EAC Agenda 05/07/2003 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
AGENDA
May 7, 2003
9:00 A.M.
Commission Boardroom
W. Harmon Turner Building (Building "F") —Third Floor
I. Roll Call
II. Approval of Agenda
III. Approval of April 2, 2003 Meeting Minutes
IV. Land Use Petitions
A. Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2002-AR-2841
Development of Regional Impact No. DRI-2000-01
"Heritage Bay DRI/PUD
Sections 13, 14, 23 &24, Township 48 South, Range 26 East
B. Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2002-AR-2433
"H D Development PUD"
Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 26 East
C. Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2002-AR-3242
"Mandalay PUD"
Section 16, Township 50 South, Range 26 East
V. Old Business
A. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Land Development Code Amendment (2.2.27)
VI. New Business
A. Solid Waste Program Overview (continued to June 4, 2003)
B. Code Enforcement Overview
VII. Council Member Comments
VIII. Public Comments
IX. Adjournment
Council Members: Please notify the Environmental Services Department Administrative
Assistant no later than 5:00 p.m. on May 1, 2003 if you cannot attend this meeting or if you
,--N have a conflict and will abstain from voting on a petition (732-2505).
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.
"- April 02,2003
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Board Meeting Room,3'd Floor,Administration Building
3301 Tamiami Trail Naples,Florida 34112
9:00 AM April 2,2003
LET IT BE REMEMBERED,that the Environmental Advisory Committee,in and
for the County of Collier,having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00
AM in REGULAR SESSION in Building"F" of the Government Complex,East
Naples, Florida,with the following members present:
Members: John Dowd
Michael Sorrel(arrived at 9:04 AM)
Alexandra Santoro
Michael Coe
Tom Sansbury
Erica Lynne
Ken Humiston
Collier County Staff:
Patrick White,Bill Lorenz, Barb Burgeson, Stan Chrznowski,
Doug Suitor,Maura Krauss
Page 1
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
AGENDA
,--� April 2, 2003
9:00 A.M.
Commission Boardroom
W. Harmon Turner Building (Building "F") -Third Floor
I. Roll Call
II. Approval of Agenda
III. Approval of March 5, 2003 Meeting Minutes
IV. Land Use Petitions
V. Old Business
A. Land Development Code Amendments
1. 2.2.27 Rural Lands Stewardship Area, RLSA Overlay
2. 2.6.22 Supplemental District- Manatee
3. 3.5.7 Excavation (Littoral Standards)
4. 3.9.5.5.6 Preserves
.-� 5. 3.14 Vehicle on the Beach Regulations
6. 6.3 Definitions- Density
VI. New Business
VII. Council Member Comments
VIII. Public Comments
IX. Adjournment
Council Members: Please notify the Environmental Services Department
Administrative Assistant no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 28, 2003 if you cannot
attend this meeting or if you have a conflict and will abstain from voting on a petition
(732-2505).
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.
April 02, 2003
I. Roll Call
-The meeting was called to order at 9:03 AM. A quorum was established.
-Members: John Dowd, Michael Sorrel (arrived at 9:04 AM), Alexandra Santoro,
Michael Coe, Tom Sansbury, Erica Lynne,Ken Humiston
-Ed Carlson had an excused absence.
-Collier County Staff: Patrick White,Bill Lorenz, Barb Burgeson, Stan Chrznowski,
Doug Suitor, Maura Krauss
II. Approval of Agenda
-Barbara Burgeson added a brief discussion by Stan Chrznowski at the beginning of the
LDC amendments.
III.Approval of March 5,2003 meeting minutes
-Mr. Coe moved to approve the minutes of March 5, 2003 as written. It was seconded by
Alexandra Santoro. All were in favor; the motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
IV.Land Use Petitions
-There were no land use petitions.
V. Old Business
A) Stan Chrznowski
-Stan Chrznowski, Engineering Review, stated that they have decided to do a permitting
process for easements and encroachments, similar to the permitting for encroachments
into a right-of-way. This matter will not come before the EAC again.
B) Land Development Code Amendments
1) 2.2.27 Rural lands Stewardship Area,RLSA Overlay
-Bob Mulhere,RWA, stated that the staff is still working with this set of amendments.
They will be including a set of definitions in this section. He explained that they would
like the input of the public and EAC and then staff would be finalizing the amendments
in the next few days. He asked if the EAC would have a special meeting to hear the final
version of this amendment before it goes to the CCPC for review on April 30, 2003.
Page 2
April 02,2003
(The committee decided that they would discuss this matter after they heard the
presentation.) Mr. Mulhere explained that these amendments were directly taken from
the Goals, Objectives, and Policies and placed into the LDC almost verbatim.
-Mr. Sansbury stated that his employer is a large land owner in the area being discussed,
but he did not feel that there was any conflict. Mr. White stated that since they were
discussing legislation he did not believe there was an"appearance of conflict". He felt
that Mr. Sansbury would be able to participate and provide a recommendation on this
matter.
-Mr. Mulhere explained that the methodology was to place the RLSA overlay into the
LDC in the same formatting. The county zoning map will designate which areas are
sending and receiving areas. He reviewed the amendment with the EAC and noted any
significant portions, additions, deletions, and changes.
Page 1 - covered the purpose&intent and the establishment of the amendment.
Page 2—Section C - They proposed to add the sentence: "All ACSC regulations continue
to apply to lands designated within ACSC regardless of designation under the
Stewardship Program in addition to the standards that apply to those lands that become
designated as SRAs within the ACSC." Page three also identifies the basic standards of
the program; baseline standards,density/intensity, etc...
Page 4—Section 2.2.27.7—discusses the SSA designation procedures and provides for
what lands may be included in an SSA.
Page 5— Item C2—they are adding the specific language"Compliance with the
following standards shall be considered by Collier County as meeting the requirement for
minimization of impact:"These would be impacts would be to HSAs and FSAs. They
are also considering adding additional language to clarify how this will not be impacted.
They will attempt to address the methodology of how they will determine if an aquifer
and water quality are impacted, as well as the fact that there would be no application for a
take-permit.
Page 6—Item B—discusses the stewardship credit system, early bonus credits, a credit
worksheet that will monitor this process, and the natural resource index and values.
Page 7—Item D—Restoration Potential Index -Mr. Mulhere clarified that they will state
the evaluation needs to be conducted by a qualified individual.
Page 3
April 02,2003
Page 8—address the restoration credit agreement
Page 9—This portion describes the necessary documents need for a restoration
agreement. It also allows for the monitoring of the agreement.
Page 11 —The Land Use Matrix is taken verbatim from Comprehensive Plan
Amendment.
Page 12—thirteen—establish the stewardship sending area designation application.
This details what is expected from staff, what should be submitted,the support
documentation, fee, etc.. This is similar to what is expected on a land use application.
Page 14—Item G1 —they are considering additional levels of protection on the lands set
aside for restoration, such as protection through conservation easements or"fee-simple"
transfer.
Page 15-requires a public hearing process for the SSA credit agreement and the SSA
designation.
Page 16—Item 9—sets out the process for establishing the documents involved in a
stewardship easement agreement or deed. Item 10 requires a natural resource
management plan. This establishes such things as the existing or potential conservation
value and the objectives and benefits, long-term management, location,monitoring, etc...
Page 17—This begins to establish the process for the establishment of the SSA and the
review process. It follows a very traditional pattern already established in the county.
This is similar to the process for a re-zone. After a staff report, there will be a public
hearing before the BCC to designate an area as a SSA. They are considering added
language which will allow the board to approve, deny, or approve the application with
conditions.
Page 19—this covers procedural legal descriptions,updating the stewardship overlay
map, establishes a process for amendments to the SSAs.
-Two documents were being referred to in this discussion on the RLSA overlay. The
documents were similar but page numbers varied slightly. At this point in the meeting,
Mr. Mulhere began to refer to the page numbers of the copy the EAC had.
Page 18—SRA Designation—this follows a similar process as that established for the
SSA. One of the major differences is that the SRA designation has a more rigorous
Page 4
•
April 02, 2003
r-, review process. The suitability criteria comes directly from the goals, objectives, and
policies.
Page 19 - Paragraph two discusses the limitations in establishing a SRA within the
existing areas of critical state concern. Item B discusses the process to entitle land and
gain stewardship credits so that an SRA can be formed. They are considering using
another term other than"entitlement"or defining it clearly in the LDC.
Page 20—discusses the transfer of credits and implements certain goals, objectives,and
policy requirements. Most of these come directly out of the goals, objectives, and
policies.
Page 21 —describes the forms of the SRAs. There are four actual types of SRA
entitlements: towns, villages,hamlets, and compact rural developments.
Page 22 & 23—these pages provide for the limitations on the four types of
developments. The application package for an SRA is established.
Page 24—sets out the requirements for an application.
Page 25—The SRAs will be required to have a master plan,this is similar to the PUD
process. The applicant will also be required to have a development document that
provides for the development regulations. Consistent with the goals, objectives, and
policies an impact assessment and economic assessment report will be required.
-Mr. Coe asked what specifications would be required if a project in Immokalee would
impact the Immokalee Rd. Mr. Mulhere replied that any level of service that is impaired
to an unacceptable level of service,must be corrected before the impact can occur. Mr.
Mulhere explained that the county has adopted the first phase of changes to the
concurrency plan, which reduces the window of when the improvements have to occur.
He added that this amendment states, if there is an impact, then the county's concurrency
plan must be followed.
-Erica Lynne asked if they could incorporate the stricter regulations that they are hoping
will be adopted into the concurrency plan into this amendment. Mr. Mulhere stated that
he believed they were following the requirements of the concurrency plan to date, in
order for consistency.
-Erica Lynne then asked if it was correct to say that fiscally-neutral meant that the cost of
improvements to the road would be borne by the developer of the SRA. Mr. Mulhere
Page 5
April 02, 2003
stated that this was correct and the developer has to demonstrate that there is no impact of
the SRA on the county tax-payer. Mr. White clarified that it may be borne by other than
the developer,but typically it will not be borne by the local government. For example the
costs could be borne by an MSTU or CDD.
Page 26—discusses the SRA Credit Agreement.
Page 30—discusses the SRA application review process. It requires the board to review
the staff report and recommendations and the recommendations of the CCPC. It allows
the board to approve, deny, or approve with conditions to the application. They are
considering placing terminology into this amendment that would also require certain
SRA applications to be reviewed by the EAC. If this requirement is added,then the
process would be through a public hearing similar to the re-zone or PUD process.
Page 31 & 32-The process to amend an existing SRA is established on these pages.
Information dealing with an SRA that will also be a DRI is listed on these pages. They
would have to follow the DRI review process. There is the opportunity for someone to
come in for a portion of an SRA that does not yet approach the status of a DRI, through
P•N an agreement with the ECA or another state agency.
Page 36—provides for the SRA characteristics chart. This was adopted into the GMP
and sets forth a basic description and standards of a town, hamlet, village, and compact
rural developments. In the next round of amendments,they will be writing more specific
design standards for each of the four types of SRAs ,which are called for in the goals,
objectives, and policies.
Page 37—lays out the common design standards. This section will probably be increased
in the next LDC amendment cycle. Item 7 calls for the deviations from LDC standards,
this is a similar process to PUD deviations. They will probably be making revisions to
this part in the near future to make it more consistent.
Page 38—discusses the infrastructure required. It requires compliancy with the
concurrency management system. Item K discusses the impact assessments and what
areas need to be assessed. This will be more detailed in the future and more specific
requirements will be listed. They will call it a SRA public facilities assessment,because
there is a separate requirement for an environmental impact assessment and economic
impact assessment.
Page 6
April 02, 2003
Page 39—discusses potable water, transportation, irrigation water,wastewater, solid
waste, stormwater management, and groundwater. These are the public facility impacts
that will need to be analyzed as part of the application for designation of SRA.
Page 41 —Item L discusses the SRA economic assessment. It explains that up-front one
has to demonstrate fiscal neutrality and that one must monitor it throughout the process
and write a report on it. If it is not maintaining fiscal-neutrality then the applicant must in
some way provide for this, some of the options are listed on this page.
Page 42 —a space was reserved on this page for the baseline standards; 2.2.27.9. The
baseline standards are for someone who chooses not to participate in the program. This
will follow in subsequent amendments.
-Erica Lynne asked if they could re-word"deviations" listed on Page 37. She was
concerned that the deviations may be considered a"right"of the property owner. Mr.
Mulhere stated they were looking at this as well and will find a new word. He clarified
that this is not a right and in order to apply for a deviation one must show justification
for a public benefit or cause no harm to the public. Mr. White added that the applicant
must specifically identify the criteria from which they are seeking a deviation and to what
degree they seek to deviate, as well as the notion as to why.
-Erica Lynne asked if they could place a provision on page 31-5A to deter inappropriate
administrative decisions before a matter comes before the review board. Mr. Mulhere
agreed that there needs to be a safeguard,but clarified that in some circumstances it
would be appropriate to waiver some of the components. He suggested that the request to
waiver a component of the package and the staff's response to the request be recorded in
a written document that could then be reviewed by the EAC. He explained that the way
they intend to amend this section is that certain SRAs and amendments will be reviewed
by the EAC.
-Erica Lynne stated that she was also concerned that the description of the developments
would not be complete enough for them to assess the environmental impacts. She
explained that they currently have this problem with some of the PUDs that they review
and this process is going to be similar. She asked that something be placed in the
amendment so they can avoid the time that is consumed by doing multiple revisions. Mr.
Mulhere stated that they will look into this.
Page 7
April 02, 2003
�-. -Mr. Sansbury asked if they could add the terms"other special taxing districts"to page
38 so that if someone came up with another type of taxing district it will not be
prohibited. Mr. Mulhere stated that this was a good point.
-Mr. Sansbury stated that the Audubon International golf guidelines were good,but he
was concerned that the ability to work with local agencies would be prohibited. Mr.
Mulhere stated that the intent was to incorporate those standards,but in no way obligated
and not any requirement for designation.
-Alexandra Santoro stated that the Conservancy has offered to work with the County and
come up with some standards. She felt this was very important. She added that the
Conservancy's points(addressed in a letter to the EAC)were very good and asked that
the staff consider them when drafting their revisions. She believed that when an
environmental impact statement was mentioned in an SRA, that the EAC should be
involved and that the EAC should be a part of the masterplan review. She stated that
there should be a limitation on hamlets and CRDs, especially in environmental lands.
-Mr. Lorenz commented on the request for an EIS for the SRA designation. He stated
,..� that the information required for an SRA designation has the same substance that is
required in an EIS,but it has a different name.
PUBLIC SPEAKERS
1)Nicole Ryan, representing the Conservancy of SWFL, stated that the Conservancy has
been generally supportive of the RLSA program. They are concerned that there is no
mechanism in place for the county to view the receiving areas as they relate to one
another and the cumulative impacts, since they are approved on a case by case basis.
They are also concerned about the ambiguity of what the population build out may be.
They would like to see some numbers of what the build out population could be. The
third concern that they have deals with transportation. Although specific considerations
are given to roads within the SRAs,they are concerned about the impacts that these SRAs
will have on the County and State roads currently within the rural lands. They were
concerned about how the issue of panther habitats would be taken into account with road
placements and expansions. They also had some specific concerns with various sections
in the LDC amendment. They were concerned that the LDC states that a SSA may be
partially or entirely within the boundaries of a SRA. They asked how the county would
Page 8
April 02,2003
delineate which part of the receiving area actually contained a sending area, and how
would they monitor the sending areas for things that cannot be seen, such as groundwater,
etc.. They were concerned about the LDC section which states"where practicable,
directional-drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be
utilized for oil and gas extraction". The questioned the definition of"practicable" and
asked who made the determinations when a situation fits the definition. They believe the
county should establish their own standards for golf courses and offered assistance in
establishing these standards. They stated that landowners can give land to governmental
agencies for restoration and expressed concerns about if the county was prepared to care
for and manage these lands if no other governmental agency chose to do so. They would
like to see specificity given to when grocery stores, etc... will be built in receiving areas;
there hope is that residential and commercial buildings will be built concurrently. They
agree that the EAC should be part of the process, and feel that this will provide the public
with another opportunity to comment. They would like to see the design criteria go
through this amendment cycle or at least have it clear that the receiving area plans should
not be approved until the use criteria for the forms are established and adopted by the
county. They believe the language should be"tightened up"in section 2.2.27-8J7,
(deviations). She added that the letter from the Conservancy outlines more of their
concerns, they believe the county is off to a good start, and asked that the EAC consider
their concerns when making a recommendation.
-Mr. Coe asked Mr. Mulhere if this was the first opportunity the public had to provide
him with input. Mr. Mulhere answered yes. Mr. Coe asked if it was appropriate to
incorporate the regular public commenters into the process or at least provide them
enough time to give comments that would go into the draft before it came to the EAC.
Mr. Mulhere stated that it was a legitimate point and that normally they try to provide the
time for the public. He added that the board will not hear this matter for a month, so
there is sufficient time to take all the public input. Mr. Coe stated that it would have been
nice if they had this done before it came to the EAC,then the public and staff could make
their differences clear at the meeting. Mr. Mulhere stated that the only way to
Page 9
April 02, 2003
accomplish what he was asking, was to have a public workshop and allow everyone to
comment. He added that he was not opposed to this.
2)Brad Cornell, representing Collier County Audubon Society, stated that if the county
was going to emphasize compact mixed-use rural developments in the SRAs, then the
county should specifically say that they require them. They agree that the Conservancy's
comments on cumulative impacts and environmental assessment are valid. They also
believe that there needs to be specific definitions in the LDC. They believe they need to
add language in section 2.2.27.8kb to protect groundwater levels in FSAs, HSAs, and
WRAs both during and after construction. Since many WRAs are actual wetlands,they
believe that staff should consider not allowing changes to the water control elevations.
Alternatively they suggest added criteria to distinguish varying wetland functional
qualities to account for protection on varying lands. They also feel that there needs to be
more specifics and criteria listed for restoration and monitoring responsibilities. On the
evaluation index system, they feel that it is too complicated and suggest that it be
addressed and set up in a way that is more easily understood. They would like more
specific definitions added concerning qualified restoration activities. They also would
like to see the design criteria adopted before they begin reviewing SRA applications. He
provided the EAC with a letter from the Audubon Society that outlined their comments
and concerns that he referenced.
3)Nancy Payton,representing the FL Wildlife Federation, stated that she liked the idea
of having a workshop prior to the EAC meeting. She explained that they feel a definition
section needs to be added at the beginning of the amendment. She added that the
"numbers"are confusing and asked that something be done in this document to make it
clearer. The goal of the FL Wildlife Federation is to get the sending areas designated as
quickly as possible and to make the process comfortable, easy, and clear for the
landowners. She explained that they believe the EAC should take particular interest in
the area of critical state concern and those lands that are receiving lands but south of Oil
Well Rd. She explained that the FL Fish&Wildlife Conservation is currently doing a
study on bear/Panther habitats,corridor uses, and"road kill". This study is to identify
road segments that are appropriate for wildlife crossings. This is being done in
coordination with the natural resources and the transportation department. The FL
Page 10
•
April 02, 2003
Wildlife Federation hopes that the areas abutting these wildlife crossings will be some of
the first areas to have their credits"peeled off'.
-Erica Lynne asked if Nancy Payton was saying that she felt the landowners"peeling"of
credits was currently a comfortable process or if she believed that it needed changes.
Nancy Payton explained that she understood there was discussion of putting more process
into this section and she is concerned that too much process will deter landowners, but
she does believe that there needs to be accountability and compliance.
-The committee discussed whether or not they would like another meeting to review this
amendment as Mr. Mulhere had requested.
-Alexandra Santoro asked if the changes could be emailed to the individual members of
the EAC and they could make comments rather than having another meeting. Mr.
Mulhere stated that they could do this,but added that the comments would then have to
be made as individuals and not as the body of the EAC. Mr. Lorenz added that if the
�., EAC felt they needed to make comments as a whole, they would still have an opportunity
to do so at their next meeting,before it went before the BCC.
-The EAC agreed that they would like the revisions emailed to individual members and
they would send back any individual comments.
-Erica Lynne asked that the comments of the Conservancy, Wildlife Federation,and
Audubon Society be integrated into the revisions. She felt they were good comments and
encouraged they be considered. Mr. Mulhere stated that they will meet with the agencies,
gather the input,prepare a new draft, and then share the new draft with the agencies
again.
-Mr. Mulhere stated that he understood the EAC's position to be one of general support
the LDC amendments,requesting that the staff work with the interest groups who have
spoken and any other member of the public who would like to have input,to tighten up
the regulations, clarify the regulations, and add definitions;but overall, generally
supportive. The Board gave unanimous agreement to this approach.
Page 11
April 02, 2003
At 10:37 a ten minute recess was taken.
C) 2.6.22 Supplemental District—Manatee
-Barbara Burgeson stated that this is the incorporation of the Manatee Protection Plan
into the LDC.
-Bill Lorenz, Environmental Services Director, stated that DSAC reviewed all of the
amendments except the RLSA Overlay. DSAC was in support of all of the amendments
they reviewed except they recommend that the county stipulate SDP upon receiving
dredging permits. This stipulation would be in reference to page 8 of the staff report,
which states: "If adequate water depth will be achieved by dredging, all necessary
permits for dredging must be obtained prior to SDP approval and the dredging must be
completed prior to issuance of required certificates of occupancy." DSAC recommends
that the SDP be stipulated upon approval of the permits. Mr. Lorenz added that the
public does have some disagreements with this amendment.
-Mr. Coe asked if staff has had discussions with the public about the disagreements or if
they have not yet discussed them with the public. Mr. White stated that they have had
discussions with the public and they are"close", but he was hoping that this meeting
would help them get"close enough".
-Barbara Burgeson explained to the EAC that staff has always required that all state and
federal permits be acquired prior to SDP approval. She stated that the permit was
required before SDP approval, so that staff can review the adequate depths and any
impacts to marine or native habitats in the area. In order to make the final determination
on whether or not they can acquire or achieve adequate depths, and whether or not they
will have less than 100 square feet of impact, staff need the dredge and fill permit in-
hand. Other issues of with SDP approval are that without the state permit,the SDP
would not be rated the same since they would not be aware if the conditions could be
met. Also, once the SDP is approved, there is no mechanism for staff to require the SDP
to come back and be re-amended. Currently when the dredge and fill permit comes back,
staff reviews it for special conditions and adds these to the SDP before approval. They
also do not have a way to open the SDP for review by the county if changes need to be
p•.• made after the fill and dredge permit is issued. The last issue is that when the SDP is
Page 12
April 02,2003
approved it allows for commercial property to clear the entire site for the infrastructure
and the buildings,therefore if the state has not completed their final inspection of the site
prior to the SDP approval, then the site could have already been cleared. This is why
staff is concerned about allowing an SDP approval without all final state and federal
permits. They recommend this in the LDC.
-Mr. Sansbury asked what the reasoning was of DSAC,who disagreed with this part of
the amendment. Barbara Burgeson stated that she believed they felt that staff could do
their final approval in anticipation that the state will issue those permits, and that staff
should take into consideration that the applicant could not have gotten that far into the
process if they didn't expect to be able to get the state and federal permits. Mr. Lorenz
added that they would be able to have further design and move more quickly on their
timeline if they could have the SDP approval first.
-Mr. Coe asked how long it took to get the other permit. Barbara Burgeson stated that
she did not know specifically,but it was similar to if you are going through an ERP
process.
PUBLIC SPEAKERS
1) Clay Booker,with the law firm Young, Van Assenderp, Varnadoe &Anderson,
stated that the points made in his letter distributed in the last regular meeting,
remain their position. Today he was going to limit his comments to the adequate
water depth dispute. They believe that at the facility site, one needs the 4 foot
mean-low water depth,but they dispute that one then needs the 4 foot depth for
five contiguous miles. He explained that this language, "for five contiguous
miles"was not, in their belief,the intent or specific language of the Manatee
Protection Plan. This material is covered in section 2.6.22.4.3, (application of the
rating system for evaluating a potential site). Mr. Booker explained that he would
only be dealing with the first sub-paragraph of this section,which deals with
adequate water depth. He used the visualizer to show the proposed LDC language
and the original MPP-section 4. The MPP refers to a five mile"sphere of
influence". He read the last sentence of this section of the MPP,which read: "this
requirement may also apply to the area between the proposed facility and any
n natural or other navigational channel, inlet,pass, or deep water." He stressed the
Page 13
April 02, 2003
word"may"rather than"shall"and added that he saw no indication that it has to
be five contiguous miles. They believe this language means that one must have
four feet of water depth at the site and if surrounded by shallower waters leading
to a channel, then one must provide at least four foot water depth to get to the
channel,not five contiguous miles past the channel. They believe if the words
"shall"and"five contiguous miles"are left in the LDC amendment,then the
county would be altering the original MPP. He added that the five mile sphere of
influence mentioned in the MPP was only to apply to the Manatee Abundance
Criteria.
-Mr. Lorenz, stated that if one does not have the adequate water depth for five miles,then
they would not get the preferred ranking. Preferred ranking allows for the most boat slips
possible. He stated that the point is that if there is not adequate water depth for five
miles, then staff does not want a lot of boats coming out of the area because there is
inadequate water depth for Manatee protection. He added that the applicant would be
allowed to get the preferred ranking, if they dredged for five miles or ensured that they
had adequate depth for five miles.
-Mr. Sansbury stated that there are existing marinas that would not be able to get the
preferred ranking with the new language. Mr. Lorenz stated that they could if they got
the permits to dredged and dredged. Mr. Booker stated that they are not trying to be
"greedy",but they want to adhere to the existing language in the MPP.
-Mr. Coe stated, that as a county,they have the right to make the county code stricter than
the MPP. Mr. Booker stated that he does not dispute that the BCC has the right to amend
the MPP,but he did not believe this was the proper forum since this council did not have
that right. Erica Lynne pointed out that the EAC is not a legal board and Mr. Booker was
fighting a legal point. She explained that the EAC is supposed to give recommendations
of how the amendments will affect the environment only. Mr. Sansbury disagreed stating
that the EAC is to defend the environment,but they also need to consider the legal
ramification,which is why the county attorney is present. Erica Lynne agreed,but added
that the EAC is not the legal expert,the county attorney is.
-Barbara Burgeson added that the current proposal does not change the way that staff has
interpreted and applied the MPP in the past and they are in no way attempting to make
Page 14
April 02, 2003
anything stricter. Mr. Lorenz added that this is how they have been interpreting and
reviewing projects since the beginning of the MPP's existence.
2) Todd Turrell, a local ocean engineer and president of Turrell&Associates,
stated that he disagreed with the staffs view on the depth requirement. He
explained that he was one of the committee members with the Marine Industry's
to craft the MPP. He stated that the water depth requirement for five miles was
never part of the original plan and that the five mile radius was specific to
Manatee mortality,which was imposed on them by the state of Florida. He
clarified that there were a number of existing marinas, which would not be able to
get a preferred ranking if the proposed LDC amendment was passed. He did not
feel that the county should impose stricter regulations than the state or federal
agencies do. The original committee has drafted a letter to Commissioner Tom
Henning, which states their position that the depth restriction within five miles
was never intended. He added that "may be considered"was originally meant to
block inappropriate expansions.
3) Butch Morgan,president of Marine Industry's of Collier County, stated that he
agreed with the two previous speakers about the original intent of the MPP and
how it applied. He stated that they believed that the staff was "adding specifics to
the MPP without being specific". They disagreed with section 26.22.2.1 because
it did not allow the use on non-motorized vehicles. They do not agree with this
section since homeowners in the area would not be able to use their smaller boats.
They also do not agree with section 2.6.22.2.3, since it will restrict residents to
one boat, which will not allow two small boats that fit in one slip. Another issue
they had was with section 2.6.22.2-2,because it did not specify single family
docks versus commercial docks. He suggested that staff have a workshop to
discuss these issues and allow the public to understand their position.
-Mr. Sansbury asked how they drafted this language without meeting with the Marine
Industry. Bill Lorenz explained that he had Doug Suitor draft the original amendments in
January and had him send an email of previous drafts to all the stakeholders who were
�.� involved in the MPP. This is how the staff"alerted"them as to what they were doing.
Page 15
•
April 02,2003
He added that on page four of section 2.6.22.1 states that this regulation does not apply to
single family docks,but they are subject to the requirements found elsewhere in the LDC.
He added that in regards to the Clam Bay System, this section also did not apply to single
family homes,only to commercial properties.
-Erica Lynne asked Mr. Morgan if he was now comfortable with the sections of the
amendment that he was questioning. Mr. Morgan stated that he was still uncomfortable
with the sections. He also stated that they never received an email and that it is not the
best way to follow-up with people. He feels that more consideration should be given to
this amendment.
-Mr. Sansbury asked what the"science"was behind the five miles and one boat per
hundred foot lot regulations. Mr. Lorenz replied that the MPP indicates that a five mile
on water travel distance was considered a sphere of influence because it was an area
found in Collier County that would not allow for overlapping areas between businesses.
Mr. Sansbury replied that he did not see the point in changing the original wording of the
MPP plan. Mr. Lorenz explained that staffs position is that they are writing the MPP
into the LDC as they have always interpreted and applied it since it was drafted. He
added that the proposals have been sent to the state for their review.
-Alexandra Santoro stated that she believed if someone needed to do the dredging for the
preferred ranking in order to be allowed eight more boat slips, then they would be able to
pay for it over time due to extra income from the eight extra boats.
-Mr. Sorrell asked about the chances of receiving a dredging permit. Mr. Lorenz stated
that it is a decision made by state and federal agencies.
-Mr. Humiston stated that he believes the five mile radius makes a lot of sense as far as
the Manatee usage, but he agreed with the speakers that the amendment was different
than what was in the MPP. He also agreed with the recommendation of DSAC.
-Alexandra Santoro made a motion to approve the LDC amendment as written. It was
seconded by Erica Lynne.
-Mr. Sorrell asked that they keep in mind that there have been more Manatees counted
this year, than there ever has been in the past, and that he has friends in the Clam Bay
System and does not want to see them restricted to one boat. Mr. Sansbury concurred
Page 16
April 02,2003
and asked staff if they could go back and meet with the concerned agencies in an attempt
to get closer to an agreement. He could not support the amendment at this time. Mr.
White stated that they could do this. He also cautioned the individual council members
that they need to maintain the appearance of objectivity in reviewing this regulation and
that they should not give to great a weight to their own individual circumstances.
-The motion was recalled. The motion failed 5-2, (Erica Lynne and Alexandra Santoro
were in favor of the motion.)
-Mr. Humiston made a motion that they recommend approval, accepting the
recommendation of DSAC and changing the language on the depth requirement as
recommended by Mr. Booker. There was no second to this motion. The motion failed.
-Mr. Coe stated that the only reason he turned this motion down was because he was tired
of not including the people who should be included in the discussion,prior to writing the
document.
-Mr. Sansbury clarified that the EAC was not prepared to approve this document or any
revision of the document, but they were prepared to recommend that staff sit down with
the various involved representatives in attempt to review the items in question. All
members of the EAC agreed. Mr. Coe moved this statement in the form of a motion. It
was seconded by Mr. Humiston.
-Erica Lynne stated that it was hard to vote against further discussion,but she clarified
that she felt staff has done a good job.
-The motion was recalled. All were in favor of the motion; the motion passed
unanimously, 7-0.
-Alexandra Santoro asked that if this matter came before the EAC again, that a map be
included, which showed where four foot depth already is in existence.
-Doug Suitor showed that this was already in the MPP.
D)3.5.7 Excavation (Littoral Standards)
-Bill Lorenz, stated that DSAC recommended approval of staff's proposal and to ensure
that"fish farms"would be exempt from the Littoral zone requirements. Staff has added
Page 17
April 02, 2003
this into the current draft. The summary contained comments from a variety of
practitioners and design consultants.
-Alexandra Santoro moved for approval. Mr. Humiston seconded the motion. All were
in favor; the motion passed unanimously, 7-0.
E)3.9.5.5.6 Preserves
-Barbara Burgeson stated that this section was re-written from the original draft. Staff
has reduced the amount of information in the draft. It was presented to DSAC and they
recommended approval. In the second cycle they will be adding language that was
removed due to controversy,but a workshop will be held before the review by the EAC.
-Alexandra Santoro moved to approve. It was seconded by Mr. Dowd. All were in
favor; the motion passed unanimously, 6-0, (Mr. Coe was absent from this point on).
F)3.14 Vehicle on the Beach Regulations
-Mr. Lorenz stated that he EAC approved the draft of this at their last meeting, supporting
/'"N staff's recommendation of a 15 foot setback for mechanical cleaning equipment.
DSAC's position was to utilize the state's position of 10 feet. Staff reviewed the
information and has now proposed a compromise of maintaing the 15 foot setback for
beach raking and mechanical beach cleaning machines, all of which are county run, but a
10 foot setback for surface grooming equipment that does not penetrate the sand.
-Alexandra Santoro asked if surface grooming was defined or if it should be called
surface grooming with no penetration. Mr. Lorenz felt it was clear,but it could be
defined if necessary in the future.
PUBLIC SPEAKERS
1) Nicole Ryan,representing the Conservancy, referred to the letter handed out by
the Conservancy. She explained that their concern was minor,but in section
3.14.3.4.7 subsection 2 was eliminated because staff believed it was redundant,
while the Conservancy feels that it added further clarification. They would like
subsection 2 to be placed back into the amendment.
-Mr. Lorenz stated they removed it due to redundancy,but if there was truly a change
in substance then it would be fine.
Page 18
April 02, 2003
-Mr. Sansbury stated that the second section made him question if some vehicles
could be used prior to the time. Erica Lynne agreed. She provided a suggestion that
included a portion of the second section into the first section.
-Alexandra Santoro moved to approve staff's recommendation, with their further
clarification that there is no misunderstanding,that vehicles are not allowed on the
beach until after their Sea Turtle monitoring. It was seconded by Erica Lynne. All
were in favor; the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
G)Definitions—Density
-Mr. White stated that an amendment was made to this based on the comments from staff
and others. This was discussed at the CCPC&BCC joint meeting, which precipitated
the change.
-Mr. Sansbury asked what the effect was on the present density calculation. Mr. White
explained that it does not change the manner of calculation and rounding,but it
implements the BCC direction that the residential land areas not include existing platted
areas for vehicular right-of-ways. This is consistent with the change to the RT district
provision. He added that the most important change is that the residential land area now
expressly states that it may include land submerged below an existing fresh-water body,
so long as they are in existence at the time the application is filed. The land submerged
below title-water bodies or marine wetlands, may not be included in the calculation for
gross acreage in order to determine density.
-Alexandra Santoro moved to approve. It was seconded by Mr. Humsiton. All were in
favor; the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
VI. NEW BUSINESS
-There was no new business to discuss.
VII. COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS
-Mr. Sansbury reported that he presented the quadrennial report to the BCC three weeks
ago. The BCC thanked the EAC for their service and stated that the EAC was doing a
Page 19
April 02, 2003
good job. The BCC denied the request to allow for a majority vote of those present,and
stated that the EAC would still have to have five votes for an official approval.
-Alexandra Santoro clarified that they would like Solid Waste and Transportation on the
agenda for the May meeting, as well as a discussion of code enforcement. She then asked
about the newsletter she was writing. Barbara Burgeson stated that she could send them
to staff and staff would distribute them.
VIII.Adjournment
-There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was
adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:03PM.
Collier County Committee EAC
r=te Chairman(Tom Sansbury)
Page 20
Item V.A
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING OF MAY 7, 2003
I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT:
Petition No.: Planned Unit Development
No. PUDZ-2002-AR-2841
Development of Regional Impact
No. DRI-2000-01
Petition Name: Heritage Bay DRI/PUD
Applicant/Developer: U.S. Home Corporation
Engineering Consultant: WilsonMiller, Inc.
Environmental Consultant: W. Dexter Bender&Associates, Inc.
II. LOCATION:
The project site is located in the northeast corner of the intersection of Collier
Boulevard and Immokalee Road in Sections 13, 14, 23 and 24, Township 48
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES:
The subject property encompasses 2,562 acres and includes all of Sections 13, 14,
23 and 24, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
Surrounding properties on the north and west are mostly undeveloped with some
agricultural activity near Immokalee Road. Bonita Bay East Golf Club lies
immediately east of the subject property.
ZONING DESCRIPTION
N - A-ST Undeveloped
S - R.O.W. Immokalee Road
E - A-MHO Undeveloped
Bonita Bay East
Golf Club
, EAC Meeting
Page 2 of 10
W- A Undeveloped or in
Agricultural Use
PUD (Mirasol) Undeveloped
IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed 2,562-acre Heritage Bay PUD/DRI is intended to be a mixed-use
community located in Sections 13, 14, 23 and 24, Township 48 South, Range 26
East. The subject site is generally located in the northeast quadrant of the
intersection of Immokalee road and Collier Boulevard. The site of Heritage Bay is
unique in that it includes lands that are designated Urban, Rural, and Activity
Center on the Future Land Use Map of the GMP. In addition, much of the site has
been mined for 28 years and is permitted to continue mining operations for the
foreseeable future. The site is bordered on the east by the Bonita bay East golf
course, on the north by undeveloped lands zoned Agricultural, on the south by
Immokalee Road and approved Grand Land Golf Club and approved RV parks,
and on the west by the approved but undeveloped Mirasol PUD.
The petitioner proposes a maximum of 3,450 residential dwelling units with a
wide range of housing styles including single family detached, villas, low rise and
mid-rise multi-family buildings. The plan also provides for 200 assisted living
units. The overall residential density is 1.35 units per acre, which reflects the land
area devoted to lakes, recreational open space and conservation use, totaling
approximately 70 percent of the entire site. The project will also contain three
Community Club/Town Centers that are intended to provide residents with
neighborhood focal points. They encompass 20 acres and will contain up to
40,000 square feet of building floor area. These sites are for common
recreational/fitness centers, clubhouses, small-scale convenience neighborhood
goods and services for the residents. The variety of services provided is intended
to allow residents within the project easy access to these facilities, which reduces
the amount of vehicular traffic on the County road network. The Activity Center
Commercial site is located at the intersection of Immokalee Road and Collier
Boulevard and will accommodate up to 50,000 s.f. of office uses and 150,000 s.f.
or retail uses.
The Master Plan for Heritage Bay indicates that the project will conserve 831
acres of wetlands. The wetland conservation area will carry surface water through
the project from the north to the south,with flows reaching the Immokalee Road
canal. Vegetated upland areas within the conservation area will also be retained as
part of extensive open space system of the community. Heritage Bay is anticipated
to be constructed in two phases with Phase one commencing in 2003 and
continuing through 2005 or 06. Florida Rock will continue its mining operations
in the project's Phase II area while Phase I is developed. Phase II is anticipated to
be completed in 2009 or 2010.
, EAC Meeting
Page 3 of 10
V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element:
A comprehensive plan amendment for the subject property was approved by the
BCC. The amendment calls for the creation of an Urban-Rural Fringe Transition
Zone Overlay that covers the subject land and allows for"Density Blending".
Development can only occur consistent with the adopted performance standards
that include 830 acres of wetlands, native vegetation that shall cover 40 percent of
the gross land area, and connection to the County's regional water and wastewater
facilities. The Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan permits
the proposed residential density and commercial uses.
Conservation & Coastal Management Element:
The subject property encompasses four sections of land, three of which lie in the
Agricultural/Rural Area. The remaining Section, Section 21, is within the Urban
Designated Area.
The proposed project is dependent on a Growth Management Plan(GMP)
Amendment recently adopted by the Board of County Commissioners but not yet
in effect. This amendment will create a separate overlay for the site,the Urban-
Rural Fringe Transition Zone Overlay.
The project as proposed is consistent with the Policies in Objective 6.1 and 6.2 of
the Conservation& Coastal Management Element, for the following reasons:
Greater than 25 % of the existing native vegetation on-site is being retained and
set aside as preserve areas with conservation easements prohibiting further
development.
Preserve areas are interconnected within the project and to adjoining off-site
preserves.
Preserve management plans for habitat management and exotic vegetation
removal will be required at the time of Site Development Plan/Construction Plan
submittal.
The requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)pursuant to policy
6.1.7 has been satisfied.
EAC Meeting
Page 4 of 10
Jurisdictional wetlands have been identified as required by Policies 6.2.1 and
6.2.2. All jurisdictional wetlands are being retained on-site.
In accordance with Policy 6.2.6,required preservation areas have been identified
on the PUD master plan. Allowable uses within the preserve areas are included in
the PUD document, with changes to the language in the PUD stipulated in this
staff report.
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
shall be required at the time of Site Development Plan/Construction Plan
submittal. Copies of the EIS have been forwarded to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
(FFWCC) for their review. State and Federal Agency permits have been
previously issued for the site for earth mining activities. Preserve areas identified
in the permits for the mining operation are identical with those shown on the PUD
master plan.
VI. MAJOR ISSUES:
.-� Stormwater Management:
The site is located within the Cocohatchee River Basin. There are no County
stormwater maintenance facilities in the vicinity of the project. The Cocohatchee
Canal, paralleling Immokalee Road is owned and maintained by the Big Cypress
Basin of the SFWMD. SFWMD will be the permitting agency for Heritage Bay.
Environmental:
Site Description:
The subject property is approximately 2,562 acres in size and the site of an
existing mining operation (the Mule Pen Quarry). Approximately 418 acres are
being actively mined, with another 1282 acres permitted and previously cleared
for mining.
The majority of native vegetation on-site occurs within the existing preserve
areas. Native habitats found in the preserves include cypress (FLUCFCS Code
621), cypress-pine (FLUCFCS Code 624), freshwater marsh (FLUCFCS Code
641), wetland forested mix (FLUCFCS Code 630), mixed wetland hardwoods
(FLUCFCS Code 617), wet prairie (FLUCFCS Code 8.4), pine flatwoods, hydric
(FLUCFCS Code 4151), pine flatwoods (FLUCFCS Code 411) and palmetto
prairie (FLUCFCS Code 321). Native habitats total approximately 841 acres.
EAC Meeting
Page 5 of 10
Wetlands:
Approximately 814.6 acres of wetlands occur on the property, all within the
existing preserve areas. All wetlands on-site will be preserved at post
development. The only impact to wetlands proposed with the project is a golf cart
bridge crossing over a recently created wetland connection in the preserve area.
Since there is no significant impact to wetlands with this project, no mitigation is
proposed.
Preservation Requirements:
Pursuant to the recently adopted Growth Management Plan (GMP) Amendment
for the DRI, native vegetation or other natural areas (inclusive of the conservation
areas) shall cover a minimum of 40% of the gross land area (or its equivalent off-
site) exclusive of existing rock quarries. The Plan also states that a minimum of
833 acres of wetlands on-site, are to be placed in a conservation easement.
As proposed, the PUD master plan identifies 863 acres as Conservation and
Preservation areas. This is equivalent to 34% of the site, or 40% of the gross land
area exclusive of existing rock quarries. These numbers are consistent with the
requirements identified in the GMP Amendment for the project.
Listed Species:
A listed plant and animal species survey was conducted to update previous
Protected Species Surveys conducted by Kevin L. Erwin Consulting Ecologist,
Inc. and Passerella and Associates, Inc. Pedestrian transects were conducted in the
morning, afternoon and evening hours during August and September 2000. At
least 98 man hours were spent on site during this additional listed species survey.
The Conservation Area perimeter extending inward 200 feet, were surveyed more
intensely with the interiors being reviewed less intensely.
Little blue heron, snowy egret, tricolored heron, white ibis, wood stork, American
alligator and gopher tortoise were the only listed wildlife species whose presence
(sight, sound or sign) were identified within the project boundary during the 1994
and recent surveys. The American kestrel has been observed on site, but this most
likely is not the Southeastern American kestrel since it was observed during the
summer. Additionally, one hawk's nest and five squirrel's nests were identified in
the Conservation Areas on-site.
Listed species of wading birds were observed on-site along the edge of the rock
quarries, drainage canals and freshwater marshes on-site. No nesting areas were
r1 identified during the surveys.
EAC Meeting
Page 6 of 10
A solitary alligator was observed on the berm area in the northeast corner of the
property during the 1994 survey.
Eighty-six active and nine inactive gopher tortoise burrows were located within
the property boundary during the 1994 survey. These burrows were located in the
palmetto prairie and pine flatwoods in the northeast quarter and central portions of
the site. Utilizing the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
(FFWCC) burrow occupancy correction factor of 0.614 gopher tortoises per
burrow, it is estimated that the property supported approximately 58 gopher
tortoises at the time of the survey. An Incidental Take Permit was obtained from
the FFWCC by Florida Rock Industries, Inc. There were no observations of any
commensals except for eastern diamondback rattlesnake and dusky pygmy
rattlesnake. The portion of the site containing gopher tortoises was cleared by
Florida Rock, Inc. as allowed by the incidental Take Permit.
A more recent survey for gopher tortoises was conducted on portions of the site
on January 12, 13 and 17, 2000. The survey included potential gopher tortoise
habitats within the conservation areas, the berms surrounding the conservation
areas, and disturbed uplands within the mining areas. The results of the survey
found a total of four active, one inactive, and ten old gopher tortoise burrows. The
burrows were located in the preserve area and on berms adjacent to the preserve in
the northeast portion of the site.
A survey for gopher tortoises or their signs was also conducted on portions of the
site on February 28, 2003 to determine if gopher tortoises were present in areas
that may be disturbed in the future by development. The surveys included the
berms surrounding preservation areas and 25 feet on either side of the berms. No
gopher tortoises or their signs were observed during this most recent survey.
Heritage Bay is located outside Priority 1 and 2 panther habitat designation. The
property to the north of the site is considered priority 1 panther habitat. No Florida
panthers of their signs were observed during the listed species surveys. Panther
and bear telemetry show locations near but not on the subject property.
Listed species of plants observed on the property include butterfly orchid
(Encyclia tampense) and reflexed wild-pine (Tillandsia balbisiana). All the listed
plants were observed in wetlands within the preserves on site.
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of Development of Regional Impact No. DRI-2000-
01/Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2002-AR-2841 "Heritage Bay
DRI/PUD"with the following stipulations:
. EAC Meeting
Page 7 of 10
Stormwater Management:
1. The existing lakes must be brought into conformance with the depth and
sideslope requirements of Section 3.5 of the Land Development Code in
effect at the time of the SDP submittal.
2. Littoral zones must be created and planted as per the requirements of the
LDC in effect at the time of SDP submittal.
Environmental:
1. Add the following language to section 2.13(A)(12)(b) of the PUD
document.
Excavation for earth mining shall be consistent with that shown on the PUD
master plan. No additional impacts to the preserve area shall be allowed as a
result of the existing Conditional Use and Excavation Permit for earth
mining activities.
2. Amend section 2.18(B) of the PUD document as follows by deleting the
,..� struck through language.
Littoral zone plantings shall conform to the requirements of the Land
Development Code in effect at the time of final development order approval
except that an area of littoral zone equivalent to two percent of the total area
of the lake at control elevation shall bo planted with wetland typo
vegetation.
3. Delete stipulations 2.19(B,F, H&I) from the PUD document.
4. Amend section 2.19(G) of the PUD document as follows by deleting the
struck through language.
Final alignment and configuration of water management structures (des;
cwales, etc.) shall be subject to minor field adjustments to minimize habitat
destruction.
5. Add the following stipulations to section 2.19 of the PUD document.
This PUD shall comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FFWCC) regarding potential impacts to
protected species onsite. A Habitat Management Plan for those protected
. EAC Meeting
Page 8 of 10
species shall be submitted to Environmental Services Staff for review and
approval prior to final Site Plan/Construction Plan approval.
6. Remove the last sentence from section 2.19(C) of the PUD document.
7. In accordance with section 3.2.8.4.7.3 of the Land Development Code,
principle structures are required to have a 25 foot setback from preserve
areas, and accessory structures are required to have a 10 foot setback from
preserve areas. Include columns for these setback requirements in Tables 1,
2 & 3 of the PUD document. Remove all reference to preserve areas from
foot notes under these tables. Include the preserve setback requirement in
section 4.5 of the PUD document.
8. Amend section 7.3(A)(3) of the PUD document as follows by deleting the
struck through language.
Water management structures ., . ., _ , - . .•-_ _ ' - . . .. -. .
9. Amend section 7.3(A)(5) of the PUD document as follows by adding the
underlined language.
Utility or roadway crossings as shown on the PUD master plan.
10. Amend section 7.3(A)(7) of the PUD document as follows by deleting the
struck through language and adding the underlined language.
Hiking trails, pedestrian/golf cart boardwalks, nature trails
(elevated and at grade), riding trails and other such facilities, constructed for
the purpose of passage through or enjoyment of the site's natural attributes,
subject to appropriate approval by permitting agencies.
EAC Meeting
Page 9 of 10
PREPARED BY:
lif
r
STAN CHRZANOWSKI, P.E. DATE
ENGINEERING REVIEW MANAGER
- f`
,,, ." - ,(X,4 'L- tS /0
JULY C. ADARMES MINOR, P.E. DA 'E
'ENGINEER SENIOR
A /al I/454 00I
STEPHEN LENBERGER DATE
SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
1244?
.--- -- 72.1,_—_----
4_.g- 03
RAYM D . ELLOWS D TE
CHIEF ANNER
REVIEWED BY:
L/304-104246- ,d_ & V-li- 03
BARBARA S. BURGESON DATE
PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
EAC Meeting
Page 10 of 10
ii/l/L24 ''' / 04-/6`0'i
LIAM D. LO' NZ, Jr.,"P.E. DATE
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
dir-
/ / i/, 9- 6'-63
Ag I/Alai/
MARG•4 ET WUERSTLE, AICP DATE
PLANN C' G SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
APPROVED BY:
/
Aimmilarl
If103
•SEPH SCHMITT%
OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
C: SUSAN MURRAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
Item IV.B.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING OF MAY 7, 2003
I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT:
Petition No.: Planned Unit Development
No. PUDZ-2002-AR-2433
Petition Name: H.D. Development PUD
Applicant/Developer: William L. Hoover, AICP
Engineering Consultant: Johnson Engineering
Environmental Consultant: Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc.
II. LOCATION:
The subject property is comprised of three undeveloped parcels totaling 46.64
acres located on the north side of Immokalee Road, approximately 1%2 miles east
of I-75, in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida.
III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES:
Surrounding properties include developed and undeveloped parcels.
ZONING DESCRIPTION
N - PUD (Olde Cypress) Mostly Developed
S - SFWMD Easement Cocohatchee Canal
R.O.W. Immokalee Road
E - Agriculture Undeveloped
W - PUD (Olde Cypress) Preserve/Developed
EAC Meeting
H.D.Development
Page 2 of 8
IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The HD Development PUD is a proposed residential development consisting of
single-family and multi-family residential tracts, water management, and preserve
areas.
The single-family area will have access from the Olde Cypress residential area to
the north. The multi-family area will have access from the Olde Cypress
commercial area to the east. There is no proposed direct access from Immokalee
Road across the Cocohatchee Canal.
V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element:
The subject property is designated Urban (Urban - Mixed Use District, Urban
Residential Subdistrict) on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management
Plan. This Subdistrict allows residential development (with a variety of unit
types) at a density consistent with the Density Rating System; recreation and open
space uses; and, other support uses related to residential development. Relevant
to this petition, review of the Density Rating System in the FLUE yields the site is
eligible for 4 dwelling units per acre, or 186 Dwelling Units total. The petitioner
is proposing 104 DUs or 2.23 DU/A.
Base Density 4 du/a
No density bonus or density reduction 0 du/a adjustment
Maximum Total Eligible Density 4 du/a
Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element encourages project interconnections; this
PUD proposes an interconnection to the north and east.
Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed uses and density may
be deemed consistent with the FLUE.
Conservation & Coastal Management Element:
The proposed project is consistent with Policy 6.1.1 for the following reasons:
1. Greater than 25 percent of the existing native vegetation is being retained on-
site and set aside as preserve areas.
2. A preliminary restoration plan for the preserve areas is included in the
/'•\ Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). This plan will be finalized at the time of
Site Development Plan approval.
EAC Meeting
H.D.Development
Page 3 of 8
3. Connectivity of on-site preserve areas to adjoining wetlands systems is being
maintained.
The project is consistent with Policy 6.1.4 in that an exotic vegetation removal
and maintenance plan has been submitted with the Environmental Impact
Statement.
The requirement for an EIS pursuant to policy 6.1.7 has been satisfied.
Jurisdictional wetlands have been identified as required in Policies 6.2.1 and
6.2.2. Agency permits are required at the time of Site Development Plan approval.
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 Policy 6.2.6, the required preservation areas have been
identified on the PUD master plan. Allowable uses within preserve areas are
included in the PUD document.
In accordance with policy 7.1.2, a wildlife survey for listed species was conducted
for the project and included in the EIS. A habitat management plan for Big
Cypress fox squirrels, listed as Threatened by the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FFWCC), was also included with the EIS. Copies of
the EIS and habitat management plan have been forwarded to the FFWCC for
review and comment. A monitoring report will be required at the time of site
development plan/construction plan submittal.
VI. MAJOR ISSUES:
Stormwater Management:
The site consists of two basins separated by a preserve. The preserve is part of a
large offsite slough coming from the northeast. Both basins discharge directly into
the Cocohatchee Canal through control structures and pipes.
The allowable discharge rate for the Cocohatchee Canal basin is 0.04 cfs/acre.
The design of the surface water management will conform to all requirements of
S.F.W.M.D. VOL IV.
. EAC Meeting
H.D.Development
Page 4 of 8
Environmental:
Site Description:
The subject property is vegetated with a mixture of wetland and upland habitats.
Vegetative communities on site include pine flatwoods, cypress and
pine/cypress/cabbage palm. All habitats on site have been invaded with
Melaleuca. There is also a .58 acre spoil area in the southwest area of the project
generated during construction of Weir 3 on the Cocohatchee Canal.
Seasonal high water elevations were determined by using water and lichen lines
on various trees. Three levels were found with the following elevations: 13.53',
13.24' and 13.54' (all NGVD). The average natural ground height is
approximately 13.0'.
Three soil types occur on the subject property as mapped by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS). These include Oldsmar fine sand (Unit 16),
Basinger fine sand (27) and Boca, Riviera, Limestone Substratum and Copeland
fine sand, depressional (Unit 25). One of the soil types found on site, Boca,
Riviera, Limestone Substratum and Copeland fine sand, depressional (Unit 25) is
^ listed as a hydric soil by the NRCS. A map showing the locations of the soils on
site, along with descriptions of each soil type, are included as attachments in the
(EIS).
Wetlands:
Jurisdictional wetlands total 89.5 percent (41.74 acres) of the 46.64 acre project
site. These consist of 14.55 acres of cypress and 27.19 acres of
pine/cypress/cabbage palm. A brief summary of the major flora within these
wetland areas is found on page seven of the EIS.
Approximately 25.53 acres (61 percent) of the on-site wetlands will be impacted
through the proposed development of the property. The remaining 39 percent of
the wetlands (16.21 acres) will be enhanced through removal of the exotic
vegetation (mainly Melaleuca) and replanting, including a 6.47 acre special
treatment (ST) overlay zoning district area. Off-site mitigation of 18.67 acres is
proposed on two parcels located upstream in the same wetland flow-way system.
The combination of on and off-site wetland preservation will total 34.88 acres or
83.5 percent of pre-development wetlands.
The hydroperiod of the on-site wetland preserve is proposed to be enhanced by
construction of a berm at the downstream end of the flow-way, just north of the
existing spillway for the Cocohatchee Canal. If approved by the South Florida
. EAC Meeting
H.D.Development
Page 5 of 8
Water Management District, the berm will enhance the hydroperiod by holding
water in the flow-way.
Non jurisdictional areas total approximately 4.32 acres of pine flatwoods. All
uplands will be impacted from this development and 1.33 acres will be mitigated
for off-site as part of one of the parcels used for wetland mitigation. A brief
summary of the major flora within this vegetative community is found on page
fifteen of the EIS.
Preservation Requirements:
With the exception of the spoil area (.58 acres) the entire site consists of viable
native vegetation (46.06 acres). Staff did not observe any areas with greater than
75 percent Melaleuca coverage in the canopy. As required by Collier County
environmental ordinances, this project is required to retain a minimum of 25
percent or 11.52 acres of native vegetation or mitigate for that same area per
Section 3.9.5.5.3 of the LDC. The master plan shows 16.2 acres of native
vegetation being preserved in a wetland preserve. The on site preserve will
preserve approximately 35 percent of the site.
Listed Species:
A biological survey of the subject property was conducted in June, August,
September and October of 2001 using field methodology that met Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) guidelines (see report in the
EIS). The survey was performed to locate and document any listed plant and
wildlife species and habitat that may occur on the project site.
One potential big cypress fox squirrel "day bed" was located on the property.
None of the protected squirrels were observed and no other signs of protected
species were observed on the parcel.
Collier County must protect the species in accordance with the Collier County
Land Development Code and Collier County Growth Management Plan,
Conservation and Coastal Management Element. The petitioner provided a
management plan for the big cypress fox squirrel. The best quality habitat for the
squirrel is proposed for preservation.
• EAC Meeting
H.D.Development
Page 6 of 8
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2002-AR
2433 with the following stipulations:
Stormwater Management:
1. The petitioner must obtain an E.R.P. or a surface water management permit
from the South Florida Water Management District.
Environmental:
No additional stipulations.
EAC Meeting
H.D.Development
Page 7 of 8
PREPARED BY:
iTAPR
TAN CHRZANOW , P.E. DATE
ENGINEERING REVIEW MANAGER
C. ADARMES MINOR, P.E. DATE
ENGINEER, SENIOR
a . fo) o- L„ /5 03
LAURA A. ROYS DA�E
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
i
i J':o 3
F 'D SCHL, AICP DATE
P' I ' i'AL PLANNER
. EAC Meeting
' H.D.Development
` Page 8 of 8
REVIEWED BY:
6o- j. .tom ii-/F-66BARBARA S. BURGESON el DATE
PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
() /- -1
0447.a
'1!1 LIAM D. LO'. NZ, Jr., P.E. DATE
E IRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
91
P.- ! ' OkLeitA;t2-4'
2jv
MARG 'A WUERSTLE, AICP bATE
PLA : SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
APPROVED BY:
/ /�
•SEPH K. CHMITT A7/ _2/;%...3
TE
OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATOR
C: SUSAN MURRAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
II
Id
Item V.C.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING OF MAY 7, 2003
I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT:
Petition No.: PUDZ-2002-AR-3242
Petition Name: Mandalay PUD
Applicant/Developer: Hole Montes, Inc.
Engineering Consultant: Jerry Neal
Environmental Consultant: Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc.,
Jeremy Sterk
II. LOCATION:
The subject property is undeveloped and totals approximately 28.06 acres in size.
The property is located approximately 1 mile east of County Barn Road, immediately
north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road in Section 16, Township 50 South, Range 26
East, in Collier County, Florida.
III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES:
Surrounding properties are mostly developed with the following zoning
classifications:
ZONING DESCRIPTION
N - RSF-5 Quail Hollow(Developed)
S - R.O.W Rattlesnake Hammock Rd
PUD Lely Palms/Lely Resort(Developed/Partially Developed)
E - RMF-6 Naples Place Vista Gardens Apt. (Developed)
RSF-3 Parker's Hammock(Partially Developed)
W- PUD Huntington Woods Villas (Developed)
EAC Meeting
Page 2 of 9
IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The intent of this petition is to rezone a 28.06-acre site from "A-ST" Agricultural with
a Special Treatment Overlay to a "PUD" Planned Unit Development Zoning District.
The purpose is to allow 84 residential dwelling units. The Master Plan indicates that
the main access point to this property is from Rattlesnake-Hammock Road. Lastly,
water and sewer service are readily available to support development of the site.
V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element:
The subject property is currently designated Urban (Urban - Mixed Use District,
Urban Residential Subdistrict) as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the
Growth Management Plan. Relevant to this petition, this Subdistrict permits
residential development (variety of unit types) at a base density of 4 DU/A and non-
residential uses that are compatible with, and/or support, the residential character of
the residential designation.
The project is located within a Traffic Congestion Area, as depicted on the Future
Land Use Map and described in the FLUE, so is subject to a 1 DU/A reduction from
the base density of 4 DU/A and is not eligible for any density bonuses. Therefore,
this project is limited to a maximum density of 3 DU/A.
Base Density 4 du/a
Traffic Congestion Area -1 du/a
Total Eligible Density 3 du/a
Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed uses and density for the
subject site may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the GMP.
Conservation & Coastal Management Element:
Objective 2.2. of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth
Management Plan states "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries
shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards.
To accomplish that, policy 2.2.2 states "In order to limit the specific and cumulative
impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way
that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to
enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge) to the estuarine
system.
• EAC Meeting
Page 3 of 9
This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to
mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing swales
and a lake connected to a preserve to provide water quality retention and peak flow
attenuation during storm events.
The proposed project is consistent with Policy 6.1.1 in that greater than 25% of the
existing native vegetation will be retained on-site and set aside as preserve areas with
conservation easements prohibiting further development. These preserve areas
emphasize the protection of wetlands in a large contiguous area, in accordance with
this Policy.
The project is consistent with Policy 6.1.4 in that an invasive exotic vegetation
removal and maintenance plan will be required at the time of Site Development
Plan/Construction Plan submittal. A stipulation has been placed in the PUD
document.
The requirement in Policy 6.1.7 to provide an Environmental Impact Statement has
been satisfied.
Jurisdictional wetlands have been identified as required in Policies 6.2.1 and 6.2.2.
Per the PUD document, agency permits will be required at the time of Site
Development Plan/Construction Plan submittal. 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 Policy 6.2.6, required preservation areas have been identified on
the PUD master plan. Allowable uses have been identified in the PUD document.
A wildlife survey for listed species has been conducted on the site and included in the
Environmental Impact Statement. In accordance with policy 7.1.2, wildlife habitat
management plans will be required prior to Site Development Plan/Construction Plan
approval. Copies of the EIS have been forwarded to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission for their review and
comment.
VI. MAJOR ISSUES:
Stormwater Management:
Mandalay PUD is a 28-acre project located on the north side of Rattlesnake
Hammock Road, east of Polly Avenue. The site is located within the Lely Canal
Basin, and the Lely Manor Canal Basin. There are no County stormwater maintenance
facilities adjacent to the site at the present time. The stormwater system will be
• EAC Meeting
Page 4 of 9
/''"•
designed to meet SFWMD and Collier County rules and regulations for a 25-year 3-
day storm event and for water quality. The discharge will be limited to 0.06 CFS/AC,
and it will be directed to the east into a proposed preserve.
The site uses the common system of a lake connected to a wetland to provide water
quality retention and peak flow attenuation. Because of the presence of the onsite
wetland preservation area, this site will undergo review and permitting by the
SFWMD.
Rear yards of portions of the neighborhood to the north called Quail Hollow may
drain directly into this parcel, which they are technically not allowed to do, but if the
condition does exist, it must be dealt with. SFWMD accounts for offsite flows in
their review.
Environmental
Site Description:
The subject property is vegetated with a mixture of wetland and upland habitats.
Vegetative communities consist of pine flatwoods, upland hardwood forests;
Brazilian pepper invaded cypress, mixed wetlands hardwoods and disturbed lands
associated with a single family home. The eastern portion of the property contains a
10.46-acre Special Treatment Overlay made up entirely of mixed wetlands
hardwoods.
R t - ,4nwd ti
r-
iti .#.- ,Il , 4,,4,10 , ,,,, , ,,,..,..„, I id,,f --.- - . '.!5,pi, .. :i -A.
41
q , sot 3 ..0-1 . + - ,i f
4
, , ,. , . 1/4 ., , ,,. lit it, . ,. , _
• 0
� �$ , . g gri -"' + —,' ; _ /' *mcda' g4
< .I• t. X b .,•'?`,":
' y � .1
., J- ' w.. A
\ r-� ,a^.. a-sem
FLUCCS 630-Mixed Wetland Hardwoods, 12.58 acres(ST area)
EAC Meeting
Page 5 of 9
•, - :.„,,,,„ , .',„'---.1,7 C: _ - '; .:7.%4- :,,,,,,,.., 0* .
.. .. , .. .. , .- ,...... ''•:-.'-_, ' li
1 't 1`.
/ \.!+ 4 R
:*- IC-It'll 441kii . PO"), :::,, : ', ' .e. ;.- _''.-,:.e. :!1;e:f ...,4(:,e,1
•
d
/ :.
a �tf1,....-.
` i f ti„ Z
•
s.
`, -,
_i r4• a"
$ �E 4.w S � § t• - w
FLUCCS 411 —Pine Flatwoods,7.62 acres
,.. 14., P. ... : -41.'.74t iL,',.'yf\ ,,i. ' ',r, : p :ri...-tick!".I .;
15
fj�.^fir '''V' t ''" 1 "'` "r '3
t , tz -t,7
3 *4:::',-'4t '''',:.P.:,-_-::'
i s
r yL +L.-_,,,i,,-1-',;,:'•.:,',i,.:!$.`e,1,-A. _ 3 t�..,..',..-4. ,-----,-
-51:4
t�4.�,
&1zC �Ni
��
f �� i. "
h ...
� . r f
--:,./t --
r �,`i` ` ��
'g"" �...
FLUCCS 621/422—Brazilian Pepper Invaded Cypress,5.35 acres
EAC Meeting
Page 6 of 9
Seasonal high water levels were determined using onsite biological indicators such as
lichen and water lines and information found in permits for adjacent projects. Two
elevations (8.46'and 8.47' NGVD) were marked in the field within the isolated
cypress/Brazilian pepper wetland and could be classified as historic. A third elevation
was taken within the Special Treatment area at 8.05' NGVD and is likely most
indicative of seasonal high water levels.
There are 4 soil types on site. They are Hallandale fine sand; Boca, Riviera,
Limestone substratum and Copeland fine sand; Urban land, Matlacha, Boca complex;
and Hallandale and Boca fine sands. For the full description of the soil types see page
6 of the EIS.
Wetlands:
Of the 28.05-acre site, 17.93 acres (63.9%) have been determined to be South Florida
Water Management District/Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. These wetlands
are made up of mixed wetlands hardwoods and an isolated cypress wetland that has
been invaded by Brazilian pepper. The project, as proposed, will impact 5.71 acres
(31.8 percent) of the jurisdictional wetlands on site without impacting the Special
Treatment Overlay. Preserving and enhancing 12.22 acres of wetlands and .05 acres
of uplands onsite will compensate impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. In addition, the
petitioner has estimated that 2.52 functional units will need to be provided in offsite
mitigation.
Preservation Requirements:
As required in Section 3.9.5.5.3 of the Land Development Code, twenty-five percent
of the existing native vegetation is required to be retained onsite. The minimum
preservation requirement for the 28.05-acre site is 7 acres. The applicant is proposing
to retain 12.27 acres (12.22 acres wetlands, .05 acres of uplands).
Listed Species:
Environmental Scientists from Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc conducted
field investigations of the site to document State and Federally listed species at
various times during August and September of 2002. One potential squirrel 'day bed'
was observed on the property, however the structure was small and not well
organized. No other signs of protected species were observed on the parcel.
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2002-AR-3242
"Mandalay PUD"with the following stipulations:
EAC Meeting
Page 7 of 9
Stormwater Management:
1. A copy of the South Florida Water Management District Surface Water
Management Permit or Environmental Resource Permit must be submitted to the
Engineering Review Department of the Community Development Division prior
to Site Development/Construction Plan approval.
2. Collier County Stormwater Management Section will review and approve the
stormwater system for compliance with the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement
Project(L.A.S.I.P.).
3. At the time of Preliminary Subdivision Plat, it shall be clarified if the backyard
swales are designed for water quality or just conveyance. The Land Development
Code prohibits backyard swales for water quality. (Section 3.2.8.3.26).
4. At the time of construction plans review, petitioner shall verify that peak stages
do not cause adverse off-site impacts to neighboring developments.
5. Delete Section 5.6.D of the PUD document.
Environmental:
No additional stipulations.
EAC Meeting
Page 8 of 9
PREPARED BY:
STAN CHRZAN• SKI, P.E. DATE
ENGINEERING 'EVIEW MANAGER
j/
L
1/43
C. A'ARMES MINOR, P.E. DATE
ENGINEER SENIOR
/</V/ /6X.3
KIM HADLEY DATE
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
j 6 °3
RAY B LOWS jl(27---- ATE
CHEIF PLANNER
REVIEWED BY:
dtit I. L-1311-47.0^-
BARBARA S. BURGESON DATE
PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
EAC Meeting
Page 9 of 9
A,.- %
WIL D. LOREN Jr., P.r. DATE
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
�i`
W�0446( `/-17 -°.MARGAR WUERSTLE, AICP DATE
PLANNING ERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
APPROVED BY:
,^r
/ ./.
Jake; eine.. . 7/ i S' a�
EPH K. ' CHMITT A E
MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR
f
C: SUSAN MURRAY, AICP
CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER
o'er
Memorandum
„ „
To: Environmental Advisory Council Members
From: William D. Lorenz, P.E.,Environmental Services Director
Date: December 6, 2002
Subject: Rural Land Stewardship Area Land Development Code Amendments
Attached is the April 17, 2003 draft of the proposed Rural Land Stewardship Area LDC
amendments (2.2.27). This draft is a result of staff and other parties' input and revises the March
3, 2003 draft that was presented to the EAC at your April 2nd meeting. The underlines and
strikethroughs represent changes to the March 3rd draft.
At your April 2nd meeting, the EAC generally supported the proposed amendments but reserved
the right to review the proposed changes up until the County Commission took final action. In
light of this direction, staff has placed this recent draft on the May 7 agenda for your continued
review. The CCPC has agreed to have its second meeting to discuss this amendment on May 14
at 5:05 p.m. in the Board Room. The County Commission's schedule is to conduct the first
public hearing on May 21 and the second public hearing on June 18.
Attachment:
Copy (w/o attachment):
Nancy Linnan, Carlton Fields
Bob Mulhere, RWA
George Varnadoe, Young, Van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Adnerson, P. A.
Stan Litsinger, Comprehensive Planning Manager
Environmental Services Department
is 1 •
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
_- Rural Lands-Stewardship Area (RLSA) Implementing Land
Development Code Amendments
2.2.27. RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA (RLSA) ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT—
STEWARDSHIP REGULATIONS (RLSA DISTRICT REGULATIONS)
2.2.27.1. Purpose and Intent 1
2.2.27.2. Definitions 1
1. Baseline Standards 1
2. Compact Rural Development (CRD) 1
3. Designation 1
4. FSA Flow way Stewardship Area 1
5. Hamlet 2
6. HSA -- Habitat Stewardship Area 2
7. Land Use Layer (Layer) 2
8. Land Use Matrix (Matrix) 2
9. Natural Resource Index (Index) 2
10. Open Space 2
11. Post Secondary Institution Ancillary Uses 2
12. RLSA District 2
13. RLSA Overlay Map 3
14. RLSA District Regulations 3
15. SRA 3
16. SSA 3
17. Stewardship Credit (Credit) 3
18. Stewardship Credit Database 3
19. Stewardship Credit System 3
20. Stewardship Credit Worksheet 3
21. Town 3
22. Village 4
23. WRA— Water Retention Area 4
2.2.27.23 Establishment of RSLA Zoning Overlay District 4
A. RLSA District Zoning Map 4
B. Additional Land Designations With the RLSA District 4
A 1. Establishment of SSA)
Designations 4,4.
BF 2. Establishment of SRA)
Designations 4-A.
2.2.27. 4. Establishment of Land Uses Allowed in the RSLA District 5
2.2.27.35 Establishment of a Stewardship Credit Database 1-5
2.2.27.46. Authorization to Establish a Stewardship Credit Trust 4-5
TAL#528665.4 1
{
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
.- . 2.2.27.67. General 25
2.2.27.68. Lands Within the Overlay-RLSA District Prior to SSA
or SRA Designation 26
A. Private Lands Delineated FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs 26
B. Private Lands Delineated as Open 26_
C. Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC)
36
D. Public or Private Conservation Lands 36
E. Baseline Standards 36
F. No Increase in Density or Intensity (in excess of the Baseline Standards) 37
G. Lands Within Overlay RSLA District Not Designated (SSA or SRA)
Subject to Special Environmental Standards 37
2.2.27. 9. SSA) Designation 47
A. Lands Within the Overlay RLSA District that can be
Designated as SSAs 47
1. May be Within an Stewardship Receiving Are. (SRA) Boundary47
32. FSA Delineated Lands 48
43. HSA Delineated Lands 48
64. WRA Delineated Lands 610
r-� B. SSA Credit Generation - Stewardship Credit System 610
1. Early Entry Bonus Credits 610
2. Credit Worksheet 611
3. Natural Resource Indices and Values 611
a. Natural Resource Indices 11
b. Index Values 11
c. Index Map 12
d. Restoration Potential Index 12
e. Restoration Stewardship Credits 12
f. Restoration Credit Agreement 13
4. Land Use Layers to be Eliminated 914
a. Land Use Layers 14
b. Land Use Matrix 15
5. Matrix Calculation 4.015
C. SSA Designation Application Package 1416
1. SSA) Designation Application1416
2. Application Fee 141616
3. Natural Resource Index Assessment 41616
4. Support Documentation 1417
5. SA) Credit Agreement 4.218
6. Public Hearing for Credit Agreement 1419
7. Recording of Agreement 4420
8. Restoration 14
98. Stewardship Easement Agreement or Deed 1-420
1-0 9Natural Resource Management Plan 4-620
TAL#528665.4 ll
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
D. SSA Application Review Process 4521
1. Preapplication Conference with County Staff 621
2. Application Package Submittal and Processing Fees 4621
3. Application Deemed Sufficient for Review 4622
4. Review by County Reviewing Agencies 4622
5. Staff Designation Review 4622
6. Staff-Designation Report 4723
E. SSA Application Approval Process 4623
1. Public Hearing 4623
2. Legal Description 4623
3. Update Stewardship Credits Database 17
43. Update the Stewardship Overlay Map and Official Zoning Atlas4723
F. SSA Amendments 4724
2.2.27:510. SRA) Designation 4924
A. Lands Within the Overlay that can be Designated as SRAs 4624
1. Suitability Criteria 4824
2. SRAs Within the ACSC 4-925
B. Establishment and Transfer of Stewardship Credits Entitlement4626
1. Transfer of Credits 2026
2. Stewardship Credit Exchange 2027
3. Public Benefit Uses 2027
4. Mixed Land Use Entitlements 2027
C. Forms of SRA Entitlements Developments 2427
1. Towns 24-28
2. Villages 24-28
3. Hamlets 2228
4. Compact Rural Developments (CRDs) 2229
a. Size of CRDs limited 29
b. CRDs within ACSC 29
5. Proportion of Hamlets and CRDs to Villages and Towns 29
5:6. SRAs as Part of a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) 2330
D. SRA Designation Application Package 2330
1. SRA) Designation Application 2330
2. Application Fee 2321
3. Natural Resource Index Assessment 2331
4. Natural Resource Index
Assessment Support Documentation 2421
5. SRA Master Plan 2532
6. SRA Development Document 2532
7. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report 2532
8. SRA Economic Assessment Report 2532
9. Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Application 2533
10. SRA) Credit Agreement 2634
E. SRA Application Review Process 26
1. Pre-Application Conference with County Staff 2836
2. Application Package Submittal and Processing Fees 2937
TAL#528665.4 111
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
3. Application Deemed Sufficient for Review 2937
4. Review by County Reviewing Agencies 2937
5. Staff Review 3038
6. Staff Report 3038
F. SRA Application Approval Process 3038
1. Public Hearings Required 3038
a. Public Hearing Before the EAC, Recommendation to
the BCC 38
b. Public Hearing Before the CCPC, Recommendation to
the BCC 38
c. Public Hearing Before the BCC,Resolution Approved 39
2. Effective Date of SRA Designation 3039
3. Update Stewardship Credits Database 31-39
4. Update the Official Zoning Atlas and the RLSA Stewardship
Overlay Map 3439
5. SRA Amendments 31-39
a. Waiver of Required SRA Application Package
Component(s) 40
b. Approval of Minor Changes by the Administrator 40
c. Review of Minor Changes by Staff 40
d. Relationship to Subdivision or Site Development Plan Approval 41
G. Master Plan Required 3341
!-� 1. Master Plan Requirements 41
1:2. Master Plan Content 3342
H. Development Document 3442
I. DRI Master Plan 3544
J. Design Criteria 3544
1. SRA Characteristics 3544
2. Town Design Criteria [Reserved] 3645
3. Village Design Criteria [Reserved] 3645
4. Hamlet Design Criteria [Reserved] 3645
5. CRD Design Criteria [Reserved] 3645
6. Design Criteria Common to SRAs 3645
7. Deviations From LDC Standards 38
87. Infrastructure Required 3847
8. Requests for Deviations from the LDC 48
K. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessments 3948
1. Transportation 38
2. Potable Water 4049
3. Irrigation Water 49
4. Wastewater 4049
5. Solid Waste 4049
6. Stormwater Management 44-49
7. Groundwater 41.50
L. SRA Economic Assessment 4251
1. Demonstration of Economic Fiscal Neutrality 4.251
TAL#528665.4 iV
r Y
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
a. Collier County Fiscal Impact Model 51
b. Alternative Fiscal Impact Model 51
2. Monitoring Requirement 4251
3. Imposition of Special Assessments 4252
4. Special Tax Districts Encouraged 4352
2.2.27,911.Baseline Standards [Reserved] 4352
TAL#528665.4 V
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
2.2.27. RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA (RLSA) ZONING OVERLAY DISTRICT
STEWARDSHIP REGULATIONS
2.2.27.1 Purpose and Intent. Collier County's objoctive The purpose of this section is
to create a Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning District (RLSA District) to implement
the incentive based Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA
Overlay) established within the County's Growth Management Plan (GMP).
It is the intent of the Overlay RLSA District and the RLSA District Regulations to protect
natural resources and retain viable agriculture by promoting compact rural mixed-use
development as an alternative to low-density single use development, and to provide a
system of compensation to private property owners for the elimination of certain land
uses in order to protect natural resources and viable agriculture in exchange for
transferable credits that can be used to entitle such compact development.
2.2.27.2 Definitions. As used in this section, terms shall have the following meanings:
1. Baseline Standards— Baseline Standards are the permitted uses, density, intensity and other
land development regulations assigned to land by the GMP, Collier County Land Development
Regulations and Collier County Zoning Regulations in effect prior to the adoption of Interim
Amendments and Interim Development Provisions referenced in Final Order AC-99-002, and
/"•• subiect to the further provisions of section 2.2.27.8, that remain in effect for all land not subject
to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits.
2. Compact Rural Development(CRD)—Compact Rural Developments are a form of SRA that
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. An example of a CRD without permanent residential housing is an ecotourism village
that would have a unique set of uses and support services different from a traditional residential
village. It would contain transient lodging facilities and services appropriate to eco-tourists, but
may not provide for the range of services necessary to support permanent residents.
3. Designation—Application of the SSA or SRA concepts through a formal application, review,
and approval process as described in this Section.
4. FSA— Flow way Stewardship Area— Privately owned lands delineated on the RLSA Overlay
Map, which primarily include privately owned wetlands that are located within the Camp Keais
Strand and Okaloacoochee Slough. FSAs form the primary wetland flow way systems in the
RLSA.
n �
TAL#528665.4 1
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
5. Hamlet— Hamlets are a form of SRA and are small rural residential areas with primarily single-
family housing and a limited range of convenience-oriented services. Hamlets serve as a more
compact alternative to traditional five-acre lot rural subdivisions currently allowed in the baseline
standards.
6. HSA— Habitat Stewardship Area— Privately owned agricultural areas delineated on the RLSA
Overlay Map, which include both areas with natural characteristics that make them suitable
habitat for listed species and areas without these characteristics. These latter areas are
included because they are located contiguous to habitat with natural characteristics, thus
forming a continuum of landscape that can augment habitat values.
7. Land Use Layer (Layer)— Permitted and conditional land uses within the Baseline Standards
that are of a similar type or intensity and that are grouped together in the same column on the
Land Use Matrix.
8. Land Use Matrix(Matrix)—The tabulation of the permitted and conditional land uses within the
Baseline Standards, with each Land Use Layer displayed as a single column.
9. Natural Resource Index (Index)—A quantitative measurement system that establishes the
relative natural resource value of each acre of land by objectively measuring six different
characteristics of land and assigning an index factor based on each characteristic. The sum of
these six factors is the Index value for the land. The six characteristics measured are:
Stewardship Overlay Delineation, Sending Area Proximity, Listed Species Habitat, Soils/Surface
Water, Restoration Potential, and Land Use/Land Cover.
10. Open Space—Open space includes active and passive recreational areas such as parks,
playgrounds, ball fields, golf courses, lakes, waterways, lagoons, floodplains, nature trails,
native vegetation preserves, landscape areas including roadway medians and edge treatments,
public and private conservation lands, agricultural areas (not including structures), water
retention and management areas, and other similar spaces. Open space also includes minor
recreational features in parks, such as sidewalks and pathways, plazas and patios, decks,
boardwalks, benches and tables, bleachers, playground equipment, etc. Buildings shall not be
counted as part of any open space calculation. Vehicular use surface areas of streets, alleys,
driveways, and off-street parking and loading areas shall not be counted as part of any open
space calculation.
11. Post Secondary Institution Ancillary Uses —Any use or facility owned and operated by a
public or private post secondary institution or its supporting foundation that is of a type
commonly found on public or private post secondary institution campuses.
12. RLSA District— Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District—The area depicted on
the Future Land Use Map and the Official Zoning Atlas Map as the Rural Lands Stewardship
Area Overlay, including lands within the Immokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County
Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment referred to in the State of Florida Administration
Commission Final Order No. AC-99-002. The RLSA generally includes rural lands in northeast
Collier County lying north and east of Golden Gate Estates, north of the Florida Panther
National Wildlife Refuge and Big Cypress National Preserve, south of the Lee County Line, and
TAL#528665.4 2
h t
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
�-.. south and west of the Hendry County Line. The RLSA District is depicted on the RLSA Overlay
Map.
13. RLSA Overlay Map—The map that identifies the areas delineated as the RLSA District,
including those areas delineated as FSA, HSA, WRA, Restoration Zone, and Open.
14. RLSA District Regulations—Collier County Land Development Code Section 2.2.27.
15. SRA—Stewardship Receiving Area—A designated area within the RLSA that has been
approved for the development of a Hamlet, Village, Town or CRD and that requires the
consumption of Stewardship Credits.
16. SSA— Stewardship Sending Area—A designated area within the RLSA that has been approved
for the generation of Stewardship Credits in exchange for the elimination of certain Land Use
Layers.
li
17. Stewardship Credit(Credit)—A transferable unit of measure generated by a SSA and
consumed by an SRA. Eight credits are transferred to an SRA in exchange for the development
of one acre of land as provided in Section 2.2.27.10.C.
18. Stewardship Credit Database—A database maintained by the County that keeps track of all of
the credit transactions (generation of Credits through SSA designation and the consumption of
credits through SRA designation) approved by the County.
19. Stewardship Credit System—A system that creates incentives to protect and preserve natural
resources and agricultural areas in exchange for the generating and use of credits to entitle
compact forms of rural development. The greater the value of the natural resources beinq
preserved and the higher degree of preservation, the greater the number of credits generated.
Credits are generated through the designation of SSAs and consumed through the designation
of SRAs.
20. Stewardship Credit Worksheet—An analytical tool that manually describes the Stewardship
Credit calculation process including the Natural Resource Index and Land Use Layer
components. The worksheet can be used to document proposed changes to the Index
component during the SSA and SRA designation processes.
21. Town —Towns are a form of SRA and 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 are comprised of several
villages and/or neighborhoods that have individual identity and character.
TAL#528665.4 3
1
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
�—, 22. Village—Villages are a form of SRA and 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 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.
23. WRA—Water Retention Area— Privately owned areas delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map,
that have been permitted by the South Florida Water Management District to function as
agricultural water retention areas.
2.2.27.23 Establishment of RLSA Zoning Overlay District. The RLSA
. .
.
- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - . - e - -= - - . In order
to implement the regulations of this section, an RLSA District, to be designated
as "RLSAO" on the Official Zoning Atlas, The Ovorlay is hereby established.
A. The RLSA District is depicted by the following map:
J1NSERT MAP1
B. Within the RLSA District, additional lands may be designated to implement
the Stewardship Credit System as follows:
1. Establishment of SSA Designations. An RLSA District overlay
district classification to be known as SSAs, and to
be designated on the official zoning atlas by the symbol "A-RLSAO-SSA", is
hereby established. This overlay district classification will be used for those
lands within the RLSA District that are designated
by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC1 as
SSAs. The placement of this designation shall be governed by the procedures
as prescribed in this Section.
2. Establishment of SRA Designations. An RLSA District overlay
classification to be known as SRAs, and to be
designated on the official zoning atlas by the symbol "A-RLSAO-SRA", is hereby
established. This overlay district classification will be used for those lands within
the RLSA District that are designated by the BCC
as SRAs. The placement of this designation shall
be governed by the procedures as prescribed in this Section.
TAL#528665.4 4
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
2 2. 7. 4 _ • •li hm-nt •f •n• - All•w- • in th- RLSA District. Land uses
allowed within the RLSA District are of two types: those allowed in the Baseline
Standards prior to designation of SSAs and SRAs, and; those uses provided for in
SSAs and SRAs after designation. The underlying land uses allowed within the RLSA
District are included in the Baseline Standards. Should designation of SSAs and SRAs
pursuant to this Section occur, additional land uses are provided for SSAs and SRAs as
indicated in the Land Use Matrix in Section 2.2.27.9.B.4.b. Land Use Layers removed
from SSAs shall create credits for additional land use intensity and/or density that may
then be used within SRAs.
2.2.27.35.Establishment of a Stewardship Credit Database. As part of the initial
implementation of the RLSA Overlay, the Community Development and Environmental
Services Administrator (Administrator) shall cause to be developed a Stewardship
Credit Database to track the generation (by SSAs) and consumption (by SRAs)of
Stewardship Credits (bySRAs}within the Overlay RLSA District. The database shall be
in an electronic form that can be linked to the Stewardship Overlay Map and can readily
produce reports that will afford convenient access to the data by the public. The
database shall be updated upon approval of an SSA or SRA Designation Application
and Credit Agreement.
2.2.27A6 Authorization to Establish a Stewardship Credit Trust. aAs part of the
implementation of the RLSA Overlay, the County may elect to acquire Credits through a
publicly funded program. Should the County pursue this option, the Community
: e : • - • _ • ' _ • • _ - — = ' •-_- • _ ••••• - _ County shall
establish a Stewardship Credit Trust to receive and hold Credits until such time as they
are sold, transferred or otherwise used to implement uses within SRAs. Nothing herein
shall preclude the County from permanently "retiring" any such credits.
2.2.27.67 General. Except as provided in Subsections 2.2.27.8.E., F. and G., there
shall be no change to the underlying density and intensity of permitted uses of land
within the RLSA District, as set forth in the Baseline Standards, until a property owner
elects to utilize the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System pursuant to the
provisions of Section 2.2.27.9.B. No part of the Stewardship Credit System shall be
imposed upon a property owner without that owner's written consent. It is the intent of
the Overlay RLSA District that a property owner will be compensated consistent with
Policy 3.8 of the RLSA Overlay for the voluntary stewardship and protection of important
agricultural and natural resources. The Baseline Standards will remain in effect for all
land not subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits.
Stewardship Credits (Credits) are-may be created from any lands within the RLSA
District that aro to bo kopt in pormanont agriculturo, opon spaco or concorvatien-usoc
from which one or more Land Use Layers are removed. These lands will be identified
as SSAs. All privately owned lands within the RLSA
District are a candidate for designation as a SSA. Land becomes designated as a SSA
upon petition by the property owner seeking such designation as outlined herein. A
Stewardship Agreement shall be developed that identifies those land uses which have
been removed. Once land is designated as a SSA and Credits or other compensation
TAL#528665.4 5
' T
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
r• is granted to the owner, no increase in density or additional uses unspecified in the
Stewardship Agreement shall be allowed on such property.
Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSA District that meet the defined
suitability criteria and standards set forth in Section 2.2.27.&9.A.1. Such lands shall be
known as Stewardship Receiving Areas or SRAs. 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 a SRA on a
per acre basis. SRA density and intensity will thereafter differ from the Baseline
Standards.
Stewardship Credits generated from one SSA may be allocated to one or more SRAs,
and a SRA may receive Stewardship Credits generated from one or more SSAs.
2.2.27.68.Lands Within the Over-lay-RLSA District Prior to SSA or SRA
Designation. All lands within the RLSA District have been delineated on the RLSA
Stewardehip Overlay Map map. Prior to designation as an SSA or SRA, lands within
the RLSA District are subject to the Baseline Standards.
A. Private Lands Delineated FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs. Lands delineated
FSA}, HSA}, or Water
Retentien-Afea-(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
r-` 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.
B. Private Lands Delineated as Open. Lands not otherwise classified as
FSA, HSA, or WRA are delineated as "Open" on the Overlay Map and are
generally of a lower natural resource quality. Open lands are the lands that may
be designated as either SSAs or SRAs.
C. Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC)-er
• - - - - • - - - - - - e- ••e - - -- --- The RLSA
District includes lands that are within the Area of Critical State Concern ACSC.
Those ACSC lands are depicted on the RLSA Overlay
Map and are eligible for designation. Lands to bo designated as SRAsl within
the ACSC aro subject to additional standards set forth in
2.2.27.10.A.2. All ACSC regulations continue to apply to ACSC lands within the
RLSA District regardless of designation.
D. Public or Private Conservation Lands. Within the RLSA District, certain
lands are held in public ownership or in private ownership as conservation lands.
Such lands may be delineated on the RLSA Overlay mMap as FSA, HSA, or
WRA but are not eligible for designation as either a SSA or SRA as part of the
RLSA District.
E. Baseline Standards. _ - - - • - - - ' e- e- - - • - e= ••• =e - ---
{conventional "A" zoning, including Conditional Uses), density, intensity and other
TAL#528665.4 6
1 1
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
. _
■ _ ee , . ee
. _
.. . . •..
e ...e•_ - - - --- •- - e - - - e: . The Baseline Standards apply
until lands are voluntarily entered into the Stewardship Program and are
designated as a SSA or SRA and will remain in effect for all land not subject to
the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits.
F. No Increase in Density or Intensity (in excess of the Baseline
Standards). No increase in density or intensity within the RLSA District or within
an SRA is permitted 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.
G. Lands Within Over-lay-the RLSA District Not Designated (SSA or
SRA) Subject to Special Environmental Standards. In order to protect water
quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural water regime in areas
mapped as FSAs on the RLSA Overlay Map prior to the time that they are
designated as SSAs as part of the RLSA District under the Stewardship Credit
Program, residential uses, general conditional uses, earth mining and processing
uses, and recreational uses (layers 1-4) as listed in Section 2.2.27.7.9.B.4.b shall
not be permitted in FSA lands within the RLSA District. 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 a Natural
Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less.
In order to protect water quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural
water regime and to protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats in
areas mapped as FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs on the RLSA Overlay Map that are
not within the ACSC, the use of such land for a non-agricultural purpose under
the Baseline Standards will be subject to special environmental regulations to be
adopted within twelve months of the effective date of this section.
2.2.27.79. SSA) Designation. Lands within the RLSA
District may be designated as SSAs subject to the following regulations.
A. Lands Within the Overlay-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 ACSC.
1. May be within an Acre-(SRA)
Boundary. A WRA, whether designated as an SRA or not, may be
contiguous to or surrounded by an SRA. Should a WRA be used to
provide water retention for an SRA, the provisions of 2.2.27.9.A.4.b. shall
TAL#528665.4 7
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
/-• apply. - -= _'• ' - • -- - -- - - - - - e. •.. e - •
. _ .. . -
• - 6 -
32. FSA Delineated Lands.
a. In the case where lands delineated as FSA are entered into
the Stewardship Program and are designated as an SSA, at a
minimum, Residential uses, General Conditional uses, Earth Mining
and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1-4) as listed
in the Land Use Matrix in Section 2.2.27.79.B.4.ab. shall be
eliminated as permitted land uses.
b. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential
services, other than those necessary to serve permitted uses or for
public safety, shall only be allowed in FSAs with a Natural
Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less.
c. Where When determined to be practicable as demonstrated
by the issuance of all required State or Federal permits, directional-
drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas
r-� shall be utilized for oil and gas extraction in FSAs in order to
minimize impacts to native habitats.
d. The elimination of the Earth Mining layer shall not preclude the
excavation of lakes or other water bodies if such use is an integral
part of a restoration or mitigation program within a FSA.
4.3. HSA Delineated Lands.
a. In the case where lands delineated as HSA are entered into
the Stewardship Program and are designated as a SSA, at a
minimum, Residential Land Uses 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, such 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.
TAL#528665.4 8
1
9 j
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
/-s•, (1) As an alternative to the foregoing, the applicant may
demonstrate that such use is an integral part of aci State or
Federally approved restoration plan or mitigation program.
(2) Compliance with the following standards shall be
considered by Collier County as meeting the requirement for
minimization of impact:
(i) Clearing of native vegetation shall not exceed 15%
of the native vegetation on the parcel.
(ii) -- - - - -- - -- -- - - - - - - - -
to beforo native vegetated areas. Priority shall be given
to utilizing contiguous areas of previously cleared land
before native vegetated areas.
(iii) Buffering to Conservation Land shall comply with
Section 2.2.27.810.J.6.h.
(iv) Stormwater Management design shall base water
control elevations on seasonal high water elevations of
adjacent wetlands to protect wetland hydroperiods.
(3) Activities that do not require a State or Federal protected
species "take" permit are deemed to not significantly or
adversely impact listed species and their habitats.
(4) Activities that are the subject of an approved SFWMD
Environmental Resource Permit or Consumptive Use Permit
and that utilize best management practices designed to
protect groundwater from contamination from allowable land
uses are deemed not to significantly and adversely impact
aquifers.
d. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential
services, other than those necessary to serve permitted uses or for
public safety, shall only be allowed in HSAs with a Natural
Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less.
e. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants are prohibited in
all HSAs.
f. Whare When determined to be practicable, as demonstrated
by the issuance of all required State or Federal permits, directional-
drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas
TAL#528665.4 9
i 1
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
shall be utilized for oil and gas extraction in HSAs in order to
minimize impacts to native habitats.
g. 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 Department of
Environmental Protection.
54. WRA Delineated Lands.
a. In the case where lands delineated as WRA are entered into
the Stewardship Program and are designated as an SSA, at a
minimum, residential land uses and general Conditional Uses shall
be eliminated as permitted land uses.
b. During permitting to serve new uses within a SRA, additions
and modifications to WRAs may be required er-desi , including
but not limited to changes to control elevations, discharge rates,
storm water pre-treatment, grading, excavation or fill. Such
additions and modifications shall be allowed subject to review and
approval by the SFWMD in accordance with best management
practices. Such additions and modifications to WRAs shall be
designed to ensure that there is no net loss of habitat function
within the WRAs unless there is compensating mitigation or
restoration in other areas of the Overlay RLSA District that will
provide comparable habitat function. Compensating mitigation or
restoration for an impact to a WRA contiguous to the Camp Keais
Strand or Okaloacoochee Slough shall be provided within or
contiguous to that Strand or Slough.
B. SSA Credit Generation - Stewardship Credit System. Stewardship
Credits (Credits) are created from any lands within the RLSA District that are to
be kept in agriculture, open space or conservation uses. These lands will be
identified as Stewardship Sending Areas or SSAs. Once land is designated as a
SSA and Credits or other compensation consistent with Policy 3.8 of the RLSA
Overlay is granted to the owner, no increase in density or additional uses
unspecified in the Stewardship Agreement shall be allowed on such property. A
methodology has been adopted in the GMP for the calculation of credits based
upon; 1) the Natural Resource Index Value of the land being designated as an
SSA, and 2) the number of land use layers being eliminated.
1. Early Entry Bonus Credits. Early Entry Bonus Credits are hereby
established to encourage the voluntary estalglistimegt designation of SSAs
within the RLSA District. The bonus shall be in the form of an additional
one Stewardship Credit per acre of land designated as a HSA located
TAL#528665.4 10
r '
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
outside of the ACSC and one-half Stewardship Credit per acre of land
designated as HSA located inside the ACSC.
a. The early entry bonus shall be available for five years from the
effective date of the adoption of this LDC Amendment.
b. The early designation of SSAs and the resultant generation of
Stewardship Credits, do not require the establishment of SRAs or
otherwise require the early use of Credits.
c. Credits generated under the early entry bonus may be used
after the termination of the bonus period.
d. The maximum number of Credits that can be generated under
the bonus is 27,000.
e. Early Entry Bonus Credits shall not be transferred into or
otherwise used to entitle an SRA within the ACSC.
2. Credit Worksheet. A Stewardship Credit Worksheet, adopted as
Attachment "A" of the Growth Management Plan RLSA Goals, Objectives,
and Policies, sets out a mathematical formula for determining the number
of credits available for each acre of land being considered for an SSA.
3. Natural Resource Indices and Values. A set of Natural Resource
Indices has been established as part of the Stewardship Credit
,-� Worksheet. Each Index listed below has a range of values based upon a
qualitative or quantitative measure developed during the RLSA Study.
a. Natural Resource Indices.
Stewardship Overlay Designation
Proximity Indices
Listed Species Habitat Indices
Soils/Surface Water Indices
Restoration Potential Indices
Land Use—Land Cover Indices
b. Index Values. During the RLSA Study, based upon data and
analysis, each acre within the Overlay-RLSA District was assigned
a value for each Index except for the Restoration Potential Index.
The Restoration Potential Index is assigned during the SSA
designation process if appropriate, and credit adjustments are
made at that time.
(1) Slough/Strand Index Score Upgrade. An index score
upgrade is hereby established as an incentive for the
protection, enhancement and restoration of the
Okaloacoochee Slough and Camp Keais Strand. All lands
within 500 feet of the delineated FSAs that comprise the
Slough or Strand that are not otherwise included in a HSA or
WRA shall receive the same natural index score (0.6) that a
HSA receives, if such property is designated as a SSA and
TAL#528665.4 11
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
r-. retains only agricultural, recreational and/or conservation
layers of land use.
c. Index Map. A Natural Resource Index Map adopted as a part
of the RLSA Overlay, indicates the Natural Resource Stewardship
Index value for all land within the RLSA. Credits from any lands
designated as SSAs, will be based upon the Natural Resource
Index values in effect at the time of designation. At the time of
designation, the Natural Resource Index Assessment required in
Section 2.2.27.79.C.3. shall document any necessary adjustments
to the index values reflected on the Index Map. Any change in the
characteristics of land due to alteration of the land prior to the
establishment of a SSA that either increases or decreases any
Index Factor shall result in an adjustment of the factor values and a
corresponding adjustment in the credit value.
d. Restoration Potential Index. At the time of SSA designation,
an evaluation of the restoration potential of the land being
designated shall be wed-prepared by a qualified
environmental consultant (per Section 3.8 of the LDC) on behalf of
the applicant and submitted as part of the SSA Designation
Application Package. In the event that a-restoration potential is
identified, , the applicant will sub identify
the appropriate Natural Resource Index Value
supported by documentation to demonstrate the restoration
potential of the lands affected. The credit value of each acre to
which the Restoration Potential Index value is applied shall be
recalculated.
e. Restoration Stewardship Credits. Restoration Stewardship
Credits are hereby established in addition to the Restoration
Potential Index Value. In certain locations there may be the
opportunity for flow way or habitat restoration such as locations
where fleww+waycflow ways have been constricted or otherwise
impeded by past activities, or where additional land is needed to
enhance wildlife corridors. Restoration Stewardship Credits shall
be applied to an SSA subject to the following regulations:
(1) Priority shall has been given to restoration within the
Camp Keais Strand FSA or contiguous HSAs. Therefore,
(Land dedicated for restoration activities within or contiguous
to the Camp Keais Strand FSA or contiguous HSAs shall
receive four additional Stewardship Credits for each acre of
land so dedicated.
(2) Two additional Stewardship Credits shall be assigned for
each acre of land dedicated for restoration activities within
other FSAs and HSAs. One or more of the following
TAL#528665.4 12
4.
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
eligibility criteria shall - be used in evaluating an applicant's
request for Restoration Stewardship Credits:
(a) FSA and/or HSA lands where restoration would
ettlastantially-increase the width of flow way and/or habitat
corridors along the Okaloacoochee Slough so that, in the
opinion of the applicant's environmental consultant and
County staff, there will be functionalenhancement of the
flow way or wildlife corridor;
(b) FSA and/or HSA lands where restoration would
increase the width of flevwnfayflow way
and/or habitat corridors within two miles of existing public
lands so that, in the opinion of the applicant's
environmental consultant and County staff, there will be a
functional enhancement of the flow way or wildlife
corridor;
(c) Documentation of state or federal listed species
utilizing the land on or adjacent to ora contiguous parcel;
(d) Lands that could be restored and managed to
provide habitats for specific listed species (e.g., gopher
tortoise, Big Cypress fox squirrel, red-cockaded
woodpecker, etc.),-ate or;
(e) Occurrence of a land parcel within foraging distance
from a wading bird rookery or other listed bird species
colony, where restoration and proper management could
increase foraging opportunities (e.g., wood storks);
(3) Upon designation of lands for restoration, ;the actual
implementation of restoration improvements is not required for
the owner to receive such credits referenced above, and the
costs of restoration shall be borne by the governmental
agency or private entity undertaking the restoration.
(4) In the event an owner agrees to complete the restoration
improvements, four additional Restoration Stewardship Credits
shall be granted for each acre of restored land. The additional
Restoration Stewardship Credits shall be authorized at the
time of SSA designation, but shall not become available for
transfer until such time as it has been demonstrated that the
restoration activities have met applicable success criteria as
determined by the permit or commencing agency authorizing
said restoration.
(50. Restoration Credit Agreement. Pursuant to Section
2.2.27.79.C.5.g, a Restoration Credit Agreement is required for the
designation of all SSAs involving the generation of additional
TAL#528665.4 13
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
Restoration Stewardship Credits. The Agreement shall establish
the basis for the additional Stewardship Credits, and shall include,
at minimum, the following:
{Sill Legal description with sketch or survey of the portion of
the SSA lands being designated dedicated through a
conservation easement or conveyed through_fee simple title,
that which are eligible for the Restoration Stewardship Credits.
{b}(2) Restoration Analysis and Report. The Restoration
Analysis and Report shall include a written evaluation of the
restoration area's existing ecological/habitat value and the
necessary restoration efforts required to reestablish, as closely
as practicable, original conditions; enhance the functionality of
wetlands or wildlife habitat; or remove exotics so as to enhance
the continued viability of native vegetation and wetlands.
(b3) Restoration Plan (only required when restoration projects
are undertaken by the landowner) that addresses, at a
minimum, the following elements;
(a) Restoration goals or species potentially affected;
Description of the work to be performed;
(tic) Identification of the entity responsible for performing
r1 the work;
(i id) Work Schedule;
(ive) Success Criteria;
(v1) Annual management, Mmaintenance and monitoring
4. Land Use Layers to be Eliminated. A set of Land Use Layers has
been established as part of the Stewardship Credit Worksheet and
adopted as the Land Use Matrix—Attachment B to the Rural Stewardship
Area Overlay Goals, Objectives and Policies. Each layer incorporates a
number of the permitted or conditional uses allowed under the Baseline
Standard. Each layer listed below has an established credit value
(percentage of a base credit) developed during the RLSA Study.
At the time of designation application, a landowner wishing to have his/her
land designated as an SSA determines which of the land use layers are to
be removed from the designated lands. A land use layer can only be
removed in its entirety (all associated activities/land use are removed),
and layers shall be removed sequentially and cumulatively in the order
listed below.
a. Land Use Layers.
1 - Residential Land Uses
.-� 2 - General Conditional Uses
3 - Earth Mining and Processing Uses
TAL#528665.4 14
� 1
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
�-. 4 - Recreational Uses
5 -Agriculture— Group 1
6 -Agriculture—Support Uses
7-Agriculture — Group 2
b. Land Use Matrix
Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay
Land Use Matrix
Conservation,
Residential Land General Conditional Earth Mining and Agriculture-Support Restoration and
Uses Uses Processing Uses Recreational Uses Agriculture Group 1 Uses A.riculture Group 2 Natural Resources
Single-family dwelling, Family care facilities Excavation,extraction Golf courses and/or Crop raising; Farm labor housing(A) Unimproved pasture Wildlife management,
incl.mobile home(P) (P) or earthmining and golf driving ranges horticulture;fruit and and grazing,forestry plant and wildlife
related processing and (CU) nut production;groves; (P) conservencies,refuges
production(CU) nurseries,improved and sanctuaries(p1
pasture(P)
Mobile homes[(P)in Collection and transfer Asphaltic and concrete Sports instructional Animal breeding(other Retail sale of fresh, Ranching;livestock Water management,
MH Overlay;(A)as sites for resource batch making plants schools and camps than livestock),raising, unprocessed raising(P) groundwater recharge
temporary use] recovery(CU) (CU) (CU) training,stabling or agricultural products; (pl
kenneling(P) grown primarily on the
property(A)
Private boathouses Veterinary clinic(CU) Sporting and Dairying;beekeeping; Retail plant nurseries Hunting cabins(CU) Restoration,mitigation
and docks on lake, recreational camps poultry and egg (CU) (P)
canal or waterway lots (CU) production;milk
(A) production(P)
Recreational facilities Child care centers and Aquaculture for native Packinghouse or Cultural,educational, Water supply,wellfields
integral to residential adult day care centers species(P)and non- similar agricultural or recreational facilities (P);oil and gas
development,e.g.,golf (CU) native species(CU) processing of farm and their related exploration(P)
course,clubhouse, products produced on modes of transporting
community center the property(A) participants,viewers or
building and tennis patrons;tour
facilities,parks, operations,such as,
playgrounds and but not limited to
playfields(A) airboats,swamp
buggies,homes and
similar modes of
transportation(CU)
Guesthouses(A) Zoo,aquarium,aviary, The commercial Sawmills(CU) Excavation and related Boardwalks,nature
botanical garden,or production,raising or processing incidental to trails(P)
other similar uses(CU) breeding of exotic Ag(A)
animals(CU)
Churches and other Wholesale reptile Natural resources not
places of worship(CU) breeding and raising- otherwise listed(P)
non-venomous(P)and
venomous(CU)
Communications Essential services(P
towers(P)(CU) and CU)
Social and fraternal Oil and gas field
organizations(CU) development and
production(CU)
Private landing strips
for general aviation
(CU)
Cemeteries(CU)
Schools(CU)
Group care facilities,
ALF(CU)
Uses as listed in Collier County Land Development Code-Rural Agricultural District
(P) Prinicpal Use, (A)Accessory Use, (CU)Conditional Use
5. Matrix Calculation. The maximum number of credits is
established in a matrix calculation that multiplies each Natural Resource
Index Value by the value of each Land Use Layer, thereby establishing a
TAL#528665.4 15
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
ro credit value for each acre in the Overlay, weighted by the quality of its
natural resources.
As land use layers are removed, the sum of the percentages of those
layers removed is multiplied by the Natural Resource Indices Values to
determine the Stewardship Credits to be generated by each acre being
designated as an SSA.
C. SSA Designation Application Package. A request to designate lands(s)
within the RLSA Overlay District as a SSA shall be made pursuant to the
regulations of this Section. An SSA Application Package shall include the
following:
1. SSA) Designation Application. A
landowner or his/her agent, hereafter "applicant", shall submit a request
for the designation of SSA for lands within the RLSA Overlay District to the
AdministfaterAdministrator or his designee, on an approved application
form. The application shall be accompanied by the documentation as
required by this Section.
2. Application Fee. An application fee shall accompany the
application. - — - - - • . -- - c .- ' - - - - .-- - • - - - - - - - -
Board of County Commission policy.
3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. The applicant shall
prepare and submit as part of the SSA Designation Application a report
entitled Natural Resource Index Assessment that documents the
preliminary Natural Resource Index Value scores. The Assessment shall
include a summary analysis that quantifies the number of acres by Index
Values, the level of conservation being proposed, and the resulting
number of credits being generated.
The Assessment shall:
a. Verify that the preliminary Index Value scores are still valid;
b. Determine through field verification,
documentation/certification, or recent aerial photography or satellite
imagery if there has been any alteration to the land that would
otherwise change the preliminary scoring shown on the Index Map
of the land being designated as an SSA;
c. Document through field verification,
documentation/certification or revised agency-approved mapping,
or other documentation any evidence to support an adjustment in
the preliminary Index Value scoring;
TAL#528665.4 16
t t
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
�-. d. Establish the suggested "Restoration Potential" Index Value
for any acres as appropriate. Provide evidence/documentation
supporting the suggested Index Value;
e. Quantify the acreage of agricultural lands, by type, being
preserved;
f. Quantify the acreage of non-agricultural acreage, by type,
being preserved;
g. Quantify the acreage of all lands by type within the proposed
SSA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2, and;
h. Quantify all lands, by type, being designated as SSA within the
ACSC, if any.
4. Support Documentation. In addition, the following support
documentation shall be provided for each SSA being designated.
a. Legal Description, including sketch or survey;
b. Acreage calculations, e.g., acres of FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs,
etc., being put into the SSA;
c. Stewardship Overlay Map delineating the area of the RLSA
District being designated as an SSA;
d. Aerial photograph(s) having a scale of one inch equal to at
least 200 feet when available from the county, otherwise, a scale of
at least one inch equal to 400 feet is acceptable, delineating the
area being designated as an SSA;
e. Natural Resource Index Map of area being designated as an
SSA;
f. Florida Department of Transportation Florida Land Use Cover
and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) map(s) delineating the
area being designated as an SSA on an aerial photograph having a
scale of one inch equal to at least 200 feet when available from the
county, otherwise, a scale of at least one inch equal to 400 feet is
acceptable;
g. Listed species occurrence map(s) from United States Fish and
Wildlife Service, Florida Fish Wildlife Conservation Commission, or
Florida Natural Areas Inventory, delineating the area being
designated as an SSA;
h. United States Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources
Conservation Service (USDA-NRCSZ Soils map(s) delineating the
area being designated as an SSA;
i. Documentation to support a change in the related Natural
Resource Index Value(s), if appropriate, and;
TAL#528665.4 17
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
�-. j. Stewardship Credit Calculation Table that quantifies the
number of acres by Index Values, the level of conservation being
offered, and the resulting number of credits being generated.
5. SA)-Credit Agreement. Any
landowner petitioning to have all or a portion of land owned within the
RLSA District designated as a SSA and who is to obtain SSA credits for
the land so designated shall enter into a Stewardship Sending Area (SSA)
Credit Agreement with the County. SSA Credit Agreements entered into
by and between a landowner and the County shall contain the following:
a. The number of acres, and a legal description of all lands
subject to the SSA Credit Agreement;
b. A map, or plan (drawn at a scale of 1"--= 200') of the land
subject to the agreement which depicts any lands designated Flow
way Stewardship Areas, Habitat Stewardship Areas or Water
Retention Areas, and the acreage of lands so designated;
c. A narrative description of all land uses, including conditional
uses, if any, that shall be removed from the land upon approval of
the SSA Credit Agreement;
d. A Natural Resource Index Assessment worksheet for the land
subject to the Agreement and the total number of SSA credits that
result from the Natural Resource Index Assessment;
e. A copy of the Stewardship Easement, (or deed if a fee simple
transfer is proposed) applicable to the land, which shall be granted
in perpetuity and shall be recorded by the County upon approval of
the SSA Credit Agreement;
f. If there are lands described in the Agreement on which
"conservation" is the only remaining land use, a Natural Resource
Management Plan shall be included in the Agreement, which shall
be applicable only to lands where "conservation" is the only
remaining land use;
g. If applicable, the number of credits for restoration (Restoration
Credits) to be granted by the Agreement. Restoration of SSA
lands, either by designating land for restoration or by implementing
restoration plans pursuant to a Restoration Plan, is only applicable
when restoration credits are sought by the Applicant, and only
under the following circumstances:
(1) Lands designated "Restoration" shall be legally described
and shall be depicted as either Restoration I ("R-I") or
Restoration II ("R-II") on the map or plan depicting all SSA
lands subject to the SSA Credit Agreement. Such lands shall
be dedicated through a conservation easement or conveyed
through fee simple title.
TAL#528665.4 18
•
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
(2) A Restoration Credit Agreement is included as an exhibit
to the SSA Agreement, which shall contain the following:
(a) A legal description of lands to be designated for
restoration and for which the Restoration Credits are to
be awarded in accordance with the following:
(i) Restoration Credits for lands identified as "R-I"
on the map of SSA lands shall be awarded for the
designation of lands for which restoration efforts or
activities may be carried out at some time in the
future, but there has been no commitment by the
Applicant.
(ii) Additional Restoration Credits for lands
identified as "R-II" on the map of SSA lands shall be
awarded when the owner of the land, or an identified
person or entity, has agreed to implement and carry
out a restoration plan which has been or will be
approved by the County for the SSA lands
designated "R-II".
(aa) For any SSA lands designated "R-II", an
acknowledgement by the public or private
entity, if other than the applicant, that will be
responsible for carrying out restoration that it
accepts and will carry out the Restoration Plan;
(bb) A Restoration Plan describing the
restoration activities and responsibilities, the
success criteria, and time period for carrying
out the restoration plan on lands designated R-
II;
(ssiii) The number of restoration credits to be granted
for lands designated "R-I" and "R-II" within the SSA
lands.
h. Provisions requiring that, upon designation of land as an SSA,
the owner shall not seek or request, and the County shall not grant
or approve, any increase in density or intensity of any permitted
uses remaining on the SSA lands, or any additional uses beyond
those specified in the SSA Credit Agreement on the land;
i. Provisions regarding and ensuring the enforceability of the
SSA Credit Agreement.
6. Public Hearing for Credit Agreement. A-The SSA Credit
Agreement shall be approved by a resolution of the Board of Collier
County Commission at an advertised public meeting by
majority vote .
TAL#528665.4 19
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
�-. 7. Recording of Agreement. Following approval by the County,a
Memorandum shall be prepared with the following portions or exhibits of
the SSA Credit Agreement as attachments. The Memorandum and
attachments shall be recorded in the public records:
a. tThe legal description of the lands subject to the SSA Credit
Agreement and the number of SSA Credits assigned to the land
designated as SSA;
b. Tthe Stewardship Easement on the SSA lands, describing the
land uses remaining on the land;
c. Tthe Restoration Agreement, if any for land within the SSA.
.
project has met applicable success criteria as determined by the permit
9:8. Stewardship Easement Agreement or Deed in the instance of a
fee simple title transfer. The Applicant shall prepare and submit a
Stewardship Easement Agreement in all cases except when the property
is being deeded in fee simple to a "conservation/preservation agency".
The Agreement shall impose a restrictive covenant or grant a perpetual
restrictive easement that shall be recorded for each SSA, shall run with
the land and shall be in favor of Collier County, Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, Florida Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services, South Florida Water Management District, or a
recognized statewide-land trust. The Stewardship Easement Agreement
shall identify the specific land management measures that will be
undertaken and the party responsible for such measures. In the event
that all land use layers are removed from the SSA (leaving only
"conservation") the applicant shall prepare and submit as part of the
Agreement a Natural Resources Management Plan as provided for below.
In the event that the land being designated as an SSA is being transferred
to a conservation entity by fee simple title, a Deed shall be submitted in
lieu of the Stewardship Easement Agreement. In such a case, the
development of the Natural Resources Management Plan shall be the
responsibility of the receiving entity, and shall not be required to be part of
the SSA Designation Application Package.
1-0F11. Natural Resource Management Plan. A Natural Resource
Management Plan is required in all cases where the only remaining use of
the property is conservation. A Natural
Resource Management Plan shall , einclude the following_elements
- ` - - - ' --e - -- `' - • - e= ••e• ' -
TAL#528665.4 20
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
r-. a. Identify-Identification of the existing and/or potential
conservation value(s) of the land being included in the SSA;
b. Identify-Identification of the objectives of the Natural Resource
Management Plan and the benefits it will
produce;
c. Include aA Work Program incorporating:
(1) Initial work needed, if appropriate (Immediate Action
Plan);
(2) Long-Term Aiaintenance-Management Plan;
(3) Restoration Plan (if-apprepnate if appropriate as provided
in 2.2.27.7.79.B.3.e.(5)(c);
(4) Work schedule or timeline;
(5) Location, area and quantity of work to be included, and;
(6) Monitoring Program.
d. Identification of responsible parties/agencies in implementing
the Natural Resource Management Plan, and if other than the
Applicant, the implementing agencies/parties agreeing to the
implementation.
D. SSA Application Review Process
1. Pre-application Conference with County Staff. Prior to the
submission of a formal application for SSA designation, the applicant shall
attend a pre-application conference with the
- ' _ _ - _ _ .-e- A e ".'.- _ e Administrator 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 is to be filed concurrent with an SSA application,
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 SSA with the goals, objectives,
and policies of the growth management plan;
b. Review of the Stewardship Credit Worksheet and Natural
Resource Index Assessment for the property;
c. Identification of the recognized entity to be named in the
covenant or perpetual restrictive easement, and;
d. Identification of the proposed land management measures that
will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures.
2. Application Package Submittal and Processing Fees. The
required number of copies of each SSA Application and the associated
processing fee shall be submitted to the
TAL#528665.4 21
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
,-s\ • e - • - _ : ___ e •• • _ _ e Administrator or his designee. The
contents of said application package shall be in accordance with Section
2.2.27.79.C.
3. Application Deemed Sufficient for Review. Within ten-fifteen
(4-015) working days of receipt of the SSA Application, the Co ity
22 - 2- - _ _ _ _ - 2 ‘ '-__ A e • -• _ _ Administrator or
his designee shall deem-advise the applicant in writing that the application
is complete and sufficient for agency review or
writing-ef advise what additional information is needed to find the
application sufficient. If required, the applicant shall submit additional
information. Within ten (10) working days of receipt of the additional
information, the - e•• •• - •• P = - - - - • - • e • e• •• =• - . 2 ' '---
Administrator or his designee shall deem-advise the
applicant in writing that the application is complete, or, if additional or
revised information is required, the Administrator shall again inform the
applicant eg of what information is needed, and the timeframe
outlined herein shall occur until the application is found sufficient for
review.
4. Review by County Reviewing Agencies: Once the SSA
application is deemed sufficient, the Administrator or his designee will
distribute it to specific County staff for their review statfr
-
{2) Evaluato suggostod rostoration potontial indox valuo
applieable
1" : - _ • A -
b. Oi'nnin :
• - -
(3) Review Zoning Atlas
- - -- • - • -
_ A _
p. 1 egal(County Attorney)•
" -
. - . - .
5. Staff-Designation Review. Within sixty (60) calendar days of
receipt of a sufficient application, county staff shall review the submittal
TAL#528665.4 22
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
documents and provide written comments, questions, and clarification
items to the applicant. If deemed necessary by county staff or the
applicant, a meeting shall be held to resolve outstanding issues and
confirm public hearing dates.
6. Staff-Designation Report. Within thirty (3990) calendar days from
the receipt of a sufficient application , county staff shall
prepare a written report containing their review findings and a
recommendation of approval, approval with conditions or denial. This
timeframe may be extended upon written agreement by the applicant.
E. SSA Application Approval Process
1. Public Hearing. The BCC shall hold an advertised public hearing
on the proposed resolution approving an SSA Application and SSA Credit
Agreement. Notice of the Board's intention to consider the Application and
proposed SSA Credit Agreement shall be given at least fifteen (15) days
prior to said hearing by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in
the County. A copy of such notice shall be kept available for public
inspection during regular business hours of the Office of Clerk to the BCC.
The notice of proposed enactment-hearing shall state the date, time and
place of the meeting, the title of the proposed resolution, and the place or
places within the County where the proposed resolution and agreement
may be inspected by the public. The notice shall provide a general legal
description of the affected land and shall advise that interested parties
may appear at the meeting and be heard with respect to the proposed
resolution The BCC shall review the staff report and recommendations
and, if it finds that all requirements for designation have been met, shall,
by resolution, approve the application. If it finds that all requirements for
designation have not been met, it may deny the application or approve it
with conditions which will bring the application as approved into full
compliance.
2. Legal Description. Following the Board's approval of the SSA
Application and SSA Credit Agreement, a legal description of the land
designated Stewardship Sending Area, the SSA credits granted, and the
Stewardship easement applicable to such lands, shall be provided to the
Collier County pProperty aAppraiser and the Applicant and shall be
recorded within 30 days by the aApplicant in the public records.
- - e _ •.e : e. _ - - • - - - - - - -
. . _ _ est-
_
- - -
— - - -- - — - - - . .ce - - - - - • — - - - - - - - - - -
and SRA crodits consumed.
3.4. Update the Stewardship Overlay Map and Official Zoning Atlas.
The Stewardship Overlay Map and the Official Zoning Atlas
to-shall reflect the designation of the SSA. Sufficient information shall be
included on the updated maps so as to direct interested parties to the
TAL#528665.4 23
L
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
appropriate public records associated with the designation, (3.g. includinq
but not limited to Resolution number; and SSA Designation Application
number, ets . Approval of such resolution shall require a super majority
vote by the Board of Collier County Commissioners.
F. SSA Amendments. Collier County shall consider an amendment to an
approved SSA in the same manner in the same manner as described in this
Section for the establishment of a SSA. Amendment(s) to approved SSAs shall
only be considered if the application removes one or more additional land use
layers from the existing SSA. Under no circumstances shall land use layers,
once removed as part of an SSA designation, be added back to the SSA. The
application to amend the SSA may be submitted as part of an application to
designate a new SSA provided such lands are contiguous to the previously
approved SSA and are under the same ownership.
2.2.27.810 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 Stewardship
Receiving Areas (SRAs). Land uses are entitled approved within SRAs through the
transfer of Stewardship Credits generated from SSAs. Stewardship Credits are
exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in a SRA on a per
acre basis as set forth herein. Density and intensity within the RLSA District or within
an SRA 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 upon the
adoption of a resolution by the BCC approving the petition by the
property owner seeking such designation. Any change in the residential density or non-
residential intensity of land use on a parcel of land located within a SRA shall be
specified in the resolution reflecting the total number of transferable Credits assigned to
the parcel of land.
A. Lands Within the Overlay that can be Designated as SRAs. All
privately owned lands within the RLSA District Overlay 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 may be located within the boundaries of an SRA and may be
incorporated into a 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.
TAL#528665.4 24
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
a. A SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate
the planned development in an environmentally acceptable
manner.
b. Residential, commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group
housing, and transient housing, institutional, civic and community
service uses within a SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a
Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2.
c. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential
services, with the exception of those necessary to serve permitted
uses and for public safety, shall not be sited on lands that receive a
Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2.
d. Open space shall also comprise a minimum of thirty-five
percent of the gross acreage of an individual SRA Town, Village, or
those CRDs exceeding 100 acres.
e. Lands or parcels within , SRn greater than one acre,within a
SRA with an Index values of greater than 1.2, shall be retained as
open space and maintained in a predominantly natural vegetated
state except for the siting of conditional use essential services and
governmental essential services necessary to serve permitted uses
and for public safety.
f. As an incentive to encourage open space, such lands within a
SRA located outside of the ACSC, exceeding the required thirty-five
percent, shall not be required to consume Stewardship Credits.
g. An SRA may be contiguous to a FSA or HSA, but shall not
encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described
in Section 2.2.27.8710.J.6.h. A SRA may be contiguous to, or
encompass a WRA.
h. The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector
or arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the
developer that has adequate capacity to accommodate the
proposed development in accordance with accepted transportation
planning standards.
2. SRAs Within the ACSC. SRAs are permitted within the ACSC
subject to the number, size, location, and form of SRA described herein.
Nothing within this Section shall be construed as an exemption of an SRA
from any and all limitations and regulations applicable to lands within the
ACSC. Lands within the ACSC that meet all SRA suitability criteria shall
also be restricted such that credits used to entitle a SRA in the ACSC
must be generated exclusively from SSAs within the ACSC. No early entry
bonus credits can be used to entitle an SRA within the ACSC.
a. The Hamlet form of SRA is permitted within the ACSC subject
to the limitations below.
TAL#528665.4 25
•
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
b. The Village form of SRA is permitted within the ACSC subject
to the limitations below.
c. The only form of SRA allowed in the ACSC east of the
Okaloacoochee Slough shall be Hamlets and CRDs of 100 acres or
less and the only form of SRA allowed in the ACSC west of the
Okaloacoochee Slough shall be Villages and CRDs of not more
than 300 acres and Hamlets. Provided, however, that two Villages
or CRDs of not more than 500 acres each, exclusive of any lakes
created prior to the effective date of this amendment as a result of
mining operations, shall be allowed in areas that have a frontage on
State Road 29 and that, as of the effective date of the RLSA
Overlay, had been predominantly cleared as a result of Ag Group I
or Earth Mining or Processing Uses.
d. The Town form of a SRA shall not be located within the ACSC.
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 a SRA on a per acre basis, as described in Section
2.2.274310.6.2. 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.
a. Stewardship Credits generated from any SSA may be
transferred to entitle any SRA, except where the SRA is within the
ACSC, in which case only Stewardship Credits that have been
generated from an SSA within the ACSC can be used to entitle
such SRA. No early entry bonus credits can be used to entitle an
SRA within the ACSC.
b. Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSA that
meet the defined suitability criteria and standards set forth herein.
c. Stewardship Credits may be transferred between different
parcels or within a single parcel, subject to compliance with all
applicable provisions of these policies. Residential clustering shall
only occur within the RLSA District through the use of the
Stewardship Credit System, and other forms of residential
clustering shall not be permitted.
d. Stewardship Credits may be acquired from any credit holder
and transferred to an SRA subject to the limitations contained in
this Section.
e. Stewardship Credits may be acquired from a Stewardship
Credit Trust established pursuant to Section 2.2.27.46., and
transferred to an SRA subject to the limitations contained in this
Section.
TAL#528665.4 26
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
2. Stewardship Credit Exchange. Stewardship Credits will-shall be
exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in a
SRA on a per acre basis at a rate of eight (8) Stewardship Credits per
gross acre _ - - -- - e, - - - -- - - --- - - - • e - - - -.e •- -- • -••=e
herein. - -
herein.
Lands within an SRA greater than one acre with Index Values of greater
than 1.2 shall be retained as open space and maintained in a
predominantly natural vegetative state except for the siting of conditional
use essential services and governmental essential services necessary to
serve permitted uses and for public safety. Any such lands within an SRA
located outside of the ACSC exceeding the required thirty-five percent
shall not be required to consume Stewardship Credits.
3. Public Benefit Uses. The acreage within an SRA devoted to a
public benefit use shall not be required to consume Stewardship Credits.
For the purpose of this Section, public benefit uses are limited to public
schools (preK-12) and public or private post secondary institutions,
including ancillary uses; community parks exceeding the minimum
requirement of 200 square feet per dwelling unit; municipal golf courses;
regional parks; and governmental facilities excluding essential services as
defined in the LDC.
4. Mixed Land Use Entitlements. In order to promote compact,
mixed use development and provide the necessary support facilities and
services to residents of rural areas, the SRA designation and the transfer
of the Stewardship Credits ontitlos allows for a full range of uses,
accessory uses and associated uses that provide a mix of services to and
are supportive to the residential population of a SRA and the RLSA
District . SRAs are intended to be mixed use and shall be allowed the full
range of uses permitted by the Urban Designation of the FLUE, as
modified by Policies 4.7, 4.7.1, 4.7.2, 4.7.3, 4.7.4 and RLSA Overlay
Attachment C. Depending on the size, scale, and character of a SRA, it
should-shall be designed to include an appropriate mix of retail, office,
recreational, civic, governmental, and institutional uses, in addition to
residential uses.
C. Forms of SRAs EntitlementcDevelopments. Stewardship Receiving
Areas shall be designed to accommodate and promote uses that utilize creative
land use planning techniques_and edits-SRAs shall be used to facilitate the
implementation of innovative planning and flexible development strategies
described in Chapter 163.3177 (11), F.S. and 9J-5.006(5)(1). These planning
strategies and techniques a-are intended to ,
_ _ '_ _ _, - -e •• :e _ __ e: _ _ _ _ _ minimize the conversion of rural and
agricultural lands to other uses while discouraging urban sprawI;i protecting
environmentally sensitive areasi; maintaining the economic viability of agricultural
and other predominantly rural land uses;i and, providing provide for the cost-
TAL#528665.4 27
. t
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
efficient delivery of public facilities and services. 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 2.2.27.810.J.1. Towns may
also include those compatible corporate office and light industrial uses as
those permitted in the Business Park and 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 2.2.27.B10.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 2.2.27.&.10.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 then 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
TAL#528665.4 28
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
have a public green space for neighborhoods. Hamlets include
convenience retail uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 2.2.27.810.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 2.2.27.8.10.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 2.2.27.810.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 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
2.2.27.810.1:C.2. or 3.
a. Sizeand-numbers of CRDs limited.
9. - - -- - -- . -- - - •- • • - - •• - - - - - - - --
_. _ • -- - - ' . _ _ _ e -. There shall be no more than
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 2.2.27.8.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 5 of any combination of Hamlets or CRDs of
TAL#528665.4 29
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
100 acres of less may be approved prior to the approval of a Village
or Town. In order to maintain that same proportion thereafter, not
more than 5 of any combination of Hamlets and CRDs of 100 acres
of less may approved for each subsequent Village or Town
approved.
5T6 SRAs as Part of a Development of Regional Impact (DRI).
SRAs are permitted as part of a DRI subject to the provisions of Chapter
380.06 and this Section.
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).
sb. 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.
'� dc. - - - - - • • : ••:- e - - • • - ` ' • - -- - -- - -
' A DRI applicant is required to
demonstrate that;
(1) heisheThe applicant has the necessary Stewardship
Credits to entitle the DRI as part of subsequent SRA
Designation Applications, or;
(2) The applicant owns or has a contract with an owner of
enough land that would qualify as SSRAs to entitle the DRI as
part of subsequent SRA Designation Applications, or has the
ability to obtain the necessary Stewardship Credits to entitle
the entire DRI as part of subsequent SRA Designation
Applications.
D. SRA Designation Application Package. A Designation Application
Package to support a request to designate lands(s) within the RLSA Overlay
District as a SERA shall be made pursuant to the regulations of this Section. A
The SERA Application Package shall include the follow:
1. RA)-Designation Application.
A land owner shall submit an application shall be submitted by a
landowner or his/her agent, hereafter "applicant", An application shall be
submitted by a landowner or his/her agent, hereafter "applicant," to
request the designation of a SRA for lands within the RLSA
Oved yDistrict. The Application shall be submitted to the GGmmunity
TAL#528665.4 30
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
_ _ _ _ _ - 'e e• ••= • _ - = ' __ A _ • • _ _ _ Administrator or
his designee, on a form provided. The application shall be accompanied
by the documentation as required by this Section.
2. Application Fee. An application fee shall accompany the
application. _ A _ . . - - - - - -- - - •- - ---- • - - - - - - -- •-
- -
pursuant to Board of County Commission policy.
3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. An Assessment that
documents the preliminary Natural Resource Index Value scores,.as
determined at the date of adoption of the RLSA Overlay, shall be prepared
and submitted as part of the SRA Application for Designation. The
Assessment shall include;an analysis that quantifies the
number of acres by Index Values.
The purpose of the Assessment is to:
a. Document the preliminary Natural Resource Index Value
scores (see Support Documentation below) and identify all lands
within the proposed SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2;
b. Verify that the preliminary Index Value scores are still valid;
c. Determine through field verification,
documentation/certification, or recent aerial photography or satellite
imagery if there has been any alteration to the land that would
otherwise change the preliminary scoring shown on the Index Map
of the land being designated as an SRA;
d. Document through field verification,
documentation/certification or revised agency-approved mapping,
or other documentation any evidence to support an adjustment in
the preliminary Index Value scoring;
e. Quantify the acreage of agricultural lands, by type, being
converted;
f. Quantify the acreage of non-agricultural acreage, by type,
being converted;
g. Quantify the acreage of all lands by type within the proposed
SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2;
h. Quantify the acreage of all lands, by type, being designated as
SRA within the ACSC, if any, and;
i. Demonstrate compliance with the Suitability Criteria contained
in Section 2.2.27.5.10.A.1.
4. Natural Resource Index Assessment SRA Designation
Support Documentation. Documentation to support the
TAL#528665.4 31
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
application Natural Resource Index Assessment shall be provided for
each SRA being designated;to include:
a. Legal Description, including sketch or survey;
b. Acreage calculations of lands being put into the SRA,
including acreage calculations of WRAs (if any) within SRA
boundary but not included in SRA designation;
c. Stewardship Overlay Map delineating the area of the RLSA
District being designated as an SRA;
d. Aerial photograph delineating the area being designated as an
SRA;
e. Natural Resource Index Map of area being designated as an
SRA;
f. FLUCCS map(s) delineating the area being designated as an
SRA;
g. Listed species map(s) delineating the area being designated
as an SRA;
h. Soils map(s) delineating the area being designated as an
SRA, and;
i. Documentation to support a change in the related Natural
Resource Index Value(s), if appropriate.
5. SRA Master Plan. A Master Plan shall be prepared and submitted
by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of a SRA.
The SRA Master Plan shall be consistent with the requirements of Section
2.2.27.84.10.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 a SRA. The SRA Development Document shall be
consistent with the requirements of Section 2.2.77810.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
2.2.27.810.K. e - • - - - - • - - P . - ` ' - - -- -Development Approval (ADA) pursuant to Chaptor 380.06, F.S. shall bo
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 a SRA. The SRA Economic
Assessment Report shall address the requirements of Section
2.2.277810.L. For SRAs that are part of a DRI, the DRI Application for
TAL#528665.4 32
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
Devolopmont Approval (ADA) pursuant to Chaptor 380.06, F.S. shall bo
9. Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Application. A
Credit Use and Reconciliation Application shall be submitted as part of a
SRA Designation Application in order to track the transfer of credits from
SSA(s) to SRA(s). The Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation
Application shall be in a form provided by the
SenficesAdministratoFAdministrator, or his designee. The application
package shall contain the following:
a. The legal description of, or descriptive reference to, the SRA
to which the Stewardship Credits are being transferred;
b. Total number of acres within the proposed SRA
and the total number of acres of the proposed SRA within the
ACSC (if any);
c. Number of acres within the SRA designated "public use" that
do not require the redemption of Stewardship Credits in order to be
entitled (does not consume credits);
d. Number of acres of "excess" open spaces within the SRA that
does not require the consume-consumption of credits;
e. Number of acres of WRAs inside the SRA boundary but not
included in the SRA designation;
f. Number of acres within the SRA that consume credits in-order
g. The number of Stewardship Credits being transferred
(consumed by) ' to the SRA;
h. Number of acres entitledto which credits are to be transferred
(consumed) Xmultiplied by 8 Credits/ acre -,---equals the
number of Credits to be transferred (consumed);
i. A descriptive reference to one or more approved or pending
SSA Designation Applications from which the Stewardship Credits
are being obtained. Copies of the reference documents, e.g., SSA
Stewardship Credit Agreement, etc., should-shall be provided.
Documentation as to the source of the Stewardship Credits to be
used to entitle the SRA, including:
(1) SSA application number;
(2) Pending companion SRA application number;
(3) SSA Designation Resolution (or Resolution Number);
(4) SSA Credit Agreement (Stewardship Agreement);
eiN (5) Stewardship Credits Database Report.
TAL#528665.4 33
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
j. A descriptive reference to any previously approved
Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Applications that pertain
to the referenced SSA(s) from which the Stewardship Credits are
being obtained, and;
k. A summary table in a form provided by Collier County that
identifies the exchange of all Stewardship Credits that involve the
SRA and all of the associated SSAs from which the Stewardship
Credits are being obtained.
I_(-} If at the time of the approval of the SRA Designation
Application the applicant has not acquired the number of credits
needed to entitle the SRA, then the SRA Designation approval shall
be conditional. The applicant shall have 60 calendar days from the
date of the conditional approval to provide the required number of
Stewardship Credits. The Stewardship Credit Use and
Reconciliation Application shall be amended to accurately reflect
the transfer of credits that occurred following the conditional
approval of the SRA. If the applicant does not provide the required
number of stewardship credits within 60 days, the conditional SRA
Designation approval shall be null and void.
10, SRA) Credit Agreement.
a. Any applicant for designation of a SRA shall enter into a SRA
Credit Agreement with the County, which shall
become effective and final upon the County's approval of the SRA
application and the assignment of the credits specified in the SRA
Credit Agreement.
b. The SRA Credit Agreement shall contain the following
information:
specify tThe number of SA
credits the applicant for a SRA designation is utilizing rand
which err-edits-shall be applied to the SRA land in order to carry
out the plan of development on the acreage proposed in the
SRA Development Documents. ,
(1-a) A legal description of the SRA land and the number of
acres;
(23) A The SRA-master plan depicting the land uses wit iR
the SRA and identifying the number of residential dwelling
units, gross leaseable area of retail and office square footage
and other land uses depicted on the plan;
(34) A description of the SSA credits that are needed to entitle
the SRA land; and the anticipated source of said credits;
TAL#528665.4 34
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
(45) The applicant's
agreementacknowledgement that development of SRA land
may not commence until the applicant has assigned said
credits as needed to proceed with the SRA development. A
credit assignment, or assignments, of sufficient credits to the
applicant from SSA lands must be recorded, by the applicant,
with the Collier County Clerk of Courts prior to commencement
of any development on SRA lands, and;
(6D The applicant's commitments, if any, regarding
conservation, or any other restriction on development on any
lands, including wetlands, within the SRA, as may be depicted
on the SRA Master Plan for special treatment.
c. If the development planprovided for within a SRA constitutes,
or will constitute, a development of regional impact ("DRI") pursuant
to Sections 380.06 and 380.0651, F.S., and if the applicant has
obtained a preliminary development agreement ("PDA") from the
Florida Department of Community Affairs for a portion of the SRA
land, the applicant may request the County to
enter into a Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement that contains the
following terms and conditions:
(1) The number of SRA credits that the applicant
must purchase or obtain and that shall be assigned to the
SRA land-in conjunction with the County's
development approval for that portion of the SRA land
constituting the land which constitutes the PDA-land. The
credits required shall not exceed the credits needed in order to
develop the PDA authorized development,located-en-the
(2) The applicant's
acknowledgement that development of the PDA land may not
commence until the applicant has assigned the SSA credits
needed to proceed with the preliminary SRA development;
(3) The applicant's
ender-standingacknowledgement that assignment of the
preliminary SRA credits required by the agreement must be
made to the County within 60 days from the County's adoption
of a resolution approving the preliminary SRA Credit
Agreement, or the County's approval shall be null and void;
(4) That the County's approval of a preliminary SRA Credit
Agreement does not in any way entitle the applicant to any
additional SRA designation, or establish any "vested rights" to
obtain further SRA approval, or in any way affect the County's
right to approve, deny, or approve with conditions a SRA
TAL#528665.4 35
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
Credit Agreement for the future DRI and SRA applications that
the applicant will file at a later date;
(5) A provision requiring that the Preliminary SRA Credit
Agreement shall remain in effect until it is superceded by a
SRA Credit Agreement covering the entire SRA designated
land, including the PDA development, which constitutes a DRI;
(6) The County's determination that the proposed preliminary
SRA development,.as described in the PDA, will be located on
land that is suitable for the development described in the plan
of development, and is consistent with the Collier County GMP
and shall be carried out in compliance with the pertinent
provisions of the Land Development Code, and;
(7) The applicant's statement that a larger SRA will
constitute a DRI and terms specifying reasonable dates for the
filing of a DRI Application for Development Approval pursuant
to Section 380.06 F.S. for the SRA.
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
,.� _ •• _ • - _ _ • ___ A : •• • - - _ Administrator 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 growth management plan;
b. Consideration of suitability criteria described in Section
2.2.27.&10.A.1. and other standards of this Section;
c. Assurance of compact, mixed-use, and self-
sufficient development;
d. SRA master plan compliance with all applicable policies of the
RLSA District Dictrist, and demonstration that
incompatible land uses are directed away from FSA's, HSA's, and
WRA's;
e. Assurance that applicant has acquired or will acquire sufficient
stewardship credits to implement the SRA uses, and;
f. Consideration of impacts, including environmental and public
infrastructure impacts.
TAL#528665.4 36
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
.-� 2. Application Package Submittal and Processing Fees. The
required number of SRA Applications and the associated processing fee
shall be submitted to the - e" " - •• •: - - - - • - - • • - • ' -
Servicos AdministratorAdministrator or his designee. The contents of said
application package shall be in accordance with Section 2.2.27.8710.D.
3. Application Deemed Sufficient for Review. Within thirty (30)
calendar days of receipt of the SRA Application, the Community
• _ _ _ _ - -- - 'e • ' _ • • _ • - - _ •-z- ' _ - • - _ e Administrator or
his designee shall doomnotify the applicant in writing that the application
is deemed complete and sufficient for agency review or provide-the
advise what additional information is needed to find
the application sufficient. If required, the applicant shall submit additional
information. Within twenty (20) calendar days of receipt of the additional
information, the - e " " - •• •: : = = •• : • ' • e • " : ' - -- - •--
Administrator or his designee shall deem-notify the applicant
in writing that the application is deemed complete, or, if-what additional or
revised information is required;. If necessary, the Administrator shall again
inform the applicant in writing of information needed, and the timeframe
outlined herein shall occur until the application is found sufficient for
review.
4. Review by County Reviewing Agencies: Once the SRA
application is deemed sufficient, the Administrator or his designee will
distribute it to specific County review staff.;
{2) Evaluate request(s) to change the preliminary Natural
b,-Planning
•
(2) Roviow SR
A - - • .. e. _ 1 -
Application
TAL#528665.4 37
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
• _ _ a
. _ . .
c. I eg'I(County Attorney)•
. .
Agreement
5. Staff Review. Within sixty (60) calendar days of receipt of a
sufficient application, county staff shall review the submittal documents
and provide comments, questions, and clarification items to the applicant.
If deemed necessary by county staff or the applicant, a meeting shall be
held to resslvo address outstanding issues and confirm public hearing
dates.
6. Staff Report. Within thirty (3990 calendar days from the receipt of
a sufficient application , county staff shall prepare a
written report containing their review findings and a recommendation of
approval, approval with conditions or denial. This timeframe may be
extended upon agreement of county staff and the applicant.
F. SRA Application Approval Process.
1. Public Hearings Required. The Board of County Commissions
shall review the staff report and recommendations and the
recommendations of the EAC and CCPC, and the Board shall, by
resolution, approve, deny, or approve with conditions the Application for
Designation of Stewardship Receiving Areas only after advertised public
notices have been provided and public hearings held in accordance with
the following provisions:
a. Public Hearing Before the EAC, Recommendation to the
BCC. The Collier County Environmental Advisory Council shall hold
one public hearing on a proposed resolution to designate a
Stewardship Receiving Area if such SRA is within the ACSC, or is
adjoining land designated as Conservation, FSA, or HSA.
b. Public Hearing Before the CCPC, Recommendation to
BCC. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) shall hold
one advertised public hearing on the proposed resolution to
designate a Stewardship Receiving Area SRA. A notice of the
public hearing before the CCPC on the proposed resolution, whiclh
contains the information specified in 2.2.27.8.D.4. above, shall
include a legal description, including a sketch or survey and shall
be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the County at
least fifteen days in advance of the public hearing.
TAL#528665.4 38
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
bc. Public Hearing Before the BCC, Resolution Approved.
The BCC shall hold one advertised public hearing on the proposed
resolution to designate a SRA. A
public notice., _e - _••••e •• a •• - •e - •- .=.
P.
which shall include a legal description with a sketch or survey, shall
be given to the citizens of Collier County by publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the County at least ten days
prior to the meeting of the BCC. The advertised public notice of the
proposed adoption of the resolution shall, in addition,,contain the
date, time and place of the meeting, the title of the proposed
resolution and the place within the County where such proposed
resolution may be inspected by the public. The notice shall also
advise that interested parties may appear at the meeting and be
heard with respect to the proposed resolution.
2. Effective Date of SRA Designation. The SRA designation
approval shall not become effective until an assignment of County-
approved credits to be removed from designated SSA lands has been
executed by the owner of the credits assigning such credits to the
applicant for SRA designation. The SSA Credit Agreement shall contain
the number of credits assigned. The assignment of SSA credits shall be
presented to the County and recorded in the public records of Collier
County by the applicant, whereupon the SRA designation and approval by
the BCC shall become effective. The Applicant's failure to present the
assignment of SSA credits to the
• ' _ • •• _ • _ __ • ___ A e • - _ _ e Administrator within sixty (60) days
following the BCC's action approving or approving with conditions the SRA
Application shall cause the SRA approval to become null and void. Upon
assignment of the credits by the County to the SRA, it shall become
effective and the SRA project shall be vested for the development,
pursuant to the development criteria specified in the SRA Master Plan and
SRA Development Document.
3. Update Stewardship Credits Database. Following the effective
date of the approval of the SRA , the County shall
update the Stewardship Credits Database used to track both SSA credits
generated and SRA credits consumed.
4. Update the Official Zoning Atlas and the Overlay Map.
Following the effective date of the approval of the SRA-Designation
Application, the County shall update the Official Zoning Atlas and
Stewandahip RLSA Overlay Map to reflect the designation of the SRA.
Sufficient information shall be included on the updated maps so as to
direct interested parties to the appropriate public records associated with
the designation, e.g., Resolution number, SRA Designation Application
number, etc.
5. SRA Amendments. Amendments to the SRA shall be considered
in the same manner as described in this Section for the establishment of a
TAL#528665.4 39
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
SRA. All other amendments to a SRA shall require BCC approval as
required by Section 2.2.27.810.F.
a. Waiver of Required SRA Application Package
Component(s). A waiver may be granted by the G ity
Admi-RietratocAdministrator or his designee, if at the time of the pre-
application conference, in the determination of the Administrator,
the original SRA Designation Application component(s) is(are) not
materially altered by the amendment or an updated component is
not needed to evaluate the amendment. The Administrator shall
determine what application components and associated
documentation are required in order to adequately evaluate the
amendment request.
b. Approval of Minor Changes by Administrator. Community
AdminietfatorAdministrator shall be authorized to approve minor
changes and refinements to a SRA Master Plan or Development
Document upon written request of the applicant developer. The
following limitations shall apply to such requests:
(1) The minor change or refinement shall be consistent with
the Ru LandcRLSA Overlay and the RLSA District
Regulations, and the SRA Development Document's
amendment provisions.
(2) The minor change or refinement shall be compatible with
ad}aceetcontiguous land uses and shall not create detrimental
impacts to abutting land uses, water management facilities, and
conservation areas within or external to the SRA.
c. Review of Minor Changes by Staff. Minor changes and
refinements shall be reviewed by appropriate Collier County Staff to
ensure that said changes and refinements are otherwise in
compliance with all applicable County ordinances and regulations
prior to the Administrator's consideration for approval. The-following
shame-deemed Mminor changes or refinements are limited to:
(1) Reconfiguration of lakes, ponds, canals, or other water
management facilities where such changes are consistent with
the criteria of the - -- ' - .e- - - '' - - - - '.- -
SFWMD and Collier County;
(2) Internal realignment of rights-of-way, other than a
relocation of access points to the SRA itself, where water
management facilityfacilities, preservation areas, or required
easements are not adversely affected ;
TAL#528665.4 40
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
(3) Reconfiguration of parcels when there is no encroachment
into the conservation areas or lands with an Index Value of 1.2
or higher, and;
(4) Changes in the Design Criteria that do not,in the-opinion-ef
alter the functional integrity of the regulatory
standards imposed in the Development Document.
ed. Relationship to Subdivision or Site Deveopment Approval.
Approval by the — _ — .. _ . P. _ __ -• _ - _ - : - . ,• •• _ •
Administrator of a minor change or refinement
may occur independently from,.and prior to,any application for
Subdivision or Site Development Plan approval;i however,such
approval shall not constitute an authorization for development or
implementation of the minor change or refinement without first
obtaining all other necessary County permits and approvals.
G. Master Plan Required. To address the specifics of each SRA, a master
plan of each SRA will be prepared and submitted to Collier County as a part of
the petition for designation as a SRA. The master plan will demonstrate that the
SRA complies with all applicable Growth Management Plan policies of thoand
thise RLSA Overlay District and this Soction and is designed so that
incompatible land uses are directed away from lands identified as FSAs,and
HSAs, and Conservation Lands on the RLSA Overlay Map.
1. Master Plan Content Requirements. A master plan shall
accompany a SRA Designation Application to address the specifics of
each SRA. The master plan shall demonstrate that the SRA is designed
so that incompatible land uses are directed away from lands identified as
FSAs,.-and HSAs,,and Conservation Lands on the RSLA Overlay Map.
The plan shall have-beenbe designed by an urban planner who possesses
an AICP certification tho education and experience to qualify for full
_ _ __ • - • ' : • and/or a
•
•
landscape architect ------ - =e - -- - - ' e - e= - -- -
Arshitestslicensed in the state of Florida;i together with either a_- acticing
sivi-l-professional engineer (P.E.) with expertise in the area of civil
engineering licensed by the State of Florida;; a qualified environmental
consultant per Section 3.8 of the LDC; or a practicing architect licensed by
the State of Florida.
TAL#528665.4 41
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
2. Master Plan Content. At a minimum, the master plan shall include
the following elements:
a. The title of the project and name of the developer;
b. Scale, date, north arrow;
c. Location map that identifies the relationship of the SRA to the
entire RLSA District;
d. Boundaries of the subject property, all existing roadways
within and adjacent to the site, watercourses, easements, section
lines, and other important physical features within and adjoining the
proposed development;
e. Identification of all proposed tracts or increments within the
SRA such as, but not limited to: residential; commercial; industrial;
institutional; conservation/preservation; lakes and/or other water
management facilities; the location and function of all areas
proposed for dedication or to be reserved for community and/or
public use; and areas proposed for recreational uses including golf
courses and related facilities;
f. Identification, location and quantification of all wetland
preservation, buffer areas, and open space areas;
g.
The location and size (as appropriate) of all proposed
drainage, water, sewer, and other utility provisions;
h. The location of all proposed major internal thefoughfafes
rights of way and pedestrian access ways;
i. Typical cross sections ef-for all majorarterial, collector, and
local streets, public or private, within the proposed SRA;
j. Identification of any WRAs that are adjacent-contiguous to or
incorporated within the boundaries of the SRA.
k. Documentation or attestation of professional credentials of
individuals preparing the master plan.
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 following-information listed below, unless determined at
the required pre-application conference to be unnecessary to describe the
development strategy:i The document shall be prepared by an urban planner
who possesses an AICP certification and/or a landscape architect licensed in the
state of Florida; together with either a professional engineer (P.E.) with expertise
in the area of civil engineering licensed by the State of Florida; a qualified
environmental consultant per Section 3.8 of the LDC; or a practicing architect
licensed by the State of Florida. The document shall identify,
�... locate and quantify the full range of uses, including accessory uses and
that provide the mix of services to,and are supportive of,the
TAL#528665.4 42
•
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
residential population of a SRA or the RSLA District, and shall include, as
applicable, the following:
1. Title page to include name of project;
2. Index/table of contents;
3. List of exhibits;
4. Statement of compliance with the RLSA-Ov clay RSLA
Stewardship Overlay's - e- e e.:- -- - - .e •-.= - • - - - '
Management-Plan and the RLSA District Regulations;
5. General location map showing the location felation,s4 of the site to
the boundaries of the RLSA Overlay Map and to such external facilities as
highways;
6. Property ownership and general description of site (including
statement of unified ownership);
7. Description of project development;
8. Legal description of the SRA boundary, and for any WRAs
encompassed by the SRA;
9. The overall acreage and proposed gross density for the SRA;
10. Identification of all proposed land uses within each tract or
increment describing: acreage; proposed number of dwelling units;
proposed density and percentage of the total development represented by
�-• each type of use; or in the case of commercial, industrial, institutional or
office, the acreage and maximum gross leasable floor area within the
individual tracts or increments;
11. Design standards for each type of land use proposed within the
SRA. Design standards shall be consistent with the Design Criteria
contained in Section 2.2.27.810.J.6.;
12. All proposed variations or deviations from the requirements of the
LDC, including justification and alternatives proposed; Design Criteria
13. The proposed schedule of development, and the sequence of
phasing or incremental development within the SRA, if applicable;
14. e • •• =• - • - - - - •- • •• - -- =A Natural Resource
Index Assessment as required in Section 2.2.27.79.C.3.;
15. The location and nature of all existing or proposed public facilities
(or sites), such as schools, parks, fire stations and the like;
16. A plan for the provision of all needed utilities to and within the SRA;
including (as appropriate) water supply, sanitary sewer collection and
treatment system, stormwater collection and management system,
pursuant to related county regulations and ordinances;
17. Typical cross sections ef-for all majorarterial, collector, and local
streets, public or private, within the proposed SRA;
TAL#528665.4 43
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
18. Agreements, provisions, or covenants which govern the use,
maintenance, and continued protection of the SRA and any of its common
areas or facilities;
19. Development commitments for all infrastructure and related
matters;
20. When determined necessary to adequately assess the compatibility
of proposed uses within the SRA to existing land uses, their relationship to
agriculture uses, open space, recreation facilities, or to assess requests
for deviations from the Design Criteria standards, the C nity
tic _ _ _ _ • _ _ • • e • ••: • _ _ _ • ___ • e ••••._ - _ Administrator or
his designee may request schematic architectural drawings (floor plans,
elevations, perspectives) for all proposed structures and improvements, as
app ropriate;i arid;
21. Development Document amendment provisionsi7 and,
22. Documentation or attestation of professional credentials of
individuals preparing the development document.
I. DRI Master Plan. If applicable, the DRI master plan shall be included as
part of the SRA Designation Application. The DRI master plan shall identify the
location of the SRA being designated, and any previously designated SRAs
within the DRI.
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 Chapter 163.3177 (11), F.S. and OJ-5.006(5)(I). 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 Future Land Use Element. The base residential density is
calculated by dividing the total number of residential units in a SRA by the overall
area therein. The base residential density does not restrict net residential density
of parcels within a 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 Overlay-District have
been established in the Goals Objectives and Policies of the Rural Lands
Stewardship 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 following
charactoristiccdesign criteria:
TAL#528665.4 44
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
Collier County RLSA Overlay
Stewardship Receiving Area Characteristics
Typical Characteristics Town` Village Hamlet Compact Rural Development
Size(Gross Acres) 1,000-4,000 acres 100-1,000 acres** 40-100 acres** 100 Acres or less** Greater Than 100 Acres**
Residential Units(DUs)per gross 1-4 DUs per gross acre*** 1-4 DUs per gross acre*** 1/2-2 DU per gross acre*** 1/2-2 DU per gross acre** 1-4 DUs per gross acre***
acre base density
Full range of single family and Diversity of single family and multi Single Family^n,i lin-iired,, iii. Cin0le Family and limned multi. Cingle Farr,ly and limned multi-
Residential Housing Styles multi-family housing types,styles, family housing types,styles,lot family family**** family"'*
lot sizes sizes
Retail&Office-.5 Retail&Office-.5 Retail&Office-.5 Rzrail R Offira..5 Rptail a()Hire..5
Civic/Governmental/Institution-.6 Civic/Governmental/Institution-.6 ri,rir
rrO,', men ral/in.,ir,dirsn-.6 rivir/amfarnmanralrincrih,Hnn..6 rivi/rinvarnmental/Incrih,tinn-.6
Maximum Floor Area Ratio or LOWnfarruringn ighr Industrial- Gsoup-tiousing-.45 pro„p u0„a;n0-.45 f;rn,p Rnusing..45 rrn„_,___r u_„„siiar,..45
Intensity .45
fang Hnueing-.45 T, -, ienr i nnging,.26 upa net T,Tr-noi.nTpi ndninr+.,i„n-26 upa net Tranrienr I 50iny-26 upa net Trnnrient l ni15ing-26 upa net
T _d -26 upa net
Town Center with Community and
Neighborhood Goods and Village Center with NeighborhoodVillage Center with Neighborhood
Services in Town and Village Convenience Goods and Convenience Goods and
Goods and Services in Village Goods and Services in Village
Services:Minimum 10 SF gross Services:Minimum 10 SF gross
Goods and Services Centers:Minimum 65 SF gross Centers:Minimum 25 SF gross Centers:Minimum 25 SF gross
building area per DU;Corparaie building area per DU building area per DU
building area per DU building area per DU
fff' t,Aafart n andin
I ht
lnd,istdal
Individual Well and Septic Individual Well and Septic
Centralized or decentralized Centralized or decentralized System;renrralizzd Or System;ranrralized nr Centralized or decentralized
Water and Wastewater community treatment system community treatment systems rlarentralizerl corm-minify riar.nrrali,ed comm„niry community treatment systems
trearmenr vysrQ” armenr system
Inrarim well and Ceprir Interim well anti Ceprir Interim well and Carter
Parks&Public Green Spaces w/n Public Green Space for Public Green Space for Parks&Public Green Spaces w/n
Community Parks(200 SF/DU) Neighborhoods(minimum 1%of Neighborhoods(minimum 1%of Neighborhoods(minimum 1%of Neighborhoods(minimum 1%of
gross acres) gross acres) gross acres) gross acres)
Parks&Public Green Spaces w/n Arrive R.r.aarinn/f:nlf Cnur,ac Active-Ele.creationlfsgitCourses.a,-r,,
Neighborhoods
Lakes Lakes
Recreation and Open Spaces Open Space Minimum 35%of
A R rr if r Open Space Minimum 35%of
SRA SRA
/” Lakes
Open Space Minimum 35%of
SRA
Wide Range of Services- Moderate Range of Services- LMerierate Rang.of Szn,ices-
I imimfi 5enfic.S- I imirad 5zrfioac
minimumip SF/r4 t
Civic,Governmental and minimum 15 SF/DU minimum 10 SF/DU;
Institutional ServicesPre-u rhro,igh Flamenrary Pre-v through Elementary Pre-u through Elementary
Fill Rana of Crhnnlc F„II Rana of 0ziio is Crhool, Crh001c CChOnlc
Auto-interconnected system of Auto-interconnected system ofAuto-interconnected system of
Auto-interconnected system of Auto-interconnected system of
collector and local roads;required collector and local roads;required collector and local roads;required
local roads local roads
connection to collector or arterial connection to collector or arterial connection to collector or arterial
Transportation Interconnected sidewalk and
Interconnected sidewalk and Interconnected sidewalk and Pedestrian Pathways Pedestrian Pathways
pathway system pathway system pathway system
County Transit Access Fn .ct'nTra,WWFri mctn',n Trail, Fq',aerre.n Tails EAuesrriar !s
Co,mry Transit Arra, rminty Transit Arras,..
*-Towns are prohibited within the ACSC,per policy 4.7.1 of the Goals,Objectives,and Policies.
**-Villages,Hamlets,and Compact Rural Developments within the ACSC are sublect to location and size limitations,per policy 4.20,and are sublect 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-family residential uses shall include proportionate support services.
I lrvi.rlinaa uses are not required uses.
2. Town Design Criteria. [Reserved]
3. Village Design Criteria. [Reserved]
4. Hamlet Design Criteria. [Reserved]
5. CRD Design Criteria. [Reserved]
6. Design Criteria Common to SRAs.
TAL#528665.4 45
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
a. Development can only be sited on lands with a Natural
Resource Index rating of 1.2 or less, except as otherwise provided
for in Policy 4.9 of the RLSA Overlay .
b. Lands with a Natural Resource Index rating greater than 1.2
must be preserved as open space and maintained in a
predominantly naturally vegetated state except for the siting of
conditional use essential services and governmental essential
services necessary to serve permitted uses and for public safety.
c. A minimum of 35% of the SRA land designated as Town or
Village shall be kept in open space.
d. SRA design shall demonstrate that ground water table draw
down or diversion will not adversely impact the adjacent FSA, HSA,
WRA or conservation land. Detention and control elevations shall
be established to protect such natural areas and be consistent with
surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables.
e. Where a SRA adjoins a FSA, HSA, WRA or existing public or
private conservation land delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map,
best management and planning practices shall be applied to
minimize adverse impacts to such lands.
f. The perimeter of each SRA shall be designed to provide a
transition from higher density and intensity uses within the SRA to
lower density and intensity uses on adjoining property. The edges
of SRAs shall be well defined and designed to be compatible with
the character of adjoining property. Techniques such as, but not
limited to setbacks, landscape buffers, and recreation/open space
placement may be used for this purpose.
g. Where existing agricultural activity adjoins a SRA, the design
of the SRA must take this activity into account to allow for the
continuation of the agricultural activity and to minimize any conflict
between agriculture and SRA uses.
h. Open space within or contiguous to a SRA shall be used to
provide a buffer between the SRA and any adjoining FSA, HSA, or
existing public or private conservation land delineated on the RLSA
Overlay Map. Open space contiguous to or within 300 feet of the
boundary of a FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation
land may include: natural preserves, lakes, golf courses provided
no fairways or other turf areas are allowed within the first 200 feet,
passive recreational areas and parks, required yard and set-back
areas, and other natural or man-made open space. Along the west
boundary of the FSAs and HSAs that comprise Camp Keais Strand,
i.e., the area south of Immokalee Road, this open space buffer shall
be 500 feet wide and shall preclude golf course fairways and other
turf areas within the first 300 feet.
TAL#528665.4 46
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
T i. Where a WRA is incorporated into the stormwater system of
an SRA, the provisions of Section 2.2.27.9.A.4.b. apply.
•- . - - - • - - - -. - - - •• - -
•
- e e - - - _ - ` - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- --
a. Doviationc roquostod as part of the SRA Designation
87. Infrastructure Required. A SRA shall have adequate
infrastructure available to serve the proposed development, or such
infrastructure must be provided concurrently with the demand as identified
in Division 3.15 of the LDC. The level of infrastructure provided will
depend on the type of development, accepted civil engineering practices,
and the requirements of this Section.
a. The capacity of infrastructure serving the SRA must be
demonstrated during the SRA designation process in accordance
with the - e •- - - - - e • - - -Systemprovisions in Division 3.15 of the LDC in effect at the time of
SRA designation.
b. Infrastructure to be analyzed will includes facilities for
transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water,
stormwater management, and solid waste.
c. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater
utilities are required in Towns, Villages, and those CRDs exceeding
100 acres in size. Centralized or decentralized community water
and wastewater utilities shall be constructed, owned, operated and
maintained by a private utility service, the developer, a Community
Development District, other special districts the Immokalee Water
Sewer Service District, Collier County;Water and Sewer District, or
other governmental entity. This Section shall not prohibit innovative
alternative water and wastewater treatment systems such as
decentralized community treatment systems provided that they
meet all applicable regulatory criteria.
d. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems,
limited to a maximum of 100 acres of any Town, Village or CRD of
100 acres are permitted on an interim basis until services from a
centralized/decentralized community system are available.
e. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems are
permitted in Hamlets and may be permitted in CRDs of 100 acres
or less in size.
TAL#528665.4 47
f
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
t". 8. Requests for Deviations from the LDC. The SRA Development
Document may provide for deviations from the LDC, provided:
a. The deviations are consistent with and further the RLSA Overlay
and the RLSA District Regulations; and,
b. 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 Chapter 163.3177 (11), F.S. and 9J-5.006(5)(1L).
K. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessments. Impact assessments are
intended to evaluate-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 amity neutrality requirements of the
SRA as required in Section 2.2.2710.14 L. Impact assessments shall be
prepared in the following infrastructure areas:
1. Transportation. A transportation impact assessment meeting the
requirements of Section 2.7.3 of the LDC, or its successor regulation or
procedure, shall be prepared by the applicant as component of an Impact
Assessment Report that is submitted as part of a SRA Designation
Application package.
a. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses
required above, the transportation impact assessment shall
specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the following issues
related to the adjacent highway network:
(1) Impacts to the level of service of adjacent impacted
roadways and intersections, comparing the proposed SRA to
the impacts of conventional Baseline Standard development;
(2) Effect(s) of new roadway facilities planned as part of the
SRA Master Plan on the surrounding transportation system,
and;
(3) Impacts to agri-transport issues, especially the farm-to-
market movement of agricultural products.
b. The transportation impact assessment, in addition to
considering the impacts on the adjacont highway system, shall also
consider public transportation (transit) and bicycle and pedestrian
issues to the extent applicable.
c. No SRA shall be approved unless the transportation impact
assessment required by this Section has demonstrated through
data and analysis that the capacity of County/State collector or
arterial road(s) serving the SRA to be adequate to serve the
TAL#528665.4 48
c
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
intended SRA uses in accordance with Division 3.15 of the LDC the
_ _ •_ _ _ _ — e ' -- = •- _ _ _ _ _ _ = •• in effect at the
time of SRA designation.
2. Potable Water. A potable water assessment shall be prepared by
the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is
submitted as part of a SRA Designation Application package. The
assessment shall illustrate how the applicant will conform to either FAC
Chapter 64E-6, for private and limited use water systems, or FAC Chapter
62-555 for Public Water Systems. In addition to the standard
requirements of the analyses required above, the potable water
assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the
disposal of waste products, if any, generated by the proposed treatment
process. The applicant shall identify the sources of water proposed for
potable water supply.
3. Irrigation Water. An irrigation water assessment shall be prepared
by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is
submitted as part of a SRA Designation Application package. The
assessment shall quantify the anticipated irrigation water usage expected
at the buildout of the SRA. The assessment shall identify the sources of
water proposed for irrigation use and shall identify proposed methods of
water conservation.
4. Wastewater. A wastewater assessment shall be prepared by the
applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is
submitted as part of a SRA Designation Application package. The
assessment shall illustrate how the applicant will conform to either
Standards for Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems, contained
in State of Florida in Chapter 64E6, F.A.C. for systems having a capacity
not exceeding 10,000 gallons per day or Chapter 62-600, F.A.C. for
wastewater treatment systems having a capacity greater than 10,000
gallons per day. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses
required above, the wastewater assessment shall specifically consider, to
the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products generated by the
proposed treatment process.
5. Solid Waste. A solid waste assessment shall be prepared by the
applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is
submitted as part of a SRA Designation Application package. The
assessment shall identify the means and methods for handling,
transporting and disposal of all solid waste generated including but not
limited to the collection, handling and disposal of recyclables and
horticultural waste products. The applicant shall identify the location and
remaining disposal capacity available at the disposal site.
6. Stormwater Management. A stormwater management impact
assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an
Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as a part of a SRA
TAL#528665.4 49
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
Designation Application Package. The stormwater management impact
assessment shall, at a minimum, provide the following information:
a. An exhibit showing the boundary of the proposed SRA
including the following information:
(1) The location of any WRA delineated within the SRA;
(2) A generalized representation of the existing stormwater
flow patterns across the site including the location(s) of
discharge from the site to the downstream receiving waters;
(3) The land uses of adjacent-adjoining properties and, if
applicable, the locations of stormwater discharge into the site
of the proposed SRA from the adjacont adioininq properties.
b. A narrative component to the report including the following
information:
(1) The name of the receiving water or, if applicable, FSA or
WRA to which the stormwater discharge from the site will
ultimately outfall;
(2) The peak allowable discharge rate (in cfs/ acre) allowed
for the SRA per Collier County Ordinance 90-10 or its
successor regulation;
(3) If applicable, a description of the provisions to be made
to accept stormwater flows from surrounding properties into,
around, or through the constructed surface water management
system of the proposed development;
(4) The types of stormwater detention areas to be
constructed as part of the surface water management system
of the proposed development and water quality treatment to
be provided prior to discharge of the runoff from the site.
(5) If a WRA has been incorporated into the stormwater
management system of an SRA, the report shall demonstrate
compliance with provisions of Section 2.2.27.9.A.4.b.
7. Groundwater. A groundwater impact assessment shall be
prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment
Report that is submitted as a part of a SRA Designation Application
Package. The groundwater impact assessment shall, at a minimum,
provide the following information, as applicable:
a. The proposed water sources for the consumptive uses within
the proposed SRA site (e.g. irrigation demands, potable water
demands, lake recharge, etc.);
b. The measures to be undertaken during development of the
proposed SRA to provide assurances that dewatering activities
performed during lake excavation, utility construction, and other
construction activities will not adversely affect the existing water
TAL#528665.4 50
G
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
�, use rights of either adjacent developments or adjacent agricultural
operations and also will not cause drawdown in any adjacent FSA,
HSA, WRA, or conservation area;
c. The types of uses proposed within the SRA that may
potentially produce or utilize in their operation possible sources of
contaminants to the groundwater. A reporting of the best
management practices to be implemented to protect the
groundwater from contamination as a result of these uses shall also
be provided, if applicable.
L. SRA Economic Assessment. An Economic Assessment meeting the
requirements of this Section shall be prepared and submitted as part of the SRA
Designation Application Package. At a minimum, the analysis shall consider the
following public facilities and services: transportation, potable water, wastewater,
irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, law enforcement,
emeraencv medical services, fire, and schools. Development phasing and
funding mechanisms shall address any adverse impacts to adopted minimum
levels of service pursuant to the — e - • — - -- e •- " - - - - - -
SystemDivision 3.15 of the LDC.
1. Demonstration of Fiscal Neutrality. Each SRA must
demonstrate that ' its development, as a
whole will be fiscally neutral or positive to the Collier County tax base, at
•� the end of each phase, or every five (5) years, whichever occurs first,and
in the horizon year (build-out). This demonstration will be made for each
unit of government responsible for the services listed in this Section
2.2.27.8.K., using one of the following methodologies:
a. Collier County Fiscal Impact Model. The fiscal impact
model officially adopted and maintained by Collier County.
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. The model methodology
will be consistent with the Fiscal Impact Analysis Model ("FIAM")
developed by the State of Florida or with Burchell et al., 1994,
Development Assessment Handbook (ULI).
The BCC may grant exceptions to this policy of fiscal neutrality to
accommodate affordable or workforce housing.
2. Monitoring Requirement. To assure fiscal neutrality,the
developer of the SRA shall generate submit to Collier County a fiscal
impact analysis report ("Report") at the end of each phase of the
development project,or every five years,whichever comes first. The
Report will provide a fiscal impact analysis of the project in accord with the
a-� methodology outlined above.
TAL#528665.4 51
4
Staff Draft
4/17/2003 5:05 PM
3. Imposition of Special Assessments in the event of negative
fiscal impact. If the Report identifies a negative fiscal impact of the
project to a unit of local government referenced above, the landowner will
accede to a special assessment on his property to offset such a shortfall
or in the alternative make a lump sum payment to the unit of local
government equal to the present value of the estimated shortfall for a
period covering the previous phase (or five year interval). The BCC may
grant a waiver to accommodate affordable housing.
4. Special Tax-Districts Encouraged in SRAs. The use of
community development districts (CDDs), Municipal Service Betterment
Benefit Units (MSBUs), Municipal Service Taxing Units (MSTUs), or other
special taxing districts shall be encouraged in SRAs. When formed, the
special districts shall encompass all of the land designated for
development in the SRA. Subsequent to formation, the special taxiRg
district will enter into an Interlocal agreement with the County to assure
fiscal neutrality. As outlined above, if the monitoring reveals a shortfall of
net revenue, the special taxing district will impose the necessary remedial
assessment on lands in the SRA.
2.2.27.911. Baseline Standards. [Reserved]
TAL#528665.4 52