with the comprehensive plan. As we've stated,the comprehensive plan currently provides that the county will defer to the U.S. Fish&Wildlife to make decisions on the bald eagle in Collier County. There's no reason to go through this process again if we already have a bald eagle management plan that reflects the terms and conditions of the core permits. That's why we don't think we needed to be here in the first place, other than informational,to let you know what the Corps and U.S. Fish&Wildlife said. There -- it's their responsibilities to make those decisions. Your staff acknowledges that in the staff report. There's no reason to have to go through this again. If we modified our permit and it says you go forth under this structure of construction, there's really no reason to go through this again for us, for the public, for you all,when the decision's basically been made to defer to the state and federal agencies. I'm going to turn it over to Steve and let him get into the details of the bald eagle management plan and his credentials. After that, we'll open ourselves up to questions. Or if we do like we did the last time, we can let the public speak, and then that way we can rebut whatever the public says and then open ourselves up for questions. That would be fine for us. Again, at the end I'm going to request that you follow your staff recommendation, apply the comprehensive plan as it's currently written and make a recommendation to forward this petition to the Board of County ,-. Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. MR. GODLY: Good afternoon, council members. I'm Steve Godly, president of Biological Research Associates,and I'm headquartered out of Tampa, Florida. I'm going to talk to you today about the bald eagles on the Cocohatchee site. And before I talk to that issue, specifically,I'd like to give a background of me so that you know where I'm coming from as a biologist and my training and my experience in this matter. I was here for the previous petition, which all the questions were waited at the end. I would encourage you to ask me questions in the middle, because it will probably help you understand. If you don't understand something or you want to confirm what I said, I think that would be helpful for you. I've been a professional biologist for over 30 years. I have a Master's from the University of South Florida in wildlife ecology. I was a member of the original Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals that formed the list that now is used in the State of Florida for those species considered endangered,threatened or of special concern. I've been a professional consulting ecologist over that entire period. I have a lot of experience with bald eagles in this state and elsewhere. I've -- I developed or under my supervision have developed approximately 30 bald eagle management plans across the state. Myself and my staff are currently working on about 15, those are in 11 different counties in the State of Florida. In addition, I'm working on two in Maryland and one in Pennsylvania. I was invited also to do one in Idaho, but unfortunately that didn't work out. I was really looking forward to going to Idaho,I have to tell you,to the Snake River. Because of my experience with bald eagles, in 1997, I was appointed to the bald eagle recovery team for the southeastern United States, and I've served on that with my group since that time. .0-4\ But the purpose of the recovery team was several-fold: One, it was clear that the bald eagle likely was going to be de-listed at the federal level in the next couple years. Obviously that hasn't happened yet. But Page 53 February 2,2005 n the charge of our group was to develop the criteria for de-listing, how many pairs of birds, what the productivity of them had to be, all that sort of stuff. What monitoring requirements would be to allow them to be federally de-listed, et cetera. In addition to that, on the Coconilla PUD that you heard earlier, you heard considerable discussion about the bald eagle monitoring guidelines and what they meant and how are they to be interpreted and all of that. Well, I wrote the bald eagle monitoring guidelines at the request of the Service. And if you look on the website,you'll see I'm the primary author,and there were others that assisted there. So I've done a lot of eagle work. I've been working on this particular project for approximately three years now. I was called in, interviewed by Mr. Corace. And because of my experience, he felt like I could give him the best advice as to how to deal with bald eagles on his particular site, and the challenges that he may face in terms of the permitting of the particular site and everything else. So I've been involved in this one for some time. I've also probably done 30, 40, 50 seminars on endangered and threatened species, and have spoken on bald eagles on a number of occasions. This particular nest, as you heard earlier under Coconilla, has been in existence for over a decade. It's been generally successful, as are most bald eagles. Let me just back up and give you some history of eagles in our state and in the nation. When I started out as a consulting ecologist in 1976, there were approximately 325 pairs of eagles in the state. There are now over 1,200 pairs, by best counts. The commission only says that there's 1,133 today that they've been able to register, but they fly them, and they typically are only flying sites where they know there are pairs or there's reports of a pair, so they've underestimated the population to some degree. Why has there been this tremendous increase in the eagle population? In fact over the last 15 years, it's been increasing at approximately 11.4 percent per year? It's really two reasons: One was the elimination of DDT. And as a result, and as a consequence of that,the eggshell thinning that had occurred is no longer a problem, so the birds are able to reproduce on a regular basis. And then the second point is that we've learned a lot about the management of bald eagles and about the biology of bald eagles over that period of time, where we -- and I say we, because I've been involved in the process -- but the Service and also the Florida Freshwater Conservation Commission have learned a lot about the biology of the animal, how it responds to humans and how to appropriately manage the bird. And it's been those two reasons probably that the eagle has increased. In the Seventies, there were four eagle pairs in Collier County. If you look at the maps that they had then, that's all that they knew about, at least in Collier County. Most of those were along the coast. But there's 20 something pairs now; 24, I think, by last count. It may be different this year. Probably will be different this year. It's different almost each year. But it's a substantial increase. What we do know, based on the biology of the birds, which is interesting to me particularly as a conservation ecologist, is that the increase in Collier County most likely did not come necessarily from birds from Collier County,but in the vicinity. In the Seventies, and even before, there was no DDT applied in the Everglades, because it was a national park. One of the consequences of that is that was a stronghold for the eagle populations,particularly in the Everglades. And I'm talking about the mangrove portions of the Everglades. They typically nested on islands there. So there was always a population of 30 to 40 pairs there that formed a nucleus. The other thing that we've observed, as the eagle population has regrown, is that there are certain nuclei that form apparently the basis of a spread in eagle populations across the state. And the nuclei that probably contributed is the Everglades population I mentioned, it's really a Florida Bay population, and then it's the ,..� population in Lee County as well as Sarasota County. What we've seen particularly over the last 15 years is literally -- a literal explosion in the eagle populations Page 54 February 2,2005 ' in those areas, in particular, because of the nesting habitat and the foraging habitat. And it's also occurred elsewhere in the state. Polk County, I went to an eagle nest day before yesterday in Polk County. Its P0-0156. And so it's the 156th nest in Polk County, and it's not even the last one. Eagles are permanently territorial,permanently monogamous birds. That means they're not like people in a sense. They typically don't get divorced. And remain on a territory. The young -- there were questions asked earlier, what happens to bald eagles in the summertime? They're the reverse of the Florida tourists, in general. What happens is after the nesting season, a majority of the adults and essentially all the juveniles fly north and over-summer from Chesapeake Bay all the way up to Canada, there's a lot of radio telemetry work now done on that. Over-summer there, then they come back in the fall. Actually in September -- typically there's a pair about a quarter a mile away from my office. They actually appear at the very end of August, mess around, et cetera, and then begin the courtship, et cetera. Typically in October begin to rebuild the nest and all that. The average egg-laying date --that was a question one of you had earlier -- in our state is the 16th day of December. That's the average egg-laying date. And then they -- if the chicks are -- if the chicks hatch and there's no predation, then they'll incubate them. They'll stay at the nest typically for eight weeks. It can be up to 14. Then they fledge. The adults will feed them for a month or so. They're like teenagers,they want handouts. Then they fly north and they repeat the cycle. So the point of that little exercise is to explain to you that the birds we have in Collier County today, we cannot-- or I can't view,as an ecologist, Collier County birds being only Collier County birds. What we do know about when the juveniles return, they typically return to the natal territory where they were born, and the adults, as they get ready for the next nesting season, kick them off the territory. They don't want any other birds in the territory while they're nesting. Eagles don't mature until the fourth or typically the fifth year. That's when they get the white heads and the white tails. And based on banding studies and our radio telemetry work, what we know is they typically will nest within perhaps 50 miles of the natal territory, but it can be up to several hundred miles away from the natal territory. And so we have to consider the eagle population in Florida to be a statewide population at a minimum, and most likely it's a southeastern U.S.population. So that gives you some basic understanding of the biology of the bird. The Service is moving forward at a snail's pace at de-listing. It's going to happen. I just can't tell you when. I was in Washington in August about that meeting with the head of migratory birds and also the endangered species coordinator. It's a political issue, I will tell you that. The Bush Administration is involved in it. In fact, the Governor called his brother and talked to him about it because of the interest in eagles in our state. It will happen. And it's a wonderful conservation success story that we've been able to manage our birds and restore them. The best estimate that we have is that historically the eagle population in the state was approximately 1,000 pairs, maybe a little bit in excess. We're over 1,200 pairs now. And so it appears, based on all the available data, that the eagle population is as big as it ever was, and perhaps even slightly larger, most likely because of improved feeding supplies as a result, unfortunately, of fertilizers, et cetera, in our water, which increases the fish production. That's what they eat mostly. The more you have to eat, the more you're able to reproduce. It's that kind of thing. They, to date at least, do not appear to be limited necessarily by nesting availability, nest structures. Most eagles, 92 percent is the best estimate, are nesting in pine trees, either live or dead, and the rest nest in a variety of other structures and/or trees. Cypress; I've got one in a live oak I'm working on. Page 55 February 2,2005 Last year there were 30 pairs in artificial structures. The majority of artificial structures are cell phone towers. But they're also nest platforms for ospreys, they're the cross members on telephone wires and that sort of stuff. The number of pairs on artificial structures has been increasing. It's been essentially doubling every three years now for the last six or eight years. And it's because our eagle population is increasing. And in some cases, they may be running out of trees that are tall enough in the right locations by the appropriate food source. You've got to have a Publix or else you can't eat. I am very encouraged about the increase in eagle populations in the state, and particularly of the number of birds that we're getting on artificial structures. It means, as you've heard earlier in the earlier case, that eagles are becoming acclimated to some degree to humans and to our presence and to our activities. There's a five-year study just recently completed by the Commission where they went in and actually climbed the trees, captured the eaglets, put on radio transmitters that are tracked by satellite and they're following those birds for a five-year period. One of the key issues that they're trying to understand and learn is do urban eagles beget urban eagles, which appears to be the case. In other words, if you're born in an urban situation, it's more likely that you're going to return and nest in an urban situation, which probably could be a response that we're seeing in terms of the number of pairs on artificial structures. So that's just some basic information. I put the--I don't know how to operate this, so I'm going to let Vanna White do the honors here. MR. HUGHES: I have a couple of quick questions at this point. MR. GODLY: Sure. MR. HUGHES: The biggest, most significant reason for the redevelopment of the eagle population is the stopping of environmental pollution of chemistry? MR. GODLY: That's one. MR. HUGHES: Number one, right? Do you think that man's activities have done anything really to affect these birds? MR. GODLY: Yes. MR. HUGHES: Other than stopping the chemistry? MR. GODLY: Actually, I do believe it's a couple of things. One, I mentioned the increase in the fisheries productions, particularly in the freshwater lakes and the streams. It's the fertilizers from cows and row crops and everything. So the fish populations are increasing-- MR. HUGHES: So food's there,they reproduce more. MR. GODLY: Right. MR. HUGHES: Next question. On setting up a precedence of, let's say, the artificial tree. Now, I may be wrong,you're the eagle expert, I'm just a farm boy. And when I was very young, these animals still existed naturally. These were not stupid animals,these are extremely smart-- MR. GODLY: And they still are. MR. HUGHES: -- territorial. When I hear people talk that are city kids, basically, talk about wildlife, I always wonder, where were they? Because these are not fragile little animals. These are extremely capable animals. So are we setting a bad precedence by putting up artificial growth areas, especially when you point out that they may be using -- like a fish does, smell its way back to where it was born? And these things are going to propagate more and more on artificial structures rather than natural structures; and are we not hurting them with that? MR. GODLY: No, I don't think we are. And I'll approach it from a couple of perspectives: One, as a biologist and a conservation ecologist, I think it's very important that we promote urban wildlife to the Page 56 February 2,2005 extent we can. I want to see kids interested in wild species and wildlife. And if eagles, as an example, can live in urban environments, it's going to increase the appreciation those kids have for things. MR. HUGHES: That's not really the point of my -- I understand an existing structure they use as a nest site,hey, great,they picked it. But if we pick one for them, such as an artificial tree, a fiberglass tree? MR. GODLY: Let me give you a better example that will hit a little bit closer to home. I mentioned earlier I live in Hillsborough County. I'm from Tampa. Two years ago Hillsborough County passed an ordinance that said all future cell towers have to be disguised, either as an artificial tree or as bells in a church or something like that. Cell tower companies have a problem, because the eagles and ospreys are nesting on the platform. I've come to them and said okay, if you've got to build an artificial tree anyway in order to build a cell tower in Hillsborough County, why don't you build an additional platform up above all your instrumentation, above your instrumentation, where it's not going to affect what you need to do for your living, okay, for eagles, for birds of prey, have all of your work down below it, then get approval from the Service. If you have to go in in an emergency to maintain those structures,you'll be okay. Eagles, understand, we've banded hundreds of eagles in the State of Florida. We've climbed up hundreds of trees, either banded them, put transmitters on, we've hauled the eggs to Arkansas and essentially repopulated a good part of the Midwest now. They don't abandon the nest. They don't like it,but they don't abandon the nest. I mean, they raise hell,just as you would if anybody comes in your house. But they -- they go back to their--my point to the cell tower companies is you're getting your butts kicked on TV and public hearings over we don't like nasty cell towers. If you can have a positive environmental effect, it's good PR. MR. HUGHES: That's really not where I'm going with that. That makes sense from a business point of view to protect your infrastructure investment, specifically a cell tower. I'm talking about sites like we have up on the screen right now where we're going to put a dead tree up for a bird,that's -- MR. GODLY: Actually, it won't be a dead tree,but I'll go into that in a bit more detail in a second. On the situation in Cocohatchee, I mentioned the birds have been over -- there over a decade. We know that in'97, I believe it was '97,the flat woods, as a result of a lightning strike, burned and killed the tree and killed a number of the other trees in the vicinity. Now this was here -- you can see the nest and the dead pine here. And also all the rest of the dead pines. And there's some that lived and survived the fire. But a majority of the pines died. That tree got hit in '97, that would be seven years ago now. It doesn't -- in my opinion is not going to last that much longer as a nesting substrate. Jay, how do you do it? Okay, right here? Actually -- that last one, there you go. And that's awful dark. I apologize here. This is -- in -- on, I think it was the 16th, 15th, 14th of September, 2001, Tropical Storm Gabriel came through. And if you remember that, two days of rain. The nest blew down. A support branch fell off the tree. It's a huge nest. At the time it was a very big nest. It probably weighed, after all the rains, 10 or eight or -- eight or 10 inches of rain. It probably weighed in excess of a ton. All the rotting material in the bottom, it was like a mattress that just gets heavier and heavier and heavier. It fell down. What you can't see very well is this is the crotch of the tree. And here and here and here and all up and down here are beetle holes. After a tree dies, the beetles get in it, they burrow, they eat the wood, it deteriorates the tree. And -- I don't know when, it could be next year, if we would have gotten a hurricane here this year it probably would have toppled it. But that tree is not going to last long. So those birds, depending upon the timing of the toppling of the tree, the old tree where they're nesting, they're going to nest somewhere else. Almost assuredly. And understand, a hurricane or a lightning strike or something like that is a situation that eagles evolved in. Page 57 February 2,2005 Nest trees are not permanent structures, they're temporary structures. They will find another place to build. And if that pair doesn't and another pair builds the nest, their young are raised and therefore that's the future generation. So evolutionarily, it's to their advantage to build a new nest. What we are trying to do on the Cocohatchee project is provide that pair of birds and other birds with other options for nesting. You've already heard the sequencing. I can go into more details of the sequencing of construction in order to minimize the adverse impact on the eagles, and I probably will, because you're going to ask me some more questions. I want to explain a bit more about the permit itself and how we got to where we are with that particular permit. I'm talking in particular the biological opinion, incidental take statement that's been incorporated into the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit. The Service has to follow the Endangered Species Act. That's the law to them. That law allows, under certain prescribed circumstances, the issuance of a biological opinion, incidental take statement. It does so for two reasons: One, it provides a lawful way for development to occur such that no illegal take, which can be the removal, the harm, the harassment of the pair of birds, the eagle's nest, et cetera, will occur. It provides a legal way for that to happen. It also requires, in doing so, that the applicant, not the developer -- it could be a county building a road or could be a condominium project like this one, it requires the applicant to minimize the adverse effects on the pair of birds,which is why we've done the sequencing and all the other things. It also says that the terms and conditions of the permit have to be reasonable and prudent. And what that means is they have to make good sense from all perspectives; from the perspective of the eagles as well as the project that the applicant is attempting to build. And in this case, it's done. It does not require any mitigation. I've been working with Mr. Corace now for three years. He volunteered to purchase a territory, another eagle territory in Southwest Florida. He could not build his project, i.e., the golf course and the five condominiums and maintain or be assured or assure the Service he would maintain that eagle pair. And by that I mean they would not abandon the -- he could not guarantee they wouldn't abandon the nest. And that's why they issued the incidental take statement, to protect him against an illegal -- and it's actually called a Section 9 take. It provides him protection, it provides the county protection and it provides the eagle protection in terms of minimization. He's agreed to purchase a territory. There's a suite of conditions in terms of ideally it would have an existing eagle tree, it would be large enough and so there would be alternate trees, it would be adjacent to state lands where perhaps it could be incorporated,managed, et cetera. In addition, he agreed to build an artificial eagle tree. That was my idea. And the reason I did that is because of my experience with eagles on artificial structures. I felt there was a high likelihood that those birds would move onto an artificial tree,particularly if we did a good job with the tree. Mr. Corace is going to spend over a quarter million dollars building an artificial pine tree. We've been to Arizona. The people that did the Tree of Life at Disney are going to build it. It's going to use monopole technology in terms of the base. All the bark -- and I'll just give you an example of the details that are going into this. This is what the bark is going to look like after the tree is constructed. Now, the tree is on an island, away from people, over 1,000 feet away from any condominiums. It's going to be in the best location that he had available. The tree will be able to withstand up to 140 mile an hour winds. Pine needles are going to be exactly like a pine needle. You won't be able to tell it apart, I don't believe. I believe it's going to be successful. n We also have incorporated lightning rods into the tree. I've worked on three different territories in which lightning hit the tree, fried the chicks and the mother. I don't want that happening here. So we have a good Page 58 February 2,2005 n chance of protecting also against lightning. It will -- it will, as best we can tell, it's going to last a long, long time and longer than any normal pine tree would. We'll have to see if it works. All the evidence I have as a biologist and where I've seen birds build on artificial structures, it ought to be successful. They'll be able to find it. It's in their territory. It's in the right location. I think it's a good plan. I believe he's done everything he can in this case. MR. HUGHES: Again, are we going down the wrong path? Does this make sense? I'll give you an example. I actually get very upset. I've been out on the water and I see the research done on our manatees, I think they're doing more damage to the manatee than letting it just be a wild system, with the radio transponders and cables dragging off the back. They're doing a disservice to these animals in the guise of research. I don't agree with all the research. Do you think it's smart for any natural system to have man's input and change the natural system and then we're better off? MR. GODLY: I don't think we can learn to appropriately manage wildlife species without the research that's being done. I'm not arguing about manatees. I'll give you another example that -- it'll particularly hit home to Collier County. Red-cockaded woodpeckers. You've got RCWs in this county, they're a big issue. I don't remember the year when Hurricane Hugo came through the Carolinas, it hit Francis Marion State Forest that at the time had the largest RCW population in the nation. Over 50 percent of the cavity trees were destroyed, and the reason was simple,the birds would drill a whole and the trees snapped over at that point. Had we not done appropriate research, we couldn't have done anything about the situation. But what happened is within a two-week or so period, the biologists went out and drilled artificial cavity structures ,.� for the birds, as a result of the research that we had done on RCWs, and in particular that, only five to 10 percent of the adults were lost, where normally almost all of them would have died. And so that kind of research, in my mind, is extremely useful and valuable. MR. HUGHES: Does that answer my question? MR. GODLY: Yes. MR. HUGHES: I don't think so. MR. GODLY: Okay. I believe the same kind of information applies here. Why should we lose our urban eagles and eagles in urban situations if we haven't done the appropriate research? That's one of the reasons why the Service and the Commission are particularly excited about this one, because it will give them a new management option and a new management option for cell towers and to deal with other kinds of situations. That's not to say they're going to increase the number of incidental take statements or anything else at issue, it will provide new management options,just like the research that has been conducted now to show that urban eagles in fact come back to urban environments. MR. HUGHES: So this tree is going to be constructed with cameras and sensors so that the research can be acquired without-- in a passive manner? MR. GODLY: I didn't bring up the camera. I'd be glad to talk about the camera,briefly. One of the other things we've come up with as another -- as another benefit, as I see it, is inside one of the artificial branches is going to be the lens of a camera that's going to be hooked up to solar panels, and it will be run by solar electricity. You'll be able to -- any resident in Collier County will be able to go to the website, watch a pair of eagles in Collier County raise their young. I think that has tremendous educational benefit, okay. So the question is will it harm the birds? The evidence would say no. The first of those was installed in Cape Canaveral in 1980, approximately. Audubon Society, Florida Audubon, at their Maitland Birds of Prey facility, has an eagle nest a half a mile away and they've got a camera installed there, and it hadn't affected the reproductive success or anything else with those -- of that Page 59 February 2,2005 n pair of birds either. What it does do is it provides a wonderful educational opportunity for kids and for everybody else. And so I think that's a benefit. MR. HUGHES: I agree with that part of the benefit. MR. GODLY: Two eagles. MR. HUGHES: Is that the purpose we're talking about this? No,this is part of the mitigation, correct? So we're really talking about mitigation, not research. This is a false tree, and I totally agree with you, a tree for the sake of the public's awareness and for the sake of research, okay. But to use this as a precedence for remedi -- and we just described that the eagles are smart birds. Matter of fact, your description of their behavior is very much like humans. Once the nest is full, move to the next one. All right, so -- I don't know that we do nature a service by creating a false nature. That's what I'm getting at. CHAIRMAN GAL: Has there been any research as to how long a nest is typically used by an eagle? For example,this one has been used for about 14 years now, I understand. Is there a life span of a nest? MR. GODLY: Yeah, there has been, and it depends on the territory, of course. And it depends on the vagaries of nature and everything else. I would suspect that the average live tree is under a decade, but it could be longer. And in individual cases, it could be much longer. I worked on one in Lee County, for example, that's 12 foot thick. It's been used ever since 1976. The oldest artificial nest has been used continually since 1983. And that's every year since '83. So, you know, they can be used for two,three, four decades. The tree sometimes collapses as a result of the nest. CHAIRMAN GAL: So was there an average there or--you were saying 10 years to -- MR. GODLY: I don't have an average. I can't quote you. My -- 10.2 years, that would be my best guess. A fair amount of birds will move pretty regularly. n CHAIRMAN GAL: But they can--a nest can last 30 years, 40 years? MR. GODLY: Oh,yes. Yes, it can. Now, in a dead tree, it's a different story. Particularly pines after they get -- after -- a decade would be a long, long time in a dead tree. And a majority of the birds just leave a dead tree. CHAIRMAN GAL: This tree's dead. MR. GODLY: Yes. CHAIRMAN GAL: It's already been 14 years. MR. GODLY: But it hasn't been dead for 14. CHAIRMAN GAL: It hasn't been dead for 14. MR. GODLY: That's correct. CHAIRMAN GAL: How long has it been dead for? MR. GODLY: '97. CHAIRMAN GAL: So we're on seven years. MR. GODLY: That's correct. CHAIRMAN GAL: So statistically,we're maybe another three years or so,right? MR. GODLY: It's getting near the end. CHAIRMAN GAL: Okay. MR. GODLY: In the hurricane season,this past one as an example, approximately--and we'll know better at the end of the nesting season after they fly all the known nests, but the guess is, the estimate is, is upwards of perhaps 40 percent of the eagle trees in the state were damaged or gone. But those birds, again, will find -- they're going to find a new nest. They're going to build a new nest. They can build a nest in a week. That's not a big effort. MR. HUGHES: And that's a fact, correct? MR. GODLY: Yes. Page 60 February 2,2005 n MR. HUGHES: That they are not stunted by these -- our activities. They don't care. They just do their thing. MR. GODLY: I don't know that they don't care, but they're going to do their thing. I'd say that is a fair assessment. MR. HUGHES: One more question, because it was raised in the early section. A dump truck gate slamming shut. Now, I can understand, it's very loud. And yes, that's a sharp, not -- that's a square wave, it's a square wave sound. MR. GODLY: Yes. MR. HUGHES: That alarms these birds? MR. GODLY: That depends -- it depends entirely on the individual pair. Here's probably -- and I'll give you just a couple of examples, a couple of quick ones. At the end of the runway on MacDill Air Force Base is a pine tree, and in that pine tree is an eagle's nest. And it's not 200 feet over their tree on a regular basis, those jets and even bigger bombers are landing, especially with what's going on in Iran and Iraq now. And that's some serious noise. That's not any tailgate banging. I had a pair--I had a pair that I worked in Collier County, and the Service was concerned. It was actually a mine pit, okay, they were mining the lime rock. And the lime rock pit was approximately 800 feet away from the nest. And the Service was concerned, okay, you got to blast the lime rock, drill holes, blast the lime rock. It falls in,then you excavate it out. You know what happens. I had to monitor the tree and the nest. When the drilling rig appeared on the site, those birds did not go to the Gulf They sat and waited and would actually land on the drilling rig until the humans came down in order to operate it, wait till the dynamite was -- it was exploded, then come and catch the fish as they floated up to the top. I've got another pair that's on the corner of an eight-lane and a six-lane highway in a cell tower. And they're 200 feet up and they don't give a flip what's going on down below, and there's lots of noise. In the -- and I would say we probably mo --I told you I wrote the guidelines. Now, we probably monitored --under the guidelines, we probably monitored now 15 territories across the state during construction. Our experience has been that the flapping of the tailgates is detectable. They'll turn their head and look at it. But after they're acclimated, and it doesn't take long,they get used to it. That's not to say you can't disturb the birds and you can't cause abandonment. Obviously you can cause abandonment of the nest. But under most conditions, the answer is no, based on all the observations that we have today. MR. HUMISTON: You said that you wrote the guidelines,the 1987 -- MR. GODLY: No,these are the 2002 -- September,2002 bald eagle monitoring guidelines. You're talking about the habitat management guidelines in'86. MR. HUMISTON: Yeah, do you happen to know what the basis was for setting those --the dimensions of the zones,the 750-foot primary zone and 1,500-foot secondary? MR. GODLY: Yeah, I was not part of the '87 committee. Obviously, I was part of the '97 committee. We actually redrafted those guidelines, but because Washington hadn't got off their duff, nothing's happened on it, I hate to say. The '87 guidelines, and I spent a lot of time -- almost all the members that wrote the '87 guidelines were also on the recovery team that did the '97 revisions. Even though they were published in '87, they were actually written in'85 and it took two years to get it through the system. At that time, understand that we only had in our state 400 and something pairs of eagles. A majority of them were in very rural situations. The bird appeared to be threatened. And so those recommendations were extraordinarily conservative, based on what we knew at the time. Had practically no experience with Page 61 February 2,2005 bald eagle development conflicts. Now we have an enormous amount of experience. And as an example--well, I'll give you two bits of data: In 1995, Steve Nesbitt and a couple other authors at the Gainesville Research Lab published a paper of the effectiveness of the '87 guidelines. What they found was two things: One is that what happened between 750 and 1,500 had no effect on the nesting success, the productivity or any other part of the biology of birds. In other words, after 750, it didn't matter. That's what they found. Wasn't any effect on a statistical basis. The other thing they observed is they didn't know where the actual cut-off is. Some pairs -- and by cut-off, I mean depending on the amount of disturbance and the timing and the frequency and the history of that pair of birds, it could be that you could get 400 feet away from the nest, 300, 200, et cetera, they didn't know the difference, or the cut-off The second bit of data is last year the Jacksonville office of the Service went back and looked at the 213 consultations that they had done on bald eagles over about a 15-year time period. Of the 215 (sic) consultations they had done -- and I may have the numbers wrong, I think I might have it here, but I can-- I'll get awful close. As I recall, there were 97 cases where development occurred within 750 feet of the nest. And it was documented. And they either got an informal Section 7 consultation, or in some cases an incidental take statement. Out of the 97, there were six cases of abandonment of that particular nest. And they went back and looked at the birds, obviously, to know if they abandoned them. Of the six cases of abandonment, only two could potentially be attributed to the development activities that occurred. So the guidelines in '87 were extraordinarily conservative, we're learning. And that again -- it's the whole business of management and understanding of the birds. And we're learning that you can get a lot, lot closer than what we had been and not affect the birds. At the earlier case, you were asked and you had a number of questions about the recent letter that's published on the Service's website about construction in the nesting season with monitoring. You remember that. Okay, well that research, as a result of the research and experience with eagles, they have relaxed those guidelines because there's no biological basis for having today the 750, 1,500, that this is what you have to do in order to protect the birds, there's no biological basis to support that decision. And by law, they're required to use the best available scientific and commercial data. So what they did is they published this year, if you're at -- if you're going to construct and the construction has to occur in the nesting season, you've got to use the guidelines, monitoring guidelines. And those monitoring guidelines -- and again, I was the primary author, I went through all the literature for disturbance, what disturbance means, how a biologist that isn't an absolute expert on eagles could detect it, recognize it, and if they see disturbance, they are required, if they agree to be a monitor, to notify the Service and the developer and to say I'm detecting you've got disturbance, stop construction. Which was the answer to the Coconilla one,but they didn't know,because they hadn't read the guidelines in detail. CHAIRMAN GAL: That recent change that you're talking about is only for the secondary zone, though, right? MR. GODLY: Or in the primary zone. CHAIRMAN GAL: So construction can occur in the primary zone? MR. GODLY: Yes, it can. And I have a number of cases where we've constructed in the primary zone and used the guidelines. MR. SORRELL: Question. The reason for the artificial tree, are all the other trees burnt and in the same shape as this in that area? MR. GODLY: No,not all the trees. Page 62 February 2,2005 MR. SORRELL: Are there suitable natural trees adjoining this property that would be suitable? MR. GODLY: That's really hard to say, Mr. Sorrell. I have seen birds nest in the most God-awful places you can imagine. And I'll just give you one short one. I had one that moved three times in Hillsborough County, and the third time they moved, it was on a lateral support branch of a pine tree. They were in two cypress and another pine that died. They moved on a lateral support branch of a pine, and they nested there and they raised a chick. And I watched the poor parents come up and bring the chick -- and by that time he was walking on the branch, you know. He would walk up -- I'm sorry,the adult would land on the branch,he would put the fish on the branch,and the branch would fall down in the palmettos. And all the eagles would look down below and then they'd look up. I mean,he nested but it didn't work. MS. STUDENT: Mr. Chairman, excuse me. There's a gentleman that has to leave, but he would like to speak before he could leave. And it's up to the Chair, and I don't know if the Chair would entertain listening to this gentleman so he can leave and go on to his other engagement. But he has been here, I think, most of the day. CHAIRMAN GAL: Sure. Keep it under five minutes,though. DR. DALY: Yes, I have been sworn in. My name is Robert Daly. Thank you ladies and gentlemen for allowing me to break protocol. I am a sensory neurophysiologist. I am especially interested in the development of hearing in young organisms, and I have had a long-time interest in the effects of environmental energy on the development of tissue. So I feel that I may be able to address some of the questions that the board has raised here. I did my work, by the way, in the departments of environmental medicine and biomedical engineering at the John's Hopkins medical institutions. I have a special concern about the artificial nest. I believe that the structure that Mr. Godly has described may embody certain problems for the progeny of the eagle. Specifically, I understand that the core will be steel structure. It will be constructed something like a microwave tower. And then this will be shrouded in some sort of a petrochemical material, a synthetic bark, which we are told will be indistinguishable from the real thing. But of course the salient fact here is not whether we can distinguish it, but whether it's important to the eagle. I think that the bark is--and steel combination are going to set up electrochemical fields that will accelerate the deterioration of this artificial external shrouding. And that's going to be manifested in the outgassing of the volatile compounds in the bark material. And it will result in emissions of gasses and sloughing of material that can certainly not be of any benefit to the eagles. I think also the random molecular structure of the materials; that is, the steel and the artificial bark, are going to provide a very different energy field than a natural material such as a tree or even a natural wood pylon. And I think that there is a body of evidence that indicates that this would be detrimental in the long run to young tissue. My laboratory did work in that regard, and we found that the beneficial energy fields are very low levels of ionic flux and not the sorts of disruptive positive energy emissions that would be created by this combination. There's a third element I think that's important that Mr. Godly, I think, did not quite get to at this point, and that would be the indwelling TV camera. In 1992, the International Symposium on Energy and the Environment had some very interesting papers regarding the effects of very low level electromagnetic fields on chick embryos. And it was found that indeed such as -- the fields such as these television cameras and perhaps the associated motors that might be required to move the lenses would cause genetic mutations. So there's, I think, another issue regarding the camera, too, and that is this up close and personal viewing of Page 63 February 2,2005 this family in its habitat is a kind of voyeurism that I think would be very difficult to justify on a scientific basis. I think there's another element too, and that is an ethical one that I think is something that we as sentient individuals should be willing to address as well. So I would like to address also questions on the noise issue here, if I may do that, if I may have just another moment. The startle reaction that was described in response to, say, the slamming of a tailgate, is very often habituated,that is, extinguished in the individual's behavior. However,that does not mean that hearing loss will not ensue from that kind of exposure to noise. Now, there is a very different reaction set out to such a growing level of noise such as the take-off or landing of a jet plane where the organism can adapt by manipulating the middle ear muscles to accommodate that, versus a very sudden onset noise. And those are the things that would be most dangerous. So if you have any questions about that, I would be happy to answer. Otherwise, I thank you very much for your indulgence. MR. HUGHES: If I may -- thank you, Doctor, very much. And he's pointing out several things I myself would agree with, that we as, human beings, with all the technology we have, come nowhere near close yet to understanding the microsensitivities of organisms that are all around us. So you're absolutely right. My concern with the structure as well being metal is you have a focusing antenna, and you're definitely doing that, pertinent to a camera to observe the nest site. My suggestion in the morning session is a high definition camera with a long lens. You're nowhere near that nest. DR. DALY: Yeah. There -- I should add also that it has been known since the Second World War that ,.� microwave emissions cause cancers. Lymphomas, especially. It's been shown very early on in radar technicians during the Second World War. And there is nothing in either our or certainly the eagles environmental history that would prepare it to deal with this. Because it likes to nest now on microwave towers doesn't mean that it's immune to these radiations. It simply means that it wants to be up high so that it can look around. So why not build a natural wood pylon that might be made of a laminated wood. You can make it as tall and as handsome as you wish. It would cost perhaps 10 or 15 percent of what you had planned to spend. The Division of Forestry wood technology division can tell you how to go about building such a structure. In fact, I can give you architect-designed plans for such a thing, if you wish me to do that. Yes, Mr. Godly. I'm finished. Did you have a question for me, sir? MR. GODLY: No, sir. DR. DALY: Thank you. DR. LYNNE: I have a question. Sir?Doctor? So what you're saying is, is that even though the eagles may like to nest on high structures like cell phone towers, that there could be emissions that would harm the chicks over generations-- DR. DALY: Oh,yes. DR. LYNNE: -- if they continue to do this. DR. DALY: Yes. I believe so. And a 25-year history of nesting in this environment is really not a very good basis for making a judgment about the next 25 years. DR. LYNNE: Thank you. DR. DALY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GAL: Some questions. This photograph, it's pictured September 19th, 2001. Was that taken ,.., by you? MR. GODLY: Yes. Page 64 February 2,2005 r-� CHAIRMAN GAL: When was the first time you were on the site; do you recall? MR. GODLY: Probably in June of that year. Could have been May. I don't remember. CHAIRMAN GAL: Well, so about from this time period, September, 2001 to the present, have any of the site conditions changed? I mean,I--not--generally. Are they the same as 2001? DR. DALY: Well, construction was initiated on the golf course, you're aware of that. Those are on the photographs. The Flatwoods haven't burned again since then. Those are probably the two major-- CHAIRMAN GAL: So then -- the reason I ask is that in the prior ordinance, it says the current site plan calls for development of a golf course, only with an option to conduct future residential constructions should the site conditions or management techniques change to allow it. So the site conditions are the same,I would imagine. We're saying that the management techniques are different? MR. GODLY: Well, Rich, do you want to comment? I think the site conditions are different from the original application in that the original application in the bald eagle management plan only included the golf course.And what is before you today is the condominiums. CHAIRMAN GAL: Physically the site condition is the same, except for the golf course construction. MR. GODLY: That's correct. They're generally the same. The other point, as I mentioned, the management techniques and the experience with dealing with eagles has increased over that period of time. CHAIRMAN GAL: Is there a certain perimeter around an eagle's nest that there should be no construction? MR. GODLY: Well, that would depend entirely on the pair, as I mentioned. There's considerable differences in the tolerance of each individual pair. As a general philosophy and as a general biological principle, those birds that are in very rural environments that rarely see humans or disturbance are going to be a lot more sensitive than those that are living in more urban environments. CHAIRMAN GAL: Does the Fish and Wildlife Service right now, today, propose a construction moratorium in that primary zone on the eagle's nest? MR. GODLY: No. The Fish&Wildlife-- CHAIRMAN GAL: So it's on a case-by-case basis is what you're saying. MR. GODLY: The Service today has and does issue incidental take statements where they believe there is even a low probability of abandonment of the nest as a result of the activity. And that's what they did here. They believed there was --there was a probability and a potential for abandonment of the CO-019 nest,and so therefore by law they issued an incidental take statement and biological opinion in this case. CHAIRMAN GAL: But their opinion is not because they think that there won't be harassment of eagle,but because the population statewide of the eagles are -- have risen to such an extent that they don't -- they're not concerned about this one eagle. Wasn't that the basis? MR. GODLY: Well, I don't think it's quite that simple. They obviously are trying to manage, as is the Commission, managing the species on a statewide basis, and as a nation we're doing it on a national basis, just like if you listened to NPR this morning about gray wolves, et cetera. We're managing -- we have to manage wide-ranging species such as eagles at a bigger than county basis. You cannot do it on a county basis. It just makes no biological sense at all. So they're managing them at either a statewide level or a southeastern region or a bigger region. CHAIRMAN GAL: The project, though, as it's proposed, will likely result in abandonment of the nest, won't it? MR. GODLY: Yes. CHAIRMAN GAL: And that would be caused by the construction of the buildings? MS. HUSHON: Yes. MR. GODLY: If the birds leave, we will never know why they left, okay, and that's an important point. Page 65 February 2,2005 .—� The probability that they nest as a result of the development,though, is high. And I want to make the other point, though, which is -- which I think is really critical: The incidental take statement is for abandonment of the nest. The probability of any harm to any individual eagle, or even the loss in productivity of the pair is low, in my opinion,based on my experience with the eagles. CHAIRMAN GAL: Sir, are you able at all to put some sort of footage around an eagle's nest where construction within that zone would cause abandonment, or would likely result in a high probability of abandonment? MR. GODLY: Not with any certainty. You know, not with any certainty. And again, it's so variable amongst the pairs that you can't do it with any certainty. CHAIRMAN GAL: Well,how did Fish&Wildlife Service develop those boundaries in the past? MR. GODLY: The 750, 1,500? CHAIRMAN GAL: Yes. MR. GODLY: It was a guess. It was their best guess. And I talked to the individuals that proposed it. They had very few examples of where development had occurred within either 750 or 1,500. It seemed to be reasonable, it seemed to fit in their minds as to what would be reasonable. It was not based, though, on but a smidgeon of empirical data. Now we have much, much more empirical data. And the new guidelines that come out of the Service, I've seen the drafts of those,they will be very different, and they will be less. MS. HUSHON: The December 15th letter that we have from the U.S. Department of Interior-- MR. GODLY: Yes. MS. HUSHON: -- Fish & Wildlife Service states that in fact the only thing that should occur potentially within a primary protection zone is a single-family home. And that, if you read down further, should not occur any closer than 330 feet. MR. GODLY: As a general recommendation,that's true. MS. HUSHON: This is their general recommendation. That sounds different from what you're saying. I'm just--they're being very specific here. MR. GODLY: Right, and-- MS. HUSHON: They're not talking -- multi-families should be definitely kept outside of the 750, and that single-families might be allowed within,but not closer than 330, if at all possible is the way it reads. MR. GODLY: Understand the basis of that particular letter. And Candace Martino, who's the author of that letter, actually shared that letter with me before it was published because she wanted my input on it. MS. HUSHON: This is David Hanklin. I'm sorry. MR. GODLY: That's right. He's the field supervisor of the Jacksonville office. He has to sign all letters like that, okay,just so you understand. But the Service, Vero Beach office and the Jacksonville office was getting eaten up with eagle calls. And the Jacksonville office, as an example, they typically handle somewhere between eight and 15 calls per day about eagles' nests. And they are -- it is a-- it's draining their resources in terms of their ability to work on what they think are more important issues. And so what they did is to draft a blanket letter that would provide blanket approval for construction at certain distances, which are lower than the old guidelines, the '87 guidelines. It's essentially a relaxation of the'87 guidelines,based on the new information. And so, in other words, if you follow those, you don't have to call them up, and Collier County will not have to write them a letter and say I want to confirm that this is appropriate, it's acceptable with the Service. It is acceptable to the Service,that's why they wrote that. At any time, though, based upon the particular circumstances of an individual territory, I or you or anybody r—N else can write a letter and say here's my circumstances, I'm at 275 or there's a house at 150 feet away on the other side and I want to build one on the opposite side of the nest at the same distance; can I do that? Page 66 February 2,2005 r1 They'll write you a letter,yes,you can,under those conditions, as an example. And so this was a -- it was a blanket approval to decrease the workload of the Service offices in cases where they were very confident no take was likely to occur. And if you follow those, you won't get prosecuted if the birds were to abandon the nest. That's the purpose of that letter. MR. HUMISTON: What was the name of the individual you said that wrote this letter? MR. GODLY: Candace Martino. M-A-R-T-I-N-O. Her number is(904) 323-2580, Extension 129. CHAIRMAN GAL: Can I hear public comments? Thank you. MR. GODLY: Thank you. MS. MASON: First speaker will be Nicole Ryan, followed by Richard Ryder. (Speaker was duly sworn.) MS. RYAN: Good afternoon, council members. For the record, Nicole Ryan, here on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. The Conservancy is opposed to the proposed eagle management plan amendment. And we've had lots of good eagle discussion this afternoon, interesting information and facts and dialogue. But the issue before you today is not primarily about eagles. And it is not primarily about CCME Policy 7.1.2,paragraph 3. What you really need to focus on today is whether agreements made in a PUD approval process count for anything when a developer seeks to amend that PUD. The proposed amendment reverses an explicit agreement made by the applicant when the PUD was first approved. This agreement stated construction would not begin in the eagle primary protection zone until the eagles left the nest of their own accord. The approval for the five high-rise towers was clearly conditioned upon this agreement. While the inconvenient eagles are still there, but instead of modifying proposed development to avoid impacts to the nest,the applicant is seeking to move forward with the towers. When this PUD was approved, you and the public were given repeated assurances that the developer was not going to do anything until, I quote, Mr. Eagle decides to find a new place to live, end quote. And that was from Karen Bishop, representative for the developer at the December 12th, 2000 Board of County Commissioners hearing. Conditions to the rezone were included in the staff report and they were stated over and over again on the record by county staff and by representatives for the developer. In the November, 2000 EAC staff report, for instance, it states: As a requirement of the bald eagle management plan, there shall be protective covenants placed over the primary zone of the eagle's nest, and restrictive covenants placed over the secondary zone of the nest. Some other promises made at the December, 2000 EAC meeting,and I believe Mr. Gal was the only one of the EAC members that actually was there for that meeting, but Mr. Ron Nino, then working for Collier County, stated: The long and the short of it is, while we are approving 590 units of housing, in fact they won't be able to build any of those units until the eagle finds a new home. Chairman Sansbury at that time asked: Just to clarify, so potentially if he, meaning the eagle, didn't move, the high-rises don't happen. Mr.Nino for the staff: They are out of luck. Similar assurances were given at the planning commission that year. Again, for the staff, Mr. Nino stating: There's an eagle there and the PUD, as structured, contains an eagle management plan. It basically says that until the eagle decides to find a new home, the development can't go forward. It just can't go forward. It's there and it will have to wait until the eagle finds a new home. Based on these assurances given by staff and promises made by the representative for the applicant, it's clear the recommendations for approval were based on the protection of this nest. Page 67 February 2,2005 The PUD process in general is characterized by negotiation and compromise. You engaged in some of that this morning when you negotiated with the developer and added some stipulations to the approval -- the recommendation of approval for the PUD and for the conditional use. And I'm sure that those were done in good faith on all sides. PUDs that are approved upon good faith negotiations should not be amended in the future to eliminate those commitments made. If developers can make any promise to secure approval of a PUD, only to discard those promises later with the approval of a more sympathetic commission, then really the PUD process becomes a mockery of land use decision-making. And there are also other--two more important points. If, as Mr. Godly has said,that tree isn't going to last very long anyway, then why are we going through this whole battle to try to amend promises that were made? Also, the applicant still has use of the property. They can construct the project in accordance with the previous Master Plan B. The eagle management plan covers only a small portion of the project site. The developer can still work on the golf course and the housing units that are on the east side of Vanderbilt Drive. Now, those promises for whatever reason were not incorporated into the PUD document. Was it because they just simply weren't important? Or maybe because they were stated so many times on the record and everyone that stood up, raised their right hand and swore that it was the truth that they were stating, that perhaps it just never made it into the PUD because nobody thought it should. But that's something that you really need to examine. Especially those of you who did vote on this issue the last go-around. And for the others,you need to look at the promises made on record and really take that into account when you make your decision on this item. The bottom line here is about the integrity and accountability of the planning process in Collier County. Therefore, we're asking that you recommend denial of the modification to the Cocohatchee Bay PUD eagle management plan and that you make the applicant stick to the agreement that was made previously. Thank you. MS. MASON: Richard Ryder, followed by Dick Macken. MR. RYDER: Good afternoon, councilors. Richard Ryder, MD, of Cove Towers,North Naples. A commitment is a commitment and a promise is a promise. Signature made commitments and promises to the county in 2000, re: not disturbing or altering the Eagle No. 19 habitat. This is documented in county records. Those undertakings should be honored and respected at the present time by Signature and the county. To do otherwise would send an inappropriate message to Signature, future developers and to our citizens regarding the integrity of Collier County. Thank you. MS. MASON: Dick Macken, followed by Rebecca Knowles. MR. MACKEN: I would like to thank the Environmental Advisory Council for allowing me to speak. My name is Dick Macken and I live at the Villages of Emerald Bay, a condominium development a short distance from the Cocohatchee Bay PUD site. I'm a member of Collier County Audubon,but I am not speaking on their behalf I've been concerned about Florida eagles for some time. I have met with Audubon's Florida Eagle Watch in Maitland, and I have also been in contact with U.S. Fish&Wildlife. Let's be perfectly clear about the request before you. In asking to amend the Cocohatchee Bay PUD eagle management plan,the developer is really calling for the removal of the eagles nesting on the site. Transcripts of hearings before the Environmental Advisory Council, the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners at the time the PUD was approved in 2000 plainly show that no high-rises were to be constructed within 1,500 feet of the eagles' nest until the eagles had left the site of their own volition. This 1,500-foot radius includes all of the property's buildable land on the west side of Vanderbilt Page 68 February 2,2005 Drive. To facilitate the removal of the birds, the developer has asked the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to issue an incidental take permit, which absolves the developer from penalties, should construction cause harm to an endangered species like the eagles. While the Corps of Engineers issues the incidental take permit, the biological opinion for the request is written by the U.S. Fish& Wildlife Service. Fish& Wildlife has to issue a take permit, unless the loss of a particular nest would negatively affect the survival of an entire species throughout the country. The issuing of the take permit for the Cocohatchee Bay site does not mean that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is in favor of the loss of the nest or thinks it is a good idea that the eagles be driven from the property. It simply means that U.S. Fish& Wildlife Service had no choice but to issue the permit. And make no mistake, the eagles will abandon their nest if this eagle management plan amendment is approved and construction of the high-rises begins. The eagles will not tolerate high-rises as close as 35 feet from their nest. The provisions of the existing eagle management plan were put in place for a reason: To protect the eagles and their nest. The developer needs to keep his pledge not to drive the eagles away. Promises don't come with an expiration date. I urge the Environmental Advisory Council to deny the amendment to the Cocohatchee Bay PUD eagle management plan. Thank you very much. MS. MASON: Rebecca Knowles, followed by Brad Cornell. MS. KNOWLES: Good afternoon, Councilors, and thank you very much for your endurance here today. I have--I'm Rebecca Knowles, and I'm a resident of Cove Towers. I have kind of a rhetorical question for you here, which has been alluded to already. Do promises mean anything in Collier County? Brent Batten of the Naples Daily News wrote a column about this last September, and he concluded with these words, and I quote: There is a steady parade of developers coming before commissioners promising this and that in order to get their approvals. County Commissioners have an opportunity to send them a message. In Collier County,words do in fact mean something. I especially hope that you will take seriously the words of our Land Development Code, that in Section 10.05.03(L) says in part, and I quote: In cases where stipulations, restrictions or safeguards are attached, all representations of the owner or his agents at public hearings shall be deemed contractual and may be enforced by suit or injunction or other appropriate relief, end quote. And there is a stipulation attached to the Cocohatchee Bay PUD. The motion to approve at the BCC stipulated that all staff recommendations be incorporated. That staff report, the executive summary, recommended approval on the proviso that the eagles would never be harmed by the actions of man. Please let your vote today reflect your desire to make forever binding all promises intended to influence your decision. Thank you. MS. MASON: Brad Cornell, followed by Anita Brown. MR. CORNELL: Good afternoon, council members. Brad Cornell, here on behalf of Collier County Audubon Society again. First I want to state that Collier County Audubon Society objects to any activities that will threaten the continued existence of eagles at Wiggins Pass and in Collier County. However, also, the issue of promises made is very problematic, as we've been just listening to. And I think that's troubling. However, I want to raise an issue that I think is even more troubling to me and to the Audubon Society here r� locally. And that is, to look at this situation with the big picture in mind, and that is whether this project is developed now with its residential component, or after the eagles nest CO-19 is gone naturally,the result is Page 69 February 2,2005 the same, the site is going to be developed with the residential units that have already been permitted in 2000. And the problem still remains, as I pointed out on the earlier discussion, we have not done anything to address comprehensive protection of eagles in Collier County or eagle habitat. So whatever the fate of this petition, the result is going to be the same. And we have a tall order in front of us to deal with the comprehensive issue of listed species habitat protection in Collier County. Collier County Audubon Society believes that it is a mistake to put all of the eagle protection eggs in this eagle management basket or nest. I don't mean to be flippant, but I do believe that we are --we're pursuing a very large issue with a small petition in front of you right now. And I don't think it's going to work. And the reason I don't think it's going to work is because the project is already approved, and because it will be built at the latest when this nest is naturally gone. And I believe that the Board of County Commissioners may likely withhold their support for a process to comprehensively plan for protecting eagles and other listed species in all of Collier County if this nest CO-19 is used to deny this petition. I'm afraid that's a political issue. But I'm here to stand in front of you and say that we need to pay attention to that, because ultimately it's going to affect how we best protect listed species in all of Collier County, including eagles at Wiggins Pass. I want to reiterate that our -- we look to you as the environmental advisory council, not just as a project review council. Because one of your primary purposes is policy recommendations. And this is an area of policy that you need to take a leadership role. And I want to reiterate that I hope that you and the county can begin the development of an effective set of local listed species policies, which would include incentives, regulations and mitigation county-wide. I think this is what we really need. We cannot expect project-by-project and petition-by-petition examination of listed species habitat issues to give us what we're going to need,because I think that's going to doom us, doom the species that we're trying to protect. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GAL: Brad, I have a question for you. I don't understand why you say if we deny this petition that it's going to be used politically to prevent an eagle management plan in the future. Why would that happen? MR. CORNELL: Because I think that politically the board -- at least some of the Board of County Commissioners look upon this project as a vested project because it's already been approved in 2000. And if we in the --what I think are our--the best of intentions, trying to protect the eagles at Wiggins Pass, and this is our interest too as the Audubon Society -- if we pursue this particular petition of wanting to change the eagle management, this particular management plan, on a vested project, we're going to, I think, drive the County Commission away from their desire and political support of treating comprehensive policies or looking for comprehensive policies countywide. And we saw in the last glitch cycle the loss of support,the erosion of support for a policy that would clarify that Growth Management Plan policy that has already been read to you a couple of times. It's ambiguous, and it's admittedly ambiguous-- CHAIRMAN GAL: I think that the replacement language was just as ambiguous. MR. CORNELL: Well,I guess that's-- CHAIRMAN GAL: I don't think it helped much,but-- MR. CORNELL: I think that's a matter of debate. But what--you may recall that what was directed was a process to begin using a stakeholders group, which is meeting now, and is going through, and there will be on, I believe, February 15th, a workshop in front of the Board of County Commissioners to discuss this very issue, to discuss a likely recommendation for habitat conservation planning process for Collier County. Whether the County Commission supports this I think is a big question. We would surely like to see them support this because this is where we believe we're going to get the most bang for our buck in Page 70 February 2,2005 terms of habitat protection. We've got to do it on a regional basis, at least on a countywide basis. And if we don't get the support of the County Commission for that, I think we're going to really make our job much more difficult. Because I don't think that what we're talking about right now is ultimately going to make a big difference, or even a positive difference for eagles, because this project is already permitted. And what we're talking about is the amount of time of nest productivity in this particular site until it's gone, and it will be gone. And then what do we have? The project's already been approved. So what I'm saying to you is, politically let's not drive away our support on the County Commission, let's try and rally some support, recognizing that this is a problematic petition, I will grant you that. And I feel that it's--you know, it's got some ethical issues around it that are aside from the eagle issue. But talking about eagles, I don't think we're going to help ourselves by ultimately denying this, because I think the damage is already done on this particular site. CHAIRMAN GAL: See, I'm still not sure that even if this petition is denied that would maybe demonstrate to commissioners that a county-wide eagle management plan is required. MS. HUSHON: We in fact said in January that we requested one. Remember,we had a special meeting in January-- MR. CORNELL: Right. MS. HUSHON: --on this very subject. MR. CORNELL: Right. I wish I could have come. It was-- MS. HUSHON: And it was forward -- I mean, at least put our comments in to staff for the incorporating before it went to the working group and finally to the commissioners. We met early so that they would have plenty of time to work on the inputs. n MR. CORNELL: Right. And I appreciate your support. And I think that this is exactly what needs to happen. However, for this particular project, this one's out of the gate. And politically I feel that this is -- I feel bad about that. I feel like politically, though, we need to acknowledge what is past, and try and do better in the future. And the future, in my view, and I will strongly suggest this to you, is a broader comprehensive habitat conservation planning process. I don't think we're going to get there with this particular one. CHAIRMAN GAL: This decision was made in 2000, really, when this wasn't even in the horizon of anybody's thoughts. MR. CORNELL: That's correct. We've learned some things in the intervening years. CHAIRMAN GAL: But all we can do at this point is deal what we have before us today. MR. CORNELL: You're right. And I'm -- and you, I'm sure, will do your best. I'm suggesting to you as a public commenter that take into consideration the political ramifications of this particular issue. We're not going to gain a whole lot for eagles by denying it. We could do ourselves some political damage by doing that. And as an example, I will hold out to you the denial of the glitch amendment, which was intended to at least help us along the way towards some interpretation of protection of listed species here, we don't have that now. We have ambiguity. You want to solve that,you're going to have to go to court. CHAIRMAN GAL: But was your sense --what was the reasons for the denial of that glitch amendment? I mean,my sense was that it was still an ambiguous-- MR. CORNELL: No, I-- CHAIRMAN GAL: You think that there are commissioners that don't want to protect listed species? MR. CORNELL: I wouldn't put it quite that bluntly, but I think that in the prioritization of issues, maybe it's not at the top of everybody's list. Maybe that's the issue. I don't want to say that for any particular commissioner. But we did see in that discussion a backing away of wanting to consider a local role of any Page 71 February 2,2005 n kind in species protection. At least the initial discussion was a big caution flag to all of us who want to see a local role and want to see these kinds of projects dealt with more comprehensively. We need to have mitigation, we need to have incentives to do better. And I think we're dangerously close to losing that opportunity. MR. HUGHES: If I may, essentially what the reality is of this procedure is, when this tree falls down next Tuesday night at 12:30 in the morning, there's no issue. Construction starts. Right? So that's really all we're talking about. The tree's near death now, anyway. MR. CORNELL: Well, it is dead. MR. HUGHES: It is dead, right. It's near falling down now. So I tend to agree with what he's saying, we're going in circles. MR. CORNELL: And we want to see eagles stay at Wiggins Pass. MR. HUGHES: Right. MR. CORNELL: And I think if we fight over this particular nest in this particular location, we're going to do ourselves harm. MR. HUGHES: Now, I have one more part to that. And I was glad the Doctor here earlier just spoke up. Putting up a steel-type tree to me is ludicrous. I just personally don't go for it. I think it makes no sense to create artificial habitat for wild animals. Makes really no sense to me. MR. CORNELL: I will reserve my comments and opinion about that except to say that in our world today, and in Florida in particular, we have -- and all you have to do is look at the Everglades restoration process, we have created a situation where we have no choice but to humanly manage natural systems. We have destroyed enough of our natural environment that we do not have a sufficient-- in many places,a sufficient ecosystem to sustain itself all by itself. We've got to manage it. That's our legacy now,unfortunately. r1 MR. HUGHES: And again as a result of our tremendous depth of wisdom. MR. CORNELL: I think it's lack of forethought. MR. HUGHES: Right. MR. HUMISTON: A follow-up question. MR. CORNELL: Yes. MR. HUMISTON: Were you kind of suggesting that it might be better to approve this petition and accept the other eagle habitat that the applicant was going to purchase and put that in preservation? MR. CORNELL: That isn't what I'm suggesting. I think it's a political reality. It's not that I prefer to do this, it's that that project is already permitted. And I think it's being viewed by the County Commission as vested. And if we try to undo it through the back door,I think we're going to shoot ourselves in the foot. I know it's not -- well, we can't undo the permit. That's the reality of it. We can't undo it. They've permitted it. And that water is under the bridge. And whatever we all may feel about that, I'm certainly sorry that that's happened. But we are where we are. So yes,to answer your question. MS. MASON: Anita K. Brown, followed by Gary Edson. MS. BROWN: Thank you for the second opportunity. We have met this morning already. We have heard many things about the danger of an artificial tree, which I agree to. I am from a medical background. I understood his comments completely, which was maybe a little different for the other party. We have already an approved plan here. Yes, we cannot backwards(sic) from this plan. But we can make it a little bit more difficult for them to start construction. I think it's ridiculous to start in 35 feet away from the tree. We know this bird is very sensitive and very intelligent. Better than we are. Never I have seen a report has shown so close to the bird's nest that it will work and the bird will not abandon the nest. We know this for sure. If we don't start now to make a point and make it clear that certain rules have to be met, we will never be able to control or at least manage certain requests of developers. They will get new ideas to make it Page 72 February 2,2005 possible to go around the back door and do what they want to do. Because we are not able to say it's enough. We have certain rules,we want to apply these rules, we gave this application,the permit, but don't start construction in 35 feet from the nest. Don't build this high. We lose every year 200,000 -- 200,000 migrating birds in the United States alone. Why? They fly against high-rises with big mirrors. Nobody's doing anything about it. We know this since 15 years, but nobody's doing anything about it. Isn't it time to do something finally,to stand up to what(sic)we are here? You are elected from the public to be their voice to say that's it, we have certain rules and we apply these rules now. Unless we don't do anything, we'll let everything build, it will be anyhow the last place we have still left. Then we are Miami Beach, we are not different than other cities, not even worth to be mentioned. And we will fit into a program that shows already a very common act. What we don't like, we put by side. We don't need it. Destroy it. We are in a society which is unfortunately God damn sick. We produce movies with-- where animals are killed for shock effect because we are so stunned against our instinct inside. The bird has one instinct. It doesn't matter if it's deaf or blind. The instinct tells them you have to build a nest in the highest tree available. It can be an artificial tree, can be a lamp post. It has to be high enough. You think the high-rise is shorter than the tree?No. You think this bird will survive? No, it will not survive. It will abandon this tree. They know it. They are afraid to take it because it's God damn good watched. I believe it's watched 24 hours every day. They are afraid to cut it down. It survived three hurricanes. It maybe will survive the next hurricane season which is coming up. We shall see. Maybe the bird finds another tree. But if we start with building high-rises,there will be no other tree. Have you seen this picture without the high-rises? It's a beautiful picture. Yes, they are dead trees, that's nature. Lightning,thunder,rain, fire, it's nature. Can you imagine to have five high-rises there, an artificial tree, no bird, no song, nothing? We getting into a poor, poor life. We are starting to kill whatever is in our way around us. It's a shame. And I think really we had a promise, Exxon, you know the problem involved in Exxon, the oil spill? They promised, it will never happen. They are still not finished with cleaning up from the accident which happened a century(sic)ago. And it takes approximately 25 to 35 years longer to clean their accident. The foreseen for nature, unpredictable. We don't know. And we think we can control or predict nature? We are a part of it. We should control ourself first. Thank you very much. MS. MASON: Gary Edson, followed by Doug Fee. MR. EDSON: One of our speakers, Diane Shandly, has to go and she'd like to speak in my place. Would that be acceptable? MS. MASON: Sure. MR. EDSON: Thanks very much. Then I'll speak later. MS. SHANDLY: I want to thank the council members for allowing us all to give our testament in this hearing, and also for their fortitude. There's been a lot of things that have been said today -- by the way, I'm Diane Shandly. I live in Collier's Reserve. I'm the head of the natural resources group there. But I am speaking as an individual and not for the Collier's Reserve Country Club. I was at a recent information meeting that Signature Communities held, and they provided mostly the same information that they've provided in front of this group. I've got a couple of comments to make based on what they said and based on what has been said this afternoon. The first thing is about this artificial tree. And I think there has been some question about it. It sounds like a good idea on the face of it. Let's build a tree, you know, they're nesting on artificial structures, let's do a good thing for the eagles. But they admitted in their meeting that I attended before and I think in this same Page 73 February 2,2005 n forum that they have no proof, the operative word being proof, that these eagles will nest in this tree. It would be a great thing, a great experiment, and certainly, for what's happening in our world today and the habitat that's disappearing, it would be a great way to maybe increase the habitat. I don't know. But I don't want to see Collier County be the recipient of an experiment that we don't if it will work or not. Secondly, Signature has received an incidental take permit for these eagles. As a personal feeling, I don't like the federal government telling me what's going to happen to eagles in Collier County. And I think, and it goes back to I think what Brad was saying a bit, although I don't totally agree with him, that we need to have a larger, larger view of what's happening throughout our region, throughout our state, with wildlife protection. But I don't believe that this particular forum by saying no to the amendment is going to have an adverse affect on our County Commissioners. I think that we can't keep on putting off decisions that we make to protect environment and animals because we feel like, well, we may offend somebody and they're going to vote against our other issue. I mean,we have to act now. Lastly, I think the larger issue here is what other people have said, and that is the fact that whether words mean what they say. This entire PUD was granted based on assurances given by the developer to the EAC and the County Commissioners that they would not start construction until the eagles vacated the nest on their own. This was probably predicated on the fact that the developer believed that the dead tree would fall down fairly soon after they received their permission for their PUD. I'm not saying that Signature Communities should not be permitted to build their property. What I am saying is that the commissioners gave their permission for the building site plan so close to the nest based on prior promises made. The developers should be denied their amendment and should come back with a plan that keeps the buildings out of the primary and secondary zones, as current government statutes provide. .-� By allowing Signature Communities an amendment to their eagle management plan, the EAC, and eventually the Commissioners will establish a precedent for any developer to say whatever they need to say in order to bypass inconvenient wildlife within their proposed projects. If this amendment is to go forward, it effectively says to me as a constituent and as an American that my government cannot be believed. This amendment should be denied and Signature Communities should have to go back and rework their site plan to eliminate the threat to these eagles and to assure that they keep their original promises to the citizens of Collier County. Thank you. MS. MASON: Doug Fee, followed by Joe Moreland. MR. FEE: Good afternoon. For the record, I'm Doug Fee. And before I read my prepared statement, a couple of comments. Just a couple of questions. Will the State of Florida have to issue a take permit on this development? What happens if the eagle leaves or moves,tree-wise or habitat-wise? I want to make sure that in the photos or the graphics there is some land that's north of the PUD. It was a different color. I believe it was pink. And I think this is where they've suggested putting up the artificial tree. And I just want to make sure that the council knows or we all know that that's not part of the PUD. That is land that -- I suppose they own it. They can state that on the record. But I just want to make sure that it's only the yellow part of the PUD that we're talking about. The staff report for this meeting talks about the Growth Management Plan consistency. And that's on Page 3 of 9. And in the middle of the page it says: Therefore, the proposed amendment does not impact the approved density. Collier County comprehensive planning finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of the future land use element. However, staff must defer to county environmental services department staff as to whether the proposed revisions to the bald eagle management plan are consistent with the proposed revisions -- I'm sorry, are consistent with the county provisions regarding the protection of listed species. And then below that it has conservation coastal management element. Staff is saying only those policies Page 74 February 2,2005 n relating to the eagle as a listed species were evaluated for project consistency. And I think that's important for the citizens as we're here with a PUD amendment, that we must make sure that whatever does get approved or disapproved is consistent with the plan. And I'm not sure what those two statements -- whether this has actually been looked at comprehensively. It may have been looked at with certain policies,but I would question if it was entirely looked at from the comp. plan. Okay,having said that, I just repeated myself. Good afternoon, Councilors. My name is Doug Fee. I'm strongly opposed to the plan by Vanderbilt Partners, as known as Signature Properties, to amend their bald eagle management plan. There was an explicit agreement by this applicant back in 2000 when this proposal came before this council that construction would not occur within 750 feet of the eagles'nest until the eagles left on their own accord. The approval of this PUD was conditioned on: Your county planning staff back in 2000 recommended approval of the PUD in the executive summary presented to you ahead of the hearing. But their recommendation was conditioned with the condition that the eagles would not be harmed by the actions of man. That staff report was later incorporated in the motion to approve at the Board of County Commission. The record of hearings is rife with references to the welfare of the eagles. Statements by Ms. Burgeson and Mr. Nino on the county staff and Ms. Karen Bishop, on behalf of the developer cannot be mistaken for anything other than solid reassurances that building on this project would never happen until, as Ms. Bishop says on the transcript on December 12, 2000, Mr. Eagle decides to find a new place to live. If such promises are allowed to drift into oblivion, the entire land development process will turn into little more than a ruse on the public. This hearing is not so much about eagles and wildlife protection as it is a test of the fundamental integrity of the planning and growth process in Collier County. I urge you to deny this petition. MS. MASON: Joe Moreland, followed by Gary Edson,the final speaker. MR. MORELAND: Good afternoon, Commissioners. With the comments that have been made, I'm just very proud to align myself to on behalf of the Estuary Conservation Commission, particularly those made by the Conservancy, and the follow-up speakers who dwelled and amplified on the point of the governance issue that is in here. I think we can dispense with the environmental kinds of issues and what their control here was, if you would just think for a moment, what if indeed none of this had transpired until now and the developer was coming in with this petition to construct a very large set of high-rises 35 feet from an eagle and it was tantamount to a-- chopping the tree and kicking the eagle out, because that's exactly what is going to be the result. That's nonsense. Nobody can think that that would go through any of this county's advisory or governing bodies. It wouldn't happen. So don't be bluffed by it. What would have happened is a serious discussion on the take of the eagle, a change in the plans so that you certainly weren't entertaining a take within the primary zone, nor in the secondary zone. It's never, never land. Enough said on that. Controlling point however, this is not a case of first impression. This is a case of lasting impression. The lasting impression is the ones that my colleagues have focused on with respect to the integrity of governance and the responsibility of developers to represent reality that they're willing to live with when they first come before you to make application for the exercise of your advisory and legislative administrative powers. They didn't do that. To the contrary, that every step of the way, up until this hearing, their representations have been we're going to wait until the eagle leaves of its own volition. Period. End of it. The record is replete with the redundancy of that commitment. It makes no sense to formulate arguments that say now in the face of the fact that that eagle has not left,the Page 75 February 2,2005 tree has not fallen down, that we should now do this about face when I harken back to what I said just a moment ago, if this were a case of first impression,you wouldn't consider it for 10 seconds, as proposed. It makes no sense, it's a juxtaposition, it's illogical, and it is really a very irresponsible act, in my opinion-- and I'm perhaps speaking for myself now, I wouldn't want to put my board in that position -- but an irresponsible act to allow a proposal to accomplish the results that are being asked here. I have nothing against Signature Property. I respect them, they're a good outfit and all. And they're caught up in a set of circumstances which may or may not have been on their own. There's no maliciousness there, and I don't mean to infer that there is. But I do have a serious concern in being sure that our county government does the right thing. We don't have a great reputation, in case you might have read the papers over the past decade, and it is little opportunities like this when they present themselves where we can take a stand that is not only factually correct,but it is morally correct, ethically correct and,I would submit,politically correct. So I urge you to do the right thing. Thank you. MS. MASON: Your final speaker is Gary Edson. MR. EDSON: I'm Gary Edson. I'm from Glenn Eden, here representing myself I don't know how to top that. That says it all. But I would like to put this down into some very simplistic -- simplistic basis, and Mr. Hughes reminded me of my being back on a dirt road when I was a boy growing up. If I was selling a piece of property and the person who brought that piece -- who was living in that piece of property said to me hey, I'd like to live here as long as I can until I get tired of it. And I said well, you can do that, because I'm going to get a good price, because it's 1990 and I can buy this property right cheap. And you say boy, that's a good deal for me, I'm buying this property cheap. I'm not wanting to build for maybe five, 10 years anyway. Well, 12 years go by, and all of a sudden I'm wanting to build because the prices are going up and the property wants to be sold. And the person says to me, well, I don't want to move. Well, I got a new law here that says I can kick you out. Say, I don't want to move, you promised me I didn't have to. But then you say well, you know, I think I will move, but I'm just going to move to another room. Because that's what the eagle might do,he might move to another room, another tree on the lot. But I'm still not going to get rid of that. I can't get in there, because I made a promise to you that I didn't say you had to move out of the house. I didn't say you had to move at all. You want to move to another room,that's fine,too. So what happened here is that we got a person that made a promise to let me live in the house and then made me want to go to another room in that house, and all of a sudden I have to leave. Something wrong with that. That's the deal. These are good people. I mean, they got a lift, they put the chick back into the nest. They aren't out to hurt anybody. And I thought that was a noble gesture. But doggone it, this isn't right. It just plain ain't right. So I'm hoping you all will do the right thing. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GAL: Why don't we take a five-minute break, give the court reporter a little break, and then we'll let you respond. MR. YOVANOVICH: That's fine. I'm going to have Mr. Godly do some scientific response and then I'm going to get into some of the points that were said on the record that absolutely need to be corrected. CHAIRMAN GAL: We're at the end of the day, so let's really keep it five minutes. (A recess was taken.) ,.1 CHAIRMAN GAL: Okay, the meeting is back in order. If you have some comments to the public comments. Page 76 February 2,2005 n MR. GODLY: Thank you. Steve Godly, again, for the record. I just wanted to clarify a couple of comments that you heard that I don't think were correct or need some clarification. The bark. You heard discussions about the bark and the fact that it may be made of petrochemicals that could be damaging to the eaglets, the birds under some scenario. This is acrylic. It's no different, I don't think, from the stuff that's on your kitchen counter that you cut your vegetables on and eat off of every day practically. So I don't think this is going to harm the birds at all. There were comments about a steel -- a steel structure, why don't you make it out of wood, and then the potential reaction of a acrylic onto steel. We considered other options, and chose the monopole technology for two reasons: One is because the base and the engineering science behind the construction of the base is well known,well documented. We knew it would withstand the weather,the hurricanes, et cetera. The other obvious is that if it's made out of wood, it wouldn't necessarily withstand any hurricanes or-- and it certainly wouldn't necessarily withstand any termites or anything else. And so it was a long-term approach to solving a potential problem. Two other comments about where birds are likely to nest and would they move off to some other county or somewhere else. This is the biology of eagles. If they lose a nest tree, typically the nest is with -- an alternate nest is within sight of the old nest in almost all cases. Not always, but the vast majority of the cases,they are within sight of the old nest, and I think the same will occur here. And the final point is that one of the speakers mentioned do you need a state permit in the case of a bald eagle nest. The answer is no, you do not. In fact, under Section 6 of the Act, there's coordination required between the Service and the Commission. That coordination occurred, and Mr. Dan Sullivan, who's the endangered species coordinator, agreed with the biological opinion. In fact, he made some of the recommendations and the changes that were in it. So thank you. Unless you have any questions. MR. YOVANOVICH: Jerry? MR. SORRELL: No, for either one of you, it doesn't matter. MR. YOVANOVICH: Let me--can I do my rebuttal and we'll answer any other questions? I sat and I listened to your public speakers tell you statements about the public record and the public hearings that occurred four years ago. I think it's time that we set the record straight. Because, frankly, statements made by the people who spoke didn't tell you what the entire record contains, if you had read the entire transcripts at each of the hearings. I wasn't involved in the year 2000. I recently got involved. I did read the transcripts so I would understand and know what I was getting involved in, so I could come forward and in good conscience represent this client. Yes, Karen Bishop made the statements she made. No question about that. What the other people didn't tell you, either because they didn't read the record or because they chose not to tell you, was that Don Corace,their principal from Signature Communities, got up after Ms. Bishop's speaking and said we have a patient time frame. We can--we're four to five years away from going with this project. Where are we today? Four to five years later. We're exactly where Don Corace said he would be. He had a patient time frame. He never said and was never asked the question, does that mean you're going to wait until the eagle leaves? That question was never posed to Mr. Corace. It would have been a very simple question to ask, it would have been a very simple provision to put into the PUD, it would have been a very simple provision to put into the bald eagle management plan. Those questions were not asked of Don Corace. He got up there and he corrected what Ms. Bishop said, we have a patient time frame. ,.� Do you think that Signature Communities would risk $45 million on the hope that eagles would leave? I don't know any developer, no matter how much money they have, $45 million is a lot of money. I don't Page 77 February 2,2005 care if you're the Queen of England, whoever, you're going to miss $45 million. You're not going to put that on a pair of eagles leaving. It's ludicrous to even believe they would have done that. Had he been asked the question, and the question could have been asked by anybody, could have been asked by the Conservancy, it could have been asked by staff, it could have been asked by the Board of County Commissioners, we would have, I'm sure would have said no, we don't do that. We clarified the record, said we have a patient time frame. If you look at the PUD document, the PUD document has a provision that addresses amending the bald eagle management plan. Why would you have a provision in the PUD document itself that talks about how you go about amending a bald eagle management plan if it cannot be amended? It's a silly provision to have. Obviously the PUD document, which is the rules of the game for this piece of property, provides a process by which you can amend the bald eagle management plan. Obviously there could have been no commitment to never come back if there was a provision in the PUD document that tells you how you come back to address these situations. Also, as the chairman pointed out, the bald eagle management plan itself talked about changing site conditions or changing management techniques. Again, the bald eagle management plan could have been one line, we will not come forward until Mr. and Mrs. Eagle leave. That's not what the bald eagle management plan says. It addresses, again, changed site conditions or changed management techniques. A lot of statements were made that frankly call into question the integrity of my client. And that needs to be clarified. The entire record needs to be put in front of you before people make statements representing what was said. They didn't give you the whole document. I don't know why. I guess they chose to make their argument based upon what's most favorable to them and not include the entire document. I find it interesting that there was no scientific evidence -- scientific testimony, contrary to Mr. Godly, who admits he's an expert in eagles and the management of eagles. Everybody said this is an issue about what was promised or not promised when we went through the process the first time. Nobody has contradicted anything that he has said from a scientific standpoint regarding how the eagle will react, how the eagle will survive. No contrary evidence to what Mr. Godly said. This is a dead tree. It's been dead for seven years. Steve has told you that. Maybe it will last a couple more years,maybe it won't. When the tree -- let's say you deny the petition. When the tree goes, you'll have nothing. Now you have mitigation and you have an experiment; the artificial tree that may lead to something that helps us manage the eagle in Collier County. Without it, you have nothing. We're not obligated to do mitigation, as Steve pointed out, I pointed out. We offered that up because it was good. It was good. It was good for the eagle. We didn't have to do that. That is further evidence that the developer has concern about what's going to happen. Mr. Cornell pointed out that we don't have a comprehensive plan that addresses eagles in Collier County. There is nothing that says -- and we're working on that, that's what the stakeholder group is, is how do we modify the comprehensive plan to address species in Collier County? Right now we don't have that. The comprehensive plan talks about the process, it talks about permitting from U.S. Fish -- I'm sorry, the Army Corps of Engineers and biological opinions from the U.S. Fish& Wildlife. That's what the comprehensive plan talks about. It talks about the Endangered Species Act. It talks about globally how will the species survive. Until we change the code or the comprehensive plan to talk about what we're going to do here in Collier County, that's an irrelevant argument. We need to follow the comprehensive plan as it exists today. And ,.� you've heard this before, the comprehensive plan says that the county will utilize the recommendations of the U.S. Fish& Wildlife. Page 78 February 2,2005 Your staff has found our petition consistent with the comprehensive plan. That is what your job is,to focus on what is consistent with the comprehensive plan. All this extraneous discussion about what happened in the year 2000, when I guess only the chairman was on the board, not including all of the record, that's irrelevant to today's discussion. The PUD exists, it's in place. The question is do you amend the bald eagle management plan. The PUD document addresses amending the bald eagle management plan. The bald eagle management plan itself addresses amending the bald eagle management plan. To interpret this that we promised somehow that we would never come back and amend this bald eagle management (sic) is not supported by the testimony of Mr. Corace and it's not supported by the very documents that are in effect. And the only documents you look at is the PUD document. You don't go back and look at the record, because those were -- if it was a commitment that was important to be in the PUD document, it would have found its way into the PUD document,just like we did it earlier today. When we wanted to make some modifications to some of the guidelines, we very specifically did that and we incorporated that into the bald eagle management plan,which is part of the PUD document. None of that occurred in the year 2000. So you have to look to what does the PUD document say, and the PUD document allows us to come forward, allows us to do this, and our plan is 100 percent consistent with the comprehensive plan, and we request that you do the right thing, follow the comprehensive plan and recommend to the Board of County Commissioners approval of this bald eagle management plan amendment. And with that we're available to answer any questions you have. CHAIRMAN GAL: Do you have the transcript that you're referring to where you said-- MR. YOVANOVICH: I can send it to you, if you want it. I'd be happy to do it. CHAIRMAN GAL: Yeah, I know. But I've got to make a decision today, I think. I don't have to, but you probably want me to. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, frankly, I didn't know we were going to be getting into this extraneous stuff, and I just needed to clarify the record. MS. MASON: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, staff did mention earlier that they wanted to have time before you close public comments to clarify some things that had come up in previous statements. MR. YOVANOVICH: I think they have the complete transcripts. MR. HUGHES: We've got a display up right now. Specifically where is the nest that we're referring to here? MS. HUSHON: By the pointer. MR. HUGHES: You're going to start this ground project all at once? MR. YOVANOVICH: No, no, sir,we're starting the most northern building first. MR. HUGHES: And the distance from that site is? MR. YOVANOVICH: That building is in the secondary zone, by the way. MR. HUGHES: Your roads will access how? MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm sorry? MR. HUGHES: Your access roads will be how? Will they be near the nest again? MR. CORACE: No,they will not. MR. SORRELL: You don't have a map like you had earlier that shows the zones? MR. YOVANOVICH: The zones? You want to see the zones? MS. HUSHON: You don't have this overlay on that? MR. SORRELL: With this project on it. This was from the previous-- MR. HUGHES: If I may, the tree is dead. It's just a matter of time,that thing just falls over. Probably next summer. If you were to start your project and stay as far away from this site,how is that going to fit your time line? Page 79 February 2,2005 MR. YOVANOVICH: If I may, and I probably went too quickly when I discussed this originally. We are starting with building five,which is this building right here,which is in the secondary zone. MR. HUGHES: Furthest away. MR. YOVANOVICH: Furthest away. Then we go to building four,then we go to building one. MR. HUGHES: Slow down. Time line? MS. HUSHON: A year between. MR. YOVANOVICH: Assuming the market will allow us to meet the schedule, the soonest we can get to building four would be one year after we do building five. MS. HUSHON: You also had clubhouses,I remember,which is within the 750. MR. YOVANOVICH: The clubhouse, which is right here, and that will be constructed -- we commence construction during the non-nesting season. MR. HUGHES: Now,your proposal today is also with mitigation,to actually relocate this nest site. MR. YOVANOVICH: No we're not touching the nest. We're not touching the nest at all. That tree never gets touched by us. What we did in -- the pink, the pink area is not within the PUD boundaries, it's adjacent, it's owned by the same entity. That is 90 acres that will go into preserve, and that's the area on which the artificial tree would be constructed. And if you look at the entire PUD,you will see how much is actually in preserve-- MS. HUSHON: A lot. MR. YOVANOVICH: --of the entire--I mean,hundreds of acres are in preserve as part of this PUD. MR. HUMISTON: Is that area that's colored in the area that would be purchased as eagle habitat? n MR. YOVANOVICH: No,no, we already own that. MR. GODLY: There would be a separate purchase of a territory, independent of anything that happens on this property, sir. MR. HUMISTON: Has there been any discussion of where or how large or what the character of that-- MR. GODLY: Yes. And there are conditions in the bald eagle management plan that's before you that describes the sequencing of how that territory would be selected. The first condition, I don't have it in front of me. The first condition, it would have a bald eagle nest on it that's active. It would ideally have a number of alternate nest sites. We would look in Collier County and use our absolute best efforts to locate and purchase a territory in Collier County. That would be a-- MR. HUMISTON: Do you know of any areas in Collier County that would be candidates that would fit that description? MR. GODLY: Yes, we do. We had hoped to schedule a flight, last week, Don and I, in order to go to every territory in the county, to fly it by helicopter, to confirm the nest is still active this year. Already had realtors involved. We know the owner of every bald eagle territory that is known in Collier County. And we're actively pursuing that, sir. MR. HUMISTON: Another question about this exhibit. You said that the area that's colored in where the relocated nest would go,do you already own that property? MR. GODLY: Yes. MR. HUMISTON: Including the part that's under water? MR. YOVANOVICH: It's already in a conservation easement. That's part of our Water Management District permit. MR. HUMIS TON: And the other areas that are bounded by the yellow line that are water, that's not state ,-\ owned submerged land,that's part of your parcel? MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, sir. And as I understand it, owned by the property owner and not the state. Page 80 February 2,2005 MR. GODLY: Up to the mean high water line, and of course you know that. MR. HUMISTON: That was my question. MR. GODLY: Yes,yes. MR. HUMISTON: So the part that's under water is owned by the state? MR. GODLY: It's my understand -- well, those are sovereign submerged lands. Now, he has the title to the whole boundary,but they're sovereign submerged lands. MR. HUMISTON: The only reason I asked is because the boundary line over here in the upper left corner, the western side goes right down close to where the channel is in the waterway there. MR. GODLY: Yes. The location of the proposed eagle -- the artificial eagle nest is above mean high water,and it clearly belongs to him. And there's no dispute over that. MR. HUMISTON: Do you have any photographs of that site, ground level photographs that would show a comparison between the character of that and where the existing nest is? MR. GODLY: I don't have them with me. It's a salt flat, and we chose this location, as I mentioned, I think earlier, because it in my view was the safest location, best protected for the birds with the least amount of impact in order to construct the artificial tree. We won't have to remove any mangroves, as an example. It will be brought in by crane. Water Management District staff will be on-site during the entire construction of the tree. That's a requirement of our permit. And it's one that we suggested, quite frankly, to make sure that no one would have any concerns. MR. HUGHES: So if I may now, if we go ahead and approve this project,you start with the north tower at a reduced speed,by the time you get to the site that's adjacent,that thing's probably gone anyway. MR. YOVANOVICH: You know, if we did it every year, that means we don't miss a year because the market tells us not to miss a year,the soonest we're going to get there is three years. MR. HUGHES: Right. MR. YOVANOVICH: The soonest. MR. HUGHES: So the odds are with us. I personally don't like artificial trees for these animals. I think it's a waste of time and a waste of money. DR. LYNNE: The clubhouse,though, is in the primary zone, and that's starting right away. MR. HUGHES: You are starting the clubhouse right away? MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes,the clubhouse is allowed to start during the first non-nesting season. MR. GODLY: Non-nesting season. MR. HUGHES: But if we were to approve this with the contingent that that's not allowed and you start your high-rise first, does that mean anything to you? MR. YOVANOVICH: We have some timing issues with the Condominium Act that we'd have to address. MR. HUGHES: And you have contract on this-- MR. YOVANOVICH: We need to make sure that the condominium amenities are available before we have the first C.O. in the first building. MR. GODLY: And the discussions we had with the Service and the Commission, this was brought up in terms of the timing and the need to have the amenities there. The Service agreed and thought it was most prudent in this case to do the site clearing and the disturbance in the non-nesting season. Obviously you do that. And then have the construction -- the initial construction of the clubhouse and of condominium number five, it would be started in the non-nesting season. The -- condominium number five has a construction schedule of approximately 18 months. This way, by the time that condo is complete, the clubhouse also would be complete. MR. HUGHES: And the clubhouse is approximately 500 feet from the closest edge? n MR. GODLY: I would suspect so. This is 925. That's 431. So yeah, it's probably 500 feet. It's single story, by the way. Page 81 February 2,2005 MR. HUGHES: It is a single -- no pylons, no pipe driving,just floating it? Are you floating that building, single story? MR. YOVANOVICH: The clubhouse you're talking about? MR. HUGHES: Yes. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay, the clubhouse is two stories. We anticipate the shell will take six months to build. Then we'll be inside. MR. HUGHES: What support structure under the shell? Are you going to put pylons in there? I'm getting at how much noise are we actually-- MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. And Mr. Hughes, we haven't designed it yet, so I can't tell you. So I don't know. But again, we'll have to do all of that. If we're doing pilings, it will have to be during the non-nesting season. We'll start that,obviously, first. MR. HUGHES: Two-story building. So no doubt of being able to throw that up in that time period. That's an easy one. It's the high-rises that really take the time. And it is site preparation that's going to take the most significant part of time; is that correct? Setting up the pilings, the infrastructure that's underneath before it really goes out of the ground. MR. GODLY: There's 15 stories on that one, there's 20 stories on the other ones. And the problem is you can't -- well, you could stop construction, but it's not practical, as was mentioned earlier. You only have four and a half months, and --when there isn't a non-nesting season and you've got to build as you go up, so it's just not practical to stop. MR. YOVANOVICH: And just so you know, the staging area is actually building number one. That's where we'll be staging when we do building five and building four,which is the most southern building. MR. HUGHES: And why is that? MR. GODLY: That was specifically done in order to minimize impacts on the birds. MR. HUGHES: All right. Because I'm looking at this area adjacent to building five, I believe it is. MS. HUSHON: That's a driving range. MR. HUGHES: That's a driving range? MR. GODLY: Yeah,that's part of the driving range there. MR. HUGHES: Are you using it? It's not being used, is it? MR. GODLY: It will be. MR. HUGHES: So you could stage there for that first building, couldn't you? MR. GODLY: If we didn't construct the driving range. And there's not a lot of sense to have a clubhouse if you don't have a golf course. MR. HUGHES: Right. But the point is, for staging the first building, get out of the ground, you're out of the way, the clubhouse is up during the non-nesting season. So you basically got your first foothold in there in non-nesting, overlapping with building five there into the nesting season. And then we're pretty clear, giving us another two years to even really be concerned, aren't we? MR. GODLY: The Service was in agreement with us. The staging area down here at building number one, that's where all the workers are going to park and everything else. There are going to be 200 people involved in the project. It's going to be probably the busiest activity center on the entire site in the sense that that's where the materials are going to be shuttled from and everything else. And so the desire again was to minimize the effect on the birds, particularly early on. And so building number five and one are the farthest away. That's how you minimize the impact. MR. HUGHES: My opinion would be, and it's my opinion, open for discussion, that you use the area adjacent to building five as your initial staging area. If it's going to be a driving range, it's, let's say, a matter of weeks the way it's done here,to all of a sudden be a golf course,because we just lay the sod. And then after that's all completed, the clubhouse is up, the building five is up. Now you pull out of that staging Page 82 February 2,2005 area and you move down to your building one,you're right where you want to end up with. MR. GODLY: The golf course from beginning to end is about a 14-month process, sir, because you've got to grow in the grass, you've got to do the earth work. It's not as though you can just lay down the sod and be done with it. MR. HUGHES: My point is, though, during construction, you're not going to even use that course until this is built. MR. GODLY: At the time the first condominium is available to be used and the clubhouse is available to be used,the golf course will also be open. MR. HUGHES: Yeah, they coincide, don't they? Again, back to my point. By doing that, you're minimizing any potential bird arguments, because you're totally out of the primary zone, operating -- other than a clubhouse,the clubhouse being a two-story simple construction,that's going to go up in a flash. MR. GODLY: I can only tell you that this is a permit condition that the Service felt was best on behalf of the birds, and the Corps of Engineers agreed. And in this particular case,I agreed,too. MR. HUGHES: Well,we can disagree with you. MR. GODLY: Always. MR. YOVANOVICH: Can agree to disagree. MR. HUGHES: What do you guys think from the project point,what I just said? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, that's an issue for us. Obviously we have a permit issue and we have bringing the amenities on line when we're going to bring in the C.O. It's tough to just pick up and move the stage. MR. HUGHES: Is it? Parking lot,trailer,job trailer? MR. YOVANOVICH: We're going to have to go back and amend our bald eagle management plan with ,..� the U.S. Fish&Wildlife and the Army Corps of Engineers. So it's not as simple as it would-- MR. HUGHES: But you've already written the plan based on the staging of building one. MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct. That's the plan that they like, and that's the one that they enforced through their permit. Plus, you know, instead of moving it twice, we'll just have, you know, one staging area for a period of two buildings and the golf club as well as the golf course,the clubhouse plus the golf course. MR. HUGHES: Let's get into it this way, then: At building one, exactly where -- on that map, exactly where will your staging area be on that photograph? MR. YOVANOVICH: Are you circling-- it's the pad for building one. Steve is circling-- MR. HUGHES: Right on the pad? MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. DR. LYNNE: Staff had comments they wanted to make? MS. ROYS: Laura Roys, Collier County environmental services. I want to just make a few clarifications from the presentation and comments. First of all, the mitigation lands, they mentioned that they volunteered to do that for the Service. That's probably true,I don't doubt that,but it is required by the incidental take statement. There does not have to be an active nest on the site. That is all information included in your packet. And it does not have to be in Collier County. Just to clarify that. My stipulation in the staff report talking about amendment to the bald eagle management plan, we actually discussed that in a staff meeting with the applicant in December. That was a comment on my first sufficiency review, and they agreed at that time to make that amendment. And that is acknowledged in their meeting minutes supplied to us and in their resubmittal letter for the PUD amendment also. And that statement that was in the first PUD about amending -- the ability to amend the bald eagle management plan was actually meant to protect those eagles on-site once they moved to a new tree on-site, Page 83 February 2,2005 to continue protection and modifying what was and wasn't permitted in the bald eagle management plan. And then regarding the abandonment of the nest, you probably just think of the adults in that matter,but I'd just like to read from the February 27th letter from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to the Army Corps of Engineers, essentially the incidental take statement. Under the section on amount or extent of take anticipated: Incidental take in the form of harm or harassment is anticipated for the adult bald eagles, their eggs or their young at nest CO-19. Harm or harassment may result in the eagles abandoning the nest prior to egg laying, abandoning the nest while eggs are in the nest, which would result in embryo mortality, or abandoning the nest when chicks are in the nest, which would result in chick mortality. And that's all I have about that. CHAIRMAN GAL: Was the Policy 7.1.2(3) as it's worded now,was it the same in 2000? MS. ROYS: I think that was modified since then. I would have to defer to Barbara. MR. HUGHES: What are you guys reading? MS. BURGESON: I'm sorry, I'm waiting for the tapes to be in place before I spoke because I didn't know if it was going to be actually recording. They were just switching out the tapes. For the record,Barbara Burgeson with environmental services. The question was, was 7.1.2 of the conservation coastal management element, as it's written now,how does that differ from what it was at the time the original PUD was approved? CHAIRMAN GAL: Yes. The reason I ask is because in 2000, according to the-- MS. BURGESON: I can give you just a quick history. I've been with the county for 15 years, and it wasn't until about two years ago when the GMPs were amended that that language was changed to say that we shall request and utilize the technical assistance from the agencies. Prior to that time county staff requested--the language stated that we shall request and may utilize. And so whenever we would get technical assistance from the agencies, we were obligated to request that technical assistance to provide us with the additional information that we would need that we didn't have expertise on staff. And the language then stated that we may utilize it. Because there were cases when we felt that for one, sometimes there were obligations or requests from the agencies' staff to, for instance, have underpasses on like public or state roads where we had no authority to require the applicant to take into the cost of doing some of the things that were requested. So we wanted to have that "may" language in there for those times when we felt it was inappropriate for those things to be required. So that's only been changed in the past couple of years. CHAIRMAN GAL: The only reason I asked, because there was a quote from you at that EAC meeting that said: At this point, the plans for the residential buildings are identified where the eagles' nest is and where the primary and secondary zones are and they are not consistent and could not be considered consistent until such time as that eagle relocates. So I'm trying to just figure out in my own head-- MS. BURGESON: That would have been the staffs position at that time. And that would have been consistent with the GMPs at the time. CHAIRMAN GAL: So the GMP has changed-- MS. BURGESON: Yes. CHAIRMAN GAL: --by the addition of that first sentence. MS. BURGESON: By the addition of changing one word, from "may" to "shall." And making that an obligation of staffs to consider changes in the agency technical assistance as consistent with our GMP. CHAIRMAN GAL: You're obligated to consider,not follow what they say, correct? MS. BURGESON: I'm sorry? CHAIRMAN GAL: You're obligated to consider what Fish& Wildlife Service recommends, not-- MS. BURGESON: It used to be that we were obligated to request and we could use it. Now we're Page 84 February 2,2005 obligated to request and we have to use it. CHAIRMAN GAL: When you say "use",I mean, use as in take it and review it and consider it, or use it as whatever they say-- MS. BURGESON: The way that last sentence is written, whatever they say. For instance, if that technical assistance stated that that tree had to remain in place for the next 20 years and other things that the developer might not be comfortable with or might not want, that would be something that would be an obligation of that technical assistance, as the current GMP language is written. So it goes both ways. MR. YOVANOVICH: If I may? CHAIRMAN GAL: This--the ordinance that is being stricken was made applying that 2000 GMP -- MS. BURGESON: Yes. DR. LYNNE: I'm sorry, I've got questions for the county staff. Could we bring her back before we hear the next thing? I just wanted to clarify,because I wasn't sure that I heard you. You said that mitigation is required with the take permit? MS. ROYS: Yes, it is. DR. LYNNE: Okay. But it's not required that it be in Collier County. MS. ROYS: That's correct. DR. LYNNE: And it's not required to have an active nest on it. MS. ROYS: No. DR. LYNNE: Okay, so -- MS. ROYS: And also, one more thing I forgot. The artificial nest tree is not a requirement, it's entirely voluntary. DR. LYNNE: That's voluntary. MR. YOVANOVICH: But we have committed today to the artificial tree. So it's no longer voluntary. We've committed to that. We've committed to providing habitat, acquiring habitat. And I think the discussion that the chairman had with Ms. Burgeson is very important. The county deliberately changed the word may to shall. That's huge. May is discretionary, shall is mandatory. And that's what we need to focus on. Now, to Mr. Hughes's comment, now this is -- you know, we have to -- we have to go back to talk to U.S. Fish & Wildlife about your concept. But we can commit to building the driving range last and try to use that as long as we possibly can, subject to getting approval from U.S. Fish& Wildlife to do that. And that hopefully will coincide -- what is it, it's about 12 months or so until the shell for the high-rise would be done, ballpark. Nine months to get the shell done. So that would be just a few months into,you know,the eagle nesting season for that to occur. But again,we'll try to push off, subject to U.S. Fish& Wildlife approval,moving from there. MR. HUGHES: I think if we do that, we're trying to make a compromise. There's no doubt, you have the rights to build on your property once the environmental issue is done. The environmental issue is a time situation. Science,with these animals,I just-- leave them alone,I think they're better off. If you were to make this change,we're halfway and you're halfway, you know. Because you can see it's hot politics,you see that as well, so -- MR. YOVANOVICH: And we'll go talk to U.S. Fish&Wildlife about making that change. MR. HUGHES: All right. I make a motion--all right, go ahead. Shoot. DR. LYNNE: Can you--aren't we allowed to terminate public comment and discuss this without-- MR. YOVANOVICH: I can't hear a word she said. n CHAIRMAN GAL: She asked whether we can terminate the discussion, basically, that we're having with you and then just have discussion amongst ourselves, is what I understand. Page 85 February 2,2005 MR. YOVANOVICH: You're the council. You can decide you don't want to talk to us anymore. CHAIRMAN GAL: I mean, as long as people have questions from the petitioner, I'm going to allow you to ask the questions. If at some point if everyone is done asking their questions, we will terminate the questions and we'll start taking motions. MR. HUGHES: We can talk. Shoot. CHAIRMAN GAL: I'm sorry, are there any more questions for the petitioner? Okay,that's-- MS. STUDENT: Mr. Chairman, are you closing the public hearing then? CHAIRMAN GAL: I'm closing the public hearing. DR. LYNNE: The public processes need to be clear and transparent. And when people come to meetings in good faith and express their opinions and when commitments are made on the record, that needs to be taken very seriously. Without that,we don't have any kind of faith in our government. I don't think anybody thought they had to ask Mr. Corace directly, because there were already so many statements on the record specifically stating that the tree wasn't going to come down or the bald eagles weren't--construction wasn't going to start until the bald eagle left. Whether or not that actually fits into the PUD or whether or not Mr. Corace actually got up and made that promise, that was the perception by people on the board, people in the public. And it's important to maintain that trust. I just -- I just find it very difficult to listen to this when public trust is being disputed -- or public trust is being eroded. If the eagle is allowed to leave by--the eagles are allowed to leave on their own accord, we're not going to lose a nesting season, we're not going to lose eggs, we're not going to lose chicks. It's more humane, it's more civilized. Everybody says the nest is coming down soon, then it will come down soon and we don't have this problem, we don't need to. If the nest is really going to come down soon, we don't need to start this right away. I don't see the point in accelerating the construction on this project after what were previously extended hearings and commitments on the part--and agreements on the part of everybody. And I understand you don't agree with me, but I think -- I've participated in a lot of public hearings as a member of the public and on the council, and I believe that it's important that people say things in good faith and stick to what they said. MR. SORRELL: I have a question for staff. Were the minutes ever found for that September, 2000? MS. MASON: The Chair has it. CHAIRMAN GAL: Yes. MR. SORRELL: My question, have you scanned them? CHAIRMAN GAL: Yes. MR. SORRELL: Was it stated that construction wouldn't start until the tree came down? CHAIRMAN GAL: This is my perception. His name is highlighted, what he says there. Maybe you want to read it out loud so everybody can hear. But I would agree -- MR. SORRELL: Let me scan it a little bit. CHAIRMAN GAL: -- that there are several statements made that there would be no construction in the primary and secondary zones until the eagle left. So there would be no reason to ask the question. Mr. Corace did say that they were on a patient time frame, they did not expect development within the next four, five years. But it -- you know, I don't -- that doesn't add to the statements that were already made previously. That doesn't change them. I mean, they're explicit statements that say there would be no construction in the primary and secondary zones until the eagle left. Page 86 February 2,2005 So the question I have in my mind is you always have the ability to make an agreement and go back and amend it and to ask for change. The issue I'm still mulling over in my head is what standard do you apply. If you're trying to amend something that was done in 2000 under a different sets of standards, what standards do you apply? And am I supposed to apply the 2000 GMP policy,the-- MS. STUDENT: Mr. Chairman, you would apply what exists now to the amendment that you have in front of you now. Just the language that you have in front of you. Because -- CHAIRMAN GAL: You're saying that the amendment does not have to -- the amendment -- the 2000 GMP and the 2000 Fish& Wildlife Service policies have no bearing whatsoever now? MS. STUDENT: I'm talking about on the language you have in front of you, the change, the underlined language. That has to be consistent, that part -- that change has to be consistent with the comp. plan. So you apply the existing comp. plan, the relevant policies to the changed language that you have in front of you. Not the whole PUD,the changed language that you have in front of you now. CHAIRMAN GAL: Even if the changed language, though, was consistent with the Growth Management Plan as it is today,does that mean we're required to vote to approve it? MS. STUDENT: Well, the general rule on that is that under Schneider versus Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County is that if an applicant shows that they're consistent with the comp. plan, then the burden shifts to the government to show that it isn't or there's a rational relation, you know, to the public health and safety and welfare as to why it shouldn't be done. But you make recommendations to the planning commission and the board and those recommendations ultimately, you know, go to the Board of County Commissioners. CHAIRMAN GAL: You know, another issue is just we're not here just to be a rubber stamp on what the staff says. We have some policy issues to deal with. MS. STUDENT: Well, a development order is quasi-judicial in nature. And so, you know, you look at that based upon what the guidelines or the standards are for the approval of an amendment, as well as limited by your duties and responsibilities set forth in the land development code. DR. LYNNE: But our purpose is to make environmental recommendations. MS. STUDENT: Yeah, that's correct. That's part of the duties and responsibilities that I alluded to referenced in the land development code. MS. HUSHON: I have real problems taking our morning's discussion and reflecting it back on this discussion here. I think we have to do a little of that because we obviously have to keep things parallel. We can't say A in the morning and B in the afternoon. And well, the morning we made them stay outside, put monitors on, et cetera. It was a very different discussion. And it was a much less close discussion, actually. Much further away. MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I address that? CHAIRMAN GAL: Yeah, go ahead. MR. YOVANOVICH: Keeping in mind that this morning nothing involved the primary zone. We were 100 percent outside of the primary zone. MS. HUSHON: I understand. MR. YOVANOVICH: So that discussion is relating to a specific project that didn't have the same issues you have today at this one. This one, totally different, the same comp. plan amendment language applies, but you're talking about different facts. MS. HUSHON: Well, but we're talking about the same opinion coming out of the Fish& Wildlife Service, so -- you know, if we can't stay outside the primary zone on that one and very heavily protect it with noise n concerns, et cetera -- we haven't even discussed noise concerns today, for example, this afternoon. So I mean,they're not--they're pretty different animals. Page 87 February 2,2005 We're -- but my concern is that we have to keep what we allow to happen in a certain way to happen in parallel. We can't say the north people have to have one set of rules and the south people another set. I think that's very bad on our part. MR. HUMISTON: I think there's another thing that sets us apart from this morning's discussion, too, and that is the fact that mitigation is being offered here. I mean, this is definitely a difficult decision, but the thing that kind of stands out to me was Brad Cornell's comment that what's important to the Audubon Society is looking at the bigger issue and the long-term preservation of habitat for preservation of the species. My only concern there is that there's very little definition of what the mitigation area is going to look like or what the size of it will be. It could be maybe a one-acre lot with a nest on it or maybe it could be the size of a primary zone,which would probably be 30 acres or something like that. Do you have any conceptual ideal of what size parcel you'd be looking at? MR. GODLY: Let me pull up the condition, sir. Make it easier. CHAIRMAN GAL: While you're looking at it, I think even a larger issue,though, is besides this eagle and the mitigation plan for this eagle is the process where these petitions are approved and improprieties -- I'm not saying there were any -- and appearances. And that's, I think even more important than this one petition. MR. GODLY: To answer your question, sir, the first statement that says: The applicant has agreed to purchase and preserve an off-site bald eagle territory prior to the initiation of construction activities on the project. I've always interpreted the territory to mean that it would likely be the 1,500 feet. It would be normally what we would do there. That's not to say it would be exactly 1,500 feet. It may depend upon the location of the pair, if it was a road. If it had water on one side, it wouldn't matter. But it's going to be on the order -- I can't say this, because it depends on just what the territory's ultimately selected. But the Service has to agree to the ultimate purchase. That's a requirement of this. MR. HUMIS TON: Have you been involved in other situations where this kind of mitigation has been done? MR. GODLY: No permittee in the State of Florida to my knowledge has ever agreed or been required to purchase a territory as a result of any activity they've constructed in order to obtain these permits. This again is not a -- it's not a requirement under the Endangered Species Act or under state law. It was a voluntary action on this applicant's part because he felt it was the right thing to do. So the answer is no, because no one's ever agreed to go to the steps that he has. MR. HUMISTON: But conceptually, you're thinking it would be a parcel somewhere in the neighborhood of the 1,500-foot radius? MR. GODLY: Yeah, depending on what--and again,you've got to have a willing buyer,willing seller. MR. HUMISTON: Probably over what, 100 some acres, 120 acres? MR. GODLY: Yeah, it would be on that order. We just don't know which territory it's going to be. It could be that you'd get an owner that says no, I want you to buy 300 acres. If you want it and it's -- I don't know yet. But that's why we couldn't specifically state any more than is already in here. All we could do is use what appeared to be logical, rational, biological justification and reasoning. It would be -- it would be either conservation easement or it would be fee simple. The applicant shall use best efforts to locate a -- and secure territory in Collier County. That's our first priority, it would be in Collier County. Selection criteria are as follows: Preference shall be given to selection of a parcel that presently supports active nesting. That's the number one priority, et cetera. And those are the guidelines that we are looking at. We're not looking at purchasing land with no territory Page 88 February 2,2005 n right now, I can tell you that. All the effort is --that we're focusing on is purchasing a territory that will be secure in perpetuity in Collier County. And it will be large enough, as I said, it will have a nest, that's the number one priority. And as a biologist, I want enough alternate nest trees, if it gets hit by lightning, there will be other trees suitable. I've already told you, most eagles, if they have to go to an alternate nest, it's within view of the old nest. That's part of the reason why the 1,500 feet came about to begin with. And it is an outstanding effort on their part, I would agree with you there. DR. LYNNE: I'm confused. Staff told us mitigation was required. You're telling me it's not. MR. GODLY: I'll explain that, okay? You will find in the Corps permit actually two biological opinions. There's one dated the 27th of February, '04, and there's one dated the 14th of July of '04. The initial biological opinion did not require the purchase of a-- as a condition of the B.O., it was rather a description of the --it was in the project description,it was in the beginning. We went back to Fish & Wildlife and to the Corps and said we've got to go to the county, we've got to amend the B.O., the biological opinion and the bald eagle management plan. We're going to have to come before you and before the B.O.C.C. We prefer it be a condition of the actual biological opinion. That's why they modified it on the 14th of July. DR. LYNNE: But right now it's required. MR. GODLY: It is required as of right now,that's correct. MR. HUGHES: I'd like to state again, as you were alluding to here, we have to be consistent. The other thing is I don't think that you gentlemen have been dishonorable or misrepresented your position. I think you've stated it quite clearly in the record, have done exactly what you said. I don't see that argument. n However, as a concern -- and then the concern about the public's opinion about procedures and clear and transparent government, as Alfred had pointed out as well, anybody in any court of law, you know, if there's due cause of recourse, you have the right to reopen an issue and talk about it at any time. I mean, I would hope so. We're a free and open society. Things change over time as well. So we -- as some of our laws that are still on the books for 100 years, you know, shouldn't even be there and tie up legalese time. I think they shouldn't even be on the books. In this case, I'm willing to go with you guys under the pretense that building five and the clubhouse are built; your staging area is out of the primary zone; your clubhouse is built in your non-nesting period, and that's done in that non-nesting period because of its proximity; you don't utilize the roads that are drawn on this map here until after the bird is gone. In other words, we're going to try and -- I would try to buy you another year and a half to two years before this is an issue anyway. So if you stay out of that primary zone, I'm with you. I don't think you frauded(sic) or defaulted any of the citizens of this county. I think you have the right to bring it up. DR. LYNNE: I think the problem is that if they had brought this up as it is in the year 2000, it wouldn't have gotten approved. That's the issue. The issue is if they had just come and said hey, we're just going to get rid of all the --the eagle and we're going to start development now, it wouldn't have been approved. So it is --in retrospect there's a problem with it. MR. HUGHES: All right. Now, the other -- in addressing that point, the information we received today from an expert, a technical expert, is that the eagle is not as endangered as people perceive it to be. So then the information that we have in 2005 is different than the information that we had in 2000. So that may be some of this deviation. DR. LYNNE: Yeah, there's a lot of neighborhood interest in this particular eagle. They've been involved-- people have been involved with these eagles for over a decade. There's a lot of public interest. People that are in the area see the eagles. And so there was a lot of special interest. Page 89 February 2,2005 We aren't necessarily talking about the survival of the species in the United States, we're talking about Collier County and whether or not we're going to value our particular eagles here. MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Hughes, can I ask for a clarification of what you said as far as the -- are you talking about during the first-- MR. HUGHES: I would be supportive of approving your requested change-- MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. MR. HUGHES: --under the following conditions: Your staging area is adjacent to building five out of the primary zone. Number two, the clubhouse is constructed in non-nesting periods and would be completed in the non-nesting periods. Your highway to access your staging area in the construction of building number five would not be under the highway lines that are drawn on this plot that we have in front of us, it would come directly across your golf driving range. Do your construction, when you're done with that and you move to building one, then that's a new issue,because the eagle hopefully will be moved at that point. MR. YOVANOVICH: So you're saying in the same sequence, but you're saying move the staging area to basically the driving range. MR. HUGHES: Out of the primary zone. MR. YOVANOVICH: And start and complete the shell of the clubhouse during the non-nesting season? MR. HUGHES: Exactly. In order to minimize noise and disturbance to the bird. Which I think you can do. And yes,I agree,we already-- MS. HUSHON: Same language we put in with the last one. MR. HUGHES: Yeah,with the monitoring of the bird. In other words, I'm trying to draw a compromise between the two ends'position. And on that one it seems to make sense. MS. STUDENT: Clarification. Is that a motion or-- MR. HUGHES: Well,we're just discussing at this point. MR. YOVANOVICH: Can we explain to you the monitoring we already have to do? It may already address your comment about monitoring. MR. HUGHES: Well, if it's what was discussed earlier, I don't want to hear that again. The point is the tree with cameras,no. And bless his expertise, but there is more to chemistry and physics than just that it's made out of acrylate and steel. There are effects, especially only on the gestation periods of electron forces. Just an alignment of electrons on a nucleus, all right, it can be a subtle as that, make a significant change. So I mean,there's a lot heavier bit of information. MR. YOVANOVICH: And I'm assuming this is the caveat that we discussed earlier about we would use our best efforts to convince the U.S. Fish&Wildlife to allow us to do that. MR. HUGHES: Yes. MR. GODLY: This is what we think is reasonable, and we're hoping you would agree. We'll do our best efforts to amend or get the agencies to agree that we could do the staging adjacent to building number one. What we -- obviously what we don't want to do is to amend the -- agree to this, have this go through and then have to amend the bald eagle management plan and go back through the entire process again just because we agreed to something that you wanted. That would be-- MR. HUGHES: I think you're facing in a situation like this a turndown because of the perceptions. I think the Fish & Wildlife will work with you. It's obvious to me under their own guidelines is that's where it should have been in the first place. MR. SORRELL: Yes. Page 90 February 2,2005 MR. HUGHES: All right? _ MR. YOVANOVICH: And keeping in mind that this is in the spirit of compromise. If we don't get a successful vote,then we don't agree to those stipulations, obviously. MR. HUGHES: Open for discussion. MR. SORRELL: I would just like to make a statement while we're talking amongst ourselves here. I think if we knew in 2000, or the people that were on the board that approved this project, we wouldn't be in this situation today. I'm not saying that I disagree with their right to develop the property, but we're in a tough situation. Our vote this morning was a tough vote. This is a tough vote, too. I think it would have been a little different if we knew in 2000 what we know now. CHAIRMAN GAL: Start the ball rolling. I move to deny the petition. Is there a second? DR. LYNNE: I second. CHAIRMAN GAL: All those in favor? And we'll do a roll. MR. KRAUT: To deny the petition? CHAIRMAN GAL: Yes. MR. KRAUT: Yea. I approve it--I agree. MR. HORN: Yea,I agree to deny. DR. LYNNE: Yea. CHAIRMAN GAL: Yes. MR. HUGHES: No. MS. HUSHON: Yes. MR. SORRELL: No. We're back to 5 and 2 again. CHAIRMAN GAL: Five-two, magic number. MR. HUGHES: Thanks for your time. CHAIRMAN GAL: Let's -- under new business, outstanding advisory committee member nominations, is that something important that we have to do? MS. MASON: We just keep that on every month. If anybody has a nomination, we can address it at that point. But if no one has a nomination,then we just move on. MR. SORRELL: Speaking of that,why is it only somebody that's active on the board now? MS. MASON: That wasn't our decision, that was the direction we were given by staff-- by other staff, saying that--I believe that's the commissioners wanted it to be active members. MR. SORRELL: Is there anything in place that we could praise somebody for their past efforts? MS. MASON: Not that I know of But I can try to get back with you next month if there's something we could do about previous members and honoring their service. MR. SORRELL: Okay,thanks. CHAIRMAN GAL: If there's no more comments from the board,we're adjourned. ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:28 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE n ALFRED F. GAL, JR., Chairman Page 91 Item V.A. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF MARCH 2, 2005 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: Special Treatment Permit No. ST-2004-AR-6229 Site Improvement Plan No. SIP-2004-AR-6189 Petition Name: Haldeman Creek Restoration Project and Dredge Disposal Site Applicant/Developer: Collier County Stormwater Management Department Engineering Consultant: Post Buckley Schuh &Jernigan, Inc. (PBS&J) Environmental Consultant: PBS&J II. LOCATION: The portion of Haldeman Creek proposed for dredging is located between U.S. 41 and Naples Bay in Sections 10, 11, 13, 14 and 15, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. The disposal site for the dredging operation is located along Haldeman Creek, at the end of Lakeview Drive, in Sections 11 & 14, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: The disposal site is bordered by residential development with the following zoning classifications. ZONING DESCRIPTION N - RMF-6 Haldeman Creek S - RMF-6 Developed E - RSF-4 Developed W- PUD (Windstar) Developed EAC Meeting Page 2 of 8 n Properties adjacent to Haldeman Creek include mostly single-family and multi- family developments, with some Commercial property located adjacent to U.S. 41 and Bayshore Drive. IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project involves the maintenance dredging of a specified section of Haldeman Creek and the placement of the soil on an adjacent upland site to be transported to the County landfill. Currently Haldeman Creek serves as an important storm water conveyance system and a navigable channel for boater access to the Gulf of Mexico. Historical records indicate that at one time the creek was natural but has since been altered due to increase development and waterway use. Sediment shoaling caused by sedimentation raises the risk of damage to boats and decreases the function of the waterway. The current water depth creates the potential for damage to water quality and surrounding resources through suspension of sediments by uneducated boaters and by boating in inadequate water depths. Currently the channel within the creek is unmarked which can lead to direct impact on oyster beds as boaters drive outside the channel. The proposed dredging will occur potentially through the use of two common dredge techniques: hydraulic dredge and clamshell. Hydraulic dredge will be utilized throughout the main sections of the creek. Although this method creates little ambient turbidity, turbidity controls will be implemented as detailed with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Environmental Resource Permit (ERP). Proposed within the FDEP permit application is the use of a weighted turbidity screen circumventing the suction head. Within the man-made channels a barge-mounted clamshell may be utilized. Weighted turbidity screens placed perpendicular to the canal running from seawall to seawall every 150 feet will be utilized. Throughout the project turbidity levels directly outside of the barriers will not exceed 29 NTU's above background as dictated by 62-302, F.A.C. The footprint and depth of the proposed dredge area have been minimized to assure that no resources are directly impacted and to avoid any rock excavation. The current design includes dredging the area west of the Bayshore Bridge to a depth of—5.0 MLW and —2.0 MLW east of the bridge. Although not previously altered, the undeveloped portion of the creek "the S-curve" has been heavily used by boats gaining access to the Gulf. Once a channel has been established within �"'� this area it will be clearly marked with navigational signs. EAC Meeting Page 3 of 8 The proposed disposal site is a previously disturbed upland site with a mangrove fringe. The mangrove fringe is currently protected by a conservation easement, and mangroves within the easement will not be impacted. The plan includes two cells and is designed to allow for the proper amount of settling time to assure that the water returning to the creek is no more then 29 NTU's above background. Upon completion of the project, a spoil pile will be left on site in the area of the containment cell closest to Lakeview Drive, as agreed upon with the owned of the property. A Site Development Plan (No. SDP-2003-AR-4596) is currently in for review for development of the disposal site. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: The proposed dredging area(Haldeman Creek) and disposal site are located within the Urban designated area(Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict) as identified on the countywide Future Land Use map, and is within the Coastal High Hazard Area. The Future Land Use Element does not specifically address dredging or the use of lands for temporary disposal. However, the purpose of the dredging is to improve stormwater conveyance, water quality, and navigation. These functions pertain, in part, to urban development, which is generally promoted in the Urban designation. Therefore, the Comprehensive Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed project does not conflict with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Future Land Use Element. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: The project as proposed is consistent with the Policies and Objectives in Goal 6 and 7 of the Conservation & Coastal Management Element, for the following reasons: Greater than fifteen percent (15 %) of the existing native vegetation will be retained on-site and set aside as a preserve area with a conservation easement prohibiting further development. Habitat management and exotic vegetation removal/maintenance plans will be required 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. The requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to Policy 6.1.8 has been satisfied. EAC Meeting Page 4 of 8 n Jurisdictional wetlands have been identified as required in Policies 6.2.1 and 6.2.2. Pursuant to Policy 6.2.4, the County shall require appropriate agency permits prior to the issuance of a final local development order permitting site improvements (Site Development Plan). As stated in Policies 6.2.3 and 6.2.4, where permits issued by jurisdictional agencies allow for impacts to wetlands within the Urban Designated Area and require mitigation for such impacts, this shall be deemed to meet the objective of protection and conservation of wetlands and the natural functions of wetlands within this area. In accordance with Objective 6.3, the dredge footprint has been modified to eliminate direct impacts to submerged resources (i.e. oyster beds). Once a channel has been established it will be clearly marked with navigational signs, minimizing boater impacts to marine habitats. In accordance with Policy 7.1.2 and 7.1.4, standard manatee construction conditions will be followed, as required by state and federal permitting agencies. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Stormwater Management: Maintenance dredging generally involves the construction of containment cells to allow the settling out of the dredged material from the pumped slurry. If the procedure is properly done, there will be no adverse water quality or quantity impacts. After the cells are "abandoned" or "reclaimed", the areas must be re- vegetated (stabilized) to prevent erosion of the material. Environmental: Site Description/Special Treatment Overlay: The proposed disposal site is a previously disturbed site with a mangrove fringe. Mangroves within the fringe are protected by an existing conservation easement, which will not be impacted by the project. The shoreline of the Haldeman Creek includes both altered (man made) and natural areas (See Figure 9 "Shoreline Assessment of Haldeman Creek"in EIS). A Special Treatment (ST) overlay is located over portions of Haldeman Creek immediately north of the dredge disposal site, west to the City of Naples line. Recent surveys have shown that the ST overlay extends just to the toe of slope of the mangroves along the north side of the dredge disposal site. EAC Meeting Page 5 of 8 Wetlands: There are 9.51 acres of Collier County/SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands on the disposal site, of which 0.64 acre (6.7 %) are proposed to be impacted. Wetlands to be impacted include 0.58 acre of Mixed Wetland Hardwoods (FLUCFCS Code 617), 0.46 acre of Borrow Area (FLUCFCS Code 742), 0.13 acre of Mangrove Shoreline (FLUCFCS Code 612), 0.04 acre of Tidal Flat (FLUCFCS Code 651), 0.01 acre of Freshwater Marsh (FLUCFCS Code 641). Descriptions of each wetland system and how they will be impacted, are included in the EIS. Wetlands to be impacted are overall low quality wetlands with an average Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method (UMAM) score of 0.52. Mitigation for wetland impacts is proposed within Little Pine Island and Panther Island Mitigation Banks. Preservation Requirements: Native habitats on the disposal site include 0.58 acre of mixed hardwoods (FLUCFCS Code 438), 5.70 acres of mangrove (FLUCFCS Code 612), 0.62 acre of mixed wetland hardwoods (FLUCFCS Code 617), 0.01 acre of freshwater marsh(FLUCFCS Codes 640 or 641) and 0.04 acre of tidal flats (FLUCFCS Code 651). Native habitats on the disposal site total approximately 6.95 acres. The disposal site is currently zoned residential, approximately 17.02 acres in size, and located seaward of the "Coastal High Hazard Area". In accordance with the County Growth Management Plan (GMP) and Land Development Code (LDC), a minimum of twenty-five percent (1.74 acres) of the native habitat will have to be retained on the disposal site (6.95 acres X .25 = 1.74 acres). Mangroves within the existing conservation easement (5.12 acres) currently exceed this requirement. Listed Species: Detailed wildlife surveys were not conducted on the disposal site due to the impacted nature of the site. An active osprey(Pandion haliaetus) nest is located on the disposal site on a nesting platform on top of one of the power poles along the eastern edge of the property, immediately adjacent to the mangrove fringe. This area is protected by an existing conservation easement and no activity is proposed within the area. No other listed species were observed during any of the on-site investigations. Habitat for West Indian Manatee may occur within the proposed dredge area. In accordance with Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC), standard manatee construction conditions will be followed, a copy of which are included in the EIS. EAC Meeting Page 6 of 8 VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of Special Treatment Permit No. ST-2004-AR-6229 and Site Improvement Plan No. SIP-2004-AR-6189 "Haldeman Creek Restoration Project and Dredge Disposal Site"with the following stipulations: Stormwater Management: None Environmental: 1. A minimum of twenty-five percent (1.74 acres) of the native vegetation shall be retained on the disposal site at the time of Site Development Plan/Construction Plan submittal. EAC Meeting Page 7 of 8 PREPARED BY: r .011-) 719/Z00r STAN CHRZANOW , P.E. DATE ENGINEERING REVIEW MANAGER ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT :2/7%Cr S STEPHEN LENBERGER DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT &rHELE M0.4e , AICP. DATE RINCIPAL rir R COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING DEPARTMENT EAC Meeting Page 8 of 8 REVIEWED BY: /39AL&C.e, 07- -044 BARBARA S. BURGESO DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT LIAM D. LORE", Jr., C` ., DIRECTOR, DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT i .03"-OS- SUSAN MURRAY, AICP, DIRECTS ' , DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: =- - - 0279 Q> J•` PH K. SCH TT, ADMINISTRATOR, DA E C MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION Item V.B. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF MARCH 2,2005 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: Site Development Plan No. SDP-2004-AR-6611 Petition Name: Ritz Carlton Beach Pavilion Applicant/Developer: Matthew Richardson, Sr. VP Host Marriott Corporation Engineering Consultant: Wilson Miller, Inc. Environmental Consultant: Wilson Miller, Inc. II. LOCATION: The Ritz Carlton Beach Pavilion is located on Vanderbilt Beach adjacent to the Naples Ritz Carlton Hotel, on Vanderbilt Beach Road, in Section 9, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: The site is bordered by a County park, and residential Planned Unit Development with the following zoning classifications. ZONING DESCRIPTION N - Collier County Vanderbilt Beach Park Haldeman Creek S - Pelican Bay PUD Residential E - Pelican Bay PUD Residential W- n/a Vanderbilt Beach IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The subject site is located within the Pelican Bay Planned Unit Development and as such allows hotels and motels as a permitted use within this area designated as Group 4 on the PUD Master Plan. Section VII of the PUD document sets forth EAC Meeting Page 2 of 10 n the development regulations for all Group 4 uses, which includes accessory uses and structures incidental to the permitted use (hotel). A beach pavilion is considered a use accessory to the hotel therefore, a permitted accessory use. The petitioner is requesting approval to reconstruct the existing beach pavilion with a two-story elevated structure, which includes a dining area on the second level and a pre-function gathering area on the first elevated level with a total square footage of 6,174 square feet (3,087 square feet each level). V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: The Urban Residential Sub-district permits residential development (variety of use types) at a base density of 4 dwelling units per acre and is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential uses, including mixed- use developments such as Planned Unit Developments. In addition, the Mixed Use Activity Center Sub-district permits a full array of commercial uses, residential uses, institutional uses, and hotel/motel uses at a density consistent with the Land Development Code. However, some of the commercial portions of this PUD so not comply with criteria in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and therefore are not consistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section. However, FLUE Policy 5.1 provides that properties zoned prior to the adoption of the Plan and found to be consistent through the Zoning Re-evaluation Program are deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan. These properties are designated on the Future Land Use Map series as properties consistent by Policy as noted above. Therefore, hotels and the accessory beach pavilion are uses permitted by the Pelican Bay PUD, which is found to be consistent with the FLUE of the Growth Management Plan as properties consistent by Policy. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: Objective 2.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan states "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards. This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it only involves roof and wood deck runoff on to sand that has a high percolation rate, so water quality and quantity considerations are met. The project as proposed is consistent with the Policies and Objectives in Goal 6 and 7 of the Conservation&Coastal Management Element, for the following reasons: EAC Meeting Page 3 of 10 Habitat management and exotic vegetation removal/maintenance plans are being reviewed and approved at a part of this Site Development 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. The requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)pursuant to Policy 6.1.8 has been satisfied. Jurisdictional wetlands have been identified as required in Policies 6.2.1 and 6.2.2. Pursuant to Policy 6.2.4, the County shall require appropriate agency permits prior to the issuance of a final local development order permitting site improvements (Site Development Plan). A wildlife survey for listed species in accordance with Policy 7.1.2 is included in the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS). Wildlife habitat management plans for listed species are required at the time of Site Development Plan/Construction Plan submittal. The proposed pavilion will not cause any further impacts to coastal barriers, shorelines, beaches and dunes or damage or destroy coastal resources. Access to beaches, shore and waterways will not be affected by the proposed project. No damage to coastal barriers, shorelines, beaches and dunes coastal resources or access to beaches will occur as a result of the proposed pavilion. Please refer to Demolition and Construction Plan and Vegetation Protection and Restoration Plan. As proposed,the pavilion is consistent with Goal 10. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Stormwater Management: The project consists of a pavilion bordering the beach with no additional parking. Stormwater runoff is from roof or wood deck on to the sand. This type of beach sand has a reasonably high percolation rate. There are no water quality or quantity concerns from the stormwater runoff. Environmental: Site Description: The native vegetation on site in the area of the proposed construction was provided in the EIS as follows: 3221: Sea oats — This area includes a 10-ft. wide, shore parallel, strip of sea oats (Panicum Uniola) that was planted by the Ritz Carlton Hotel as part of mitigation EAC Meeting Page 4 of 10 for the original one-story beach pavilion. The sea oats have since spread landward in areas, among planted seagrapes (Coccoloba uvifera) as well. No canopy or subcanopy trees exist in this area. Other groundcover species include railroad vine (Ipomoea spp)and nuisance coinvine(Dalbergia ecastaphyllum). 3222 El: Sea grape, Exotics 10%-24% - The only canopy size trees in this area include an occasional cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto). This area consists predominately of subcanopy sized seagrape trees planted by the Ritz Carlton Hotel, along the seaward side of the existing beach pavilion, as part of the mitigation required to build the existing one-story beach pavilion. Exotic Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) and beach naupaka (Scaevola sericea) have since spread into portions of this area. Groundcover species include railroad vine, sea oats, and the nuisance coinvine. 428: Cabbage palm — This upland area consists of a dominant canopy of cabbage palms and occasional strangler fig (Ficus aurea). Subcanopy species also include strangler fig, sea grape, and an occasional date palm(Phoenix reclinata). Very little groundcover exists in this area. Wetlands: As described in the EIS, "The proposed structure will directly impact a total of approximately 0.014 acres of wetlands. Approximately 0.001 acres of wetlands will be directly impacted by the construction of a pile-supported elevator/stairway area to access the proposed beach pavilion along the southeast side of the structure. Approximately 0.001 acres of wetlands will be directly impacted by a 4' X 17' cantilevered, service walkway along the east side of the proposed new pavilion. Approximately 0.011 acres of wetlands have expanded westward underneath the existing pavilion footprint since the issuance of the old wetland resource permit; therefore the new proposed structure will also directly impact this approximately 0.011-acre wetland area. The new wetland impacts include the removal of one mature white mangrove and the minor trimming of several other mangroves. Two leather fern, two seagrape and four cabbage palms will also be removed to allow construction of the stairway/elevator construction. No other direct impacts are anticipated as a result of the construction of this structure. The structure will be elevated and the deck planks spaced in a manner to allow maximum light penetration into the adjacent wetlands. Proposed impacts to wetlands and natural resources have been reduced and are more secondary in nature than under the previously issued Wetland Resource Permit. Specifically, the 4-ft service walkway along the mangrove fringe along the east side of the pavilion is only proposed to be partially constructed to a length of 17 feet instead of the prior-approved, 68 feet shore-parallel dimension. The EAC Meeting Page 5 of 10 first floor of the pile-supported pavilion will be built at 13' N.G.V.D., incidentally allowing light to penetrate below the structure, along the wetland edge (east side of structure). The proposed pavilion will be pile-supported and pose minimal impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. The project will have no effect on the existing hydroperiods of the adjacent wetland. Pelican Bay has an existing SFWMD surface water management permit." Preservation Requirements: Native vegetation preservation requirements were fulfilled as a part of the Pelican Bay PUD. Listed Species: The following are excerpts from the EIS provided by the consultant: "Gopher Tortoise: The gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) is listed as a SSC by FWC and is not listed by FWS. Suitable gopher tortoise habitats were surveyed for tracks, scat, burrows, and/or individuals. Gopher tortoise burrows were observed within the dune vegetation along the beach, inside and outside the subject property boundaries (reference Exhibit J). One inactive gopher tortoise burrow was observed within the limits of the proposed construction area fence. Another inactive burrow was observed on the edge of the proposed construction fence location. A gopher tortoise on-site relocation permit for less than 5 tortoises has been obtained to excavate the 2 inactive burrows that are located inside and in line with the proposed construction fence. Under gopher tortoise relocation permit No. GTRS-2004-752, these two burrows will be excavated prior to commencement of demolition/construction. If upon excavation, a gopher tortoise is found, it will be relocated on-site, outside of the project area construction fence and silt screens. The tortoise would be relocated within the existing dune vegetation area, located on the north side of the existing/proposed pavilion, a minimum of 25 feet from the project area. The relocation area is approximately 25,000 ft2 of native sea oats, sea grape and cabbage palm hammock. Following completion of construction, dune vegetation will be replanted inside the construction fence area after the fence is removed. This area will once again be available for gopher tortoises once construction is completed and dune vegetation is restored, as referenced in the Vegetation �„\ Protection and Restoration Plan(Attachment 6). EAC Meeting Page 6 of 10 Additional active and inactive gopher tortoise burrows were observed inside and outside the subject property boundaries. Observed listed species locations may be referenced in the Listed Species Transect and Location Map, Exhibit J at the end of this EIS. Extra caution will be taken to protect the other adjacent burrows observed outside the project area along the dune areas of the parcel. The locations of adjacent gopher tortoise burrows have been ribboned in the field and mapped on Exhibit"J"at the end of this document. Gopher tortoises will be kept safely out of harm's way by the installation of a construction fence and silt screen on all sides of the limits of construction. No impacts to the gopher tortoise are anticipated to occur as a result of the project. Loggerhead Sea Turtle(Caretta caretta): Three sea turtle nests, taped off and marked with signs by Collier County, were also observed along the beach within the parcel boundaries. The sea turtle nests were most likely Atlantic loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) nests. All three sea turtle nests (Collier County/Conservancy of Southwest Florida nest #s 57, 73 and 81) were ribboned off for 2 to 3 months, during which time they were all washed away by hurricanes Charlie, Frances, and Ivan. Sea turtle nesting season has since ended, and the County has removed the ribbons and stakes. Construction will be performed outside of the sea turtle nesting zone during sea turtle nesting season, and the applicant is in the process of applying for a permit for construction within 100 feet of a sea turtle nesting zone during sea turtle nesting season. No adverse impacts to potential listed species are anticipated to occur as a result of the proposed pavilion. Therefore, the proposed pavilion is consistent with the Objectives and Policies of Goal 7. No construction will occur inside the limits of the sea turtle nesting zone during sea turtle nesting season. A permit for construction within 100 feet of a sea turtle nesting zone will has been applied for, and will be obtained by the permittee prior to the commencement of any construction during sea turtle nesting season. A Sea turtle protection plan was submitted to FDEP for approval on December 14, 2004. A copy of this plan will be forwarded to Collier County upon approval. During field investigations no wading birds were observed on-site. The only birds observed on-site were two Florida gallinules, one mourning dove and a flock of brown pelicans flying over the beach. Review of the "Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies"(Runde et al. 1991)revealed no breeding colonies within 5 miles of the project site. The nearest reported breeding colony(#619038C) is located approximately 6 miles north of the project site. As such, no impacts to listed wading bird species are anticipated to occur as a result of the project. EAC Meeting Page 7 of 10 Listed plant species observed on site: Two species of listed plants (per the FDA list) were observed on the project site during the field survey. These species include giant leatherfern (Acrostichum aureum) and giant wild pine (Tillandsia utriculata). These two species are listed as endangered by the Federal Department of Agriculture (FDA). No plant species listed by The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) were observed on the project site during the field survey. Both giant leather fern and giant wild pine are common in southwest Florida. Giant leatherfern was found throughout the mangrove swamp, adjacent to the project area and to a small degree (two plants)within the footprint of the proposed structure. Additional listed plant species are capable of occurring on-site based on the presence of suitable habitat. No significant impacts to listed plant species are anticipated to occur as a result of the construction of the proposed pavilion." VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of SDP-2004-AR-6611 with the following stipulations: Stormwater Management: None Environmental: The following changes must be completed prior to final SDP approval and changes shall be made on the SDP plans. 1. All proposed improvements shall be designed in accordance with the standards of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems. Approved FDEP permit shall be obtained, and copies provided,prior to final SDP approval. 3. Construction activities shall not occur within one hundred (100) feet of the sea turtle nesting zone, defined by Collier County Land Development Code Division 3.04.02.B, between May 1 - October 31, sea turtle nesting season, without first submitting and obtaining necessary FDEP permits and Collier County Construction in Sea Turtle Nesting Area Permits. 4. Petitioner shall notify Environmental Services Staff one week prior to commencing work seaward of the CSSL and shall again contact Staff within r-� one week following completion of work seaward of the CCSL. EAC Meeting Page 8 of 10 5. Outdoor lighting associated with construction or development within three hundred (300) feet of the high tide line, shall be in compliance with Division 3.04.02.B of the Collier County Land Development Code. Lighting plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Collier County Environmental Services Department prior to building permit approval. Inspections for approved lighting shall be completed prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy(CO) for the building. 6. Petitioner shall utilize only native coastal dune vegetation for all on-site landscaping beyond the 1974 Coastal Construction Control Line. 7. Petitioner shall re-vegetate the dune where the dune is devoid of coastal dune vegetation (appropriate to that specific area i.e. fore-dune or back dune). The re-vegetation shall be completed, according to a plan approved by Collier County Environmental Services Staff, prior to the issuance of a CO. Signs shall be installed in the re-vegetation area indicating that beach users are not to intrude into this area. 8. Petitioner shall remove all exotic vegetation from the subject property in accordance with Section 3.05 of the Collier County Land Development Code. 9. A restoration planting plan was required to mitigate for impacts that are a result of the construction. Amend the vegetation restoration plan. All mitigation planting shall be in accordance with the LDC and must be a minimum of 14 ft in height for trees, 7 gallons shrubs and 1-gallon ground cover. 10. The gopher tortoise relocation/management plan shall be amended as follows; resubmitted on a 24x36 sheet as part of the SDP: a. Provide a map showing the location of the relocation area. b. Change the proposed fencing to gopher tortoise fencing and provide a detail. c. Show the location of the proposed gopher tortoise fencing. d. Note that all active and inactive burrows will be excavated within 25 feet of the construction site. 11. The required CCSL permit to allow clearing of native vegetation for a staging area, shall be approved prior to any site clearing. 12. A Collier County Vehicle on the Beach (VOB) Permit is required, subject to review and approval by the Environmental Services Staff. Access shall be in accordance with the LDC. It is incorrect as shown on the SDP plans, and will be changed through the VOB permit. EAC Meeting Page 9 of 10 PREPARED BY: • /� 21 n73 OS STAN CHRZANOWSKI, P.E. DATE ENGINEERING REVIEW MANAGER ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT &axe/a_ A / �" �y-tO5 BARBARA BURGESON c:i�� DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT tiAL-41 , a JOYC 4 E' 4 ST DA E SR. PFA R DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: na,(Lbta, xj �0 W i I A�GtJ% c) >2y-c J' WILLIAM D. LOREN r., P.E., DIRECTOR, DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT EAC Meeting Page 10 of 10 S AN MURRAY, AICP, DIREC ! '', DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: JO' 'H K. SC TT, ADMINISTRATOR, ATE C 0 TY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES D SION MEMORANDUM Community Development&Environmental Services Division Department of Zoning and Land Development Review To: Board Members From: Susan Murray, AICP, Director,Zoning Department Date: February 15, 2005 Subject: LDC Amendments Cycle 1, 2005. Attached please find the draft amendments to the Land Development Code for Cycle 1, 2005. For organizational purposes and ease of use, the amendments have been divided into three separate packets, each with its own summary sheet. The first packet consists of amendments to the LDC regulatory language including new language proposed to be added to the LDC. The adoption of these amendments by the Board of County Commissioners will result in regulatory change. The second packet is comprised of those amendments which are necessary to correct omissions and incorrect citations in the existing code as a result of the Fall, 2004 recodification process. These amendments do not result in regulatory change. The third packet consists of amendments to existing text made for clarification purposes, mostly as a result of the recodification process. These amendments do not result in regulatory change. It is suggested that if review and discussion time is of importance, that you read over the first set of amendments which result in regulatory change, as the remaining packets consist largely of "clean up" matters as a result of the recodification process. Lastly, Russell Webb, Principal Planner, accepted a position elsewhere and is no longer with Collier County. In the interim, I will handle the LDC amendment process. Should you have any questions or concerns, please let me know. Thank you as always for your time and energy you put forth in reviewing these documents and we look forward to discussing their contents in detail at the LDC scheduled public hearings. ag o ° • ' H ° H Aa O AA � � • 0z zEi., v� E v� WHrs+ E Z x SE ~ W ri � rZ � U �¢ a c � o zC x � W E E U Ea E W o E _ on .� m a) N x U U W on •t Q - x 14 cd E 0 p 7-1 im-‘ aa)) O U a) U Fri U 1 cr) A 4-) O Cll E E_ 7i -0 rE f a) a) yo-d Z o U 0b U a) ..p N cip EU a8 o Qp4 I—I p a b i-1 0 N H O v.) a) 0 P4 CNIp o 0 u3 � 4 0 " -d .a .amr v G ."- O b.0 cd N kcn • + � c. � j teU 73 0 � 4 . . )a) rr , 7. 4 � II¢ " NOb 0 .a. te Q ^pG � NN N4ti c .11 p 'C7Q : E mppUO E O U N E ay A. 2y •r— ai ,. O [ O b b ' . O y n z 0A NI .2 y c . > td) 6" > 0 • a) 0 00 0. v 9p �-4 c N v t•O � .� N - O ) 51 • -t U .p cv a) a) N 0 4 ,4 a) e'7 N • n , a) (-1 ti p `" U C m c� ate) ava ° •- rn �+ ° Q p R� at a 7. •4 �' A, R.' aii o 9 ;9 d CA rn0. VDU r 0 C/' U to os 9 a) N Z U U r4 nn .5 1) L/] U W Ct U _0 • � CA cd b H a 0 T4 b) E (4...) o 4,4V Iv) z o .� E b Q o COz o z •- O -''' -b C p Qx 0 0 Q ° as b U 0 cciW o O ) O N 0 Pk rd Off.,o b °' o ro ct E `) 5 C7 v 0. ° > E o 0 a0i „o.o aa) ri f:121 .-1 `m at � �� w at mfr at ~ cG C� c > cn bq oA pq a oA 0 © r� o ani =o r��� a0i . Lf) 0 .5 8 E U N O F--I U N rnel .a -, N d N W +' •-� S� d C CA �7 CA a� S� bA i .5. o w a� A Ea. a, '= •ul - 0a as o cu cn �N �" U ar � U V.) a' � U W o to a) 1,1 U U to ani . x rip o gq 0 e-1 a ani U FA " i v U . g4-) N E U t� K b a) 40 A5 d Ii oZ 0 c...) � 0 O Ag N 0 olQ b zi U N g W 1 O ami O _ N b0 U . 3 C O O bq A O l O a4 U co p .y cd 4. .2.e ;co eq to h 2 a0i o >, o `'"' I a 3 3 a - � cm� y bq° O VI ti) O 'U y UIU U A a Iqpi as i• Z j, N N ti"'z' O a 1) = ',C5 " "15 y tO �" U U by d' vJ G7 . p 15 O c� v� aQ7; ' U c� JfitIJi � C om•+G7VU r. c y„, . Q 41 T} .-i c .—� g 0 f„ M itri...5- 5 r•,.i v.. R,N U 2 v) -o ca E .� 2 �. a) O. N a) C ... tf) to 0 0r UNp4 �+ as ONz y li Do a) 0 t $ y O 0 a 0 0r4 C/1 U rn H an ° N U U G a4 a CD — x V1 C.„) 0 v r-+ a a) U0 1.4 0 C ) a) �sy/ M+r Co) # O Eb cE ter .:..) ...,:, 0 04 y"0 o o ^ i U O a) xi . CD � E U o Q N a Q .o m 0 F--a W i o O a) O04 N a) O w N ,, a, _ _ ° o > a) U .. 0ro Q , ro Od > a) O � al w a) ,a, (>1= Q , oO0O 0 o a) „ ) • °) c.ai 0 cd E1 do 0 , N ci . d .0 ° 'o"" UD y0 .a) o cd . as •-• v a o cd , »-� W O � '" ELT) 2 C „ -0 cd .0 © o ' U M o •-o a)o aa, r, Q •o r.• Pa a) `r ,r W a) rf �' - 0.1 M s>. G� s� ) a a, c d act o c o o ca c 4° o bp ro ° as c ° a o an ad VD o > Ln N 'j a F" cid py '� .� w a) '� CL+ o 3-4 i1] cd '> a" O C. o a � � ro � � � a) 0o > .fls� a) o v� zU � W CA r) d W CA W W �, � W ,� U c) 0 cz .5 0, b a. Nx U U cU i N - x cA U R3 i o y 1. .1 Pal U. aa) WU E U o U 0 0• 5 U z 0 r 5 U ° O Qf c) a) 0 Q _0 ¢ � a 0 0 yr 0 o x 0 ° � m v � . °n a� aio o ao ct � 00 ° ate 3 `d •° � .0. � bqy a � o -o =d '�r�'n 3 �' cor. al a0i � y a, . 0 0 � •" . 0 b4 0 Z O ° I. 1.-00 III . h u a'U N o -d o X 'bb1) 0 0 E-c N Q Q W - Ub 0 O. E o 0 a�r0 cti c, _ o v' b bu a' be 5 5 c °� a o 'v 'o C U 'o al r,' 0 Qre', C4 a E O a O -,, .. 0 '7 C 0 -d °2 0 .fl 0 e_C ,n v� c bo bn w+ c P, ." U o� o a c o W o , W o aa) Wi/) cdW V1 b�A Q X ro• et aai 05 0 cV v� 13:1w a (A > E, o • cap Nx U U CQ an N -. x rn U PO cc1 oo • rag U a0i w U0 0 V o A 0 a)..,,q 0 o cu0 RA v) 5 U8 OAr=4 N a) 0 . . . •. o a) dW0 0 C) x • 0 b ani . r ...4 IHiflo flijil o w y �t oa) H �. w o g .g on C U o ami >,' w a> �oF, bw o0 0 •-E �o 0 0000 ! ili §u � c6 a, 2 � "" 4za ,~ q va a> a� ,. a) d Q o > .30 › cEr 0o o › m rowg 15 ta.a s a, ) a � � zb ayb0 . z0 �� y � 0N � U ° � o o aCA 41 go .1 v U Its) x U. U go .5 N . x U V1 U cct cd O V] U o" 1-4 p, a.) a UE. O U U U o il Cd a),...., 4 4 0 2 0 ti.). N c r8Z b Ts U 0 4 Q ) v1 1CUU O Qg 0 0 c Q •. -7 - cd deu a Wi o x . o N U o 0o ap b.h) 0%9, DIS o oy •bbO•� po U � � 11 • U 'Uro 1 !IO1J ON by 1flI F - ci)4' 1 O 5 6-4 nit, os cd U U ^d O P /'\ i" U h U +Q # U 0 QU C: U •� dD OGA p + y tr) r 7:1 oo N Q CO _ U N Urg, po H O U U � • A uri W , Q v , i to b[ a ° rzi I-1 a ecd �rip Gq p•' a Iv t:t 9 Pa C4 FO-+ . ea . • N `Z U U • • CQ • by .5 ,- U C/] U G4 • 0 0 o C.) W " i • 0 0 U a) co) Y o a) 5 U 0 coD /"N. 7:1 • 01 „0 (I) o • 7 O • • U oa cn4 U c • 00> • � A N o Q • cid A UIicd W 0 i0 0 N y a> O a`) yo o 't7 0 DI VI o , qi"4,1 o Cd al cYd rb bA 7:iv8 a> lluiIfE14p a 1100 Dts. toE as ts.. i1 -. /"\ I 0 N w .5 1 o �� .bo Why e _ . _ UI bt1, to Nq q g 00mci.: •Io °' vp�, 0 0 W a"i� . 0 Ox W o ;I! E i Pio'+ li r24 — on cci b a.) N Z U U to -4-) as N x U V1 U W cci o 0 Cn -d 0L, 0 UH 4 O I I -� o E - V) H z • a) r) i. o �in z i1 Ia) O U O Q N 0 Q O a) ct a w0 O v) C O (24O N •z a0i °'t. A — . ''-'5 'a4 0 .., o a) � cd a) i-+ y .� -07:I :_,9^ ice.+ • 04 O 0 CS 1-. O/] ~ , (� , � 0Cro -� pn N 7 - - UO U o o ab g b1 0 N ( a) 4.., d Q U o o p4 °' I.) oa °owo O a E�� � "' _ er W o . A I 2 t> H o ro O M on ,--1 m+-' n O - ' maN y co, O t tiU .O p `� O y ,yO -0 0-I rn ., C 6, E o g P., c Y 41 > P, o : d m 4.� o P� 0 0 P, o 03 CID H • +, Z aa w V) U � ("1 ' ...,, co .5 Nx . U U 0G by • . • • LI U ct o oa 0 U N' U 'd a.) o O U � 0 Pi -00 05. . U 0 Po • Ax • a) • a Q . 1 N a Wo L ) U N 0 o s 4 o ° v ii Hui• E .� ,4 ... ai� -, G. i- w 0 .< 4 ' U /••'\ co . sa Pa aa) W a) o ° V:' A. c.2 2 to ab 0 ei P-, bi) 0 --, v::' rf) .c.) .5 i om 0 x II W 0a a i • ZA" rigpy c (D '1441 LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Stan Chrzanowski DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC1: LDC SECTION: 1.08.02 -Definitions LDC SUPPLEMENT #: N/A-new language CHANGE: Defining pervious area for parking in areas other than enclosed structures. REASON: To ensure that vehicles are parked in appropriate areas and on.appropriate materials. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC section 4.05.03 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on January 5, 2005 at 5:20 p.m. • • Amend the LDC as follows: 1.08.02 Definitions Pervious (also pervious surface or pervious area - applicable to Section 4.05.03 only): Material that allows the percolation or absorption of water into the ground including, but not limited to "iris:aitiiicli;`Ad crushed stone. havers`'and limen ck`areIo ''cons deredlsiie'ry 'ious"a °urfaei. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Stan Litsinger DEPARTMENT: Comprehensive Planning AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC 2:19 LDC SECTION: 2.03.05 Open Space Zoning District LDC SUPPLEMENT#: New CHANGE: Implementing provisions for the update, clarification and corrective GMP amendment for the RLSA and RFMU (Final Order) related "glitch" amendment CPSP-2003-11 adopted by the BCC on October 26,2004. REASON: Required LDC to implement the"glitch'amendments FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Sections 2.03.07;2.03.08; and 4.08.00 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This draft provided by Marti Chumbler, Esq., Carlton Fields,P.A. This version dated February 1, 2005. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.03.05 Open Space Zoning District A. No change. B. No change, 1. Allowable uses. The following uses are allowed in the CON District, a. Uses permitted as of right. • ,.� (1)-(7) No change. • (8) Oil and gas exploration subject to applicable federal and state drilling permits - ,.� and Collier County non-environmental site development plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in, compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as such rules existed on January 14, 2005, regardless of whether the . activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C- 30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long.as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-3Q, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a) (1)through(12),F.A.C. (9) No change. b. No change. c. Conditional uses.No change. (1)Oil and gas field development and production,subject to federal and state field development permits and Collier County non-environmental site development plan • review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats,where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14,2005"regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C- 30.001(2),FAC.All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County,so long as the state permits complywith the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,FAC. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big'Cypress Watershed,the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42,F.S.,to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed.All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1) through(12),F.A.C. (2)—(4) No change. 2. No change. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Stan Litsinger • DEPARTMENT: Comprehensive Planning AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC 2:33 LDC SECTION: 2.03.07 Overlay Zoning Districts LDC SUPPLEMENT#:New CHANGE: Adding implementing provisions for three (3) new TDR bonuses outlined in the GMP amendment CP-2004-4 transmitted by the BCC to the. DCA for Objection, Recommendations,and Comments (ORC)on January 25, 2005. . REASON: The GMP amendment is the result of a joint petition CP-2004-4 of the CBIA, The Florida Wildlife Federation,Florida Audubon and County staff at the direction of the BCC. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: 2.03.08 Rural Fringe Zoning Districts GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: Implementing LDC for TDR bonuses to be adopted in June 2005. OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: Draft provided by Marti Chumbler, Esq. of Carlton Fields,P.A. This version dated February 1, 2005. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.03.07 Overlay Zoning Districts A.—C. No change. D. Special Treatment Overlay"ST". 1.—3. No change. 4. Transfer of dDevelopment Rights (TDR). • a.—b. No change. c. TDR credits from RFMU sending lands: General Provisions i. Creation of TDR credits. a) TDR credits are generated from RFMU sending lands at a rate of 1 TDR credit per 5 acres of RFMU Sending Land or, for those legal non-conforming lots or parcels of less than 5 acres that were in existence as of June 22, 1999, at a rate of 1 TDR credit per legal non-conforming lot or parcel. b) For lots and parcels 5 acres or larger, the number of TDR credits generated shall be calculated using the following formula: #of acres x 0.2 #of TDR credits generated. Where the number of TDR credits thus calculated is a fractional number,the number of TDR credits created shall be rounded to the nearest 1/100th. ii. Creation of TDR Bonus credits. TDR Bonus credits shall only be generated from RFMU sending landproperty from which.TDR credits have been severed. The three types TDR Bonus credits are as follows: a) Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits. Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits are generated at a rate of 1 credit for each TDR credit severed from that RFMU.sending land for which a Restoration and Management Plan(RMP)has been accepted by the County. In order to be accepted,a RMP shall satisfy the following: .1) The RMP shall include a.listed species management plan. 2) The RMP shall comply with the criteria:set forth in 3.05.08.A.and B. 3) The RMP shall provide financial assurance,in the form of a performance surety bond or similar financial security,that the RMP shall remain in place and be performed until the earlier of the following occurs: a. Viable and sustainable ecological and hydrological functionality has been achieved on the property as measured by the success criteria set forth in the RMP. b. The property is conveyed to a County,state,or federal agency as provided in b)below. 4) The RMP shall provide for the exotic vegetation removal and • maintenance to be performed by an environmental contractor acceptable to the County. b) Conveyance Bonus credits. Conveyance Bonus credits are generated at a rate of 1 credit for each TDR credit severed from that RFMU sending land that is conveyed in fee simple to a federal,state,or local government agency as a gift. Conveyance Bonus credits shall only be generated from those RFMU sending landproperties on which an RMP has been accepted as provided in a)above. c) Early Entry Bonus credits. Early Entry Bonus credits shall be generated at a rate of 1 additional credit for each TDR credit that is severed from RFMU sending land for the period from March 5.2005,until three yeas after the adoption of this regulation. Early Entry Bonus credits shall cease to be generated after the termination of this early entry bonus period. However, Early Entry Bonus credits may continue to be used to increase density in RFMU and non-RFMU Receiving Lands after the termination of the Early Entry Bonus period. iii. Calculation of TDR Bonus credits. a) Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits are calculated as follows: #TDR credits generated from property x%property subiect to an approved RMP b) Conveyance Bonus credits are calculated as follows: #TDR credits generated from property x%property subject to an approved RMP and conveyed as provided in ii.b)above. c) Early Entry Bonus credits are calculated as follows: #TDR credits generated within Early Entry period x 1. /Th. iv Receipt of TDR credits or TDR Bonus credits from RFMU sending lands. TDR credits or TDR Bonus credits from RFMU sending lands may be transferred into Urban Areas,the Urban Residential Fringe,and RFMU receiving lands,as provided in Sections 2.03.07.(4)(d)and(e)below. • v. Prohibition on transfer of fractional TARS credits and TDR Bonus credits. While fractional TDR credits andTDR Bonus credits may be created,as provided in (ii)above,TDR credits andTDR Bonus credits may only be transferred from RFMU sending lands in increments of whole,not fractional,dwelling units. Consequently, 0 fractional TDR credits and fractional TDR Bonus,credits must be aggregated to form whole units,before they can be utilized to increase density in either non-RFMU Receiving Areas or RFMU Receiving lands. vi. Prohibition on transfer of development rights. a)Neither TDR credits nor TDR Early Entry Bonus credits shall net be transferred generated from RFMU sending lands where a conservation easement or other similar development restriction prohibits the residential development of such property,with the exception of those TDR Early Entry Bonus credits associated with TDR credits severed from March 5,2004,until 'the effective date of this provision]. b)Neither TDR credits nor any TDR Bonus credits shall net be sferfed �--1 generated from RFMU sending lands that were cleared for agricultural operations after June 19,2002,for a period_of twenty-five(25)years after such clearing occurs. d. Transfer of development rights from RFMU sending lands to non-4ml RFMU receiving areas. i. Transfers to urban areas. a) No change. b) Developments which meet the residential infill conditions i)through v) above may increase the base density administratively through a Site development Plan or Plat.approval by a maximum of one dwelling unit per acre by transferring that additional density from RFMU district Sending Lands. ii. Transfers to the urban residential fringe. TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits may be transferred from RFMU sending lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringed to increase density by a maximum of 1.0 dwelling units per acre, allowing for a density increase from the existing allowable base density of 1.5 dwelling units per acre to 2.5 dwelling unit per gross acre. e. Transfers from RFMU sending lands to RFMU receiving lands . i.Maximum density on RFMU receiving lands when TDR credits are transferred from RFMU sending lands. a) No change. b) The density achievable through the transfer of TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits into RFMU receiving lands shall be as provided for in section 2.03.08 (A)(2)(a)(2)(b)(i)outside of rural villages and sections 2.03.08 (4(2)_fb)_(3)(b)and 2.03.08(A)_(2),(b)_(3)(c)(i)inside of rural villages . ii.Remainder uses after TDR credits are Inflamed severed from RFMU sending lands .Where development rights have been transferred severed from RFMU district Sending Lands, such lands may be retained in private ownership and may be used as set forth in section 2.03.08 A.4.b. f. Procedures applicable to the severance and transfer of TDR credits and the generation of TDR Bonus credits from RFMU sending lands: i. General. Those developments that utilize such TDR credits or TDR Bonus credits are subject to all applicable permitting and approval requirements of this Code, including but not limited to those applicable to site development plans,plat approvals,PVDs, and DRIs. The severance of TDR credits and the generation of Early Entry Bonus credits from RFMU sending lands does not require the approval of the County.However,those development-s that utilize such TDR credits and Early Entry Bonus credits are subject to all applicable permitting and approval requirements of this Code,including but not limited to those applicable to site development plans,plat approvals,PUDs, and DRIs. • b) The,generation of Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits tTh and Conveyance Bonus credits requires acceptance by the County of a RMP. ii. County-maintained central TDR registry. In order to facilitate the County's monitoring and regulation of the TDR Program, the County shall serve as the central registry of all TDR credit and TDR Bonus credits purchases, sales, and transfers, as well as a central listing of TDR credits' and TDR Bonus credits available for sale and purchasers seeking TDR credits or TDR Bonus credits. No TDR credit and TDR Bonus credit generated from RFMU sending lands may be utilized to increase density in any area unless the following procedures are complied with in full. a) No.change. b) TDR Bonus credits shall not be used to increase density in either non RFMU receiving areas or RFMU receiving lands until a TDR credit certificate reflecting the TDR Bonus credits is obtained from the County and recorded. 1) Early Entry Bonus credits. All TDR credit certificates issued by the County for the period from the effective date of this provision until three years after such effective date shall include one Early Entry Bonus credit or fractional Early Entry Bonus credit or each TDR credit or fractional TDR credit reflected on the TDR credit certificate. Where TDR credits were severed from March 5, 2004, until the effective date of this provision, the County shall, upon receipt of a copy of the TDR credit pm certificate reflecting those previously severed*TDR credits, issue a TDR credit certificate entitling Early Entry Bonus credits equal in number to the previously severed TDR credits. 2) Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credit. A TDR certificate reflecting Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credits shall not be issued until the County has accepted a RMP for the sending lands from which the Environmental Restoration and Maintenance Bonus credit is being generated. . 3) Conveyance Bonus credit. A TDR certificate reflecting Conveyance Bonus credits shall not be issued until the County has accepted a RMP for the Sending Lands from which the Conveyance Bonus credit is being generated and such sending lands have been conveyed, in fee simple, to a County,state, or federal government agency. b} c), A PUD or DRI utilizing TDR credits or TDR Bonus credits may be conditionally approved, but no subsequent application for site development plan or subdivision plat within the PUD or DRI shall be approved, until the developer submits the following: i)documentation that the developer has acquired all TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits needed for that portion of the development that is the subject of the site development plan or subdivision plat; and ii)No change. s} The developer shall provide documentation of the acquisition of full .-� ownership and control of all TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits needed for the development and of recordation of the TDR credit and TDR Bonus credit Certificates for all such TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits prior to the approval of any site development plan, subdivision plat,or other final local development order, other than a PUD or DRI. d) Each TDR credit shall have an individual and distinct tracking number, which shall be identified on the TDR Certificate that reflects the sever • the TDR credit . The County TDR Registry shall maintain a record of all TDR credits,to include a designation of those that have been expended. fl Each TDR Bonus credit shall have ari individual and distinct tracking number,which shall be identified on the TDR Certificate and which shall identify the specific TDR credit associated with the TDR Bonus credit. The County TDR Registry shall maintain a record of all TDR Bonus credits,to include a designation of those that have been expended. g.Proportional utilization of TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits.Upon the issuance of approval of a site development plan or subdivision plat that is part of a PUD or DRI, TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits shall be deemed to be expended at a rate proportional to percentage of the PUD or DRI's approved gross density that is derived through TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits.All PUDs and DRIs utilizing TDR credits and TDR Bonus credits shall require that the rate of TDR credit and TDR Bonus credits consumption be reported through the monitoring provisions of sections 10.02.12 and 10.02.07(C)(1)(b) of this Code. • 4,11 • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay • CHAPTER 2 ZONING DISTRICTS AND USES 2.01.00 Generally 2.01.01 Purpose 2.01.02 Miscellaneous Structures 2.01.03 Essential Services 2.01.04 Polling Places 2.02.00 Establishment of Zoning Districts 2.02.01 Establishment of Official Zoning Atlas 2.02.02 District Nomenclature 2.02.03 Prohibited Uses 2.02.04 Continuation of Provisional Uses 2.03.00 Zoning Districts 2.03.01 Residential Zoning Districts 2.03.02 Commercial Zoning Districts 2.03.03 Industrial Zoning Districts 2.03.04 Civic and Institutional Zoning Districts 2:03.05 Open Space Zoning District 2.03.06 Planned Unit Development Districts 2.03.07 Overlay Zoning Districts 2.03.08 Eastern Lands/Rural Fringe Zoning Districts 2.03.09 Districts Under Moratorium 2.04.00 Permissible, Conditional,and Accessory Uses in Zoning Districts 2.04.01 Rules for Interpretation of Uses 2.04.02 Effect of Approvals Under the Zoning Reevaluation Ordinance 2.04.03 Table of Land Uses in Each Zoning District 2.05.00 Density Standards 2.05.01 Density Standards and Housing Types 2.05.02 Density Blending 2.06.00 Affordable Housing Density Bonus 2.06.01 Generally 2.06.02 Purpose and Intent 2.06.03 AHDB Rating System 2.07.00 Table of Setbacks for Base Zoning Districts I:\LDC Arnendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 1 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay Bayshore Drive Mixed Use Overlay District. Special conditions for the properties adjacent to Bayshore Drive as referenced on BMUD Map 1; and further identified by the designation "BMUD"on the applicable official Collier County Zoning Atlas Map or map series. 1. The purpose and intent of this district is to encourage revitalization along the Bayshore Drive corridor by providing opportunities for small-scale mixed use development.This district is intended to: revitalize the commercial and residential development along this corridor; enhance the waterfront;encourage on-street parking and shared parking facilities and provide appropriate landscaping and buffering between the various types of uses; and protect and enhance the nearby single-family residential units.The types of uses permitted are low intensity retail, office, personal service and residential uses. 2. These regulations shall apply to the Bayshore Drive Mixed Use Overlay district as identified on BMUD Map 1 and further identified by the designation "BMUD"on the applicable official Collier County Zoning Atlas Maps.Except as provided in this section of the LDC, all other uses, dimensional and development requirements shall be as required in the applicable underlying zoning category. . primary resideflee 3. Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict(NC).The purpose and intent of this subdistrict is to encourage,a mix of low intensity commercial uses and residential uses. Developments will be small-scale and pedestrian-oriented. 4. Waterfront Subdistrict(W). The purpose of this subdistrict is to allow maximum use of the waterfront for entertainment while enhancing the area for use by the general public. Development standards for the district are the same as those set forth for the Neighborhood Commercial subdistrict, unless set forth below. Development in this subdistrict is encouraged to be a mix of restaurant and retail uses while allowing for limited marina uses. 5. Residential Subdistrict I (RI). The purpose of this subdistrict is to encourage the rti development of multifamily residences as a transitional use between commercial and single- family development. The multifamily buildings shall be compatible with the building patterns and facade articulation of traditional neighborhood design.The intent is to create a row of I:ILDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zon' tricts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 2 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay residential units with uniform front yard setbacks and access to the street. 6. Residential subdistrict 2(R2). The purpose of this subdistrict is to encourage the development of multi-family residences as transitional uses between commercial and single- family development. The multi-family buildings shall be Compatible with the building patterns and facade articulation of traditional neighborhood design. 8. Residential Subdistrict 3(R3).The purpose of this district is to allow the development of mobile home, modular home,townhouses and single-family residences.All new development in this subdistrict shall be compatible with the building patterns and facade articulation of traditional neighborhood design. The intent is to create a row of residential units with consistent front yard set backs and access to the street. a. Minimum LOT width: boundaries- . and At Min—Side-Yard Min. Rear Yard One (Single) F-amify 40-feet 54eet 84eet Dwelling-Units Modular--Dwelling 404eet 54eet 84eet Units Townhouse 10 feet 04eet-when, 8-feet 5-feet Mebile-klernes . 4.0400t 54eet 8 feet 9. Residential Subdistrict 4(R4)The purpose of this Subdistrict is the same as Residential Subdistrict R2 except only single-family detached dwelling units are permitted. 10. Residential Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict(RNC)The purpose and intent of this subdistrict is to allow limited home occupational businesses. 11. Residential/Art Village Subdistrict(R/AV). The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow certain appropriate home occupational uses oriented toward or supporting a visual or cultural arts theme, and also which are compatible with, and capable of maintaining or sustaining a desired residential character. • I:1LDC Amendments1LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 3 • • • • FINAL. DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay•• . BMUD Map No. 1 • .._ . A iZiA 6,.. ,..:,, '''' 11 -_-, j An , . ilif i p ., . ...„ ., . L, 1r . T--� A�,a 41* reo/VrAir/.40r_drartbt , , , 1111 . ./. P ' Pill. • h x • ..,`'`44 r } p //fir ?'.. 7.41:=,;,..:;.2L,-;;;;;:?.v.:-...a..,4„. ry..:/,..rJ'L� Yti^.:( x,,:. 111lai! ;,s S'',r�(�T ,,,, • �i :;• — �- • 2• }•.4• •// 1./ an - ir1 ! rnii& •a FxX.F•:"f'c¢�4{7y fx . • ; Y.k h Ir/.®.r/r/1/�� ,,�: rox ///Irk/l/ �irs•17,�a x.r, ;vaK•? Y.y�..;a ''''''.......:::::-.4::.:1'.:'/".1/7r `Tf C / . .`:tr:y.?n};3.1•121:.K•a. {. t h,;t ".1/7 r. -Ty/ A X • d r m?`h' a ti M1 M.,� AN. I///ZorAJA �, • fa P'"j!.`u� .✓g:4 f •ti w "k'.L f r����/em,e Y/llh5l r f.i ..�...... .. ,4-%„...r.,,,,,F•10:4; . 4Y•• 'V Y.q I LY i t'•' C • • • t1 ����� �.F� Nor1 liked' tJ QTY Cliff /� fi"C WYIGY( ':J/// %�', dre,, ��� suu11�IC Cs a as / Y Ta } �d - (C/'/.7'///,✓,r?rj -WUD:IWeJddda�IN YwMtld Camw�eW . � z .........__..-s4 //}/T7 F/l! rr Zr. /x..F{SLY!z.. rkti Y. •�..i // !" , .'b7N1CR; ri•i: p� 1 • Y • • ,3 1 uYYCiei WWni41l4dNrbt3 ;-tKtY x .moi-'.. �.l{ L 3 ? .:.�_;r'•♦� X' •YD#IAVtiIWNdMlNO/e1/i4Y1NtV1eM1eyC4p mtlbhlo• . � / fs',ra �� Y4 �'•f171JdJ/,, Jl: IY.. ��i?{;l:. .. f ; x { eN � , 17;#50, / /J/ 7e. CPup. Z PImWUNIOanIpeNRl .[ •fl. / r • [� } -rtt ,}ti.�. ir !°/1 fid $x, /�ifniv✓F///!.r f + L////l/V�C�///l,�/�i�Gp T Y .... //JINN N ' 7 1 I Y z;:,at,c t„,,,;,,,,,7711.2.„,r3i • r ,U y { !! k r 7Cp111WldIPR111 t t ix ,f • ii ii t �,a 511 'i',1r�z j Epp . ���� e �1 f{• 'tits” T': {....;gig A•tl,,,•`. • s //,, /77 t Y 7i /}Y • • 'Y ti G tL. .1 %. . uFi•iri'v°:c%k•t'<.s:::::v.::.:: ';; •'--: • .t::'; +r' t: u}?3a'`4 /. !/ / .e•:Sj{isn.• ? : i -' ..-:=nkvWin. - ?. - .i 'rii:}'is : :.:r:_ :_i;( ix : -.-c „o:3 {i?�i iai;-re • r r ,r rJ ✓ y /0 / .� : • • 0 . • gtflargagiiiii:Nagiai 0'420.7 . ,c ,o. I :!1:) . M. d ' s r /4 ., . • .r..�. .. d:c;,...1:}942a, .. S" v`:cJi::rks:aY:�$.ti5Ai. $ ,;? y,. • • • • • • C:\LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts()SMrdoc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM • 4 • . • • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay • 2.04.03 Table of Land Uses in Each Zoning District Table 1. Permissible Land Uses in Each Zoning District P=permitted E= permitted with certain >- exceptions rg w a 8 Blank cell =prohibited (also 0 - �, M o S see table of conditional andre accessory uses) �. co o € v N c o E '" V V V Ct ` V This a recommended use by E IA the Consultant. (I) w o - .0 .0 .0 _ r.5 Ti; W N CO W Z - CO LUre t r. CO CO CO CO' CO v To >- 2(� m N H fA �Q to' Land Use Type or Category m Z z c U174 Accounting Services 8721 P P Administrative Service Facilities Adult Day Care Facilities& 8322 Centers 0 Agricultural Activities Agricultural Outdoor Sales Agricultural Services 0741,0742, 0752- 0783 Agricultural Services 0711, 0721, 0722- 0724, 0762, 0782, 0783 Agricultural Services 0723 Aircraft and Parts 3721-3728 Airport-General Aviation Amusement&Recreation 7911, 7991 P • Services Amusement&Recreation 7999 tourist P Services guides only Ancillary Plants Apparel&Other Finished 2311-2399 Products Apparel &Accessory Stores 5611-5699 P Appraisers Artist Studios: Painting, ceramics/pottery. sculpture and p p photographv Architectural, Engineering, 0781, 8711-8713 P P Surveying Services Assisted Living Facilities Attorney Offices& Legal 8111 ig 1 Ill Services 1:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 5 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay ''• P=permitted To E=permitted with certain >- exceptions N a) Lu °o E Blank cell = prohibited (also o ' c, M o see table of conditional and m co a accessory uses) N cn -- o -- v ▪ d E Ts This a recommended use by .o ` v 111 ro the Consultant. w vs v > a .c .Q . .0 .- zap .a • o co co co co V) Z V) ea ea ea ed as s R - _ .0 d d m m m M m U) :0 .O " :o '0 • .0 Land Use Type or Category' m zz v) Auctioneering Service,Auction 7389, 5999 " Rooms and Houses Auto and Home Supply Store 5531 Automobile Parking 7521 Automotive Repair, Services, 7514, 7515, 7521, and Parking 7542 Automotive Repair,Services, 7513-7549 and Parking n Automotive Services Automotive Dealers and 5511,5531, 5541, Gasoline Service Stations 5571, 5599 Barber Shops or Colleges 7241 Beauty Shops or Schools 7231 P1 Biking Trails Bowling Centers 7933 Building Construction 1521-1542 Building Materials 5211-5261 Building Materials, Hardware, 5231 -5261 Garden Supplies Business Associations 8621 Business Repair Service Business Services 7311, 7313, 7322- 7331, 7338, 7361, 7371, 7372, 7374- 7346, 7379 Business Services 7311-7313,7322- 7338,7361-7379, 7384 Business Services 7311, 7313, 7322- P 7338, 7384 Business Services 7311-7313, 7322- 7338,7361-7379, 7384, 7389 Except beauty school culture schools, cosmetology schools, or barber colleges I:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 6 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay P= permitted E=permitted with certain >- •� exceptions tx w `m Blank cell =prohibited (also o N es- o see table of conditional and ty o co v accessory uses) c c •e— F N M c a v W m C) ....31/ wC o I This a recommended use by w2 st the Consultant. in 0 w :a •o ,a Ti-c c' ,� v a p 0 N CO . Z �COyCO W w Itis W 10 sita 19 V TO s.^ -0 'D 'C dp Land Use Type or Category m Z ? fY Z fY fY Z CO Business Services 7311-7352,7359, 7361-7397, 7389 Business Services 7311-7353,7359 Business Services 7312,7313, 7319, 7334-7336, 7342- 7389 Business Services 7311 Business Services 7312, 7313, 7319, 7331,7334-7336, 7342,7349,7352, 7361, 7363, 7371- 7384, 7389 Business Services 7311, 7313, 7322- 7331, 7335-7338, 7361, 7371, 7374- 7376, 3747376, 7379 Business/Office Machines Canoe Rental Canoeing Trails Care Units Carwashes 7542 Category II Group Care Facilities Child Care-Not for Profit Child Day Care Services 8351 Churches& Places of Worship Civic and Cultural Facilities Collection/Transfer Sites Commercial Printing 2752 Communications 4812-4841 Communications 4812-4899 Communication Towers Construction Construction -Heavy f-Th. Construction -Special Trade 1711-1793, 1796, Contractors 1799 1:1DC Amendmergs\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 7 • • FINAL DRAFTS Bayshore Overlay '-� P=-Permitted E= permitted with certain , . exceptions Blank cell= prohibited (also o N M v a see table of conditional and ° w �o th .o a Et accessory uses) c N r� o ,- tua ° This a recommended use by v x E w `o the Consultant. N Is > v ,.,0-° - 9 z o o N co N O (0 z - to V E t 10 14 10 t1 t0 v 10 o o 2 c .c �c �c 01-. Land Use Type or Category m zco? re w re re Cl)wie Construction -Special Trade 1711-1799 Contractors Continuing Care Retirement Communities Depository institutions 6011-6099 Depository Institutions 6011, 6019, 6081, 6082 Depository Institutions 6021-6062, 6091, 6099, 6111-6163 Depository Institutions 6021-6062 Drinking Establishments and 5813 Places Drug Stores 5912 Drugs and Medicine 2833-2836 iloprike4P P P Dwelling Units Eating Establishments and 5812 Places Educational Plants Educational.Services 8211-8231 Educational Services 8243-8249 Educational Services 8221-8299 Educational Services 8211-8244, 8299 Electronic Equipment&Other . 3612-3699 Electrical Equipment Engineering, Accounting, 8711-8748 Management and Related Services • Engineering, Accounting, 8711-8713 P Management and Related Services Equestrian Paths '".'.\ 2 Except concessions stands,contract feeding, dinner theaters, drive-in restaurants,food services (institutional), industrial feeding. Ibid I:1LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 8 • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay r1 P= permitted • E= permitted with certain 0 5 5 exceptions v, m w `a E . Blank cell=prohibited (also o _ N M o S see table of conditional and m Lu �; r. a accessory uses) 'o Ts. € N Cr) •- o ,- This a recommended'use by v E w 2 i at ro the Consultant. W o �+ :o s v > • v 3 .0 0 .0 .0z 1.t oz N co co co co Z co Vt t CD 0 CD CD CD OS a dz d 0 d d 00 d Land Use Type or Category' m z z s lr CL EtCo Essential Services'' P P PPPP Excavation Fabricated Metal Products 3411-3479,, 3419- 3499 Fairgrounds Family Care Facilities Fishing Piers Fishing/Hunting/Trapping 0912-1919 Fixture Manufacturing Food Manufacturing 2034,2038, 2053, 2064, 2066, 2068, 2096, 2098, 2099 Food Products 2011-2099 Food Stores 5411,5421-5499 P Food Stores 5411-5499 Fraternal Organizations Funeral Services and 7261 Crematories Furniture& Fixtures 2511-2599 Manufacturing Gasoline Services Stations 5541, 5511-5599 General Contractors 1521-5261 General Merchandise Stores 5311-5399 P Glass and Glazing Work 1793 Golf Courses Government Offices/Buildings 9111-9222, 9224- 9229, 9311, 9411- 9451, 9511-9532, 9611-9661 Group Care Facilities I Gunsmith Shop 7699 Hardware Stores 5251 Health Food Stores 4 For requirements pertaining to Essential Services, see 2.01.03 I:\LDC_AmendmentssLDC Cycle 1 -200512.03.07,1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 9 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay • P=permitted E=permitted with certain `° exceptions n a) u) Blank cell = prohibited (also o ' N M o see table of conditional and co th co -0a accessory uses) 'o 'v .a eh --- o This a recommended use by E w w • o the Consultant. w ) a 11 a v Z .0 .a .o .0 .n z .0 p Ort co CD U) CO N Z 0) W . C co to co ca ca v io CCCC C ++ C _ .0 m m d 0 0 0 m (1) 'C>- .� d :0 'B 'C 'O -0 'p .0 Q Z fn rt U) rn Land Use Type or Category m Z Health Services 8011-8049 Health Services 8011-8049, 8082 P Health Services 8051-8059, 8062- 8069,8071, 8072, 8092-8099 Heavy Construction 1611-1629 Hiking Trails Home Furniture, Furnishings, 5713-5719, 5731- P ^, Equipment Store 5736 Home Furniture, Furnishings, 5712-5736 Equipment Store Home Supply Store 5531 Hotels and Motels 7011, 7021, 7041 Hotels and Motels 7011 P Houseboat Rental 7999 Individual & Family Social Services Industrial Inorganic Chemicals 2812-2819 Industrial, Commercial, 3511-3599 Computer Machinery and Equipment Insurance Agencies, Brokers, 6311-6399, 6411 P Carriers Insurance Agencies, Brokers, 6311-6361, 6411 P f Carriers Insurance agents, brokers,,and 6361 and 6411 service, including Title . Insurance Investment/Holding Offices 6712-6799 • Job Training &Vocational 8331 Services Justice, Public Order&Safety 9221, 9222, 9229 Labor Unions 8631 Lakes Operations 79990-1 Large Appliance Repair Service 7623 Legal Services 8111 P I:\LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.071 Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0.SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 10 • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay P=permitted E=permitted with certain >- c exceptions ce. w d 3 E Blank cell = prohibited(also 0 co' M o S see table of conditional and d co r r.ts v'o accessory uses) w _ som St uoE w w wThis a recommended use byV ow TA '64 Consultant. w H :e :a : v3 p O Cl) co co t) N Z - N tc as R{ 10 c3 RI v }0 _ .0 i d d a, d CD N 0 Land Use Type or Category m Z ? Leather Products 3131-3199 • Libraries 8231 • Local and Suburban Transit 4111-4121 Local and Suburban Transit 4131-4173 Lumber and Wood Products 2426, 2431-2499 Management& Public Relations 8741-8743, 8748 P j Management Services 8711-8748 Marinas 4493,4499 Measuring, Analyzing and 3812-3873 Controlling Instruments Medical and Optical Goods 3812-3873 Medical Laboratories and 8071,8072, 8092, Research& Rehabilitation 8093 Centers Membership Organizations 8611-8699 P Membership Organizations 8311,8631 Membership Organizations 8611 Membership Organizations 8611, 8621 Misc. Manufacturing.Industries 3911-3999 Miscellaneous Plastic Products Miscellaneous Repair Service 7629-7631 P Miscellaneous Repair Service 7622-7641, 7699 Miscellaneous Repair Service • 7622-7699 Miscellaneous Retail Services 5912,5942-5961 Miscellaneous Retail Services 5912-5963 Miscellaneous Retail Services 5912-5963, 5992- 5999 Miscellaneous Retail Services 5912, 5932-5949, P 5942-5961, 5992- 5999 Mobile Home Dealers 5271 Mobile Homes P liyl'odutar Budt W.oames P P2C) ,--4\ Motion Picture Production 7812-7819 Motion Picture Theaters 7832 • • l:\LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/1.4/2005 2:22:00 PM 11 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay • P= permitted E= permitted with certain c exceptions H a`) > E Blank cell =prohibited (also 0 N M o S see table of conditional and d r a accessory uses) c '` N M o v 1 E v .c This a recommended use by r. the Consultant. N w o �+ a - . 5 6 — y 0 o Co co co co Z - W 46 to .d ca t0 04 r) C c C c C co _ g^ d 2 Land Use Type or Category' m ZZ Z Z w w wv) Motor Freight Transportation 4225 and Warehousing Motor Homes Multi-Family Dwellings P P PP Museums and Art Galleries 8412 P Nature Preserves Nature Trails Non-Depository Credit 6141-6163 Institutions Non-Depository Credit 6111-6163 Institutions Non-Depository Institutions 6011-6163 Non-Depository Institutions 6011, 6019, 6081, 6082 Non-Depository Institutions 6021-6062, 6091, 6099, 6111-6163 Nursing Homes 8051, 8052, 8249 . Office Machine Repair Service 7629-7631 Oil &Gas Exploration Open Space Outdoor Storage Yard Paint, Glass,Wallpaper Stores 5231 Paper and Allied Products 2621-2679 Park Model Travel Trailers Park Service Facilities Parking Facilities Parking Services Parks, Public or Private Parochial Schools—Public or Private 8211 Party Fishing Boats Rental 7999 Personal Services 7291 P Personal Services 7212-7215, 7221- 7251, 7291 Personal Services 7212, 7215, 7221- 7251 I:\LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-2005\2.03.07.I.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 12 • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay P=permitted E =permitted with certain 5' s exceptions = E Blank cell=prohibited(also 0j c^ M o S see table of conditional and m N fr o '9 v a accessory uses) c c N M - o a This a recommended use by :5E . o w a 11 the Consultant. y ga ga v ;o a v z O O C j f' f� y ffl Z cA W 2 w o• .0 t m m m d ow in cnOff.-. -O :C 0 :C C 'a :O >-Land Use Type or Categoryto wwwrereco Personal Services 7212, 7291 P Personal Services 7211, 7212, 7215, 7216, 7291, 72995 Personal Services 7215, 7217, 7219, , 7261, 7291-7299 Personal Services 7211-7219 Personal Services 7215-7231, 7241 Personal Services 7221, 7291 Photographic Goods 3812-3873 Photographic Studios 7221 P P Physical Fitness Facilities 7991 Physical Fitness Facilities Pickup Coaches Plant and Wildlife Conservancies Plastic Materials & Synthetics 2821, 2834, Play Areas and Playgrounds Pleasure Boat Rental Printing and Publishing 2711, 2712 Industries • • Printing and Publishing 2711-2796 Industries Professional Offices 6712-6799, 6411, I fl 96311-6399, 6531, 6541,6552, 6553, 8111 Professional Organizations 8631 Public Administration 9111-9199, 9229, P 9311, 9411-9451, 9511-9532, 9611- 9661 Public Service Facilities- 5 Group 7299 limited to babysitting bureaus, clothing and costume rental, dating service, depilatory salons, diet workshops, dress suit rental, electrolysis, genealogical investigation service, and hair removal. • IALDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts O SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 13 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay • P=permitted E= permitted with certain .r - >- 'C exceptions Blank cell =prohibited(also o N N M ,. o S see table of conditional and m N "a •; a I accessory uses) '� N M o ,- v r so u This a recommended use by E B w w `or. the Consultant. co w v *- 'a ''a- laaa v .Q .a .0 a .' z c) C u) N CO CO V) Z - Lu , t 70 1a is t0 t0 TS v Ts 0 o d m m cm d N t d .0 '0 .0 'O .Di 0 m Z W Land Use Type or Category Z u) Essential Railroad Transportation 4011,4013 Real Estate 6531-6541 P Real Estate 6521-6541 Real Estate 6512 Real Estate 6512-6514, 6519, 6531-6553 Real Estate Brokers and 6531 Appraisers Real Estate Offices 6531,6541, 6552, 6553 Recreational Service Facilities Recreational Services- Indoor 7911-7941, 7991- 7993, 7999 Recreational Uses Recreational Vehicles Rehabilitative Centers 8093 Repair shops and related 7699' services, not elsewhere P classified Research Centers 8093 Research Services 8732 Residential uses P Retail Nurseries, Lawn and 5261 Garden Rubber and Misc.Plastic 3021, 3052, 3053 Products Safety Service Facilities Schools, public Schools-Vocational 8243-8299 Security Brokers, Dealers, 6211-6289 P Exchanges, Services 6 Except mobile home brokers, on site; housing authorities, operating. 'Antique repair and restoration, except furniture and automotive only, bicycle repair shops only, rod and reel repair. !AMC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 14 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay P= permitted E =permitted with certain ›' u CO exceptions H `m au E Blank cell=prohibited (also O see table of conditional and w 7,co o a accessory uses) S N •. o ,- I This a recommended use by v E w w w o ro the Consultant. u) o H �' TO H .c ^ ' v .�°a .•°a .•°a .•°a .,z .•°a E • C N N N. N N Z n' �'' W l0 a; co !0 S to o .a it m d cc 0 H 0 • • U "re Land Use Type or Category' m Z z Cl) Shoe Repair Shops or 7251 P Shoeshine Parlors Shooting range, indoor 7999 SidaWatlifiMaititig , P P P P P P Social Services 8322-8399 Stone, Clay, Glass and 3221,3251, 3253, Concrete Products 3255-3273, 3275, 3281 Storage Synthetic Materials 2834 Testing Services Textile Mill Products 2211-2221, 2241- 2259,2273-289, 2297,2298 Timeshare Facilities Title abstract offices 6541 Tow-in Parking Lots 7514,7515, 7521 Townhouses • P P PPP Transportation by Air 4512-4581 Transportation Equipment 3714,3716, 3731, 3732,3751, 3761, 3764,3769, 3792, 3799 Transportation Services 4724-4783, 4789 Travel Agencies 4724 Travel Trailers 5561 Two-Family Dwelling P P mit United States Postal Services 4311 P Veterinarian's Offices , 0742 P Veterinarian's Office 0752 P/X Videotape Rental1s 7841 P Vocational Rehabilitation • 8331 B Excludes major distribution center. 9 Excludes outdoor kenneling. 18 Limited to 1,800 square feet of gross floor area. • I:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 15 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay • • P=permitted E= permitted with certain g exceptions y d > Blank cell =prohibited (also • 0 ' N M o see table of conditional and y i 4t-accessory use's) 'c 'c N M "- o° m` , I c This a recommended use by 2 E 74 w f o the Consultant. rn v ,'-a :a :5 E r v 3 2 .0 .0 .a .a Z .0 O tj m N N N Z - t7 g • !o !0 !0 W e0 V t0 =!- d c N. m d d O d'0d :0 .D 0a :aa o.. N !A .0 Land Use Type or Category' < Z z C W it C it Services Welding Repair 7692 Wholesale Trade 5148 Wholesale Trade- Durable 5021, 5031, 5043- Goods 5049, 5063-5078, 5091, 5092, 5094- 5099 Wholesale Trade- Nondurable 5111-5159, 5181, Goods • 5182, 5191 Wildlife Conservancies 9512 • Wildlife Management 0971 Wildlife Refuge/Sanctuary Wildlife Sanctuaries Watches/Clocks 3812-3873 A=50%of the building height,but not less than 15 feet. B=50%of the building height,but not less than 30 feet. C=50%of the building height, but not less than 25 feet. D = 50% of the building height, but not less than 25 feet. STRUCTURES 50 feet or more in height= 25 feet plus one additional foot of SETBACK for each foot of building height over 50 feet. E=the total of all side YARD SETBACKS shall equal 20%of the LOT width,with a maximum of 50 feet. No side YARD shall be less than 10 feet. Alternative dimensions may be possible when approved through a unified plan of DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING one or more LOTS undercommon ownership where the YARD requirements are met for the unified site but not necessarily for each PARCEL within the unified site. F=the YARD requirements shall be equal to the most restrictive adjoining district. X = for PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES: 50 feet from all property lines; for accessory STRUCTURES: 25 feet from all property lines. I:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-2005\2.03.071 Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 16 - FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay Table 2. Land Uses that May be Allowable in Each Zoning District as Accessory Uses or Conditional Uses. C =conditional use A=accessory use = Recommendation Z N '11,001 ! :_ v 2 1 2 2 . 2 g D . m.O mo N ma m m m m: m Administrative or service building Adult day care 8322 Agricultural: animal& livestock breeding, exotic aquaculture, aviary, diary or poultry plant, egg production, exotic animals, ranching, or wholesale reptile breeding Agricultural 0741, 0742, 0752- Agricultural services 0783 /Th Amusement&recreation 7911 services 7911- 7941, 7991- Amusement&recreation 7993, services 7QQ7 7948, 7992, • Amusement&recreation 7996, services 7999 Ancillary plants Animal control. Aquariums 8422 Archery ranges 7999, Assisted living facilities Auctioneering Services, 7389, auction rooms and houses 5999 5521, 5551, Automotive dealers and 5561, 201°gasoline service stations 5599 1:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 17 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay C=conditional use A=accessory use = Recommendation v r N M "C�'� if �i r r ? ♦e fh th th § samazamm N m m m m m m m m 7513, Automotive rental/leasing 7519 Beach chair, bicycle, boat or moped rentals Bed & breakfast facilities 7011 C C Boathouses A Boat ramps Boat yards Botanical garden 8422 Bottle clubs 5813 Camping cabins Care Units Caretaker's residence Category II group care facilities Cemeteries • 2812- Chemical products 2899 Child day care 8351 C Churches & places of 8661 worship C Civic&cultural facilities Clam nurseries Cluster development Cocktail lounges 5813 Collection/transfer sites Commercial uses 4812- Communications 4841 Communication towers Community centers I:1LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-2005\2.03.07.I.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2J14/2005 2:22:00 PM 18 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay C=conditional use A=accessory use = Recommendation N C9 I V > A of "a Z fY OC to �gL m m m m CO CO C ea m m 7922 Community theaters Concrete or asphalt plants Continuing care/retirement centers 5411 Convenience stores Dancing establishments& staged entertainment 6011- Depository institutions 6099 Detention facilities Docks 5813 Drinking establishments Driving ranges Earth mining 5812 Eating establishments 8211- Education services 8222 Education facilities; public & 8211- private schools 8231 Electric generating plants Electric, gas, &sanitary 4911- services 4971 Excavation Extraction related +l' processing and production 10) I:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 19 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay r„\ C=conditional use A=accessory use = Recommendation N ehet q� s .I�� �� +w c Z g ; V 2 02 2 2 2; 2 m m CO CO CO fn co in G in 3482- Fabricated metal products 3489 Farm labor housing 5153- Farm product raw materials 5159 Field crops 0912- Fishing/hunting/trapping 1919 2011, Food products . 2048 Food service 5411- Food stores (over 5,000 s.f.) 5499 Fraternal lodges, private club, or social clubs 5983- Fuel dealers 5989 Fuel facilities C Funeral services & 7261 crematories Gas generating plants Gift shops 5947 A Golf club house Golf course Golf driving range Group care units Guesthouses Health services 8011 Homeless shelters 8322 8062- Hospitals 8069 7011, Hotels and motels 7021. Hunting cabins I:1LDC_AmendmentslLDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.l.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 20 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay • C =conditional use A=accessory use = Recommendation • e- N M Z �I N m m m m m COi m C'I Incinerators Jails Justice,public order& 9211- safety 9224 0742, Kennels & kenneling 0752 Kiosks Leather tanning &finishing 3111 •Livestock 4111- Local and suburban transit 4121 4131- Local and suburban transit 4173 2411- 2421, Lumber and wood products 2429 Maintenance areas Major maintenance facilities 4493, Marina 4499 Mental health facilities • Merchandise—outdoor sales Miniature golf course 7999 Mixed,residential and A ort commercial Model homes and model sales centers Motion picture theaters 7832 Motion picture theaters 7833 4212, 4213- Motor freight transportation 4225, and warehousing 4226 Motor freight transportation 4225, ' and warehousing 4226 1:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 21 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay C=conditional use A=accessory use A= Recommendation 07 N M �' 2 t Vk��C�ar r 4fiY ,° ,ES� t � z w Cl) m m m c O m G Noncommercial boat launching ramps Nursery—retail 5261 Nursing and personal care 8062 facilities Nursing homes 1321, Oil and gas extraction 1382 Oil &gas field development and production Outdoor display Packinghouse Paper and allied products 2611 Personal services 7291 A Petroleum refining and 2911 related 2999 Pistol or rifle range Play areas and playgrounds Poultry raising(small) 3312- Primary metal industries 3399 Private boathouse and A A A docks • Private clubs Private landing strips Pro shops (large) Pro shops (small) Recreational facilities Recreational services Refuse systems 4953 Rehabilitative centers 8093 Repair or storage areas I:\LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.l.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 22 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay C =conditional use /Th A=accessory use A=Recommendation 21 Z Ce m m o c o c p p _ ,.. . CO m CO CO m Residential uses Resource recovery plant Restaurant(small) or snack 5812 shoo Restaurant(large) 5812 Retail shops or sales Rubber and misc. Plastic 3061- products 3089 Sanitary landfills Sawmills Schools, public or private Schools,_private 8243- Schools,vocational 8299 Service facilities Slaughtering plants 2011 Social association or clubs 8641 8322- Social services 8399 Soup kitchens Sports instructional camps or schools Staged entertainment facility 3211, 3221, 3229, 3231, 3241, 3274, Stone, clay, glass and 3291- concrete products 3299 Swimming pools-public Storage, enclosed Tennis facilities I:1LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts Q SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 23 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay C =conditional use A=accessory use = Recommendation MT I a g 2 212 m m m m m m mi m 03 2231, 2261- 2269, 2295, Textile mill products 2296 Transfer stations 4212 0741- Veterinarian's office 0742 5015, 5051, Wholesale trade-durable 5052, goods 5093 5162, 5169, Wholesale trade— 5171, 5172, nondurable goods Yacht club 7997 Zoo 1 The overlay districtsare not included in this table where they are design-oriented and does not change the underlying uses. Overlay districts, whether listed herein or not, allow the uses in the underlying zoning district. Those overlay districts listed in this table also allow the specifically listed uses. Residential Neighborhood Commercial is not included, as it deals with home occupations. Also permissible in the C-1 zoning district is any other commercial use or professional service which is comparable in nature with the listed uses including those that exclusively serve the administrative as opposed to the operational functions of a business and are purely associated with activities conducted in an office. • I:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts O SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 24 • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay CHAPTER 4 SITE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 4.01.00.Generally 4.01.01 Elevation Requirements for All Developments 4.01.02 Kitchens in Dwelling Units 4.02.00 Site Design Standards 4.02.01 Dimensional Standards for Principle Uses in Base Zoning Districts 4.02.02 Dimensional Standards for Conditional Uses and Accessory Uses in Base Zoning Districts 4.02.03.Specific Standards for Location of Accessory Buildings and Structures 4.02.04 Standards for Cluster Residential Design 4.02.05 Specific Design Standards for Waterfront lots 4.02.06 Standards for Development in Airport Zones 4.02.07 Standards for Keeping Animals 4.02.08 Outside Lighting Requirements 4.02.09 Design Requirements for Shorelines 4.02.10 Design Standards for Recreation Areas within Mobile Home Rental Parks 4.02.11 Design Standards for Hurricane Shelters within Mobile Home Rental Parks 4.02.12 Design Standards for Outdoor Storage 4.02.13 Design Standards for Development in the BP District 4.02.14 Design Standards for Development in the ACSC-ST District 4.02.15 Design Standards for Development in the SBCO District 4.02.16 Design Standards for Development in the BMUD- Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 4.02.17 Design Standards for Development in the BMUD-Waterfront Subdistrict 4.02.18 Design Standards for Development in the BMUD-Residential Subdistrict(R1) 4.02.19 Design Standards for Development in the BMUD—Residential Subdistrict(R2) 4.02.20 Design Standards for Development in the BMUD—Residential Subdistrict(R3) 4.02.21 Design Standards for Development in the BMUD-Residential Subdistrict(R4) 4.02.21.a Design Standards for Development in the BMUD--Residential Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict(RNC) 4.02.21b Design Standards for Development in the BMUD—Residential/Ait Village Subdistrict(R/AV) 4.02.24 Corridor Management Overlay District(CMO)-Special Regulations for Properties Abutting Golden Gate Parkway West of Santa Barbara Boulevard and Goodlette-Frank Road South of Pine Ridge Road 4.02:25 Mobile Home Overlay District(MHO)--Special Regulations for MHO in Rural Agricultural (A) Districts 4.02.26 Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Overlay District(GGPPOCO)—Special Conditions for the Properties ABUTTING Golden Gate Parkway East of Santa Barbara Boulevard as Referenced in the Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial District Map(Map 2)of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan 4.02.27 Specific Design Standards for the Immokalee--State Road 29A Commercial Overlay Subdistrict 4.02.28 Specific Design Standards for the immokalee--Jefferson Avenue Commercial Overlay Subdistrict 4.02.29 Specific Design Standards for the Immokalee--Farm Market Overlay Subdistrict 4.02.30 Specific Design Standards for the Immokalee—Agribusiness Overlay Subdistrict 4.02.31 Specific Design Standards for the immokalee--Central Business Overlay Subdistrict 4.02.32 Specific Design Standards for the Immokalee—Main Street Overlay Subdistrict 4.02.33 Specific Design Standards for the Mobile Home Park Overlay Subdistrict 4.02.34 Specific Standards for Shopping Centers 1:1LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts()SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 25. FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay 4.03.00 Subdivision Design and Layout 4.03.01 Generally 4.03.02 Applicability 4.03.03 Exemptions 4.03.04 Lot Line Adjustments 4.03.05 Subdivision Design Requirements 4.03.06 Golden Gate Estates Lot Divisions 4.03.07 Monuments 4.03.08 Facility and Service Improvement Requirements . 4.04.00 Transportation System Standards 4.04.01 Generally 4.04.02 Access Management 4.05.00 Of Street Parking and Loading 4.05.01 Generally 4:05.02 Design Standards 4.05.03 Specific.Parking Requirements for Residential Uses in Mixed Use Urban Residential Land Use 4.05.04 Parking Space Requirements 4.05.05 Parking Variation in the P District 4.05.06 Loading Space Requirements 4.05.07 Handicapped Parking.Requirements 4.05.08 Bicycle Parking Requirement$, 4.05.09 Stacking Lane Requirements 4.06.00 Landscaping, Buffering,and Vegetation Retention 4.06.01 Generally 4.06.02 Buffer Requirements 4.06.03 Landscaping Requirements for Vehicular Use Areas and Rights-of-Way 4.06.04 Trees and Vegetation Protection 4.06.05 General Landscaping Requirements . . 4.06.06 Special Buffer Requirements for the TTRVC Zoning District 4.07.00 Design Standards for Planned Unit Developments 4.07.01.Unified Control 4:07.02 Design Requirements 4.07.03 Special Requirements for industrial Planned Unit Developments 4.07.04 Special Requirements for Mixed Use Planned Unit Developments Containing a Commercial Component 4.07.05 Special Requirements for Research and Technology Park Planned Unit Developments 4.07.06 Provision of Polling Places 4.08.00 Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District Standards and Procedures 4.08.01 Specific Definitions Applicable to the RLSA District 4.08.02 Establishment of RLSA Zoning Overlay District 4.08.03 Establishment of land uses allowed in the.RLSA District. 4.08.04 Implementation of Stewardship Credits 4.08.05 Lands Within the RLSA District Prior to SSA or SRA Designation • 4.08.06 SSA Designation 4.08.07 SRA Designation 4.08.08 Baseline Standards 4.02.16 Design Standards for Development in the.BMUD- Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 1:1LDCAmendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 26 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay - • • A. Puropse. The purpose and intent of this Subdistrict is to encourage a mix of low intensity commercial uses and residential uses. Developments will be small-scale and pedestrian-oriented. B. Special Requirements for Accessory Uses. 1. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to the permitted uses allowed within this subdistrict are allowed unless otherwise prohibited in this subdistrict. 2. Properties immediately adjacent to Haldeman Creek may engage in boat rental operations. 3. Lots adjacent to the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Waterfront(W)subdistricts,as indicated on BMUD Map No. 1, may construct a dock provided the lots are under the same ownership and have been approved by the County Manager or designee.A site development plan shall be submitted to the County Manager or designee. C. The Following Regulations Govern the Outdoor Display and Sale Of Merchandise: 1. No automatic flood and drinking vending machines or public pay phones are permitted outside of any structure. 2. Newspaper vending machines will be limited to two machines per project site and must be architecturally integrated within the project site. 3. Outdoor display and sale of merchandise, within front yards on improvedproperties,are permitted subject to the following provisions: a. The outdoor display/sale of merchandise is limited to the sale of comparable merchandise sold on the premises and as indicated on the proprietors'occupational license. b. The outdoor display/sale of merchandise is permitted on improved commercially zoned properties and is subject to the submission of a site development plan that demonstrates that provision will be made to adequately address the following: i. Vehicular and pedestrian traffic safety measures. ii. , Location of sale/display of merchandise in relation to parking areas. iii. . Fire protection measures. iv. Limited hours of operation from dawn until dusk. v. Merchandise must be displayed in a vendor cart that complements the architectural style of the building that it is accessory to. vi. Vendor carts located on sidewalks must afford a five(5)-foot clearance for non-obstructed pedestrian traffic. 1:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 27 • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay �-r BMUD Map No. 1 • • __JI.1 .. 1=1 �, .`_ . - i t. . p'Oreiro/t:rZi/Or� a_ eir‘,1,40; ap.: ., .. . ,, , . A$ ,*,--jeeezzrA .: ir, .II. ' ' .*'• 7 . ya'r , iJ !' 'YS"r//f /)!-;'?' dd `;x�.1 s a<•xv. r. . 4 x34 Jt, tux. i •+• , e.-, /`/ FINAL DRAFT:Bayshore Overlay • D. Dimensional Standards Table 11. Design Standards for the.BMUD Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict. Minimum Setbacks Front Yard Front.Yard Build-to-Line 5 Feet* 1. 80 percent of the structure must be located at the required front yard build-to-line,the remainq 20 percent must be behind the the Front Yard Build-to-Line. 2. In-fill Droiects may vary from front build-to-line to keep consistent with front yard of adiacent exiting structures. 3.Buildings containing commercial or residential uses are required to have a minimum depth of 35 feet from the front setback line on all floors. The remaining depth of the lot may be used for parking. s1 4. Buildings which face Bayshore and intersecting side streets shall have the same Front Yard Build- to-Line as the Front Yard Build-to-Line of Bayshore. See BMUD Figure 1. *Shall be 5 feet from the property line to the building footprint. Side yards-abutting residential 15 feet Side yards-all other 5 feet Rear yard • 20 feet Waterfronf'` 25 feet Building Standards Locations on Bayshore Drive _ _- _ _ _ _ _ • • _ _ __ _ .The first floor of the buildings must be utilized for commercial purposes and be level with the sidewalk. Building Design Where possible buildings facing Bayshore Drive shall wrap around the corner as depicted on BMUD Figure 1. Building Footprint A building with only commercial use is limited to a maximum building footprint of 20,000 square feet._ Minimum Floor Area 700 square foot gross floor area for each building on the ground floor. Maximum Density For the residential component-12 units per acre. I:\LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts( SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 29 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay Maximum Height Of Structures Commercial use 2aly buildings 3 stories, or 42 feet above the sidewalk grade to the building eave. Residential use only buildings 3 stories or 42 feet above the sidewalk grade to the building eave. Mixed-use buildings residential over 4 stories or 56 feet above the sidewalk grade to commercial uses the building eave. shall be no less than 12 feet and no more than 18 feet in height from the finished floor to the finished ceiling and shall be . limited to commercial uses only. Outdoor seating areas, canal walkway,water management facilities, and landscaping area may be located within the required setback. 2To allow the maximum use of the waterfront, building placement on a lot can vary from the required setbacks, provided such variation is recommended by the CRA staff and the county architect and • approved by the County Manager or designee. E. Parking Standards. 1. Three spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area open to the general public for commercial use. 2. Minimum one parking space for each'residential unit. 3. Outdoor cafe areas shall be exempt from parking calculations. 4. Access to the off-street parking facility must be from the local side street unless restricted . due to lot size. • 5. Should the property owner develop on-street parking spaces on local streets within the same block of the project site,then each space so provided shall count as one space toward the parking requirement of this.subsection. 6. On-street parking on local streets excluding Bayshore Drive requires an agreement with the county to use the public right-of-way for parking.Angle or parallel parking (as depicted on BMUD Figure 2 below) is permissible based on the site development plan as approved by the planning services department and built to county standards.The property owner must agree to maintain that portion of the public right-of-way where the parking is located. I:\LDC_AmendmentsIDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.I.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 30 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore OverlaytTh BMUD Figure 1 -Typical Corner Lot Development NII 1' :14, n .r w a� \ ;‘,1•7 7■ ■'.■ M rs' , ' LI A G ie• ....:,•I `.Nig tahoodlb Cafine dal. Oa L'a taWYlatsteamed wr.!�,n'yr fift- es ik'41E) „ 7. Lots adjacent to the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and.Waterfront district(W) Subdistricts, as indicated on BMUD Map No. 1, may be used for off-site parking provided the lots are under the same ownership, meet the standards of section 4.05.02 of this LDC and have been approved by the County Manager or designee a site development plan shall be submitted to the County Manager or designee. BMUD Figure 2-Typical On-Street Parking - -,rk - 1 1se 9114 s'" i VP,'4. d`� ,�q� %1: sol !rs "'yr' wr• tea, iv 1 -�M 8. On-street parking on Bayshore Drive shall be made available to the property owner on a first come first serve basis at the time of site development plan (SDP) or site improvement plan (SIP) approval provided the parking does not interfere with the on-street bike lanes and is located within the block in which the block that the property it serves is located. 9. Construction or renovation of any building must occur within ninety(90)days of the SDP or SIP approval and be completed within six(6) months of commencement in order to secure the on-street parking spaces. Due to circumstances beyond the control of the applicant the property owner may request an extension from the County Manager or designee. These spaces must be used toward the fulfillment of the parking requirements set forth herein. 10. The off-site parking requirements of section 4.05.02 J. of the LDC shall apply. Vehicular egress points may be located on local streets opposite residential homes provided they are within the Bayshore Mixed Use Overlay District. 11. Shared parking requirements shall be consistent with those provided in subsection 4.05.1 of the LDC except that the County Manager or designee can approve or deny requests I:\LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 31 4 -)(:) • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay • instead of the Board of Zoning Appeals or Planning Commission. Shared parking spaces may be separated by Bayshore Drive provided the two properties are located within the BMUD. F. Design Standards For Awnings, Loading Docks, And Dumpsters.. 1. Retractable awnings shall be exempt from fire sprinkler requirements. Fixed awnings under 145 square feet shall be subject to sprinkler requirements but only from the potable water Supply without requirements for backflow protection. 2. Loading docks and service areas shall not be allowed on tho frontago lino.alonp the street frontage. 3. All dumpsters must be located in the rear yard and not visible from Bayshore Drive. 4. Streetwalls shall be used when surface parking lots abut the right-of-way of Bayshore Drive. a. The wall shall be constructed of the same or complementary materials as the primary buildings and be 3 to 4 feet in height. and shall have a 12 inch prosection or recess a minimum of every 10 to 15 feet.The"streetwalr can be a combination of"wall"and metal "fence"materials. b. The"streetwalr may no longer than 62 feet, and no two streetwalls shall adjoin on a common property line. BMUD Figure 3: Streetwall 111111111; 1111 MICIMEMIMMI rI !E, 'fK1 0 r � .L C ;' "x.411111111111 I x;. yy ----- ib. �, �.. III I-j� l i � �I ifiT I • G. Architectural Standards. 1. All buildings shall meet the requirements set forth in section 5.05.08 unless otherwise specified below. 2. All buildings adjacent to Bayshore Drive will have the principal pedestrian entrance fronting Bayshore Drive. 3. Thirty-five (35) percent of the buildings facade that faces along Bayshore Drive will be clear glass. 4. Clear glass windows between the height of two(2)three(3) and seven (7)sight-(44}feet above sidewalk grade are required on the primary facade of the first floor of any buildin• I:11-DC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -200512.03.07.l.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 32 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay 5. Attached building awnings may encroach over the setback line by a maximum of five(5) feet. 6. Neon colors shall not be used as accent colors. H. Landscaping. 1. As required by division Chapter 4.06.00 of this Code unless specified otherwise below: 2. Special buffer requirements for commercial development areas contiguous to residentially zoned . property. A minimum 15-foot wide landscape buffer area shall be required. This area shall include a f.61 six-foot high wall, fence or berm, or combination thereof, a row of trees spaced no more than 25 feet on center, and a single row of shrubs at least 24 inches in height at the time of planting. Landscaping shall be on the residential side of the wall. 3. Landscape buffer requirements for multifamily residential development adjacent to single family residential property. A ten-foot-wide Type B landscape buffer with narrow canopies proportionate to the narrow buffer space shall be required. 4. Landscape buffer requirements where vehicular use areas abut the waterfront. A double row hedge at least 24 inches in height at the time of planting and attaining a minimum of three feet in height within one year shall be required. • 5. Landscape requirements for properties fronting Bayshore Drive. The intent is to integrate the right-of-way and building front vard with decorative pavement and landscaping that is consistent with the Bayshore Beautification Plan. - - --. - - - - - = -_ _'_ _ • 6. Landscape screening of mechanical equipment. Mechanical equipment shall be screened with a fence that is architecturally compatible with the building it serves or be screened with a three- foot high hedge, spaced three feet on center. • 7. Landscape buffer requirements for marina development contiguous to residentially zoned property. A 20 foot-wide landscape buffer area is required. Such buffer must include a minimum six foot high wall, fence, berm, or combination thereof, a double row of trees spaced no more than 20 feet on center, and a double row of shrubs at least 24 inches height at time of planting. Landscaping shall be on the residential side of the wall. I:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 33 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay I. Architectural Design Theme. 1. The architectural design theme of the buildings shall reflect the"Old Florida" or"Florida Cracker"vernacular. This includes using some of the architectural elements listed below: HID or aable roof ',f104W Dormers or copulas . Porches or verandas f. Balconies Y Large overhangs v a �t �� t '7 1 Shutters IJ7 .e t 1 ¢f z` eta � l ) h 2. Building roofs shall be metal seam 3. Traditional windows with vertical orientation and divided glass trim. 4. Facade wall building materials shall be high quality material of wood and or stucco. H. Signs. As required by division 5.06.00 unless,specified below: 1. One wall sign shall be permitted for each single-occupancy parcel, or for each establishment in a multiple-occupancy parcel provided such sign does not exceed 20 percent of the•total square footage of the visual facade of the building to which the sign will be attached and shall not exceed 65 square feet in area. • 2. In addition, hanging or projection signs are permitted provided such signs do not exceed six square feet, and shall not project more than four feet from the building on which the sign will be attached.The sign shall be elevated to a minimum of eight feet above any pedestrian way and shall not exceed a height of 12 feet. 3. No freestanding signs shall be permitted. 4. Awnings with a In-additionT-the vertical drip e€-an-awei may be stenciled with letters no more than eight inches in height and not to exceed one-third of the length of the canopy. 5. Parcels adjacent to the waterfront may have one additional sign to be placed on the facade which faces the waterfront provided it meets all of the above requirements. 6. Corner buildings or corner units within multiple tenant buildings may have one additional wall sign provided both signs are not placed on the same wall. 7. No internally lit cabinet signs shall be permitted. I:\LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts O SM.doc2114/2005 ' - .- 'M 34 • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay 8. Properties that are located in the waterfront subdistrict (W) and are located adjacent to the Haldeman Creek Bridge are allowed one pole sign not to exceed 65 square feet in area. The pole signs shall not be internally lit. Pole signs shall be architecturally compatible with the building it serves. 4.02.17 Design Standards for Development in the BMUD-Waterfront Subdistrict A. Purpose Design Standards for the Subdistrict are the same as those set forth for the Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict, unless set forth below. Development in this Subdistrict is encouraged to be a mix of restaurant and retail uses while allowing for limited marina uses. B. Special conditions for Marinas: 1. Repair and la storage areas shall not be visible from the local street. 2. Boats available for rental purposes shall be located in the water or properly screened from the local roadways and not visible from Bayshore Drive. 3. All boat racks shall be enclosed. 4. Height of structures may be increased to a maximum height of fifty(50)feet by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) upon approval of a variance petition. The BZA, in addition to the findings in Chapter 9, shall consider whether or not the literal interpretation of the provisions of this LDC imposes a financial hardship on the applicant. 5. Outdoor displays of new boats for sale on properties fronting Bayshore Drive shall be limited to the following: a. All areas used for new boat sales activities shall occupy no more than thirty-five (35) percent of the linear frontage of the property. b. All boat sale activities are limited to new boat sales. c. All new boat sale areas shall not be closer to the frontage line than the primary building they serve unless it is otherwise recommended by the CRA staff and administratively approved by the County Manager or designee. d. All new boats located within an outdoor sale area shall not exceed the height of seventeen (17) feet above existing grade. e. Outdoor sales areas shall be connected to the parking area and primary structure by a pedestrian walkway. f. An additional landscape buffer is required around the perimeter of the outdoor boat sales area. This buffer must include, at a minimum fourteen (14)-foot high trees, spaced at thirty(30) feet on center and a three (3)-foot high double row hedge spaced at three feet on center at the time of planting. 6. Outdoor displays of boats on properties fronting Haldeman Creek shall be limited to the following: a. All areas used for boat sales shall utilize no more than fifty(50) percent of the linear frontage of the property. b. All boat sale areas shall be no closer to the frontage line than the primary building they serve unless it is otherwise recommended approved by the County Manager or I:\LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.1. Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 35 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay designee. c. All boats located within outdoor sales areas shall not exceed a height of thirty-five (35)feet above the existing grade. Sailboat masts are exempt from this limitation. "d. Outdoor sales areas shall be connected to the parking area and primary structure by a pedestrian walkway. e. An additional landscape buffer is required around the perimeter of the outdoor sales area. This buffer must include, at a minimum fourteen (14)foot high trees,spaced at thirty(30) feet on center and a three(3)-foot high double row hedge spaced at three (3)feet on center at the time of planting. 7. One(1) parking space per five (5) dry boat storage spaces. 8. On-site traffic circulation system shall be provided that will accommodate areas for the loading and unloading of equipment that will not encroach on residential developments. 4.02.18 Design Standards for Development in the BMUD- Residential Subdistrict(R1) A. Dimensional and Design Standards Table 12. Design Standards in the BMUD Residential Subdistrict R1. Maximum Density 12 units per acre Minimum Lot Size • • Single Family 6000 SF/Two Family 6000 SF Minimum Lot Width(feet) Single-family 50 feet Two-family • 50 feet Townhouses 25 feet Multi-family 100 feet Minimum Setbacks Front Yard A•ttt Min. Side Yard Min. Rear Yard One (single)family units 10 feet dwelling 7.5 feet unless abutting commercial 15 property,then 5 feet Two family dwelling units 10 feet 5 feet unless abutting single-family 15 unit, then 7.5 feet Townhouse 10 feet 0 feet when abutting another 15 townhouse, if not then the same standards as a two family dwelling unit Multi-family(three or more) 10 feet 5 feet unless abutting single family unit, 15 . dwelling units then 7.5 feet Building Standards Minimum Floor Area 750 square feet per unit Maximum Height of Principal Structures*` 3 habitable floors or 40 42 feet Maximum Height of Accessory Screen Same as principal structure, not to exceed 35 feet Enclosures Maximum height of all other accessory 15 feet structures Parking Standards All uses 1 space per dwelling unit *Shall be 10 feet from the property line to the building footprint. ** Maximum height of structures measured from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to building eave. 1:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.l.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts O SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 36 • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay B. Specific Design Requirements Minimum off-street parking is one space per dwelling unit. Parking areas shall not be visible from the Bayshore Drive. _ 2. Buildings and their elements shall adhere to the following: (See BMUD Figure 4 4 ): a. Buildings shall be divided using articulation and/or modulation at least every sixty (60) oighty{80) feet_ Facade modulation is stepping back or extending forward a portion of the facade at least five (5) six(§)-feet measured perpendicular to the front facade for each interval. Articulation includes porches, balconies, bay windows and/or covered entries. b. The primary recidonco entrance shall be oriented to the street. Orientation is achieved by the provision of a front facade including an entry door that faces the street. c. On corner lots, both street facades of a building shall have complementary details; in particular, building materials and color, rooflines and shapes, window proportions and spacing, and door placement. d. All mechanical equipment must be screened with a three (3)-foot high hedge spaced three (3) feet on center or an opaque fence or wall at any height to completely screen the mechanical equipment. e. A maximum of two feet of fill shall be allowed on site towards meeting FEMA requirements. Additional FEMA height requirements shall be accomplished through stem wall construction. Stem walls shall be finished in material and color complimentary to the main structure. BMUD Figure 4-Typical Front Elevation, Residential Development -- _ .---„ 3,(Ill! OB I�� sillMI .... , illi ll v ) iiaaa��t 1 HUI 111.111. N �m.(p.m Inc 1 pis F 11191I,jNi INIIIIIIIII 11111 f Single Family Detached TwoSa ' Single FamilyDeleched7MpFamily/Duplex/TwoStoiy: Two! h? p' c ,aiii 111111^ Iyil� IQ;�'a _Ills iilau.,.`. .,,�nII___, om n�lli]il,,,. �. !iii un ! nn — _... nen um man ;l9{If7l 1111!11111 itiih ki F ;IIpN�. iiii gI,qIy iiia II uii Sill �..11ii ill- uii .. 11 illi EI�711E1 min ---- .ml,lil t. :.--. ..<I01lA" Buildings shall adhere to the following elevation requirements: a. The first habitable floor at the street facade may not be greater than one (1) foot over the minimum first floor elevation designated in the National flood Insurance Program by the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA). A maximum of forty(40) percent of the first habitable floor may be greater than one (1)foot ove,... 1:1LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 -200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts()SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 37 4 ' \J • ' FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay the FEMA-designated minimum first floor elevation. b. Open stilt-type construction is not permitted. On front yards,the facade area below the first floor must be treated with a solid facade or lattice which is consistent with the architectural style of the building. , c. The garage floor shall not exceed twenty-four(24) inches above the elevation of the right-of-way from which it is accessed. 4. Front porches that adhere to the following standards. I a. Front porches may encroach seven (7)feet into the front yard setback. BMUD Figure 5: Front Porches 1 ii e.,.."," , il ' 1111 rf :. 1111 ®,i s r °mf ' : a 11"'1®".°°..' rfer 11 CACI EIEJE3 1111111.0 0E3E3 �:�C7 Ci0C1 L.--.,.., Em» ClC7CI 1 Porches 4O%of Font F'eeadO. b. Front porches must cover a minimum of forty(40) percent of the horizontal length of the front yard facade of the primary residence.. c. Front porch design and material shall be consistent with the architectural design and construction material of the primary residence. d. Front porches shall not be air-conditioned nor enclosed with glass, screen, or other material. e: -_- - - -- _- - - :-_e_ ---0, - - _ - --_- - • -_ -• •_- --- = the-€rent-perch•. e. Steps shall encroach no more than four feet into the front yard setback. 5. Garages and driveways. a. The rear setback may be reduced to ten (10)feet if a front-access garage is �--‘\ constructed on the rear of the residence. b. Garage doors shall have a maximum width of sixteen (16)feet. c. Other than the permitted driveway,the front yard may not be paved or otherwise used to accommodate parking. .• _ e ' _ - '- - - =e e= ' • -t =- 1:1LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005.2:22:00 PM 38 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay d. Garages shall be recessed a minimum of ten (10)three-(3)feet behind the front facade line of the primary residence. BMUD Figure 6: Garage Recess Va- 1L!AL!!J r//////7/770 Reassiled Aantru ..., MIMMININN f. No carports are permitted. e. No freestanding carports are permitted. Carports and portachere must be attached to the main structure and of similar materials and design as the main structure . f. .The distance from the back of the sidewalk to the garage door must be at least 23 feet to allow room to park a vehicle on the driveway without parking over the sidewalk. Should the garage be side-loaded there must be at least a 23-foot paved area on a " perpendicular plane to the garage door or clans must ensure that parked vehicles will not interfere with pedestrian traffic. 6. Accessory Unit a. Ownership of an accessory unit shall not be transferred independently of the primary residence. b. Only one(1) accessory unit is permitted per principal structure. c. The maximum area of an accessory unit is 550 square feet, limited to one(1) habitable floor. d. The accessory unit may be above a garage or may be connected to the primary residence by an enclosed breezeway or corridor not to exceed eight(8)feet in width. e. The maximum height of a structure containing a guest unit over a garage is limited to fifteen (15) feet, measured from the level of graded lot to the eave, and with a maximum overall building height of twenty(24)feet to the top of the roof.A I:\LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 39 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay structure containing only a guest unit must meet '•- =- - t': - _ - -t : • ^ feetr rneasuc,e€14Fem.the FEMA first habitable floor height requirement.te-the-save.,, with. f. For purposes of calculating density, an accessory unit will count as one-half (1/2) a dwelling unit. 7. Fencing forward of the primary facade of the structure is permitted subject to the following conditions: a. The fence shall does not exceed three(3)four(1)feet in height. b. The fence is not opaque but provides an open view. c. Chain link fence is prohibited. d. The fence material shall be wood,vinyl, or metal ire. e. Fencing and walls must architecturally complement the primary structure as determined by the County Manager or designee. IN11 d!�ni i X911111 1i���I�i�1Yr, 11,''?ipa� '''‘c x (1,'-':,11,79''' ,"��'' 4 1 li�it'I ii( ti,_ , t , �� �� 14,_. r4 tt�1)F� Vfi7�r (ail I ��i r^�° P i hu 11'11 1ii4A * A ,1 i fqf E 4, y �V x - fi 4 9 0. ri r j '1 ��`1, 1 -._ 4 a I 1:,;:4(iii 1 li G ,f 1,,, 1 " i lip I .. � i i�� �4it` : i i. Ii. nIll+uoN,oa, 7� �,.. ry 1 ,„fitj4Fl2i1.i,; aid (- ��-.. 1 h I r ik ,' t 4,.^.e 2 41 C� Fj { f — t �( , 1 + 31a��t �o- t,,,w ,}... lid) 1 '� 4 ,0.,,, ;d "" ..av rp"-1,.owl1 �' 111b k(I (ii'I I, 1 U ii, � 2 i , Y It, BMUD Figure 4—Permitted Typical Fencing C. Specific Standards for Bed And Breakfast Lodging as a Conditional Use 1. A site development plan pursuant to Chapter 10. , 2. Minimum number of guest rooms or suites is two (2)with a maximum number of six(6). Guest occupancy is limited to a maximum stay of thirty(30) days.The minimum size of bedrooms for guest occupancy shall be 100 square feet. 3. No cooking facilities shall be allowed in guest rooms. 4. Separate toilet facilities for the exclusive use of guests must be provided.At least one(1) bathroom for each two (2) guestrooms shall be provided. 5. All automobile parking areas shall be provided on-site based upon a minimum of two(2) i", spaces plus one (1) space for each two (2) bedrooms.All other applicable provisions of this LDC relative to parking facilities shall apply. I:\LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 40 • I FINAL DRAFT:.Bayshore Overlay 6. One(1) sign with a maximum sign area of four(4) square feet containing only the name of the proprietor or name of the residence. sign lettering shall be limited to two(2) inches in height and shall not be illuminated. 7. An on-site manager is required. 8. The facility shall comply with all business license, certifications, and health laws of Collier County and the State of Florida. 4.02.19 Design Standards for Development in the BMUD—Residential Subdistrict(R2) A. The purpose of this subdistrict is to encourage the development of multi-family residences as transitional uses between commercial and single-family development.The multi-family buildings shall be compatible with the building patterns and facade articulation of traditional neighborhood design. • B. Design Standards for the Subdistrict are the same as those set forth for the Residential • Subdistrict 1, unless;set forth below. Table 13. Setback Standards for BMUD Residential Subdistrict(R2) Setbacks Front Yard At Min. Side Yard Min. Rear Yard One (Single) Family 25 feet 7.5 feet 15 feet Dwelling Units Two Family Dwelling 25 feet. 6 feet unless abutting 15 feet Units single family unit,then 7:5 feet Townhouse 25 feet 6 feet unless abutting 15 feet single family unit, then • 7.5 feet Multi-Family(Three 25 feet 6 feet unless abutting 15 feet or more) Dwelling single family unit,then Units 7.5 feet *Shall be 25 feet from the property line to the building footprint. 4.02.20 Design.Standards for Development in the BMUD--Residential Subdistrict(R3) A. The purpose of this district is to allow the development of mobile home, modular home, townhouses and single-family residences.All new development in this Subdistrict shall be compatible with the building patterns and facade articulation of traditional neighborhood • design.The intent is to create a row of residential units with consistent front yard setbacks and access to the street. development standards for this Subdistrict are the same as those set forth for the Residential Subdistrict 1, unless set forth below. B. Minimum Lot Width Single-family 40 feet Modular homes 40 feet Townhouses 25 feet Mobile homes 40 feet C. Yard Requirements. Front Yard At Minimum Side Yard Minimum Rear Yard 1:1LDC Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 41 • • FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay One(Single) Family 10 feet 5 feet 8 feet Modular Dwelling Units Dwelling Units 10 feet 5 feet 8 feet Townhouse 10 feet 0 feet when abutting 8 feet another townhouse, if not then 5 feet. Mobile Homes 10 feet 5 feet 8 feet 4.02.21 Design Standards for Development in the BMUD--Residential Subdistrict(R4) A. The purpose of this Subdistrict is the same as Residential Subdistrict R2 except only single- family detached dwellings is permitted. B. Development standards for the Residential Subdistrict R4 are the same as those set forth for the Residential Subdistrict R2, except only single-family uses are permitted. 4.02.21a Design Standards for Development in the BMUD--Residential Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict(RNC) A. The purpose and intent of this subdistrict is to allow limited home occupational businesses. B. Home occupation in section 5.02.01 of the LDC, shall apply unless specified otherwise below. Development standards for the subdistrict are the same as those set forth for the residential subdistrict 2, unless otherwise set forth below. C. The home occupations permitted include:Accounting (8721), auditing and bookkeeping services(8721),barber shops and beauty salons (7231 except beauty culture schools, cosmetology schools, or barber colleges), engineer or architectural services (8713, 8712, 8711), insurance agents and brokers (6411), legal services(8111), and real estate agents (6531 except mobile home brokers,on-site; housing authorities, operating). D. The home occupation shall be clearly incidental to and secondary to the use of the dwelling for residential purposes and shall not change the character of the dwelling unit.The following conditions shall be met: 1. There shall be a minimum of one(1) residential dwelling unit. 2. The resident of the home shall be the owner and operator of the home occupation. 3. The home occupation shall not occupy more than (thirty) 30 percent of the primary , residential structure. • 4. The home occupation shall not employ more than two.(2) employees at any given time. 5. One(1)wall sign shall be permitted provided it does not exceed six(6)square feet in area, and shall not project more than four(4)feet from the building on which the sign is attached. 6. A total of two(2) parking spaces shall be provided for clients or customers.Two (2) additional parking spaces shall be provided for employees, if any.The required parking area or areas shall not be located in the front yard of the residence. 7. Parking areas shall consist of a dust free surface such as: Mulch, shell, or asphalt. A single row hedge at least twenty-four(24) inches in height at the time of planting shall be required around all parking areas. 8. There shall be no additional driveway to serve such home occupation. 1:1LDC_Amendments1DC Cycle 1 -2005\2.03.07.1.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 42 FINAL DRAFT: Bayshore Overlay 9. There shall not be outdoor storage of materials or equipment used or associated with the home occupation. 4.02.21b Design Standards for Development in the BMUD--Residential Art Village Subdistrict(R/AV) A. The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow certain appropriate occupational uses oriented toward or supporting a visual or cultural arts theme, and also which are compatible with, and capable of maintaining or sustaining a desired residential character, B. The Subdistrict can have single residential only buildings, single family residential buildings with allowable home occupations, and Artist Studios only buildings. Development standards for the Subdistrict are the same as those set forth for the Residential Subdistrict 2, unless otherwise set forth below. C. Home occupation in section 5.02.01 of the LDC;shall apply if the building is a residential unit with a home occupation unless specified otherwise below. D. The occupations permitted include only artistic painting, ceramics/pottery, sculpture, or photography studios activities. E. if the residential building has a home occupation shall be clearly incidental to and secondary • to the use of the dwelling for residential purposes and shall not change the character of the dwelling unit.The following conditions shall be met: 1. There shall be a minimum of one(1) residential dwelling unit. 2. The resident of the home shall be the owner and operator of the home occupation. • 3. The home occupation shall not occupy more than (thirty) 30 percent of the primary residential structure. 4. The home occupation shall not employ any one on a permanent basis. 5. One(1)wall skin shall be permitted provided it does not exceed six(6) square feet in area, and shall not proiect more than four(4) feet from the building on which the sign is attached. 6. A total of two(2) parking spaces shall be provided for clients or customers. 7. Parking areas shall consist of a dust free surface such as: Mulch, shell, or asphalt. A single row hedge at least twenty-four(24) inches in height at the time of planting shall be required around all parking areas. 8. There shall be no additional driveway to serve such home occupation. 9. There shall not be outdoor storage of materials or equipment used or associated • . with the home occupation. • I:\LDC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1-200512.03.07.l.Bayshore Overlay Zoning Districts 0 SM.doc2/14/2005 2:22:00 PM 43 LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Stan Litsinger DEPARTMENT: Comprehensive Planning AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC 2:62 LDC SECTION: 2.03.08 Eastern Lands/Rural Fringe Zoning Districts LDC SUPPLEMENT#: New CHANGE: Implementing provisions for the update and corrective GMP amendment known as the"glitch" amendment CPSP-2003-11 adopted by the BCC on October 26, 2004. Also, further implementing LDC for the TDR bonuses and Rural Villages amendment CP- 2004-4 transmitted to DCA for ORC on January 25, 2005. REASON: Required LDC to implement the "glitch" amendments and the forthcoming TDR bonuses and Rural Villages amendment to be adopted in June 2005. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS:None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: 2.03.07 Overlay Zoning Districts GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. IMPACT: Implements the TDR program and RFMUD of the GMP OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This draft provided by Marti. Chumbler, Esq., Carlton Fields, P.A. This version dated February 1, 2005. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.03.08 ural Fringe Zoning Districts A. Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District(RFMU District) 1. No change. 2. RFMU RECEIVING LANDS. No change. a. OUTSIDE RURAL VILLAGES (1) No change. • • (2) MemIreum DENSITY. (a) No change. (b) Additional DENSITY i. Additional Density Allowed Through the TDRS Process. Outside of RURAL VILLAGES, the maximum DENSITY achievable in RFMU RECEIVING LANDS through the TDR proses& credits and TDR Bonus credits is one (1) dwelling unit per acre. a)—c) No change ii.. Additional DENSITY Allowed Through Other Density Bonuses. Once the-tnaiiimtwil a DENSITY of one (1)unit per acre is achieved through the use of TDR&credits and TDR Bonus credits, additional DENSITY may be achieved as follows: a)—b) No change. (3) Allowable Uses (a) No change. i.—x. No change xi. Golf courses or driving ranges, subject to the following standards: a) No change b) Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and managed in accordance with the best management practices of Audubon International's Gold Signature Program. The project shall demonstrate that the Principles for Resource Management required by the Gold Signature Program(Site Specific Assessment,Habitat Sensitivity, Native and Naturalized Plants and Natural Landscaping,Water Conservation, Waste Management. Energy Conservation&Renewable Energy Sources, Transportation, Greenspace and Corridors, Agriculture, and BUILDING Design)have been incorporated into the golf course's design and operational procedures. c)—g) No change xii. Public ., - - : _ - --- •. . __ - .._ - _ - educational plants and ancillary plants. a) Site area and school size shall be subject to the General EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES adopted by the State Board of Education. c) The site shall be subject to all applicable State or Federal 6tif xiii. OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION, subject to applicable state and federal drilling permits and Collier County non-environmental site DEVELOPMENT plan review procedures.Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C- 30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14,2005,regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County oil and gas environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed,oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed,the APPLICANT shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42,F.S.,to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C- 30.005(2)(a)(1)through(12),F.A.C. xiv. Park, open space, and recreational uses. xv.. Private schools. (b) No change. (c) CONDITIONAL USES. No change. i. Oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT and production, subject to applicable state and federal field DEVELOPMENT permits and Collier County non-environmental site DEVELOPMENT plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with,the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C.,as those rules existed on January 14, 2005,regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed,the APPLICANT shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., • to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1) through(12), F.A.C. ii.—ix. No change. (4)=(6) No change. b. RURAL VILLAGES. No change (1) Allowable Uses: (a) All permitted uses identified in section 2.03.08-{4.(2),(a)_(3)(a), when specifically identified in, and approved as part of, a RURAL VILLAGE PUD. (b) CONDITIONAL USES 1 through 5, and 7 identified in section 2.03.08 (A),F2),(a),(3)(c), when specifically identified in, and approved as part of a RURAL VILLAGE PUD. (c)—(e) No change. (2) No change. (3) DENSITY. A RURAL VILLAGE shall have a minimum DENSITY of 2.0 units per gross acre and a maximum DENSITY of 3.0 units per gross acre, except that the minimum DENSITY within a NBMO RURAL VILLAGE shall be 1.5 units per gross acre. Those densities shall be achieved as follows: (a) No change. (b) Minimum DENSITY. - _ _. _. • • _ • _ _ . • _I._ _ . ,A - • - -� - - _ e -- - ._ ...,. ._ .-. -- - - - ,-- The minimum gross DENSITY ef in a RURAL VILLAGE is 2.0 units per acre outside of the NBMO and 1.5 units per acre within the NBMO. i. For each TDR CREDIT used to achieve the minimum required • density in a RURAL VILLAGE, one RURAL VILLAGE BONUS CREDIT shall be granted. RURAL VILLAGE BONUS CREDITS may only be utilized in RURAL VILLAGES and shall not be available for use once the minimum required density is achieved. ii. The minimum DENSITY shall be achieved through any combination of TDR CREDITS, RURAL VILLAGE BONUS CREDITS, and TDR BONUS CREDITS. (c) Maximum DENSITY. The maximum gross DENSITY = ---_.. ,.: - - -_ --- _- ! allowed in a RURAL VILLAGE is 3.0 units per acre;. The maximum DENSITY shall be achieved through any of the following means, either in combination or individually: i. TDR CREDITS; . • • ii. TDR BONUS CREDITS. Renumber ii. through iv. to iii. through v. (4) Other Design Standards (a) Transportation System Design. i. No change. ii. Each RURAL VILLAGE shall be served by a binary road system that is accessible by the public and no roads shall ne be gated. The primary roads system within the RURAL VILLAGE shall be designed to meet County standards and shall be dedicated to the public. iii.-xiv. No change. • xv. Required vehicular parking and loading amounts and design criteria: a) The amount of required parking shall be demonstrated through a shared parking analysis submitted application as part of the Rural Village PUD. Parking shall be determined utilizing the modal splits and parking demands for various uses recognized by the ITE, ULI or other sources or studies. The analysis shall demonstrate the number of parking spaces available to more than one use or function,recognizing the required parking will vary depending on the multiple functions or uses in close proximity which are unlikely to require the spaces at the same time. xvi-xvii. No change. (b)—.(d) No change (5) No change. (6) GREENBELT. Except within the NBMO RURAL VILLAGE, a GREENBELT averaging a minimum of 300 300 feet in width,but not less than 300 200 feet in width at any location, shall be required at the perimeter of the RURAL VILLAGE. The GREENBELT is required to ensure a permanently undeveloped edge surrounding the RURAL VILLAGE, thereby discouraging sprawl. GREENBELTS shall conform to the following: (a)—(d) No change. (7) OPEN SPACE: Within the RURAL VILLAGE, a minimum of 70% 40%of OPEN SPACE shall be provided, inclusive of the GREENBELT. (8) No change. 3.. NEUTRAL LANDS. No change. a. ALLOWABLE USES. The following uses are permitted as of right: • (1) Uses Permitted as of Right. (a)—(j) No change. (k) Golf courses or driving ranges, subject to the following standards: i. Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and managed in accordance with the best management practices of Audubon International's Gold Signature Program. Theproject shall demonstrate that the Principles for Resource Management required by the Gold Signature Program(Site Specific Assessment, Habitat Sensitivity,Native and Naturalized Plants and Natural Landscaping, Water Conservation, Waste Management, Energy Conservation&Renewable Energy Sources, Transportation, Greenspace and Corridors,Agriculture, and Building Design)have been incorporated into the golf course's design and operational procedures. ii.—vi. No change. (1) Public . . - _ ;. .•__ „_ _ . - _ _ : educational plants and ancillary plants. •:: - _ '_ .: ,. ,._ - • .. a. • Ata -" J_ - '• ' mien: (m) OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION, subject to applicable state and federal drilling permits and Collier County non-environmental site DEVELOPMENT plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14, 2005, regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C- 30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the APPLICANT shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42,F.S.,to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1)through(12),F.A.C. n. Park, open space, and recreational uses. o. Private schools. _..-,_ _... (2) No change_ (3) CONDITIONAL USES. No change. (a)—b. slum I u '� 4��""ammmwomprirm mi n r` i i A n i t nipriam 10 Male:111MM mak„ Y"" � 'A�•; Jail'a,11,1 #I ib U l tt`+iey �, • N,tp V i{! ,!.0,1%, ���i�E, i�u {fir q��lie��h� ti If:. V' .� � tkG 11.i�f i Renumber(d)to (e). (e)ft Oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT.and production, subject to applicable state and federal field DEVELOPMENT permits and Collier County non-environmental site DEVELOPMENT plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats,where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14, 2005, regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2),F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the APPLICANT shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S.,to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1)through(12), F.A.C. Renumber(f)to (g). b.—e. No change. 4. RFMU SENDING LANDS. No change. a. ALLOWABLE USES WHERE TDR CREDITS HAVE NOT BEEN SEVERED • (1) Uses Permitted as of Right tTh (a)—(f) No change. (g) OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION, subject to applicable state and federal drilling permits and Collier County non-environmental site DEVELOPMENT plan review procedures.Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats,where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as such rules existed on January 14,2005,regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C- 30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the APPLICANT shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 37742,F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in � Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1)through(12),F.A.C. (2) No change. (3) CONDITIONAL USES. (a)—(b) No change. (c) Oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT and production, subject to applicable state and federal field DEVELOPMENT permits and Collier County non-environmental site DEVELOPMENT plan review procedures. . • Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a • state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14, 2005, regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the APPLICANT shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress.Swamp '1 Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42,F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 6 - 0, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1)through(12),F.A.C. (d) No change. b. USES ALLOWED WHERE TDR CREDITS HAVE BEEN SEVERED (1) Uses Permitted as of Right (a)—(g) No change. (h) OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION, subject to applicable state and federal drilling permits and Collier County non-environmental site DEVELOPMENT plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,. F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14, 2005,regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed,as defined in Rule 62C- 30.001(2),F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied,by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the APPLICANT shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42,F.S.,to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1)through(12), F.A.C. (i) Mitigation in conjunction with any County, state, or federal permitting. (2) CONDITIONAL USES (a) No change. (b) Oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT and production, subject to applicable state and federal field DEVELOPMENT permits and Collier County non-environmental site DEVELOPMENT plan review procedures. Directional-drilling and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized in order to minimize impacts to native habitats,where determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14, 2005,regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in �-. Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be co 'dered satisfied by evidence of the (.0 • issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the APPLICANT shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)(1)through(12),F.A.C. (c) No change. c. e. No change. • 5. No change. C. No change. D. NORTH BELLE MEADE OVERLAY DISTRICT (NBMO) 1.—4. No change. 5. ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC AREA PROVISIONS a. RECEIVING LANDS (1) DENSITY. • tm (a) No change. (b) This DENSITY may be increased,through TDR CREDITS and TDR BONUS CREDITS,up to a maximum of 1 dwelling unit per gross acre. (c) Once a DENSITY of 1 dwelling unit per gross acre is achieved through TDR CREDITS and TDR BONUS CREDITS, additional density may be achieved as follows: i. i • — ii. No change (2) The earth mining operation and asphalt plant uses that currently exist within NBMO Receiving Lands may continue and may expand as follows: (a) Until June 19,2004 2005, or such other date as the GMP is amended to provide, such uses may expand only into the western half of Section 21 and shall not generate truck traffic beyond average historic levels. (b) Such mining operations and an asphalt plant may expand on Sections 21 and 28 and the western quarters of 22 and 27 as a permitted use if either of the following occurs by June 19,2004 2005, or such other date as the GMP is amended to provide: i. No change. ii. the mine operator commits to construct a private haul road by June 19, 2006 2007, or such other date as the GMP is amended to provide,without the use of any public funds. • • - (c) No change. (3) A GREENBELT is not required for any DEVELOPMENT in NBMO Receiving Lands,whether inside or outside of a RURAL VILLAGE. However, any GREENBELT that is provided in a NBMO RURAL VILLAGE shall be included in the calculation of open space. (4) NBMO RURAL VILLAGE. No change. (a) DENSITY. No change. i. The minimum required DENSITY shall be achieved through TDR CREDITS, TDR BONUS CREDITS, and RURAL VILLAGE BONUS CREDITS, as provided in section 2.03.08 EAA,(23,Eb},(3)(C). ii. Once the minimum required DENSITY is achieved, additional DENSITY may be achieved,up to the maximum of three (3) DWELLING UNITS per gross acre through any one or combination of the following: a) TDR CREDITS; b) TDR BONUS CREDITS; Renumber b)through d)to c) to e). b. No change. • • . I LDC Amendment Request ,`1 • ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Stan Litsinger DEPARTMENT: Comprehensive Planning AMENDMENT CYCLE#OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC 2:124 LDC SECTION: 2.05.02 Density Blending LDC SUPPLEMENT#: New CHANGE: Implementing provisions for the update, clarification and corrective GMP amendment for the RFMUD know as the "glitch" amendment CPSP-2003-11 adopted by the BCC on October 26, 2004. REASON: Required LDC to implement the"glitch"amendments tm FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Sections 2.03.07 and 2.03.08 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This draft. provided by.Marti Chumbler. Esq., Carlton Fields,P.A. This version drafted February 1, 2005 Amend the LDC as follows: 2.05.02 Density Blending A. No change. B. Conditions and limitations. . 1.—3. No change. 4. Lands straddling RFMU Receiving and Neutral Lands. Density blending between properties straddling Receiving and Neutral Lands in the RFMU District is permitted subject to all of the following conditions and limitations: (6- t,_ a. The property was under unified control as of June 19, 2002; b. The project for which density is to be blended shall be a minimum of 80 aggregate acres in size; c. A minimum of 25% of the property shall be RFMU Receiving Land d. Theproject shall extend central water and sewer to serve the entire project,unless alternative interim sewer and water provisions are authorized by the County; and e. The density shall be shifted so as to preserve and protect the highest quality native vegetation and wildlife habitat on-site and to maximize the connectivity of such native vegetation and wildlife habitat with adjacent preservation and habitat areas. r� • LDCAmendment Request /Th ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Cormac Giblin,Housing and Grants Manager DEPARTMENT: Financial.Administration and Housing AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC SECTION: 2.06.03 —AHDB Rating System LDC SUPPLEMENT#: CHANGE: Update to the Affordable Housing Density Bonus Rating System, bringing the charts up to date with current practices and market conditions. REASON: The AHDB Rating system was written over ten years ago and has not been revisited as required in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: Required by Policy 2.9 of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version.was created'on January 28, 2005 at 10:33 - a.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.06.03 AHDB Rating System A. The AHDB rating system shall be used to determine the amount of the AHDB which may be granted for a development , based on household income level, number of bedrooms per , type of affordable housing units (owner-occupied or rental, single- family or multi-family, and percentage of affordable housing units in the development. To use the AHDB rating system, Tables A and B, below, shall be used. Tables A —B shall be reviewed and updated, if necessary, on an annual basis by the BCC or its designee. 1: First, choose the household income level (moderate, low, or very low 50% of Median Income, 60% of Median Income, or 80% of Median Income) of the affordable housing unit(s) proposed in the development , and the type of-affordable housing units (owner-occupied or rental, single-family or multi-family, where applicable) to be provided, as shown in Table A. . An AHDB ;sting based on the household income level and the number of bedkeems is shown in Table A. Table A. TABLE INSET: Efeiency-en 4- 2- 3-er-Mere- �- 3-- 4- 3-- 4- 3-- obtain two (2). 2. After the AHDB rating has been determined in Table A, locate it in Table B, and determine • . . _ . • • , , • • . - _ _ _-r . . :, Table b A will indicate the maximum number of residential dwelling units per gross acre that may be added to the base density . These additional residential, dwelling units per gross acre are the maximum AHDB available to that development . Developments with percentages of affordable housing units which fall in between the percentages shown on table b A shall receive an AHDB equal to the lower of the two (2)percentages it lies between,plus one-tenth(1/10) of a residential dwelling unit per gross acre for each additional percentage of affordable housing rental units in the development . For example, a development which has twenty-four (24) percent of its total residential dwelling units as affordable housing units, :.-=. -' - • • P. = : _ : " at the 80%MI level will receive an AHDB of 44 2_4 residential dwelling units per gross acre for the development. TABLE INSET: (6)-9 • • tat tg- _ 10%- 204%- 30% 4946.- /T 4-- . 9r 0- 2- 2— 0— 4r.. 2+- - 3-^ ' 2-- 3-- 4- 4- 3— 4— 5- 4— 5— 7- . 8- 3. Where more than one (1) type of affordable housing unit (based on level of income awl shown in Table A) is proposed for a development , the AHDB for each type shall be calculated separately in Table B. After the AHDB calculations for each type of affordable housing unit have been completed in Table B, the AHDB for each type of unit shall be added to those for the other type(s) to determine the maximum AHDB available for the development. In no event shall the AHDB exceed eight(8) dwelling units per gross acre. Table A. Affordable Housing Density bonus /Th (Additional Available Dwelling Units Per Gross Acre) Percent of Development Desi..ated as Affordable Housing 10% 120% 30% 40% 50% 160% 70% 180% 190%. 1100% 80% MI* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 • Income 60% MI 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Level — 50% MI 3 4 5 6 7 8. 9 10 11 12 *Owner-occupied only Total Allowable Density =Base Density+Affordable Housing Density Bonus In no event shall the maximum gross density allowed exceed 16 units per acre. B. The AHDB shall be available to a development only to the extent that it otherwise complies and is consistent with the GMP and the land development regulations, including the procedures, requirements, conditions, and criteria for "PUDs" and rezonings,where applicable. C. The minimum number of affordable housing units that shall be provided in a development pursuant to this section shall be ten(10) affordable housing units. g D. The ratio of number of bedrooms per affordable housing unit shall in general be equal to the ratio of the number of bedrooms per residential unit for the entire development. • • LDC Amendment Request " ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC2:131 and LDC4:4-5 LDC SECTION: Section 2.07.00 and 4.02.01 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Supplement 1 CHANGE: 1) Relocating the table of minimum yard requirements (minimum setbacks) from Chapter 2, pertaining primarily to Zoning Uses, to Chapter 4, pertaining to dimensional standards for development, and adding a provision for measuring setbacks (i.e., for minimum required yards)where road right-of-way easements burden.a portion of such yards. 2) .Also, adding an exemption for legal non-conforming lots in the CON district. 3) Finally,making a few corrections to footage requirements in various portions of the table. REASON: 1) This table is more appropriately located with similar provisions regulating lot dimensions and site design as general development standards. The additional text was not'included as part of the definition of"setback line" as it is operative'in nature, but it was not inserted into the operative text of the LDC as part of the LDC's recodification. 2). The original LDC (Ordinance 91-102) failed to provide for an exemption for those lots that were in existence prior to the effective date of the LDC. 3) This language was not transcribed as it should have been during the recodification of Cycle 1, 2004 (Ordinance 2004-41) FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None • GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 7, 2004 at 4:15 p.m. •1 • Note that any cross-references contained in the LDC to Table/section 2.07.00 should be found with a word search and revised to reflect the new section (4.02.01)and Table identification. Amend the LDC as follows: 1 1 1 • I •: . . • I • * Il. 1- mi.. Zoning i., _ District k :. _ __ (feet) - (feet) e meets- GC !. ::= None None - A- e 30- 50- X- E.- • 30- 7-5-- X RSF 1 e 30- 30-- X- RSF 2 20- 30- X RSF 3 -e 1WX-- ` r wate25- 7.5 RSF 1 . 10- • 775- 25- •RSF 5 ' 4-0-- 775- 20- X RSF 6 P 10- 7 20- - NA 775 20 RMF 6 !•- : : NA 4.0 20 X- t. - . : e NA 4-5- 20- RMF 12 ! A- 30- X- RMF 16 A- B- X- C-1---D • RT- B- Ne- S.F./MH 20 waterfrent 20 Duplex 35 44) 44 5 30 M.F. 35 - 44 30- 4-5 4-5--- Nen- MH 1 25- Wa �w 4-9-- 7.5 Ne - TTRVC 2 30- 4-0- 5- WategFellt waterfront - 40- 8- Resi al Nea- Rem Fee- G-3- 25- 25- . residential . reel X- 26- 4-5- 44- C 2 25- 25- . 4-5-- 26-. 45- - • C 3 3 GG 25- A- 25- A- . - C 1 1 . B-- 26- A- 25= A- X- C 5 1 25- 25- 45- 25- A . 25- 59= - 50- 45-- X- BP- 50- 50- 4-0- 59- ' 25- _ GAN- 50- 50- 50- F-- F- . F- F Nen- Nen- GF- 2-5- Residual Residential residentia4 residents X-- 25- 44- 25-- 4-5- 5-OveOverlay rly -- . - : ::_ - __- -- -- - - - --- : ; '_: : : Dictriots . - . •-. -:: -- _ - . _ park- 15ft. setback from an external street—50 ft., setback from an internal street—25 ft.; setback ffrern any building or other structure- 10 ft. 3C 3 District minimum setback on any side that is waterfront—25 ft.; setback for marinas— nene. 4C 1 and C 5 Districts minimum setback on any side that is waterfront—25 ft.; setback for marinas—none; setback on any side adjacent to a railroad right of way—none A—50%of the building height,but not less than 15 feet. B—50%of the building height,but not less than 30 feet. C—50%of the building height,but not loss than 25 feet. D—50%of the building height,but not less than 25 feet. Structures 50 feet or more in height— _ -= - - -• e =_ E—the total of all aide yard setbacks shall equal 20%of the lot width,with a maximum of 50 • _ . ' - .. a _- . - _ ... : : .... _. . ... .... ._ ..._ : _ X—for principal structures: 50 feet from all property lines; for accessory structures: 25 feet from all PPoPerty-li • * * * . * * ' * * * * * * 4.02.01 Dimensional Standards for Principle Uses in Base Zoning Districts A. The following tables describe the dimensional standards pertaining to base zoning districts. Site design requirements apply to the principal building on each site. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Table 2.1 -TABLE OF MINIMUM YARD REOUIRMENTS • (SETBACKS)FOR BASE ZONING DISTRICTS Note as to Setback line measurement: minimum setback lines are typically measured from the legal boundary of a lot, regardless of all easements burdening a lot, with the exception of easements that comprise a road right-of-way where the minimum setback line is to be measured form the road right-of-way easement line. Zoning Minimum Front District Minimum Side Yard(feet) Minimum Rear Yard Public School Yard(feet) (feet) Le uirements GC None None None - A 50 30 50 X E 75 30 75 X • RSF-1 50 30 50 X' RSF-2 40 20 30 X Waterfront Non • RSF-3 30 10 waterfront 25 X 7.5 RSF-4 25 10 7.5 25 X • RSF-5 25 10 7.5 20 • X RSF-6 25 10 7.5 20 X S.F. 25 NA 7_5 R RMF-6 Duplex 25 NA 10 20 X 3 +units 30 NA 15 20 RMF-12 30 A 30 X RMF-16 B A B X tm • r T is B _ X aterfront Non- .F./MH 20 waterfront 20 II .lex 35 15 5 30 X 15 .F. 35 15 15 30 15 i Non- 1 1 •,5 5 1 Oaterfront waterfront 10 X 7.5 aterfront Non- Non- TRVC2 10 waterfront aWaterfront waterfront — — 8 i'esidential Non- Residential Non -1 r 5 r 5 residential 25 residential X 15 — 15 C-2 r 5 r 5 15 25 15 X -33 r 5 A 25 A X C-44 ii P A 25 • A . X -54 0,5 P 15 25 X 1 r5 • 0 E 50 15 X I:P 50 50 10 50 25 ON/ 50 0 50 _ r , I 1 F X I.esidential Non- Residential Non- CF r 5 r 5 residential 25 residential X • 15 — 15 Overlay See table of special design requirements for the applicable overlay district located in the I'istricts ppropriate section for that district in Chapter 4. • 'MH District-additional yard requirements: side yard setback from a public road that is external to the boundary of the park=50 ft.; the minimum setback on any side from the exterior boundary of the park= 15ft. 2TTRVC District-additional yard requirements: setback from exterior boundary of park=50 ft.: setback from an external street=50 ft., setback from an internal street=25 ft.; setback from any building or other structure= 10 ft. 3C-3 District-minimum setback on any side that is waterfront=25 ft.; setback for marinas= none. 111111..i Districts-minimum setback on any side that is waterfront=25 ft.; setback for marinas=none; setback on any side adjacent to a railroad right-of-way=none 5 ait>•!ry'!idt IiNi. IW&I,nN I�,'�e�INRRigat iG iy�l I�tp tDt (!t On t u� � c tm t a GI�.d �Cfd! .f I !PII� 'ti I r 'u n t:!n F'�i t ft7mly titW s a e a�ILe�'a�id�"�o�,rm I ,$a..`:,�y..? Cis�l�•� �I���C��f�i �#'TT�e� .int I�lamla'a ytry�ix aata� Y ", � � � t I. �t a�te!, r will+b.e su j egg :# e, d 'obi`s a ga#'•gs l tr...Ct!prnl III°Itt!'IB!ix tt3t'" kl,!!!!!� inia �'' N `eel 3 1 1s 471,rpritte !.4 a d s 4t 'o ae l i r314,ii b a agil powitgranta A=50%of the building height,but not less than 15 feet. B=50%of the building height,but not less than 30 feet. C r 50%of the building height,but not less than 25 feet. D=50%of the buildingheight,but not less than 25 feet. Structures 50 feet or more in height= 25 feet plus one additional foot of setback for each foot of building height over 50 feet. E=the total of all side yard setbacks shall equal 20%of the lot width,with a maximum of 50 feet.No side yard shall be less than 10 feet. Alternative dimensions may be possible when approved through a unified plan of development involving one or more lots under common ownership where the yard requirements are met for the unified site but not necessarily for each parcel within the unified site. F=the yard requirements shall be equal to the most restrictive adjoining district. X=for principal structures: 50 feet from all property lines; for accessory structures:25 feet from all property lines. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Barbara Burgeson,Principal Environmental Specialist DEPARTMENT: Environmental Services Department AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC 3:10 LDC SECTION: 3.03.06 Native Vegetation Retention on Coastal Barriers LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Clarification of the protection required for coastal native vegetation. REASON: County staff gets requests for native vegetation removal on the shoreline and even though it is clear that these areas must be provided extra protection, we are sometimes asked to provide citations for the prohibition of manicuring these areas. FISCAL& OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED.CODES OR REGULATIONS: 10.02.06 H 2 — Coastal Construction Setback Line permits for dune vegetation. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 7, 2004 3.03.06 Native Vegetation Retention on Coastal Barriers Native vegetation retention or revegetation shall be in compliance with the requirements of section 3.05.00, and shall incorporate, at a minimum,the preservation and revegetation standards as follows: A. Native vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. To the extent that native vegetation cannot be retained on-site, and the remaining native vegetation can be supplemented without degrading or damaging its natural function, then the existing native vegetation shall be supplemented with compatible vegetation on-site``` • B. All beach front land development projects shall be required to revegetate the dune where the dune is devoid of coastal dune,vegetation. C. All land development projects shall provide 100 percent native Southern Floridian species within their required landscaping and buffering standards as established within section 4.06.00. D. Appropriate coastal dune or strand vegetation shall be required as the only stabilizing medium in any coastal barrier dune or strand vegetation restoration program. E. Native vegetation on shorelines, either naturally existing or planted in coastal dunes or strands or seaward of the CCSL, shall not be trimmed or altered in any way and shall not be maintained as landscaping. This shall be a requirement of all Coastal Construction Setback Line permits issued for dune creation, enhancement or re-vegetation(10.02.06 H 2). Exceptions made be allowed when it is necessary for safety reasons to trim along walkways or adjacent to buildings. F. Temporary irrigation may be utilized only until newlyplanted vegetation can be established. add any fill, mechanically clean any beach, or grade any dirt within 100 feet of the nesting zone of a beach where sea turtles nest or may nest, without obtaining a construction in sea turtle nesting area permit from the County Manager or designee. a. If sea turtle nesting occurs within 100 yards of the construction, measured parallel to the shoreline during permitted construction activities, the nest area shall be flagged by the permittee and the County Manager or designee informed prior to 9:00 a.m. of that morning. b. Depending on nest location, in relation to intensive construction activities, the County Manager or designee may require that the nest(s)be relocated by the applicant. c. Construction activities shall not interfere with sea turtle nesting, shall preserve or replace any native vegetation on the site, shall maintain the natural existing beach profile, and minimize interference with the natural beach dynamics and function. d. Construction or repair of any structure, including, but not limited to, dune walkovers, seawalls, or other revetments, sandbags, groins, or jetties, shall not be permitted during sea turtle nesting season on any County beaches, except if permitted structures are damaged by a named storm or other declared natural disaster and the following conditions are met. 1.. Any structure that has minor repair work (boards need to be nailed back to the exisiting intact structure, or a few needing to be replaced) that can be done completely from atop the structure can be authorized to do so after obtaining the necessary approval by Collier County that they have noticed the DEP of that work. 2. Any structure that has damage that requires reconstruction of any part of the walkover shall provide the following information so staff can determine if the activity can occur prior to the end of sea turtle nesting season: a. Obtain the needed field permit from I=DEP. b. Through assistance from Community Development and Environmental Services (ODES) staff, locate all known sea turtle nests. c. Provide a survey by a qualified.consultant locating any gopher tortoise burrows on site within 50 feet of the structure. d. Provide photographs of the site as it existed after the storm to document the conditions of the property. e. Provide an aerial of the property with the CCSL line located on the property. f. Provide a copy of a Collier County approved CCSL variance or CCSL permit and County building permit approving the original construction of the structure. 3. Sea turtle nest locations will be reestablished using their previously recorded GPS locations and accuracy data to identify a 95% confidence boundary. Construction activities shall not occur within 10 feet of these boundaries for viable nests. Nests will be considered viable for 80 days from the time the nest was recorded unless it can be proven that a particular nest has been damaged by the storm and there is no chance of any hatchlings. 4. Applications to construct the walkover can be approved once all other necessary permits have been obtained and if the requirements in recommendations#2 and #3 above are met. 5. The following shall be obligations for all property owners who have had sand washed ashore as a result of the storm and had it deposited back of the dune and seaward of the CCSL. This is not a temporary requirement but an obligation. of the Growth Management Plan as it states, that activities shall maintain the natural beach profile and minimize interference with the natural beach dynamics and function. The sands shall remain in place as it is a natural rebuilding of the beach and dune system. The only vegetation allowed to be planted on this sand must be native salt tolerant beach or dune vegetation and shall be approved through a CCSL permit issued by ODES staff. 6. Minor structures shall be approved provided that they also comply with: a. Federal requirements for elevations above the 100-year flood level. b. Collier County Building Code requirements for flood proofing. c. Current building and life safety codes. d. Collier County and State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection CCSL/CCCL regulations, e. Applicable disability access regulations of the American Disability Act (-ADA), and f. Any required Collier County zoning and other development regulations with the exception of existing density or intensity requirements established, unless compliance with such zoning or other development regulations would preclude reconstruction otherwise intended by the Buildback Policy as determined by the Emergency Review Board established herein. BV1 LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Barbara Burgeson, Principal Environmental Specialist Stan Chrzanowski,Engineering Review Manager DEPARTMENT: Environmental Services Department AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC 3:26 LDC SECTION: Section 3.05.05 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Allow for removal of vegetation on construction projects when the Environmental Review is complete,instead of waiting until all,possibly unrelated, reviews are complete and the final, formal SDP approval is issued. Provide for other circumstances in which minimal clearing may be allowed such as for habitat management, fire breaks, state or federal permit issuance and in conjunction with conducting preserve management. REASON: . Most reviews are not related to tree removal and occasionally,the final review is delayed awaiting the resolution of issues that have nothing to do with infrastructure construction. The code presently does not address these circumstances. V V FISCAL& OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 1,2004 Amend the LDC as follows: . 3.05.05 Criteria for Removal of Protected Vegetation The County Manager or designee may approve an application for vegetation removal permit if it is determined that reasonable efforts have been undertaken in the layout and design of the proposed development to preserve existing vegetation and to otherwise enhance the aesthetic • • appearance of the development by the incorporation of existing vegetation in the design process n Relocation or replacement of vegetation may be required as a condition to the issuance of an approval in accordance with the criteria set forth in this section. In addition, a vegetation removal permit maybe issued under the following conditions: A. Protected vegetation is a safety hazard to pedestrian or vehicular traffic, public services,utilities, or to an existing structure. B. Diseased or otherwise unhealthy vegetation, as determined by standard horticultural practices, and, if required, a site inspection by the County Manager or designee. • C. A final local development order has been issued which requires allows removal of the protected vegetation:,or: 1. When the Environmental review of the project is complete as indicated by comments on the submittal review and the drawing conforms to all codes,the petitioner can submit for a Preliminary Clearing and Excavation Permit,which allows for only clearing (vegetation removal) , excavation, spreading fill, and grading. All applicable Federal. State, and Local permits must have been obtained prior to applying for a PCEP. No road or utility work can be done until the Final Development Order is issued. D. Compliance with other codes and/or ordinances may involve protected vegetation removal. • E. Replacement of non-native vegetation shall be with native vegetation and shall be subject to the approval of the County Manager or designee. Replacement vegetation shall comply with the standards of section 4.06.05 and shall include the following minimum sizes: one gallon ground cover; seven(7) gallon shrubs; fourteen(14) foot high trees with seven foot crown spread and dbh(diameter at breast height) of three inches. Replacement native vegetation shall be planted within fourteen(14) calendar days of removal. F. On a parcel of land zoned RSF, VR, E, or other nonagricultural, noncommercial zoning district in which single-family lots have been subdivided for single-family use only, a vegetation removal permit may be issued for any permitted accessory use to that zoning. G. The proposed mangrove alteration has a DEP permit, or meets the permitting standards in the Florida Administrative Code. However,mangrove removal or trimming shall be prohibited in all preserves or areas used to fulfill the native vegetation preservation requirements. H. Removal of vegetation for approved mitigation bank sites (as defined by the • Florida Administrative Code); state, federal or county approved or endorsed .—. environmental preservation, enhancement, or restoration projects; or fire breaks . _ _ _ : : - _ : - - _ , shall be permitted. Vegetation removal permits issued under these criteria are valid for the period of time authorized by such agency permits. I. Vegetation relocation plan. If vegetation relocation is proposed by the applicant prior to site development plan, construction plan or other final approvals, a vegetation relocation permit(vegetation removal permit)may be issued by the County Manager or his designee provided that it can be demonstrated that early transplantation will enhance the survival of the relocated vegetation. The vegetation relocation plan shall document methods of relocation, timing of relocation, watering provisions,maintenance and other information as required by the County Manager or his designee. J. Landscape plant removal or replacement. The removal or replacement of approved landscaping shall be done in accordance with the regulations that guide the landscape plans reviews and approvals in section 4.06.00.A vegetation removal permit will not be.issued for the removal or replacement of landscape plants. That approval must be obtained through an amendment process to the landscape plan or as otherwise authorized by permit by the Collier County Landscape Architect. K. Removal of vegetation for fire breaks approved by the State of Florida, Division of Forestry, shall be permitted. The width of the approved clearing shall be limited to the minimum determined necessary by the Division of Forestry. L. A State or federal permit issuance that depends on data that cannot be obtained without preliminary removal of some protected vegetation. The clearing shall be minimized and shall not allow any greater impacts to the native vegetation on site that is absolutely necessary and shall be limited to areas that are outside any future on- site preserves. M. In conjunction with a Preserves management plan native vegetation clearing may be approved only when it is to improve the native habitat or to improve listed species habitat. . N. Conservation Collier projects which may need minimal clearing for parking., pathways for walking, or structures that may not require site plan approvals. 0. An early clearing permit(ECP)has been issued. Early clearing will be allowed when the Environmental review staff can approve the necessary components of the project to ensure the appropriate environmental protection andpreservation on site. This can only be allowed when the following are completed: 1) final configuration and protection of the preserve is complete, 2)the conservation easements and completed and approved by both the environmental review staff 055 and the county attorney's office, 3)the environmental review staff has approved ,•� the clearing of the site through the site clearing/protection plan,4) copies of all applicable Federal, State, and Local permits must be submitted and reviewed against the ECP preservation plan. Approval for excavation, spreading fill, and grading is not authorized by this early clearing permit. * * * * * * * * * * * * * • Job #10375 1\3(?) User ID N/A it P. 144 C 14 � j 1 Userj' fh j11000 '„ Awamurray_sfor h Title Microsoft Word - 3.05.07 Preservation Standards _012605.-1705_ SL. Source: Network Card Language: PostScript Printed: MON FEB 14 15:21:22 2005 3.05.07 Preservation Standards All development not specifically exempted by this ordinance shall incorporate, at a minimum, the preservation standards contained within this section. A. General standards and criteria. 1. —2. No change! 3. 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.: greater; la: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. —i. No change. 4. -5. No change. B. —H. No change • 61 A LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Barbara Burgeson, Principal Environmental Specialist DEPARTMENT: Environmental Services Department AMENDMENT CYCLE#OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC 3:42 LDC SECTION: 3.05.08 Requirement for Removal of Prohibited Exotic Vegetation LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification (04-41) CHANGE: Amend the criteria used to require removal of exotic vegetation, applicable to single-family and two-family lots. REASON: County staff amended the LDC a couple of years ago to require the removal of exotics on single-family and two-family lots for any new principal or accessory structure and any additions to the square footage of the principal or accessory structures on single-family or two-family lots. It has been very costly to property owners to remove exotics on their property if they are only doing a minor addition to their home. It is also a burden on County staff to inspect exotic removal for such small modifications. This amendment is to provide some relief to the property owner so that they are not obligated to remove exotics if they are proposing a minor change and shall not apply to tents, awnings, cabanas, or screened enclosures not having a roof impervious to weather. This shall not apply to remodeling of any existing structure. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 7, 2004 3.05.08 Requirement for Removal of Prohibited Exotic Vegetation Prohibited exotic vegetation specifically includes the following: Earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis) Australian pine (Casuarina spp.) Melaleuca (Melaleuca spp.) Catclaw mimose (Minosa pigra) Downy rosemyrtle (Rhodomyrtus tomentosa) Brazilian pepper(Schinus terebinthifolius) Java plum (Syzygium cumini) Women's tongue (Albizia lebbeck) Climbing fern (Lygodium spp.) Air potato (Dioscorea bulbifera) Lather leaf(Colubrina asiatica) Carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides) A. General. 1. Prohibited exotic vegetation removal and methods of removal shall be conducted in accordance with the specific provisions of each local development order. 2. Native vegetation shall be protected during the process of removing prohibited exotic vegetation, in accord with the provisions of section 3.05.04. 3. Prohibited exotic vegetation shall be removed from the following locations, and within the following timeframes: a. From all rights-of-way, common area tracts not proposed for development, and easements prior to preliminary acceptance of each phase of the required subdivision improvements. • a > b. From each phase of a site development plan prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for thatp hase. c. From all golf course fairways, roughs, and adjacent open space/natural preserve areas prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first permitted structure associated with the golf course facility. d. From property proposing any enlargement of existing interior floor space, paved parking area, or substantial site improvement prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. In the case of the discontinuance of use or occupation of land or water or structure for a period of 90 consecutive days or more, property owners shall, prior to subsequent use of such land or water or structure, conform to the regulations specified by this section. 5. Verification of prohibited exotic vegetation removal shall be performed by the development services director's field representative. 6. Herbicides utilized in the removal of prohibited exotic vegetation shall have been approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 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. B. Exotic vegetation maintenance plan. A maintenance plan shall be submitted to the development services director for review on sites which require prohibited exotic vegetation removal prior to the issuance of the local development order. This maintenance plan shall describe specific techniques to prevent reinvasion by prohibited exotic vegetation of the site in perpetuity. This maintenance plan shall be implemented on a yearly basis at a minimum. Issuance of the local development order shall be contingent upon approval of the maintenance plan. Noncompliance with this plan shall constitute violation of this section. The development services director's field representative shall inspect sites periodically after issuance of the certificate of occupancy, or other final acceptance, for compliance with this section. C. Applicability to new structures and to major additions on single-family and two-family lots. In addition to the other requirements of this section, the applicant shall be required to remove all prohibited exotic vegetation before a certificate of occupancy is granted on any new principal or accessory structure and any major additions to the square footage of the principal or accessory structures on single-family or two-family lots. This shall not apply to tents, awnings,cabanas, or screened enclosures not having a roof impervious to weather. This shall not apply to remodeling of any existing structure. The removal of prohibited exotic vegetation shall be required in perpetuity. Upon issuance of a vegetation removal permit, prohibited exotic vegetation may be removed from lots which are zoned residential single-family (RSF), estates (E), village residential (VR), and mobile home (MH), prior to issuance of a building permit. • • b. From each phase of a site development plan prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for that phase. c. From all golf course fairways,roughs, and adjacent open space/natural preserve areas prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first permitted structure associated with the golf course facility. d. From property proposing any enlargement of existing interior floor space,paved parking area, or substantial site improvement prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. In the case of the discontinuance of use or occupation of land or water or structure for a period of 90 consecutive days or more, property owners shall,prior to subsequent use of such land or water or structure, conform to the regulations specified by this section. 5. Verification of prohibited exotic vegetation removal shall be performed by the development services director's field representative. 6. Herbicides utilized in the removal of prohibited exotic vegetation shall have been approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 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. B. Exotic vegetation maintenance plan. A maintenance plan shall be submitted to the development services director for review on sites which require prohibited exotic vegetation removal prior to the issuance of the local development order. This maintenance plan shall describe specific techniques to prevent reinvasion by prohibited exotic vegetation of the site in perpetuity. This maintenance plan shall be implemented on a yearly basis at a minimum. Issuance of the local development order shall be contingent upon approval of the maintenance plan. Noncompliance with this plan shall constitute violation of this section. The development services director's field representative shall inspect sites periodically after issuance of the certificate of occupancy, or other final acceptance, for compliance with this section. +' �11.��IIS 114@I Im I ,I Iw PI Iqn{Nn Igll!I't t 4pli�nll nuimiPrfl Iqt In I'i'ui('lun,Inl np n nl�h Ip f++f d if'4i1Y i fl I"'911 n�P r�Y r I Inlnnl by ai q'Inllfn 3E{a i.l, p nr? +;,u i ,,,!,. : ,p 'iYc .i5ih one ,s rncfures and t� rda�61,at dit�ons�ori�sin.g�e film !91P4 Eyh F�xl{II o-�ihlIpil it` �1911t'�N' i I �Itukp f�If�Np�t,+III�k iE )4.IIMdt I,I h E i 1,Gil IlduptWri 19{EIIki t I +�, i ',kt-+:: ,h.,i: r ,II h h r +�`P 1 �i Ih I Plb� l�l�d�ht+[ u � von m 10.44,46,ini on�O,�tte p r�imilAten.s o �ilus see tip9ihEh �:...t M+t , ,i � , II 111�f'+ hl I �%kmI�In�I wIa� 1H7 p 1,,i,ilh p �p�1�4 Wdhil pn r Edi Ip�p i lyral an E tl1 • • • "tit i;li; Rini B �, �"eku� Iw'�n�,, 16 f li fl',� a%y� mU.•;,1,141.4j'10' ,fitd 71pflli i ny W�� „� �Aq�gAlu i�AuIA i I:l -� F Y°.a,�. hR? °� �, N P a�k"i 'I'9�Sr�;,i b'I P �'" 'r.,i 9.8 k� . ®B 1 0 A '1•:;,.1'14.' i A:j� fl1N,A 1L �"' � b.�7, �t�l't,�'..y�iht74`, .I a 1 8 o .1,'''.0n4 1 ® a tll A Ao"q;�' e�1e I ,..i.:,a 1 J i ryu�,yW '� k yLH mop! i � i 1411F17,4:',1..'•!,t1114 iJ,i� a® ^i.ti,„ i41-iSI IkhA 0 8 ,,C11� 7b 9r Hnr��"4qF° yq 21.14i''''4.1'1111'!1711::;;-1`6.460 �i�d tl� ;E ' PI lB�M r ('� 411,,,,,',1,1 I i ,C r i i i I l i l I ll I i i' `t'� i�i I wi 61 i i'1 ul �I� v L a i ��6A 7T.fld9, 1f � �y�lT��97 @�I�r �i �1 I �.�tly7p�lihAy^ 139�' ItlLL �A 61� A R q L P Y'9 0,,I,....4'': �I 31. �11 iw';' .1 C '�3 d 4� •Ji 'PSB �, k9 A., � 'a ,i,^ �iJ:11.11.1 1;�T{04, v,,.,:. !1i ^6r.T..c.�a�I.6 1 flF °.I. ..., •„,,,,,,,,d.,,,., 1 U � 1"'ll'iNGL_`tk ll,.A 6 7 h 0 11 P B 1 4n !A••'.•:•.4,1:0',,�iSi,b ry. ."-i' '7 II:�p,a I �ry.w p+�7-r,�—r� —gyp yew, '�w�� W1 n I.�! fi� E ���6�. @ MI. ��1�IF� ��0 �F� pl�' 117�r CI � P B�m2 i�b;��,pg),�9 � A® @� .. �a�V� ._ �'�i� pp .,Ir F TATS .I I tl . @R 'f'I i �.�t i . CE " flm'��h"i�"+nfl'BT�A,fl 'R I���lA !AAA�f"fl 1 "'IB F @� �@ H 6, '1-R ' i I Ili i M i r q,qn II{fl? fl P .. '4, '� u� 1` J' a IIlJ II hV 41iF0J!,fi a 1 ' 6� . I;SII w d l u II ;��I�� �ur' ea[� S Ay PA' I Ji A ATN h>' a`rfl a P �> o A i!fl& I...III"""���''' a i i t ,i rl f"rry" I"'"�i.uGfu.'7 ,1 0,*It;41,1.9.'01,-. ' n In;; , I , . • ' ,o I u i °' dw u i ` �. fl P 'illilUl T"r u ry 1V'� �� +'�'4,,t ',lit: ' �li31 1.. J 6p:u• E .P.!'R �0,6.,•:, I i ! Y 1 @ i �..� ��p• �q M. T �(�y '9 �� upau 'r�sw ip: �u �d vui. , a�wu �Af,�"4 I .'4 4uu if@Yil,i�`�! °9','.,�!cm' NA . �,A1 P 1 LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Public Utilities Division AUTHOR: Ray Smith, Director DEPARTMENT: Pollution Control and Prevention AMENDMENT CYCLE#OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC3:58 LDC SECTION: Section 3.06.06 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Through the "Wellfield Remodeling" exercise, Collier County's Ground Water Protection LDC will better reflect the current status of those municipal wells located within the County. REASON: Wellfield Remodeling FISCAL& OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: There are no known fiscal impacts on Collier County other than the cost of updating the existing Ground Water Protection LDC maps and Zoning Maps. The only known operational impact would be the required identification and application of changes in County's Ground Water Protection LDC land use restrictions, due to changes in active municipal potable water well locations and pump rates. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 14, 2004 at 1:31 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 3.06.06 Regulated Wellfields The following wellfield risk management special treatment overlay zones,as defined in section 3.06.03, and criteria specified herein shall be applied to the following wellfields: A. City of Naples East Golden Gate Well Field WeM eld. B. City of Naples Coastal Ridge Well Field _ .:_. _ _ ' :... - - - . C. Collier County Utilities Golden Gate Well Field We'„-field. D. Everglades City Well Field Wellfield. E. Florida Governmental Utility Authority Golden Gate City Well Field Water-Treatment F.The Orange Tree Well Field Weis . G.Immokalee Well Field. - - - -. .. . ,. _. _ 1. . N N • CII. o. • W ,wp -4 -. N • /7 ' ' '4."L—//, . g"A ' ' c'A. - ,i' ''.... . ' '-': . ''' . • ' ,Iii_...J1111_ liiiiiitTS jiti,_40": : , • . ..,.1.,.., • • ,. .: , ...,, ,.....' .: ... MI en Iilei�li /irill�lr� — iI N • CD ( �I- _ ,z• gg o O 1 N 111110.1 ;"'" 11111111 C.11 N 4 s `G D- n� N F - .'16111Xv— Millibit , ,. ,. . ,.. ' 0. c 7 : : N. �� ��• • ! M� N. iiii - '''''w" .tri_ ...._,,,,Elaymmilmtmaammilik 1 1, ,,, . _,._,,,1 ;,,,,_. , = Q N N. . . zi , • w _ diswita Ecuanionniiiiiiiiii ,, , : 1.,...„_._:„._....._. ,_ , ,. o_. ININCI, _ W., . • i x,15.. "C7y1 ii N� N cn iiiilii N IIII! I9I1 .,_. ��� 0 C th„ e • O 9 P ii Illilill 11111 III/11111i. ' � 21 • 22 23 24 19 - �.. r....rr ...W. H 1 . - _ -.. ®EI®A o—te Iv i . • r ,..:,:::..,==, -_ 9- 4., • .. ,,r,,,4ti 1.iiii ,, L��=._.� or 3 i -- Ivh�� I iiiiiimmiximmim , ' 1111 4..h, ,,,• .. , <�� 36 s 1` H Liiiii )0i 1 ''. Mk , 4, . II . ' I. C J-77-it,-j-'-T47 1J� f pi 4 kJIHW �;. .¶4 / Pi'- ,ice 1 a► , • . r , . . - - - - - . - . , ' . er1t1A11 1 I,.®L r r 1 ' Z ..1 I i 1 141':' 1 I 4t liptii, L'I . ''' 7 ' - ' ' ' ' - - - fir g .ki.ris 6011 Aft ► i �..:J fri x5 1kIULcP1 �M , 110d 7���■� r'. ' . \ � I, , ,I 111, �� 1►��>>>lilrilitiill"" \if .r . r - ,-2.1- 19 r' : - . ' 1 \i . :i! Ill I _ . , L ' - - -:-.......1.�IltierilL! "SA . . „ rig, , ,k„ i m L. . . ..• . . , . L Ai ._ - - . . -' . tL w iiii4/4 v. . 0 . 3. 11,,,,. .._. ._ :, .. • . . irat,.......„,.................,__ .. ::_,______ , . .., ...mi.. • •L r r ... Itr. . ' r ' . allgi".1 I I 13 '.'7 ) '', r r r:M I I 12 B. .L.:.:... _. , .. Figure 2. - City of Naples Coastal Ridge Well Field Protection Zone co75 "" N o Q� N u-) N C N CO ------------ n : ' : co CU cCN r 0 N c F-' � o u-, N o ° (NU VI N f"7 c'7 0 0 N ,, e� L V Nijiii‘,..i _ ' .$)- . LL co '' 111111111 iiiipiliiiiiimmimpi rojeure ....:a) Prillit ' 1111011Millisoli,„ , , f ' C lidlrA 1941*1401‘,07A"All, oraolki!iilly•=msrowif Nalkdi iiiiil ,(u r Ci a a 8 �, INiilI�,,�.....�..r ..i.. ---- ci,nirlvpi umaimpoir 60 ) ,11.1. .. - . , - ,, , , 0., __„„,,,,,,, , II , EL a) ' III i Milli .4_zo 0 CD 1-6 111111111 . NI- N LL a .,.... , . i - . , -...., =ail . . . ,, ,,,,4, _.-if _ - - - - , . of 3 u.. _ ... a \4fl-t4j U") �D •cu �, Cu 0' ) n Cu W. ,. . . .. , . .,. '-'- .:- .. , c) - :' , , .F... ,. ..:,g);_,-. c c . N vo o a N J d N o 0. CU QJ N o U (U CO • •• III rn � o ® _ 11, iiiik ----....-- . , = ' - , CO CU . .. CU co CU . 1 LL 3 i (liz " � `D ` U ^ U - '' ': - , a - - - --- • - , • -/--• -. IT - N �* ; ' ,' : - °� `dam _ R ,_ii- (� o „ o a . _,L , ..;.., : „,., __ _,t,,4...,..„ ..,_I �� a) ' . iPliitliTiliZ' '• -IMELl'itillt L.L. . ,I „,,,,,;#;411!--. E*►, is • s -47.aill ' * i ' .--- L •, .6a ' �� ) ,� Irk; •k a) iill'; ;(14iii - .6 , , -1,0-, , . : ,,: . wi,+7. , ' -',.,,,,,...7;.: ''' -,.#,..PP _,,,,EL..i ..',' - , , ' . '. ',. ' E L .V_1/4. '• ligrkliT,LVV0t, ... ;-.•:-..-, , ' ,- ' . . '`• ' ; 1. ,. 1 ,,,, fir•dd�;.l + iikilR" ' ` iii.,„1„,. . ,..,*- c-im,ial„,,.,tlia,:, 111,0*.lkiesigv- 01-t',1111-111a"! y ' - ' ' ' - ' w ,....„.militirj , I , , , ,. ,,.....1, .,, ,, , .,. (-)-), , . .. rt. It I !II ...,, .„,,,L.... e..111'001i;', -, ....\4117:lirri „ :.i .,,„ c.. , , , - 01 y • , ir ,. .,,,,,,,.....,, , ... _..... .,,, „ _.. , ,,,, : . ,„...•11 -Rif‘frA6.-: Afftft F . .iiiikiL'1,-,itgr,takTi I '. . , , , , .. , iiiiiiww.,,,00,,,44_,:m .,,,,r,Irre...,,,iir' :tw �� tin ... .. .,.;tea. if; N co U7 ' I /° E CU a CU ,.r,i L L y_ (j - __.%-..,.._ _.,,,"°y '''''i'. (-1 l,j,J LLa - 3 N N ���Y-iiaa_" ft's`,aA 0 0.1 ,Irrif-4.1,4',- - 'ar-40PrOP,woliiier . . ..:ir , prilk , __., . ,.. , -_-,:,:,..„,.,,,,, _.._ . .... . „...,....::. !tkiii...104_,!„,,,,i.i , ,..,, ,,t •- \ g B ,�R F� '"4 t - 2 i;' -* P7 boN L i d O a) A c E a .� .6 „mow,,. ;g ; '1, $ N a - -- (U d \ Co r N .-' (U InN -7-6‘.1,.... Co CocpIn CO Co 1A CU (U Co LS ../.-'' . . i iicli R Co ,-.1d- 0� ,..-I Cu co 0 o Ln L_J__ ca -, U- W N c- ) i'-)i - , ' , ,:- ' N U u/ c � n ' U � 2')* te (� r-t r-1 �-I i.L o . '' ' — ' '' 41 • , ' ' , ', :-, cx, ,,,I iiv , , ,_ , , , . _ _ ' ,,•-orisiN-1 0) , , . L C11 r E. _ . d_ _, . ' 1 1, - ' .. ''' ' .t ' .� ClJ LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant)/Stan Chrzanowski DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC4:107-108 LDC SECTION: Section 4.06.04 A and B. • LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Adding language to allow for Preliminary Clearing and Excavation Permits under certain circumstances. Deleting Section 4.06.04 B. , REASON: Allow for preliminary clearing once the Environmental review is complete and approved. Regarding Section B, this language is also contained in section 3.03.06 and is more appropriately located in that section. • FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS:. None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC section 3.03.06 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 29, 2004 at 3:43 p.m. FIag�T�iltl^ 'Nflfl`yil�f$It�tl lHtd$.�NI�h.PfF^,2"w@7Y, tl(t�IB.�i{I �^ �9i.t,x7 u�`4;�llr;;ll(IIIiII NifB�IN��. "'�' 'N i°lPht�i�';�!rynliPi stn�u,,?i .x �jlW"fl!Itt I"tibl' Hotel t a�t a search s Dina e;; er, ormer of thelenikre LD%C'ant ' 3' re, rences t e e sect oyy� tinl I ui'INII't tl F 'I Intl ! r,; l;I;I I Iii III Nihl n1 ,f�; ; 111E qi ; nyt 'igrs" iou c qa i t qqc{r t bas oalny, is,ck t Amend the LDC as follows: 4.06.04 Trees and Vegetation Protection * * * * * a. Permitted removal of vegetation: • 9, II i. Subdivisions: Residential, commercial or industrial subdivisions,upon approval of construction drawings for the entire project or any given phase , thereof, or upon obtaining a Preliminary Clearing and Excavating Permit, may clear for the construction of the infrastructure within that phase. Road rights-of-way,lake areas, and lake maintenance, drainage and utility easement areas may be cleared. ii. Site development plans (SDPs): • c) Preliminary Clearing and Excavation Permits (PCEP): Once the environmental review is complete and approved, the applicant may submit for a PCEP to allow for early clearing, excavation, and earthwork as per the work limits that are shown on the applicant's site plan. All requirements of Section 3.05.05.C.1. must be met. program. 1}B. Credit for Tree Preservation. Existing trees may be credited towards meeting the minimum tree planting requirements according to the formula in table 4.06.04 B. - 1. Fractional measurements shall be attributed to the next lowest category. Table 4.06.04 Dr B. - 1. Calculation Of Tree Preservation Credits Existing Crown or Diameter of Tree at = Number of Tree Spread of Preserved 4.5 Feet Above Credits Trees Natural Grade 50 feet or greater or • 26 inches or greater = 3 40 to 49 feet or 20 to 25 inches = 2 30 to 39 feet or 13 to 19 inches = - 2 20 to 29 feet or 8 to 12 inches = '1* 10 to 19 feet or 2 to 7 inches 1* Less than 10 feet or 1 1/2 to 2 inches = 1* *Credited against equivalent required tree only. 1. Trees excluded from preservation credit. No credit shall be given for preserved trees which: a. Are not located within the areas of the property for which trees are required by the Code; b. Are located in required natural preservation areas indicated on an approved master land use plan, site development plan or plat; c. Are required to be preserved by federal, state or local law, such as mangroves; d. Are not properly protected from damage during the construction process, as provided in section 4.06.05 C.10.; e. Are prohibited species identified in section 4.06.05 C.B.; f. Are dead, dying, diseased, or infested with harmful insects; g. Are located in recreation tracts,golf courses or similar subareas within planned developments which are not intended to be developed for residential, commercial or industrial use(unless abutting said use, and the required buffer width is dedicated on the plat as a landscape buffer easement); or h. Are not located within the boundaries of the parcel. � � i ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion,Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: 2005 Cycle I LDC PAGE: LDC4:108 LDC/UDC SECTION: Create new LDC section 4.06.05 "Cultivated Tree Protection and Tree Replacement Fund (There will be a subsequent renumbering of the current sections). LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Add tree preservation language to the code and create a Tree Replacement Fund. REASON: Trees are a valuable community asset. Trees contribute to a healthy,beautiful,and safer community. This is accomplished by the trees carbon dioxide absorption, oxygen production, dust filtration, heat reduction (thereby lowering energy consumption and costs), soil erosion prevention, surface drainage improvement, beautification and aesthetic enhancement of improved and vacant lands and increase property values. Currently, trees in Collier County have no protective status as they do in other communities. 't� FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS Nplpf�" .77:"`111770 mita!'NN( p@! )"IP@n ".rye. i p I I 1. I `j: I�N rt 6. A.I �J gy m.: ' - e n® ® !PeaH i e IK. w 1: l�fll�D 1j11 7 I I�� �� �I '. 1 m �' '�' J " I " 2i" " i 1 d m x �I i iti ti 1 q i � r, i D�U:r II NI (Nf[H l�y.. � �n NP 1.. 'pINM' V T ;:obt10 O� 1 t o ®® a Bent a. ® ` u t all�ma r`� : :e W IN:fIy'NNINNNINit4N.! IIN�°uI�I'I_�!iNlhl 1161111,1 1�y�.N VI II IH'i'�:N@ a MINI Whig I i iel ijr �,m�',1','yh"'•.i4i M we M�;11rs.,I wismol�yr�Ihr.n�'I iti. i j�:�!yx!(N+�II'�%�I Ihi 'iHI m remove muomuuD1"�"F,CT4' Jana,ilii Ep i NO '$ 1)O r l� lr : %' a o e11L:�t w? {121 jai onU a. "4 ui IH li)'mf0 NSW NII:'�b I��fulN phli �N'lllj�il"I�pd!�Il, ;".I N'lit"'��l i�k.1,!I�in�pI� 'I�fl i�:.NfNI q ��I,y l'e�bi!!!, Il I'', I�( x �l c 1 th l�itre��� .gem a r I � " I I I I��q�NH� � N"& u� un��v. 1 u. ���� �.�11rCr�n't®n � 1ibi1�an @' '1i.19'' 'I i�''�'1!NE! Iryx.' �tl N pxr. u i 'i:,ver now I .,i lh N' '�'IN INN � Erg, !NINNeI " N'f i i r.vg n d. I b I � ;" II111 r ('HNI !; I.x JF I�ia'flNl I 91.NII'" Ii +'i dit!o 'I ''" ,''n " ice 1 it o 'I og ravari °"t11 'Treee C 0�. 71131015.211 1pI' ...� tillu: A N4tNN@ a .FA VTLS � RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC 4.06 "Landscaping, Buffering, and Vegetation Retention,"and LDC 10.02.06 J. "Tree Removal Permit." GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. OTHER NOTES: This regulation lays the foundation for the Tree Removal Permit process and the Tree i n � I°F Hla;um �n R �rylfi uyl�N� rytixn �IN�!d"'-@�^N'�@P�@n^im in,nn f:,. ; � 1 :,611 N "�, lacementl Fun " :ease note lat the' X 10 tree r �acement Ig1,1111,�ii I ,lu:,,�IEi�T'�I�I�fx;6�gij�hlk �:h � r F i i a i:c.„ ���xi' !6� :� ti" �'I,H'.Inrryl �n:» IIpNh�a�H jl,.illi L� .alb@NI�' Il�:�llilll�'lliflHnl f'I,�:d!gl�l�I�t uieN:N�li11PNB l' �p',I�xli�l:.�lln ih .ie:W.q���N feed shaif�h'�I estee lshei i ces of t`l eKxe Il: ehe eil!oy, �tf.ii't:;Hoardl1'.4Ora�ul+Collier 'Count.' CiNIIIINIi 1'HI Wllirlii!a!4 NII""IlipolNN(' o ssioner Amend the LDC as follows: 4.06.05 Cultivated Tree..Protection and Tree Replacement Fund A. Generally 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this section is to establish rules and regulations governing the protection of trees and their related canopy coverage within the county limits. I:_ : : ' _ • - . .. . _ -_ _- #h anteibuti n a healthy,beautiful and safer community. This is accomplished by the trees carbon dioxide absorption, oxygen production; dust filtration, wind and noise reductions, soil erosion prevention, surface drainage improvement,beautification and aesthetic enhancement of improved and vacant lands and.the general promotion of the health, safety and well-being of the community. 2. Application. 2.1. Generally. All cultivated trees are protected. No person may remove, relocate, or otherwise destroy any tree or cause,allow, authorize, or assist in the removal, relocation or destruction of same without first obtaining a"Cultivated Tree Removal Permit" from the County Manager or his designee. The application , shall be reviewed by the Community Development and Environmental Services Division. Refer to 10.02.06 J. "Cultivated Tree Removal Permits." 3. Removal of Protected Tree(s). Trees that have been approved for removal shall require replacement as outlined on the approved Cultivated Tree Removal Permit per section 10.02.06 J. Those trees that cannot be replaced on site shall be replaced by the applicant by depositing the equivalent monetary value to the County's Tree Replacement Fund. 3.1. Exempted Activities. . Single Family. Trees located on any single family, manufactured home subdivision,manufactured home park, or duplex lot shall be exempt. This does not include any areas of common ownership within manufactured home parks or subdivisions. !It41,1 Iil';iPL�Hlp im lki'" I(at {I+'ti TI i i i N "liflilli i+i Niil.:"i. it ie.!: ut tihd MI litt!I:Il is:l!!i lifal}luj'?;' C (� + ' + N 'N'Wt�l'hf '�„IU�t�+IHMIBP+9H t! ynnigl!!tl!i rllilti!t tt 1� � TA' a t r ter' t t :�Jx . lxft�l A N C.li 1 'A � I iG 10 .I I'.t t i ++ .x ij� +i K. 7 II+ fiN tWt • I p� I IIP 14 �� �'�tq {+ '� �I ��t I � I �a .t� � I��� I s7' � � �HII �t .N a� t�xff�ffl 1�n 911 %� .`IIINi�)l'1'th{'� ��rll,}F �- T t Wi t4 � 'hltl!I�iHa1t tl'llll.4t11't+'il{ryE'I htl i+Hb�:"6��t"I hM �i.,4 NIt11�+T�I1+:IlIH1�1' I{ip^h�,'.:. .La ,::',:z. n.:- r :. :�., 4. Tree Replacement Fund. Any payments collected under Section 24. b ildlff 16.'� � upjjjlttp+,khk°t �I� 'II t I(Illi I' shall be deposited into the C Tree Replacement Funder 'Ti ese funds and are designated for the replacement of trees on"�Igt�l ' 'a d ad:: scludeEs`e Ito S I,IiG those incidental materials, i.e mulch, irrigation mechanisms,required ford x�y llfjLij�. � trees to be planted 4.1. When payment is made into the .„;w, Tree Replacement Fund"the amount of payment will be in the manner established by the Board and shall include all n material and labor costs, as well as those costs associated with the administration of this program. The"Tree Replacement Funds" shall be used for landscaping county roadway andpathway beautification projects, and other public projects. 5. Incentive for Tree Preservation. In order to helppreserve significant trees (twenty orches dbh or greater), an applicant will be required to pay double the .', t.q.Kw 4tli Y. tree replacement fee into the"Tree ���" 4 Kat �. ',Rind". ��� ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion, Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: 2005 Cycle I LDC PAGE: . 4:119 LDC/UDC SECTION: LDC section 4.06.05 L(new section) LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Require certification of installed landscapes.prior to County inspection. REASON: To ensure compliance with approved landscape plans and expedite landscape inspection approvals. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: There will likely be an hourly cost to the applicant to send the landscape architect out to the site to ensure compliance with the approved plan or that cost may be incorporated into an overall fee charged to prepare the landscape plans. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. OTHER NOTES: This landscape certification has been successful in other counties such as Lee County, The development community and governmental agencies have embraced it because it has resulted in obtaining County inspection approvals more smoothly and quickly. • • Amend the LDC as follows: 4.06.05 L. [new sections Post-installation Landscape certificate of compliance. For all projects wherein the requirement for a registered Landscape Architect to submit landscape plans applies, and prior to the request for a County landscape and irrigation inspection, a LANDSCAPE architect must inspect and certify that all project open space areas, landscaping and irrigation systems are in consistent with the landscape and irrigation plans approved by the County as part of the development order review process. Proof of certification shall be provided on a form approved by the County Manager or his designee and must be submitted to the Engineering Services Department Director prior to the request for inspection. (F00) • LDC Amendment Request • ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division • AUTHOR: Stan Litsinger DEPARTMENT: Comprehensive Planning AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC 4:128-4:207 LDC SECTION: 4.08.00 RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES LDC SUPPLEMENT#: New CHANGE: Implementing provisions for the update, clarification and corrective GMP amendment for the RLSA known as the"glitch" amendment CPSP-2003-11 adopted by the BCC on October 26,2004. REASON: Required LDC to implement the "glitch" amendments FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH.MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This draft provided by. Marti Chumbler, Esq., Carlton Fields,P.A. This version drafted February 1, 2005. Amend the LDC as follows: 4.08.00 RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES 4.08.01 Specific Definitions Applicable to the RLSA District As used in the RLSA District Regulations, the terms below shall have the following meanings, set forth below,to the exclusion of any meanings ascribed to such terms in section 1.08.00: A. =K. No change. L. Incidental Clearing—Clearing of no more than 1% of the area of an SSA,which is conducted to accommodate th ..ab to convert from one Ag 1 use to another Ag 1 use and 1 which connects existing Ag 1 acres, squares_up existing Ag 1 farm fields, or provides access to or from Ag 1 areas. Renumber L. through WW to M through XX. 4.08.02 through 4.08.05. No change. 4.08.06 SSA Designation. Lands within the RLSA District may be designated as SSAs subject to the following regulations: A. No change. 1. No change. 2. FSA Delineated Lands. a.—b. No change. d.. c. Directional-drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION and oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT, and production activities in FSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit requiring compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62G- 30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14, 2005,regardless of whether the FSA in which OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION and oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT and production activities is within the Big Cypress Swamp as defined in Rule 62C- 30.001(2). F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42,F.S.,to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. Nothing contained herein alters the requirement to obtain CONDITIONAL USE permits for oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT and production activities. d. No change. e. Once land in an FSA is designated as an SSA,no expansion of Agriculture Group 1 (Layer 5) or Agriculture Group 2 (Layer 7) and no conversion of Agriculture Group 2 to Agriculture Group 1 shall be allowed beyond those land uses in existence or allowed by applicable permits as of the date that the SSA designation is approved other than incidental clearing as set forth in f.below. f. Incidental clearing is permitted,provided that the Ag 1 Land Use Layer has been retained on the areas to be incidentally cleared and the Natural Resource Index Value score has been adjusted to reflect the proposed change in land cover. In the even said incidental clearing impacts lands having a Natural Resource Index Value in excess of 1.2, appropriate mitigation shall be provided. 3. HSA Delineated Lands. a.—f. No change. g. Directional-drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION and oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT, and production activities in HSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit requiring compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C- 30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14, 2005,regardless of whether the HSA in which OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION and oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT and production activities is within the Big Cypress Swamp as defined in Rule 62C- 30.001(2),F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42,F.S.,to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. Nothing contained herein alters the requirement to obtain CONDITIONAL USE permits for oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT and production activities. h. Golf Course design, construction, and operation in any HSA shall comply with the best management practices of Audubon International's Gold Program and the Florida DEP, which standards shall be adopted by December 13,2003. i. Once land in an HSA is designated as an SSA,no expansion of Agriculture Group ' 1 (Layer 5) or Agriculture Group 2 (Layer 7)and no conversion of Agriculture Group 2 to Agriculture Group 1 shall be allowed beyond those land uses in existence or allowed by applicable permits as of the date that the SSA designation is approved other than incidental clearing as set forth in f. below. i. Incidental clearing is permitted,provided that the Ag 1 Land Use Laver has been retained on the areas to be incidentally cleared and the Natural Resource Index Value score has been adjusted to reflect the proposed change in land cover. In the even said incidental clearing impacts lands having a Natural Resource Index Value in excess of 1.2, appropriate mitigation shall be provided..• 4.—5. No change B.-F. No change. 4.08.07 SRA Designation A.—J. No change. K. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessments. No change. 1.—6. No change. 7. Public schools. The applicant shall coordinate with the Collier County School Board to provide information and coordinate planning to accommodate any impacts that the SRA has on public schools. As part of the SRA application,the following information shall be provided: a. Number of residential units by type; b. An estimate of the number of school-aged children for each type of school impacted(elementary,middle, high school); and • c. The potential for located a public educational-facility or facilities within the SRA, and the sites of any sites that may be dedicated or otherwise made available for a public educational facility. L. SRA Economic Assessment. No change. 1. No change. a. No change. b. Alternative Fiscal Impact Model. If Collier County has not adopted a fiscal impact model as indicated above, the APPLICANT may develop an alternative fiscal impact model using a methodology approved by Collier County. State of Florida or with Burchell et al., 1991,DEVELOPMENT Assessment HandbookI). The BCC may grant exceptions to this policy of fiscal neutrality to accommodate affordable or WORKFORCE HOUSING. 2.—4. No change. M. The BCC may, as a condition of approval and adoption of an SRA development, require that suitable areas for parks, schools, and other public facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use. When the BCC requires such a set aside for one or more public facilities, the set aside shall be subject to section 2.03.06, in the same manner as are public facility dedications required as a condition of PUD rezonings. 4.08.08 BASELINE STANDARDS A. No change. • B. APPLICABILITY OF CODE.Except as otherwise specifically provided in this section 4.08.00,those provisions of this Code in effect as of November 8 1999, shall apply to all land within the RLSA District unless or until such lands become subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits. C. ALLOWABLE USES. The permitted, accessory, and CONDITIONAL USES allowed shall be those set forth in section 2.03.00 in effect as of November 8 1999,with the following exceptions: 1.—2. No change. 3. Directional-drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION and oil and gas field DEVELOPMENT and production activities in FSAs and HSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed as of January 14, 2005., regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the t �' boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the APPLICANT shall be responsible for ,convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas ACCESS roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C- 30.005(2)(a)(1)through(12), F.A.C. 4. No change. D. No change. E. STANDARDS APPLICABLE OUTSIDE THE ACSC. No change. 1. No change. 2. • -- _ • !' , _ . • - . • fetaiffeiEL If listed species are directly observed on the site of the project or are indicated by evidence, such as denning, foraging, or other indications, = _ •- : ,. - - - -. • _- --- a minimum of 40% of native vegetation on site shall be retained, with the exception of clearing for incidental purposes. 3. No change. 4. On property where the wildlife survey establishes that listed species are utilizing the site or where the site is capable of supporting listed species and such listed species can be anticipated to potentially occupy the site,the County shall, consistent with the RLSA Overlay of the GMP, consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the State of Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and recommendations from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing DEVELOPMENT ORDERS. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case by case basis may change the requirements contained in herein and any such change shall be deemed consistent with this Code. F. –G. No change. H. STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO WETLANDS OUTSIDE OF FSAS, HSAS, WRAS, AND THE ACSC. WETLANDS located outside of FSAs, HSAs,WRAs, and the ACSC shall be preserved in accord with the following criteria: 1. The vegetative preservation requirement set forth in E.2. above shall first be met through preservation of WETLANDS having a functionality assessment score of 9:6-5 0_7 or greater. a. APPLICANTS shall establish the WETLAND FUNCTIONALITY score of WETLANDS using the South Florida Water Management District's Unified WETLAND Mitigation Assessment Method,F.A.C. 62-345. Upland vegetative communities may be utilized to meet the vegetative, OPEN SPACE,and site preservation requirements when the WETLAND FUNCTIONAL assessment score of on-site WETLANDS is less than g:65 0.7. b. In the alternative, an applicant may submit to the County a wetlands functional assessment conducted using the South Florida Water Management Districts' Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure(WRAP), as described in Technical Publication Reg.— • 1, dated September 1997 and updated August 1999, if such-assessment has been previously accepted by the South Florida Water Management District or the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. If such an agency-accepted functional assessment is submitted,the wetland preservation requirement set forth in E.2 above shall first be met through preservation of wetlands having a WRAP score of 0.65. Upland vegetation communities on land having a WRAP score of less than 0.65 may be utilized to meet the vegetative, open space, and site preservation requirements. 2. — 10. No change. • a • LDC Amendment Request- ORIGIN: equest ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Margaret Perry, Kim Hadley and Kris VanLengen DEPARTMENT: Comprehensive Planning/Consultants AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC4:135 LDC SECTION: Section 4.08.05 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: As to the first change, inserting provisions that were not included in the recodification performed in Cycle 1, 2004. As to the second change, combining sections 4.08.05 . and 4.08.08 into one section(4.08.05). REASON: As to the first change, these provisions were intended to be brought forward. As to the second change, baseline standards are currently contained in both of these sections and it is appropriate to combine them into one. FISCAL& OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 7, 2004 at 5:19 p.m. Note that any cross-references within the LDC to section 4.08.08 should be found with a word search and revised to reflect the appropriate section/subsection in 4.08.05. Amend the LDC as follows: 4.08.05 Baseline Standards -. . - • ' • • • -_ • ! • ; • , . . __ _ Designation All lands within the RLSA District have been delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map. Unless and until designated as an SSA or SRA, lands within the RLSA District shall remain subject to the Baseline Standards. A. Purpose and intent. These Baseline Standards will remain.in effect for all land within the RLSA District unless or until such land becomes subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits, except as to those agricultural uses subject to sections 163.3162(4) and 823.14(6), Florida Statutes. The Baseline Standards are intended to protect water quality and quantity,maintain the natural water regime, and protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats on land that has not been designated as an SSA or SRA. The opportunity to voluntarily Participate in the Stewardship Credit Program, as well as the right to sell conservation easements or a feeor lesser interest in the land, shall constitute compensation for the loss of any development rights related to these standards. . B. Applicability of code. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this section 4.05.00, those provisions of this Code in effect as of July 25, 2000, shall apply to all land within the RLSA District unless or until such lands become subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits. C. Private lands delineated FSAs,HSAs, and WRAs. Lands delineated FSA,HSA, or ' WRA on the RLSA overlay map have been identified through data and analysis as having a higher quality natural resource value than those lands not delineated. Although any land within the RLSA District can be designated as an SSA, generally those lands delineated FSAs,HSAs,and WRAs are the most likely candidates for designation because of the higher credit values applied to lands with those delineations. D. Private lands delineated as open. Lands not otherwise classified as FSA, HSA, or WRA are delineated as "open" on the RLSA overlay map and are generally of a lower natural resource quality. Open lands may be designated as either SSAs or • SRAs. E. Area of critical state concern (ACSC). The RLSA District includes lands that are within the ACSC. Those ACSC lands are depicted on the RLSA overlay map and are eligible for designation as SRAs, subject to additional standards set forth in subsection 4.08.07 A.2. All ACSC regulations continue to apply to ACSC lands within the RLSA District regardless of designation. F. Public or private conservation lands. Those lands within the RLSA District that are held in public ownership or in private ownership as conservation lands may be delineated on the RLSA overlay map as FSA, HSA, or WRA but are not eligible for designation as either an SSA or SRA. A. Baseline Standard©. The Baseline Standard© shall apply until lands within the • • • /—•\ 137 G. No increase in density or intensity within the RLSA District is permitted beyond the Baseline Standards except in areas designated.as SRAs. Within SRAs, density and intensity may be increased through the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System and, where applicable,through the affordable housing density Bonus as referenced in the density Rating System of the FLUE, and the density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. • C. Land© Within the RLSA District Not Deoignated SSA or SRA Subject to Special • ., _ :, ...- '_ _ . ,.: -_ • e : . ,... _ _ . - ,.. _ _ _ ._ --- e - .. _. • - . . ..... .: . --- - - _ December 13,2003. H. Allowable uses. The permitted, accessory,and conditional uses allowed shall be those.set forth in section 2.03.00 in effect as of July 25. 2000.with the following exceptions: 1. Residential Uses, General conditional uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1--4) as listed in the Matrix at section 4.08.00 shall be eliminated in all FSAs, as provided in section 4.08.00. 2. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, except those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety, shall only be allowed in FSAs with an Index value of 1.2 or less, as provided in section 4.08.00. 3. Directional-drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development and production activities in FSAs and HSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30.F.A.C.,regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C- 30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all • applicable federal and/or state oil and gaspermits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30,F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62-30.005(2)(a)(1)through (12), F.A.C. 4. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants shall be prohibited in areas mapped as HSAs. I. Standards applicable inside the ACSC. RLSA District lands within the ACSC shall be subject to all ACSC regulatory standards, including those that strictly limit non- agricultural clearing. J. Standards applicable outside the ACSC. Except to the extent superceded by L. or M.below,the following standards shall apply to all development within those areas of the RLSA District that are outside of the ACSC, other than agricultural operations that fall within the scope of sections 163.3162 (4) and 823.14(6),F.S., and single family residential dwellings, unless or until such lands are subject to transmittal or receipt of Stewardship Credits: 1. A wildlife survey, as set forth in Chapter 10, shall be required for allparcels when listed species are known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site or where listed species are directly observed on the site. 2. A minimum of 40%of the native vegetation on the project site must be retained. If listed species are directly observed on the site of the project or are indicated by evidence, such as denning, foraging, or other indications, first priority shall be given topreserving the habitat of such listed species. 3. If the wildlife survey indicates that listed species are utilizing the site, or the site is capable of supporting and is likely to support listed species, a wildlife habitat management plan shall be prepared and submitted to the County. a. The wildlife habitat management plan within the RLSA District shall include the following techniques to protect listed species from the negative impacts of development: i. Open space and vegetation preservation requirements shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and areas dominated by human activities. ii. Fencing,walls, other obstructions, or other provisions shall be used • to minimize development impacts to the listed species-and to - encourage wildlife to use wildlife corridors. • iii. Roadways crossings,underpasses, and signage shall be used where roads must cross wildlife corridors. b. The wildlife habitat management plan shall also incorporate the following: i. A description of the techniques used to direct incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats and to comply with the criteria identified in 1 and 2 above, as applicable; ii. Identification of appropriate lighting controls for permitted uses and a consideration of the opportunity to utilize prescribed burning to maintain fire-adapted preserved vegetation communities and provide browse for white-tailed deer, consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recover Plan, May 1999, except as recommended otherwise by the UFWS or FFWCC; and iii. If the development will be larger than 10 acres, a monitoring program. c. The following references shall be used, as appropriate, to prepare the wildlife habitat management plan: i. South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan,USFWS, 1999. ii. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the • Southeast Region,USFWS, 1987. • iii. Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise. (Gopherus polyphemus)Populations found on Lands Slated for Large Scale development in Florida, Technical Report No. 4, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1987. iv. • Ecology and development-Related Habitat Requirements of the Florida Scrub Jay(Apelocoma coerulescens), Technical Report No. 8, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1991. v. • Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of the Southeastern American Kestrel (Falco Sparverius Paulus) on Large-scale development Sites in Florida,Nongame Technical Report No. 13, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1993. d. The following species specificprovisions shall be included within the wildlife habitat managementplan if the wildlife survey indicates that the • identified species utilizes the site or the site is capable of supporting and is likely to support such species: Gopher tortoise. For parcels containing gopher tortoises (Gopherus polvphemus),priority shall be given to protecting the largest,most contiguous gopher tortoise habitat with the greatest number of active burrows, and for providing a connection to off site adjacent gopher tortoise preserves. ii. Florida scrub jay. Habitat preservation for the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens)shall conform to the guidelines contained in Technical.Report No. 8,Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1991.. A maintenance program shall be established,which shall specify appropriate fire or mechanical protocols to maintain the natural scrub community.A public awareness program to educate residents about the on-site preserve and the need to maintain the scrub vegetation shall be developed. These requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, May 1999. iii. Bald eagle. For the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), the required habitat management plans shall establish protective zones around the eagle nest restricting certain activities. The plans shall also address restricting certain types of activities during the nest season. These requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recover Plan, May 1999. iv. Red-cockaded woodpecker. For the red-cockaded woodpecker (Ipicoides borealis), the required habitat protection plan shall outline measures to avoid adverse impacts to active clusters and to minimize impacts to foraging habitat Where adverse effects cannot be avoided, measures shall be taken to minimize on-site disturbance and compensate or mitigate for impacts that remain. These requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan,May 1999. v. Florida black bear. In areas where the Florida black bear(Ursus americanus floridanus)maybe present,the management plans shall require that garbage be placed in bear-proof containers, at one or more central locations. The management plan shall also identify methods to inform local residents of the concerns related to interaction between black bears and humans. Mitigation for impacting habitat suitable for black bear shall be considered in the management plan. vi. Panther. For projects located in Priority I or Priority II Panther • Habitat areas, the management plan shall discourage the destruction of undisturbed,native habitats that are preferred by the Florida panther(Felis concolor corvi)by directing intensive land uses to currently disturbed areas. Preferred habitats include pine flatwoods and hardwood hammocks. In turn,these areas shall be buffered from the most intense land uses of the project by using low intensity land uses (e.g.,parks,passive recreational areas, golf courses). 4. On property where the wildlife survey establishes that listed species are utilizing the site or where the site is capable of supporting listed species and such listed species can be anticipated to potentially occupy the site, the County shall, consistent with the RLSA Overlay of the GMP, consider and utilize recommendations-and letters of technical assistance from the State of Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and recommendations from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing development orders. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case-by-case basis may change the requirements contained in herein and any such change shall be deemed consistent with this Code. K. Golf course standards. Except as otherwise required by L. or M. below, all golf courses within the RLSA District that are not within an SRA shall be subject to the following requirements: /1 1. Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and managed in accordance with Audubon International's Gold Signature Program. The project shall demonstrate that the Principles for Resource Management required by the Gold Signature Program(Site Specific Assessment, Habitat Sensitivity,Native and Naturalized Plants and Natural Landscaping, Water Conservation, Waste Management. Energy Conservation&Renewable Energy Sources, Transportation, Greenspace and Corridors, Agriculture, and building Design)have been incorporated into the golf course's design and operational procedures. In addition to addressing these requirements, golf courses shall meet the following specific criteria: a. In order to prevent the contamination of soil, surface water and ground water by the materials stored and handled by golf course maintenance operations, golf courses shall comply with the Best Management Practices for Golf Course Maintenance Departments,prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, May 1995. b. To protect ground and surface water quality from fertilizer and pesticide usage, golf courses shall demonstrate the following management practices: i. The use of slow release nitrogen sources: ii. The use of soil ant tissue analysis to adjust timing and amount of fertilization applications; iii. The use of an integrated pest management program using both biological and chemical agents to control various pests; iv. The coordination of pesticide applications with the timing and application of irrigation water; and v. The use of the procedure contained in IFAS Circular 1011, Managing Pesticides for Golf Course Maintenance and Water Quality Protection, May 1991 (revised 1995)to select pesticides that will have a minimum adverse impact on water quality. 2. To ensure water conservation,golf courses shall incorporate the following in their design and operation: a. Irrigation systems shall be designed to use weather station information and moisture-sensing systems to determine the optimum amount of irrigation water needed considering soil moisture and evapotranspiration rates. b. As available, golf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water consistent with Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element Objective 1.4 and its policies; c. Native plants shall be used exclusively except for special purpose areas such as golf greens, fairways, and building sites. Within these excepted areas, landscaping plans shall require that at least 75%of the trees and 50%of the shrubs be freeze-tolerant native Floridian species. At least 75% of the required native trees and shrubs shall also be drought tolerant species. • 3. Stormwater managementponds shall be designed to mimic the functions of natural systems: by establishing shorelines that are sinuous in configuration in order to provide increased length and diversity of the littoral zone. A Littoral shelf shall be established to provide a feeding area for water dependent avian species. The combined length of vertical and rip-rapped walls shall be limited to 25% of the shoreline. Credits to the site preservation area requirements, on an acre-to- acre basis, shall be given for littoral shelves that exceed these littoral shelf area requirements. L. Standards applicable in FSAS, HSAS, and WRAS that are outside of the ACSC.. The provisions of Chapters 3, 4, and 10 in effect as of July 25,_2000, shall apply to FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs that outside of the ACSC,with the following exceptions: 1. Site clearing and alteration shall be limited to 20%of the property and ,.-1 nonpermeable surfaces shall not exceed 50% of any such area. 2. Except for roads and lakes, any nonpermeable surface greater than one acre shall provide for release of surface water run off, collected or uncollected, in a manner approximating the natural surface water flow regime of the surrounding area. 3. Roads shall be designed to allow the passage of surface water flows through the use of equalizer pipes, interceptor spreader systems or performance equivalent structures. 4. Revegetation and landscaping of cleared areas shall be accomplished with predominantly native species and planting of undesirable exotic species shall be prohibited. M. Standards applicable to wetlands outside of FSAS, HSAS, WRAS, and the ACSC. Wetlands located outside of FSAs,HSAs, WRAs, and the ACSC shall be preserved in accord with the following criteria: 1. The vegetative preservation requirement set forth in J.2. above shall first be met through preservation of wetlands having a functionality assessment score of 0.65 or greater. Applicants shall establish the wetland functionality score of wetlands using the South Florida Water Management District's Unified wetland Mitigation Assessment Method, F.A.C. 62-345.Upland vegetative communities may be utilized to meet the vegetative, open space, and site preservation requirements when the wetland functional assessment score of on-site wetlands is less than 0.65. 2. Wetlands utilized by listed species or serving as corridors for the movement of listed species shall be preserved on site. . 3. Wetland flowway functions through the project shall be maintained. 4. Ground water table drawdowns or diversions shall not adversely change the hvdroperiod of preserved wetlands on or offsite and detention and control elevations shall be set to protect surrounding wetlands and be consistent with • surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. In order to meet these requirements,projects shall be designed in accordance with Sections 4.2.2.4.6.11 and 6.12 of SFWMD's Basis of Review, January 2001. 5. All direct impacts shall be mitigated for as required by applicable federal or state agencies and in the same manner as set forth in section 4.06.04 of this Code. 6. Single family residences shall follow the requirements contained within Policy 6.2.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. 7. Appropriate buffering shall be provided to separate preserved wetlands from ,-•+ other land uses. A minimum 50-foot vegetated upland buffer is required adiacent to a natural water body and for other wetlands a minimum 25-foot vegetated 4 • upland buffer adjacent to the wetland. A structural buffer, consisting of a stem- wall, a berm, or a vegetative hedge with suitable fencing,may be used in conjunction with a vegetative buffer that would reduce the vegetative buffer width by 50%. A structural buffer shall be required adjacent to wetlands where direct impacts are allows. Wetland buffers shall conform to the following standards: a. The buffer shall be measured landward from the approved jurisdictional line. b. The buffer zone shall consist of preserved native vegetation. Where native vegetation does not exist, native vegetation compatible with the existing soils and expected hydrologic conditions shall be planted. c. The buffer shall be maintained free of Category I Exotics. d. The following land uses are considered to be compatiblewith wetland functions and are allowed within the buffer: i. Passive recreational areas,boardwalks and recreational shelters: ii. Pervious nature trails: iii. Water management structures: iv. Mitigation areas: v. Any other conservation and related open space activity or use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses. 8. Mitigation Requirements. Mitigation shall be required for direct impacts to wetlands, such that the wetland functional score of the mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland functional score of the impacted wetlands. a. Priority shall be given to mitigation within FSAs and HSAs. b. Loss of storage or conveyance volume resulting from direct impacts to wetlands shall be compensated for by providing an equal amount of storage or conveyance capacity on site and within or adjacent to the impacted wetland. c. Protection shall be provided for preserved or created wetland or upland vegetative communities offered as mitigation by placing a conservation easement over the land in perpetuity,providing for initial exotic plant removal(Class I invasive exotic plants defined by the Florida Exotic Plant Council) and continuip5 exoticplant maintenance, or by appropriate ownership transfer to a state or federal agency along with sufficient - funding for perpetual management activities. 9. Prior to issuance of any final development order that authorizes site alteration, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with paragraphs 8.a. through 8.c. above, as applicable. If state or federal agency permits have not provided mitigation consistent with paragraphs 8 above, the County shall require mitigation exceeding that of the jurisdictional agencies. 10. Wetland preservation, buffer areas, and mitigation areas shall be identified or platted as separate tracts. In the case of a Planned Unit development(PUD), these areas shall also be depicted on the PUD Master Plan. These areas shall be maintained free from trash and debris and from.Category I Exotics. Land uses allowed in these areas shall be limited to those identified in 7.d. above. • ) - - - - .- - - al: _ . ..._... _ _ .., _.. . - •.- -• - -- - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 1 , Stewardship-CT-edits: ' -- - --_ -- ... - _- f .,. . . . , . . 1 11 _ -_ _ . - 111 _ _e-xeeptiens' :3 3 -_ - - - . 1• 1 1 • • - ., -- ., . _ - • • • I • •- - - as set forth in Section 377.12, F.S.,to assure compliance with Chapter 62C 25 through 62C 30,F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All (12), F.A.C. HSAs. D. Standards applicable inside the ACSC. RLSA District lands within the ACSC shall be subject to all ACSC regulatory standards, including those that strictly limit non agieultufal-clearing. . E. Standards applicable outside the ACSC. Except to the extent superceded by G. or of sections 163.3162 (4) and 823.11(6),F.S., and single family residential dwellings,unless or 1. A wildlife survey, as set forth in Chapter 10, shall be required for all parcels 2. A minimum of 40%of the native vegetation on the project site must be retained. •- . ... . _.. .. _ - ... - - - , .. . - �..� 3. . If the wildlife survey indicates that Hated species are utilizing the site, or the site is capable of supporting and is likely to support listed species,a wildlife habitat • ii. Identification of appropriate lighting controls for permitted uses env c. he following references shall be used, as appropriate, to prepare the i. South Florida Multi Species Recovery Plan,USFWS, 1999. S,Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Cen issien, v. Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of the Southeastern Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1993. • • .. _.: , : - • .. -- - _- - - __-- ,. - , -, ii. Florida scrub jay.Habitat preservation for the Florida scrub jay protocols to maintain the natural scrub community. A public . .6 iii. Bald eagle. For the bald oagle(Haliaootus lcuoocophalus),tho - 61" --- -- .. - .- _ - . - ;..•: _. - ► 6 . .. . to minimize impacts to foraging habitat. Where adverse effects - f. . • Y. manageolent-plea.. vi. Panther.For projects located in Priority I or Priority H Panther - ,.- ` _, , _ -_ .. .., , -. ,. ,.., requirements: 1. Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and managed in accordance with • - -- _ .. _-... _ .., _ - - - . _ ., Y._ __ . .• _ _ ,- • • _ -•-- -• - _ .- .. .. . , - . . .. __..• • - , A . • ' . .. _. ., • _.. .. _, .,. . . . _ -_.• . ... - - -- • -- • . .._ - .: - . _ .. .. .. ..., .. h a. In order to prevent tho contamination of soil, surface water and ground ("--r."0.2.°.* i. The use of Glow release nitrogen sources; ii. The use of coil and plant tissue analysis to adjust timing and iii. The use of an integrated pest management program using both Y. - - --. .. _ _ ._ - _ _. , _ .. ,._ ,. ., _ , v. The use of the procedure contained in IFAS Circular 1011, .- .. .. 2. To ensure water conservation, golf courses shall incorporate the following in their design-and-eiseration: b. As available, golf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water c. Native plants shall be used exclusively except for special purpose areas 0 .o species. 3. Stormwater management ponds shall be designed to mimic the functions of Y. 0 • • req ents: G. Standards applicablc.in FSAS, HSJS, and WRAS that arc outsidc of the ACSC. - - • -, - 1°-• - - •- - - -.•. _ - - _ -- - •-. = - _ - -_• •- 2. Except for roads and lakes, any nonpermeable surface greater than one acre shall • stpuetafes. H. Standards applicablc to wetlands outsidc of FSAS, HSAIS, 117R/1S, and the ACSC. 1. The vegetative preservation requirement set forth in B.2. above shall first be met . _ . . . - ;_ • ___.. _, . . . , . . •, ., _ . _ . _,_ . . __ ... _ _ , • /1.2.2.1.6.11 and 6,12 of SFWMD's Basis of Review, January 2001. 6. Single family residences shall follow the requirements-oeitwhin Policy . - - ,. , - _ - . - • , .. - - .. - - - - . -_- .. • _ . . t0 . , stander4s: • ''--Yrr____ .. • ., _ _- ., - ., . - _ . - • - - . -- •.. ,_, - Y-- Y . . . . •-_ c. The buffer shall be maintained free of Category I Exotics. Y . ii. Pervious nature trails; iv. Mitigation areas; v. Any other conservation and related open space activity or use 8. Mitigation Requirements. Mitigation shall be required for direct impacts to a. Priority shall be given to mitigation within FSAs and HSAs. /"'N impactedond: ' e e e • • , - • : :, , . -- -„. ,- . .. _ , . . ., _.,. , :: _ _- - _- - LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Keith Scamehorn, R.A.,AIA, Urban Design Planner DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: to be determined LDC SECTION: 5.05.08.C.1 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: to be determined CHANGE: Adding primary facade features on adjacent facades as described in previous code. REASON: Substantial revision to the Architectural and Site Design Guidelines was adopted in the second cycle of 2004 via Ordinance No. 2004-72. The provision noted below is part of the original language adopted as part of the original ordinance adopted in 1996, which established the Architectural and Site Design Guidelines. It was intended to carry over this requirement in the amendments adopted via Ordinance No. 2004-72, except that it was inadvertently omitted. FISCAL &OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on February 5, 2005. • Amend the LDC as follows: 5.05.08.C.1. Building Facades. All facades of a building must be designed with consistent architectural style, detail and trim features. Facades attached to a primary facade shall incorporate features of the primary facade for a minimum of 33 percent of the overall wall length measured from the attached primary facade. rlik) LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental services AUTHOR: Mike Bosi, AICP DEPARTMENT: Zoning&Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC5:91 LDC SECTION: 5.05.09 G. LDC SUPPLEMENT #: Original LDC Recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Add lighting require to include existing telecommunications towers over 150 feet for the protection of Collier Mosquito Control pilots and general public. REASON: Collier Mosquito Control pilot and general public safety FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 14, 2004 a 4.20 p.m. • Amend the LDC as follows: 5.05.09 Communication Towers * ' * * * * * * * * * * * * G. Development standards for communication towers. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 23. All existing and proposed ground mounted and rooftop towers and antennas with a height greater than 150 feet shall be required to have a solid red beacon • or dual mode lights unless exempted in writing by the Collier Mosquito r.. Control District. Such lights shall meet the then existing Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) technical standards: The total structure height shall include all appendages and attachments, such as antennas, lights, lightening ?TAOISM'. fI�NI� ISI t' I �MSC leu�G l l 4 rti �U I I l i rods 9 91i :.' 61 :,'+ :� N e;1. �� �iI da; .t�L' �:� �,,���: � `E All existing towers shall have six months (180 days) from Ritvett a K �� ir d ' dant' to comply with the requirement. If the FAA rules require lighting, then the applicant shall comply with such rules. 24. A copy of each application for a tower in excess of 150 feet shall be supplied by the applicant to the Collier Mosquito Control District tifwen � ti y .. • • LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and.Environmental Services • AUTHOR: Thomas E.Kuck,P.E.,John R. Houldsworth, Senior Engineer DEPARTMENT: Engineering Services AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC SECTION: 6.06.01 (0) LDC SUPPLEMENT#: CHANGE: Allow for the County Engineer / Engineering Services Director to approve alternate cross-sections for private rights-of-way for projects which have not submitted a Preliminary Subdivision Plat(PSP). REASON: The Code allows for private roadway cross sections to be determined on a case- '^\ by-case basis through the PSP process. The PSP process is now optional. If a PSP is submitted solely for a revised cross-section, the County Engineer determines if the section is acceptable. This revision would eliminate the submittal of a PSP solely for a revised right-of-way cross- section. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None • RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on October 4, 2004 at 12:31 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 6.06.01 (0) The minimum right-of-way widths to be utilized shall be as follows and, where applicable, shall be classified by the cross-sections contained in Appendix B, and will be directly related to traffic volume as indicated in the definition of each street sem contained herein and, where rL9 applicable, clarified by the cross-sections contained in Appendix B. ckPrivate street right-of- way widths and design may be determined on a case-by-case basis in accordance with Chapter 10. In the event that the applicant does not apply for a preliminary subdivision plat, the applicants engineer may request that the County Manager or his designee approve an alternate private right-of-way cross-section. The request shall be in writing and accompanied with documentation and justification for the alternate section based on sound engineering_principals • and practices. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/David Weeks DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review/Comprehensive Planning. AMENDMENT CYCLE#OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDCE:1 -LDCE:24 LDC SECTION: Appendix E LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Deleting the Access Management Plan Maps and accompanying Legend. REASON: Ordinance 02-03 attempted to effectuate the current change by deleting references in old LDC 2.6.38.3. to the Access Management Plan Maps, but did not delete the maps themselves. Transportation staff did not want pre-determined access features identified, given the unknowns about the activity centers - what the undeveloped properties' land use would be, how existing land uses might change, how traffic patterns/volumes might change, and other factors considered when determining ingress/egress locations and type and any associated median • openings.. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 9, 2004 at 2:55 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: - --- - - • MAPS: -- . . .. , ... _ . , _ , . : :. _. _ :_ . : :. _ __ _ : . . .,.. • - -z -:.• _ ... • n • n .. _ - ---.. ._:_. ._ _ . _ . : • • _ ce:i ' roadway. a No dircct acccss to (narnc of road) Indicate° a parcel cannot obtain aeoeaa - . - . : , - . , . .. .- _• _. . . ..... _. _ . . . - ..., m: _ me -- - -• -- _. . .. . _ _.... _- - =- .. ._ .. - aasa r a ss1 I 4IP4 I I I tr IM M — n 1 • • . • 1 1 .. , I 1 t ' N111 1 1 1 t I u t M . 1 l . . . I .aw I . , �,. ' i� . I - 1..0 ____........_____A,! tris - .. V „Pt I" I I i1 I i 1 1 x , 1 1 i • u 1 i t Vii ' / ; ' .i . i 1 I , • us ri1 • , i I . !. • ; , r 111111 - . . • 1I . • . ' . i Or 1 1i i ' itrilliMINIMMIll' ' I . 1 • 11..1% I : " . - • ).......... ....I!......... ,.....1 ..i ,.... , ., 1 t il I `` ' L . } I �. 1/ •' e I f ..•••••••••, I. X i A 1 • ! . . • r i I 1 ', I ._ ; q 1 "' rr i 1 � ; 1 i . . , t II ,. • . ! .... i • • • ;a ■I � '' 1 .. .. ' f( : , •. imi6L F 11, ACC MA NAMOMINT "�Ir. r..N�i' PLAN ) 'i74 '' , AVIV fTY CHHfi6A 1 ' . i--- INfi�X MAP i ►II ,g'.." j • • • r • Mk �� iApt N r1 P l'i 1 lit"Ilik llit MWaji.r4.7 .rnnww.IM iail h.wy.dM114 • - .I•%, I e VI 4 I 4 ul 1 I a n t 1 41 1 1 ! N' i I i I t. I ... , , i,t 1111 i 4 ggi ibiIIII 4i iii iiiiii fili IiiillIfills .; g g 1 . ..... 110,40.L.104:I to. d , ! p-IIII M Will riti k � (• I [• I �... lg. e^V"''jiD•!�"'''• fir.• ._ . �� t Imo:". tl • _ • I •is3t II • ;r' It• s -+ . — /� Air_ ��1. _.n..... • _ fes: ,.. <:.: ii 1•• ... • .• 4, i/NI a I _,+1 ; j 1` 'a'477.�') • X41 i Hill04,4 !i .: r'':' ''••.,:4 • I ,' i r- •S. 'r' 1 it ' .. 41P altillifi • ....Hi: • �' ' t 1 ' iii . " ..".. .C' __ .41. 1 1 1I , gI. w 3 i 11 . gi . 1c tx 11l If 64 . . i il1111 i Si 1111111 ilk / 1111UP ! -- • i II 01...•.....z 1 I I • 4., ••• i, 1 on igui g::I i • 41 t III I$i FII ( to I 4 / 4 AI�' � I IIP 4...- •1. 1 L ,+ i 4 I I S 1 :$ EI • Ir., .... k • . ,. „ •.. tl . . If ''1.-0.u. snw.:l t' 'Of..• 1.. ° o . II 1= . - _ t �. _ �' -- i 1 w f I 1 1 I -d ;▪ 11 11 1ff iii 111II ;,1 �• ° SII / IIIliii1411 ! ill / 1 � • y I r. I • • : •�:..':" . I ,,':........'..:`:;,..4.`,11: r•� Y • 1 • -W j�byp� •r yrRw. r t�q�r►AM al 1 1 { a '\ ` - 1 \ w I 1 111Inifilii i 011 zti, ii I11Iff ! 1 """• M AMAIN P.m Wowl _--,-r- I, ••M•N•, I 11 "1 W W g‘O . ( ' 111 I • I .. W i I1 i j jI fil ale ' lini II WNW 1 . 11_____,_ 4 ,: II 11 1 I P pi t i1 j 1 i I a • � A I L i r:i I ! ;or. 1 ! 114 1 I r i 1 2 mil Liv iti wM l I I 4 r - 1 J TM9el1 : a S ,, EY 1y. i 41411414/1 .: Jill! 111Arliirielli: IP ' . 4/1•' 1 ric it.. '..;i" .1_74 ;,:-.......1.4., I . ..... ...--:;=-7, , .A.7.„...44, ., 7. Is 1 .• ' . r i'S •ft,.. ti . 011 YIP 4* 'I"43 •1...4.1. iI It jun.:1:4. 4 .: , p:;.,: :. , R g #11111111.-,r 4 la --.,f i �• t r J,Y. ti• (x i 1.hti. rl; ... r ... • A., F ill It 11 1 5 . Lf11 l 1 ' glig . lilt. g . II ' 1i h ` IIiiiiI1 !jLiiuiIItiQ . • !! , -1 i . ' li 0 1.........: • • i . .... 1 1 onsum::1:' --,: , ., • . ,. '•' • . IIS • ,_ ✓1,�„ ; 1 i. {iii.;�+:LY;••LILIIII";; . S '1 4, . I . . ori • w.M�.wwrL ..i •; r.. M 11 Iw.MH.,. Mme- / \ spow -. �� . • / ' ,1 I" r: I •••••••'''. • :. '...:11:j•ji.411:, i 1 It / . . • .$14 r /ko'"<."1::,,4:':''.''''.:il 1 lir . \ili: ' ..., • ...:,.. . .. • . p I ' :....,..... ......7. P ..1. • •'On ..M =bomb L .M —. ''''..t. L . SM./ .fir. f 41.114141.11419 '---.1 2 1 7 0 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 - 1 I 1 :IJ . . ........411E- iiI 1 1 1 i 0 I-44-: " I • — i I me";I:I ll I i r.1. ..M i E I 1 • 1 I - t P"'" w.,r.�r.4 r« ! a • . .....www !ii r • M} L -at................] - 10 . 1, i"'-"" 4 4 1 II rt+ 'bi . I 11 4 1 • I 10 vtH--n—r[------7—TicTi 1 8 41 N ' 1 1 # I IiIbt I . 1 I $ . I . k 4 , i , I V 1 ; 41111 VIII 1 1 III ; i 61 . I 1 ill Nil / IIIC , 'a""hF it • w .lrn w i w..w 1 4 1 I t I , 44114, till" , i1 • I M �i I ' j • .li.e t pulp' 1 1i ,41I f I 1 Ei , pAa V'F ^.+�� n.��1♦M + .� rMN 11 , 1 }M•YbY NINn._ .1=- ara 4r: 'L 4..--- ,i�+. ttr ,ay ` wMr. •0 i ♦ �r.yuw ri i 11 if 1 1 Ill . . 1 I#1 1 I F111il1111111111111111811J---x'' ' --i!-" flJi ii .. i , 0 . , I411 . I t 1 ; - 331_,UL - f° . j .!ij ,// 1 . 4<<1) rf , 1111 II la LI,11. 14s Mli 1 ! 1 ---...,.. a kW it - -- ,. .-L- ' AIM 2i r I MIN ,, rri��� q M iWEE .--. . 1-7— - • 011-: .i _ Nil - . iiiiiiitilt- 1 lir f 11 I if iiiiiiii. , Ili • fh' 1 ......2,00...11.....7 . a 11 J roam-x%, . 112 MIII ,_ ..- I . o , ilirlr 1 .14 . i ______ 1 , , f 44, ,1 .... , ... ,, _.=_,-- , . ,!, •V"), • - . - ii — 40,0, • t" lr <y EINIrl . w ir t Ter ... NM . i =I 1 . I i . . r i WPM= 1 l1 M . n --. —z 11 el ii$IilfI 1 1 it l : 1 1 ; IWi1 li ll � F,/I ; i ( 1iiint1 ;4 iIIiI .I ,,,1 , 110 I x I iii)... .. i* I . . .. gi0°e•kiiii 1, 1 , ;. .# r I I i I 11 b 401 1 1 Ict � , r 1I. 7 r ', , il II ,: II ming � /..NNM I:Z . LJ ( .• � _ 4 ' tit owl.. Ii 1111._ I ,.��_ . —........` ' . � / ilk ! P • s i � ; if ' f I hiIItfUhikid 1111111 . 1' 11 . _ '-' 111111 ll ' i ' v91111111 I• 11 0 i..".12 ... 1 II r' .. g 1 M®®: :I i , 111111111111FXSAIIIMIWI Iiirallgrip., ,-- ' ' ' .1=1" is ilial wow il: , . •� �r�. 111411r.q.• ^��f , .ter •.i �, . rA 'f'' / :1 Pi ■ mini Sr.r ■a •..4 4kge."'...4:i'''"it"44i0: .1!3 I.' Int=1111 sinE112 . . :11; ...,,,' '1;7 ril 'IN/ 7,1111..4T4V.WVal:.4 fr !,.. .....4...-....:...1., ,,...5.-441-7., ,. . . • 1 4 'Viral r r g lal l . img . ..ilic • ..•' ••^;:...4.47:; .. . . FT, . -ii'' iv, . . . . . 1... . . - . .. . :• 4 ‘,..,.....„,... .•- L,. Ukvill • l1-1 ` .. a..''1: •-• 'Y ' \04!,'.41/'11-'1•10. ' "r•''Al*'$ ' 1]: sill_ LIr! 1 R . 1 • ., !•.•-,4ci'n 21, -pigii • 1 . • • 112 • • j•;III ��':::7 rr--;"''',',7 ry14 Ill, • ii= AN iN - pwr�9lYW �ITAIIR dg _ • 1 . • . 0 . • •••11MOMIIMalliMil•••111 11,01T.... 1 1 - .........101110.4.. .1.11........ ..-11 Bi a. a d i PI i 11 1 /.. t4i. g i I Z i 1 1 .. Ii " gg i i 1 . 1 Ng i i 111111111111h 'il 1 iiil filit lie 3 14 i I 411 I i . .1 5I L, 11303.........21 1 1 . .. 4 II I DNA OR 14:1 .........••••••••••••••,, .. .• .1.1%.1..a, 4.-44 lito .j:i• ,, .,— . it•-f.t" •••••••,•;(1 • . • .. . •r•it a %a .. . e ; •,' .1.1 4 4 4 %. i• II l'UN., ' . •jj I:.. • ••i t•i11:1•• ti 1 ,, • ..• . 1 .'.kto r.•A... .- i DM •.. I • 7-- . '•••..A.n; • • %A. ....' ,./•. .4'•.•."4". '4 '• .. .• ..24..')!...A.'ri • •44 . •••.44: . ' ......1 J li i • ...1•;4- .rt"•••"""•••,. ., g. • 1 ' ' . • '.. 1...n. 16.4 i ' .. 4.... 1 1 C..%••• E. 5" •... .4rr.:.; %.•;••:*••• 41111P 1 1 •..• '• "r a •• ". t li . N.. a 1 fr..•, . " • , • "'s c.. r• ft I ' .....„ . .....4 .• —. I fit*. .... 1 .v '• • • Os.' II... ."...* ; II, k:slif ' . %.':1„.7.1 • i , _ • I, ' , ,, ..: I,.. /•-- ..... ....: IIMMEM.111 MiriliMICIIIIIIIMMIIIMIPIK igen ' 4•1';-•su-'-,;• a ;•.—mr.9.tvi-.1- --.•47-- -.1 , . I -:. : I 1 iii:..tt .I.s h:r::•••:::ti , . ; NA 1 . . 711 li --''.111 ' .1 '• 1 , •I • . . LI:.„..:. . a•L ma.mmmoom ' •••• , MA..;:‘....... ;1/..•••'.I; 1 ;4..' --•f. •I' f: • • ;15; •1 r • *:.r•j;..e 4 nif <,..1,,,,,,,, ,,•7.1 1 -' 1 I 7/ . ".__-acd... ... 1:44' ..,,. eq. igar. 4,t • ,0 .i• .Vic vij:.• ..: 1.• •• ,.1;d •• a A ....,..'0'. ', ...)'4 '''+'' ? . . ." • ' " 3 • • - • -• ' ' -• .4. ;41mIte•11:et:r*Ars e .... • 1 .1,-.. . .: ::- ..4-.I rye '' '4 '44.... . . 1 –• .. . '. 1. ivti •;, , •• ,.. ' •)"$* s.:: . ,..:. ...... ,• .. „..,3,. .. 011 i..-.• .t.,.. La. /'.... .. 4 ?• L ' %.t../gt.21L F i I. .......•E..... • h '' .. I I. s I • ' . • f i . _ i••• . . .. . ............... ri____..........Ti • - I aik I 1-444 2 ; 3 /--.* \IQT4'1) I . . 10. 1 iill • 1iii Ci h1flhI1 !I ! ui1iIiHJL • illa .. :ii, 1103,..,y....z . . 1 4, 9. .ir q 1 tango:: NI . • 1 _ N ll -_ _ ■tom L .....""No............-.—.....'f a • \I . . 1:1 . i I 11.1 1 \ $ - '. 11 "4" """iliji : IP r --�r�-� a t.n.,,, ,CAtT -M1i S11nAMT�?..1Z rin:MlAILIbiT.YC1GriCDE w 1 II r } qii") .emong.ifflusiLlo- i I IP w if lit .1 11 IIIII IliIii , iii 1 , 11111 iti: J. . , ilif . . 1 . • lisilifulig ; lifilliwit - ii . . . t r?nt.........zi I 1 . .. ., 1 ii.....1:if t si&,..,pla,. 1. e II:tt liii ' r .4.1 Boil wi• • r�....0111 0.11 tib*llltl win #tlafiallW 1 1."0. Sr.; S ,. tw♦ 110 1+1fM ## III 1`.'01 ■ 1p elf Sv' , 10.1.4 r*00 t milli * 11��Illill .2; i i silk#'0,0 ' , +f'''APO 1,-xw0�`�a al ` * '{ 1100 t* i * Mr4•i1i� 11ili� r { r r� sr w = iv . . y �, ? ,� ��.4� **.. ��# 11,\-44t ►s�05. Cl' =g = • ## i * + 4.,.• 0°)i „I.N.,k 141 A �* � 'i S He III r J Iw = te. iw .:i fl I V.r,`. ■ II*, ,!, 4 r.. a+ - M ii .p. - �,�`y} ,it ;Mr�1 1.1 01' 411 1111/11.,.., , +j'� os %nu. 4501,iinsi -w is• . ,..,"_,..i". -'i,,I./.;,.Sfrii...r4-\\40,41.so,s,\, ow ■I.iiirdInar rr gmlipiRillille la JIM 1 !+. . '1 ti* iv-. ,40:14:0\o‘f:A oNA411:4 Ii"1111111111/111,1q11111111 - Iii 4 40} *N., # 4, r- t ii 111 ;7111 liKikiimo � ��A,' + •± .�� r ,*'� �r+rrw �� 7 f +� J► + '1111 AI XII ■111111111 ` s.', ,,,. #,f, nit- r 111111III en s 11 . 4** +.4 * 1 . e.0 1111111 : is. In r 40IO'', L/8,4 t, i � ' #44dill ii -.W . '" - MOS ,0 . ,. i ##40 •#,.- 111 04 .Li:lb • 1•Tnid all r /4 rdik 111,4 411i . .. I I."! ad .-...., .... 1 10, " # #44 4IP W. 4" i� 'm „;W,,..,rc..�, I . E ..„ 1 311 111 11 . . i, ilk _. � 11111111114i1111111111 ! , iii ....i.. I . - - i Igo®®: :I a I 1 rB AIIMIL MAW . .1” NNW • i tp-.. i t••mss�f v' '4, ,,,r ,....y. •S• 13 • ..:! 4:0.4.0 •; t' • P'....44 ms's �� �S '�►� .. { •., " / I IW .� • I tCCCt,. r :.. • a f i/ !":hP •re' 4, 'ti,f ' i :3 4 I 1 -.... '' ,./ ;.-k----;11.- „ 4 i � }h�l�ii . aaIUMMC WIN I -r1 ", ►L. 11111111 i N i , El . ' ; 3.V .J�'" 1111limn It . icci ; r NI lNEIIi1I:'' tt t MI11111hIU11I1i ..a '. EN -nr!41:..i J s10, , ak,A,A4-1 0• I . •1 V. 11;1,1.111 1 1 1111111 1 14111 111 "�,� ' ; • . 111 - «•.....•.•.•I. Y.II .....V.. �.... 1 S i,it wail _ WV I n 4.1 b II / 1! Ii • i i Illi i llliIb . . 1 . ii ii lis ii o ill:r .11 1 If II01«..,.. 1 1 1 . .. .. i �win1'� 444 in in .1 l 1441111, t Aidilik V"-- J ,N ItilliriaTI illrip -."11111111 ,,,, •' ":.. ,eth.NsItiFir IIV , ,4 • iifi a : i ' . , ! . > rit'AtilTli°1 11;1 1. i.- *3:f . - t ' s-,.,,' '!'''' - if'. , • 4 44.1.40 pi I . at /1,a" ages . El*t., , .. . 0 E Sill 1111V‘' \ ' y $ • • I l liply ,.., 1 ,-k N\I - A - it- ) i . Iii • . 1 'i / • . , , 0:400110, :44‘ •# i ' <41jff 111 .. ; k.. il&& I \il Air !r:Pima / . "ate . • • • • • I • 1 g ' . ..* . ir; I i .1 ill . 0 ' rAh J' t ! • hi i1 iJ ! ttttnJ �• gi biol..: t t 1 . .. . liciamil :li , , .4S 111114 • . si ,1111�, MO ' i : . . T r;' $ t; i 1 ' . 1 r fi° ; , ri dif ► ' � .` rt • s_ I , i . AA 1 . • • IMINNIMI i 'el — 1 IC" i i I IE • II II It 1. 111 1 • 1 ......E.,31,........... ....z . „ I ... ... I 1.........2.,....,..M 1 • 1..., , • i . ��r■ il HEaRalcrirmiaria ill -4.1,i1:: i 4, Ati".. Imo i . 1.1 .004. \ • .,..., 0 4:10111 ,., — . i I ilk . .::,::;:`,:_,18,4 Ai,'a' ,piv.":' . s .14,011 44,, . V 1512, ,:\:''',' 7 do . . I'll"- ' ,,,:0111.. -. - /do#A '4.14,,WO,'.\ . ...<4r 10 es:,A \ 1 . . . ' ' ' WO ' • * iiir . :. -:t-- .' . ..+� ilY^lii _• r� is 1y' . k . . gli • , ., P.,\,.,.. _ 0 i . . W'. . , _. . ';-. 2: - '1.-,-'44':}:4 'iip w. PI , II* „ A• . ,,,,,.,:.. .1, . • 1 \ lr• 4 E.1 7it . I i Alfa' notruirani M 1 • • 163 . • 4511111111111111=0, . • 1. juill a ! !Al!! Iii gig • i 5i i :• mi . 1111111111111 ; 11111111111 . ..i 111111 # 111 ; 1 i . til li0l".......z , • i . .. .1 gIlain O • i =0: i . I ..-.. ' "' ''. --,1 a o ir . • i• .„,„,,.4.. ,... .e ...,...,4t..,,..-. . ... . ...„... .. .. • :•A.?%v• Mill Mil:'.'"•• 3'7N • . nom,:i '9 .tea" ••! ' + ler I .Lr Q�f• lag . t. i 1 8i9• �. ,. . � SSM M:.. ' s: i 3 �t. tk. 2 '. t _"'tRfm• {ice .ti • 'ffitAkil! 0. • !# ilk � � { i. MM • • 1$11i n� • • '. in r•NYo1N IM "Z •2.1 reil � i ; / � lila? 1uILIL !Iq ii 11 3 . 111111 11 T " 1111111111 'i V8 IiiO3«...pa I 1 1 . -- 1 IsmonwilWi ii ' Li," ".14,0 M S :4 it i'f_..1lk ice` 'M..L\#d PI' - ,,��V. 0. •1 T. '11%1111444 a C 3 111.3111 1/0111W d l 3. 11 10!;41, t �►itiOrAN gni • t 17111N;Al ..1 'Ai :47 i ...-• . yA‘ ..-. 11410)bir ir,„,. ,........A.., tit" • � �0 ,)., s .pvcia., ...il � , %..;„. IM u A•tim , :11111:11F. r :91)-ibio, ,--. . r. ,......,„ ,, . ;•Apit: 1 -. ,;intma t,i ' ' Atipilkv- 0 ; M POI .47111 *4$4. . i 'et* „ 444 if e * ri • 4r,„-Apittr,i. #.• 14i1140 P ' qiiii” ic . gir44, 4 '1 I Fqf)1,?4, Q itiAti, .4, . 14?;%/1 4.• . 4, o t7, i►f,gir # .�ii 1�113im & kti iktgl t • '`# . -will , 'lir-- it i4 N ilia F LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services AUTHOR: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E., John R. Houldsworth DEPARTMENT: Engineering Review Services AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: LDC PAGE: LDC 10:59 LDC/UDC SECTION: 10.02.02 Submittal Requirements for Plats LDC SUPPLEMENT#: CHANGE: Exempt Golden Gate Estates Lots from having to front on a public or private right-of-way. Allowing Golden Gate Estates Lots to front on easements REASON: Golden Gate Estates was subdivided into Tracts which have access and frontage on easements, not rights-of-way. This amendment would recognize the existing conditions and allow future divisions of the platted Tracts to front on easements. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: 10.02.02. 1I.d, which currently allows for the subdivision of a 5 acre Tract to utilize an easement as access and frontage. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: Amend the LDC as follows: 10.02.02 B.11.d ii d. Rights-of-way and easements. All right-of-way and easement widths and dimensions shall be shown on the plat. All lots, with the exception of replatted Tracts in Golden Gate Estates. must have frontage on a public or private right-of-way in conformance with the design requirements of this section. Re-subdivisions in Golden Gate Estates may utilize an access easement to satisfy access and frontage requirements. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services AUTHOR: Thomas E. Kuck,P.E.,John R. Houldsworth DEPARTMENT: Engineering Review Services AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: LDC PAGE: 10.52 • LDC/UDC SECTION: 10.02.04 Submission Requirements LDC SUPPLEMENT#: CHANGE: Add reference to include Site Development Plans • REASON: To allow conditional approval of certain aspects of a site development plan prior.to final approval by staff FISCAL:& OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: There are no fiscal or operational impacts RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: There is no growth management impact OTHER R NOTES/VERSION DATE: • Amend the UDC (LDC] as follows: Section 10.02.04 (4f) Approval of improvement plans, site development plans, and final subdivision plat required prior to development. Anything contained elsewhere in this Code to the contrary notwithstanding, no development shall be allowed pursuant to a preliminary subdivision plat prior to the approval of improvement plans and final subdivision plat submitted for the same or portion thereof. Authorization to commence any development prior to the completion of the provisions set forth herein in sections 10.02.05 E.,10.02.04 B.3., and 10.02.03 (4) shall be the subject of a preliminary work authorization as set forth herein. A preliminary work authorization whose form and legal sufficiency shall be approved by the county attorney shall be submitted in the form established by the county attorney and shall be a legally binding agreement between the applicant and the county. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Barbara Burgeson,Principal Environmental Specialist DEPARTMENT: Environmental Services Department AMENDMENT CYCLE#OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC 10:103 LDC SECTION: 10.02.06 H 2—Coastal Construction Setback Line permits LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Clarification of the protection required for coastal native vegetation. REASON: County staff gets requests for native vegetation removal on the shoreline and even though it is clear that these areas must be provided extra protection, we are sometimes asked to provide citations for the prohibition of manicuring these areas. FISCAL& OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Section 3.03.06 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 7, 2004 Amend the LDC as follows: (10.02.06 H 2 Coastal Construction Setback Line permits) H. Coastal Construction Setback Line Permits. The following activities seaward of the coastal construction setback line shall not require a hearing by the board of county commissioners,but shall require a coastal construction setback line permit. Such permit shall be reviewed and approved administratively by site development review environmental staff. The appropriate fee as set by county resolution shall be submitted with permit application. 1. Construction or replacement of a dune walkover when a Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)permit has been obtained and the following • criteria have been met. a. A maximum width of six feet. b. A minimum separation of 200 feet between walkovers when two or more walkovers are proposed on a single parcel. 2. Creation,restoration,re-vegetation or repair of the dune or other natural area seaward of the CCSL on an individual parcel of land,when a Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)permit has been obtained and the following criteria have been met. a. Sand used must be compatible in color and grain size to existing sand subject to FDEP requirements. b. Plants utilized shall be 100 percent native coastal species. c. Restoration plans shall be designed by an individual with expertise in the area of environmental sciences,natural resource management or landscape architecture. Academic credentials shall be a bachelors or higher degree. Professional experience may be substituted for academic credentials on a year for year basis,provided at least two years professional experience are in the State of Florida. d. Native vegetation on shorelines, either naturally existing or planted in coastal dunes or strands or seaward of the CCSL, shall not be trimmed or altered in any way and shall not be maintained as landscaping. This shall be a requirement of all Coastal Construction Setback Line permits issued for dune creation, enhancement or. re-vegetation(10.02.06 H 2). Exceptions made be allowed when it is necessary for safety reasons to trim along walkways or adjacent to buildings. • e. Temporary irrigation may be utilized only until newly planted vegetation can be established. - • ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion,Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle.1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC10:109 LDC/UDC SECTION: UDC 10.02.06 J. LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Revise "Cultivated Tree Removal Permit"language to add tree protection language and to reference the newly created "Cultivated Tree Protection and Tree Replacement Fund"language. REASON: , To cross reference the newly created"Cultivated Tree Protection and Tree Replacement Fund" language and to create language that will protect trees. Unlike most other counties, trees in Collier County currently are not protected. FISCAL& OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. • RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Newly created LDC 4.06.05 "Cultivated Tree Protection and Tree Replacement Fund" and LDC 3.05.00 "Vegetation Removal Permit". GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. OTHER NOTES: This version created 12/31/04 at 3:50 P.M. • Amend the UDC [LDC] as follows: 10.02.06 J. [Sec. 2.4.8.] Cultivated Tree Removal Permit. 1. Cultivated Tree Removal Permit. Cultivated Tree Removal Permits are required for the removal or relocation of any tree or palm that has been installed by man and is not part of a preserve. Moving a tree from one location to another shall not be considered removal; however, a permit shall be obtained. A maximum of Permit. When more than 10 trees shown on an approved code minimum landscape plan are removed, an Insubstantial Change shall be submitted. However, prohibited exotic tree removals are exempt from this requirement, except when they have been used to meet minimum code landscaping standards. Naturally occurring landscapes shall require a Vegetation Removal Permit; refer to section 10.02.06 C. In no instance shall a site fall below the current minimum landscape code standard. 2. Applicability. The provisions of this section are applicable to all development except for single family home sites. However, such homes must maintain the minimum landscape code required trees per section 4.06.05 [2.4.6.]. An owner, or an agent of the owner may apply for a permit. If the applicant is an agent of the owner, a letter from the property owner indicating that the owner has no objection to the proposed tree removal shall be submitted with the application. 3. Criteria for removal of cultivated landscaping. The Landscape Architect Planner may approve an application for vegetation removal based on the following criteria: (a) A tree cannot be maintained by proper canopy, root pruning or root barriers and has become a safety hazard to pedestrian or vehicular traffic, utilities, or to an existing structure. (b) A tree is growing too close in proximity to another tree(s) to permit normal growth and development of the affected tree(s). (c) Other public health and safety circumstances as determined by the county landscape architect. 4. Application requirements. An application for Cultivated Tree Removal Permit shall be completed and submitted to the Zoning and Land Development Department. The application shall include the following: (a) Proof of ownership such as a warranty,deed or tax statement. (b) A site plan depicting the location of proposed trees to be removed, proposed replacement or relocated trees, buildings, paved areas, structures and utilities. The Zoning and Land.Development Review Department may require that said plans be prepared by a Landscape Architect registered in the State of Florida when the tree removal exceeds 10 trees. If the site plan does not provide sufficient information to determine which trees will be affected by the proposed tree removals, the Department may require that a tree survey of the site be prepared and submitted to the Department for review. (c) A letter of approval of the tree removal from the Homeowner and or Master Association if applicable. (d) Addressing Check List. 5. Permit conditions. The Landscape Architect Planner shall issue a Cultivated Tree Removal Permit when the applicant for such permit has agreed to fulfill one (1) of the following conditions: (a) That the tree, if transplanted, will be moved, established and maintained using proper arboricultural and horticultural practices and as outlined in Chapter section 4.06.05 of the Code [Division 2.4.]. (b) That the tree(s), if destroyed, be substituted with an equivalent replacement or replacements, approved by the county Landscape Architect Planner, planted on the site from which the destroyed tree(s) were removed. Sufficient space shall remain on the site allowing replacements to establish a mature canopy spread,based on usual growth characteristics. (c) That the tree, if it cannot be replaced on site, shall be replaced by the applicant by providing the equivalent tree monetary value to the County's Tree Replacement Fund. • • CI .)# • • LDC Amendment Request • ORIGIN: Transportation Services Division AUTHOR: Nick Casalanguida/Alan Elurfali DEPARTMENT: Transportation Planning AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: 10:136 and 10:137 • LDC SECTION: 10.02.13.F LDC SUPPLEMENT#: CHANGE: Modifying the reporting procedures to be more specific about build out status and adding the option of payment in lieu for the annual traffic counts to allow for major roadway network monitoring by County staff. REASON: The current monitoring reports do not provide accurate build out information. The annual traffic counts only provide a three day snapshot of driveway volumes and are not cost effective for the PUD or the County FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None • OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was.created February 2, 2005 at 4:00 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: ' 10.02.13 F. Monitoring requirements. In order to ensure and verify that approved project densities or intensities of land will not be exceeded and that development commitments will be fulfilled and are consistent with the approved transportation impact study, annual monitoring reports must be submitted by the owner(s) of a PUD to the County Manager or his designee. The monitoring report must be prepared in a County approved format to include an affidavit executed by the property owner(s) attesting that the information contained in the monitoring report is factually correct and complete, submitted annually, on each ersary of the date said PUD was approved • by the board until the PUD is completely constructed and all commitments in the PUD document/master plan are met (built out). The monitoring report must provide the following information: 1. Name of project. 2. Nameof owner. 3. Number of units, by residential type;.square footage and acreage of recreation facilities, commercial and other permitted uses; and provide information regarding the build out status, infrastructure and/or other uses which are complete and approved or for which a valid permit has been issued, but which have not been completed and any on-site or off-site commitments completed and approved as of the due date of the monitoring report. The build out status information shall be submitted on a spreadsheet and in an electronic format as determined appropriate by the County. This report shall be comprised of the following information: 1. Each parcel shall be identified with its specific assigned county parcel • identification number. 2. Structures located on parcels developed with residential,uses shall be identified as such and the total number of units on each parcel shall be identified and labeled according to its use, either as single family residential, or multi-family residential. 3. Structures located on parcels developed with non-residential uses shall be identified as commercial, industrial, recreational, etc. and the total square footage of the building area by use shall be identified. 4. . For every developed parcel, wherein a certificate of occupancy has been issued, the building's certificate of occupancy number and the issuedate shall be provided as part of this report. 4. Up-to-date PUD master plan, showing infrastructure, projects/developments, plats, parcels and other pertinent information, including on-site or off-site commitments. 5. Traffic counts for all access points to the adjacent roadway network signed and sealed by a professional engineer in the following format. • The counts shall be performed over a 72-hour weekday period to include 15 minute intervals and turning movements. • At the sole discretion of the County Manager, or designee, the developer may make a payment in lieu of the amount equal to the cost to conduct the required traffic count. The funds received will be used by the county to monitor traffic on the major roadway network used by the development. • 6. ' Copies of all required monitoring reports completed in past year (i.e., traffic, wellfield, etc.). 7. Up-to-date PUD document which includes all approved amendments as of the date of the monitoring report. 8. Status of commitments in PUD document, including projected completion dates if then established. 9. Other information as may be required by County Manager or his designee. 10.Affidavit form drafted and supplied by Collier County to be executed by the owner(s) of the PUD. Change of ownership. A change in ownership shall not absolve the original owner of the requirement to file an annual monitoring report. Transferring responsibility for filing the annual monitoring report to an entity other than the original owner may be demonstrated in the form of an executed agreement between the original owner and the new entity which when filed with the planning services department director shall automatically transfer responsibility for filing the annual monitoring report. G. Violations. Violation of this section shall be enforced as provided in section 8.08.00. H. Interpretations of PUD documents. The planning services director shall be authorized to interpret the PUD document and PUD master plan. I. Applicability. All applications for either a PUD rezoning or an amendment to an existing PUD document or PUD master plan submitted after January. 8, 2003, shall comply with the amended procedures set forth in section 2:02.12 of this Code. All PUDs existing and future, shall comply with the sunset provisions established pursuant . to section 2.02.12 D. of this Code. 1. All applications for a PUD rezoning or an amendment to an existing PUD • document or PUD master plan whether submitted before or after [the effective date of this ordinance], shall comply with the processing time procedures set forth in this section of the Code. S LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Ray Bellows, Chief Planner DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC10:140 LDC/UDC SECTION: 10.03.05 B.8. LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Eliminate the first of two required notices to be mailed by the Planning Services Department (now the Department of Zoning & Land Development Review) to property owners within 500 feet of the subject project. The first notice is to be mailed no less than 30 days after receipt of a sufficient application. REASON: The 30 day notice requirement is no longer. necessary due to a previous amendment that moved the Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) requirement after the initial staff review and comments are complete. The initial staff review is typically completed within 30 days from submittal, which results in the NIM being held around the 30 day time frame.As a result, the County's 30 day notice letter is redundant with the NIM notice sent by the petitioner. In addition, this Subsection also requires the first notice to provide the time,and place of the public hearing by the planning commission. The problem is that this -requirement is to early in the review process for staff to determine the time of the planning commission hearing. FISCAL& OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: Implementation would eliminate the cost of mailing the notice letters and would reduce staff time associated with preparing and mailing the letters. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC Sections 10.03.05 E. (Public Participation requirements for rezonings, PUD amendments, conditional uses, variances and parking exemptions) GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 23, 2004 at 4:43 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 10.03.05 Notice Requirements for Public Hearings Before the BCC, the Planning Commission, the Board of Zoning Appeals, The EAC, and the Historic Preservation Board * * . * * * * * * * *. * * * B. Notice and public hearing where proposed amendment would change zoning classification of land and for CONDITIONAL USES and variances, for planned unit development (PUD) rezoning extensions. In the case of an application for extension of PUD zoning status or the rezoning of land, to include rezonings, conditional uses and variances initiated by other than the board of county commissioners or amendments to planned unit developments, such provisions shall be enacted or amended pursuant to the following public notice and hearing requirements by the planning commission and the board of county commissioners. PUD extensions, Rezoning, conditional use and variance petitions initiated by the board of county commissioners or its agencies for county owned land shall be subject to these provisions. * * * * * ,* * * *. * * * * 8. For subject properties located within the urban designated area of the future land use element of the growth management plan, notice of the time and place of the public hearing by the planning commission shall be sent by the county twice. Tho seat at least 15 days in advance of the hearing. Beth This notices shall be sent by mail to all owners of property within 500 feet of the property lines of the land for which an approval is sought;provided,however, that where the land for which the approval is sought is part of, or adjacent to, land owned by the same person, the 500 foot distance shall be measured from the boundaries of the entire ownership or PUD, except that notices need not be mailed to any property owner located more than one-half mile (2,640 feet) from the subject property. For the purposes of this requirement, the names and addresses of property owners shall be deemed those appearing on the latest tax rolls of Collier County and any other persons or entities who have made a formal request of the county to be notified. • • • • LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Stan Litsinger . DEPARTMENT: Comprehensive Planning • AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 • LDC PAGE: 10:145 LDC SECTION: Section 10.03.05. E. Public Participation LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Supp#1 CHANGE: Adding a requirement that all applicants for small-scale and site-specific Comprehensive Plan Amendments conduct at least one Neighborhood Information Meeting "NIM"prior to the CCPC adoption hearing for small-scale and the CCPC transmittal hearing for other site specific amendments, and providing for a second NIM prior to the CCPC adoption hearing. 'in the event of a substantial change subsequent to transmittal of site specific amendments. • REASON: The CCPC has requested that a NIM requirement be added to the Comprehensive Plan amendment process to broaden the awareness of potentially affected adjoining communities beyond the statutorily required public hearings. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: Applicants willincur additional advertising and NIM staffing expenses. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None • GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: Will provide greater notice to citizens of proposed small scale, site-specific amendments to the Growth Management Plan. OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on January 24, 2005 at 12:00 p.m., and was amended on February 13., 2005, at 4:24 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: Page 1of3 CD) (49 • CHAPTER 10-APPLICATION,REVIEW,AND DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES • * * * * * * * * * * * 10.03.05 Notice Requirements for Public Hearings Before the BCC, the Planning Commission, the Board of Zoning Appeals, The EAC, and the Historic Preservation Board * * * * * * * * * * * * E. Public participation requirements for small-scale or other site-specific comprehensive plan amendments, rezonings, PUD amendments, CONDITIONAL USES, variances or parking exemptions. • 1. . APPLICANTS requesting a small-scale or other site-specific comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning, PUD amendment, or CONDITIONAL USE'approval must conduct at least one Neighborhood Informational Meeting ("NIM") after initial staff review and comment on the application., or after notification of application sufficiency for a small- scale or other site-specific comprehensive plan amendment,and before the Public Hearing is scheduled with the Planning Commission. For a small- scale amendment, the NIM is required prior to the CCPC adoption hearing. For other site-specific comprehensive plan amendments, the NIM is required prior to the Planning Commission transmittal hearing. A second NIM for a site-specific comprehensive elan amendment, to be held prior to the Planning Commission adoption hearing, will only be required if. as determined by staff, a substantial change has occurred to the proposed amendment subsequent to the Board of County Commissioners transmittal hearing. For all other applications. tThe appropriate number of staff reviews of the application returned before the NIM can be held will be at the discretion of the County Manager or his designee, only in cases where one or two pending reviews are unnecessarily hindering the APPLICANT from presenting the proposal to the public. Written notice of the meeting shall be sent to all property owners who are required to receive legal notification from the county pursuant to section 10.03.05. B. above 6. or 7. Notification shall also be sent to property owners, CONDOMINIUM and civic associations whose members are impacted by the proposed land use changes and who have formally requested the county to be notified. A list of such organisations must be provided and maintained by the county, but the APPLICANT must bear the responsibility of insuring that all parties are notified. A copy of the list of all parties noticed as required above, and the date, time, and location of the meeting, must be furnished to the County manager or designee and the Page2of3 in69 - office of the board of county commissioners no less than ten days prior to the scheduled date of the neighborhood informational meeting. The APPLICANT must make arrangements for the location of the meeting. The location must be reasonably convenient to those property owners who are required to receive notice and the facilities must be of sufficient size to accommodate expected attendance. The APPLICANT must further cause a display advertisement, one-fourth page, in type no smaller than 12 point and must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear stating the purpose, location, time of the meeting and legible site location map of the property for which the zoning change is being requested. The advertisement is to be placed within a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least seven days prior to, but no sooner than five days before, the neighborhood informational meeting. The Collier County staff planner assigned to attend the pre-application meeting, or designee, must also attend the neighborhood informational meeting and shall serve as the facilitator of the meeting, however, the APPLICANT is expected to make a presentation of how it intends to develop the subject property. The APPLICANT is required to audio or video tape the proceedings of the meeting and to provide a copy of same to the County manager or designee. * * * * * * * * * * * Page 3 of 3 w � 0 w 4 � WArWi� za , 0 zW °-tt � 4. H ~ ;4 U � aH a v� A w © gAa rnV ;74 E.0 H � v3 Elm • N x U U CD go , • C) - U - a a • T.40 U U r I � 00 mg U /'1. N 0 - 41" N G A 8 0 i •i c 5U8 rat Aa 73A a g 1 o 0 N a) t 'b 'b N y m w 8 b a 0 ' • a0 a 3314 :' eh •g j ';lIirIIHlIIIt4l an U 11' 38 0 a • ,• er a, 3 en R al 4_ 0a' 4;b1 °o7 ii e°iio al I � ! '_' v, o° .0 N b aI.)xi U U P:1 go° r, x U OR o U y 0 0 x g 1 a cn N y N s. 4-a Q o to O • ii U 4.4 v a E g U Oo A � o 0 a b d 0 a Wi O c" N rA 4 0 Wyv a VV . r ? 01 ,rno a y owaS w . 0 4 ' gav o 0 co 04 a '0 odo > .s ocAas 43 a 1 II 8 . N� ® 0 4:3 ca ® s 0 c a i rio" 4 us 1!iJIiI !i4 ; 1 ± a _U u9 .48 _ 0 db bdaN0.0 py oo 0 LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: David Weeks/Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Comprehensive Planning AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC2:62, 67 LDC SECTION: Section 2.03.08 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: The first change is to update the name of the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission. Second, removing the reference to the Eastern Lands in the subject heading/title of this section. REASON: The reason for the first change is that the agency is no longer referred to by that name. The reason for the second change is that nothing in Section 2.03.08 pertains to the Eastern Lands. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 24, 2004 at 11:18 a.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.03.08 ural Fringe Zoning Districts A. Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District(RFMU district). * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. RFMU receiving lands. RFMU receiving lands are those lands within the LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant) DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC4:113 LDC SECTION: Section 4.06.05 C.12. LDC SUPPLEMENT #: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Deleting Section 4.06.05 C.12. and replacing with only a cross-reference to 10.02.06 E.3.c. REASON: This language is also contained in section 10.02.06 and is more appropriately located in that section. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC section 10.02.06 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 29, 2004 at 5:42 p.m. a% that a setzr�i.si+?ud be performer o, t1�e entire �3G' tei „ c . 1 }ti , a lei , � , {� tin. EOrt # ' tte� i ,� 600 4 ,.. 0 Amend the LDC as follows: 4.06.05 General Landscaping Requirements * * * * * * * * * * * * C. Plant Material Standards. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 12. For a description of plants utilized for mitigation,please see Section 10.02.06 E.3.c. 12. Plants used for Mitigation according to the procedures set eut in Chapters 4 and 10. a. All plant©used for mitigation shall be native Florida species. b. All plants used for mitigation shall be from a legal source and be graded S. Bush,`1973 Part 1 and 2). .not list _ ' ' ). All plants ed in Grades and Standards for Nursery Plants shall conform to a Florida No. 1 as to: (1)health and vitality, (2) condition of foliage, (3)root system, ('1) freedom from pest or c. The plants proposed for planting must be temperature tolerant to the area© c. The source and method of providing water to the plants shall be indicated � - -- • ewe : , _ . . . , •_ • . , . . .: , _ . . . ., _ � II LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Keith Scamehorn DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: to be determined LDC SECTION: 5.05.08.C.4.a I thru 5.05.08.C.4.a.IV LDC SUPPLEMENT #: CHANGE: Adding a referencewidth requirement for the massing variation recess and projection to correct an omission from the original recodification. REASON: The original draft was divided into five parts. The last line on item number 5 (f the fifth part)was not repeated on the other four parts and it should have been codified that way. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on February 5,2005. Amend the LDC as.follows: 5.05.08.C.4. a. Projections and recesses. i. For buildings 40,000 square feet or larger in gross building area, a - maximum length, or uninterrupted curve of any facade, at any point, must be 150 linear feet. Projections and recesses must have a minimum depth of ten feet (within 150 linear feet limitation) and a minimum total width of 20 percent of the facade length. ii. For buildings between 20,000 and 39,999 square feet in gross building area, a maximum length, or uninterrupted curve of any façade, at any point, must be 125 linear feet. Projections and recesses must have a • (c.) minimum depth of eight feet (within 125 linear feet limitation) and a minimum total width of 20 percent of the facade length. iii. For buildings between 10,000 and 19,999 square feet in gross building area, a maximum length, or uninterrupted curve of any façade, at any point, must be 100 linear feet. Projections and recesses must have a minimum depth of six feet (within 100 linear feet limitation) and a minimum total width of 20 percent of the facade length. iv. For buildings between 5,000 and 9,999 square feet in gross building area, a maximum length, or uninterrupted curve of any façade, at any point, must be 75 linear feet. Projections and recesses must have a minimum depth of four feet(within 75 linear feet limitation) and a minimum total width of 20 percent of the facade length. v. For buildings less than 5,000 square feet in gross building area, a maximum length, or uninterrupted curve of any façade, at any point, must be 50 . linear feet. Projections and recesses must have a minimum depth of three feet, and a minimum total width of 20 percent of the façade length. LDC Amendment Reouest ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC5: LDC SECTION: 5.06.01 - Generally(Signs) LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Adding a cross-reference to 10.02.06 B. (Building Permits) REASON: Provide direction to the reader as to where the building permit provisions are in the Code. FISCAL& OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC section 10.02.06 B. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on October 28, 2004 at 3:53 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 5.06.00 SIGNS 5.06.01 Generally * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. Signage Table The following table is intended to provide a graphic representation of the various permitted residential and commercial signs, but may not encompass all of the requirements for those signs.. For the specific regulations, please see the appropriate subsections throughout this section of the code. Fa ..3 g • • C)z _} O N . g a)) 8 8 8 8�- >- >- >- >- • X • 0,_. ::'d. 000u) . oo2 o 2 ,en i) ooh oo � p� z z >. z z } z >. . >. z z >. z z >. >. >. .m' 0 i ai Ct re W N . N 8 To o (n f0 2 ca Hi ,� ,. Hi ! ! ca Q • • r No if) co cCC p W p r 2 co 0 15 co O f • J C o w - O w • y 0 co 6 w o, CO LL r 12 NT T mr 8 yT 6, Q m m' �) • {NV � C$d •�_yF T 0I r 0) • 13 .inco 0 to F=�r yy..� aaE« a :12 < « < < y y a) o z � � zzz z z z cqm zzz� Zzz� o o 3 T r r 000 000 0 0 0 000 000 LO o T T r T T r T T"r r T T T T CO . I • = co CO ,L,2 . co co r. co co • co . . ems- 0 0 . N r g 2 C • o d eN- aN— c0 cN7 •tO �co M c�0 2 yO • L p E a r r r r r r r cV r r r r r T r N Z en 0 C C C 0 al y y m 2w ifi E m +: m IH o0 O WWW m • = S 5 � � � o ep 0 • CD CD 0a) a) >- › > > ›- >U >• › a)U CO y '0 O co O y O p O O Ct CV N .v- N N al N w a ems- Or�O C6 N (ya N a) co cu v C C Eco E .2 ET o E E o G' o 0 1 y 1 $ 1 CO O I I M 0 = = a) N g a) d c -op -p0 c = v 'O y 'p ai O O K (A ,;(:). F3, as O ca . N ccaac @cr)cr, aN = ' T Z-- i i i 0 i . 0 p 1:2 I. 'iD �j -oN LC) '0 TSO =" T 0 � -t .0 O � co T .0 .o T O r T o N o O o CD o O T N c o N N O N N E O L LL I\ (g g Q - Q Q y Q Q y 0....)O 0 0 Z Z Z O Z Z o O O O O O T T T T N OO O Q Q Q O ¢ Q O T T T z z T Z Z r' . N co co . Z Z" c Z Z co T 0 CO 0 NCO 0 00 to Oo2f OO CO C T T N N O O T co LC) • 1- N N N N N N N T N N T C — 7 l0 O c — (9 C 7 To i i - C o 0 CO o C O _ (9 I CD 7 c6 c0 C6 a) a a) co0. coi coi o O 0. 0 (/D i) 0 0 ¢ Q �-. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC6:4 LDC SECTION: Section 6.01.02 C. LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: This provision is contained in the code twice and therefore this needs to be deleted with a cross-reference. REASON: The second occurrence (10.02.04 B.1.) reflects more current, adopted language and therefore should remain. In addition,this seems to be the proper location for the language. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: 10.02.04 B.1. of the LDC GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 9, 2004 at 12:13 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 6.01.02 Easements If applicable, easements shall be provided along lot lines or along the alignment of the improvements requiring easements in accordance with all design requirements so as to provide for proper access to, and construction and maintenance of, the improvements. All such easements shall be properly identified on the preliminary subdivision plat and dedicated on the final subdivision plat. * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. Protected/preserve area and easements. II For provisions related to protected/preserve area and easements, see section 10.02.04 B.1. of this code. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant) DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC9:15 & 10:103-104 LDC SECTION: Sections 9.04.06 F. and 10.02.06 H. LDC SUPPLEMENT #: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Moving the provision from the CCSL Variance section of the Code to the CCSL permit section. REASON: Beach renourishment does not require a variance, but instead requires a CCSL permit. FISCAL &OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 1, 2004 at 5:27 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 9.04.06 Specific Requirements for Variance to the Coastal Construction Setback Line * * * * * * * * * • - -= - - -- - _ 3 - 10.02.06 Submittal Requirements for Permits * * * * * * * * H. Coastal Construction Setback Line Permits. The following activities seaward of the coastal construction setback line shall not require a hearing by the board of county commissioners,but shall require a coastal construction setback line permit. Such permit shall be reviewed and approved administratively by site development review environmental staff. The appropriate fee as set by county resolution shall be submitted with permit application. 1. Construction of a dune walkover when a Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)permit has been obtained and the following criteria have been met. a. A maximum width of six feet. b. A minimum separation of 200 feet between walkovers when two or more walkovers are proposed on a single parcel. 2. Creation,restoration,re-vegetation or repair of the dune or other natural area seaward of the CCSL on an individual parcel of land, when a Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)permit has been obtained and the following criteria have been met. a. Sand used must be compatible in color and grain size to existing sand subject to FDEP requirements. b. Plants utilized shall be 100 percent native coastal species. c. Restoration plans shall be designed by an individual with expertise in the area of environmental sciences, natural resource management or landscape architecture. Academic credentials shall be a bachelors or higher degree. Professional experience may be substituted for academic credentials on a year for year basis,provided at least two years professional experience are in the State of Florida. 3. Certain activities that may temporarily alter ground elevations such as artificial beach nourishment projects, excavation or maintenance dredging of inlet channels maybe permitted seaward of the coastal construction setback line if said activity is in compliance with the Collier County GMP and receives Federal and State agency approvals. Until such time as the fee schedule can be amended, the fee shall be $400.00 for these beach nourishment permits. 3,4. Penalty and civil remedies. a. Penalty for a violation of section 9.04.06. Notwithstanding the penalties set forth elsewhere in this Code, the following violations of section 9.04.06 H., which occur during sea turtle nesting season: i. Setting up of any structures ,prior to daily sea turtle monitoring, 2) failing to remove all structures from the beach by 9:30 p.m., or 3) failing to have lights, so required, turned off by 9:00 pm., are subject to the following penalties: . • First violation: Up to $1,000.00 fine. Second violation: $2,500.00 fine. Third or more violation: $5,000.00 fine. ii. Beach front property owners who leave beach furniture unattended on the beach between 9:30 pm and the time of the next day's sea turtle monitoring, are subject to the following penalties: First violation: Written notice of ordinance violation. Second violation: Up to $1,000.00 fine. Third violation: $2,500.00 fine. More than three violations: $5,000.00 fine. f LDC Amendment Request — ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant) DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC10:12 LDC SECTION: Section 10.02.02 A.9. LDC SUPPLEMENT #: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Adding language clarifying that the Appeals process applies to only EIS issues. REASON: The current language creates confusion as it seems to suggest that the appeals process applies to all sections of the Code when they in fact only apply to EIS submittals. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC Section 8.06.00 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 1, 2004 at 11:05 a.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 10.02.02 Submittal Requirements for All Applications A. Environmental impact statements * * * * * * * * * * * * * 9. Appeals. a. Any person aggrieved by the decision of the County Manager or his designee regarding EIS procedures or submittals (i.e. -this section of the G5 Code) may file a written request for appeal,not later than ten days after said decision, with the EAC environmental heard or their successor organization. b. The EAC will notify the aggrieved person and the County Manager or his designee of the date,time and place that such appeal shall be heard; such notification will be given 21 days prior to the hearing unless all parties waive this requirement. c. The appeal will be heard by the EAC within 60 days of the submission of the appeal. d. Ten days prior to the hearing the aggrieved person shall submit to the EAC and to the County Manager or his designee copies of the data and information he intends to use in his appeal. e. Upon conclusion of the hearing the EAC will submit to the BCC their facts, findings and recommendations. f. The BCC , in regular session,will make the final decision to affirm, overrule or modify the decision of the County Manager or his designee in light of the recommendations of the EAC • • • cc.,) i ,..... O poi 04,4 X N EomO F Oo w zx A � z0 ° bEL AN -+ U � G H5 a r/ 0 c.; ( u ;10 cW 0 a I I W3 U[ E. Az 4 ;xiz5220V a_ lx - xa v1U 5 1 Pq 5ET x H z <4 2gt ^ 8 ba a° Nx U U x U 7 Oa 6. o g: 0 0 .... rel <9 al W U i a o 1 >0 x U o c %lao ;15A 0 1U cg x "d bA ao U0 8 a• I p,'° ¢ I O g Ag 0 Q • a ob 0) Cl 0 a : 0 a o .rte a> g .0 `� lIfl' 111111 8 ..., v a a a3oc .fib 1 !I 'II /"..)\ O U CI 4U 0N N .0 ,o co co ;1i1 � oo m0Va Ma.4 rtA dd3co a� O .N d 0 toot. q � A. qas, o aaa� ao � • • Nx . • U U pop m^m ~ x G U 51 • g = o j U v - I U 0 uI N g 4.1 O .� O v V Q N 405 all A co O a ..tq :14.) "d to o • O •Z .8 U O o a C O U 0 O A a no .E U a a w co . II 1111 ! 11111 111111'! ° a az eq, a _ VD .� L7 n N y�? 1 'c R p 0 a� •'° • ++ '° "Q '+ t7 ° o ev o y .� •od ca 4 .� U 0 N o y 4. 4 0.1 0 . v o z a i.:1 a f „. ..,.„. .,i) v� cci .to 2 xi V U •> V a w?3A 9 de ni d0 O O N x U U Ra U l g00 al :0_ rn "t1) c) 1 r* <9 ei, :5 W d., v U o u U o• N i • MI Q :al M o <9 CL) O bA ° a o c2-51 � O p.ya A 4 b .5 0 g c.) iO 0 oU N bow �=° N Q gA 8 0a + OOOyO 1 aC 1 a 'S ..8 O a • il ou oObi'� 1oloo U a4 O e0 v .s O p , d y p b H V « O.yb . ag1� H1II1I1I G, $ 1111 i pOC O 4 O, O O : i ch in�a UI 3 � ii 4) o Ncn xos Uxy x o H y ap 0V a pg g g od ow II x U U toI U N iii ...1 ..tq 01 w d. Utg 5 • NN x U o c I U 40 cs• i/'' ' A a) O .t ga4 tv b to = c U b � `n rn O rvl d aO a ,d 00 g 46 i o U N ti '� a 3 o ,2toy 1 o LH1 OlU d y� 1E474 ; • . "*U1 y gC , o `�ai � i coi P4 ' •5 ami 1. j8 •� U 1111 ooq oa a, 4 � =AEI v .� � 2 › e.c eq :1-4v �° � � � oo � x� II = ee • . o � a 4 ) o > �= w 8aa q ta, wAwa t . • cn o vNx U U Oq J m cn G U i A g ° as WU i ao 0 cid N O CA p .40 0 C Q a C A kin •d to , c a b .80 o-w c4a A ° g •0i a coo N ii y11A �4 � o � woto • oQ °p3g ,d � = a> ° iii O - b >-. Oo C 3 o b 4o a ` Ntu UHeC W w N.., Z Q 492 A ei , + ›, M u > y � >, Acl •� m 3 M oo � 3 � .7 13 cg d q ° 3to et � 0 LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Barbara Burgeson DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review/Environmental Services AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC1: LDC SECTION: Section 1.08.02 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Adding the language explaining where the list of exotics can be found. REASON: This language was not included in the recodification. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Various environmental LDC provisions GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 21, 2004 at 6:23 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 1.08.02 Definitions it * * * * * * * * . * * * * * Vegetation, Category I Invasive Exotic: Invasive exotic vegetation that alters native vegetation communities by: displacing native plant species, changing the structure or ecological functions of native plant communities, or hybridizing with native species; which includes all species of vegetation listed on. - ' _ . --- - •_. _., __ _ ., _ •- the 2003 Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council's List of Invasive Species, under Category I. • LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE#OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC1: LDC SECTION: 1.08.02 -Definitions LDC SUPPLEMENT #: N/A-new language CHANGE: Re-inserting the definition of kenneling. REASON: The lack of a definition allows the keeping of numerous dogs without defining what constitutes a kennel. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: 2.04.03 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on October 28, 2004 at 2:40 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 1.08.02 Definitions Kenneling: An establishment licensed to operate a facility housing doss, cats, or other household pets or the keeping of more than three dogs, six months or older, on premises used for residential purposes, or the keeping of more than two dogs on property used for industrial or commercial security purposes. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development,Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC1: LDC SECTION: 1.08.02 -Definitions LDC SUPPLEMENT#: N/A-new language CHANGE: Re-inserting the definition of shopping center. REASON: There are different development standards for shopping centers as opposed to other commercial uses. FISCAL &OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Chapters 2 and 4 of the LDC GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on October 27, 2004 at 2:48 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 1.08.02 Definitions Shopping center: A group of unified commercial establishments built on a site which is planned, developed, owned or managed as an operating unit and related in its location, size, and type of shops to the trade area that the unit serves. It consists of eight or more retail business or service establishments containing a minimum total of 20,000 square feet of floor area.No more than 20 percent of a shopping center's floor area can be composed of restaurants without providing additional parking for the area over 20 percent. A marina,hotel, or motel with accessory retail shops is not considered a shopping center. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC2:97-99 LDC SECTION: . Section 2.03.08 C. and D. LDC SUPPLEMENT #: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Changing the lettering of the sub-section headings. REASON: The lettering of the sub-sections was done improperly during the recodification and"C" should have been"B",etc. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 29.,.2004 at 3:08 p.m. As to the reason for the deletion of the "Eastern Lands"in the title for this section,please see the Amendment request in this Cycle submitted by David Weeks under the same LDC section number. Amend the LDC as follows,: 2.03.08 Erasteds1Rural Fringe Zoning Districts B. Natural resource protection area overlay district(NRPA). • • 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of the Natural Resource Protection Area OverlayDistrict (NRPA) is to: protect endangered or potentially endangered species by directing incompatible land uses away their habitats; to identify large, connected, intact, and relatively unfragmented habitats, which may be important for these listed species; and to support State and Federal agencies' efforts to protect endangered or potentially endangered species and their habitats. NRPAs may include major wetland systems and regional flow-ways. These lands generally should be the focus of any federal, state, County, or private acquisition efforts. Accordingly, allowable land uses, vegetation preservation standards, development standards, and listed species protection criteria within NRPAs set forth herein are more restrictive than would otherwise be, permitted in the underlying zoning district and shall to be applicable in addition to anystandards that apply tin the underlying zoning district. * * * * * * * * * * * * IB:C. North Belle Meade Overlay District(NBMO). 1. Purpose and intent. The North Belle Meade Overlay (NBMO) is unique to the RFMU district because it is surrounded by areas that are vested for development on three sides. Because this area is largely undeveloped and includes substantial vegetated areas, the NBMO can and does provide valuable habitat for wildlife, including endangered species. The NBMO is intended to achieve a balance of both preservation and opportunities for future development that takes into account resource protection and the relationship between this area and the Estates developing around the NBMO: -LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Cormac Giblin DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 2,2004 LDC PAGE: LDC2:258 LDC/UDC SECTION: Old LDC section 2.7.7.4. - 2.7.7.7. and UDC section 2.06.04 - 2.06.06 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original text CHANGE: Adding a portion of the AHDB provisions that were mistakenly omitted in the recent LDC rewrite. REASON: Unintended omission. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Various. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: Version created on September 2, 2004 at 5:24 p.m. Amend the UDC [LDCJ as follows: 2.06.04 [2.7.7.4.1 Limitations on AFFORDABLE HOUSING density bonus. Anything to the contrary notwithstanding, the following limitations and conditions shall apply to all of the AHDB for a DEVELOPMENT: A. AFFORDABLE HOUSING density bonus DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT required. The AHDB shall be available to a DEVELOPMENT only when an AHDB DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT has been entered into by the developer/APPLICANT and the BCC, and such ,..� agreement has been approved by the county attorney and the BCC pursuant to the public hearing process established in this section prior to execution. Amendments to such agreement shall be processed in the same manner as the original agreement, The AHDB DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT shall include, at a minimum,the following provisions: 1. Legal description of the land subject to the agreement and the names of its legal and equitable owners. 2. Total number of residential DWELLING UNITS in the DEVELOPMENT. 3. Minimum number of AFFORDABLE HOUSING units,categorized by level of household income,type of unit.(single-family or multifamily, owner-occupied or rental), and number of bedrooms,required in the DEVELOPMENT. 4. Maximum number of AHDB DWELLING UNITS permitted in the DEVELOPMENT. 5. Gross RESIDENTIAL DENSITY of the DEVELOPMENT. - I 6. Amount of monthly rent for rental units, or the price and conditions under which an owner-occupied unit will be sold, for each type of AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit in accordance with the definition for each type of AFFORDABLE HOUSING rental unit(moderate, low, and very low). 7. The foregoing notwithstanding, any rent charged for an AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit rented to a low or very low income family shall not exceed 90 percent of the rent charged for a comparable market rate dwelling in the same or similar DEVELOPMENT. Comparable market . rate means the rental amount charged for the last market rate dwelling unit of comparable square footage, amenities, and number of bedrooms,to be rented in the same DEVELOPMENT. • 8. No AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit in the DEVELOPMENT shall be rented to a tenant whose household income has not been verified and certified in accordance with this division as moderate, low, or very low income family. Such verification and certification shall be the responsibility of the developer and shall be submitted to the County Manager or his designee for approval. Tenant income verification and certification shall be repeated annually to assure continued eligibility. 9. No AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit that is to be sold, leased with option to purchase, or otherwise conveyed in the DEVELOPMENT shall be sold, leased with option to purchase, or otherwise conveyed to a buyer whose household income has not been verified and certified in accordance with this section as moderate, low, or very low income family. Such verification and certification shall be the responsibility of the developer and shall be submitted to the County Manager or his designee for approval. It is the intent of this section to keep housing affordable: therefore, any person who buys an AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit must agree, in a lien instrument to be recorded with the clerk of the circuit court of Collier County,Florida,that if he sells the property(including the land and/or the unit)within 15 years after his original purchase at a sales price in excess of five percent per year of his original purchase price that he will pay to the county an amount equal to one-half of the sales price in excess of five percent increase per year. The lien instrument maybe subordinated to a qualifying first mortgage. 10. For example, a person originally buys a designated AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit(a house) for$60,000.00 and sells it after five years for $80,000.00. A five percent increase per year for five years will give a value of$76,577.00. Deducting this amount from the sales price of $80,000.00 gives a difference of$3,423.00. The seller would then owe the county$1,711.50 (one-half of$3,423.00). Payment of this amount would release the first owner from the recorded lien against the property. Such payment shall be maintained in a segregated fund, established by the county solely for AFFORDABLE HOUSING purposes, and such money shall be used solely to encourage,provide for, or promote AFFORDABLE HOUSING in Collier County. 11. No AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit in any BUILDING or STRUCTURE in the DEVELOPMENT shall be occupied by the developer, any person related to or affiliated with the developer, or a resident manager. 12. When the developer advertises,rents, sells or maintains the AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit, it must advertise,rent, sell, and maintain the same in a nondiscriminatory manner and make available any relevant information to any person who is interested in renting or purchasing such AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit. The developer shall agree to be responsible for payment of any real estate commissions and fees. The AFFORDABLE HOUSING units in the DEVELOPMENT shall be identified on all BUILDING plans submitted to the county and described in the application for AHDB. 13. The developer shall not disclose to persons, other than the potential tenant, buyer or lender of the particular AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit or units, which units in the DEVELOPMENT are designated as AFFORDABLE HOUSING units. 14. The square footage, construction and design of the AFFORDABLE HOUSING units shall be the same as market rate DWELLING UNITS in the DEVELOPMENT. 15. The AHDB agreement and authorized DEVELOPMENT shall be consistent with the growth management plan and land DEVELOPMENT regulations of Collier County that are in effect at the time of DEVELOPMENT. Subsequently adopted laws and policies shall apply to the AHDB agreement and the DEVELOPMENT to the extent that they are not in conflict with the number, type of AFFORDABLE HOUSING units and the amount of AHDB approved for the DEVELOPMENT. 16. The AFFORDABLE HOUSING units shall be intermixed with, and not segregated from, the market rate DWELLING UNITS in the DEVELOPMENT. 17. The conditions contained in the AHDB DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT shall constitute covenants,restrictions, and conditions which shall run with the land and shall be binding upon the property and every person having any interest therein at anytime and from time to time. 18. The AHDB DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT shall be recorded in the official records of Collier County, Florida,subsequent to the recordation ofthe,grant deed pursuant to which the developer acquires fee simple title to the property. 19. Each AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit shall be restricted to remain and be maintained as the type of AFFORDABLE HOUSING rental unit (moderate, low or very low income)designated in accordance with the AHDB DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT for at least 15 years from the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for such unit. •20. The developer and owner of the DEVELOPMENT shall provide on-site management to assure appropriate security,maintenance and appearance of the DEVELOPMENT and.the DWELLING UNITS where these issues are a factor. B. Compliance with growth management plan and land DEVELOPMENT regulations. The AHDB shall be available to a DEVELOPMENT only to the extent that it otherwise complies and is consistent with the GMP and the land DEVELOPMENT regulations, including the procedures,requirements, conditions and criteria for planned unit DEVELOPMENTS (PUDs) and rezonings, where applicable. C. Minimum number of AFFORDABLE HOUSING units. The minimum number of AFFORDABLE HOUSING units that shall be provided in a DEVELOPMENT pursuant to this section shall be ten AFFORDABLE • HOUSING units. D. Nontransferable. The AHDB is not transferrable between DEVELOPMENTS or properties. E. Phasing. In the case where a DEVELOPMENT will occur in more than one phase,the percentage of AFFORDABLE HOUSING units to which the developer has committed for the total DEVELOPMENT shall be maintained in each phase and shall be constructed as part of each phase of the DEVELOPMENT on the property. For example,if the total DEVELOPMENT'S AHDB is based on the provision of ten percent of the total DWELLING UNITS as AFFORDABLE HOUSING rental units for low income households with two bedrooms per unit,then each phase must maintain that same percentage (ten percent in this case)cumulatively. 2.06.05 [2.7.7.5.1 AFFORDABLE HOUSING density bonus monitoring program. A. Annual progress and monitoring report. The AHDB for a DEVELOPMENT shall be subject to the AHDB monitoring program set forth in this section. The developer shall provide the County Manager or his designee with an annual progress and monitoring report regarding the delivery of AFFORDABLE HOUSING rental units throughout the period of their construction, rental and occupancy for each of the developer's DEVELOPMENTS which involve the AHDB in a form developed by the County Manager or his designee. The annual progress and monitoring report shall, at a minimum, require any information reasonably helpful to ensure compliance with this section and provide information with regard to.AFFORDABLE HOUSING in Collier County. To the extent feasible,the County Manager or his designee shall maintain public records of all DWELLING UNITS (AHDB and AFFORDABLE HOUSING units) constructed pursuant to the AHDB program, all AFFORDABLE HOUSING units constructed pursuant to the AHDB program,occupancy statistics of such DWELLING UNITS, complaints of violations of this section which are alleged to have occurred, the disposition of all such complaints, a list of those persons who have participated as tenants or buyers in the AHDB program, and such other records and information as the County Manager or his designee believes may be necessary or desirable to monitor the success of the AHDB program and the degree of compliance therewith. Failure to complete and submit the monitoring report to the County Manager or his designee within 60 days from the due date will result in a penalty of up to $50.00 per day per incident or occurrence unless a written extension not to exceed 30 days is requested prior to expiration of the 60-day submission deadline. B. Income verification and certification. 404 1 • 1. Eligibility. The determination of eligibility of moderate,low, and very low income families to rent or buy and occupy AFFORDABLE HOUSING units is the central component of the AHDB monitoring program. Family income eligibility is a three-step process: (1) submittal of an application by a buyer or tenant: (2)verification of family income: and(3) execution of an income certification.All three shall be accomplished prior to a buyer or tenant being qualified as an eligible family to rent or purchase and occupy an AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit pursuant to the AHDB program. No person shall occupy an AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit provided under the AHDB program prior to being qualified at the appropriate level of income (moderate, low or very low income). 2. The developer shall be responsible for accepting applications from buyers or tenants,verifying income and obtaining the income certification for its DEVELOPMENT which involves AHDB, and all forms and documentation must be provided to the County Manager or his designee prior to qualification of the buyer or tenant as a moderate, low or very low income family. The County Manager or-his designee shall review all documentation provided, and may verify the information provided from time to time. Prior to occupancy by a qualified buyer or tenant, the developer shall provide to the County Manager or his designee, at a minimum, the application for AFFORDABLE HOUSING qualification, including the income verification form and the income certification forms and the purchase contract, lease, or rental agreement for that qualified buyer or tenant. At a minimum,the lease shall include the name, address and telephone number of the head of household and all other occupants, a description of the unit to be rented, the term of the lease, the rental amount, the use of the premises, and the rights and obligations of the parties. Random inspections to verify occupancy in accordance with this section may be conducted by the County Manager or his designee. 3. Application.A potential buyer or tenant shall apply to the developer; owner,manager, or agent to qualify as a moderate, low, or very low income family for the purpose of renting and occupying an AFFORDABLE HOUSING rental unit pursuant to the AHDB program. The application for AFFORDABLE HOUSING qualification shall be in a form provided by the County Manager or his designee and may be apart of the income certification form. . 4. Income verification. The County Manager or his designee or the developer shall obtain written verification from the potential occupant(including the entire household)to verify all regular sources of income to the potential tenant(including the entire household). The written verification form shall include, at a minimum,the purpose of the verification, a statement to release information, employer verification of gross annual income or rate of pay,number of hours worked, frequency of pay, bonuses, tips and • commissions and a signature block with the date of application. The verification may take the form of the most recent year's federal income tax return for the potential occupants (including the entire household), a statement to release information,tenant verification of the return, and a signature block with the date of application. The verification shall be valid for up to 90 days prior to occupancy.Upon expiration of the 90-day period,the information may be verbally updated from the original sources for an additional 30 days,provided it has been documented by the person preparing the original verification. After this time, a new verification form must be completed. 5. Income certification. Upon receipt of the application and verification of income, an income certification form shall be executed by the potential buyer or tenant(including the entire household)prior to sale or rental and occupancy of the AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit by the owner or tenant. Income certification that the potential occupant has a moderate, low, or very low household income qualifies the potential occupant as an eligible family to buy or rent and occupy an AFFORDABLE HOUSING unit under the AHDB program. The income certification shall be in a form provided by the County Manager or his designee. 2.06.06 [2.7.7.6.1 Violations and enforcement. A. Violations. It is a violation of section 2.06.00 to rent, sell or occupy, or attempt • to rent, sell or occupy, an AFFORDABLE HOUSING rental unit provided under the AHDB program except as specifically permitted by the terms of section 2.06.00, or to knowingly give false or misleading information with respect to any information required or requested by the County Manager or his designee or by other persons pursuant to the authority which is delegated to them by section 2.06.00. B. Notice of violation. Whenever it is determined that there is a violation of section 2.06.00, a notice of violation shall be issued and sent by the County Manager or his designee by certified return receipt requested U.S. mail, or hand delivery to the person or developer in violation of section 2.06.00. The notice of violation shall be in writing, shall be signed and dated by the County Manager or his designee or such other county personnel as may be authorized by the BCC, shall specify the violation or violations, shall state that said violation(s) shall be corrected within ten days of the date of notice of violation, and shall state that if said violation(s) is not corrected by the specified date that civil and/or criminal enforcement may be pursued. If said violation(s) is not corrected by the specified date in the notice of violation,the County Manager or his designee shall issue a citation which shall state the date and time of issuance,name and address of the person in violation, date of the violation, section of these regulations, or subsequent amendments thereto, violated, name of the County Manager or his designee, and date and time when the violator shall appear before the code enforcement board. C. Criminal enforcement. Anyperson who violates any provision of this section shall,upon conviction,be punished by a fine not to exceed$500.00 per violation or by imprisonment in the county jail for a term not to exceed 60 days, or by both,pursuant to the provisions of F.S. 6 125.69. Such person also shall pay all costs, including reasonable attorneys fees, including those incurred on appeal, involved in the case. Each day such violation continues, and each violation, shall be considered a separate offense. D. Civil enforcement. In addition to any criminal penalties which may be imposed pursuant to section 2.06.06 C. above, Collier County and the County Manager or his designee shall have full power to enforce the terms of this section and any AHDB DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, rezoning conditions or stipulations, and planned unit DEVELOPMENT(PUD) conditions and stipulations pursuant to this section and the rights, privileges and conditions described herein,by action at law or equity. In the event that it is determined that a violation has occurred and has not or will not be corrected within 60 days, the certificate of occupancy for all AHDB units within the DEVELOPMENT shall be withdrawn and the sanctions or penalties provided in the AHDB DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT shall be pursued to the fullest extent allowed by law.. 0 LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Nancy Siemion DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC4:53 LDC SECTION: Section 4.02.23 D. LDC SUPPLEMENT #: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Re-inserting the language concerning landscape buffers adjacent to road rights-of-way in the Activity Center#9 Overlay District. REASON: This provision was not included in the LDC recodification. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC 2.03.07 K. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 6, 2004 at 12:15 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 4.02.23 Same--Development in the Activity Center#9 Zoning District * * * * * * * * * * * * * D. Landscape buyers adjacent to road rights-of-way. In addition to the requirements for a Type D buffer,the following requirements shall apply: 1. Landscape buffers adjacent to Collier Boulevard, S.R. 84. (Davis Boulevard and ,..� Beck Boulevard) and within 400 linear feet of I-75 right-of-way line: 3 a. Shall measure a minimum of 25 feet in width. b. The required number of trees shall be supplemented by an additional palm tree planting in the amount of 25 percent. c. Undulating beds of ornamental grasses and/or ground cover beds shall be incorporated for at least 30percent of the required buffer strip area. d. All required trees shall be a minimum of 12 feet in height. e. Where industrial land uses abut I-75, an eight-foot high unified, opaque, masonry wall is required. Landscape buffers shall beplaced along the street side of said wall. The wall shall be located at the edge of the landscape buffer farthest from the property line. 2. Landscape buffers adjacent to all other public streets: a. Shall measure a minimum of 15 feet in width. b. Undulating beds of ornamental grasses and ground cover beds shall be incorporated for a least 25 percent of the required buffer strip area. c. All required trees shall be a minimum of 12 feet in height. 3. Landscape buffers, signage and lighting fixtures in residential areas shall feature a unified design at point of ingress/egress. 1?:E. Lighting fixtures and signage within the Activity Center #9 shall be designed to complement the architectural themes of this overlay district. Lighting shall also be subject to the requirements pursuant to section 5.05.08 regardless of the gross building area. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Sharon Dantini/Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review/Code.Enforcement AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC4:78 LDC SECTION: LDC 4.05.04 B.5. LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Revising the language to reflect the proper numerical value (1/2) as opposed to 1 1/2. REASON:. This seems to be an error made during the recodification performed in Cycle 1, 2004. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 24, 2004 at 12:23 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 4.05.04 Parking Space Requirements * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. Measurement. Where this LDC requires off-street parking based on various types of measurements, the following rules shall apply: 1. Floor area means, for the purposes of this section only,the gross floor area inside the exterior walls, unless otherwise specifically indicated. 2. In hospitals,bassinets do not count as beds. 3. In stadiums, sports arenas,houses of worship, and other places of public assembly where occupants utilize benches,pews, or other similar seating arrangements, each twenty-four(24) lineal inches of such seating facilities count as one (1) seat. 4. Where the parking requirements are based on number of employees or persons employed or working in an establishment and the number of employees increases after the building or structure is occupied,then the amount of off-street parking provided must be increased in ratio to the increase of the number of employees. 5. When units of measurements determining number of required off-street parking spaces result in a requirement of a fractional space, then such fraction equal or greater than one-half d-1/2) shall require a full off-street parking space. . j 1 LDC Amendment Request n ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Margaret Perry DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: Page4:151-4:200 LDC SECTION: Section 4.08.07 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Renumbering the internal cross-references from section 4.08.05 to 4.08.07. Also, correcting a few typos. REASON: It appears that during the recodification in Cycle 1, 2004, this section was originally numbered section 4.08.05 and was changed to 4.08.07. When this was done, the internal cross-references were not modified. FISCAL &OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT' None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 8, 2004 at 2:10 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 4.08.07 SRA Designation SRA designation is intended to encourage and facilitate uses that enable economic prosperity and diversification of the economic base of the RLSA District, and encourage development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques and facilitates a compact form of development to accommodate population growth by the establishment of SRAs. Stewardship Credits generated from SSAs are exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis as set forth herein. dDensity and intensity within the RLSA District shall not be increased beyond the Baseline Standards except through the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System, the affordable housing density Bonus as referenced in,the density Rating System of the FLUE, and the density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein. Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSA District that meet the defined suitability criteria and standards set forth herein. Land becomes designated as an SRA on the date that the SRA Credit Agreement becomes effective pursuant to Section 4.08.05.7 D.11. Any change in the residential density or non- residential intensity of land use on a parcel of land located within an SRA shall be specified in the resolution, which shall reflect the total number of transferable Credits assigned to the parcel of land. A. Lands Within the RLSA District that can be Designated as SRAs. All privately owned lands within the RLSA District that meet the suitability criteria contained herein may be designated as SRA, except lands delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map as FSA, HSA, or WRA, or lands already designated as an SSA. WRAs maybe located within the boundaries of an SRA and may be incorporated into an SRA Master Plan to provide water management functions for properties within such SRA, subject to all necessary permitting requirements. 1. Suitability Criteria. The following suitability criteria are established to ensure consistency with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the RLSA Overlay. • * * * * : * * * * * * g. An SRA may be contiguous to an FSA or HSA,but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in Section '1.08.05(J)(6)4.08.07 J.6. An SRA may be contiguous to, or encompass a WRA. * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. Establishment and Transfer of Stewardship Credits. The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein. Stewardship Credits will be exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis, as described in Section 4.08.057 B.2. Stewardship density and intensity will thereafter differ from the Baseline Standards. 1. Transfer of Credits. The transfer or use of Stewardship Credits shall only be in a manner as provided for herein. * * * * * * * * * * * * * e. Stewardship Credits may be acquired from a Stewardship Credit Trust established pursuant to Section 4.08.04.4 B. and transferred to an SRA subject to ''-'` the limitations contained in this Section. • * * * * * * * * * * * * * n C. Forms of SRA developments. SRA developments are a compact form of development, which accommodate and promote uses that utilize creative land use planning techniques. SRAs shall be used to facilitate the implementation of innovative planning and flexible development strategies described in § 163.3177 (11), F.S. and Rule 9J-5.006(5)(1), F.A.C. These planning strategies and techniques are intended to minimize the conversion of rural and agricultural lands to other uses while discouraging urban sprawl, protecting environmentally sensitive areas, maintaining the economic viability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and, providing for the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. Only the following four specific forms of rural development in SRAs are permitted within the RLSA District. 1. Towns. Towns are the largest and most diverse form of SRA,with a full range of housing types and mix of uses. Towns have urban level services and infrastructure which support development that is compact, mixed use, human scale; and provides a balance of land uses to reduce automobile trips and increase livability. Towns shall be not less than 1,000 acres or more than 4,000 acres and are comprised of several villages and/or neighborhoods that have individual identity and character. Towns shall have a mixed-use town center that will serve as a focal point for community facilities and support services. Towns shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Towns shall have at least one community park with a minimum size of 200 square feet per dwelling unit in the Town. Towns shall also have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Towns shall include both community and neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.037 J.1. Towns may also include those compatible corporate office and light industrial uses as those permitted in the Business Park and S Research and Technology Park Subdistricts of the FLUE. Towns shall be the preferred location for the full range of schools, and to the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. Towns shall not be located within the ACSC. 2. Villages. Villages are primarily residential communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be not less than 100 acres or more than 1,000 acres.Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed-use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.037 J.1. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. The Village form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.037 A.2. 3. Hamlets. Hamlets are small rural residential areas with primarily single-family housing and limited range of convenience-oriented services. Hamlets shall be not less than 40 or more than 100 acres. Hamlets will serve as a more compact alternative to traditional five-acre lot rural subsections currently allowed in the Baseline Standards. Hamlets shall have a public green space for neighborhoods. Hamlets include convenience retail uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.037 J.1. Hamlets may be an appropriate location for pre-K through elementary schools. The Hamlet form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.037 A.2. 4. Compact Rural developments (CRDs). Compact Rural development(CRD) is a form of SRA that will provide flexibility with respect to the mix of uses and design standards,but shall otherwise comply with the standards of a Hamlet or Village. A CRD may include,but is not required to have permanent residential housing and the services and facilities that support permanent residents.Except as described above, a CRD will conform to the characteristics of a Village or Hamlet as set forth in Section 4.08.037 J.1. based on the size of the CRD. As residential units are not a required use,those goods and services that support residents such as retail, office, civic, governmental and institutional uses shall also not be r"N required. However for any CRD that does include permanent residential housing, the proportionate support services listed above shall be provided in accordance with the standards for the most comparable form of SRA as described in Section 4.08.037 C.2. or 3. a. Size of CRDs limited. There shall be no more than five(5) CRDs of more than 100 acres in size. b. CRDs within the ACSC. The CRD form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.037 A.2. 5. Proportion of Hamlets and CRDs to Villages and Towns. In order to maintain the correct proportion of Hamlets and CRDs of 100 acres or less to the number of Villages and Towns approved as SRAs, not more than five (5) of any combination of Hamlets and CRDs of 100 acres of or less may be approved prior to the approval of a Village or Town. In order to maintain that same proportion thereafter,not more than five (5) of any combination of Hamlets and CRDs of 100 acres of or less may approved for each subsequent Village or Town approved. 6. SRAs as Part of a development of Regional Impact(DRI). SRAs are permitted as part of a DRI subject to the provisions of§ 380.06, F.S. and the RLSA District �'` Regulations. a. An SRA Designation Application may be submitted simultaneously with a �.., Preliminary development agreement application that occurs prior to a DRI Application for development Approval (ADA). In such an application, the form of SRA development shall be determined by the characteristics of the DRI project, as described in the PDA ADA. b. The DRI may encompass more than a single SRA Designation Application. It is the intent of this Section to allow for the future designations of SRAs within a DRI as demonstrated by the DRI phasing schedule. * * * * * * * * * * D. SRA Designation Application Package. A Designation Application Package to support a request to designate land(s)within the RLSA District as an SRA shall be made pursuant to the regulations of the RLSA District Regulations. The SRA Application Package shall include the ig974v.94tomyalls * * * * • * * * * , * * . * * * 3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. An assessment that documents the Natural Resource Index Value scores shall be prepared and submitted as part of the SRA Application. The Assessment shall include an analysis that quantifies the number of acres by Index Values. The Assessment shall: * * * * * * * * * * * * * h. Demonstrate compliance with the Suitability Criteria contained in Section 4.08.0-S7 A.1. * * * * . * * * * * * * * * 5. SRA Master Plan. A Master Plan shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of an SRA. The SRA Master Plan shall be consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.05-7 G. 6. SRA development Document. A development Document shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of an SRA. The SRA development Document shall be consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.067 H. 7. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report. An Impact Assessment Report shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation a of SRA. The SRA Impact Assessment Report shall address the requirements of Section 4.08.057 K. E 8. SRA Economic Assessment Report.An Economic Assessment Report shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of an SRA. The SRA Economic Assessment Report shall address the requirements of Section 4.08.057 L. * * * * * * * * * * * * * E. SRA Application Review Process. 1. Pre-Application Conference with County Staff: Prior to the submission of a formal application for SRA designation, the applicant shall attend a pre- application conference with the County Manager or his designee and other county staff, agencies, and officials involved in the review and processing of such applications and related materials. If an SRA designation application will be filed concurrent with an SSA application, only one pre-application conference shall be required. This pre-application conference should address,but not be limited to, such matters as: a. Conformity of the proposed SRA with the goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP; b. Consideration of suitability criteria described in Section 4.08.0§7 A.l. and other standards of this Section; * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. Application Package Submittal and Processing Fees. The required number of SRA Applications and the associated processing fee shall be submitted to the County Manager or his designee. The contents of said application package shall be in accordance with Section 4.08.0§7 D. * * * * * * * * * * * * * H. Development Document. Data supporting the SRA Master Plan, and describing the SRA application, shall be in the form of a development Document that shall consist of the information listed below, unless determined at the required pre-application conference to be unnecessary to describe the development strategy. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. The document shall identify, locate and quantify the full range of uses, including accessory uses that provide the mix of services to. and are supportive of, the residential population of an SRA or the RSLA District, and shall include, as applicable, the following: * * * * * * * * * * * * k. Design standards for each type of land use proposed within the SRA. Design standards shall be consistent with the Design Criteria contained in Section 4.08.037 J.; * * * * * * * * * * * * * J. Design Criteria. Criteria are hereby established to guide the design and development of SRAs to include innovative planning and development strategies as set forth in §§ 1633177 (11),F.S. and Chapter 9J-5.006(5)(1), F.A.C.. The size and base density of each form of SRA shall be consistent with the standards set forth below.The maximum base residential density as specified herein for each form of SRA may only be exceeded through the density blending process as set forth in density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan or through the affordable housing density Bonus as referenced in the density Rating System of the FLUE. The base residential density is calculated by dividing the total number of residential units in an SRA by the acreage therein that is entitled through Stewardship Credits. The base residential density does not restrict net residential density of parcels within an SRA. The location, size and density of each SRA will be determined on an individual basis, subject to the regulations below, during the SRA designation review and approval process. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1. SRA Characteristics. Characteristics for SRAs designated within the RLSA District have been established in the Goals Objectives and Policies of the RLSA Overlay. All SRAs designated pursuant to this Section shall be consistent with the characteristics identified on the Collier County RLSA Overlay SRA Characteristics Chart and the design criteria set forth in 2. through 6.below. a. SRA Characteristics Chart Collier County RLSA Overlay SRA Characteristics Chart Typical Town* Village Hamlet Compact Rural Development Characteristics Size (Gross 1,000--4,000 100--1,000 acres 40--100 acres** 100 Acres or Greater than 100 Acres) acres less** Acres** Residential 1--4 DUs per 1--4 DUs per 1/2--2 DUs per 1/2--2 DUs per 1--4 DUs per Units (DUs)per gross acre*** gross acre*** gross acre*** gross acre*** gross acre*** gross acre base density Residential Full range of Diversity of Single Family Single family Single family Housing Styles single family single family and limited and limited and limited and multi-family and multi-family multi-family multi- multi- housing types, housing types, family**** family**** styles, lot sizes styles, lot sizes Maximum floor Retail-&Office - Retail&_Office- Retail& Office- Retail & Office- Retail & Office - " area ratio or .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 Intensity Civic/Govemme Civic/Govemme Civic/Govemme Civic/Governme Civic/Governme ntal/Institution- ntal/Institution- ntal/Institution- ntal/Institution- ntalInstitution- .6 .6 Group .6 Group .6 Group .6 Group Manufacturing/L Housing- .45 Housing- .45 Housing .45 Housing- .45 ight Industrial- Transient Transient Transient Transient .45 Group Lodging- 26 Lodging-26 Lodging-26 Lodging-26 Housing- .45 upa net upa net upa net upa net Transient Lodging-26 upa net Goods and Town Center Village center Convenience Convenience Village center Services with Community with Goods and Goods and with and Neighborhood Services: Services: Neighborhood Neighborhood Goods and Minimum 10 SF Minimum 10 SF Goods and Goods and Services in gross building gross building Services in Services in village centers: area per DU area per DU village centers: Town and Minimum 25 SF Minimum 25 SF village centers: gross building gross building Minimum 65 SF area per DU area per DU gross building area per DU; Corporate Office, Manufacturing and Light Industrial Water and Centralized or Centralized or Individual Well Individual Well. Centralized or Wastewater decentralized decentralized and Septic and Septic decentralized community community System: . System: community treatment system treatment system Centralized or Centralized or treatment system Interim Well and Interim Well and decentralized decentralized Interim Well and Septic Septic community community Septic treatment system treatment system • • Recreation and Community Parks &Public Public Green Public Green Parks &Public Open Spaces Parks (200 Green Spaces Spaces for Spaces for Green Spaces SF/DU) Parks & with Neighborhoods Neighborhoods with Public Green Neighborhoods (Minimum 1% (Minimum 1% Neighborhoods Spaces with Active of gross acres) of gross acres) Active. Neighborhoods Recreation/Golf Recreation/Golf Active Courses Lakes Courses Lakes Recreation/Golf Open Space Open Space Courses Lakes Minimum 35% Minimum 35% Open Space of SRA of SRA Minimum 35% of SRA Civic, Wide Range of Moderate Range Limited Services Limited Services Moderate Range Government and Services- of Services - Pre-K through Pre-K through of Services - Institutional minimum 15 minimum 10 Elementary Elementary minimum 10 Services SF/DU Full SF/DU; Full Schools Schools SF/DU; Full Range of Range of Range of Schools Schools Schools Transportation Auto - Auto - Auto - Auto - Auto -. interconnected interconnected interconnected interconnected interconnected system of system of system of local system of local system of collector and collector and roads Pedestrian roads Pedestrian collector and local roads; local roads; Pathways Pathways local roads; required required Equestrian Equestrian required connection to connection to Trails . Trails connection to collector or collector or collector or arterial arterial arterial Interconnected Interconnected Interconnected sidewalk and sidewalk and sidewalk and pathway system pathway system pathway system County Transit Equestrian Equestrian access Trails County Trails County Transit access Transit access * Towns are prohibited within the ACSC,per policy 1.7.1 of the Goals, Objectives, and Policia& section 4.08.07 A.2. of this code. ** Villages, Hamlets, and Compact Rural developments within the ACSC are subject to location and size limitations,per policy 1.20 section 4.08.07 A.2. of this code, and are subject to Chapter 28-25,FAC. *** Density can be increased beyond the base density through the affordable housing density Bonus or through the density blending provision,per policy 4.7 **** Those CRDs that include single or multi-famil residential uses shall include proportionate support services. Underlined uses are not required uses. * * * * * * * * * * * 8. Requests for Deviations from the LDC. The SRA development Document may provide for nonprocedural deviations from the LDC,provided that all of the following are satisfied: a. The deviations are consistent with the RLSA Overlay; b. The deviations further the RLSA District Regulations and are consistent with those.specific Design Criteria from which Section 4.08.037 J.2. - 5. expressly prohibits deviation; and c. It can be demonstrated that the proposed deviation(s) further enhance the tools,techniques and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ 163.3177 (11), F.S. and Chapter 9J-5.006(5)(L),F.A.C. K. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessments. Impact assessments are intended to identify methods to be utilized to meet the SRA generated impacts on public facilities and to evaluate the self-sufficiency of the proposed SRA with respect to these public facilities. Information provided within these assessments may also indicate the degree to which the SRA is consistent with the fiscal neutrality requirements of Section 4.08.037 L. Impact assessments shall be prepared in the following infrastructure areas: * * * * * * * * * * * * * • j • LDC Amendment Request • ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1,2005 LDC PAGE: LDC5: LDC/UDC SECTION: Section 5.02.03 C. LDC SUPPLEMENT #: Supplement 1 CHANGE: Re-inserting the language dealing with meeting and parking at a residence used for home occupation. REASON: The language was not included in the LDC recodification. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 7, 2004 at 11:01 a.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 5.02.03 Standards The home occupation shall be clearly incidental to the use of the dwelling for dwelling purposes. The existence of the home occupation shall not change the character of the dwelling. A. An allowable home occupation shall be conducted by an occupant of the dwelling. B. There shall be no on-site or off-site advertising signs. C. The use shall not generate more traffic than would be associated with the allowable residential use. To that end, traveling to and from as well as meeting orparking at the residence by either employees of the business operated therefrom who are not residing at the subject address or by customers or clients of the home occupations isprohibited. D. There shall be no receiving of goods or materials other than normal delivery by the U.S. Postal Service or similar carrier. E. Parking or storage of commercial vehicles or equipment shall be allowable only in compliance with the requirements for commercial vehicles in the County Code. F. The on-site use of any equipment or materials shall not create or produce excessive noise, obnoxious fumes, dust, or smoke. G. The on-site use of any equipment or tools shall not create any amount of vibration or electrical disturbance. H. No on-site use or storage of any hazardous materialshall be kept in such an amount as to be potentially dangerous to persons or property outside the confines of the home occupation. I. There shall be no outside storage of goods or products, except plants. Where plants are stored,no more than fifty(50)percent of the total square footage of the lot may be used for plant storage. J. A home occupation shall be subject to all applicable County occupational licenses and other business taxes. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Keith Scamehom DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE; Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC5: LDC SECTION: Section 5.03.02 A.1.a. LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Re-inserting fencing standards. REASON: These standards were not included in the LDC recodification performed in Cycle 1 of 2004. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC section 5.05.08 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 1, 2004 at 3:54 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 5.03.02 Fences and Walls A. All districts. 1. Whenever a property owner elects to erect a chain link fence pursuant to the provisions herein adjacent to an arterial or collector road in the urban coastal area, said fence shall not be located nearer than three (3) feet to the right-of-way or property line, and said fence shall be screened from view by planting a vegetative hedge a minimum of thirty (30) inches in height at planting spaced at a distance that will achieve an opacity rating of eighty (80) percent within one (1) year of planting. An irrigation system-shall be installed to ensure the continued viability of the vegetative hedge as a visual screen of the chain link fence. This regulation shall not apply to single-family homes. a. Structures subject to section 5.05.08 Architectural & Site Design Standards shall comply with the following additional fencing standards: i. Chain link and wood fences are prohibited forward of the primary facade and must be a minimum of 100 feet from a public right-of- way. Chain link and wood fencing facing a public or private street shall be screened with an irrigated hedge planted directly in front of the fence on the street side.Plant material shall be a minimum of three gallon in size and planted no more than three feet on center at time of installation. This plant material shall be maintained at no less than three-quarters of the height of the adjacent fence (See Illustration 5.03.02 A.1.a. - 1). ii. Fences forward of the primary facade, excluding chain link and wood are permitted under the following conditions: (a) Fences shall not exceed four feet in height. (b) The fence provides either an open view at a minimum of 25 percent of its length or provides variation in its height for a minimum of 15 percent of its length with a deviation of at least 12 inches. (c)The fence style must complement building style through material, color and design. • PROPERTY LINE I I STRUCTURE _ ) I I �----- •- I - I' PROPERTY LINE SITE DIAGRAM • FENCING STRUCTURES N.T.S. PREPARED BY:OFFICE OF GRAPHICS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION DATE:6/2004 FILE LDC-2004-15.DWG Illustration 5.03.02 A.1.a. - 1 LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant) DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC5:28 LDC SECTION: Section 5.05.02 A. LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Re-inserting a portion of the provision that was not included during the LDC recodification. REASON: It is important because it's the only provision that states the criteria for MPP regulations apply to all "multislip facilities with 10 or more slips." FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 30, 2004 at 11:04 a.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 5.05.02 Marinas A. The following standards are for the purpose of manatee protection and are applicable to all multi-slip docking facilities with ten slips or more, and all marina facilities. 411� I LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant) DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC5:28 LDC SECTION: Section 5.05.09 C. LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Adding the effective date to this section. REASON: This was not done when Municipal Code published the LDC. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 30, 2004 at 2:10 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 5.05.09 Communications Towers * * * * * * * * * * * * C. Migratory Birds and other Wildlife Considerations. 1. Ground Mounted towers. Except to the extent not feasible for the respective new ground mounted tower's intended purpose(s), each new ground mounted tower that will exceed a height of seventy-five (75) feet(above ground), exclusive of antennas,but will not exceed a height of one hundred and ninety-nine (199) feet above natural grade, exclusive of antennas, should not be guyed. If the applicant proposes that a new ground mountedtower within-this height range be guyed,the applicant shall have the burden of proving the necessity of guying the tower. 2. Bird Diverter Devices. Each new ground mounted guyed tower installed on or after February 20, 2004, greater then seventy- five(75) feet in height above natural grade, exclusive of antennas, shall have installed and maintained bird diverter devices on each guy wire (to reduce injuries to flying birds). 3. Habitat Loss. In addition to the requirements in Chapters 4 3 and 10, towers and other on-site facilities shall be designed, sited, and constructed to minimize habitat loss within the tower footprint. At such sites, road access and fencing, to the extent feasible, shall be utilized to minimize on-site and adjacent habitat fragmentation and/or disturbances. / it LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC5: LDC SECTION: section 5.06.07 - Enforcement(signs) LDC SUPPLEMENT #: N/A-new language CHANGE: Re-inserting the enforcement provisions that were contained in Ordinance 91-102 REASON: The general enforcement and penalties provisions in 10.02.06 E. do not specifically address signs. FISCAL &OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on October 28, 2004 at 3:24 p.m. Note that the enforcement and penalties provisions should all be located in one code section and, as they are not purely land development regulations, they should be placed in the Administrative Code. Once it is determined where in the Admin. Code the provisions should be placed, these, along with the provisions in 10.02.06 E., should be relocated accordingly. Amend the LDC as follows: 5.06.07 Enforcement A. General. No sign shall hereafter be erected, placed, altered or moved unless in conformity with this Code. All signs located within Collier County shall comply with the following requirements: 1. The issuance of a sign permit pursuant to the requirements of this Code shall not permit the construction or maintenance of a Sign or structure in violation of an existing county, state or federal law or regulation. - 2. All signs for which a permit is required shall be subiect to inspections by the County Manager or his designee. The County Manager or his designee is hereby authorized to enter upon any property or premises to ascertain whether the provisions of this Code are being adhered to. Such entrance shall be made during business hours, unless an emergency exists. The County Manager or his designee may order the removal of any sign that is not in compliance with the provisions of this Code, is improperly maintained, or which would constitute a hazard to the public health, safety, and welfare. 3. The County Manager or his designee shall be charged with interpretation and enforcement of this Code. B. Enforcement procedures. Whenever, by the provisions of this Code, the performance of an act is required or the performance of an act is prohibited, a failure to comply with such provisions shall constitute a violation of this Code. 1. The owner, tenant, and/or occupant of any land or structure, or part thereof, and an architect, builder, contractor agent, or other person who knowingly participates in, assists, directs, creates or maintains any situation that is contrary to the requirements of this Code may be held responsible for the violation and be subject to the penalties and remedies provided herein. 2. Where any sign or part thereof violates this Code, the County Manager or his designee may institute any appropriate action or proceedings to prevent, restrain, correct, or abate a violation of this Code, as provided by- law, including prosecution before the Collier County Code Enforcement Board against the owner, agent, lessee, or other persons maintaining the sign, or owner, or lessee of the land where the sign is located. 3. If a sign is in such condition as to be in danger of falling, or is a menace to the safety of persons or property, or found to be an immediate and serious danger to the public because of its unsafe condition, the provisions of section 2301.6 of the Standard Building Code, as adopted by Collier County shall govern. 4. Code enforcement shall immediately remove all violative signs located in or upon public rights-of-way or public property. 5. Penalties. If any person, firm or corporation, whether public or private, or other entity fails or refuses to obey or comply with or violates any of the provisions of this Code, such person, firm, corporation, or other entity, upon conviction of such offense, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $500.00 or by imprisonment not to exceed 60 days in the county fail, or both, in the discretion of the court. Each violation or noncompliance shall be considered a separate and 2—(0 distinct offense. Further, each day of continued violation or noncompliance shall be considered as a separate offense. a. Nothing herein contained shall prevent or restrict the county from taking such other lawful action in any court of competent jurisdiction as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation or noncompliance. Such other lawful actions shall include, but shall not be limited to, an equitable action for injunctive relief or an action at law for damages. b. Further, nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the county from prosecuting any violation of this Code by means of a code enforcement board established pursuant to the subsidiary of F.S. ch. 162. • LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant) DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC8:10-11 LDC SECTION: Section 8.06.03 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Re-inserting provisions that were not included during the LDC recodification. REASON: It is necessary to identify exactly which land use petitions that the EAC is empowered to review. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 30, 2004 at 3:09 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 8.06.03 Powers and Duties The powers and duties of the EAC are as follows: * * * * * * . * * * * * * * O. The EAC shall review all land developmentpetitions which require the following: an environmental impact statement(EIS)per section 10.02.02 of the LDC: all developments of - regional impact(DRI); lands with special treatment(ST) or area of critical state concern/special treatment(ACSC/ST) zoning overlays; or any petition for which environmental issuescannot be resolved between the applicant and staff and which is requested by either party to be heard by the EAC. The EAC shall also review any petition which requires approval of the Collier County Planning Commission(CCPC) or the board of county commissioners (BCC)where staff receives a request from the chairman of the EAC, CCPC or the BCC for that petition to be reviewed by the EAC. 1. Any petitioner may request a waiver to the EAC hearing requirement, when the following considerations are met: 1)no protected species or wetland impacts are identified on the site; 2) an EIS waiver has been administratively granted; 3) ST zoning is present and an administrative approval has been granted; or 4) an EIS was previously completed and reviewed by staff and heard by a predecessor environmental board, and that EIS is less than five years old(or if older than five years,has been updated within six months of submittal) and the master plan for the site does not show greater impacts to the previously designated preservation areas. 2. The surface water management aspects of any petition, that is or will be reviewed and permitted by South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), are exempt from review by the EAC. C2-9 ''1 LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Kay Deselem/Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC9:11 and 10:175 LDC SECTION: Sections 9.04.00 and new LDC section 10.09.00 LDC SUPPLEMENT #: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Reinserting some of the Variance procedures. REASON: These were notincluded in the LDC recodification. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None • OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 6, 2004 at 4:05 p.m. Amend the LDC.as follows: 9.04.00 VARIANCES 9.04.01 Generally A. Purpose. In specific cases,variance from the terms of the LDC may be granted where said variance will not be contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare and where owing to special conditions peculiar to the property, a diminution of a regulation is found to have no measurable impact on the public interest, safety or welfare; or a literal enforcement of the LDC would result in unnecessary and undue hardship, or practical difficulty to the owner of the property and would otherwise deny the property owner a level of utilization of his/her property that is consistent with the development pattern in the neighborhood and clearly has no adverse effect on the community at large or neighboring property owners. B. Historic Places.Variances may be issued for the reconstruction,rehabilitation or restoration of structures listed on the National Register of Historic Places or the State Inventory of Historic Places, without regard to the procedures set forth in the remainder of this section. C. For specific procedures associated with Variances,please see section 10.09.00 of the LDC. • 9.04.02 Types of Variances Authorized A variance is authorized for any dimensional development standard, including the following: height,area, and size of structure;height of fence; size of yards and open spaces; dimensional aspects of landscaping and buffering requirements; size,height,maximum number of, and minimum setback for signs; and minimum requirements for off-street parking facilities. A. Variances for signs. The board of zoning appeals based upon the evidence given in public hearing; and the findings of the planning commission should determine to the maximum extent possible if the granting of the variance will diminish or otherwise have a detrimental effect on the public interest, safety or welfare. A variance from the terms of this zoning code may be granted based on the requirements of this section 9.04.00 or where it can be demonstrated that a sign has significant historic or community significance, and pursuant to the criteria and procedures set forth in this section 9.04.00. In granting any variance,the board of zoning appeals may prescribe the following: 1. Appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with this Code or other applicable county ordinances. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the variance is granted,shall be deemed a violation of this Code. 2. A reasonable time limit within which the action for which the variance required shall be begun or completed or both. 9.04.03 Criteria for Variances Findings. Before any variance shall be recommended for approval to the board of zoning appeals, the planning commission shall consider and be guided by the following standards in making a determination: A. There are special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size, and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved. B. There are special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant, such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. C. A literal interpretation of the provisions of the LDC work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. D. The variance, if granted,will be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure and which promote standards of health, safety, or welfare. E. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands,buildings,or structures in the same zoning district. F. Granting the variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the LDC, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. G. There are natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation, such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. H. Granting the variance will be consistent with the GMP. 10.09.00 Variance Procedures A. Conditions and safeguards. In recommending approval of anv variance,the planning commission may recommend appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with this zoning code including,but not limited to; reasonable time limits within which the action for which the variance is required shall be begun or completed, or both. In the case of after-the-fact variances,the planning commission may recommend, as a condition of approval,that in the case of the destruction of the encroaching structure, for any reason,to an extent equal to or greater than 50 percent of the actual replacement cost of the structure at the time of its destruction, any reconstruction shall conform to the provisions of this Code in effect at the time of reconstruction. Violation of such conditions and safeguards., when made apart of the terms under which the variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this zoning code. B. Recommendation of denial. If the planning commission recommends denial of a variance, it shall state fully in its record its reason for doing so. Such reasons shall take into account the factors stated in section 9.04.03 of this code, or such of them as may be applicable to the action of denial and the particular regulations relating �-.� to the specific variance requested if any. • C. Status of planning commission report and recommendations. The report and - recommendation of the planning commission required above shall be advisory only and shall not be binding upon the board of zoning appeals. D. Notice of board ofzoning appeals public hearing. Upon completion of the public hearing before the planning commission,the petition shall be heard by the board of zoning appeals.Notice of public hearing shall be given at least 15 days in advance of the public hearing before the board of zoning appeals. The owner of the property for which the variance is sought, or his agent or attorney designated by him on his petition, shall be notified by mail.Notice of public hearing shall be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least one time 15 days prior to the hearing. E. Board of zoning appeals public hearings. The public hearing shall be held by the board of zoning appeals. Any party may appear in person by agent or attorney, or may submit written comments to the board of zoning appeals. F. Board ofzoning appeals action. Upon consideration of the planning commission's report, findings and recommendations, and upon consideration of the standards and guidelines set forth in section 9.04.03 of this code, the board of zoning appeals shall approve,by resolution,or deny apetition for a variance. G. Conditions and safeguards. In granting any variance,the board of zoning appeals may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with this zoning code, including,but not limited to,reasonable time limits within which action for which the variance is required shall be begun or completed, or both. In the case of after-the-fact variances,the board may stipulate that in the case of destruction of • the encroaching structure, for any reason, to an extent equal to or greater than 50 percent of the actual replacement cost of the structure at the time of its destruction, any reconstruction shall conform to the provisions of this Code in effect at the time of reconstruction. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this zoning code. H. Limitations on power to grant variances. Under no circumstances shall the board of zoning appeals grant a variance to permit a use not permitted under the terms of this zoning code in the zoning district involved, or any use expressly or by implication prohibited,by the terms of these regulations in the said zoning district. I. Variance application processing time. An application for a variance will be considered "open" when the determination of"sufficiency" has been made and the application is assigned a petitionprocessing number. An application for a variance will be considered"closed" when the petitioner withdraws the subject application through written notice or ceases to supply necessary information to continue processing or otherwise actively pursue the variance, for a period of six months.An application deemed"closed"will not receive further processing and shall be withdrawn and an application "closed"through inactivity shall be deemed withdrawn. The ^ planning services department will notify the applicant of closure,however, failure to notify by the county shall not eliminate the "closed" status of apetition. An application deemed "closed" may be re-opened by submitting a new application, repayment of all application fees and granting of a determination of"sufficiency". Further review of the request will be subject to the then current code. 1. Applicability. All applications for a variance whether submitted before or after June 26, 2003, shall comply with the processing time procedures set forth in section I. above. • • F) • LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant) DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC 10:10 LDC SECTION: Section 10.02.02 A.4. LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Re-inserting language that was not included during the LDC recodification. REASON: It is imperative that the applicant set forth measures necessary for mitigation. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES.OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 30, 2004 at 3:45 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 10.02.02 Submittal Requirements for All Applications A. Environmental impact statements * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4. Information required for application. * * * * * * * * * * * * * .0-70 1J g. Listed species. Provide a plant and animal species survey to include at a minimum, listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on-site, and conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. State actual survey times and dates, and provide a map showing the location(s) of species of special status identified on-site. ii. Identify all listed species that are known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on the site or that have been directly observed on the site. iii. Indicate how the project design minimizes impacts to species of special status. Describe the measures that are proposed as mitigation for impacts to listed species. iv. Provide habitat management plans for each of the listed species known to occur on the property. For sites with bald eagle nests and/or nest protection zones,bald eagle management plans are required, copies of which shall be included as exhibits attached to the PUD documents,where applicable. v. Where applicable, include correspondence received from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission(FFWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), with regards to the project. Explain how the concerns of these agencies have been met. 5 LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant) DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: LDC10:11-12 LDC SECTION: Section 10.02.02 A. LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Placing the language dealing with an ST or ACSC-ST Overlay in a ' separate lettered paragraph and adding a cross-reference to an exemption listed in 3.04.01 C.1. REASON: The language is more appropriately located as a separate paragraph as it discusses any parcel as opposed to only single-family or duplex uses. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None - RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC section 3.04.01 C. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on November 24, 2004 at 4:55 p.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 10.02.02 Submittal Requirements for All Applications A. Environmental impact statements * * * * * * * * * • * * * * 7. Exemptions. '- a. The EIS exemption shall not apply to any parcel with a ST or ACSC-ST overlay,unless otherwise exempted by section 4.02.14 H. of this Code. a:b. Single-family or duplex uses. Also.,sSingle-family or duplex use on a single lot or parcel. _ _ . : _ . .. -. . _: .. . _ this Code. c. Agricultural uses. Agricultural uses that fall within the scope of sections 163.3214(4) or 823.14(6),Florida Statutes,provided that the subject property will not be converted to a nonagricultural use or considered for any type of rezoning petition for a period of twenty-five years after the agricultural uses commence and provided that the subject property does not fall within an ACSC or ST zoning overlay. d. Non-sensitive areas. Any area or parcel of land which is not, in the opinion of the County Manager or his designee, an area of environmental sensitivity, subject to the criteria set forth below,provided that the subject property does not fall within an ACSC or ST zoning overlay: i. The subject property has already been altered through past usage, prior to the adoption of this Code, in such a manner that the proposed use will not further degrade the environmental quality of the site or the surrounding areas which might be affected by the proposed use. ii. The major flora and fauna features have been altered or removed to such an extent as to preclude their reasonable regeneration or useful ecological purpose. An example would be in the case of an industrial park or a commercial development where most of the flora and fauna were removed prior to the passage of this Code. iii. The surface and/or natural drainage or recharge capacity of the project site has been paved or channeled, or otherwise altered or improved prior to the adoption of this Code, and will not be further degraded as a result of the proposed use or development. iv. The use and/or development of the subject property will definitely improve and correct ecological deficiencies which resulted from use and/or development which took place prior to the passage of this Code. An example would be where the developer proposes to reforest the area,provide additional open space, replace natural drainage for channeled drainage, and/or reduce density. v. The use or development will utilize existing buildings and structures and will not require any major alteration or modification of the existing land forms, drainage, or flora and fauna elements of the property. d:e. All lands lying within all incorporated municipalities in Collier County. o-f All NBMO Receiving Lands. g. Single-family lots in accordance with section 3.04.01 C.1. LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant) DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 • LDC PAGE: LDC10:82-84 and 10:123-125 LDC SECTION: Section 10.02.06 B.1. and 10.02.12 LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Deleting section 10.02.12. REASON: With one minor exception, the language of 10.02.06 B.1. is repeated in 10.02.12. The provisions in question pertain to building or land alteration permits, so they should be located only in the permit section of the code (10.02.06). FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 1, 2004 at 12:21 p.m. All cross-references in the Code to 10.02.12 will need to be revised Further, any references to those sections following 10.02.12 (i.e. - 10.02.13 and 10.02.14) will need to be revised as these section numbers will change upon removal of the now 10.02.12. Amend the LDC as follows: 10.02.06 Submittal Requirements for Permits A. Generally. Any permit submitted to the County must meet the requirements for P---\ that particular permit, as more specifically stated below. • • 1. Relation to state and federal statutes. a. Required state and/or federal permits. Where proposed use or development requires state or federal development orders or permits prior to use or development, such development orders or permits must be secured from state or federal agencies prior to commencement of any construction and/or development, including any changes in land configuration and land preparation. b. Development of regional impact. Where a proposed use or development is a development of regional impact(DRI), it shall meet all of the requirements of F.S. ch. 380, as amended,prior to the issuance of any required county development orders or permits and commencement of construction or development. Submission of the application for development approval (ADA) for a DRI shall be simultaneous with the submission of any rezoning and/or conditional use application or other land use related petition required by this Code to allow for concurrent reviews and public hearings before both the planning commission and the BCC of the ADA and rezone and/or conditional use applications. The DRI and rezone and/or conditional use shall be approved prior to the issuance of any required county development orders or permits and commencement of construction or development. 2. No approval of the final subdivision plat, improvement plans or authorization to proceed with construction activities in compliance with the same shall require Collier County to issue a development order or building permit if(1)it can be shown that issuance of said development order or building permit will result in a reduction in the level of service for any public facility below the level of service established in the Collier County growth management plan, or(2) if issuance of said development order of[or] building permit is inconsistent with the growth management plan. Anything in this division to the contrary notwithstanding, all subdivision and development shall comply with the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. III] and the growth management plan. B. Building or Land Alteration Permits. 1. Building or land alteration permit and certificate of occupancy compliance process. a. Zoning action on building or land alteration permits. The County Manager or his designee shall be responsible for determining whether applications for building or land alteration permits, as required by the Collier County Building code or this Code are in accord with the requirements of this Code, and no building or land alteration permit shall be issued without written approval that plans submitted conform to applicable zoning regulations, and other land development regulations. For purposes of this section a land alteration permit shall mean any written authorization to alter land and for which a building permit may not be required. Examples include but are not limited to clearing and excavation permits, site development plan approvals, agricultural clearing permits, and blasting permits.No building or structure shall be erected, moved, added to, altered, utilized or allowed to exist and/or no land alteration shall be permitted without first obtaining the authorization of the required permit(s), inspections and certificate(s) of occupancy as required by the Collier County Building Code or this Code and no building or land alteration permit application shall be approved by the County Manager or his designee for the erection,moving, addition to, or alteration of any building, structure, or land except in conformity with the provisions of this Code unless he shall receive a written order from the board of zoning appeals in the form of an administrative review of the interpretation, or variances as provided by this Code,or unless he shall receive a written order from a court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction. b. Application for building or land alteration permit. All applications for building or land alteration permits shall, in addition to containing the information required by the building official,be accompanied by all required plans and drawings drawn to scale, showing the actual shape and dimensions of the lot to be built upon; the sizes and locations on the lot of buildings already existing, if any; the size and location on the lot of the building or buildings to be erected, altered or allowed to exist; the existing use of each building or buildings or parts thereof;the number of families the building is designed to accommodate; the location and number of required off-street parking and off-street loading spaces; approximate location of trees protected by county regulations; changes in grade, including details of berms; and such other information with regard to the lot and existing/proposed structures as provided for the enforcement of this.Land development Code. In the case of application for a building or land alteration permit on property adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico, a survey, certified by a land surveyor or an engineer licensed in the State of Florida, and not older than 30 days shall be submitted. If there is a storm event or active erosion on a specific parcel of land for which a building or land alteration permit is requested,which the County Manager or his designee determines may effect the density or other use relationship of the property, a more recent survey may be required. Where ownership or property lines are in doubt, the County Manager or his designee may require the submission of a survey, certified by a land surveyor or engineer licensed in the State of Florida. Property stakes shall be in place at the commencement of construction. n c. Construction and use to be as provided in applications; status of permit issued in error. Building or land alteration permits or certificates of • • occupancy issued on the basis of plans and specifications-approved by the County Manager or his designee authorize only the use, arrangement,and construction set forth in such approved plans and applications, and no other use, arrangement, or construction. Building use arrangement, or construction different from that authorized shall be deemed a violation of this Land development Code. i. Statements made by the applicant on the building or land alteration permit application shall be deemed official statements. Approval of the application by the County Manager or his designee shall, in no way, exempt the applicant from strict observance of applicable provisions of this Land Development Code and all other applicable regulations, ordinances, codes, and laws. ii. A building or land alteration permit issued in error shall not confer any rights or privileges to the applicant to proceed to or continue with construction, and the county shall have the power to revoke such permit until said error is corrected. d. Adequate public facilities required. No building or land alteration permit or certificate of occupancy shall be issued except in accordance with the • Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, Ord.No. 90-24 (chapters 3, 6 and 10 of this Code) and Rule 9J-5.0055,F.A.C. e. Improvement of property prohibited prior to issuance of building permit. No site work,removal of protected vegetation, grading, improvement of property or construction of any type may be commenced prior to the issuance of a building permit where the development proposed requires a building permit under this Land development Code or other applicable county regulations. Exceptions to this requirement may be granted by the County Manager or his designee for an approved subdivision or site development plan to provide for distribution of fill excavated on-site or . to permit construction of an approved water management system, to minimize stockpiles and hauling off-site or to protect the public health, safety and welfare where clearing, grading and filling plans have been submitted and approved meeting the warrants of section 4.06.04 A. of this Code; removal of exotic vegetation shall be exempted upon receipt of a vegetation removal permit for exotics pursuant to Chapters 4 and 10. i. In the event the improvement of property, construction of any type, repairs or remodeling of any type that requires a building permit has been completed, all required inspection(s) and certificate(s) of occupancy must be obtained within 60 days after the issuance of after the fact permit(s). f. Zoning and land use approval required prior to or simultaneously with 411D • b issuance of building or land alteration permit or occupancy of land and space. A zoning certificate, attesting to compliance with all aspects of the zoning provisions of the Land development Code, shall be required prior to obtaining a building or land alteration permit or to occupying any space of land or buildings or for the conduct of a business in all zoning districts. The following zoning certificate review procedure shall provide for the issuance of a zoning certificate. i. For the purposes of determining compliance with the zoning provisions of the Land Development Code, an approval of a site development plan pursuant to section 10.02.03 herein, authorizes the issuance of a zoning certificate. Said zoning certificate shall constitute a statement of compliance with all applicable provisions of the Land Development Code, including the uses of the building space upon which applicable off-street parking and loading requirements were based, however, issuance of a zoning certificate shall not exempt any person from full compliance with any applicable provision of the Land Development Code. ii. In subdivided buildings each space for which a use is proposed requires a zoning certificate for that particular space, independent of any approval conferred upon the building and the land pursuant to section 10.02.03 and of a zoning certificate issued for the building and the land, shall be required. iii. A zoning certificate shall be required for any use of land or buildings located in residential zoning districts,which involve the conduct of a commercial or other nonresidentially allowed uses of land or buildings. C. Vegetation Removal permit requirements. 1. Other permits required. No vegetation removal permit • • • - - • _ •• _ - -., -: - •' _ . - = -- . shall be issued by the County Manager or his designee until all applicable federal and state, and County approvals as designated by the County Manager or his designee have been obtained. These approval may or may not include,but are not limited to: I.! - - • -• _ • . . • , • ... , process. 1. Zoning action on building or land alteration permits. The County Manager or his • • • Z..- . . . .,. _ _ . :_ •__.,__ ,. - _ ,. ..:, ., . _ ! ... 3. Construction and use to be as providcd in applications; status of pcnnit issucd in • County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, Ord.No. 90 21 (chapters 3,6 and 5. Improvcmcnt of property prohibitcd prior to issuancc of building permit. No sito • - • - - -- =- -_- . - ., : . ... - - - - -- ' - • - _ ., _ .".• _ .. . _ a, a. In the event the improvement of property, construction of any type,repairs • . . . - . . . . . cequifeek c. A zoning certificate shall be required for any use of land or buildings APPENDIX H - LDC/UDC COMPARATIVE TABLES The tables contained in this Appendix provide a detailed cross-reference between the sections of the LDC in effect prior to the October 18, 2004; effective date, and the LDC sections thereafter in effect on that date. The documents are broken down into Articles, which was the format of the LDC prior to the October 18, 2004, effective date. The LDC has been revised into a Chapter format as of the October 18, 2004 date. The contents of this Appendix are as follows: Article 1 - General Provisions Article 2 - Zoning Article 3 - Development Requirements Article 4 - Impact Fees Article 5 - Decision-Making and Administrative Bodies Article 6 - Definitions 4B ARTICLE 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS LDC LDC LDC Sub- UDC UDC Section Other Notes Division Section section Chapter 1.1 Chapter 1 1.01.00 — Title 1.2. Chapter 1 1.02.00 — Authority 1.3. Chapter 1 1.05.00 — Findings, Purpose and Intent 1.4. Chapter 1 1.05.00 — Findings, Purpose and Intent 1.5. Chapter 1 1.04.01 - Generally 1.5.1. Chapter 1 1.04.05 — Relationship to GMP 1.5.2. Chapter 1 1.04.03 — Exceptions 1.5.3. Chapter 1 1.04.02 — Applicability to... 1.5.4. Chapter 1 1.04.02 — Applicability to... 1.5.5. Relocated to Code of Laws & Ord.. 1.5.6. Chapter 1 1.04.01 — Generally 1.5.7. Relocated to Code of Laws & Ord.. 1.6. Revised in Supp. 17 (Ord. 03-55) 1.6.1. Chapter 1 1.06.01 — Responsibility for... §§1.6.2. — 10.02.02 - 1.6.6. Submittal Requirements for All Applications 2C/\:ID 1.6.7. Chapter 1 1.06.02— Rules for Interpretations... 1.6.8. Chapter 1 1.06:03 — Interpretations Not... 1.6.9. Chapter 1 1.06.02— Rules - for Interpretations... 1.6.10. Chapter 1 1.06.40 — Continuity of Zoning 1.7. Chapter 9 9.02.00 - This Division Development is no longer with Vested legally Rights- effective and [Reserved] therefore is not being carried forward, but the section is reserved for future amendment 1.8. Chapter 9 9.03.00 - § 1.8.2. was Nonconformities revised in Supp. 16 (Ord. 03-27) and Supp. 17 1.9• Chapter 8 8.08.00 - Code (Ord. 03-55) Enforcement Board 1.10. Fees This Division relocated to the County Administrative Code 1.11, — 1.17. These "Reserved" divisions were not required for inclusion in the UDC 1.18._ Chapter 1 1.07.00 Laws Revised in Adopted by Supp. 16 Reference (Ord. 03-27) 1.19. Chapter 10 10.02.08 - 11 1.20. & These 1.21. Divisions are replaced by Section Five in the 2004 adopting Ordinance. 1.22. This Division is replaced by Section Four in the 2004 adopting Ordinance. 1.23 This Division is replaced by Section Seven in the 2004 adopting Ordinance. ARTICLE 2- ZONING LDC LDC LDC Sub- UDC UDC Section Other Notes Division Section section Chapter 2.1. — 2.1.1. This section General is not needed and is not included in the UDC. 2.1.2. Chapter 2 2.01.01 — Purpose 2.1.3. This section is not needed and is not included in the UDC. ss. 2.1.4. — Chapter 2 2.02.01 - 2.1.7. Establishment of Official Zoning Atlas ss. 2.1.8. Chapter 2 2.02.01 — ^ & 2.1.9. Official Zoning Atlas ss. 2.1.10. Chapter 1 1.04.01 - - 2.1.12. Generally 2.1.13. Chapter 1 1.04.04 C Reduction 2.1.14. Chapter 2 • 2.02.02 — District... 2.1.15. Chapter 2 2.02.03 — Prohibited Uses 2.1.16. Chapter 2 • 2.02.02 — District... 2.1.17. Chapter 1 1.04.02 — Applicability.. 2.1.18. Chapter 1 1.04.02. D.... Div. 2.2. 2.2.1. Chapter 2 2.03.05. & 2.04.03 Table of Uses 2.2.2. Chapter 2 2.03.05 — Open Revised in Space Zoning Supp. 16 Districts (Ord. 03-27) & Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 2.2.2 % Chapter 2 2.03.08 - New zoning Eastern Lands/ district Rural Fringe Zoning Districts ss. 2.2.3. — Chapter 2 2.03.01 — Revised in 2.2.10. Residential Supp. 16 Zoning Districts (Ord. 03-27) and in Supp. 18 (Ord. 04- 08) 2.2.11. Chapter 2 2.03.02. F- TTRVC District 2.2.11.4.13. Chapter 4 4.06.06 - Special Buffer Requirements... _ ss. 2.2.12. Chapter 2 2.03.02 — Revised in — 2.2.15 1/2 Commercial . Supp. 18 Zoning Districts (Ord. 04-08) ss. 2.2.16 Chapter 2 2.03.03 — Sec. 2.2.16. & 2.2.16 1/2 Industrial revised in Zoning Districts Supp. 17 (Ord. 03-55) and in Supp. 18 (Ord. 04- 08) 2.2.17. Chapter 2 2.03.05 — Open Revised in Space Zoning Supp. 18 Districts , (Ord. 04-08) ss. 2.2.18. Chapter 2 2.03.04— Civic Revised in & 2.2.19. and Institutional Supp. 18 Zoning (Ord. 04-08) Sub-section Chapter 4 2.2.18.4.6. 4.05.05 — Parking Variation in the P District 2.2.20. Chapter 2 2.03.06 — PUD Revised in Districts Supp 18 (Ord. 04-08) ss. 2.2.21. Chapter 2 2.03.07— § 2.2.27. — 2.2.28. Overlay Zoning created by Districts Supp. 16 2.2.27. in (Ord. 03-27), Chapter 4 revised in 4.08.00 Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 2.2.29 2.2.29.1. - Chapter 2 2.03.07 G.6. 2. 2.2.29.3. - Chapter 10 10.02.05 F. Section 4. and created in 2.2.29.5. Cycle 2, 2004 (2) and (6) after the LDC recodification,. 2.2.29.5. Chapter 4 4.02.33 (1), (3), (4) and (5) ss. 2.2.30. NRPA-2.03.08 Revised in (NRPA) & C ; Supp. 18 2.2.31. NBMO - (Ord. 04-08) (NBMO) 2.03.08 D ss. 2.2.32. Chapter 2 2.03.07— §§ 2.2.32.& -2.2.35. Overlay... 2.2.33. revised in Supp. 16 (Ord. 03-27) §§ 2.2.33. & 2.2.34. revised in Supp. 17 2.2.37. (Ord. 03-55) This section has expired and is no longer needed or included in the UDC. 2.2.38• New district Revised in § 2.03.07 Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 2.3. 2.3.1. This section is not needed and is therefore not included in the UDC. ss. 2.3.2. Chapter 4 4.05.01 — & 2.3.3. Generally ss. 2.3.4. — Chapter 4 4.05.04 — Sec. 2.3.5. 2.3.12. Parking Space revised in Requirements Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) ' 2.3.13. Chapter 1 1.04.04 C ss. 2.3.14. These were & 2.3.15. reserved sections and are not included in the UDC. 2.3.16. Chapter 4 4.05.09 — Revised in Stacking Lane Supp. 16 Requirements (Ord. 03-27) 2.3.16.1. Chapter 4 4.05.08 Bicycle Parking... ss. 2.3.17. Chapter 4 4.05.06 — § 2.3.19. —2.3.21. Loading Space revised in Requirements Supp. 16 (Ord. 03-27). § 2.3.21. revised in Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 2.3.22. Chapter 4 4.05.07— Handicapped Parking... ss. 2.3.23. These were & 2.3.24. reserved sections and are not included in the UDC. 2.4. 2.4.1. This section is not needed and is therefore not included in the UDC. 2.4.2. Chapter 4 4.06.01 — Generally 2.4.3. Note: ss. Chapter 10 Administrative § 2.4.3.6. 2.4.3.4. - procedures revised in 2.4.3.7. in Chapter. Supp. 16 Chapter 4 (Ord. 03-27) (4.06.05) § 2.4.3. revised in Supp. 17 (Ord. 03-55) 2.4.4. Chapter 4 4.06.05— §. 2.4.4. General revised in Landscape Supp. 17 Requirements _(Ord. 03-55) 2.4.4.14. Chapter 4 4.06.04 D. Sub-section Chapter 4 4.06.01 — 2.4.4.16. Generally 2.4.5. Chapter 4 4.06.03 — § 2.4.5. Landscaping revised in Requirements Supp. 17 for Vehicular... (Ord. 03-55) 2.4.6. Chapter 4 4.06.05 — . § 2.4.6.5. General revised in Landscape Supp. 16 Requirements (Ord.'03-27) §§ 2.4.6.6. & 2.4.6.7. revised in Supp. 17 (Ord. 03-55) 2.4.7. Chapter 4 4.06.01 - §§ 2.4.7.2., Generally and 2.4.7.3. & 4.06.02 — Buffer 2.4.7.5. Requirements revised in Supp 17 (Ord. 03-55). §§ 2.4.7.2. and 2.4.7.5. revised in Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 2.5. 2.5.1. This section is not needed and is not included in the UDC. ss. 2.5.2. — Chapter 5 5.06.01 — § 2.5.5. 2.5.4. Generally revised in Supp. 17 (Ord. 03-55) and in Supp. 1U 18 (Ord. 04- --•N 08) 2.5.5 Chapter 5 5.06.04 Permitted ss. 2.5.6. § 2.5.7. Chapter 5 5.06.03 — §§ 2.5.6.22. & & 2.5.7. revised in Prohibited 2.5.7.30. Supp. 17 Signs revised in (Ord. 03- Supp. 16 55) (Ord. 03-27) 2.5.8. Chapter 5 5.06.04 ss. 2.5.9. Chapter 9 9.03.00 — & 2.5.10. Nonconformities 2.5.11. Chapter 9 9.04.00 — Variances s 2.5.12. & Chapter 10 10.02.06 - 2.5.13. Submittal Requirements for Permits 2.6. 2.6.1. Chapter 4 4.04.01 — Generally 2.6.2. Chapter 4 4.02.03 — Specific Standards ... ss. 2.6.3. — Chapter 4 4.02.01 — § 2.6.4. 2.6.4. Dimensional revised in Standards for Supp. 16 Principal Uses (Ord. 03-27); in Base Zoning § 2.6.3. Districts revised in Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 2.6.2.4. Chapter 5 5.03.01 — Canopy Tents 2.6.4.3. Chapter 9 9.04.00 — Variances 2.6.4.4. Chapter 4 4.02.01 — Dimensional St. ss 2.6.5. & Chapter 4 4.04.01 — 2.6.6. Generally 2.6.7. 2.6.7.1. Chapter 2 2.01.00 A 2.6.7.2. Chapter 2 2.01.00 B 2.6.7.3. Chapter 2 2.01.00 C 2.6.7.4. Chapter 2 2.03.07 L 2.6.8. Chapter 1 1.04.01 — Generally 2.6.9. Chapter 2 2.01.03 - Essential Services & 2.04.03 —Table of Uses 2.6.10. Chapter 5 5.05.01 — Businesses... 2.6.11. Chapter 5 5.03.02 — Fences &Walls 2.6.12. Chapter 2 2.01.00 E 2.6.13. Chapter 2 2.01.02 2.6.14. Chapter 2 2.04.00 - Permissible, Accessory, Chapter 4 4.02.01 - (CONT'D.) Dimensional Standards & Chapter 5 5.03.03 - Guesthouses 2.6.15. Chapter 5 5.03.04— Revised in Dumpsters Supp. 16 (Ord. 03-27) 2.6.16. Chapter 5 5.03.05 — Caretaker ... 2.6.17. Chapter 2 2.01.00 F 2.6.18. Chapter 2 2.01.00 G 2.6.19. Chapter 10 10.02.06 A 2.6.20. Chapter 5 5.02.00 — Home Occupations 2.6.21. Chapter 5 5.03.06 — Dock Revised in Facilities Supp.18 (Ord. 04-08) 2.6.21.2.7. Chapter 3 3.05.00 — Vegetation... 2.6.22. Chapter 5 5.05.02 — Marinas 2.6.23. Chapter 2 2.03.01 J 2.6.24. Chapter 5 5.04.02 — Interim... 2.6.25. Chapters 2 2.04.00 and 5 5.05.03 2.6.26. Chapter 5 5.05.04 — Group _ Housing 2.6.27. Chapter 4 4.02.02 - Dimensional Standards 2.6.28. Chapter 5 5.05.05 — Automobile... Chapter 9 9.04.07 — 2.6.28.4. Specific Reqts. 2.6.29. Chapter 5 5.05.06— Private Airports 2.6.30. Chapter 4 4.07.06 2.6.31. Relocated to Code of Laws & Ord. 2.6.32. Chapter 4 4.02.01 — Dimensional Standards 2.6.33. Throughout Temporary Use Chapter 5 - Process in see below 10.02.06 G Sub-section Chapter 5 5.03.05— Revised in 2.6.33.3. Caretaker... & . Supplement 5.04.03 — 16 (Ord. 03- Temporary 27) Uses... Sub-section Chapter 5 5.04.04 — Model 2.6.33.4. Homes... Sub- Chapter 5 5.04.05 — sections Temporary 2.6.33.6. — Events 2.6.33.9. Sub-section Chapter 5 5.06.06 - Sign Added in 2.6.33.10. Standards for Supplement Specific 18 (Ordinance Situations 04-08) 2.6.34. Chapter 5 5.04.06 - (see Annual Beach alsoAppx. Events Permit G 2.6.35. Chapter 5 5.05.09— Revised in Communication Supp. 18 (112;) Towers (Ord. 04-08) 2.6.36. Chapter 5 5.05.07- Townhouse... 2.6.37. Chapter 4 4.01.02 - Revised in Kitchens in Supp. 18 Dwelling Units (Ord. 04-08) 2.6.39. Chapter 2 2.03.07 - Added in TDRs Overlay Zoning Supp. 18 Districts (Ord. 04-08). 2.6.40. Chapter 2 2.05.02 - Added in Density Density Supp. 18 Blending Blending _(Ord. 04-08) 2.7. Portions revised in Supp.16 (Ord. 03-27) 2.7.1. This section is not needed and is not included in the UDC. 2.7.2. 2.7.2.1. & Chapter 10 10.02.08 - Revised in 2.7.2.2. Submittal Supp.17 (Ord. Requirements... 03-55) 2.7.2.3. - Chapter 10 10.03.05 - Revised in 2.7.2.16. Notice Supp.17 (Ord. Requirements... 03-55) 2.7.3. Chapter 10 10.02.13 - PUD Revised in Procedures Supp. 17 (Ord. 03-55) and § 2.7.3.5. • revised in Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 2.7.4. Chapter 10 10.08.00 - Sec. 2.7.4.9. Conditional Use revised in Procedures Supplement 18 (Ordinance 04-08) 2.7.5. Chapter 9 9.04.00— Variances 2.7.6. Chapter 10 10.02.06 - Submittal... 2.7.7. Chapter 2 2.06.00 —AHDB Revised in Supp.17 (Ord. r, 03-55) 2.8. Chapter 5 All in Portions of § 5.05.08 — Div. 2.8. were Architectural carried over Standards, into Div. 2.4. EXCEPT by Supp. 17 2.8.3.3.2. 4.06.02 C (Ord. 03-55) • ARTICLE 3- DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS LDC Division LDC LDC Sub- UDC Chapter UDC Section Other Notes Section section 3.1. General 3.1.1. None This section Overview was not required or included in the UDC 3.1.2. Fees None This section was not required or included in the UDC 3.2. 3.2.1. Title None This section Subdivisions and Citation was not required or included in the UDC 3.2.2. Chapter 4 4.03.01 Purpose 3.2.3. Chapter 1 1.04.01 Revised in Applicability Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 3.2.4. Chapter 1 & 1.04.03— Exemptions Exceptions Chapter 10 10.02.02 B 3.2.4.10. 10.02.02 B 10. 3.2.4.10. was 1.to 4., not required or Rural Area included in the Subdivisio UDC n • 3.2.4.11. 10.02.02 B 11. 3.2.4.11. was 1.to 4., not required or Chokolosk included in the ee Island UDC Subdivisio n 3.2.5. 3.2.5.1. Chapter 1 1.04.01 General Requirement S 3.2.5.2. Chapter 1 1.04.01 3.2.5.3. Chapter 4 4.03.02 3.2.5.4. Chapter 10 10.02.06 A.2. 3.2.6. Sub- Chapter 10 Revised in division Supp. 18 (Ord. review procs 04-08) 3.2.6.1. 10.02.01 A. 3.2.6.2. 10.02.04 A. 3.2.6.3. 10.02.05 A. 3.2.6.4. 10.02.05 B. 3.2.6.5. 10.02.05 C. 3.2.7. Chapter 10 10.02.04 - Revised/made Preliminary Submittal optional in subdivision Requirements Supp. 18 (Ord. plat for Plats 04-08) 3.2.8. 4.03.02, Revised in Improvement 4.04.01, Supp. 16 (Ord. Plans 4.06.00 03-27) & 6.03.00 & Supp. 18 6.04.00 (Ord.04-08) 3.2.8.1. — Chapter 10 10.02.05- 3.2.8.2. 3.2.8.3.1. Chapter 10 10.02.05 - & 3.2.8.3.2. 3.2.8.3.4. Chapter 4 _ 4.06.01 3.2.8.3.5. Chapter 10 10.02.05 3.2.8.3.6. Chapter 4 4.06.04 3.2.8.3.7. — Chapter 10 10.02.05 3.2.8.3.10. 3.2.8.3.11. Chapter 10 10.02.05 3.2.8.3.12. 3.2.8.3.13. Chapter 4 4.06.01 3.2.8.3.14. Chapter 2 2.01.04 3.2.8.3.15. Chapter 10 10.02.05 3.2.8.3.16. 3.2.8.3.17. Chapter 6 6.06.02 3.2.8.3.18. Chapter 10 & 10.02.05 E.3(n) and Chapter 4 4.06.01 C 3.2.8.3.19. Chapter 10 10.02.05 E.3 and 21 3.2.8.3.20 Chapter 6 6.06.03 & and 22. 6.06.05 ''Th 3.2.8.3.23. Chapter 6 6.01.00 - 3.2.8.3.24. Chapter 6 6.01.01 A 3.2.8.3.25. Chapter 6 6.04.01 3.2.8.3.26. Chapter 6 6.05.01 3.2.8.4. 3.2.8.4.1.. - Chapter 6 6.05.02 Relocated into 13., Construction except Stds. Manual, 3.2.8.4.11. except as noted. 3.2.8.4.14. Chapter 6 6.06.02 D. NOTE:3.2.8.4. 14. revised in Supp. 16 (03- 27). 3.2.8.4.15. Chapter 6 _ 6.01.03 3.2.8.4.16.; Construction Streets Standards Manual Revised in Supp. 17 (03- 55). 3.2.8.4.17. Chapters 6 6.06.03 - Streetlights & and 10 10.02.12 A 3.2.8.4.18. Chapter 10 10.02.05 E.3.(r) 3.2.8.4.19. Chapter 6 6.01.01 3.2.8.4.20. None Construction Standards 3.2.8.4.22.; Manual except 3.2.8.4.22, Chapter 10 10.02.05 E.4 paragraph 11 3.2.8.4.23. Chapter 6 6.04.01 3.2.8.4.24. Chapter 6 6.04.02 3.2.8.4.25. Chapter 4 4.06.05 E.3 3.2.8.4.26. Chapter 4 4.06.05 E.4 3.2.9. Final Chapter 10 10.02.04 Revised in subdivision Supp. 18 (Ord. plat 04-08) 3.3. Chapter 10 Revised in Site Supps. 16 Development 10.02.03 - (Ords. 03-27), Plans Submittal Supp. 17 (03- Requirements 55), and 18 '"� for SDP's (04-08) 3.3.1. This section not required or included in the UDC 3.4. Relocated to Explosives Code of Laws & Ord.; Ch 55, Art I., ss. 55-1 - 55- 18 3.5. 3.5.1. — 15.; Relocated to Excavation Code of Laws & Ord.; ss. 22-106 except —22-119 3.5.11.; Chapter 3 3.05.10 NOTE: Revised Littoral Shelf in Supp. 16 Planting (Ord. 03-27) Area and Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 3.6. Relocated to Well Code of Laws & Construction Ord.; ss. 90-1 - 90-8. 3.7. 3.7.1. This section Soil Erosion was not Control required or included in the UDC 3.7.2. This section was not required or included in the . UDC 3.7.3. Chapter 10 10.02.02 3.8. Environ- Revised in mental Impact Supp. 18 (Ord. Statements 04-08) 3.8.1. - This section was not required or included in the UDC 3.8.2. — Chapter 10 10.02.02 3.8.11. 1t""` 3.9. Revised in Vegetation Supp. 18 (Ord. Removal 04-08) 3.9.1. This section was not required or included in the UDC 3.9.2. Chapter 3 3.05.02 Exemptions 3.9.3. Chapter 3 3.05.02 Exemptions 3.9.4. —3.9.7 Chapter 3 3.05.07 Div. 3.9 Section Preservation numbering was Standards greatly revised in Cycle 3, 2003 3.9.5. (prior Chapter 3 3.05.04 — Revised in to Cycle 3, Vegetation Supp. 16 (Ord. 2003, then removal . . . 03-27) re-numbered thru 3.05.07 to 3.9.8. 3.9.5.5. 3.05.07 (3.9.4. after Cycle 3, 2003) 3.9.8. 3.9.8.1. Chapter 3 03.05.04 3.9.8.2. Chapter 3 03.05.05 3.9.8.3. Chapter 3 , 03.05.06 3.9.8.4. This section was not • required or included in the UDC 3.9.9. Chapter 3 3.05.08 - Requirement for Removal... 3.9.10. Chapter 10 10.02.06 C - (3.9.6. prior Submittal to Cycle 3, Requirements 2003) for Permits 3.9.10.2. Chapter 10 10.02.06 D 3.9.11.; ss. 3.9.12. Chapter 10 10.02.06 E - numbered & 13, were Submittal ss. 3.9.6.8. created in Requirements and 3.9.6.9. Cycle 3 & for Permits prior to 3rd are in Cycle, 2003. Ch.10 3.10. 3.10.1. This section Sea Turtle was not Protection required or included in the UDC 3.10.2. Chapter 3 3.04.02 - 3.10.5. Species... 3.10.6. Chapter 3 3.04.02 B.6 3.10.7. Chapter 3 3.04.02 3.10.8. This section (reserved) was not required or included in the UDC 3.10.9. Chapter 10 10.02.06. C, 3.10.10. This section'' was not required or included in the UDC 3.11. Chapter 3 3.04.00 - Revised in Endangered, Protection of Supp. 18 (Ord. Threatened Endangered, 04-08) or... Threatened... 3.11.3.2. & Deleted in Cycle • 3.11.3.3. 3, 2003 3.11.3.4. Chapter 3 3.04.02 - Species Specific... 3.12. 3.12.1. & These sections Coastal Zone 3.12.4. were not Management required or included in the UDC 3.12.2. Chapter 3 3.03.01 - Purpose 3.12.3. Chapter 3 3.03.02 - Applicability 3.12.5. Chapter 3 3.03.02 - Applicability 3.12.5.1. Chapter 10 Cross- Revised in referenced in Supp. 18 (Ord. 3.03.04 04-08) 3.12.5.2. Chapter 10 Revised in Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 3.12.5.3. Chapter 3 3.03.05 - Sea Level Rise 3.12.5.4. Chapter 3 3.03.06 - Native Vegetation... 3.12.6. Chapter 3 3.03.07 - Undeveloped Coastal Barriers 3.12.8. Chapter 3 3.03.07 - Undeveloped Coastal Barriers 3.12.7. & These sections 3.12.9. were not required or included in the UDC 3.13. 3.13.1 This section Coastal was not Construction required or Setback included in the UDC. 3.13.2. - Chapter 9 9.04.06 - Variances and 3.13.7. Specific Administrative Requirements procedures for Variance chapter 3.13.8 & Chapter 10 10.02.06 A- 3.13.8. revised 3.13.9 Submittal in Supp. 18 Requirements (Ord. 04-13) for Permits 3.14. Vehicle Chapter 10 10.02.06 I. Revised in on the Beach Regulations Supp. 16 (Ord. g 03-27) rio('—'2) 3.15. Revised in Adequate Supp. 18 (Ord. Public 04-08) Facilities 3.15.1. This section was not required or included in the UDC 3.15.2. Chapter 6 6.02.01 3.15.3. Chapter 6 6.02.01 D 3.15.4.; This section reserved was not included in the UDC 3.15.5 & Chapter 6 6.02.01 - 3.15.6. Generally & 6.02.02 - Management . 3.15.7._ Chapter 10 10.02.07 3.16 3.16.1 3.16.1.1. — These sub- Groundwater 3.16.1.3. sections we'' Protection not required or included in the UDC 3.16.1.4. & Chapter 3 3.06.01 - 3.16.1.5. Purpose and Intent 3.16.2. 3.16.2.1. & Chapter 3 3.06.01 - 3,16.2.1.1. Purpose and Intent 3.16.2.1.2. Chapter 3 Throughout Ch. 3 3.16.2.1.3. Chapter 3 3.06.04 - Groundwater Protection 3.16.2.2. & Chapter 3 3.06.05 - 3.16.2.3. Annual Review of Zones 3.16.2.4. Chapter 3 3.06.06 - 3.06.08 1 3.16.2.5. Chapter 3 3.06.09 - Protection of Future Wellfields 3.16.2.6. Chapter 3 3.06.10 - Effects of... 3.16.3. Chapter 3 3.06.11 - Exempted Development 3.16.4. Chapter 3 3.06.12 - Regulated Development 3.16.5. Chapter 3 3.06.13 - Countywide Groundwater 3.16.6. Chapter 10 10.04.01 (B) - Determination of Completeness 3.16.7. Chapter 10 10.02.06 (F) - Submittal ,� Requirements for Permits 3.16.8. Chapter 10 10.04.08 - Modifications to Pending Applications 3.16.9. Chapter 10 10.02.02 (E) - Submittal Requirements for All... 3.16.10. Chapter 10 10.04.11 - Public Hearings 3.16.11. Chapter 3 3.06.09 - Protection of Future Wellfields 3.16.12. 3.16.12.1 Chapter 1 1.08.00 3.16.12.2 Chapter 1 1.03.02 3.16.13. — Chapter 10 10.01.04 — Administrative 3.16.17. Deter. of procedures Completeness chapter C91) 3.17. Relocated to Post-Disaster Code of Laws & Recovery & Ord.; ss. 38-1 to Re- 38-12. construction Management • ARTICLE 4— IMPACT FEES LDC Division LDC Section LDC Sub- UDC UDC Other Notes section Chapter Section 4.1. —4.7. These provisions are located in Chapter 74 of the Code of Laws & Ordinances, and therefore, are not required to be, and are not, located in the UDC. ARTICLE 5— DECISION-MAKING AND ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES LDC Division LDC LDC UDC UDC Other Notes Section Sub- Chapter Section section 5.1. Board of County Chapter 8 8.02.00 - Commissioners BOCC 5.2. Planning Chapter 8 8.03.00 — Commission CCPC 5.3. Board of Zoning Chapter 8 • 8.04.00 — Appeals • BZA 5.4. Building Board of Chapter 8 8.05.00 — Revised in Adjustment and BOAA Supp. 16 (Ord. Appeals 03-27) 5.5. & 5.6.; 5.8. ; & These Divisions 5.10. - 5.12. were not Reserved required or included in the UDC 5.7. County Manager 5.7.1. This Section was not required or included in the UDC 5.7.2. 5.7.2.1. This Section was not required or included in the UDC, except for 5.7.2.1., relocated to Sec. 2-78 (a) (4), of the Code of Laws & Ords. 5.9. CD&ES Division Chapter 8 8.09.00 — CD&ES 5.13. Environmental Chapter 8 8.06.00 — Advisory Council EAC 5.14. Historical/ Chapter 8 8.07.00 — Archaeological HAPB Preservation Board ARTICLE 6 - DEFINITIONS LDC Division LDC LDC Sub- UDC UDC Other Notes Section section Chapter Section 6.1. Rules of Chapter 1 1.03.00 Construction Rules of Construction 6.2. Chapter 1 1.08.00. A. Revised in Abbreviations Supp. 18 (Ord. 04-08) 6.3. Definitions Chapter 1 1.08.00. B. Revised in all three Supps. (16, 17, and 18). LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Kim Hadley(consultant) DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 1, 2005 LDC PAGE: Various LDC SECTION: Various LDC SUPPLEMENT#: Original LDC recodification(04-41) CHANGE: Cleaning up various typographical errors. REASON: See above. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: This version was created on December 9, 2004 at 9:31 a.m. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.03.05 Open Space Zoning District A. Golf Course District "GC". The purpose and intent of"GC" district is to provide lands for golf courses and normal accessory uses to golf courses, including certain uses of a commercial nature. The GC district shall be in accordance with the urban mixed use district and the agricultural rural district of the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. B. Conservation District"CON". The purpose and intent of the conservation district "CON" is to conserve,protect, and maintain vital natural resource lands within unincorporated Collier County that are owned primarily by the public.All native habitats possess ecological and physical characteristics that justify attempts to maintain these important natural resources. Barrier 1 Islands, coastal bays,wetlands, and habitat for listed species deserve particular attention because of their ecological value and their sensitivity to perturbation. All proposals for development in the CON district must be subject to rigorous review to ensure that the impacts of the development do not destroy or unacceptably degrade the inherent functional values. The CON district includes such public lands as Everglades National Park,Big Cypress National Preserve, Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge,portions of the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern,Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, Collier-Seminole State Park, Rookery Bay National Estuarine Sanctuary Research Reserve, Delnor-Wiggins State Park, and the National Audubon's Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary(privately owned), and C.R.E.W. It is the intent of the CON district to require review of all development proposed within the CON district to ensure that the inherent value of the County's natural resources is not destroyed or unacceptably altered. The CON district corresponds to and implements the conservation land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP. 1. Allowable uses. The following uses are allowed in the CON District. a. Uses permitted as of right. * * * * * * * * * * * * (9) The following essential services: (a) Private wells and septic tanks necessary to serve uses identified in 1 through 8 above. (b) Utility lines necessary to serve uses identified in 1 through 8 above,with the exception of sewer lines. (c) Sewer lines and lift stations if all of the following criteria are satisfied: i. Such sewer lines or lift stations shall not be located in any NRPA Lands in the CON district; ii. Such sewer lines or lift stations shall be located withil already cleared portions of existing rights-or- way or easements; and iii. Such sewer lines or lift,stations are necessary to serve a central sewer system that provides service to Urban Areas; or to the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District, as delineated on the Urban-Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the GMP. * * * * * * * * . * * * • * * 2.03.08 Eastern Lands/Rural Fringe ZoningDistricts * * * * * * * * * * * * 197B. Rural villages. Rural villages, including rural villages within the NBMO, may be approved within the boundaries of RFMU receiving lands, subject to the following: * * * * * * * * * . * * * * (3) Density.A rural village shall have a minimum density of 2.0 units per gross acre and a maximum density of 3.0 units per acre, except that the minimum density with a NBMO rural village shall be 1.5 units per gross acre. Those densities shall be achieved as follows: (a) Base density.A base density of 0.2 dwelling units per acre(1.0 dwelling units per five acres)for lands within the rural village, and the land area designated as a greenbelt surrounding the rural village, is granted by right for allocation within the designated rural village. (b) Minimum density. For each TDR credit for use in a rural village, one bonus credit shall be granted,up to the minimum gross density of 2.0 units per acre outside of the NBMO and 1.5 units per acre within the NBMO. (c) Maximum density. A developer may achieve a density exceeding the minimum required density,up to.a maximum of 3.0 units per acre, through the following means: i. TDR credits; ii. An additional density bonus 0.3 units per acre for the additional preservation of native vegetation as set forth in Chapter 4 section 3.05.07 E.; iii. An additional density bonus of 0.3 units per acre for additional wetlands mitigation as set forth in Chapter 4 section 3.05.07 F.; and/or iv. An additional density bonus of 0.5 units per acre for each Affordable or workforce housing unit. * * * * * * * 2.05.02 Density Blending * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. Conditions and limitations. * * * 3. Properties straddling the Immokalee urban area and the RLSA district. Density and Intensity Blending between properties straddling the Immokalee Urban Area and the RLSA District shall be permitted, subject to all of the following conditions and limitations: a. The project in aggregate must be a minimum of 200 acres in size. b. The lands from which density and/or blending are shifted must be within .� the Immokalee Urban Area must be designated Recreational/Tourist District. c. The lands within the Immokalee Urban Area from which density and/or intensity are shifted must have a FLUCCS FLUCFCS Code designation of Group 1 or Group 2 and an Index Value of greater than 1.2,both as indicated on the Natural Resource Index. d. Density and/or intensity may only be shifted from the lands within the Immokalee Urban Area containing the Index Value (as measured above), on an acre per acre basis,to lands within an SRA having an Index Value of 1.2 or less. e. Lands from which the density and/or intensity has been shifted, shall be placed in a conservation easement in perpetuity. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2.06.01 Generally '� A. Within most of the coastal urban designated areas identified on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP, a base density of four(4)residential dwelling units per gross acre is permitted. However,the base density may be adjusted depending on the characteristics of the development. One characteristic of a housing development which would allow the addition of density bonuses in order to increase the density over the base density is the provision of affordable housing in the development. The provision of affordable housing units may add up to eight(8) dwelling units per gross acre to the base density of four(4)residential dwelling units per gross acre, for a total of twelve (12)residential dwelling units per gross acre,plus any other density bonuses available, and minus any density reduction for traffic congestion area required,pursuant to the collier county gam,GMP. The total eligible density must not exceed a total of sixteen(16) dwelling units per gross acre, except as allowed through use of transfer of development rights, as provided for in the growth management plan. The program to accomplish this increase to provide affordable housing is called the affordable housing density Bonus (ADHB)program. B. Within most of the Immokalee Urban area, as identified on the Immokalee area master plan future land use map of the growth management plan,base densities are four or six or eight residential dwelling units per gross acre. However, the base density may be adjusted depending on the characteristics of the development. One characteristic of a housing development that would allow the addition of density bonuses is the provision of affordable housing in the development. The provision of affordable housing units may add up to eight dwelling units per gross acre to the base density of four, six or eight residential dwelling units per gross acre, for a total of twelve, fourteen or sixteen residential dwelling units per gross acre,plus any other density bonuses available. The total eligible density must not exceed a total of 16 dwelling units per gross acre. C. Within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Agricultural/Rural area, as identified on the future land use map of the growth management plan,towns,villages, hamlets and compact rural developments are allowed at a density range of one-half to four dwelling units per gross acre. The allowed density may be adjusted depending on the characteristics of the development. One characteristic of a housing development that would allow the addition of density bonuses is the provision of affordable housing in the development. The provision of affordable housing units may add up to eight dwelling units per gross acre to the allowed density of one-half to four dwelling units per gross acre, for a total of eight and one-half to twelve and one-half residential dwelling units per gross acre,plus any other density bonuses available. 87D. In order to qualify for the AHDB for a development, the developer must apply for and obtain the AHDB from the County for a development in accordance with this section, especially in accordance with the provisions of the AHDB program, including the AHDB rating system, the AHDB monitoring program, and the limitations on the AHDB. 1. Preapplication conference. Prior to submitting an application for AHDB, a preapplication conference may be scheduled with the County Manager or his designee. If the proposed development is to include affordable housing,the housing and urban improvement director must participate in the preapplication conference. The preapplication conference provides an opportunity to familiarize the applicant with the AHDB program and provides an opportunity for the county staff to obtain a clear understanding of the proposed development. The AHDB rating system,the AHDB monitoring program,the limitations, criteria, procedures, standard conditions, standard forms, and other information will be discussed and made available to the applicant. Depending on the type of development proposed,the application may be combined with an application for a planned unit development(PUD), a rezone, or a Stewardship Receiving Area. 2. Application. An application for AHDB for a development must be submitted to the County Manager or his designee in the form established by the County Manager or his designee. One additional copy of the application as otherwise required must be provided for the housing and urban improvement director. The application must, at a minimum, include: a. Zoning districts proposed by the applicant on the property and acreage of each; b. The total number of residential dwelling units in the proposed development,categorized by number of bedrooms and whether the unit is to be rented or owner-occupied; c. The total number of AHDB units requested, categorized by number of bedrooms and whether the unit is to be rented or owner-occupied; d. Total number of affordable housing units proposed in the development categorized by level of income,number of bedrooms, and rental units and owner-occupied units: • i. Moderate income households (one bedroom, two bedrooms, or three bedrooms'or more). ii. Low income households(one bedroom, two bedrooms, or three bedrooms or more). iii. Very low income households (one bedroom, two bedrooms, or three bedrooms or more). iv. Total affordable housing units (one bedroom,two bedrooms, or three bedrooms or more). e. Gross density of the proposed development; f. Whether the AHDB is requested in conjunction with an application for a planned unit development(PUD), an application for rezoning,or an application for a Stewardship Receiving Area; and g. Any other information which would reasonably be needed to address the request for AHDB for the development pursuant to the requirements set forth in this section. 3. Determination of completeness. After receipt of an application for AHDB, the housing and urban improvement director shall determine whether the application submitted is complete. If he determines that the application is not complete,the housing and urban improvement director shall notify the applicant in writing of the deficiencies. The housing and urban improvement director shall take no further steps to process the application until the deficiencies have been remedied. 4. Review and recommendation by the housing and urban improvement director. After receipt of a completed application for AHDB,the heg-and-wbaan County Manager or designee must review and evaluate the application in light of the AHDB rating system, the AHDB monitoring program and the requirements of this dMaieff section. The housing and wan wester County Manager or designee must coordinate with the development services director to schedule the AHDB application with the companion application for rezoning,planned unit development or stewardship receiving area, and must recommend to the planning commission and the be oemmissiefrefs BCC to deny, grant,or grant with conditions, the AHDB application. The recommendation of the _ .. . . ., _ .. .. .- . _ _. _ County Manager or designee must include a report in support of his recommendation. •5. Review and recommendation by the planning commission. Upon receipt by the planning commission of the application for AHDB and the written recommendation and report of the _ _ ., .... _ _ - County Manager or designee, the planning commission must schedule and hold a properly advertised and duly noticed public hearing on the application. If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a PUD,then the hearing must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for the PUD before the planning commission, and the planning commission must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the application for the PUD. If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a rezoning, then the hearing must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for rezoning before the planning commission, and the planning commission must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the application for rezoning. If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a stewardship receiving area,then the hearing must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for stewardship receiving area before the planning commission, and the planning commission must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the application for stewardship receiving area.After the close of the public hearing, the planning commission must review and evaluate the application in light of the requirements of this division section and the requirements for a rezoning, PUD rezoning, or stewardship receiving area, as applicable, and must recommend to the BCC that the application be denied, granted or granted with conditions. 6. Review and determination by board of county commissioners. Upon receipt by the BCC of the application for AHDB and the written recommendation and report of the director County Manager or designee and recommendation of the planning commission, the BCC must schedule and hold a properly advertised and duly noticed public hearing on the application. If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a planned unit development(PUD),then the hearing must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for the planned unit development(PUD) before the BCC, and the 130W-of-sour eernmissienefs BCC must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the application for the planned unit development(PUD). If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a rezoning,then the hearing must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for rezoning before the BCC, and the bear-d-ef-oeunty eeinmissieners BCC must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the application for rezoning. If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a stewardship receiving area, then the hearing must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for stewardship receiving area before the BCC, and BCC must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the application for stewardship receiving area.After the close of the public hearing, the BCC must review and evaluate the application in light of the requirements of this division section and the requirements for a rezoning, and must deny, grant,or grant with conditions, the application in accordance with the AHDB rating system and the AHDB monitoring program. Cn E. The procedures to request approval of a density bonus are described in Chapter 10 of this LDC, along with requirements for the developer's agreement to ensure compliance. * * * * * * * * 3.04.02 Species Specific Requirements * * * * * * * * * * * * * On property where the wildlife survey establishes that listed species are utilizing the site or where the site is capable of supporting listed species and such listed species can be anticipated ^ to potentially occupy the site, the County shall, consistent with the GMP, consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and recommendations from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing development orders. It is recognized that these agency recommendations,on a case by case basis,may change the requirements contained herein and any such change shall be deemed to be consistent with this Code. The following specific species management and protection plans shall be applicable, in addition to those required by other provision in this section 3.04.00: A. Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus Polyphemus). 1. All gopher tortoises,their habitats, and the associated commensals are hereby protected. 2. It is expressly prohibited to take, which means to harass,harm, hunt, shoot,wound,kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct, any gopher tortoise, and to alter, destroy, or degrade the functions and values of their natural habitat, unless otherwise provided for in this section. 3. All gopher tortoise burrows are protected, and it is prohibited to intentionally destroy or take any such burrow by any means,unless otherwise provided for in this section. * * * * * * * * * * * * 11. When identifying the native vegetation preservation requirement of section 3.05.00. 3.05.07 of this LDC for parcels containing gopher tortoises,priority shall be given to protecting the largest,most contiguous gopher tortoise habitat with the greatest number of active burrows, and for providing a connection to off-site adjacent gopher tortoises'preserves. All gopher tortoise preserves shall be platted with protective covenants, as required by this section and section 10.02.043.05.07 H. of this LDC or, if the project is not platted, shall provide such language on the approved site development plan. It shall be a priority to preserve scrub habitat, when it exists on-site, for its rare unique qualities and for being one of the most endangered habitats in the County,regardless of whether gopher tortoises are relocated off-site. 12. Gopher tortoises shall be removed from all active and inactive burrows located within the area of construction prior to any site improvement, in accordance with the protection/management plan approved by County Manager or designee. 13. Exemptions. Single family platted lots, seven and one-half acres or less in • size, shall be exempt from the requirements set forth in subsections 5 through 11 above, when these lots are not a part of a previous development which has been required to comply with subsections 5 through 11. However, gopher tortoises shall be protected pursuant to 4-4 1-3 above. B. Sea Turtle Protection. 1. The purpose of this section is to protect the threatened and endangered sea turtles that nest along the beaches of the County,by safeguarding sea turtle hatchlings from sources of artificial light, and adult and hatchling sea turtles from injury or harassment. The County shall adhere to state and federal guidelines for the protection of sea turtles. 2. The requirements of this section apply when new development or lighting associated with new development is located within three hundred (300) feet of mean high water; when parking lots, dune walkovers, or other outdoor lighting is proposed; and when reflective surfaces that will be illuminated by outdoor lighting will be visible from the beach. * * * * * * * * * * n 3. For existing development, existing structures with any light sources, or reflective surfaces illuminated by such sources,that are visible from the beach, shall be in compliance with the following: a. All lights shall be turned off after 9:00 p.m.between May 1 and October 31 of each year, or fitted with a hood or positioned so that the light sources, or any reflective surfaces illuminated by such sources, shall not be visible from the beach. • b. Lights illuminating dune crosswalks shall be turned off after 9:00 p.m. between May 1 and October 31 of each year, and must be modified to conform to the requirements for new development in accordance with . section 3.04.02 B.2. c. Security and emergency exit lighting shall follow the same requirements stated in section 3.04.03(C)(1) of this section item a. listed above. If high intensity lighting is necessary, low pressure sodium vapor luminaries shall be used and fitted with a hood, or positioned so that the light sources, or any reflective surfaces illuminated by such sources, shall not be visible from the beach. 3.05.02 Exemptions from Requirements for Vegetation Protection and Preservation * * * * * * * C. Agricultural exemption. Agricultural operations that fall within the scope of sections 163.3162(4)and 823.14(6), Florida Statutes, are exempt from the provisions of section 3-05.09 3.05.03 through 3.05.09,provided that any new clearing of land for agriculture outside of the RLSA District shall not be converted to non-agricultural development for 25 years, unless the applicable provisions set forth in section 3,05,00 3.05.04 through 3.05.07 (G) are adhered to at the time of the conversion. The percentage of native vegetation preserved shall be calculated on the amount of vegetation occurring at the time of the agricultural clearing,and if found to be deficient, a native plant community shall be restored to re-create a native plant community in all three strata(ground covers, shrubs and trees),utilizing larger plant materials so as to more quickly re-create the lost mature vegetation. D. Pre-existing uses. Exemptions from the requirements of section 3.950 3.05.07.F through 3.05.09 shall not apply to, affect or limit the continuation of uses within the RFMUD acted existing prior to June 19, 2002. 1. Such existing uses shall include: those uses for which all required permits were issued prior to June 19 2002; or projects for which a conditional use or Rezone petition has been approved by the County prior to June 19, 2002; or, land use petitions for which a completed application has been submitted and which have been determined to be vested from the requirements of the Final Order prior to June 19,2002. The continuation of existing uses shall include expansions of those uses if such expansions are consistent with or clearly ancillary to the existing uses. 2. Such previously approved development shall be deemed to be consistent with the GMP Goals, Policies and Objectives forte RFMU district, and they may be built out in accordance with their previously approved plans. Changes to these previous approvals shall also be deemed to be consistent with the GMP Goals, Objectives and Policies for the RFMU district as long as they do not result in an increase in development density or intensity. E. Exempt mangrove alteration projects. Mangrove alteration projects that are exempted from Florida Department of Environmental Protection permit requirements by Florida Administrative Code 17-321.060 are exempt from preservation standards for the mangrove trees, unless they are a part of a preserve. This exemption shall not apply to mangrove alterations or removal in any preserve or in any area where the mangroves have been retained in satisfaction of section 3.05.07. The Collier County Environmental Advisory Council (EAC)may grant a variance to the provisions of this section if compliance with the mangrove tree preservation standards of this DiN.isien section would impose a unique and unnecessary hardship on the owner or any other person in control of affected property.-Mangrove trimming or removal for a view shall not be considered a hardship. Relief shall be granted only upon demonstration by the • landowner or affected party that such hardship is peculiar to the affected property and not self- imposed, and that the grant of a variance will be consistent with the intent of this divisien section and the growth management plan. * * * 4.05.04 Parking Space Requirements A. Requirements for off-street parking for uses not specifically mentioned in this 4zlivisien section shall be the same as far the use most similar to the one sought, or as otherwise determined by the County Manager or designee pursuant to 4.05.04 of this LDC it being the intent of this LDC to require all uses to provide off-street parking,unless specific provision is made to the contrary. * * * 4.06.01 Generally A. Purpose and Intent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. Buffering and Screening. The purpose and intent of establishing landscape buffering and screening is to: * * * * * * * * * * * * * J. Promote water conservation by encouraging the use of native and drought- tolerant vegetation and properly zoned irrigation systems through xeriscape. k. In order to minimize negative effects between adjacent land uses,this section promotes the use of landscape buffers and screens to eliminate or minimize potential nuisances such as dirt, litter,noise, lights,unsightly buildings and structures, and off-street parking and loading areas. Additionally, buffers and screens provide spacing and landscaping to reduce potentially adverse impacts of noise, odor, or lighting. buffering refers to a strip of land separating adjacent land uses,whereas screening refers to fences, walls, berms,trees, shrubs, or a combination of these screening devices on the buffer strip. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4.06.03 Landscaping Requirements for Vehicular Use Areas and Rights-of-Way A. Applicability. The provisions of this section shall apply to all new off-street parking or other vehicular use areas. Existing landscaping which does not comply with the provisions of this Code shall be brought into conformity to the maximum extent possible when: the vehicular use area is altered or expanded except for restriping of lots/drives,the building square footage is changed, or the structure has been vacant for a period of 90 days or more and a request for an occupational license to resume business is made. These provisions shall apply to all developments with the exception of single-family,two-family, mobile home dwelling unit, and dwellings on individually platted lots. Any appeal from an administrative determination relating to these regulations shall be to the board of zoning appeals or equivalent. Prior to issuing occupancy permits for new construction, implementation and completion of landscaping requirements in off-street vehicular facilities shall be required. Where a conflict exists between the strict application of this divieien Chapter/section and the requirements for the number of off- street parking spaces or area of off-street loading facilities, the requirements of this section shall apply. B. Standards for landscaping in vehicular use areas. * * * * * * * , * * * * * 8. Green space required in shopping centers and freestanding retail establishments with a floor area greater than 40,000 square feet. An area that is at least seven percent of the size of the vehicular use areas must be developed as green space within the front yard(s) or courtyards of shopping centers and retail establishments and must be in addition to the building perimeter planting area requirements. The courtyards must only be located in areas that are likely to be used by pedestrians visiting the shopping center and retail establishment. The seven percent green space area must be in addition to other landscaping requirements of this division section,may be used to meet the open space requirements (section 4.02.01),and must be labeled"Green Space" on all subdivision and site plans. (Refer to section 5.05.08,Architectural and Site Design Standards and Guidelines for Commercial buildings and Projects.) The interior landscape requirements of these projects must be reduced to an amount equal to five percent of the vehicular use area on site. Green space must be considered areas designed for environmental, scenic or noncommercial recreation purposes and must be pedestrian-friendly and aesthetically appealing. Green space may only include the following: lawns,mulch, decorative plantings, nonprohibited exotic trees, walkways within the interior of the green space area not used for shopping, fountains, manmade watercourses (but not water retention areas), wooded areas,park benches, site lighting, sculptures, gazebos, and any other similar items that the planning service director deems appropriate. Green space must include: walkways within the interior of the green space area not used for shopping, a minimum of one foot of park bench per 1,000 square feet of building area. The green space area must use existing trees where possible and landscaping credits will be allowed as governed by table 4.06.04 D. The green space areas must be located in areas that are in close proximity to the retail shopping area. Benches may also be located in interior landscaped areas and 75 percent of the benches may be located adjacent to the building envelope along paths,walkways and within arcades or malls. * * * * * * * * * * * 4.06.05 General Landscaping Requirements * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. Plant Material Standards. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1. Quality. Plant materials used to meet the requirements of this section shall meet the standards for Florida No. 1 or better, as set out in Grades and Standards for Nursery Plants,part I and part II, Department of Agricultural, State of Florida(as amended). Root ball sizes on all transplanted plant materials shall also meet state standards. a. At least 75 percent of the trees and 50 percent of the shrubs used to fulfill these requirements shall be native Southern Floridian species, as determined by accepted valid scientific reference. For sites that are north and east of U.S. Highway 41, at least 35 percent of the shrubs used to fulfill these requirements shall be native Floridian species, as determined by accepted valid scientific reference. "Native Trees and Shrubs for Collier County List" is available for reference. For proposed land development projects on coastal shorelines and/or undeveloped and developed coastal barrier islands, all required landscaping shall be 100 percent native Southern Floridian species. b. In addition, for all sites, at least 75 percent of the trees and shrubs used to fulfill these requirements shall be drought-tolerant species as listed in the Xeriscape Plant Guide and Native Trees and Trees for South Florida(IFAS). Reference to be used in the native determination may include,but not be limited to: Long, R.W., and 0. Lakela, 1976. A Flora of Tropical Florida. Small,J.K., 1933. A Manual of the Southeastern Flora. Wunderlin,R.P., 1982. Guide to the Vascular Plants of Central Florida. ''1 c. Where xeric plants are to be utilized,use the South Florida Water Management - District,Xeriscape Plant Guide (as amended) as a reference. 2. Trees and palms. All required new individual trees, shall be species having an average mature spread or crown of greater than 20 feet in the Collier County area and having trunks)which can be maintained in a clean condition over five feet of clear wood. Trees adjacent to walkways,bike paths and rights-of-way shall be maintained in a clean condition over eight feet of clear wood. Trees having an average mature spread or crown less than 20 feet may be substituted by grouping the same so as to create the equivalent of 20-foot crown spread. For code-required trees, the trees at the time of installation shall be a minimum of 25 gallon, ten feet in height,have a 1 3/4-inch caliper(at 12 inches above the ground) and a four-foot spread. a. A grouping of three palm trees will be the equivalent of one canopy tree. Exceptions will be made for Roystonea spp. and Phoenix spp. (not including roebelenii)which shall count one palm for one canopy tree. Palms may be substituted for up to 30 percent of required canopy trees with the following exceptions. No more than 30%of canopy trees may be substituted by palms (or palm equivalent)within the interior of a vehicular use area and within each individual Type D road right-of-way landscape buffer. Palms must have a minimum of ten feet of clear trunk at planting. b. All new trees,including palms, shall be of a species having an average mature height of 15 feet or greater. * * * * * * * * * 8. Site-specific plant material. Trees and other vegetation shall be planted in soil and climatic conditions which are appropriate for their growth habits. The County Manager or his designee shall review and approve land plans based on the following criteria. Required plants used in the landscape design shall be: a. Appropriate to the conditions in which they are to be planted (including drought, salt and cold tolerance). b. Have noninvasive growth habits. c. Encourage low maintenance. d. Be otherwise consistent with the intent of this ien section. * * * * * * * * * * * * * K. Irrigation system requirements. • 1. Cultivated landscapes. Cultivated landscape areas shall be provided with an automatic irrigation system to improve the survivability of the required landscaping. Sprinkler heads irrigating lawns or other high water demand areas shall be zoned separately from those irrigating trees, shrubbery, ground cover, flowers, or other reduced water requirement areas.Automatically controlled irrigation systems shall be operated by an irrigation controller that is capable of watering "high water" requirement areas at different frequencies and duration than "low water requirement areas. Landscaping shall be watered on an as-needed basis only. Irrigation systems shall be designed for the zoning of high and low water use areas. Heads shall be designed for 100 percent head-to-head coverage unless specified by the manufacturer. These requirements may be adjusted for retention areas. The irrigation system shall be designed and installed in accordance with the Florida Irrigation Society, Standards and Specifications for Turf and Landscape Irrigation Systems (as amended). Irrigation systems utilizing well water shall be designed and maintained in a manner which eliminates staining of the building, walks,walls, and other site improvements. All systems'shall be designed to eliminate the application of water to impervious areas. Irrigation systems, other than drip or soaker hose systems, shall be operated between the hours of midnight and 10:00 a.m.,unless the operation of multiple zones requires additional time. South Florida Water Management District(SFWMD) or other utility company water use restrictions shall supersede these requirements. There are no operational requirements for irrigation systems utilizing effluent. All new residential, commercial, and industrial developments shall be irrigated by the use of an automatic irrigation system with controller set to apply water in a manner consistent with this demon section. Moisture detection devices shall be installed in all automatic sprinkler systems to override the sprinkler activation mechanism during periods of increased rainfall. Where existing irrigation systems are modified requiring the acquisition of a permit, automatic activation systems and overriding moisture detection devices shall be installed in compliance with this section. * * * * ' * * . * * * 4.08.00 RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES 4.08.01 Specific Definitions Applicable to the RLSA District * * * * * * * * * * * * * M. Land Use-Land Cover Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon land use and land cover characteristics as mapped using the Florida Land Use, Cover, and Forms Classification System(FLUCCS FLUCFCS)(FDOT 1999). For purposes of assigning values, land use and land cover codes are grouped as follows: Group 1 (Codes 617, 6172, 621, 6218, 6219, 624, 630, 641, 643); Group 2 (Codes 321,411,4119,425,434,439,428); Group 3 (211, 212, 213, 214, 221, 222, 241,242, 243,250, 260, 261, 310, 329, 330, 422, 510, 521, 523, 533, 534); and Group 4 (all others). * * * * * * * * * * * * P. Listed Species Habitat Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value,with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for listed,species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species with land cover identified as preferred or tolerated habitat for that species. Land mapped,using FLUCCS FLUCFCS, as 310, 321, 411, 425,428,434, 617, 6172, 621, 6218, 6219, 624, and 630 is deemed to be preferred or tolerated habitat for panthers for the purpose of assigning a value for these indices. An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information. system(GIS)polygon of preferred or tolerated habitat for that species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4.08.06 SSA Designation Lands within the RLSA District may be designated as SSAs subject to the following regulations: A. Lands Within the RLSA District that can be Designated as SSAs. Any privately held land within the RLSA District delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map as FSA,HSA, WRA, Restoration, or Open,may be designated as an SSA, including lands within the ACSC. * * * * ' * * * * * * * * * 3. HSA Delineated Lands. a. In the case where lands delineated as HSA are designated as an SSA, at a minimum, Residential Land Uses (Layer 1), as listed in the Matrix, shall be eliminated. b. General conditional uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses shall be allowed only on HSA lands with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. c. In addition to the requirements imposed in the LDC for approval of a conditional use,uses listed in b. above will only be approved • upon submittal of an EIS which demonstrates that clearing of native vegetation has been minimized,the use will not significantly and adversely impact listed species and their habitats and the use will not significantly and adversely impact aquifers. This demonstration shall be made by establishing the following: * * * * * * * * * * * * * (3) Buffering to Conservation Land shall comply with Section 4.08.07 J.6.4— * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. SSA Designation Application Package. A request to designate lands(s)within the RLSA District as an.SSA shall be made pursuant to the regulations of this Section. An SSA Application Package shall include the following: * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4. Support Documentation. In addition,the following support documentation shall be provided for each SSA being designated: * * * * * . * * * * * * * f. FDOT Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS FLUCFCS)map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SSA on an aerial photograph having a scale of one(1) inch equal to at least 200 feet when available from the County, otherwise, a scale of at least one (1) inch equal to 400 feet is acceptable; * * * * * * * * * * * * * 7. Recording of SSA Memorandum. Following approval by the County, an SSA Memorandum shall be prepared and recorded in the public records, together with the following portions or exhibits of the SSA Credit Agreement as attachments: a. The legal description of the lands subject to the SSA Credit Agreement and the number of SSA Credits assigned to the land designated as SSA, including lands designated for restoration, if any, and the Restoration Credits assigned to such land; b. The Stewardship easement Agreement on the SSA lands, describing the land uses remaining on the land; '� • -c. A summary of the Restoration Plan,if restoration is to be undertaken by the applicant, to include the elements set forth in Section/1.08.04 C.5 4.08.06 C.5. * * * * * * * * * * * * * D. SRA Designation Application Package. A Designation Application Package to support a request to designate land(s) within the RLSA District as an SRA shall be made pursuant to the regulations of the RLSA District Regulations. The SRA Application Package shall include the follow: * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4.. Natural Resource Index Assessment Support Documentation. Documentation to support the Natural Resource Index Assessment shall be provided for each SRA being designated to include: * * * * * * * * * * * * * f. FLUCCS FLUCFCS map(s)delineating the area being designated as an SRA; * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4.08.08 Baseline Standards * * . * * * * * * * * * * * H. Standards applicable to wetlands outside of FSAS, HSAS, WRA.S, and the ACSC. Wetlands located outside of FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and the ACSC shall be preserved in accord with the following criteria: , * * * * . * * * * * * * * * 5. All direct impacts shall be mitigated for as required by applicable federal or state agencies and in the same manner as set forth in section 1.06.01 3.05.07 F. of this Code. 6. Single family residences shall follow the requirements contained within Policy -. . _ _ __ -_ _ - .,:_ __:.. : " .. __ -_- _ _ - ;: section 3.05.07 D.5. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 5.04.06 Annual Beach Events Permit A. The owner of beach-front commercial hotel-resort property shall apply for an annual beach events permit. The County Manager or his designee, or his designee,may grant the permit following review of an application for such permit.The application shall be submitted on the form prescribed by Collier County together with the applicable fee for the number of planned annual beach events as indicated on the permit form and exhibits thereto. Permits issued pursuant to this section are not intended to authorize any violation of F.S..§ 370.12, or any of the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as it may be amended. * * * * * * * * * * E. Sea turtle nesting season. Annual beach events which occur during sea turtle nesting season(May 1st through October 31st of each year) are also subject to the following regulations: * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4. Use of vehicles on the beach is prohibited, except as may be permitted under the Code of Lawc of Collier County section 10.02.06 L * * * * * * * * * * * * * 9. A copy of all notices required by any permit or these regulations must also be provided by the permit holder to __ - • . _. ., _ .. _ _:., , the County Manager or designee. Note: When a state permit is more restrictive than the Code requirements,the State requirements shall supersede, and the county shall enforce these requirements. * * * * * * * * * * * * • * 8.06.00 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL 8.06.01 Establishment There is hereby established an Environmental Advisory Council ("ECA" "EAC")which. The EAC obtains its jurisdiction,powers, and limits of authority from the BCC, and pursuant to this LDC, shall act in an advisory capacity to the BCC in matters dealing with the regulation, control, management,use, or exploitation of any or all natural resources of or within the County, and the review and evaluation of specific zoning and development petitions and their impact on those resources. * * * * * * * * * * * * 8.09.02 Jurisdiction,Authority and Duties In addition to the jurisdiction, authority and duties which may be conferred upon the community development and environmental services administrator by other provisions of the county Code of Collier County or the county manager,the community development and environmental services administrator shall have the following jurisdiction, authority and duties: A. To provide the board of county commissioners, the Development Services Advisory Committee,planning commission,the board of zoning appeals, the building board of adjustments and appeals,the code enforcement board, and the contractors' licensing board,with reports and recommendations with respect to matters before such bodies as directed by the board of county commissioners or the county manager. B. To administer and manage the Planning Services,Pollution Control,Natural Recourses, Environmental Services,Building Review and Permitting, Code Enforcement and housing and urban improvement departments, and oversee the preparation of the budget for each. C. For the purposes of this code the phrases Development Services Director, Growth Management Director, Code Compliance Director, Growth Planning Director and Planning Services Director, shall mean the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator, or his designee. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 9.04.06 Specific Requirements for Variance to the Coastal Construction Setback Line * * * * . * * * * * * * * * G. Procedures for obtaining variance. 1. A written petition requesting a variance from the established setback line shall be filed with the BCC or their designee. The petition shall set forth: a. A description of petitioner's property to include the information requested on a current Collier County request for a coastal construction setback line variance form; �-. b. A description of the established setback line and the line which petitioner wishes to be v 'ed; Astik_ q-DLi c. The justification upon which the petitioner relies for the granting of the variance, to include compliance with the Collier County growth management plan, conservation and coastal management element. 2. Notice and public hearing for coastal construction setback line variances. An application for coastal construction setback line (CCSL)variance shall be considered by the BCC pursuant to the following public notice and hearing requirements. a. The applicant shall post a sign at least 45 days prior to the date of the public hearing by the BCC. The sign shall. contain substantially the following language and the sign copy shall utilize the total area of the sign: PUBLIC HEARING REQUESTING CCSL VARIANCE APPROVAL(both to contain the following information:) TO PERMIT: (Sufficiently clear to describe the type of variance requested). DATE: TIME: TO BE HELD IN BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER. b. The area of a property sign shall be as follows: i. For a property less than one acre in size,the sign shall measure at least one and one-half square feet in area. ii. For a property one acre or more in size, the sign shall measure at least 32 square feet in area. c. In the case of a sign located on a property less than one acre in size, such sign shall be erected by the County Manager or his designee in full view of the public on each street side of the subject property and on the side of the property visible from the beach. Where the property for which approval is sought is landlocked or for some other reason a sign cannot be posted directly on the subject property, then the sign shall be erected along the nearest street right-of-way,with an attached notation indicating generally the distance and direction to the subject property. d. In the case of sign(s) located on a property one acre or more in size, the applicant shall be responsible for erecting the required sign(s). The sign(s) shall be erected in full view of the public on each street upon which the subject property has frontage and on the side of the property visible from the beach. Where the subject property is landlocked, or for some other reason the sign(s) cannot be posted directly on the property, then the sign(s) shall be erected along the nearest street right-of-way, with an attached notation indicating generally the distance and direction to the subject property. There shall be at least one sign on each external boundary which fronts upon a street,however, in the case of external boundaries along a street with greater frontages than 1,320 linear feet, signs shall be placed equidistant from one another with a maximum spacing of 1,000 linear feet, except that in no case shall the number of signs along an exterior boundary fronting on a street exceed four signs. The applicant shall provide evidence to the County Manager or designee that the sign(s)were erected by furnishing photographs of the sign(s) showing the date of their erection at least ten days prior to the scheduled public hearing by the beafel-af-seiffity BCC. The sign(s) shall remain in place until the date of either of the following occurrences: 1. Final action is taken by the bear of BCC or 2. The receipt of a written request by the County Manager or designee from n the applicant to either withdraw or continue the petition indefinitely. e. Notice of the time and place of the public hearing by the booFel-ef-eetifity Geniiiiififiefiffli BCC shall be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least one time and at least 15 days prior to the public hearing. Where applicable, the notice shall clearly describe the proposed variance. The advertisement shall also include a location map that identifies the approximate geographic location of the subject property. f. The BCC shall hold one advertised public hearing on the proposed variance and may, upon the conclusion of the hearing, immediately adopt the resolution approving the variance 3. The BCC shall notify petitioner in writing of its decision within 15 days of the public hearing. 4. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the BCC granting or denying a variance may apply to the circuit court of the circuit in which the property is located for judicial relief within 30 days after rendition of the decision by the BCC. Review in the circuit court shall be by petition for a writ of certiorari and shall be governed by the Florida Appellate Rules. * * * _* * -* * * * * * ' * n i H. Exemptions. Exemptions shall be reviewed administratively for compliance with applicable county codes, and shall not be heard by the BCC. Exemptions to this section 9.04.06 shall include: 1. The removal of any plant defined as exotic vegetation by county code. 2. Any modification,maintenance, or repair, to any existing structure within limits of the existing foundation or footprint,which does not require, involve, or include any additions to, or repair or modifications of, the existing foundation of that structure, except those modifications required by code, excluding additions or enclosure added, constructed, or installed below the first dwelling floor or lowest deck of the existing structure. 3. Any structures,that: 1) do not constitute fixed structure(s), 2) do not require a building permit, 3)weigh less than 100 pounds, and 4)upon review by the County Manager or his designee , ' does not present an actual or potential threat to the beach and the dune system and adjacent properties are exempt from the variance requirements of this section. This exemption shall not be effective during sea turtle nesting season (May 1--October 31)unless the structures are removed daily from the beach prior to 9:30 p.m. and are not moved onto, or placed on, the beach before completion of monitoring conducted by personnel with prior experience and training in nest surveys procedures and possessing a valid Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Marine Turtle Permit(daily sea turtle monitoring), or unless the beach furniture is being actively used or attended during the period of time from 9:30 pm until the next day's monitoring. Exemptions allowed under this provision are not intended to authorize any violation of F.S. § 370.12, or any of the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as it may be amended. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 10.02.02 Submittal Requirements for All Applications A. Environmental impact statements * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4. Information required for application. * * * d. Native vegetation preservation. Identify the acreage and community type of all upland and wetland habitats found on the project site, according to the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System(FLUCFCS). Provide a description of each of the FLUCFCS categories identified on-site by vegetation type (species),vegetation composition(canopy, midstory and ground cover) and vegetation dominance (dominant, common and occasional). ii. Explain how the project meets or exceeds the native vegetation preservation requirement in Goal 6 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan, and Chapters 4 3 and 10 of the Land Development Code. Provide an exhibit illustrating such. Include calculations identifying the acreage for preservation and impact,per FLUCFCS category. iii. For sites already cleared and in agricultural use,provide documentation that the parcel(s) are in compliance with the 25 year rezone limitation in Policy 6.1.5 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan and Chapters 4 3 and 10 of the Land Development Code. For sites cleared prior to January 2003,provide documentation that the parcel(s) are in compliance with the 10 year rezone limitation previously identified in the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code. * * * * * * • 10.02.03 Submittal Requirements for Site Development Plans A. Generally. * * * 3. Exemptions. Due to its location or minimal impact on surrounding properties and probable minimal impacts under the site development plan review standard contained in section 10.02.03 A.4., standard application requirements as described in section 10.02.03 A.,may be waived in part or in full by the County Manager or his designee for agriculturally related development as identified in the permitted and accessory uses section of the rural agricultural zoning district; however, a site n improvement plan as required by section 10.02.03 B. addressing the application requirements deemed necessary by the County Manager or his designee shall be submitted to the planning department for review and approval. * * * . * * * * * * * * b. The expedited site plan for school board review, as referenced in section 10.02.03 A.3.a. of the Land Development Code,will consist of the following areas of review: * * * * * * * * * * * * * iv. Environmental regulations for compliance with the Collier County GMP Conservation and Coastal Management Element in effect at the time a SBR Letter of Compliance is requested shall apply as follows: (a) On a site by site basis, County Staff will determine the necessity for an environmental impact statement("EIS") to be submitted. (b) The final SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit and all' other agency permits for wetlands must be submitted prior to a determination that the SBR application is sufficient for review. (c) Submission of Protected Species Surveys and, if needed, wildlife management plans in accordance with the code and the GMP in effect at the time of the issuance of the SBR Letter of Compliance along with United States Fish and Wildlife Service ("USFWS") and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission("FFWCC") agency permits. (d) A site clearing plan must be submitted that shows the native vegetation areas to be preserved and identifies the upland/wetlands preserve or protected species preserves. (e) The GMP and LDC section 3.05.07 requires schools to provide a set percentage for native vegetation preservation in the Rural Fringe and the Rural Lands. The School Board must comply with the set percentages of native vegetation preservation. * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. Final Site development plan procedure and re uirements A pre-application meeting shall be conducted by the County Manager,or his designee, or his/her designee,prior to the submission of any site development or site improvement plan for review. This meeting may be waived by the County Manager or his designee upon the request of the applicant. 1. Site development plan submittal packet: The site development submittal packet shall include the following,if applicable: * * * * * * * * * * * d. Vegetation inventory:A generalized vegetation inventory of the property shall be required to the extent necessary, as determined at the pre- application meeting, indicating the approximate location, densities and species of the following: i. Upland, wetland and estuarine vegetation including prohibited exotic vegetation,mapped using FLUCCS FLUCFCS terminology. ii. Any type of vegetation identified,for preservation. iii. Projects containing the following shall provide a survey of identifying species and locations on a current aerial photograph at a scale of one inch equals 200 feet or larger or superimposed on the site plan: (a) Plants specified to remain in place or to be transplanted to other locations on the property as specified in the applicable development order. (b) Specimen trees designated by the bear-d-ef-aeuaty BCC,pursuant to section 10.02.06 D.l.f.iii.(b)3.05.09. * * - * * * * * * * * * * * 10.02.06 Submittal Requirements for Permits n A. Generally. Any permit submitted to the County must meet the requirements for that particular permit, as more specifically stated below. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. No approval of the final subdivision plat, improvement plans or authorization to proceed with construction activities in compliance with the same shall require Collier County to issue a development order or building permit if(1) it can be shown that issuance of said development order or building permit will result in a reduction in the level of service for any public facility below the level of service established in the Collier County growth management plan, or(2) if issuance of said development order of[or] building permit is inconsistent with the growth management plan.Anything in this division section to the contrary notwithstanding, all subdivision and development shall comply with the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. III] and the growth management plan. * * * * * * * * * * * * * D. Agricultural land clearing. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. Land clearing notice. No later than 60 days prior vegetation removal as part of agricultural operations that fall within the scope of sections 163.3162(4) or 823.14(6),Florida Statutes,the property owner shall provide notice to the County Manager or designee that the removal will occur. Said notice shall include the following information: * * * * * * * * * * * * * E. Enforcement and penalties. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. Restoration standards. If an alleged violation of this Code has occurred and upon agreement between the County Manager or his designee and the violator, or if they cannot agree,then,upon conviction by the court or the code enforcement board, in addition to any fine imposed, a restoration plan shall be ordered in accordance with the following standards: * * * * * * * * * * * * * c. The understory vegetation shall be restored to the area from which protected trees wer; "o removed. The selection of plants shall be C 1-$) based on the characteristics of the Florida Land Use,Covers and Form Classifications System(FLUCCS FLUCFCS) code. Shrubs, ground cover, and grasses shall be restored as delineated in the FLUCCS FLUCFCS code. The species utilized shall be with relative proportions characteristic of those in the FLUCCS FLUCFCS code. The exact number and type of species required may also be based upon the existing indigenous vegetation on the adjacent property at the discretion of the County Manager or his designee. * * * * * * * * * * * * 3. Corrective measures for environmental violations. a. Mitigation. i. The person(s)responsible for violations of the environmental sections of the Land development Code shall be notified according to section 8.08.00 and shall have 30 days to prepare a mitigation plan that is acceptable to the county to resolve the violation. The mitigation plan shall be submitted to development services staff for review and comment. Once the plan is accepted by development services, the responsible party shall have 15 days to complete the mitigation unless other arrangements are specified and agreed upon in the mitigation plan. ii. Mitigation shall restore the area disturbed unless the responsible party demonstrates that off-site mitigation will successfully offset the impacts being mitigated for. Off-site mitigation shall be on lands under the control of a public agency, or identified for public acquisition, or on lands protected from future development. Ratios for off-site mitigation shall be as follows: two to one for uplands and three to one for wetlands. iii. The selection of plants to be used shall be based on the characteristics of the Florida Land Use, Covers and Forms Classification System(FLUCCS FLUCFCS) Code. The exact number and type of species required may vary depending on the existing indigenous vegetation found at the site. * * * * * * * * * * * * * c. Site-specific review criteria. * * * * * * * * * * * * * • vi. A program to control prohibited exotic vegetation (section 3.05.8;08) in the mitigation area shall be required. * * * * * * * * * * * F. Wellfield conditional use permit and standards. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 5. Administrative review of wellfield conditional use permit petition. a. The county manager shall review the petition for wellfield conditional use permit for compliance with sections 3.06.12 and 3.06.13 of this division section in the same procedural manner as for a certificate to operate. * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. Vehicle on the beach regulations. * * . * * * * * * * * * * * 2. Exceptions; permit.All permits to allow operation of vehicles on county beaches shall expire on April 30, of each year, to coincide with the beginning of sea turtle nesting season. During sea turtle nesting season,May 1 through October 31, of each year, all permits shall be subject to section 10.02.06 I.3 below. a. Sheriff, city, state and federal police, emergency services, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission vehicles operated or authorized by officers of these departments operating under orders in the normal course of their duties shall be exempt from the provisions of this division section. b. Vehicles which must travel on the beaches in connection with environmental maintenance, conservation, environmental work, and/or for purposes allowed by Collier County Ordinance No. 89-16,providing that the vehicle(s) associated with the permitted uses of Collier County Ordinance No. 89-16 remain stationary, except to access and egress the beach, shall be exempt from the provisions of this division section if a permit has been obtained from the environmental services department director or his designee, and said [permit] is prominently displayed on the windshield of such vehicle and kept with the vehicle and available for inspection. The procedure for obtaining such a permit shall be by application to the environmental services department director in writing stating the reason or reasons why it is necessary for such vehicle or vehicles to be operated on the beaches in connection with an environmental maintenance, conservation, environmental purpose and/or for purposes allowed by Collier County Ordinance No. 89-16, taking into consideration the vehicular use restriction previously stated as a criterion for an exception, and permit for such vehicle or vehicles shall be issued by the environmental services department director if the environmental services department director is satisfied that a lawful and proper environmental maintenance, conservation, environmental purpose and/or purpose as described above and allowed by Collier County Ordinance No. 89-16 will be served thereby. c. Baby buggies (perambulators), toy vehicles, toy wagons, wheelchairs or similar devices to aid disabled or non-ambulatory persons shall be exempt from the provisions of this division section. d. Vehicle-on-the-beach permits issued in conjunction with special or annual beach events, in conjunction with permanent concession facilities, or for other routine functions associated with permitted uses of commercial hotel property. Vehicles which are used in conjunction with functions on the beach,are exempt from the provisions of this division section if a vehicle- on the-beach permit has been granted by the County Manager or designee. All permits issued are subject to the following conditions and limitations: 3. Operation of vehicles on the beach during marine turtle nesting season. The operation of motorized vehicles, including but not limited to self-propelled,wheeled, tracked, or belted conveyances, is prohibited on coastal beaches above mean high water during sea turtle nesting season, May 1 to October 31, of each year, except for purposes of law enforcement, emergency, or conservation of sea turtles,unless such vehicles have a valid permit issued pursuant to this division section. Permits issued pursuant to this division section are not intended to authorize any violation of F.S. § 370.12, or any of the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of'1973, as it may be amended. a. All vehicle use on the beach during sea turtle nesting season, May 1 to October 31, of each year must not begin before completion of monitoring conducted by personnel with prior experience and training in nest surveys procedures and possessing a valid Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Marine Turtle Permit. 4. Penalties.Notwithstanding the penalties set forth elsewhere in this Code, violations of this division section are subject to the following penalties: I ° 10.02.07 Submittal Requirements for Certificates of Public Facility Adequacy C. Certificate of public facility adequacy. 1. General. * * * * * * * * * * * d. Estimated transportation impact fees for a development shall be paid into the applicable impact fee trust fund in the amount estimated to be due upon issuance of the fmal local development order(s) for the development upon or prior to issuance of a certificate of public facility adequacy for the development. Developments that have paid estimated impact fees for all Category"A" facilities prior to the [effective date of this section's amendment], and which elect to come under the provisions of this section may make payment of estimated impact fees into the applicable transportation impact fee trust fund such that previously paid estimates may be applied as a credit towards the impact fees calculated and due as a prerequisite to the issuance of the final local development order(s) for the development. If the developer does not elect to come under the provisions of this istiNisien section,impact fees paid into the impact fee escrow trust fund prior to [the effective date of this section's amendment] shall be refundable upon written request to the Community development and Environmental Services Division Administrator accompanied by the surrender of the original certificate of public facility adequacy obtained prior to issuance of final local development order(s) for the development. Fees paid into applicable impact fee trust accounts as a prerequisite to the issuance of final local development order(s)prior to the [effective date of this sectioti`s'amendment] in accordance with the applicable consolidated impact fee ordinances shall be refundable pursuant to the provisions of such ordinances upon written request to the Finance Director, Clerk of Courts. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 10.02.14 Landscape Plans A. Landscape plan required. Prior to the issuance of any preliminary subdivision plat, final site development plan, or building permit,an applicant whose development is covered by the requirements of this section must submit a landscape plan to the County Manager or his designee. The landscape plan must bear the seal of a Landscape Architect registered in the State of Florida. The landscaping required for single-family, two family,and mobile home dwelling units must be shown on the building permit plot plan. This plan is not required to bear the seal of a landscape architect. * * * * * * * * * * * * 1. Public educational facilities and Plant, ancillary plant, and auxiliary facility. Essential services including Collier County Public Schools (CCPS)/public Educational and ancillary plants, and other public facility projects developed jointly with CCPS may demonstrate that the intent of this division section can be effectively accomplished without meeting specific development standards. The applicant must request an administrative review of the alternative design, as outlined in paragraph(a)below. The deviations are limited to quantity of plant material and the School district must demonstrate that the deviation is necessary as a result of an educational program or joint use of the school site with another public facility or use. a. Procedure. In addition to the base submittal requirements, applicants shall clearly label the plan submitted as an"Alternative Landscape Code Plan". This plan shall reference the deviations on the plan. An applicant must submit a narrative description identifying the code development standards required by this section which will be addressed through the alternative approach. The County Manager or his designee will administratively review submittal documents for consistency with the intent of this division section. If the plan is approved through this provision, the approved deviations must be specifically noted and the basis of the approval must be stated within the site development plan approval letter. Deviations approved will be applicable only to the specific design and plan reviewed. Modifications of an approved design will void the deviation request and require resubmittal to planning services staff for re- evaluation of the request in the context of the amended design and plan. b. Exemption. An administrative deviation is not required for specific standards relating to placement of plant materials if the intent of the Code can nonetheless be carried out without meeting these standards. The intent of the division section can be demonstrated by detailing a specific health, safety, or welfare concern as defined by SREF or as may be unique to a specific site or educational program that would override the need to provide plant materials. A copy of SREF, as may be amended, is available in the records room in the Community Development and Environmental Services Division building. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 10.08.00 CONDITIONAL USES PROCEDURES * * * * * * * * * I. Conditional uses for school or religious purposes. A use which has been approved as part of a preliminary subdivision plat(formerly subdivision master plan) or a planned unit development for schools,religious or eleemosynary uses shall be exempt from the provisions of this section. Such uses must comply with the provisions of section 10.02.03, site development plan approval, as applicable, and all other zoning requirements. * * * * * * * * * * * * * APPENDIX G ANNUAL BEACH EVENT STANDARD PERMIT CONDITIONS * * * 10. Annual beach events which occur during Sea Tuttle Nesting Season(May 1st through October 31st of each year) are also subject to the following regulations: A. All required Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP) Field Permits, shall be obtained and a copy furnished to Collier County prior to the time of the scheduled event as set forth in section 5.04.06. B. Consistent with section 10.02.06 I 5.04.06,no structure set up, or beach raking, or mechanical cleaning activity for any particular Beach Event shall not commence until after monitoring conducted by personnel with prior experience and training in nest surveys procedures and possessing a valid Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Marine Turtle Permit has been completed. C. Prior to all scheduled beach events, every beach event permit holder is required to rope off(or otherwise identify with a physical barrier) an area with no less than a 15-foot radius around each sea turtle nest that has been identified and marked on a beach, unless a greater distance is required by an applicable State permit. D. Use of vehicles on the beach is prohibited, except as may be permitted under section 10.02.06 15.04.06. E. Consistent with section 10.02.06 I 5.04.06 all materials placed on the beach for the purpose of conducting permitted Beach Events must be: 1) removed from the beach by no later than 9:30 p.m. the date of the event; and 2)no structures may be set,placed,or stored on, or within ten feet of any beach dune, except that - materials may remain in an identified staging area until 10:00 p.m. The location and size of all staging areas will be as identified in the annual beach events permit. 111 41