Loading...
EAC Agenda 08/06/2003 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA August 6,2003 9:00 A.M. REVISED Commission Boardroom W.Harmon Turner Building(Building"F")—Third Floor I. Roll Call II. Approval of Agenda III. Approval of July 2,2003 Meeting Minutes IV. New Business: A. Land Development Code Amendments(Clam Nursery Amendment) V. Land Use Petitions A. Conditional Use No.CU-2002-AR-3537 "Stewart Earthmining" Section 19,Township 46 South,Range 29 East B. Commercial Excavation EX-2002-AR-3537 "Stewart Earthmining" Section 19,Township 46 South,Range 29 East C. Planned Unit Development Amendment No.PUDZ-2002-AR-3158 "Coconilla" Section 17,Township 48 South,Range 25 East D. Planned Unit Development Amendment No.PUDZ-2003-AR-3860 "Artesa Pointe" Section 3,Township 51 South,Range 26 East E. Planned Unit Development No.PUDZ-2002-AR-3495 "Wentworth Estates PUD" Sections 29,30,31 &32,Township 50 South,Range 26 East,and Section 5,Township 51 South,Range 26 East F. Excavation Permit No.EX-2002-AR-3112 "Golden Gate Quarry" Section 21,Township 49 South,Range 27 East VI. Old 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 August 1,2003 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. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA August 6,2003 9:00 A.M. Commission Boardroom W.Harmon Turner Building(Building"F")—Third Floor I. Roll Call II. Approval of Agenda III. Approval of July 2,2003 Meeting Minutes IV. New Business: A. Land Development Code Amendments(Clam Nursery Amendment) V. Land Use Petitions A. Conditional Use No. CU-2002-AR-3537 "Stewart Earthmining" Section 19,Township 46 South,Range 29 East B. Planned Unit Development Amendment No.PUDZ-2002-AR-3158 "Coconilla" Section 17,Township 48 South,Range 25 East C. Planned Unit Development Amendment No.PUDZ-2003-AR-3860 "Artesa Pointe" Section 3,Township 51 South,Range 26 East D. Planned Unit Development No.PUDZ-2002-AR-3495 "Wentworth Estates PUD" Sections 29,30,31 &32,Township 50 South,Range 26 East,and Section 5,Township 51 South,Range 26 East E. Excavation Permit No.EX-2002-AR-3112 "Golden Gate Quarry" Section 21,Township 49 South,Range 27 East VI. Old 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 August 1,2003 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. July 2, 2003 ,y 4 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Board Meeting Room, 3rd Floor,Administration Building 3301 Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 9:00 AM July 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: Tom Sansbury Alexandra Ellis Ken Humiston William Hughes Alfred Gal Ed Carlson Erica Lynne(left at 9:55 AM) Collier County Staff: Patrick White, Bill Lorenz,Barb Burgeson, Stan Chrzanowski, Stephen Lenberger, Marjorie Student r-� Page 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Wednesday, July 2, 2003 AGENDA ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA July 2,2003 9:00 A.M. Commission Boardroom W. Harmon Turner Building(Building "F")—Third Floor Roll Call II. Approval of Agenda III. Approval of June 4,2003 Meeting Minutes IV. Solid Waste Program Overview 0' V. Land Use Petitions A. Planned Unit Development Amendment No.PUDZ-2002-AR-2944 "Royal Palm Academy"-Section 13,Township 48 South,Range 25 East B. Planned Unit Development Amendment No. PUDZ-2003-AR-3605 "Botanical Place"-Section 14,Township 50 South,Range 25 East C. Planned Unit Development Amendment No. PUDZ-2002-AR-3158 "Coconilla"-Section 17,Township 48 South,Range 25 East D. Conditional Use No.CU-2002-AR-3537 "Stewart Earthmining"-Section 19,Township 46 South,Lange 29 East VI. Old Business: VII. New Business: A. Consideration to schedule a separate meeting date in October to hear the Cycle 3 LDC amendments VIII. Council Member Comments IX. Public Comments X. Adjournment ****************************************************************************** *** Council M embers: P lease notify the Environmental Services Department A dministrative Assistant no later than 5:00 p.m. on June 27, 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. a July 2,2003 I. Roll. Call -The meeting was called to order at 9:05 AM. A quorum was established. Members: Alexandra Santoro, Tom Sansbury, Ken Humiston, William Hughes, Alfred Gal, Ed Carlson, Erica Lynne -Michael Sorrell and Michael Coe had excused absences. -Erica Lynne noted that she would need to leave the meeting—10:00AM. Collier County Staff: Patrick White, Bill Lorenz, Barb Burgeson, Stan Chrzanowski, Stephen Lenberger, Marjorie Student II. Approval of Agenda -At the request of the petitioner item 5C, "Coconilla", was rescheduled for the August meeting of the EAC. III. Approval of June 4, 2003 meeting minutes -Mr. Carlson moved to approve the minutes of June 4, 2003 as written. It was seconded by Alexandra Ellis. All were in favor; the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. IV. Solid Waste Program Overview -Denise Kirk, Waste Reduction and Recycling Manager—Waste Management Department, gave a PowerPoint presentation to the committee. (Copies of the presentation were not provided to the court reporter). The various parts of the solid waste management operations are collections, disposal & landfill operations, yard waste processing, recycling centers, outside contractors, environmental compliance, operational permitting,public education, and customer service. There are three recycling center drop offs for businesses and residences. The county has contracts with Waste Management and Immokalee disposal. The integrated solid waste management includes the disposal of solid and hazardous waste: the Naples landfill, Immokalee landfill, hazardous waste disposal and the hazardous waste infrastructure. The Naples landfill currently has available line-capacity until May 2005; 15+years to be updated annually by air surveys. Immokalee landfill is scheduled for closure in 2004, at which point it will be converted to n a waste transfer station and a recycling center. Future landfill options are existing cell Page 2 July 2, 2003 remediation or alternative waste processing methods,which are being researched. Some of the methods being researched are clean gasification,pyrloysis, and converting landfill gas into energy. The county is in the process of permitting and building artificial reefs made out of construction and demolition debris. 100%of the construction and demolition materials are diverted. Increased recycling and waste reduction efforts are diversion efforts to extend the life of the landfill. —98% of the 70,000 yard waste per year collected in Collier County is reused as slide slope erosion control or is composted by R&D Soil Builders. The Solid Waste Management Department and Waste Reduction Team provides educational presentations to the community, as well as residential composting presentations. The Waste Management process has cleaned wood-ways to create marketable, valuable mulch. In March 2002 the county began working with Immokalee disposal and Waste Management to increase the participation in Multi-family recycling; this has created the probability of the diversion of -24 tons of recyclables per week. In order to spread the word on recycling the Waste Management Department has a multi-media public education campaign. The department is in the process of creating an education center at the Naples Recycling center. This will be used by schools and other community groups. Public drop off points for cardboard recycling are very well utilized. The department has a tire grant from the state, which they usually receive yearly. This grant is used to resurface playgrounds, walkways, etc... The department also received a $50,000 grant from DEP to begin their electronics recycling program in July 2001. Since this time, they have collected 117, 418 lbs of electronics for recycling. As directed by the BCC the department is currently working with businesses in the community to encourage recycling. The non-residential recycling ordinance is currently pending. Staff has visited 150 businesses and performed follow up phone contacts to see how effective the visits are. The DEP state figures report that 60% of the municipal solid waste taken to the landfills is generated by businesses. -Alexandra Ellis asked when curbside recycling would be available for businesses. Denise Kirk informed her that residential curbside recycling is franchised through the two haulers, but businesses have an "open"business decision as to which hauler they choose. Page 3 - July 2, 2003 -Mr. Hughes asked if solvents were collected at the recycling centers. Denise Kirk informed him that they are not. Mr. Hughes then asked if the collected paints were contained. Gary Morocco replied that they are contained. -Mr. Carlson asked where the waste would go once the Immokalee center is closed. Mr. Morocco stated that it would be transferred to the Naples landfill. -Mr. Carlson asked what the county would do when the Naples landfill is full. Mr. Morocco stated that they are looking into gasification and other programs. Currently they have 20 years of air space. The department is also considering diverting 120 tons per year of solid waste, which would bring them up to 25 years of air space. Another option is to raise elevation. -Mr. Sansbury asked if anyone was considering the resource recovery operations. Mr. Morocco stated that incineration is not being considered. Mr. Sansbury felt that Palm Beach County would be a good place to do a study on the benefits and disadvantages of resource recovery operations. Public Speakers A) Bob Krasowski,Zero Waste Collier County Group, stated that they have been active on the solid waste management issue for the last 15 years. He noted the possibility of a pyrloysis operation in Collier County. This operation is one form of incineration, and there are concerns about emissions. Mr. Krasowski stated that he would email the committee website links that discussed the various concerns and scientific studies on pyrloysis. He added that Collier County has increased their recycling efforts since 2000 and now has a good infrastructure of personnel and abilities. Mr. Krasowski felt that if the county maximizes potentials for recycling and diversion from the landfill, then they could avoid the need for a pyrloysis facility. Mr. Krasowski stated that they have been asking the BCC to bring in some of the experts, who spoke at the zero waste workshop, to do a comparative analysis for the county. B) Ralph Brookes asked about the use of open burn flames to burn the gas out of the landfill. He explained that there was a company willing to pay all the expenses of this process in order to convert the gas into energy. He also asked if any confirmation had Page 4 July 2, 2003 been made that ground water near the landfill had not been violated and if there was a current monitoring program to ensure this. -Mr. Morocco stated that there is a current monitoring program and that they are in compliance with all the groundwater standards. Mr. Morocco added that they have been considering the option of the recovery of the landfill gas, but nothing has been decided at this point. -Mr. Carlson asked if the discharged effluent was being tested during high periods of rainfall. Mr. Morocco stated that it was and added that the stormwater and the leech-aide are also tested. -Mr. Hughes asked how much cubic feet of gas was being released per day. Mr. Morocco stated between 1400 and 1500 cubic feet per day. C)John Mansika,Zero Waste Collier County Group, stated that they are looking at gasification and they feel that it does not work. Rather than spending the money to further consider this option or educate others on it, Mr. Mansika agreed with Mr. Krasowski that the money should go to bringing in the experts, who could do a i"-• comparative analysis. He requested that the EAC review the videotapes of the zero waste program workshop. -Erica Lynne asked if there was any movement on charging residents based on the amount of curbside garbage. Denise Kirk stated that they are investigating this. Mr. Krasowski stated that this is one of the key strategies of the zero waste program. -The EAC committee decided that they would like to review the zero waste workshop videotapes and the videotapes in use by the county. They decided to circulate them through the committee members and review the tapes individually. Mr. White stated that this was fine as long as the committee members did not discuss the tapes until an EAC meeting where this item would be placed on the agenda. Denise Kirk stated that they would gather the tapes and distribute them among the committee members. V. Land Use Petitions A) Planned Unit Development Amendment No. PUDZ-2002-AR-2944 "Royal Palm Academy" Page 5 } July 2, 2003 Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East -There were no disclosures reported. -The court reporter swore in all those who were testifying. -Wayne Arnold, Grady Minor Engineering, introduced his team for this project. The project is located west of the existing Royal Palm Academy campus. The existing academy is—10 acres. The project site is —162.7 acres and they are proposing a mixed- use project that would consist of a K-12 private academy, as well as residential components. Mr. Arnold used the masterplan to point out the residential components, access points to Livingston road, 50 acres of campus facilities, and the preserve areas. The county Transportation Department asked that the applicant make provisions for an easement that would connect to Madira's easement. Mr. Arnold pointed out the location of the easement and stated that their intent was to provide access to their residential tracts and not to impact the wetlands, until such time that the county chose to permit the public road network. There are—84 acres of jurisdictional wetlands on the site,most of which are infested with Brazilian Pepper and Malucca and impacted by the road extension. 40 acres of preserve are being set aside on the site, which fulfill and exceed the native vegetation/retention requirement. All mitigation for the impacts will be on-site. Mr. Arnold noted that language was placed in this document to allow the 25 feet setbacks from principal structures to be reduced to 20 feet setbacks. In these locations, they demonstrated to staff that this change will work and there will be no impacts to the vegetation. In regards to Water Management: they will create a flow-way system that is approximately 50 ft wide and they will be taking a small upland area and creating a filter marsh system. -Fred Reischl, Planning Services, stated that this project was found to be consistent with the GMP and compatible with neighboring uses. -Stan Chrzanowski stated that in Section 6.6.A, where it reads: "...of the applicable permits and plans which have been approved by Southwest Florida Water Management District will be provided..."they will now underline the new language: "...plans which have been approved by Southwest Florida Water Management District will be provided...." There were no objections to this. Mr. White added that the text that ^ follows in this recommendation will be inserted as the new capital letter C for 6.C. Page 6 it July 2, 2003 -Mr. Hughes made a motion to approve. It was seconded by Mr. Carlson. All were in favor of the motion; the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. B) Planned Unit Development Amendment No. PUDZ-2003-AR-3605 "Botanical Place" Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 25 East -There were no disclosures reported. -The court reporter swore in all those who were testifying. -At 10:03 AM a five minute recess was taken. -Jeff Davidson, Davidson Engineering, stated that this is an affordable housing project located on Bayshore Drive. The site is-20 acres. The water management system will be mainly in the preserve area. There is a ditch on the east side of the project which will collect the outfall from the site and then the water will flow into Henderson Creek. -Mr. Carlson asked if the preserve area was serving as a retention area for another project. Mr. Davidson stated that it was set up this way to meet the native vegetation requirement. There are also some small lakes located on the front side of the project that will be part of the water management system. Mr. Carlson stated that this was unusual and asked if it was because the project needed very little fill. Mr. Davidson stated that the owner of the property has the fill from the Botanical Gardens south of the project. -Geza Wass de Czega, Southern Biomes, stated that this is a small site completely isolated by development and canals. The site has a dense stand of heavy Malucca on the west-side, a Java Palm infested Pine Cypress area that extends through the middle of the site, and a mixture of Pine, Palmetto, & Brazilian Pepper on the sides. There is evidence that the site may have been cleared at one time; approximately 30-40 years ago. The applicant proposed the preserve area in the center of the site because it works with the plan and contains the best wetlands,which will provide potential for restoration. The dense Malucca areas will be- 100%cleared and re-vegetated with native vegetation. -Ray Bellows clarified that there are 218 units proposed for this project and 64 units will be affordable housing units. -Alexandra Ellis made a motion to approve. Mr. Carlson seconded the motion. All were in favor of the motion; the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Page 7 __ I July 2, 2003 C) Planned Unit Development Amendment No. PUDZ-2202-AR-3158 "Coconilla" Section 17, Township 48 South Range 25 East -At the request of the petitioner this item was rescheduled for the August Meeting. D) Conditional Use No. CU-2002-AR-3537 "Stewart Earthmining" Section 19,Township 46, Range 29 East -There were no disclosures reported. -The court reporter swore in all those who were testifying. -Stan Chrzanowski,Development Review Department, located the project on a map. Mr. Chrzanowski stated that the project is in a Citrus Grove area, near Blueberry fields, and farming activities. The site is away from "signs of civilization". The petitioner intends to dig a 200 acre lake on—220 acres of land. This leaves a—50ft perimeter or buffer on the outside edge. Mr. Chrzanowski stated that the petitioner wants to dig to a depth of 85ft. He explained that the LDC uses the"fetch formula", which is based on the distance that wind blows across the surface of a lake, builds up a wave, and causes the lake to overturn. As you go deeper in the lake, the colder water is denser and the wind overturn cannot overcome this density. These conditions are known as chemo-klines and thermo-klines. In this type of situation the top of the lake will overturn, but not the bottom of the lake. The "fetch formula"is designed to allow the entire lake to overturn. The petitioner will be attempting to prove that this factor is not important. Mr. Chrzanowski stated that the Water Management District informed him that there were lakes in Lee County that were 95-100ft deep. -Alexandra Ellis asked what an acceptable depth would be for this project if the"fetch formula"was used. Mr. Chrzanowski informed her that it would be—50ft. -Pamela Stewart,representing Stewart Mining Industries, stated that the LDC says that depths must be 20 feet, or in accordance with the fetch formula or the petitioner must do a comparative quality water study that proves the proposed depth will not have a detrimental effect on the groundwater resources in the surrounding area. Stewart Earthmining chose to prove that there would be no detrimental effects and proposed a lake depth of—85ft. Brian Bowman, associate professor of agricultural engineering at the Page 8 July 2, 2003 University of Florida, and Freddie Langford, President of Langford Aquatics were present to give presentations that showed that there would be no detrimental effects from an 85ft deep lake. -Freddie Langford used various photos and charts to demonstrate the quality of water in lakes created by the excavation of sand. (Copies of the photos and charts were not provided to the court reporter.) Mr. Langford referenced a photo of a sand lake that had been created by the excavation of sand. The lake was a 10 year old lake, the grade of sand had a quality of grade 1, the visibility was 112 inches, and there were no algae or plant life growing. He explained that the biggest influence on water quality in a lake is from the water that runs into the lake. The run-off that will enter the proposed lake will be filtered through the sand. Mr. Langford believed that since the runoff flowed through the grade 1 sand rather than soil, the lake would have excellent water quality,just as the 10 year old sand lake. He added that there was no difference in water quality of a 50ft or 100ft deep lake because the water quality is determined at the surface level. He stated that there will be no detrimental effects of the proposed lake to the groundwater. -Mr. Gal asked if the 4/1 slope would change if they dug an 85f1 deep lake instead of a 50ft deep lake. Jeff Davidson, engineer for the project, stated that typically lakes had a slope of 4/1 for 3ft and then 2/1 beyond that. He added that there is no change to the slopes based on the depth of the lake. -Mr. Carlson asked where the referenced 10 year old sand lake was located. Mr. Langford informed him that it was a lake in Polk County, but the nature of the sand is the same as the proposed lake. Mr. Carlson asked if cores of the sand had been done to determine if there was sand 8511 down. Mr. Davidson stated that the cores were done and they have the borings available to show that this is a good location for sand. He added that the sand is primarily to be supplied for beach re-nourishment along the coast. -Mr. Sansbury asked what lives in this type of lake, since there are no nutrients flowing into the lake. Mr. Langford stated that there is an amount of chlorophyll and therefore an amount of phytoplankton and zooplankton. He added that there are small fish in some of the sand lakes, but not fish to the extent that there would be in a more fertile body of water. Page 9 July 2, 2003 -Mr. Carlson stated that the land proposed for the sand excavation has been Orange groves since the 70's. This led Mr. Carlson to believe that there may be different conditions than in the lakes it was being compared to. He was also concerned about ignoring the fetch plan. If the fetch plan needed to be removed from the code or if it needed to be rewritten, then he believed that this was not the committee's decision to make. Based on what he had seen in the presentation, he did not see anything that compelled him to approve the plan under the third option. -Nick Stewart, Stewart Earthmining, stated that there is a central Florida Ridge of high quality sand that runs through Florida. The tail of the ridge is located at the proposed site. He explained that this is very coarse, high grade silica sand that is used in the manufacturing of concrete, mason sands, and beach erosions. The top 15 ft is fine sand that does contain some clay material. Any nutrients that would be in this area would be in the top 15ft and therefore removed as a fill source. This is a dredging operation; it does not require any de-watering. The material would be pumped through a processing plant. n -Mr. Carlson was concerned that there may be clay-lense or aquacludes that could affect the recharge. He noted that the nutrients from surrounding groves would also affect the quality of the lake and its recharge. Mr. Carlson was uncomfortable making a decision on this, since they did not have enough information on the topic and they were not experts in this area. Mr. Humiston noted that he was also concerned about the nutrient recharge, because with no wind blowing across the top layer there will be a gradual gradient where the temperature drops the further down one goes. The cold, dense layer can cause low dissolved oxygen levels on the bottom of the lake. He believed that this was a good basis for the reasoning behind the fetch formula and noted that he would be uncomfortable voting in favor of something that went against it. -Mr. Langford referenced Dr. Reed's book: "Ecology of Inland Waters and Estuaries", which explains that the density gradient is a self perpetuating barrier to the mixing of water. He felt that the information provided, demonstrated that the fetch formula was incorrect. -Mr. Sansbury stated that he was concerned that if they dug that deep, they may"punch" n through something that would have a cause and effect someplace else. He then asked if Page 10 July 2, 2003 this was within the Eastern Lands and if it was an SRA. Fred Reischl stated that it was within the Eastern Lands, but it has not been designated yet. Mr. Sansbury felt that if they built a larger littoral shelf, they may create a"win/win"situation, where the lake could be dug to 85ft and the land will retain developable value in the future. -Mr. Stewart stated that they permit the entire track as-seen,but ultimately this is probably not the way the lake will end up. He explained that they are property owners to the lake and they recognize the back-side value of properties, but they do not want to create the appearance that they are a developer instead of an earth mining business. -Mr. Hughes agreed that test cores needed to be done in the area to check for aquifers and sink-holes. Mr. Hughes then asked the petitioner if he would be willing to donate the property to the county after their primary uses had been completed. Mr. Stewart stated that it may be possible, but he could not say for sure because of what they may add to the tract in the future. Mr. Hughes stated he was alluding to the 20 year plan for fresh water supply for Collier County and the potential for this site to be a reserve emergency water supply. Mr. Carlson noted that if it became a surface water reservoir, it could be dangerous by affecting the water levels of Lake Trafford. He reiterated that this is an example of why they should not be making a decision on this matter without professional studies to follow. -Mr. Carlson asked why staff recommended approval if the fetch formula was"law". Mr. Chrzanowski informed him that there is a third option,which says that if the petitioner can prove that the proposed lake will not degrade the water quality, then it will be allowed. Mr. Chrzanowski added that he spoke with Terry Bengtsson at the Water Management District,who was not concerned about the depth. -Mr. Gal stated that there is no basis to deny the petition because the petitioner presented their side of the story and there was no one saying otherwise. -Mr. Chrzanowski stated that there used to be a Dr. Daniel Jackson on this board and the Dr. Reed, referenced earlier, used some of Dr. Jackson's work in his book. Mr. Chrzanowski asked Dr. Jackson if he had a problem with this and Dr. Jackson would not say that it was a bad thing. Mr. Chrzanowski added that he couldn't find anyone to tell him that it was a bad idea. Page 11 July 2, 2003 -Mr. Carlson and Mr. Humiston felt that the petitioner had not presented a thorough comparative water quality study. Mr. Stewart stated that the closest similar lakes,that were not lakes owned by their competitors, were in Polk County. The 10 year sand lake that they used in their presentation is in Polk County,but it is the closest lake of a comparative nature. -Mr. Sansbury asked about the permitting requirements of the district. Mr. Chrzanowski stated that he did not believe they had a depth requirement, but he noted that this project will have to go through the district for their review. Mr. Stewart added that they also have to receive an environmental resource permit from the state of Florida and they have to get industrial waste permits. -The committee asked Mr. Chrzanowski if they could ask the district to come to the next meeting and discuss this item. Mr. Chrzanowski stated that he could ask them. -Mr. White stated that staff recommendation 7-2, proposes that they waive the excavation permit public hearing. He did not feel that this would be possible, and if they approved this conditional use, they would have to remove this item. Mr. White noted that this change would mean that the excavation permit would come before the committee for further consideration at a public hearing. Mr. Chrzanowski stated that there is no difference between the conditional use and the excavation use, except that the excavation has to notify all the neighboring property owners. The neighbors have had a property owner's meeting. Mr. Chrzanowski asked if the committee wanted him to repeat the notification procedure. Mr. Sansbury felt that the first notification was sufficient. -Mr. Gal made a motion to approve the petition. Public Speakers A) Ralph Brookes stated that although he is not against this mine in particular, they are fighting the deep mines in Lee County. They are fighting the 85-90ft mines on the grounds that they are mining out potential recharge sites for the county aquifers, digging to 100 ft connects the water tables for the superficial water aquifer with the sandstone aquifer, and the blasting done to get to this depth is disturbing the neighbors and their properties. Page 12 July 2, 2003 -Mr. Gal stated that his motion stands,because adjoining landowners were notified,but • did not appear and staff cannot find anyone to oppose this project. Mr. White stated that in section 3.5.22 of the LDC, it says that in order to issue a commercial excavation permit, the division administrator and the EAC must consider and approve it. Mr. White noted that the EAC does not have an excavation permit before them, and this could not be legally sound because it waived the requirements of the LDC. Mr. White believed that in order to approve the permit, they needed to have a subsequent noticed hearing, consider the permit, and then approve or deny it. He noted that they could not waive this requirement, 7-2, so this staff recommendation should not be included in the motion. -Mr. Gal amended his motion to approve the petition with the removal of the stipulation in paragraph 7-2. -Mr. Carlson stated that he did not support the motion because the burden of proof was on the applicant and he did not feel that the applicant provided enough proof for the committee to be comfortable with an approval. -Fred Reischl noted that 5 votes were required to forward the item with a recommendation to the board. If the item does not get five votes, then it is forwarded with no recommendation. Although it is not an official recommendation, staff will inform the BCC of the vote. -Mr. Gal's motion was recalled. There was no second to the motion; the motion failed. -Mr. Carlson made a motion to continue this item to the next meeting, invite representatives of the Southwest Florida Water Management District, the Department of Environmental Protection, and any other agencies involved in the permitting of this project to speak on the matter, and request that staff provide more information and proof that this is as "benign" as the applicant proposes. Mr. Sansbury added that this motion would be with the understanding that there would be two things occurring at the meeting, approval of the petition and the review and approval of the excavation permit. Mr. Humiston seconded the motion. -Mr. White stated that the EAC's meeting must be noticed to the neighbors. He did not feel that the original notice was sufficient. Mr. Carlson amended his motion to include the request that the neighbors be re-notified. Page 13 July 2, 2003 -Mr. Sansbury stated that his employer may own property next to this land and he was not sure whether there was an effect on his employer's property or not. On "the appearance of a conflict", he abstained from the vote. Mr. White provided Mr. Sansbury with the appropriate forms to fill out. -The motion was recalled. The motion passed, 4-1 (Mr. Gal was against the motion and Mr. Sansbury abstained from voting). Mr. White noted that since there were not 5 members in favor of the motion, it would not be forwarded to the BCC as an"official" recommendation. VI. Old Business -There was no old business to discuss. VII. New Business A) Consideration to schedule a separate meeting date in October to hear the Cycle 3 LDC amendments -A separate meeting was set for the third amendment cycle of the LDC on October 6, 2003 in the BCC chambers. VIII. Council Member Comments -There were no council member comments. IX. Public Comments -There were no public comments. X. Adjournment Page 14 July 2, 2003 Ili /^\ ***** -There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:33AM. Collier County Environmental Advisory Committee Chairman Tom Sansbury Page 15 ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE#OR DATE: Cycle 2 2003 LDC PAGE: LDC2:124.26 LDC SECTION: 2.2.34.4. CHANGE: Adding a conditional use section and, more specifically, allowing clam nurseries to be conditional uses in Goodland. REASON: The fishing net ban placed a tremendous hardship on many fisherman. This is a method to spur this rather stagnant industry while creating a minimal impact to the residents. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.2.34.4. Development criteria. The development criteria and standards for each zoning district in Goodland as provided for in this Code shall apply for all uses and structures in this overlay district unless specifically superseded below. 2.2.34.4.1. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in this subdistrict: 2.2.34.4.2. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in this subdistrict: a. Clam nursery, subject to the following restrictions: 1) A "clam nursery" is defined as the growing of clams on a "raceway" or "flow-through saltwater system" on the shore of a lot until the clam reaches a size of approximately one-half inch. p A 1 2) For the purposes of this section, a "raceway" or "flow-through salt water system" is defined as a piece of plywood or similar material fashioned as a table-like flow through system designed to facilitate the growth of clams. 3) At no time may a nursery owner operate a raceway or raceways that exceed a total of 800 square feet of surface area. 4) The nursery must meet the requirements of a"minimal impact aquaculture facility"as defined by the Department of Agriculture. 5) The nursery must not be operated on a vacant lot, unless both of the following requirements are met: i. The vacant lot is owned by the same individual who owns a lot with a residence or habitable structure immediately adjacent to the vacant lot; and ii. The vacant lot must not be leased to another individual for purposes of operating a clam farm within the RSF-4 and VR zoning districts. 6) At no time will a nursery owner be allowed to feed the clams, as the clams will be sustained from nutrients occurring naturally in the water. 7) Only the property owner or individual in control of the property will be allowed to operate a raceway on the shore off his property within the VR and RSF-4 zoning districts. In other words, a landowner must not lease his property to another individual to use for purposes of operating a clam nursery. 8) Any pump or filtration system used in conjunction with the nursery must meet all applicable County noise ordinances and must not be more obtrusive than the average system used for a non-commercial pool or shrimp tank. 2.2.34.4.1. 2.2.34.4.3. Maximum building height. As provided for in the Village Residential zoning district for each permitted, accessory, and conditional use provided that no residential building may contain more than two levels of habitable space. 2.2.34.4.2.2.2.34.4.4. Minimum lot requirements. As provided for in the Village Residential zoning district for each permitted, accessory, and conditional use except for the following: ''� a. Single family/mobile home: f al Minimum lot area: 4,275 square feet. Minimum lot width: 45 feet. 2.2.34.4.3.2.2.34.4.5. Minimum lot requirements. As provided for in the residential single family district(RSF-4) for each permitted, accessory, and conditional use except for the following: a. Minimum lot area: 5,000 square feet. b. Minimum lot width: 50 feet. 2.2.34.4.4.2.2.34.4.6. Minimum yard requirements. As provided for in the residential single family district (RSF-4) for each permitted, accessory, and conditional use except for the following: a. Side yard: Five feet. g q. LI C.-P-1 1;14 ifill ‘1.4 'f)(rN Memorandum To: Participants, LDC Amendment Cycle 2—2003 From: Russell Webb,Planning Services Department Date: July 8,2003 Subject: LDC Amendments for 2003-C cle 2 1. CURRENT DRAFT OF LDC AMENDMENTS THAT WAS DISTRIBUTED TO CCPC IS ATTACHED. 2. ALL STAFF WITH AMENDMENTS IN THIS CYCLE PLAN ON ATTENDING WEDNESDAY'S MEETING(7/16),BCC MEETING ROOM,ADMIN. BUILDING,COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER,5:05 P.M. 3. UPDATED SUMMARY SHEET WITH RESULTS OF DSAC MEETINGS TO DATE IS ATTACHED TO SCHEDULE. FOR QUESTIONS CALL RUSSELL WEBB(403-2322). ARNOLD,M MEYER,ROBIN AUCLAIR,CLAUDINE MOSS,JOHN DAVID BAKER,DENNY MURRAY -- BEDTELYON MURRAY,DARREN(C) BELLOWS NIMNUAN,KRISTIE(C) BENBOW,MELODY(I) PERICO,ED BLAIR,AARON(R) REISCHL BOSI ROYS BROWN,CHRIS RWA-NICOLE BROWN,SUMMER(C.E.) SAWYER,MIKE BURGESON SCHMITT,J. CASELTINE,HELENE(R) SCHNEIDER,DON(R) CHRZANOWSKI SIEMION COHEN,RANDY (R) SMITH,GLENDA DELONY SMITH,RAY DERUNTZ,MICHAEL SOTER DESELEM STRICKLAND,DORA(I) DEVANAS,MARYANN(R) SULECKI,ALEX DUNNUCK,JOHN SWEAT,JASON(C) ERNST VALERA,C. FEDER VIGNARI,MIKE FLAGG WALLACE,BLEU GOCHENAUR WEBB,RUSSELL HADLEY WEBSTER,JEAN HEATH,GLEN(C) WEEKS,D. (C) HEDRICH WUERSTLE,M. HOULDSWORTH YONKOSKY JOHNSON,C -Finalized Copy of Ordinance ONLY JOURDAN,JEAN(C) COLLI,MARIAN-Co.Attny Office KANT,E GRAPHICS—M.Ocheltree KELLY,JOHN SPENCER,BILL KENDALL,M..(C) MULHERE,ROBERT(RWA) LISA KOEHLER FILE KUCK PERMITTING LENBERGER FRONT PLANNER LITSINGER,S. (C) RECORDS DEPT LORENZ,BILL ADDRESSING DEPT MARKS,ANDREW County Attorneys: STUDENT,M./WHITE,P. O J i cn co 3. m 0 c4 c4 Ad .9Oy A fD ~ W m (D CN C) r .: 0 'O O�4 A N '- . •N N m O7 ^t a C. Fr °\ QfE /..".• rA C [J ^' GCtv ro M O. N ? til � nry d W b H .-, 0 CA A) 0 0 r1+• 0 � CD obd � � . o ' �fD e R b ybb ,t1 Do C a W CD Uq°OsCr o . . Det C'-MC `-1 rn N 0o r ° a oa.o o o �O a u cl, z. CD mg C � G a, cr0 n o• O co• O M u �(CD O, co�� w y B. O N ° I. A co y. a• a O CD co. .1 y a. =. w 0 coa. co g. u' C 'C �. o coCD00 CD a m tCo p a. CD opc- 0 F O Fn r� ° f�s.3 0 � coc. 00a. C CD i•-•o 0.• M p=. OL+' W 0 O CD .O�t n n o a Bti' CD co a y 5 0-i n a pa oO C G cr O 10 i o O O O o a CD � CO CD a te0r. oo0 - a ms n+ o n aa .› r n m Y � o � o •, 0 N acp ad o > Cl)0 o< 0 p o. d � a a b ° v00ocD00 b b �� a CD cob CD w Co' < w w S. ay ` (") w a .F .'6 07 C'S x '"' Do g. Cro IZ C) CI = o co a W 0 , y ny Pv i70 00 0 CD vOap N° Oyw ' " d N 9 et 0 G mi, IQ CD • a N n Co QN ... o m Pis.)vi [v pN is..) a CD � � "� ` 41. o' 0 . o ` 0. .. a.er a � o � p < ap r. 0 O v C. O a ( O •^ O CD < 0- < ( 4- < t .T' < •O E . 0 co e O E. << O E . << tttEyyyyyy `< 00 co d a • aro a j 0PO CDto 0 00 C (D p a sCD cm a s arra Gro a s = o 1 w n N n A CD OQ CDD n' -. C W 01.0 co N S. 0 y O n a. r.'co ;2.CDD N ° �' 9 � � as cn O , oa oc � o CA SHo Wa. p p Ca q WO N o ° w m C A-P ..,N00X 0ya5. eat cpa � CD C G ap' a • • CD CD co .� Co s vp . p0 CI a li, a. p O ' Aa 5 t< ~° y '3 vo �. (D o.ao CD el- 06 p 7d C) 0 0 00 CD CD a o CD p 8 ° a P ) CA CD oco nd � ° � o N ° ' o cd vaop at . o • < a o• C OM m A. R. p r) y y d CD WNCD b A l< `0 a' O0 ,1m (Do ° � n .y o ° 0 o CD6 rN c • QaC pU)acmCyQ. S; nCs K N & p 56 6 0 pcJ Y <p .o o a co 0 m Ci)ooa' c y ' c v nr . oo '0c, � � < ff. .8 < 'd" p , szB' g pCDggo o cp ca? sco � E5 " w C0 ocv 3 o o� *e 0 � Baa p b0 n x "•-: (D N Cro tElC) Z CD 13w g. ara co 1 r z r c4 z r an z r an v 4 r - N ao = 0 a O c 0 p O C 0 a P W Cl) to G y. N ET K y' N`< m N`G N y N ` m !! .ACA Co A ' Ato W. cocil Ago WN . b vw1: 5 'C 5' b ',_ b W • • 0 IQ P m P m p to P a+ m cn a ° aaD''ti a. 'b . b s. "c1 . . r, • o.7 CO to 1. nDADro a ° CPI ^ � y .� b Lw B. co � � � ci) CIO wcpz cD co c �. . co co co CA r. (1 CD CA 5- n • m F. f9 OO o C w▪ Da'CDOY " ° W P' vu1. • N y Cil fa. erls .1:3 0. 5. AD fD On tin -ba D D 0. 0 CD 0 A . •l- CPO CD eo CDco n. yG .CD o O R CC(D Q. z. ° g °' ca° s < � a o.o0 wO . � � 0 mae. og � 0 n 'ry . ° R E. Bw'0 ° CD. pD 2,1 .- r. 0O 7c C) co 0 iCD a a an a aCD O a -"Ts CD a •. > orn ° o 'o �CQ CD C,...) 0 > 0 9 ?' FCoW Q' p, c o5�° ° O q 'd O % • t 2 2 < OCr' Cl. . 10 Cn 0 E. P On cD ca c 009. 5' 0- 0OC , CD nCD C < < � i� acm " 00 3a ° n C 'n a• • 0 cr. � n n d a s • r y 0" o By CD co° ab° a �a °Oo co . E.� d N pp = ° dtia < 6-0' f,t cco w . q a, c 5 G O c.) c' n. c0- a' °4 � � � P o .1 0 . i y o a`� ta• CA D cti °' 0c y cocD C p N y EcD a x 0 O o y ep co cb fa. 0 co cr b b co 0 N 7y O '.T 0 '."i n cD cD O w g.'v c�D cD '> 0 w y. 0 0 "c.-0 .0 0 '.� aro n C 't3 �,' �--• CDs3 i "r-.. na. n0- 0 cocD n 0- 0 cD a a y co O :; o w g CIO E' 0. °,� .-t co CD o o o b7 Fr n n a. n .r 0o � o CD n 5 E' aro 1 na. n0. C) x N O a CDD Q. r5. P Cro 0 I t z r cn loo CD loo co 0 to 0 W `•G y N `G cai • �G y N `G P. N y. N n !, n C� d m 4 p C4 m A C/1 0 �a co in b cD b •W co b v .. b s. g. E. p ry p m p w p m m b a' b a. b fl. a. b a. CII Er to r.-, bo to 0d Po, 1. w ni-to iv • cro ea w co 'ti ooA Z. w oc Cl) CM WNJ cra 3 pfo CDNWCN • J Cl) NCoo •n' jn co co coU CDD y co ti H IV C gi g 6 0 () a G a OC o p W g. cD go p o E. a `° �' °a y a' . co Er P E: a Oa 0 � � '� C3.CD Cil O. y r. N 0 CD 7y C7 0o 00 rin et) 0. 0 0 a a. ° ° N2- Q' eD b C/1-isE. aa. cog . Er o a C. oro > ° CD 08 t0o . ° d v'Cfco 5. g B ° ac i CD aQ ° NCl c w 3 POo a onP' ° pN ' y. r R. (DP coo =. ^ 6 g. 5 y N -' R. (D , p • . ( 0. N '" w a o C* to a CD ilHk ouC < < C C dB N • N CA 0 CD ° oco a � �a CD a . . wa C0 on bby 'illU CO 0 = � r CD o 0 A, CD Q. s w • � ne-r° p pv = p a 0 I n C) x '7' o T to g. Oa n n x o (D a 1. CrQ 0 1 i 00 0. ci' d A � tri Cl) pro b C/) z r+ CA o w�C 0O C v - fD o i CD 6. -s c 0 N F.(3 0 r N C3. vii •N CD a O C) c' 0_co 0' O, D\ r.ix C . c V• �\ A 0 C 'tet V� • v, a o. E y N ° b a 7 ON co p M N. a . dr., o o iv I. cco m A m 0 0 C N g CD erg.0 cra eo n cm CAD co,CL w lD AD 000 0A n 00 co ' y CD C coo co A C A R N C) •t Co CA CA ctirA, - on Y cia c` iil p, r' o = Yom• -'0 CDD coo ° YG� o ��rtooE.. p b m o 0 0... a. � A: • � a' aa'. O cfli n o ' p r* w °* o C row g0 crz o. o P2cm0a. ot? 0c. 0 b #' CD W 0 c2) y v� O ° o c y a co , y 2 n w r"' o 0 �c o . c5• ° o .0 .. p Co co 0 •, G "� N n `.G _ CD p� v, N O N y CCD 8 'b g a b P. °, 0 by Ig. i CD co o 'O p k7 '"' °' ..° ° '� "' C �. ��•*•. y o �, yQQ ate. m EG p fD ,.-'6.'.,,o.'. �'r ° A CD 0 -. e-•. - ".�. �. CD i.a. ' aOi RI. e h N• y , l9 '� /ro CD .•. 0 FA ,4. R. I. CT v, foo . . ° N TS O or'LS Cry H y Cr n 00 .`1. g • N ni r" oe ,,• 0 �� 9 0 - 0• o . �' Off�•.. N w a'. c(D n R g, C) CD CD o G y = V] C(7D 0r °, O 2 - c CDD N y 12 r♦ po l 1 a i tri CD co > ng n 0 P. v CDC CD CA c '0 0 .0 0 .0 o oo .0cn O ' a co � a . �' a S " tea k, . n r) 0 r) 0 C" 0 til na . 00 ..9 ..51 d N O O p C a 0 0 <o a ya a. 6 5" �e �e a• 0 V1 0 M a na arx ° • w fy c qp n n ` CD G c9 ti p O pq 000 0 0 N a 0 CD b CD g. a ., prQ c° oD . CACD CCD 0. W °' a• V) °' y c 0,•• °° p, 0 n n a. n �v 1 CA .d CC/ na n te N P. too I. CA 0 CA C x CA C d g' � r agj' Cl) 0 y a A y . n C o co 2 f) 5' a N p QNso CN Ov QQ vE p0 .yA N Q. 1 2 O NO 5- r. 4. /—• ,.,-T _ Cr - y , x O co co v, P b b n p • R o a m (TOO co CD MA ril A V at. P' i1 M n cro O• w H CD d 0.CD b 11/ o UGb PI .0 oo CD CD g g y C C y et �` N C `� a a. tD F. p, f D O fDCD C �n p to coi CD b 0 1��y C A 0 fD H w v I. y �. cro r�. IV 0t1 'a 0b n0 > v», c'no o to > rI ro9 C) 0 "0 > ZY � p, f�`D '" p C) 0 cooa 51co as . c0-. wp • oy0p 0-, �, � awo O yea M ° I. rn $ oNgcr. W O w O w p o 09 a. a.rte o y sv y. CD `� o CD CD �' co Z m r O at �D w p r0a = 4. r. "0 o O co O co O w a. O O v, co 0 go. - a' �r Ca ad o a � � o CVO a o t� E. o O CD G1 •0o 0• �t a, o •, co CD R o o• a. � '0 0 o a. d a >v 'a ,� :r w vo a � a CD CD CD w000 � OM r5omt 8 * S' 0 0 w p Z. o •-• o o co 5 o G O Ill M'' CD v rl a' te. G rsoo°1 a al a " 'CDca. a CD �• n o a CD s' x P a 01 a: a: 0 a Cr• 0 fD fD 0 y 0 a CD cn 0 c� O C ."4.0 0 '51N CA „y ,y n '•t . • �' . e O CDp g. 9� s. a0N 'Ca c .. AD ca. fy 8 . c O n C 2. 0ca5cD a•a is is is 0 c N . . B vcb toacn c cwG o o 6) o conco c o 0 c ; 0r s. e)< a — a f' co.c0 CD 5 .., o CD a a a a a 0 C, .11 b o CD 0bo g o r r° 0 I o ^ a ^ 1 x ~ 0 o fD F b CO (") a n N x o 0. • 5 g. 5' 00 o '-' H Y X t7 C6 X C C4 () d 0 7o C 0 po00 00 °Or� Al ,< b y m n y A n 0' A a 0 to a' 0 CD 0 R CSD y y '� .J y 4. y A P o d ^. :I CD E. w `D C W� w /'� arLa e' " rt • ° d ? ., d y CD y .-. E ~45. K A • b y Cr sr O b .d `, tri 2 b oA IT m .'.' w wcso P. 'b "d "d b C1 d '� O a CDD p co p w OC w p a yt. pw 0000 CD AD y w p CD CD J J CD o C. CD CD Cl)CD n' CM Cl) Cl) co F. a Cr E � Y O< 50 • oao Ds , , ....1 a c . y y < CD a' og y c 5•.d yCD a a a. 0 RI 0. cD d o a '•� y ' � a Wa +' U, o Co y pNP1 N 72. w A � y pa o c • ' CDCrQ-. O p: w co4 R. v, ng' g o '' rw � k v) a oNC - g :e 44' y 0 ao g — 2 es+ .41 Fnil • cD td io `" wict o g w 0 pe N �. o E• fie' 0. �' �• CT �. o o �' oco p CD C .7. CD o'�y' A. Pb- y tro .8� vy, cRD CD C.0 " Q C ., 0 e; O co Ra. w FI Gs. op 0 CD (D° y' n p' '°' C o 00 Cif CD 5 CD o' p a dd d 7v - a a CD y o 9 ° y a o a cr ° ° b ° � 0 O .b . . O a C% .1 � � �rrnco CD CD � a ip. a I. p r) 7 a 0 rii 01. o "o 00 00 00 0 o CDy v) tpi. cD y y - . cD A . O. a a a ,� a a w Pr. et per-, 0 o o o ."'D'I.:3 '� E• o () 0 `C == P � oa� . � ,o 'd 0 , owo � � '� 0n CD 1SR: rif N Cpp �°-+tea: g.,,,-- 05 O O �. w a y y " O CD b 0 0 p 0 G •cr O• to 0 Ua = w 0 r p • p ° .Cw a C7 CD e-r cD cDa. a p a 0 td C') x '-' ,,..,\ °° w CD C x o CD a OD g. ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Susan Murray, Current Planning Manager DEPARTMENT: Planning Services LDC PAGE(S): 1.10— 1.12.1 LDC SECTION: Division 1.6 Interpretations CHANGE: Clarification of the Amendment REASON: The current version is wordy and ambiguous. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS:None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT:None n Amend the LDC as follows: Sec. 1.6.3. Procedures 1.6.3.1. Submission for request for interpretation. • - Rfequests for interpretation shall must be submitted to the planning ' ,in a form services director or chief building official "officials' established by him. Each request must identify the specific land development code or building code citation to be interpreted. Each request for interpretation must be accom anied by the appropriate fee as set forth in the fee resolution adopted by the board of county commissioners. = - . = =- - - _ : ..• . _ .. Under no circumstances may the request for inte •retation contain more than three issues/•uestions. It must not contain a sin l le •uestion with more than three sub-issues or •uestions. If it is determined the guro_priate official that the request for interpretation contains more than three issues,the a..licant will be re•uired to submit a s-•arate re•uest accom•anied b the a. •licable fees. Cm\ 1.6.3.2. Determination of completeness. After receipt of a request for interpretation ,the ' " annropriate official must shall determine whether the request is complete. If the : ••-•• - : - •-- anvropriate officiai_determines that the request is iencot complete, e ,he must shall serve notice on the applicant specifying the defic riate • '• -' - z- : _ • : : : _: : :,will official : • '-- • _ : - , shall take no further action on the request for interpretation until the deficiencies are remedied. ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Margaret Wuerstle DEPARTMENT: Planning Services • MENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 2, 2003 LDC ' • GE: LDC1:19,20 LDC SEC ON: 1.8.10.2.1. CHANGE: Adding a sub-section dealing with n• conforming docks/boathouses. REASON: ue to the unique nature of ,ocks and boathouses and the expense accompanying this uniqu= nature, there is an existin: eed to allow for repair when the structure is destroyed, but expansion ' any way will void the egal nonconforming status. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL I 'ACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULAT N . None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN P• CT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 1.8.10.2.1. Docks and bo.thouses are not subject to the provisi• s of Section 1.8.10.2. Docks and boatho es must be reconstructed to conform to the Code only if the reconstruc '.n of the dock or boathouse will expand the , 'ginal footprint, as it is listed on he building permit, regardless of the percentage o s estruction or repairs perfo -d. Any expansion of the footprint, no matter how insignificant will void legal onconforming status and require strict compliance to the Code. Improvements that did not exist prior to the destruction or repair of the dock or boathouse are not all iwed and will also void the legal nonconforming status. ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division (A) AUTHOR: Margaret Wuerstle DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 2, 2003 LDC PAGE: LDC1:19,20 LDC SECTION: 1.8.10.2.1. CHANGE: Addinga sub-section dealing with nonconforming docks/boathouses. REASON: Due to the unique nature of docks and boathouses and the expense accompanying this unique nature, there is an existing need to allow for repair when the structure is destroyed, but expansion in any way will void the legal nonconforming status. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: There are no fiscal impacts to the County, but this language is being devised, in part, due to the economic impacts to the property owner. Without this language, a dock would need to be brought up to Code when only minor repairs occur due to the elevated costs of materials and equipment necessary to perform the work. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 1.8.10.2.1. Docks and boathouses are not subject to the provisions form to Section the Code 10.2.only Docks and boathouses must be reconstructed to co if the reconstruction of the dock or boathouse will expand or alter the original nonconforming facility with regard to deck area, protrusion, setbacks, or the addition of any covered structure, regardless of the percentage of destruction or repairs performed. The determination of legal nonconforming status will be established by presentation of a signed, sealed survey, a copy of the Property Appraiser's record, or other dated photography or documentation showing that the facility existed in its present location and configuration prior to 1990. Any expansion of the facility, no matter how insignificant will void legal nonconforming status and require strict compliance to the Code. Improvements that did not exist prior to the destruction or repair of the dock or boathouse are not allowed and will also void the legal nonconforming status. ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: LDC Cycle 2, 2003 LDC PAGE: LDC2:64.4.1 LDC SECTION: 2.2.16.2.1. CHANGE: Adding two uses to the industrial district section. • REASON: The "wholesale trade--nondurable goods..." was mistakenly omitted from s section. Further, sing Ordinance 2002-31 and needs to be addedranges atso�accessory use and add al new paragraph for 0 gunsmith shops to delete the reference to shooting g shooting ranges. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.2.16.2.1. Permitted uses. 1. Agricultural services (groups 0711, except that chemical treatment of soil for crops, fertilizer application for crops and lime spreading for crops shall must be a minimum of 500 feet from a residential zoning district, 0721, except that aerial dusting and spraying, disease control for crops, spraying crops, dusting crops, and insect control for crops (with or without fertilizing)shall must be a minimum of 500 feet from a residential zoning district, 0722-0724, 0761,0782, 0783). 2. Apparel and other finished products (groups 2311-2399). 3. Automotive repair, service, and parking(groups 7513-7549). 4. Barber shops (group 7241). 5. Beauty shops or salons (7231). 6. Building construction(groups 1521-1542). 7. Business services (groups 7312, 7313, 7319, 7334-7336, 7342-7389, including auction rooms (5999), subject to parking and landscaping for retail use). 8. Communications (groups 4812-4899 including communications towers up to specified heights, subject to section 2.6.35). 9. Construction-Special trade contractors (groups 1711-1799). 10. Crematories (7261). 11. Depository and nondepository institutions (groups 6011-6163). 12. Eating places (5812). 13. Educational services(8243-8249). 14. Electronic and other electrical equipment (groups 3612-3699). 15. Engineering, accounting, research, management and related services (groups 8711-8748). 16. Fabricated metal products (groups 3411-3479, 3491-3499). 17. Food and kindred products (groups 2011-2099 except slaughtering plants). 18. Furniture and fixtures (groups 2511-2599). 19. General aviation airport. 20. Gunsmith shops (groups 7699) • --_ - - - •- : __ - _ •• 21. Heavy construction(groups 1611-1629). 22. Health services (8011 accessory to industrial activities conducted on-site only). 23. Industrial and commercial machinery and computer equipment(3511-3599). 24. Leather and leather products (groups 3131-3199). 25. Local and suburban transit(groups 4111-4173). 26. Lumber and wood products(groups 2426,2431-2499). 27. Measuring, analyzing, and controlling instruments; photographic, medical and optical goods;watches and clocks(groups 3812-3873). 28. Membership organizations(groups 8611, 8631). 29. Miscellaneous manufacturing industries(groups 3911-3999). 30. Miscellaneous repair services (groups 7622-7699) with no associated retail sales. 31. Motor freight transportation and warehousing (groups 4212, 4213-4225, 4226 except oil and gas storage, and petroleum and chemical bulk stations). 32. Outdoor storage yards pursuant to the requirements of section 2.2.151/2.6. 33. Paper and allied products(2621-2679). 34. Personal services (groups 7211-7219). 35. Physical fitness facilities(group 7991). 36. Printing,publishing and allied industries(groups 2711-2796). 37. Railroad transportation(4011, 4013). 38. Real estate brokers and appraisers (6531). 39. Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products(groups 3021, 3052,3053). 40. Shooting range indoor(group 7999). 40: 41. Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products (groups 3221, 3251, 3253, 3255— 3273, 3275, 3281). 417 42. Textile mill products (groups 2211-2221, 2241-2259, 2273-2289, 2297, 2298). 42:43. Transportation equipment (groups 3714, 3716, 3731, 3732, 3751, 3761, 3764, 3769, 3792, 3799). 43 44. Transportation by air(groups 4512-4581). 44-:45. Transportation services (groups 4724-4783,4789 except stockyards). 45. 46. United States Postal services (4311). 46:47. Welding repair(7692). 47. 48. Wholesale trade—Durable goods (groups 5012-5014, 5021-5049, 5063- 5092, 5094-5099). 49. Wholesale trade—nondurable goods (groups 5111-5159, 5181, 5182, 5191 except that wholesale distribution of chemicals, fertilizers, insecticides, and pesticides must be a minimum of 500 feet from a residential zoning district (5192-5199). 'D ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russ Muller DEPARTMENT: Engineering AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 2,2003 LDC PAGE(S): 2:124.20 LDC SECTION: 2.2.33.22.13 Garages and driveways. CHANGE: Add a separation requirement for the garage to the back of the sidewalk. REASON: The distance from the back of a encroaching to theinto dewalk. Corage door ommon practice uld accommodate a parked vehicle without gnto the is to park in the driveway far enough from the garage to spafor a c ear zone for the owrooto walk between the garage and the parked car. It is also necessary p sidewalk user. Several site visits and measurements were taken to determine that a minimum of 23 feet is required. The primary concern is safety,but there are many reasons why sidewalk parking is unacceptable. Safety and health Sidewalk parking can force pedestrians into traffic. Vehicles on sidewalks make it difficult to see children as they attempt to circumvent obstructions. The weight of cars parked on sidewalks can cause breaks or separations in the concrete creating trip hazards and uneven walking surfaces. Oil from cars parked on sidewalks create slippery areas on the concrete. Even partially blocked sidewalks are difficult tonavigate for the visually impaired. Walking should be encouraged to promote health. Legal aspectsrohibited in specified Florida Statutes Chapter 316.1945 Stopping, snding, or parking a vehicle on a sidewalk. places states no person shall stop, stand, or park Financial aspects Collier County risks an ADA lawsuit. Sidewalk maintenance responsibilities lie with the County,homeowner associations or property owners. Cars parked on sidewalks damage pavement. Supporting Organizations Community Traffic Safety Team �..� pathways Advisory Committee to the MPO. • • y"\ FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: As stated above the County risks ADA lawsuits and the maintenance costs. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: none GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: none Amend the LDC as follows: 2.2.33.22.13. Garages and Driveways. 1. The rear setback may be reduced to ten feet if a front-access garage is constructed on the rear of the residence. 2. Garage doors shall must have a maximum width of 16 feet. 3. Only one driveway is allowed per 50 linear feet of front property line. The driveway shall must have a maximum width of 18 feet in the right- of-way ,.., area. 4. Other than the permitted driveway, the front yard may not be paved or otherwise used to accommodate parking. 5. Garages shall must be recessed a minimum of three feet behind the front facade of the primary residence. 6. No carports are permitted. 7. The distance from the back of the sidewalk to the garage door must be 23 feet to allow room to park a vehicle on the driveway without parking over the sidewalk. Should the garage be side-loaded there must be a 23-foot paved area on a perpendicular plane to the garage door or plans must ensure that parked vehicles will not interfere with pedestrian traffic. • , ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Mike Barbush DEPARTMENT: Public Request AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 2,2003 LDC PAGE: LDC2:124.26 LDC SECTION: 2.2.34.5.1. CHANGE: Modifying this section to allow certain commercial vehicles. REASON: The residents of Goodland have recognized a need for storage of certain commercial vehicles as long as they are within certain restrictions. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.2.34.5. Parking/storage of major recreational equipment and,personal vehicles, and certain commercial vehicles. 2.2.34.5.1. Within the VR and RSF-4 zoning districts, e xcept for pecifically and designatther e attravel vel trailer subdivisions, boats, trailers, recre equipment may be stored in any yard subject to the following conditions. a. }*le-(Recreational equipment chall must not be used for living, sleeping, or housekeeping purposes when parked or stored. b. Ne-(Recreational vehicles or equipment shall-must not exceed 35 feet in length. c. Ne- Recreational vehicles or equipment shall must not be parked, stored nor encroach in any county right-of-way easement. • d. Recreational vehicles or equipment that exceed 35 feet in length sly will be '" subject to the provisions of subsection 2.6.7.2 of this Code. 2.2.34.5.2. Personal vehicles may be parked in drainage swales in the VR and RSF-4 zoning districts subject to the following conditions. a. No vehicle shall block or impede traffic. 2.2.34.5.3. Commercial vehicles 35 feet in length or less will be allowed to park at the owner's home and in the drainage swale subject to the following conditions: a. No vehicle shall block or impede traffic; b. Drainage must not be blocked or impeded in any way as a result of the parking in the swales• c. Parking will only be permitted in driveways and not in yard areas; and d. No more than two commercial vehicles may be parked at one residence/site, unless one or more of the vehicles is engaged in a construction or service operation on the residence/site where it is parked. The vehicle engaged in this service must be removed as soon as the construction or service is completed. For purposes of this subsection only,a commercial vehicle is defined as a van,pickup truck, or passenger car used for commercial purposes and licensed by the Department of Transportation. A vehicle is not considered a commercial vehicle merely by the display of a business name or other insignia. No other commercial equipment, such as dump trucks, cement trucks, forklifts or other equipment used in the construction industry will be allowed to park at a residence or site overnight unless specifically approved by the planning services director. ( . ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Mike Barbush DEPARTMENT: Public Request AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 2, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): LDC2:124.27 LDC SECTION: 2.2.34.6.2. CHANGE: To add language for legal nonconforming sheds. REASON: There are certain sheds in Goodland that are not in strict compliance with the Code that existed prior to the adoption of the LDC. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS:None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT:None Amend the LDC as follows: 2.2.34.6.2. Parcels located off of Bayshore Drive are allowed the Code retain Sorage ssheds that s for were constructed prior to the effective date of fishing and boat equipment on the boat dock parcels off of Bayshore Drive constructed after the effective date of the Code are permissible if they comply with the following requirements: 1. Bayshore drive setback: ten feet. 2. Waterfront setback: ten feet. 3. Side yard setback: 0 feet. 4. Maximum size of shed: 144 square feet. 1 c • . ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Mike Barbush DEPARTMENT: Public Request AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 2, 2003 LDC PAGE: LDC2:124.27 LDC SECTION: 2.2.34.7. CHANGE: Addition of a new subdivision. REASON: The addition is necessary to provide the residents of Goodland an exemption from the new sign ordinance for a short time period or until the sign is destroyed, whichever occurs first. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: 2.5 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None Amend the LDC as follows: 2.2.34.7. Sign requirements. All signs currently existing in Goodland are exempt from the requirements of the Collier County sign ordinance (Division 2.5) for fiveyears from the effective date of this ordinance or until the sign is destroyed, whichever comes first. Any signs constructed after the effective date of the ordinance must strictly comply with Division 2.5. Sign maintenance is limited to painting existing signs. All other maintenance or repairs will void the exemption and require the owner to construct a sign that strictly adheres to Division 2.5. in the event that the owner wishes to have a sign. • ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Margaret Wuerstle,Planning Services Director DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE#OR DATE: LDC Cycle II, 2003 LDC PAGE: LDC 2:137 LDC SECTION: 2.4.3.1. CHANGE: Provide a landscape deviation process for Essential Services and Collier County Public Schools. REASON: To allow Collier County Public Schools flexibility when meeting landscape codes. This change is being effectuated due to the state-mandated interlocal agreement between the BCC and the Collier County School Board. In general, educational facilities School Boardnt subject as too the landscaping requirements set forth below regardless; however, the that they will follow these landscape provisions and only request deviations when the "State Requirements for Educational Facilities" ("SREF") requires them to do so, or for local School Board considerations such as provision for an educational program, safety or when the site is shared with other public facilities. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: Sec.2.4.3. Procedures. 2.4.3.1.Landscape plan required. Prior to the issuance of any preliminary applicant subdivision plat, final site development plan, or building permit, development is covered by the requirements of this section shall must submit a landscape plan to the planning services director. The landscape plan shall must bear the seal of a Landscape Architect registered in the State of Florida. The landscaping required for single-family, two family, and mobile home dwelling units shall must be shown on the building permit plot plan. This plan is not required to bear the seal of a landscape architect. l � . i • The landscape plan-shall must be drawn to a suitable scale, include dimensions, north arrow, date, title,project owner's name, delineate the existing and proposed parking, vehicular use areas,buildings, access points, and roadways, show all utility lines or easements, and show the location of existing and proposed planting areas and vegetation communities and designate them by species name. The code- required landscaping shall must be highlighted or indicated on the plan to differentiate from the applicant's provided landscaping that is in addition to that required by this Code. Design creativity is encouraged so long as it meets the intent of this Code. The plan shall must show the location of permanent vegetation protection devices, such as barricades, curbing, and tree wells. The plan shall must also include a shaft plant legend indicating graphic plant symbol, botanical and common name, quantity, height, spread, spacing,native status, drought tolerance rating (as defined by"Xeriscape Plan Guide II"published by South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL) and type of mulch. The plan flail must show tree and palm staking details per accepted industry practices and standards. In addition, a tabulation of the code-required landscaping indicating the calculations necessary to insure compliance with this Code shall must also appear. A certificate of occupancy shall must not be issued until approval of the landscaping plan and installation of plants and materials consistent with that approved plan has been completed and inspected by the County. 2.4.3.1.1. Public Educational Facilities and Plant, Ancillary Plant, and Auxiliary Facility. Essential services including Collier County Public Schools (CCPS) / public Educational and Ancillary Plants, and other public facility projects developed jointly with CCPS may demonstrate that the intent of this division can be effectively accomplished without meeting specific development standards. The applicant must request an administrative review of the alternative design, as outlined in Section 2.4.3.1.1.1. of the code. The deviations are limited to quantity of plant material and the School district must demonstrate that the deviation is necessary as a result of an educational program or joint use of the school site with another public facility or use. 2.4.3.1.1.1.Procedure. In addition to the base submittal requirements, applicants shall clearly label the plan submitted as an "Alternative Landscape Code Plan". This plan shall reference the deviations on the plan. An applicant must submit a narrative description identifying the code development standards ^ required by this section which will be addressed through the alternative approach. The planning services director will administratively review l J 1 ) submittal documents for consistency with the intent of this division. If the •lap is a• •roved throu• this 'rovision the a. be stated within the d deviations must be specifically noted and the basis of the approval must site development plan approval letter. Deviations approved will be applicable only to the specific design and plan reviewed. Modifications of an approved design will void the deviation request and require resubmittal to planning services staff for re-evaluation of the request in the context of the amended design and an. 2.4.3.1.1.2.Exemption An administrative deviation is not required for specific standards relating to placement of plant materials if the intent of the division can nonetheless be carried out without meetingthese a specific healthn safety, or tandards. e itent of the division welfare can be demonstrated by detailing concern as defined by SREF or as may be unique to a specific site or educational program that would override the need to provide plant materials. A copy of SREF, as may be amended, is available in the records room in the Community Development and Environmental Services Division Building. ORIGIN: Community Development &Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion,Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Planning Services LDC PAGE(S): 2:137 LDC SECTION: 2.4.3.1. CHANGE: Require installation of landscape buffers prior to vertical construction when a nonresidential project is constructed adjacent to an existing residential development. REASON: To protect and buffer residential dwellers from impact of construction of incompatible development. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: There are no fiscal impacts. However, there may be some difficulty for construction activities to occur around a pre-planted landscape buffer. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: Sec. 2.4.3. Procedures. 2.4.3.1. Landscape plan required. Prior to the issuance of any preliminary subdivision plat, final site development plan, or building permit, an applicant whose development is covered by the requirements of this section shall must submit a landscape plan to the planning services director. The landscape plan shall must be prepared by and bear the seal of a landscape architect registered in the State of Florida. The landscaping required for single-family, two-family, and mobile home dwelling units shall must be shownon the building permit plot plan. This plan is not required to be prepared by and bear the seal of a landscape architect. The landscape plan shall must be drawn to a suitable scale, include dimensions, north arrow, date, title,project owner's name, delineate the existing and proposed parking, vehicular use areas, buildings, access points, and roadways, show all utility lines or easements, and show the location of existing and proposed planting areas and vegetation communities and designate them by species name. The code-required landscaping shall 1 � . /1, must be highlighted or indicated on the plan to differentiate from the applicant's provided landscaping that is in addition to thatolred by this f this code.The pplde. )ansign s must show the tivity is encouraged so long as it meets the intent location of permanent vegetation protection devices, such as barricades,curbing, and tree wells. The plan shall must also include a slit plant legend indicating graphic plant symbol,botanical and common name,quantity,height, spread, spacing,native status, drought tolerance rating(as defined by"Xeriscape Plan Guide H"published by South Florida Water Management District,West Palm Beach,FL) and type of mulch. The plan shall must show tree and palm staking details per accepted industry practices and standards. In addition, a tabulation of the code-required landscaping indicating the calculations necessary to insure compliance with this code shall must also appear. Where a nonresidential development/parcel is constructed adjacent to an existing residential development, perimeter landscape buffers required by Section 2.4.7.4. must be installed prior to vertical construction of such nonresidential property. Where these buffers are not practicable,then deviations will be allowed. Practicability may be demonstrated by showing the buffer would be severely damaged or destroyed during development. The site development plan must clearly state that this buffer is not practicable. This, among other factors,will be used by the planning services director to determine practicability. A certificate of occupancy shall must not be issued until approval of landscaping plan and installation of plants and materials consistent with that approved plan has been completed and inspected by the county. ORIGIN: Community Development &Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion, Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: LDC Cycle II, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): LDC2:141 LDC SECTION: 2.4.3.5. CHANGE: Move site lighting and landscape language from Section 2.8.3.7.2. #4 into Division 2.4 "Landscaping and Buffering." REASON: Landscape regulations have been relocated from the architectural section of the code to the landscape section. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.4.3.5. Installation. Prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy for a use required to provide landscaping and irrigation in accordance with this section, all required landscaping and irrigation shall be installed and in place as set out in the plans approved under subsections 2.4.3.1 and 2.4.3.2. All plant materials must be installed in accordance with accepted landscape practices in the area and meet the plant material standards contained in Section 2.4.4. Plant materials shall be installed in soil conditions that are conducive to the proper growth of the plant material. Limerock located within planting areas shall be removed and replaced with native or growing quality soil before planting. A plant's growth habit shall be considered in advance of conflicts which might arise(i.e. views, signage, overhead power lines, lighting, circulation, etc.). Trees shall not be placed where they interfere with site drainage, subsurface utilities, or overhead utility lines, or where they shall require frequent pruning in order to avoid interferences with overhead power lines. 4. Tree and site lighting locations shall be designed so as not to conflict with one another. Parking lot/site lighting shall not be located in landscape islands with trees and shall be located a minimum of4-0-12.5 feet from the trunk of a tree. see Illustration 18 below). - ' I GRAPHIC UNAVAILABLE: Compatible Tree and Lighting Design Trees shall not be planted in areas that retain excessive quantities e t a wahealth of reter or will quire e tree er the root system that will species. Required landscaping excessive amounts of fill placed lO 11 not be placed within easements without written approval from all entities claiming an interest under said easement. All trees and palms shall be properly guyed,braced and/or staked, at the time of planting to ensure establishment of the tree or treesanderect the ee ailare staking or other Trees shall methods that cause cosmetic or biologicalg be re-staked within 24 hours in the event of blow-o1 a 2months after ir other re of he staking and guying. Staking shall be removed between six and n. All required landscaping shall be installed inaccordance thin a subdivisionh lans development shallbe proved under section[s] 2.4.3.1 and 2.4.3.2. Landscaping guaranteed by a subdivision completion bond in accordance with division 3.2 governing the final platting of subdivision. • All required landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy condition investigaten pedeficienitycies per the approved building and site plans. Code Enforcementmay in approved landscaping and institute corrective action to insure compliance with this Code. • • • ORIGIN: Community Development &Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion, Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: LDC Cycle II, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): 2:151 LDC SECTION: 2.4.4.18.1 CHANGE: The requirements of the section are more clearly defined. Establish a height limit for berms. REASON: Recent applications of this section have revealed that it does not address berm height. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.4.4.18. Landscape berms. All perimeter landscape berms over two feet in .height shall must meet or exceed the minimum standards as set forth herein. All grassed berms sll must have side slopes no gfeatef steeper than four to one. Berms planted with ground cover and landscaping shall must have side slopes no gruatef steeper than three to one. The toe of the slope shall must be set back a minimum of five feet from the edge of all right-of-way and property lines. 2.4.4.18.1. Berms located adjacent to Interstate 75 right-of—way(I-75). Berms located adjacent to the I-75 right-of-way may be reduced to a maximum slope no steeper than of 2:1. The maximum height of 12 feet will be measured from the adjacent center line elevation of I-75 pavement. The toe of the slope must be located a minimum of ten feet from the I-75 right-of-way/property line. This ten-foot wide area must be level (no steeper than a 10:1 slope) and must be r• planted with native trees randomly spaced and the equivalent of 25 feet on center, equal in height to the height of the berm. Sash 0`` f • 13Berms with a 2:1 slope-shall must be planted with native ground cover over an erosion control fabric_, Existing native vegetation shall must be incorporated into the berms with all slopes fully stabilized with trees, shrubs, and ground cover. Landscape berms shall must not be placed within easements without written approval from all entities claiming an interest under said easement. 2.4.4.18.1.1. Deviations to 1-75 berms. A deviation will be anted if the a licant can prove that the intent of this section can be effectively accomplished without meeting the specified development standards In addition to the be submittal reaw . rements as a. •licants shall clearl label the elan submitted as an"Alternative Landscape Code Plan". Thislan shall reference the deviations on the planAn applicant must submit a narrative description identifying the code development standards required by this section which will be addressed throw the alternative a roach. The planning services director will administratively review submittal documents for consistent with the intent of this division. If the plan is approved throe h this provision,the a. •roved deviations must be s.ecificall noted and the basis of the a• •royal must be stated within the site develo•ment •lan a. •royal letter. Deviations a. .roved will be a• •licable onl to the •ecific design and plan reviewed. Modifications of an approved design will void the deviation re uest and re wire resubmittal to Tannin services staff for re-evaluation of the re uest in the context of the amendeddesign and plan. /"\ ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion, Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: LDC Cycle II, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): LDC2:154 LDC SECTION: 2.4.5.4. CHANGE: Add Section 2.4.5.5. "Landscaping required for Division 2.8 buildings over 20,000 square feet" REASON: This is a relocated landscape requirement from Section 2.8.3.7.2. and Division 2.8. "Architectural and Site Design Standards and Guidelines for Commercial Buildings and Projects"to Division 2.4"Landscaping and Buffering." FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.4.5.4. Green space required in shopping centers and freestanding retail establishments with a floor area greater than 40,000 square feet. An area that is at least seven percent of the size of the vehicular use areas shall must be developed as green space within the front yard(s) or courtyards of shopping centers and retail establishments and shall be in addition to the building perimeter planting area requirements. The courtyards shall must only be located in areas that are likely to be used by pedestrians visiting the shopping center and retail establishment. The seven percent green space area shall must be in addition to other landscaping requirements of this division,and may be used to meet the open space requirements (section 2.6.3.2), and shall must be labeled "Green Space" on all subdivision and site plans. The interior landscape requirements of these projects shall be reduced to an amount equal to five percent of the vehicular use area on site. Green space shall must be considered areas designed for environmental, scenic or noncommercial recreation purposes and shall be pedestrian-friendly and aesthetically appealing. Green space may only include the following: lawns, mulch, decorative plantings, nonprohibited exotic trees, walkways within the interior of the green space area not used for shopping, fountains, manmade watercourses (but not water retention areas), wooded areas,park benches, site lighting, sculptures, gazebos, and any other similar items that the planning services director deems appropriate. Green space shall must include: walkways within the interior of the green space area not used for shopping, a minimum of one foot of park bench per 1,000 square feet of building area, and a minimum of one tree for each 250 square feet of green space area. The green space area shall must use existing trees where possible and landscaping credits will be allowed as governed by table 2.4.4. The green space areas shall must be located in areas that are in close proximity to the retail shopping area. Benches may also be located in interior landscaped areas and 75 percent of benchhess mthin ay deslorca ed adjacent to the building envelope along paths,walkways and 2.4.5.5. Landscaping required for Division 2.8 buildings over 20,000 square feet. 2 _bandseaping-Thefollowing requirement_, will be counted toward the required greenspace and open space requirements of division 2.4. of this Code- • • . _ •- - -- -- - - = - , - ' - - - height-of-seven-feet: _ - - .. , •.. _ - ,tTrees in vehiculaLuse es _'s m - a • •nuI •_ 14 _. 1 . e- __-_� • - • .•• — spread and a three-lo:four-inch caliper and mug have clear_trunk aro/o 1iei.ht of six feet. �_fr ewe _• • ca. - is � • oca -d 1• e ! • --_• . =••' i•' -• • . _ , - 11 • - an• . • -• wih - • . , e' • y_ '---- fi - e-llustratien-4-7 it U • e • -1 --_-�—�s • '------- belew). ORIGIN: Community Development &Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion,Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: LDC Cycle II, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): LDC2:156 LDC SECTION: 2.4.6.6. CHANGE: Restate more clearly the landscape requirements for building foundation plantings. Move building foundation landscape requirements from Division 2.8.3.7.3. "Architectural and Site Design Standards and Guidelines for Commercial Buildings and Projects"into Division 2.4 "Landscaping and Buffering". Per BCC Section 2.4.6.7.has been added, which requires taller trees adjacent to taller buildings. REASON: Landscape regulations have been removed from the architectural section of the code. Section 2.4.6.7. has been added to help minimize the impact of tall buildings. FISCAL Be OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: Taller trees will cost two to three times more than usual. In addition, taller trees will require more landscape buffer width than we typically provide in a 10 to 15' wide buffer. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.4.6.6. Building perimeter oundatiouinareas. kePitings. All shopping center, retail, office, apartments, condominiums, clubhouses and similar uses shall must provide building perimeter foundation plantings in the amount of et per i-O00-sgeare-€eet ten percent of proposed building ground level floor area. These planting areas shall must be located adjacent to the primary public building entrance(s) and/or primary street elevation and shall must consist of landscape areas, raised planters or planter boxes that are a minimum of five-feet wide. These areas must be landscaped with trees and/or palms in the amount of one tree or palm equivalent per 250 square feet; shrubs and ground covers other than grass. Water management areas shall must not be a part of this five foet planting area. Parking lot islands will not count towards this requirement. �..� (Ord.No.96-66,§3.D.;Ord.No.00-92, §3.B.) 2.4.6.7. Buildin r oundation .lantin: re,uirements or non industrial buildin:s _• eater than 3 stories or 25 eet in heir ht• and/or Division 2.8 buildin r s includin r industrial ri ani /omaa corridors e with C urest,tint r eater than 20 000 s uare ee (a) The minimum width of buildingfoundation lantin areas must be measured from the base of the buildin and must relate to the ad'acent buildin 's wall height as herein defined as follows: Ad'acent Buildin f 's Wall Hei'ht: Foundation Plantin r Width: Building wall hei t between 35 feet 15 feet. and 50 feet. 20 feet. Build wall height ¢neater than 50 feet. (b) Trees re uired b this section must be of an installed size relatin to the adjacent building's wall height as defined below: Building's Wall Tree Height Tree= Patin S read eet Hei ht Hei ht eft eet n eet 35 to 50 14 t_ 7 16 greater than 50 16 to 18 g 20 r> ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion, Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: LDC Cycle II, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): LDC2:157 LDC SECTION: 2.4.7.2. CHANGE: Shorten the time period that an unoccupied business site must come into compliance with minimum landscape code. REASON: To bring vacant/defunct properties into minimum landscape code compliance more quickly. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.4.7.2. Applicability. The buffering and screening shown in table 2.4 shall be required under this section and shall apply to all new development. Existing landscaping which does not comply with the provisions of this section shall be brought into conformity to the maximum extent possible when: the vehicular use area is altered or expanded except for restriping of lots/drives, the building square footage is changed, or there has been a discontinuance of use for a period of-90 60 consecutive days or more and a request for an occupational license to resume business is made. ORIGIN: Community Development &Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion,Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: LDC Cycle II, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): LDC2:158 LDC SECTION: 2.4.7.3. CHANGE: Restate a requirement in 2.4.7.3 Item 2 to bore eeclearly dAlsobLDC Section e integration of water management areas into landscape 2.4.7.3.1.has been relocated from Division 2.8. sta clearly and REASON: Requirement originally stated in 2.4.7.3.Ite 2 is nota 1 tes a landscape has been restated. The newly created LDC requirement that is relocated from Division 2.8. Buildings and Prollects". te Design Standards and Guidelines for Commercial FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: otherwise noted, all standards outlined in section 2.4.4 shall apply. Trees and shrubs shall 2.4.7.3. Standards. Unless o merw ust be installed at the height specified in section 2.4.4.2. Water management systems,which shall must include ere�itt�andtdi i a detention areas, swales, and subsurface installations,shall-be_ andwithin landscapingre buffer provided they are consistent with acceptedengineering practice and the following criteria: 1. Water management systems shall must not exceed 50 percentbthe square footage of any required side,rear, or front yardlandscape ffer. �—, systems sly must not exceed, at any location within the 2. Water management Tequired side,rear,or front yard landscape buffer, 70 percent of the required aCSM) • • buffer width. . -• •. : . . •. - ': - : : :.- •- _ :. _: _- : : = _: .' _ . Required trees and/or hedges must be planted at the top of the berm in a minimum five foot wide 10:1 level planting area. The remainder of the landscape buffer area must maintain a slope no steeper than or equal to 4 :1. 3. Exceptions to these standards may be.granted on a case-by-case basis, evaluated on the following criteria: a. Water management systems, in the form of dry retention,may utilize an area greater than 50 percent of the buffer when existing native vegetation is retained at natural grade. b. For lots of record 10,000 square feet or less in size, water management areas may utilize an area greater than 50 percent of the required side and rear yard buffers. A level planting area of at least three feet in width shall must be provided in these buffers. 4. Sidewalks and other impervious areas shall must not occupy any part of a required Alternative A,B, C, or D type buffer, except when: n a. Driveways and sidewalks are constructed perpendicular to the buffer and provide direct access to the parcel. b. Parallel meandering sidewalks occupy the buffer and its width is increased by the equivalent sidewalk width. c. A required 15-20 foot wide buffer is reduced to a minimum of ten feet wide and is increased by the five to ten foot equivalent width elsewhere along that buffer. 2.4.7.3.1 2.8.3.7.4, Natural and manmade bodies of water including wet and dry retention areas =- -- . • - - for all Division 2.8 projects. .n ra i• , w' -r _ a • •_-m-t .r-• V - . . - • • Yls•-• . - body of w•ter includi • retentio and detenti•ne -�� m_ ••_ desi! -• to . • • -ar na t-_ wi , urv' 'n- • -• . s ": aa •_ A ha. - " l'l r- •e s . • .ialt- i•iv- • - a, II • . - . . .r.ves_. t_!t • the design of the buildi •. if the design of the water management area ik re •ted o the arch't- • - •u. •f •_ • _' ••• • 2 .1 a - m• a• - -nt , w't[ 'i he .1 'r. •w i • t- • • wa -r man• .e lent ara ai- • o • t;• wits _I_ I . _d __ _ — _! �1' •0 • � v_ � -. fac.des •f • •u lsi • •i• betty-en th- •rig� - -• d_ i�_• • - - • .w •1d • w• -r i• • '_11-It • e' Th-se au e� _ lles in width with*�aY ��rn slove of 4 to 1. • •w • _ .jI•TS -I • t• a a! -i -lv- f-et •iw V. _- ° _ -- i ret-nt • , ar- c--.1,_�_--- - - - '` -x -� �• I 111 � . 1• � • - - re - li. __ - - - ,c] • •--• .-sem. = _ •u'l. i•�_-• -w. AL , 11 _ •! • '• - Wii • • - • • 1 - f• .wit!. ;01 V. - • •1•I1__Ai • 11 f- • L. • • - - _0 -v ray__• I f --- =kg. • a b. Fountains. P.rtall s a• l •a. cent .rd • ill'�'� •• 11- - • AL- _ a .r • �' t. . •••a -it • • water body or retention areas . 0 50 loo 0-1 1 1 I 1 1 10' offset _ 4 100— DO THIS i 0 50 100 0_1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I- I lBODY OF WATER SHAPES 50 100 DON'T DO THIS-7 6.(N . ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion,Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: LDC Cycle II, 2003 LDC PAGE: LDC2:161 LDC SECTION: 2.4.7.4. II CHANGE: Remove shared/reduced landscape buffers in commercial outparcels and restore original code language. REASON: Since this language was adopted a few years ago, the minimum landscape buffer width has been reduced by 50%. Experience has shown that the required trees cannot fit in a narrower buffer. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: TABLE 2.4 TABLE OF BUFFER REQUII1EMENTS BY LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS Ad'acent Pro,erties District 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Subje 1 2 3 4 ct Prope rty's Distri ct/Us A A A D A A e B B B B B A 1. - r• Agric ulture A' v � 2. A A B B B B B C B * D B - C ' Resid ential (E, RSF) singl e- famil Y 3. A B A N A B B B B * D B - C Resid ential (RM F-6, RMF -12, RMF -16) multi famil Y 4. A B A ABB A B B * D B - Resid ential touris t (RT) 5. A ABB A B B B B * D B - B Villa ge resid ential (VR) 6. A B B B B A B B B * D B B B Mobi le home ! ! • • • B B A A A * D B B B 7. A B BB Corn merci ala' 5 (C- 1, C- 1/T, C-2, C-3, C-4, C-5); Busin ess Park * D B B B :P BBB A 8. �► C B Indus trice * D B _ C 9. A B BBBB A A A Publi c use (P), corn muni ty facilit Y (CF), Golf Cour se Club house Ame nity Cente r 1110 } 10. * * * * * * * * * * D * * * Plann ed unit devel opme nt (PUD 11. D D D D D D D D D D - B - D Vehi cular rights -of- way 12. B B B B B B B B B B B A B C Golf cours e maint enanc e r. build ing 13. - Golf cours e 14. A C C B B B B B C * D C C D Auto mobi le servi ce statio n The letter listed under"Adjacent Properties District"shall be is the landscape buffer and screening alternative required. The "-" symbol shall represent that no buffer is required. The PUD district buffer, due to a variety of differing land uses, is indicated by the "*" symbol, and shall must be based on the landscape buffer and screening of the district or use with the most similar types, densities and intensities of use. Where a conflict exists between the buffering requirements and the yard requirements of this Code, the yard requirements of the subject zoning district shall apply. 3 5 'Buffering in agriculture(A)districts shall be applicable at the time of site development plan(SDP) submittal. property,(I) zoned where abutting industrial(I) zoned property, shall be required to install a minimum five-foot-wide type A landscape buffer adjacent to the side and rear property lines. This area shall not be used for water management. In addition,trees may be reduced to 50 feet on center along rear and side perimeter buffers only.This reduction in buffer width shall not apply to buffers adjacent to vehicular rights-of-way or nonindustrial zoned property. 3Buffer areas between commercial outparcels located within thin shopping right-of-waypi center may have a shared buffer 40! 15 feet wide. This does napply buffers. aed 5Refer to section 2.6.28 for automobile service station landscape requirements. GRAPHIC UNAVAILABLE: Fig. 4-Displaced commercial interior line.B.; landscaping p 8 § 3.D.; (Ord.No. 96-66, § 3.D.; Ord.No. 97-26, § 3.C.; Ord. Ord.No. 00-43, § 3.D.; Ord.No. 00-92, § 3.B.) ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Nancy L. Siemion, Landscape Architect DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: LDC Cycle II, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): LDC2:162 LDC SECTION: 2.4.7.5. CHANGE: Incorporate the"Golden Gate Community Roadways Beautification Master Plan"into the Land Development Code. REASON: It has been bought to our attention that this was directed by the Board of Collier County Commissioners in 1997. The"Golden Gate Community Roadways Beautification Master Plan"will ensure that the development adjacent to the roadways is consistent with the master plan. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: 2.4.7.5. ::Collier County Streetscape Master Plan"and the "Community Roadways Beautification Master Plan. " Street corridors identified in"Collier Naplessape 90!s County Streetscape Master Plan"and the "Community Roadways Beautification Master Plan", including areas within the right-of-way and on required buffers adjacent to the right-of-way, shall adhere to the requirements of the "Collier Naplessape 90'a County Streetscape Master Plan" and the "Community Roadways Beautification Master Plan". Notwithstanding the above, for required landscape buffers adjacent to any right- of-way, the requirements of the Collier Naplescape 90's Streetscape Master Plan and the"Community Roadways Beautification Master Plan"shall apply at the time of issuance of any related subsequent development order including construction plans attendant to the approval of a final plat and or a final site development plan. Where the application of said Streetseape Master Plan standards and requirements is questioned, an official interpretation of the planning services director pursuant to section 1.6.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code may be requested. Further, the interpretation of the planning services director may be appealed to the board of zoning appeals as prescribed by section 1.6.6 of the Land Development Code. `6.- ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Patrick G. White,Assistant County Attorney DEPARTMENT: County Attorney's Office. AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: 2003, Cycle2 LDC PAGE(S): Supplement 13: LDC2:174-75 &LDC2:179 LDC SECTION: 2.2.5.2.9. &2.5.7. CHANGE: Allow barber pole signs that otherwise meet requirements for permitted on- premises signs to be considered as a new class of special purpose sign which allows the pole of a barber pole sign to rotate when illuminated. REASON: Traditional barber pole signs have rotated when illuminated so customers would be aware that the establishment would have a licensed barber on premises to perform barber services. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: This amendment will allow certain establishments employing licensed barbers to have a barber pole sign that rotates when illuminated to evidence the establishment is "open." RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: none GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: none Amend the LDC as follows: Sec.2.5.5. Permitted signs. 2.5.5.1. Signs within residential zoned districts and as applicable to residential designated portions of PUD zoned properties. 2.5.5.1.1. Development standards. 1. Maximum allowable height. All signs within residential zoned districts and as applicable to residential designated portions of PUD zoned properties are limited to a maximum height of eight feet, or as provided within this Code. Height shall be measured from the lowest centerline grade of the nearest public or private R.O.W. or easement to the uppermost portion of the sign structure. ' v . 2. Minimum setback All signs within residential zoned districts and as applicable to residentially designated portions of PUD zoned properties shall not be located closer than ten feet from the property line, unless otherwise noted below or as provided for in section 2.1.13 as determined by the county for safety and operation. * * * * * * * * * * * 2.5.5.2. Signs within non-residential districts: * * * * * * * * * * * 2.5.5.2.5.9. Special purpose signs (on-site). Due to the unique and varied nature of the following uses, additional signs may be required to provide the desired level of service to the public. Special purpose signs shall be permitted as follows: 2.5.5.2.5.9.1. Time and temperature signs. One time and temperature sign having a surface area not exceeding 12 square feet shall be p mitted t e affixedd to the h industrial, commercial or other non-residentially zoned property. signsmay structure of a pole or ground sign. Such sign shall require a building permit. 2.5.5.2.5.9.2. Barber Pole slims. All traditional size and style barber poles which cont_ ai_ illuminated moving or rotating part may be permitted as a lawful sign if the followin and all other a licable re uirements are met: i. The barber pole sign is located on the wall of an establishment providing the services of a licensed barber; 2. Each such establishment (barbershop, salon, etc.) is limited to only one barber pole sign that rotates 3. No barber pole sign may move or rotate except when the establishment is open and providing the services um1 whetherbarber; or not they rotate, otherwise 4. All barber pole signs that illuminate, comply with sec. 2.5.5.2.5.13. for illuminated signs. * * * * * * * * * * * 2.5.5.2.5.13. Illuminated signs. All illuminated signs shall have electrical components, connections, and installations that confound regulations. National ations Further, lighted lectrical Code, igns shall: be and all other applicable federal, state, and local codes gn shielded in such a manner as to produce no glare, i phosphorescent;ard or nuisance to havle oa steady rists or occupants of adjacent properties; nor be reflective or nonfluctuating or nonundulating light source. * * * * * * * * * * * n • Sec. 2.5.7. Prohibited signs. It shall be unlawful to erect, cause to be erected, maintain or cause to be maintained, any sign not expressly authorized by, or exempted from this Code. The following signs are expressly prohibited: 2.5.7.1. Signs which are in violation of the building code or electrical code adopted by Collier County. 2.5.7.2. Abandoned signs. 2.5.7.3. Animated or activated signs, except special purpose time and temperature signs and barber pole signs complying with sec. 2.5.5.2.5.9.2. 2.5.7.4. Flashing signs or electronic reader boards. 2.5.7.5.Rotating signs or displays, except barber pole signs complying with sec. 2.5.5.2.5.9.2. * * * * * * * * * * * r • p ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 2, 2003 LDC PAGE: LDC2:184.14 LDC SECTION: 2.6.9.1. and 2.6.9.2. CHANGE: Adding fire stations, EMS substations, and sheriff substations to the permitted uses in the agricultural district. Also, adding ancillary fire station services to the conditional use section. REASON: There is a recognized need to provide these essential services. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Sec. 2.2.2. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None Amend the LDC as follows: 2.6.9.1. Permitted uses. The following uses are allowed as permitted uses: a. In every zoning district: water lines, sewer lines, gas lines,telephone lines,telephone switching stations, cable television, electrical transmission and distribution llp g substations, emergency power structures, sewage lift stations, pt mn stations; essential service wells (includingh have been-or will be permitted by xtraction facilities, and the ancillary facilities,) and any other wells which South Florida Water Management District orthe the effectivFlorida e ofnt this of environmental protection either prior to orsubsequent ordinance, or if the respective well and/or well relatedfacility tict otherwise arequired to be installed or constructed by law; in every zoning private wells and septic tanks, and similar installations necessary for the performance manceunderthf these services. If any proposed well is a Collier County owned '^ permitting jurisdiction of a Florida agency, staff, early in the county's well permit application process, shall post sign(s) at the county's proposed well site(s) and shall provide written notice that the county has applied for a required well permit to property owners within 300 feet of the property lines of the lots or parcels of land on which the applied-for well is being sought by the county, including, if applicable, the times and places of the permitting agency's scheduled public hearings; b. In commercial and industrially zoned districts: other governmental facilities, as defined by this Code, to the extent the facility or service is required by law, rule or regulation; c. In the agricultural and estate zoned districts the following governmental facilities: nonresidential not-for-profit child care, nonresidential education facilities, libraries, museums, neighborhood parks, and recreational service facilities; d. In residentially zoned districts: neighborhood parks:; and e. In the agricultural district only (excludes the estates district): fire stations, EMS substations, and sheriff substations all outside of the area encompassed by the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay in the Future Land Use Elements except as may be limited or prohibited by the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District in the Future Land Use Element. 2.6.9.2. Conditional uses. The following uses require approval pursuant to section 2.7.3:4. as conditional uses: a. In every zoning district: electric or gas generating plants, effluent tanks, major re- pump stations, sewage treatment plants including percolation ponds, hospitals, hospices, water aeration or treatment plants, governmental facilities; b. In residential, agricultural and estate zoned districts, except as otherwise specified by section 2.6.9.1.; regional parks, community parks, , and other similar facilities; c. In the residential and estates districts only(excludes the agricultural district): safety service facilities; d. In the agricultural district only: those safety service facilities that are defined by the code and not specifically listed in paragraph "e."of section 2.6.9.1.; and e. In the agricultural district: ancillary fire station services, such as fire training camps~ outside of the area encompassed by the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay in the Future Land Use Element, except as may be limited or prohibited by the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District in the Future Land Use Element. ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Donald A. Schneider,Principal Planner DEPARTMENT: Planning Services LDC PAGE: LDC2:188.1 LDC SECTION: 2.6 CHANGE: Additions to Section 2.6.11 Fences • Move Sections 2.8.3.3.3.1. and 2.8.4.2.3.1. of Division 2.8, REASON: Architectural and Site Design dards that complement thenl'S.Fence section to include fencing star Architectural and Site Design Standards. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGUALTIONS: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: This n the Growth Management ndment will not have an Plan. Amend the LDC as follows: Sec.2.6.11. Fences. llow all 2.6.11.1. Fences in residential districts. Fences rs t forth in Secs shall be allo ed i 6.11.2-- zoning districts subject to the restrictions 2.6.11.5. Residential districts. For the purposes of this section,residential districts 2.6.11.2. RMF-6,RMF-12, and RMF- 16shall include: RSF residential single-family; VR village residential multiple-family;RT residential tourist; ential; MH mobile home; TTRVC travel trailer-recreational vehicle resid d park , park campground; and residential increments of PUD residential plane unit development districts.Fences and walls placed within required yards shall be subject to the following: 2.6.11.2.1. Fences or walls on all lots greater than one acre in area may reach a maximum height of six feet. r 2.6.11.2.2. For non-waterfront interior lots one acre or less in area, fenbut are mayy reach a maximum height of six feet for side yards, /1/ �-1 . i'1 limited to four feet within the required front yard. 2.6.11.2.3. For waterfront lots one acre or less in area, height limits are as for non- waterfront lots,but with the additional restriction that fences or walls within the required rear yard are limited to four feet. 2.6.11.2.4. For corner lots one acre or less in area, which by definition have only front yards and side yards, fences within required front yards are limited to four feet in height,with the exception that any portion of a front yard fence within the safe sight triangle described in section 3.2.8.3.22. of this Code is restricted to three feet in height. (Two sides of this triangle extend 30 feet along the property lines from the point where the right-of-way lines meet, and the third side is a line connecting the other two.)Fences within required side yards may reach six feet in height. 2.6.11.2.5. Barbed wire, razor wire, spire tips, sharp objects, or electrically charged fences shall be prohibited, except that the board of zoning appeals may allow the use of barbed wire in conjunction with chain link fencing for facilities where a security hazard may exist, such as a utility substation, sewage treatment plant, or similar use. 2.6.11.3. Agricultural districts. For the purposes of this section, agricultural districts shall include: A agricultural; E estates; and CON conservation districts. Fences and walls within agricultural districts shall be exempt from height and type of construction requirements. • - ' 2.6.11.4.1. Fences or walls in d industrial districts not subject to Division 2.8 shall be limited to eight feet in height. 2.6.11.4.2. Walls and fences required contiguous or opposite residentially zoned districts. Whenever a nonresidential development lies contiguous to or opposite a residentially zoned district, said nonresidential development ,-„•••. shall provide a masonry wall or prefabricated concrete wall/fence. If located on a contiguous property, the wall/fence shall be a minimum of six feet and a maximum of eight feet in height and shall be located a minimum of six feet from the residentially zoned district. If on a property opposite a residentially zoned district but fronting on a local street, or the properties are separated by a platted alley,the wall/fence shall be located a minimum of three feet from the rear of the right-of-way landscape buffer line and shall be four feet in height. On properties which front on more than one street, a six-foot high wall/fence shall be required along the street which is opposite the primary ingress and egress point of the project along the street frontage which is adjacent to the rear of the project. At the applicants'request,the planning services director may etermine that a masonry wall/fence is not the local street lies contiguous to the rear of a residence or some other physical separation exists between the residential development and the nonresidential development,or for other good cause including the existence of a wall on an adjacent residential development. The applicant shall demonstrate that the intent of this section can be effectively accomplished,without constructing a wall,by submitting for the approval an alternative design, and a descriptive narrative through the administrative variance process set forth in subsection 2.6.11.5.7. of this Code. The planning services director will review the submitted documents ,-� for consistency with the intent of this section and, if the administrative variance is approved the fact of the approval and basis for it shall be stated in the site development plan approval letter. Vegetative plantings shall be located external to the wall/fence such that 50 percent of the wall/fence is screened within shall be installed to insure ne year of the installation of said vegetative material. An irrigationsystem the continued viability of the vegetative screen. These regulations shall not be construed to require a masonry wall/fence for commercial development fronting on an arterial or collector roadway where the opposite side of such roadway is zoned residential or to be otherwise inconsistent with the provisions of section 2.8.2 of this Code. A wall/fence shall be constructed following site plan approval but prior to any vertical construction or any other type of improvement resulting from the issuance of a building permit. Special circumstances may warrant constructing the wall/fence in phases depending upon the location of affected residential areas and after vertical construction commences. 2.6.11.5. All districts. Whenever a property owner elects to erect a chain link fence pursuant to the provisions of section 2.6.11 adjacent to an arterial/collector road in the urban coastal area said fence shall not be located nearer than three feet to the right-of-way/property line, and said fence shall be screened from view by planting a vegetative hedge a minimum of 30 inches in height at planting spaced at a distance that will achieve an opacity rating of 80 percent within one year of planting. An irrigation system shall be installed to insure the continued viability of the vegetative hedge as a visual screen of the chain link fence. This regulation shall not apply to single family homes. 1. Structures subject to Division 2.8 Architectural & Site Design Standards shall comply with the following additional fencing standards: a. Chain link and wood fences are prohibited forward of the primary facade and must be a minimum of 100 feet from a public right-of-way. Chain link and wood fencing facing a public or private street shall be screened with an irrigated hedge planted directly in front of the fence on the street side. Plant material shall be a minimum of 3 gallon in size and planted no more than 3 feet on center at time of installation. This plant material shall be maintained at no less than three-quarters of the height of the adjacent fence (See Illustration 6.1). b. Fences forward of the primary facade, excluding chain link and wood are permitted under the following conditions: (1) Fences shall not exceed 4 feet in height. (2) The fence provides either an open view at a minimum of 25 percent of its length or provides variation in its height for a minimum of 15 percent of its length with a deviation of at least 12 inches. (3) The fence style must complement building style through material, color and design. (INCLUDE ILLUSTRATION 6.1) 2.6.11.5.1. All fences and walls shall be of sound construction and shall not detract from the public health, safety and welfare of the general public. 2.6.11.5.2. All fences and walls shall be maintained in a manner that will not detract from the neighborhood or community. 2.6.11.5.3. Barbed wire is authorized within agricultural, commercial and industrial districts. Razor or concertina wire is not permitted except in the case of an institution whose purpose it is to incarcerate individuals, i.e., a jail or penitentiary, or by appeal to the board of zoning appeals. • 2.6.11.5.4. No fence or wall within any district shall block the view of passing motorists or pedestrians so as to constitute a hazard. 2.6.11.5.5. Fences and walls shall be constructedbrick,woodbde corativle ironlor s such as,but not limited to concrete block, steel, and chain link. of the 2.6.11.5.6. Fences and walls shall be constructed topresent the finished right --ways Where due fence or wall to the adjoining lot orany abutting to the presence of an existing fence or wall or continuous landscape hedge on the adjoining parcel,this provision may be administratively waived where said request has been requested in writing. 2.6.11.5.7. When determined to be beneficial to the health, safety, and welfare of the approve an administrative public,the planning services director may variance from height limitations of fences and walls in all districts provided that at least one health, safety,or welfare standard peculiathe does not set an unwanted property is identified, and that such approval precedent by addressing a generic problem more properly corrected by an amendment to this Code. 2.6.11.5.8. Existing ground levels shall not be altered for the purpose of increasing the height of a proposed wall or fence except as provided for within section 2.6.11.5.7 and division 2.4. 2.6.11.6. Fence height measurement for all districts. The height of a fence or wall located outside of the building line shall be measured from the ground level at the fence location. However, alteredeso as totservices provide for director for determines that ground levels have been higher fence,the development services director shall determine the ground level for the purposes of measuring the fence height. In determining whether the ground level has been altered for the purposes of increasing the height of the fence,the development services director may consider, but is not limited to consideration of,the following facts: 2.6.11.6.1. General ground elevation of the entire lot. 2.6.11.6.2. In the case of a lot with varying ground elevations,the average elevation over the length of the fence, and at points in the vicinity of the fence. e 2.6.11.6.3. The ground elevation on both sides of the fence. In measuringaurin tht is nathe. height,the ground elevation on the side of the fence lowest elevation shall be used as a point from which the fence height is to .•� be measured. . 2.6.11.6.4. Fences or walls shall be permitted principal uses; however a fence or wall shall not, in any way, constitute a use or structure, which permits,requires and/or provides for any accessory uses and/or structures. (Ord. No. 92-73, § 2; Ord. No. 94-27, § 3; Ord.No. 99-46, § 3.D.; Ord. No. 00-92, § 3.D.; Ord. No. 02-3, § 3.E.) ORIGIN: Community Development &Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Linda Bedtelyon, Community Planning Coordinator DEPARTMENT: Administration LDC PAGE: LDC 2:238 LDC SECTION: 2.7.2.3.5 CHANGE: To clarify advertising requirements for the Neighborhood Information Meeting (N1M) relative to the time that the advertisement appears in a newspaper of general circulation and to allow flexibility to the time requirement for conducting the Neighborhood Information Meeting(NIM). REASON: The existing LDC requirement for a NIM advertisement specifies that the display advertisement must appear at least seven days prior to the NIM. The code should also address the timeliness of the advertisement ensuring that the advertisement does not appear sooner than ten days prior to, but at least seven days prior to, the NIM. The existing LDC requirement for the NIM specifies that the applicant requesting a zoning change must conduct at least one public informational meeting within 30 days of receipt of County staff's initial review comments on the application. Typical reviews may involve up to 17 staff reports. If one or two reviews remain pending for any length of time, the petitioner is unnecessarily delayed from holding the NIM. The change will allow the Planning Services manager the discretion to determine that if the majority of the staff reviews have been returned, the applicant may hold the NIM. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None II GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None • Amend the LDC as follows: 2.7.2.3.5. Public participation requirements for rezonings, PUD amendments, conditional uses, variances or parking exemptions. 1. Applicants requesting a rezoning, PUD amendment, or conditional use approval shall must conduct at least one his Neighborhood Informational Meeting after initial staff review and comment of the application and before the Public Hearing is scheduled with the Planning Commission. The appropriate number of staff reviews of the application returned before the NIM can be held, will be at the discretion of the current planning manager, only in cases where one or two pending reviews are unnecessarily hindering the applicant from presenting the proposal to the public. • - - • • • - - -= - - - - Written notice of the meeting shall be sent to all property owners who are required to receive legal notification from the county pursuant to section 2.7.2.3.2. Notification shall also be sent to property owners, condominium and civic associations whose members are impacted by the proposed land use changes and who have formally requested the county to be notified. A list of such organizations shall must be provided and maintained by the county, but the applicant shall must bear the responsibility of insuring that all parties are notified. A copy of the list of all parties noticed as required above, and the date, time, and location of the meeting, shall must be furnished to the planning services department and the office of the board of county commissioners no less than ten days prior to the scheduled date of the public informational meeting. The applicant shall must make arrangements for the location of the meeting. The location should must be reasonably convenient to those property owners who are required to receive notice and the facilities shall must be of sufficient size to accommodate expected attendance. The applicant shall must further cause a display advertisement, one-fourth page, in type no smaller than 4-8 point and chall must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear stating the purpose, location, and time of the meeting, and e legible site location map of the property for which the zoning change is being requested. The advertisement is to be placed within a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least seven days prior tobut not sooner than ten days before, the public neighborhood informational meeting. The Collier County staff planner assigned to attend the pre- application meeting, or designee, shall must also attend the public informational meeting and shall serve as the facilitator of the meeting, however, the applicant is expected to make a presentation of how it intends to develop the subject property. The applicant is required to audio or video tape the proceedings of the meeting and to provide a copy of same to the planning services department. �'�' 2. As a result of mandated meetings with the public, any commitments made by the applicant must be reduced to writing and made a part of the record of the proceedings provided to the planning services department. These written commitments will be made a part of the staff report to the county's appropriate review and approval bodies and made a part of the consideration for inclusion in the conditions of approval of any applicable development approval order. 3.2 Any applicant requesting variance approval or parking exemption approval shall must provide documentation to the planning services department indicating that property owners within 150 feet of the subject site have been advised of the extent and nature of the variance or parking exemption requested within 30 days of receipt of a letter indicating that the application is sufficient. _ - • - __ • _ _---• _ : 4. Where it has been determined that there is a property owner, functioning condominium or civic association who has made formal request of the county to be notified, then the applicant must provide written documentation to the planning services department indicating that such property owner or organization has also been notified concerning the extent and nature of the variance or parking exemption requested. The applicant must provide a written account of the result of such noticing and shall submit any and all written communications to the planning services department. A list of property owners, homeowner or condominium associations notified and any other written communications must be submitted to the planning services department at least two weeks prior to the scheduled date of the first advertised public hearing. s . n • ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Stan Chrzanowski,P.E. DEPARTMENT: Engineering Review Services AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: 2003, cycle 2 LDC PAGE(S): LDC2:247 LDC SECTION: 2.7.3.6 CHANGE: Add the requirement that all Pie yearlymonitoring reports hencefortht must be in the form of an affidavit. submitted to Collier County Planning Dep REASON: PUD monitoring reports presently submitted are being prepared by personnel who lack legal accountability. l force some Developers FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: This am ntdm Pdatel their yearly monitoringto hire planners, licensed engineers, or otheragents reports. Cost will be a function of the complexity of the we project. veracity s ochange madell resuon in Collier County CDES spending less time verifying monitoring reports due to the fact that the reports will have to meet the form of an affidavit. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: none GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: none Amend the LDC as follows: 2.7.3.6. Monitoring requirements. In order to ensure and verify that approved project densities or intensities of land will not be exceeded reports that developmentebe ual monitoring submitted by the developer/owner will be fulfilled�� or authorized agent of a PUD to the development services director. The monitoring report shall must be in the form of an affidavit and be executed b the erert own agent and be submitted annually, on each anniversary of the date said PUD was approved by the board until the PUD ismet The monitoring reportely constructed and l commitments in the PUD document/master plan are shall must rovide the following information: 1. Name of project. • 2. Name of owner, developer. 3. Number of units, by residential type; square footage and acreage of recreational facilities, commercial and other permitted uses; infrastructure and/or other uses which are complete of[or] for which a valid permit has been issued, but which have not been completed. 4. Up-to-date PUD master plan showing infrastructure, projects/developments, plats,parcels and other pertinent information. 5. Traffic counts for all access points to the major highway network. 6. Copies of all required monitoring reports completed in the past year (i.e., traffic,wellfield, etc.). 7. Up-to-date PUD document which includes all approved amendments. 8. Status of commitments in PUD document. 9. Other information as may be required by the development services director. ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: David Weeks,AICP,Chief Planner DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE #OR DATE: Cycle 2 for 2003 (prepared May 1,2003) LDC PAGE: LDC2:254.1 -257 (Supp.No. 12) LDC SECTION: 2.7.7. Affordable housing density bonus CHANGE: Eliminate provision for Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement independent of a rezone or PUD rezone petition, except where now allowed within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay; reflect that the base density and density bonuses are applicable to most, but not all, of the coastal urban area; reflect densities and density bonus for the Immokalee urban area; and, clarify density bonuses/reductions/maximums allowed in the coastal urban area. REASON: Submittal of an independent Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement is only applicable to properties in jeopardy of down-zoning pursuant to the zoning reevaluation program; it is a means by which the zoning could be retained, not down-zoned. That program was .-� completed several years ago so there are no longer applicable properties. Clarification is needed that the base density and density bonuses - components of the density rating system - do not apply to the entire coastal urban area. For example, the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict is limited to a maximum density of 1.5 DU/A and is not subject to any density bonuses; and, some future land use districts and subdistricts in the coastal urban area do not allow residential uses (other than caretakers unit), such as the Urban Industrial District. Clarification different lan for needed the hat the coastal base density and density bonuses for the Immokalee urban area are urban area. Need to recognize the ability to obtain affordable housing density bonus in conjunction with a Stewardship Receiving Area application (for towns, villages, hamlets and compact rural developments) within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. Finally, clarification/correction is needed as to the density maximums/bonuses/reductions allowed in the coastal urban area. FISCAL& OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: There will be no fiscal or operational impacts as result of this amendment. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: The Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan (Affordable Housing Density Bonus in Density lViasRating ter Plsstem,an and esdential Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay); and, the Immokalee Area Designation). GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. The Affordable Housing oMasi DensiPlaniy Bonus provided for in the Future Land Use Element and Immo Area continue to be available via the rezone process. Amend the LDC as follows: Sec. 2.7.7. Affordable housing density bonus. 2.7.7.2. Affordable housing density bonus program. 2.7.7.2.1. Overview. Within most of the coastal urban designated areas identified on the future land use map of the growth management plan, a base density of four residential dwelling units per gross acre is permitted. However, the base density may be adjusted depending on the characteristics of the development. One characteristic of a housing development which would allow the addition of density bonuses in order to increase the density over the base density is the provision of affordable housing in the development. The provision of affordable housing units may add up to eight dwelling units per gross acre to the base density of four residential dwelling units per gross acre, for a total of 12 residential dwelling units per gross acre, plus any other density bonuses available, and minus any density reduction for traffic congestion er-eeastal management area required, pursuant to the growth management plan. ; The total eligible density must not to exceed a total of 16 dwelling units per gross acre, except as allowed through use of transfer of development rights, as provided for in the growth management plan. Within most of the Immokalee Urban area, as identified on the Immokalee area master plan future land use map of the growth management plan, base densities are four or six or eight residential dwelling units per gross acre. However, the base density may be adjusted depending on the characteristics of the development. One characteristic of a housing development that would allow the addition of density bonuses is the provision of affordable housing in the development. The provision of affordable housing units may add up to eight dwelling units per gross acre to the base density of four, six or eight residential dwelling units per gross acre, for a total of twelve, fourteen or sixteen residential dwelling units per gross acre, plus any other density bonuses available. The total eligible density must not exceed a total of 16 dwelling units_per gross acre. Within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Agricultural/Rural area, as identified on the future land use map of the growth management plan, towns, villages, hamlets and compact rural developments are allowed at a density range of one-half to four dwelling units per gross acre. The allowed density may be adjusted depending on the characteristics of the development. One characteristic of a housing development that would allow the addition of density bonuses is the provision of affordable housing in the development. The provision of affordable housing units may add up to eight dwelling units per gross acre to the allowed density of one-half to four dwelling units per gross acre, for a total of eight and one-half to twelve and one- half residential dwelling units per gross acre,plus any other density bonuses available. applicationrence. Prior to submitting an for AHDB, a li preappcati 2 7 7 Z 3. preappcati on onconference may be scheduled with the development services director. housing and If the proposed development is to include affordable =easplgcathe on conference.�The ban improvement director shall must participate P P preapplication conference provides an opportunity to familiarize the applicant with the AHDB program and provides an opportunity for the county staff to obtain a clear understanding of the proposed development. The AHDB ingtsysystem, the AHDB monitoring program, .the limitations, criteria, procedures, standard forms, and other information will beediscussed�and e application may�e made available to the applicant. Depending on the type of development for aplanned unit development be combined with; an applicationp � a Stewardship Receiving Area. (PUD), a rezone,or an 2.7.7.2.4. Application. PP An application for AHDB for a development shall must be submitted to the the development services director in the form established asl�e rwi a requiredevelopment msha� must be ces director. One additional copy of the application provided for the housing and urban improvement director. The application shall must, at a minimum, include: 1. Zoning districts proposed by the applicant, '-Y on the property and acreage of each; �-. 2.-5. 6. Whether the AHDB is requested in conjunction with an application for a UD ng, or an planned unit development (P , an application for rezoni ) a lication for a Stewardship Receiving Area agFee ; 7. Any other information which would reasonably be needed to address the request for AHDB for the development pursuant to the requirements set forth in this section. 2.7.7.2.6. Review and recommendation by the housing and urban improvement director. After receipt of a completed application for AHDB, the housing and urbanimprovement director shall must review and evaluate the application in nlight oof this e A DB ratingand, f system, the AHDB monitoring program and the $pp} : The housin andurban im rovement director shall must coordinate-a gene-with the development services director;-ate to schedule the AHDB application with the corn.anion a. •lication for rezonin .lapped unit develo•ment or stewardship receiving area, and shall must recommend to the planning commission and the board of county commissioners to deny, grant, or grant with conditions, the UB application. The recommendation of the housing and urban improvement director shall must include a report in support of his 2.7.7.2.7. Review and recommendation by the planning commission. Upon receipt by the planning commission of the application for AHDB irectorethe planning ommdiss on tion and report of the housing and urban improvement shall must schedule and hold a properly advertised and duly noticed public hearing on • .. • • the application. If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a PUD, then the hearing-shall must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for the PUD before the planning commission, and the planning commission shall must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the application for the PUD. If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a rezoning, then the hearing shall must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for rezoning before the planning commission, and the planning commission shall must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the application for rezoning. If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a stewardship receiving areas then the hearing must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for stewardship receiving area before the planning commission, and the planning commission must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the application for stewardship receiving area. In-the-event-that •.-!!! !: ' - ' .. �16 • :: •• 1-- :- - • - - _ ... _ : :. .• : : _ : , . .:: - . After the close of the public hearing, the planning commission shall must review and evaluate the application in light of the requirements of this division and the requirements for a rezoning, PUD rezoning, or stewardship receiving area, as applicable, and shaft must recommend to the board of county commissioners that the application be denied, �^ granted or granted with conditions. - - - = , •- - - = - • . . '-• •-7. . • . • . • • . . sestien: 2.7.7.2.8. Review and determination by board of county commissioners. Upon receipt by the board of county commissioners of the application for AHDB and the written recommendation and report of the housing and urban improvement director and recommendation of the planning commission, the board of county commissioners shall must schedule and hold a properly advertised and duly noticed public hearing on the application. If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a planned unit development (PUD), then the hearing shall must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for the planned unit development (PUD) before the board of county commissioners, and the board of county commissioners shall must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the application for the planned unit development (PUD). If the application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for a rezoning, then the hearing r shall must be consolidated and made a part of the public hearing on the application for rezoning before the board of county commissioners, and the board of county S� . commissioners• • shall must consider the application for AHDB in conjunction with the ' application for rezoning. If theapplication has been submitted in con unction with an a. •lication for a stewardshi s receivin area thena the hearinl must be lication for stewardshi� receivi� and made a •art of the s ublic heann l on the area before the board of coon ' ;c�nsioners and for AHDB in the board with the of coun commissioners must consider thea li a plication for stewardship receivin area. - . • • _ • _ After the of thepublic hearing, the board of county commissioners shall must review and close evaluate the application in light of the requirements of this conditions, the requirements for a rezoning, and shall must deny, grant, or grant application in accordance with the AHDB rating system and the AHDB monitoring prop-am' . = - , -. . ._ I. - - -=- - • . 1 ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russ Muller DEPARTMENT: Engineering AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 2, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): 3:53 LDC SECTION: 3.2.8.4.16.21 CHANGE: Add a separation requirement for the garage to the back of the sidewalk. REASON: The distance from the back of a sidewalk to the garage door should accommodate a parked vehicle without encroaching into the sidewalk. Common practice is to park in the driveway far enough from the garage to allow room to walk between the garage and the parked car. It is also necessary to allow space for a clear zone for the sidewalk user. Several site visits and measurements were taken to determine that a minimum of 23 feet is required. The primary concern is safety,but there are many reasons why sidewalk parking is unacceptable. Safety and health Sidewalk parking can force pedestrians into traffic. Vehicles on sidewalks make it difficult to see children as they attempt to circumvent obstructions. The weight of cars parked on sidewalks can cause breaks or separations in the concrete creating trip hazards and uneven walking surfaces. Oil from cars parked on sidewalks create slippery areas on the concrete. Even partially blocked sidewalks are difficult to navigate for the visually impaired. Walking should be encouraged to promote health. Legal aspects Florida Statutes Chapter 316.1945 Stopping, standing, or parking prohibited in specified places states no person shall stop, stand, or park a vehicle on a sidewalk. Financial aspects Collier County risks an ADA lawsuit. Sidewalk maintenance responsibilities lie with the County,homeowner associations or property owners. Cars parked on sidewalks damage pavement. Supporting Organizations Community Traffic Safety Team Pathways Advisory Committee to the MPO. C:77' C • FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: As stated above the County risks ADA lawsuits and the maintenance costs. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: none GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: none Amend the LDC as follows: 3.2.8.4.1.16. Streets. The street layout of all subdivisions surrng areas edevelopments properties shall coordinated with the street systems of thesurrounding be provided with local street interconnections allowunless top equine said graphy,othr n nato ons. All features or other ordinances/regulations do not arterial or collector streets shall anbedpl�annadstreets within a develoCollier pment shall not comprehensive plan. Collectorright-of-way have individual residential driveway connections.by thelcounty transportateir location and n services cross section must be reviewed and approved division during the preliminary subdivision plat comprehensive planw process. t and the right ofsubdivisions �l provide rights-of-way in conformance with thd way cross section contained in appendix i B. vehicular andedestrian safetytreets shall be , gaservice life d constructed to provide for optimum and low cost of maintenance. 1. Street access. Every subdivision or development shall have legal and adequate access to a street dedicated for public use and which hyo been accepted for maintenance by or dedicated to the State of Florida or C County, described in LDC, section 3.2.8.3.1. When a subdivision or development does not immediately adjoin such a street, the applicant shall provide access to the development from a dedicated street in accordance with these regulations and provide legal documentation that access is available to the of access site.a streAll ot o within a subdivision or development shall be pro legal dedicated for public use. 2. Adjoining or proposed adjoining street sym e e arrangement of for the in subdivisions or developments may berequired continuation of existing or proposed collector or arterial streets to and from adjoining properties, whether developed or undeveloped, and for their proper projection to ensure a coordinated and integrated street system per requirements of the growth management plan,this Code or other ordinances and regulations. Where a subdivision or development abuts an existing or proposed public arterial or collector street,buffering shall be required per division 2.4. 1 3. Local streets. Use of local streets by cut through traffic shall be discouraged, using methods(like traffic calming)that do not compromise connectivity or reduce the number of access points to the subdivision. 4. Traffic analysis. If the proposed land development or subdivision will generate traffic volumes in excess of 1,000 ADT(average daily trips) or 100 vehicles per hour, peak hour/peak season,whichever is more restrictive, then a traffic analysis,prepared by a professional engineer, shall be provided by the developer. The analysis shall show the impact on the proposed internal streets of the subdivision or development and existing externally affected streets. The analysis shall be used to determine the street classification, width and number of traffic lanes internal to the development and any requirements for off-site(external) improvements on the existing street system per the Collier County growth management plan. 5. Street right-of-way width. The minimum right-of-way widths to be utilized shall be as follows and,where applicable, shall be clarified by the cross sections contained in appendix B. and will be directly related to traffic volume as indicated in the definition of each street continued herein and where applicable clarified by the cross sections contained in appendix B. Private street right-of- way widths and design may be determined on a case-by-case basis in accordance with section 3.2.7.2. Street Type (feet) R/W Width* Number of All Streets Lane Width (feet) lanes Cul-de-sac 60 2 10 Local 60 2 10 Minor collector 80 2 11--12 Minor collector 80--100 2 11--12 (divided) Major collector or As determined for 4 11--12 minor arterial* median and turn lanes Note: Any rural cross sections approved may require expanded right-of-way widths for additional shoulder and swale facilities. Design to be approved on a case-by-case basis. *If an alley is utilized, the right-of-way width may be reduced upon approval of the transportation services administrator. ` e • e t 6. Dead-end streets. Dead-end streets shall be prohibited endespa cul-de-sac. When a street is designed to be extendedwhenha adjacent designed is developed, a temporary cul-de-sac and right-of-way shall be designed. Culs- de-sac in excess of 1,000 feet shall not be permitted unless existing topographical conditions or other natural features preclude a street layout to avoid longer culs-de-sac. When conflicts occur between the design standards of this division and Collier County Ordinance [No.] 86-54,the County Fire Protection Code,or its successor ordinance [see Code ch. 58, art. III],the standards of this division shall take precedence. Culs-de-sac shall have a minimum 40-foot pavement radius (to back of valley gutter) and 60-foot right-of-way radiusislands sade edge of pavem�en and ithi�cul- de-sac, they shall have a minimum 45 foot o inside edge of pavement radius of no greater than 25 feet(See Figure 4 below). Graphic Unavailable(Figure 4) tter or 7. Curbs/valley gutter. All streets shall required ae provided street intewith ley rsec�ions and for those s to provide for drainage. Curbs shall areas requiring additional vehicular protection. All required intersection curbs shall extend ten feet beyond the radius. f 8. Intersection radii. Street intersections shall cul-de- acprovided streets and 40-foot radi s5 foot radius (edge of pavement) for local or for collector, arterial and commercial/industrial streets. If two local or cul-de-sac streets intersect at less than 90 degrees, a radius of greater than 30 feet may be required. Intersection right-of-way lines shall be provided with no less than a 25- foot radius, or as approved by the community development and environmental services administrator. All intersections shall be provided with ramps where sidewalks are required. l be ed so as 9. Intersections and street jogs. Whereverstreets eshall noltinte sect atle, streets anangle lessthan 60 to intersect at right angles. Two s degrees. When an intersection occurs on a curve, it should be made radially at the point of intersection, with a minimum 75-foot tangent measured from intersecting centerlines. All local cross streets or stop streets should provide a minimum 50-foot tangent measured from intersecting centerline. Any proposed deviation to the tangent requirements must be supported by design calculations submitted by the applicant's professional engineer.The calculations must be based on the roadway speed limit and the Florida Department of Transportation "Green Book" standards for degree of curvese Streetsclassified 1prts an local shall be provided with appropriatelygsupoed by degn calculations. Street jogs, at intersections, shall be prohibited. In no case shall intersections be located closer than 100 feet apart, as measured between closest right-of-way lines. The use of the 100-foot intersection separation criteria shall be used only when a traffic impact analysis indicated that neither intersection will require turn lanes or signalization. Intersections of more than two streets shall be subject to the approval of the community development and environmental services administrator. 10. Reverse curves. Tangents shall be provided for all streets,between reverse curves, according to the following, unless otherwise approved by the community development and environmental services division administrator pursuant to section 3.2.7.2. Street Classification Tangent (Minimum) (feet) Cul-de-sac 25 Local 50 Minor collector/commercial/industrial 75 All other streets 100 11. Construction in muck or clay areas. The design of street proposed in excessive muck areas shall be considered on an individual basis and may,where so directed by the development services director, require the use of under drains. Alternate methods of construction may be considered by the development services director based on a design study, containing soil testing data, and recommendations prepared by a geotechnical engineer licensed to practice in the State of Florida and supported by the applicant's professional engineer. 12. Materials. Streets shall include a stabilized subgrade, base and wearing surface in accordance with standards designated by the development services director and as shown in the typical sections. a. Subgrade and shoulders. All subgrade and shoulders shall be stabilized to a depth of 12 inches and to the full width as shown on the typical section drawing. The stabilized area shall be free of muck, roots and other objectionable material. The subgrade and shoulders shall be stabilized and compacted to obtain the minimum limerock bearing ratio (LBR) of 40 LBR and at least 98 percent of maximum density as determined by AASHTO T180. If the bearing value of the natural soil is less than that specified, the subgrade and shoulders shall be stabilized in accordance with section 160 of the Florida Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction (latest edition thereof). The construction of the subgrade and shoulders shall generally conform to sections 160-8 and 160-9 of S • 'e--\ the Florida Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction(latest edition thereof). b. Base. The base shall be compacted limerock constructed to the thickness specified in the typical section drawing for the class and type of road to be constructed, and shall be built to the specified width and centered on the subgrade. Limerock used for the base shall meet the standard specifications for grade no. 2 limerock and shall be compacted to obtain at least 98 percent maximum density as determined by AASHTO T180. Construction and materials of the base shall conform to sections 200 and 911 of Florida Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction(latest edition thereof). Alternate base courses that meet FDOT specifications may be considered and approved by the development services director. c. Prime. The base shall be primed with type RC-70 bituminous material of SS-1 (asphalt emulsion) and shall comply with section 270-2 of the standard Florida department of transportation specifications. d. Surface course. The surface course thickness and width shall be as specified in the typical section drawings. The processing of the mixture and construction of the surface course shall comply with sections 320, 330 and 332 of the standard Florida department of transportation specifications. e. Grass. All areas within the right-of-way not receiving the surface course shall receive seed, fertilizer and mulch in accordance with sections 570, 981, 982 and 983 of the standard Florida department of transportation specifications. Where sod is specified by the development services director for erosion control, it shall be installed prior to preliminary acceptance of the roadway. f. Maintenance. The applicant shall be responsible for maintenance of the roads for the period between preliminary and final acceptance as specified herein. This includes workmanship,materials, and all repairs and maintenance. g. Testing. The applicant shall have the subgrade and shoulders tested for compaction and limerock bearing ratio (LBR) at intervals set forth in the latest edition of the Florida Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction development services director. The subgrade and base shall be tested for compaction by a certified engineering testing laboratory.Prior to acceptance by the county, a copy of the test results along with a statement of compliance issued by the testing laboratory, shall be furnished to the development services director. h. Inspection. During construction, a field inspection shall be made by the development services director. It is the applicant's responsibility to provide written notice to the development services director when construction is ready for inspection. i. Signs. The developer shall provide and install traffic control signs, street name and speed limit signs. All signs shall be of noncorrosive, reflective material construction or of a type approved by the development services director. One double-sided street name sign of standard design as prescribed by current county standards shall be provided at each intersection for each named street unless otherwise approved by the development services director pursuant to section 3.2.7.2. A street sign shall be placed at a point eight feet from the edge of pavement on a radial line that bisects the intersection radius curve unless otherwise approved by the development services director pursuant to section 3.2.7.2. All signs shall be designated on the construction plans prior to their approval by the development services director. j. Pavement striping. All work shall be in accordance with section 711 of the Florida Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction(latest edition thereof). 13. Alternative types of pavement, base and subgrade. Alternate types of pavement, base and subgrade determined by the development services director and/or the transportation services administrator to be equivalent to those specified in this division may be approved. Application for such approval shall be accompanied by written data, calculations and analysis which show, by generally accepted engineering principles, that the alternate types are equal or superior to those specified. 14. Street grades. Street grades shall be determined in relation to the drainage facilities for the subdivision and shall not exceed four percent nor be less than 0.3 percent, unless otherwise approved by the development services director pursuant to section 3.2.7.2. Street grades shall be shown on the development plans by direction and percent of fall on the road profiles. 15. Swales. Swales shall not be permitted within the right-of-way in lieu of curbs or valley gutters unless the provision for a rural section specified in section 3.2.8.3, Required improvements, is justified. Swales may be permitted to convey rear yard drainage and to collect street drainage. 16. Marginal access streets. Where a subdivision or development abuts or contains existing limited access highway, freeway or arterial street, and if access is Cj� . • desired to adjoining property other than street connections, a marginal access street to afford separation of through and local traffic may be required by the development services director. 17. Half streets. Half or partial streets shall not be permitted except where essential to the reasonable development of a property ro onsand where,in addition,dedicationl ce with the circulation plan, comprehensive plan or these regulations of the remaining part of the required street right-of-way is provided. Whenever a property erty to be developed borders on an existing half or partial swithin such the other part of the street shall be required to be dedicated and constructed property. A proposed development or subdivision that adjoins or includes ay requirements of these regulations an existing street which does shall provide for the dednot conform to the minimum ication of additional right-of-way along either one or both sides of said street so that the minimum right-of-way requirements of these regulations shall be established. 18. Limited access strips. Limited access strips controlling access to streets on adjacent parcels shall be prohibited 3.2.7.2. excep�here approved by the development services director pursuant to sectio 19. Clearance and height. At least 17 feet of nominal clearance lanes, and other means of all be provided over the full width of public streets,private streets, /'� greater height and will vehicular access. Overhead public utilities may require a be evaluated on a case by case basis. 20. Pavement samples. The developer shall provide c e samples f both the ysmplesprior course and surface course of the completed publicprivate preliminary approval. The core samples shall be taken at a maximum of 300 feet intervals and arrangements shall be made to immediately replace the areas so removed with materials and construction to conform to theanspt ecifications and to the line and grade of the immediate testingngs'laboratory and/or professional samples shall be taken by an approvedg engineer and certified as to location and thickness measured. A tolerance of one-quarter inch for pavement surface anone-half ii chlfor result en course may be accepted. Any deviations more than these tolerances withholding preliminary acceptance until such time that the pavement is brought up to county standards. 21. Sidewalk •arkin-. The distance from the back of the sidew'ark a vehicle on the alk towa thoua-t ue door lcinl must theb23 feetwko �low room hould thea arae be side-loaded there must be a 23-foot over sidewalk. S .aved area on a .e •endicular •lane to the aa le door traffic.r .lans must ensure that arked vehicles will not w r interfere with ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russ Muller DEPARTMENT: Engineering AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 2, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): 3:75 LDC SECTION: 3.3.7.1.9. CHANGE: Add a separation requirement for the garage to the back of the sidewalk. REASON: The distance from the back of the sidewalk to the garage door needs to accommodate a parked vehicle without encroaching into the sidewalk. Common practice is to park in the driveway far enough from the garage to both feel comfortable and/or to allow a passenger room to walk between the garage and the parked car. It is also necessary to allow a couple of feet for a clear zone for the sidewalk user. Several site visits and measurements were taken to determine that a minimum of 23 feet is required. The primary concern is safety, but there are many reasons why sidewalk parking is unacceptable. Safety and health Sidewalk parking can force pedestrians into traffic. Vehicles on sidewalks make it difficult to see children as they attempt to circumvent obstructions. The weight of cars parked on sidewalks can cause breaks or separations in the concrete creating trip hazards and uneven walking surfaces. Oil from cars parked on sidewalks create slippery areas on the concrete. Even partially blocked sidewalks are difficult to navigate for the visually impaired. Walking should be encouraged to promote health. Legal aspects Florida Statutes Chapter 316.1945 Stopping, standing, or parking prohibited in specified places states no person shall stop, stand, or park a vehicle on a sidewalk. Financial aspects Collier County risks an ADA lawsuit. Sidewalk maintenance responsibilities lie with the County, homeowner associations or property owners. Cars parked on sidewalks damage pavement. Supporting Organizations Community Traffic Safety Team Pathways Advisory Committee to the MPO. '� • FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: As stated above the County risks ADA lawsuits and the maintenance costs. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: none GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: none Amend the LDC as follows: 3.3.7.1.9. Infrastructure improvements plans. Detailed on-site and off-site infrastructure improvement plans and construction documents prepared in conformance with the design standards of division 3.2 and any current county ordinances, regulations,policies and procedures which consist of,but are not limited to, the following items: 1. A cover sheet setting forth the development name, applicant name,name of engineering firm, and vicinity map. /`` 2. Improvements for water and sewer service as needed or as may have been specified during a preliminary site development plan review prepared in conformance with Collier County Ordinance No. 88-76, as amended. 3. Improvements for roadway,motor vehicle and non-motorized circulation, ingress and egress,parking and other transportation needs, including traffic calming devices, required or as may have been specified during the preliminary site development plan review,prepared in conformance with section 3.2.8.4 subdivision design requirements(for purposes of this requirement, all references in section 3.2.8.4 to "subdivision" should be read to mean development,where applicable and appropriate). 4. Non-motorized circulation is defined as movement by persons on foot, bicycle or other human-powered device.Non-motorized circulation depicting sidewalks and bicycle facilities consistent with sections 2.8.3.4. and 3.2.8. 5. The absence of obstructions in the public right-of-way shall be demonstrated, including provisions for safe and convenient street crossing. Sidewalks and bike paths at intersections shall continue to the edge of curb as depicted by Illustrations 1 and 2. �v ` GRAPHIC LINK(not available): Illustration 1 6. Two curb ramps shall be provided for sidewalks and bike paths at each street corner of an intersection. Curb ramps shall be a minimum of 36 inches in width and shall not rise at a ratio greater than as outlined by the Florida accessibility code for building construction. GRAPHIC LINK(not available): Illustration 2 Crosswalks shall be required at any intersection where the distance to the nearest crosswalk is greater than 1,000 feet. 6:7. Improvements for water management purposes as needed or as may have been specified during the preliminary site development plan review, prepared in conformance with section 3.2.8.4 subdivision design requirements (for purposes of this requirement, all references in section 3.2.8.4 to "subdivision" should be read to mean development,where applicable and appropriate), and pursuant to South Florida Water Management District rules, chapter 40E-4, 40E-40 and 40E-41,Florida Administrative Code. q78. All necessary standard and special details associated with sections 3.3.6.2.9.2. through 3.3.6.2.9.6. above. 8:9. Written technical specifications for all infrastructure improvements to be performed. 9:10. Engineering design computations and reports for water, sewer,roads and water management facilities, as required by federal, state and local laws and regulations. 4-011. Topographical map of the property which shall include the following: a. Existing features, such as, watercourses, drainage ditches, lakes, marshes. b. Existing contours or representative ground elevations at spot locations and a minimum of 50 feet beyond the property line. c. Benchmark locations and elevations (NGVD). 44,12. Site clearing plan and method of vegetation disposal. 4:13. Sidewalks, bike lanes and bikepaths. For all projects required to be developed through the site development plan (SDP)process, the developer shall be required to construct sidewalks or bikepaths, and bike lanes where applicable, as described below,unless otherwise exempted from the subdivision regulations of this Code. Sidewalks or bikepaths, and bike lanes shall be constructed contiguous to public and private roadways which are adjacent to and internal to the site,in conformance with the following criteria: a. Sidewalks, six feet in width, or bikepaths seven feet in width shall be provided on both sides of collector and arterial streets. b. Sidewalks,or bike paths, five feet in width, shall be provided on both sides of local streets except as follows: (1). Where a cul-de-sac or dead-end street exists within an approved single-family residential subdivision, and where the developer of such subdivision was granted an exemption to the subdivision regulations to allow a sidewalk on one side, the same exemption shall then apply to any new abutting single-family residential subdivision which extends the dead-end street or cul-de- sac to no more than 1,000 feet. c. Bike lanes shall be provided on both sides of any street classified higher than a local street(i.e. collector, arterial). d. All sidewalks,bikepaths and bike lanes along public and private roadways shall be constructed in accordance with design specifications identified in section 3.2.8.4.14. and division 2.8 of this Code. e. Alternative designs for sidewalks,bike lanes, and bikepaths in developments adjacent to public or private roadways may be provided, subject to approval by the community development and environmental services division administrator and may utilize,but not be limited to the following criteria: (1). A design that reflects the land use density and intensity of the development along the street or cul-de-sac. (2). A design that reflects the expected traffic volumes on the street or cul-de-sac. (3). A design that does not create a safety hazard caused by vehicles parked across the sidewalk or directs pedestrians or cyclists into high traffic areas. 7 ; . , (4). A design that does not encourage additional landscape area due to clearing for the installation, aesthetic softening or additional landscape, additional softening of unnatural linear concrete strips, or similar features. (5). A design that reflects the expected demographics of the development, including but not limited to considerations such as the expected amount of school age children and active adults. (6). A design that reflects reduced speed streets and culs-de-sac. (7). A design that reflects the expected amount of utilization by joggers, walkers and cyclists. (8). A design that reflects the character of the development, i.e., golf course/country club community, affordable housing,private gated communities. (9). Criteria pursuant to the provisions of section 3.2.7.2. of this Code. f. Developments that provide an internal bikepath system,which functions primarily for transportation purposes, not recreation, and which connects with existing public bicycle paths or bike lanes may be exempt from the sidewalk/bikepath requirement. The county's transportation services division administrator may grant such an exemption if the alternative system functionally operates equal to the standards of the county bikeway system, interconnects with the existing or proposed county bikeway system and will be perpetually open to the public. g. Developments providing interconnections to existing and future developments pursuant to the density rating system section of the Collier County growth management plan future land use element, shall include sufficient right-of-way to accommodate the roadway, sidewalks, bike lanes or bikepaths, and bike lanes,where required. Bikepaths, bike lanes and sidewalks shall be constructed concurrently with the roadway interconnection. h. Where planned right-of-way improvements scheduled in the county's capital improvements program (CIP)would cause the removal of any sidewalks/bikepaths or bike lanes required by this Code within two fiscal years following the fiscal year in which the first building permit for the project is issued, the developer, in lieu of construction of the required sidewalks/bikepaths and bike lanes, shall provide funds for the cost of sidewalk/bikepath and bike lane construction and deposit the same into a fund approved by the transportation services director,or his designee, for future construction of required sidewalks/bikepaths and bike lanes,by the • county. 4r14. Completion of site development plans. Upon completion of the infrastructure improvements associated with a site development plan, and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy,the engineer shall provide a completion certificate as to the improvements,together [with] all applicable items referenced in section 3.2.6.5.3 of this Code. Upon a satisfactory inspection of the improvements, a certificate of occupancy may then be issued. 15. Sidewalk narldn . The distance from the back o k a vehicle lk tothe ara a door must be 23 feet to allow room to drivewa without •arkin over the sidewalk. Should the :ara le be side- loaded there must be a 23-foot •aved area on a •e •endicular •lane to the ara a door orplans must ensure thatparked vehicles will not interfere with pedestrian traffic. ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb/Mary Ann Devanas DEPARTMENT: Planning Services LDC PAGE: LDC6:3 LDC SECTION: Section 6.1.3. and 6.1.4. CHANGE: Revise these sections to define day and specify when a calendar day as opposed to a business day is applicable. REASON: This is proposed to avoid confusion on when certain action by staff is due. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: No fiscal impacts. But, it may require staff to change their operating procedure to meet deadlines. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Various code sections. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: Sec. 6.1.4:3. Day. The word "day" shall be construed to mean business day when County action is required, such as issuing a permit, rendering a decision on a site development plan, or any other decision requiring County action. In all other instances, unless expressly provided, Tthe word "day" shall mean a calendar day as defined by the Code. Sec. 6.1.34. Computation of time"business day". . .. . . '. . _ . .. - • , _ - - • . . . _ . . . . . A business day is any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or County-recognized holiday. The first business day shall be excluded from the computation for County action, but every other business day shall be included. �-. . r /""\ ORIGIN: Community Development&Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Cheryl Soter, Senior Planner DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: LDC Cycle 2, 2003 LDC PAGE(S): LDC6 LDC SECTION: 6.3 CHANGE: Add definitions. REASON: There are certain references to educational institutions in the Code that necessitate these definitions. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: 2.4.3.1. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT:None Amend the LDC as follows: Ancilla ,lant: The buildin) site and site im.rovements necess. to •rovide such facilities as vehicle maintenance warehouses maintenance or administrative buildin necess• to •rovide su• sort services to an educational •ro a am. Educational Facilities: The buildin.s and e•ui•ment structures and s•ecial educational use areas that are built installed or established to serve .rimaril the educational .0 .oses and secondaril the social and ea recreational Florida Statutes�and ae ro ed b the and which ma lawfull be used as authorized Collier Coun School Board. Educational Plant: The educational facilities site and site im•rovements necess to accommodate students facul administrators staff and the activities of the educational nroeram of each plant. • ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 2, 2003 LDC PAGE: LDC6 LDC SECTION: Definitions section CHANGE: Adding definitions for fire stations and ancillary fire station services. REASON: These uses are being added to the essential services section and need to be clearly defined. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: 2.6.9.1. and 2.6.9.2. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None Amend the LDC as follows: Fire station: The building(s) and site of a government establishment primarily engaged in firefighting, used to house fire trucks and other emergency vehicles, firefighting equipment and apparatus, firefighters, and support/administrative staff. Fire station services, ancillary: Fire protection activities imperative to carry out the purposes of a government establishment primarily engaged in firefighting, such as fire training camps, but which is not required to be located at a fire station for that fire station to serve its function. However, services designed to repair any firefighting equipment is not an ancillary fire station service. 4 ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division AUTHOR: Russell Webb DEPARTMENT: Planning Services AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 2,2003 LDC PAGE: LDC6 LDC SECTION: 6.3 -Definitions section CHANGE: Adding educational definitions from the School Board interlocal agreement. REASON: To accommodate the interlocal amendments that will be forthcoming in the next cycle. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. Amend the LDC as follows: Adiacent• Lying near or adjoining Auxilia acili : The s•aces located at educational •lants which are not desi ed for student occupation stations. Corn,atibili review: A review •ursuant to the Architectural and Sit eDin Standardseffect d ime contained within the Division 2.8 of the Land Develo.ment SBR Letters of Com•liance are re•uested and ement and mitirtains to issues ton of neof corn.atibili atve im�acts. surroundin: uses coma liment• •atterns of develo The Com•atibili Review will be limited to corn.atibili and screenin issues orientation of buil :sand d •athwa connections li: tin: dum•ster location ancillary facilites. Clonsisten Review: A review •rocess whereb the Coun will determine rior to locatto thecritl of e is eria Board's ac•uisition of •ro•e whetherLand Use•Element consistent with the Golden Gate Area Master the Growth Mara'ement Plan's Future Plan and Immokalee Area Master Plan and whether the •lant or facili is a •ermitted use • , • conditional use or prohibited use in the zoning district on the site,pursuant to the 1996 Interlocal Agreement. Locational Criteria: The land use categories established in the Growth Management Plan's . Future Land Use Element and Map, Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Immokalee Area Master Plan. School Board Review("SBR"): The site development plan reviewjrocess for School Board projects as outlined in the 2003 Interlocal Agreement. State Requirements Loy Educational Facilities ("SREF"): The Florida Department of Education State Requirements for Educational Facilities, effective 1999, as amended. 1996 Interlocal Agreement: the Interlocal Agreement between the Collier County School Board and Collier County as recorded in Official Record Book 2207, Pages 1729 et seq.,which bears an effective date of June 25, 1996. 2003 Interlocal Agreement: the Interlocal Agreement between the Collier County School Board and Collier County as recorded in Official Record Book 3228, Page 2989 et sea.,which bears an effective date of February 28,2003. b ' 4 ORIGIN: Transportation Division AUTHOR: Tom Tomerlin DEPARTMENT: Traffic Operations and Alternative Transportation Modes AMENDMENT CYCLE# OR DATE: Cycle 2,2003 LDC PAGE: LDCB:4-LDCB:8 LDC SECTION: Appendix B CHANGE: Depict limerock base under sidewalks. REASON: Housekeeping. See attached documents. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: None. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: 3.2.8.4.14. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None /'• Amend the LDC as follows: a) m - . t Nit if • y O O M 2 'v CU V :I; ID o y Y a) O E _ 1 a. U(n C-Cs/ C T4 ` I .0) '> a T) U Cl) 3 V) C z3z O Ti. 1...r.......1914:4-1- 0•c C C NeJ n j C�® � >CU Ua L � Cc V) c°) I- H cn E o W '---c5 f2 L 4.) -..-... 1:13 d) v CC O in Q oo w -1-0 mO E O ♦A oma L � � V/ vim.N .F+ NCD CI Q co itco N _v A 0 Cn CD cv O U . J U •' Q) 0N (/) 1 ,n N L Q m 3 U cn j_____ iI O mO p Ou cI Ini , u II Qitlot "..4.. S 3 _ c i2 v a k Y U u d /""NI U0 O . 0 o y O 2 _ o • ++ T 5 coE a i L =m z < ° ems U - m O J T O _U d .-4-* 41) • ' :m+ o 0 0 i � � U Y A CC U +O' o �'` d' ;to L. p 0 U1 E- - Z a.).g i C3 10 N -_j 0 O C � E a we _o Z 1 4...0 11 ..,c in o Q 0 L" -J mm. U c U i L UJ 0 in o '_Z �� COm W 11!-c, _'-p -1—•W o ° ° s CC 4mN .i G7 V E Q ( UH NvN >UC O �\ r oa -- > 4 ! > Y 0 Q) t,l U o w U ti J C4,N L.Om t v v o a).J. cn >�[i Yom.- .1:.1 O O CI N 2 �Qa tnc N ilL W a� I-7,7 --....\ cri Co / .c++C Q N a) O imm Y_< 0m '' Z e' a W ° tn 0. �_ � CC a 0, 7 0 d U /`■ • V C a O+• U C N V to V i0 11N2 "' o i. of o 0 o z o h G o. Z < _ S1 L - s =� m 4 , w • i m -6' o • " W o i N U N C o O v U Y „,_IO U d' O`Q O O =c O o� 1 U N CI _L , 0 N : 0T HI a 0- N\ 0 m U, D ' 3J O C cW + V i N>0 U O EnE W a ix W O 0 OO Q� �p o v CL a Q .v V1 + Z ► Jy . N Q) C Qo \ in70 Q Q CO toI >,C ..J +a • 04 V 0 a o c: C s . ZF\ 15 . a) c� D. N o 0 U 3 i_____ U Ce ' o IS, W OC u N 6 G C J cnv 0 > 13 exU >' 0 O+' 4411 C m c " o a c N v y " v G M o 0 N G .0 U.c c� ! t0 v L. coy a COj Vi a> 0 _�o ims_ ii O `-J Q O _ 0 �� C Vm C ^ O U k a V l ♦ V N O M • r C 0 I. •-,d.o cYi «o i Ny 0p o p T'` a)o E n U y (O -C' � � Um O S N _ -F WO W mac/ 0 0 O -N Z 0 C : T.0 ..c in D < 0L" N07 J U Wix 1 - 'CI- ` Oo OC J Wo m D W y- o a o a 0 C] �m Z J a� z CI o I J N o a Zco Q �C g) ligt U .,.I N Cr w Da O C; U ._ o W u - • /. -' o o ✓ s co F.. wG UOG o,o .: N v ° J — 0c t O a>U , v U o EE corm m Oo �N a E " o" o UL v cNi ;' G r 0 Cr1 0 O c-� O� y 1.1. a M N c o ; c 3 CL E ✓ V ... m y W 0 t _� a O4- m - o O oo at hz �m n ; 2 O o c 6- a `E a 2 o i " ] aEu � v O Ni aw O m o 0 cp. 0 -0'0-0 CET �C m-6)-5 o; rnb- v 7. 0 ! I II o.. mac •o= o o c I — o 0 V >.% �_ C O E o"O' A .D wE 300 — y T o o�c u o .V+ V ++ L o O— D .' C V O Z 0 a.O ..CX V O O = 0 a-p avmoUEm Eley c E� 0 -- N M v CO ;1-- ;/-J w 1710 c YE 77.131 Yu)- h* UO . O d O * O J W O .. N Z Q A W m i W Y CD Z 0 CO o w io �o .N CI l _ - .> U J SI O U �Y JN ZQ0 (n o vo3 .0 > v1"1" 1. 4 (x C C W 0Z W ass.ar.........) a G a-\ ° o Q) .Q L . ' U - • O ° c°i w i i___ ° N gc.) WW MATCH LINE Y w —rte' i c �_a C 0J i Q) E ZEnxm � � QW — ° co C:1 0 Q v WC V) d� 5 ° J ,..c, Q NUW l. >-U 2 Z Z Nam V J m cc az Q) �, r v,o o ; � Q ..J o •`rmoWe. . Q cc JOm = 0 U_ T Wv<W Oc U Z -� N cr 1----- OU U L. 1- Q) 0 ° O p N 00 CIN CO Nlii « ►+-I-- 9/2 Q Z = Z a • 0 O Z o � w 0 U U L M Z � P o rt "1 0 WI- W 0 0 LU W 1 J w Q �mQ 3NI1 H31VVI w cr J I, i } ix 0 J f- - N o N < E a11' S V Li W Z oa o „ c U W yrn 3 a UZ U Li O Q 0 ID 9 Q Li U d �� ci CO r E UJ Y U, 0 a cfl03� r 00 o a> L$.$�! U Wo ZQv J J mk_ m W.,/ .1•-•1"a3 Item IV.A. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF AUGUST 6,2003 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: EX-2002-AR-4378 Companion to: CU-2002-AR-3537 Petition Name: Stewart Earthmining Applicant/Developer: Stewart Mining Industries Engineering Consultant: Davidson Engineering, Inc. Environmental Consultant: N/A II. LOCATION: i—, The subject site is located approximately 1.25 miles southwest of intersection SR29 and SR82, northwest of Immokalee in Section 18 &19, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Surrounding properties are mostly undeveloped with the following zoning classifications: ZONING DESCRIPTION N - A-MHO Citrus Grove E- A-MHO Farm building & Vacant S - A-MHO Vacant& Citrus Grove W - A-MHO Citrus Grove it EAC Meeting Page 2 of 7 IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The petitioner:seeks an Excavation Permit for earthmining. A Conditional Use petition for this item was heard by the EAC during the July meeting and the item was continued until the August meeting so that the Excavation Permit application processing could catch up to the conditional use and also so that staff could acquire more information on water quality in deep lakes (those that violate the fetch formula). The proposed operation is large. The petitioner intends to extract over 24 million cubic yards of material, resulting in a 203-acre lake on a 220-acre parcel of existing citrus grove. The excavated volume of fill per year is estimated at 930,000 cubic yards. At this rate, the operation will continue for approximately 25 to 30 years. The petitioner intends to do the excavating with a hydraulic dredge, so no blasting is necessary. A shallow excavation will be started using normal excavating equipment to establish a pool of water so that the hydraulic dredge can operate. The dredge will discharge directly into a sand processor. The Traffic Analysis submitted by the petitioner estimates that there would be 217 two-way trips per day (207 truck trips and 10 employee/service trips). Access is proposed from SR 82 via an existing farm access road. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural (Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District) on the Future Land Use-Map of the Growth Management Plan, and it is in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO); the site could potentially be designated as Stewardship Receiving Area(SRA). Policy 1.5 of the RLSAO provides that the baseline standards (i.e. pre-Final Order uses, densities and intensities) remain in effect for all land not subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits, except as provided in Group 5 policies. The baseline standards (Agricultural/Rural designation) include earthmining. The Stewardship Credit System has not yet been established and there is no indication the petitioner intends to participate in that system at this time. The Group 5 Policies (Policy 5.1) eliminate certain uses for properties designated as Flowway Stewardship Area and not participating in the Stewardship Credit System -but not EAC Meeting Page 3 of 7 agricultural uses; and, the Group 5 Policies (Policies 5.1 - 5.3) impose certain restrictions (e.g. site alteration limitations) and requirements (e.g. submittal of wildlife habitat management plan for listed species) upon properties designated as Flowway Stewardship Area, Habitat Stewardship Area, or Water Retention Area and not participating in the Stewardship Credit System - but they are not applicable to agricultural uses. The petitioner should be aware that the proposed development activity may, or may not, lessen the environmental value of the property. As such, it may, or may not, lessen the number of Stewardship Credits the site is eligible for at some future date should the property owner wish to participate in the Stewardship Credit System. Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed CU petition to allow earthmining may be deemed consistent with the FLUE, as amended October 22, 2002 and now in effect. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: Objective 2.2 of the County's Growth Management Plan states "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable Federal, State, or local water quality standards." Upon completion, the lake will provide additional water quality retention well above that existing on the site currently. During construction, the only discharge may be from dewatering, which will be subject to the rules of NPDES and the SFWMD since the project is within the limits of an existing agricultural surface water management permit. The petitioner does not intend dewatering. Objective 5.1 states "Allow the extraction or use of mineral resources in the County provided such activities comply with applicable industry and government standards regarding health, safety and environmental protection." This conditional use will allow the simple extraction of earth (sand and/or rock) and the creation of a lake. Such activities are easily done in compliance with accepted standards of health, safety, and environmental protection. Objective 5.2 states "Continue to reclaim the total disturbed area of extraction sites in order to ensure adequate assessment and mitigation of site specific and cumulative impacts resulting from mineral extraction activities." Excavations such as these, when properly finished, with shallow side slopes and smooth banks can provide opportunities for recreation and wildlife habitat. EAC Meeting Page 4 of 7 The project is consistent with Policy 6.1.4 in that an invasive exotic vegetation removal and maintenance plan will be required as part of the excavation permit. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Stormwater Management: The site lies within the Corkscrew Slough Basin, abutting a county-maintained canal that must remain undisturbed by any excavation activities. Lakes retain more water than is discharged from the original ground prior to the excavation of the lake. That is why lakes are usually used for surface water management. In this case the whole site will become a lake, so staff has no water management concerns. Staff's only concern with this petition is the requested depth of the excavation. The excavation is proposed to go to a depth of 85 ft. Section 3.5 of the LDC limits the depth of any excavation in Collier County to that allowed by the "fetch formula", which takes lake geometry into account when allowing for wind overturn. In this case the fetch formula (D = 5' + (0.015 x Avg. Fetch)) yields an allowable depth of approximately 50 ft. There is at least one older excavation in Collier County, Crown Pointe, that violates the fetch formula by a considerable amount. The Crown Pointe lake measures about 2250 ft. x 750 ft., so the maximum allowable depth should be 27.5 ft. The file for Ex 59.112 (Loch Louise, a.k.a. Crown Pointe) shows that the lake was excavated to an average elevation of—40 NGVD (+1-) from an original grade of approximately +7 NGVD. The report shows a maximum depth in some areas of 51 ft of water. There have been no water quality complaints that staff is aware of at the large Crown Pointe lake. The first phase was platted in 1987. Staff has contacted representatives of local and state agencies that might have insight into the negative side of fetch formula violations and has, so far, found no agency representative that opposes deep pits on general principle. The standard reply seems to be that the worst case scenario is an anoxic (no oxygen) condition at the deeper levels, but that such a condition may be common or normal, or at best, not harmful to the lake or the aquifer. Staff does not oppose this petition. The LDC allows the petitioner to prove that his violation of the fetch formula will not cause water quality problems. Not being limnologists, staff finds the arguments of the petitioner's experts and the lack of real opposition on the part of any other review agency to be satisfactory EAC Meeting Page 5 of 7 justification to allow, in this one case, at this specific location with these specific subsurface conditions, the requested depth. Environmental: Site Description: This subject site is an existing citrus grove. Wetlands: There are no wetlands on the property. Preservation Requirements: The subject site has been impacted by the current agricultural use, citrus groves. There is not a preservation requirement. Listed Species: There are no suspected listed species on the site. VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of Ex 2002-AR-4378 "Stewart Earthmining" and its companion item Conditional Use No. CU-2002-AR-3537, with the following stipulations: Stormwater Management: 1. Petitioner will modify the existing Agricultural Surface Water Management Permit for this site. Environmental: 1. Conditional Use approval will require the site to be cleared of all exotics and maintained exotic-free in perpetuity. EAC Meeting Page 6 of 7 Planning: 1. The petitioner shall pave the access road from SR 82 to the subject property line prior to commencement of operations. The pavement shall be a minimum of 24 feet in width and 1.5 inch of asphalt. 2. Turn lanes on SR 82 (westbound left-in, eastbound right-in) shall be provided prior to commencement of operations. PREP• RED BY: ,�►: 7c%3 STAN CHRZANO, ` SKI, P.E. DATE ENGINEERING SiRVICES MANAGER ("'`- 7722/03 03 JULY . ADARMES MINOR. P.E. DATE ENGINEER SENIOR KIM HADLEY DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST 7 6- 0 FRED/ ISCHL, AICP DAME PRIN I'AL PLANNER EAC Meeting Page 7 of 7 REVIEWED BY: CAL ,,la,,,,,_ 7- /S BARBARA S. BURGES ' DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST n % � . VAI LIAM D. LORENZ Jr., P.E. DA'Z'E ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR (7)74:h / (..)/„GtAilfkr----- 7-za-r)3 MARGA 1 T WUERSTLE, AICP DA'Z'E PLANN I SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: AIL...,. - �.4�..�..../ ? Z 2/3 • PH K. SCHMITTD7/2- ATE 0MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT &ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MINISTRATOR C: SUSAN MURRAY, AICP CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER • zn_ N apiel 1114 ____ /.. M SISC���� 0 E S.R. 951 5 O1 / C.R. 951 r yc 0 33 0,--1,2, . -i 0 m J a • z -I _1 00 n n N A P o t=i Do a o, m co 0, Z o W:. '^ o a 410r,Q co t o t T A V \ S.R. 29 \ U 7 7 n ; , s ER A .0 § 1 ( ) -I 7 0 z C OT TO swaillillc N O O N D CO Crio W O U) V ' -1 - m 0 z CO M M D 13 i-,E.; y p J Map Output Page 1 of 1 CCPA GIS - HTML Ma• w ., - FII „ii u , moi. . ��. �,. f,i,•. i 1 i tir -g. 421 cNiti t ?" 7 NIP — I �l { i riw' .: -, ., .., ; - rt. - .I r'} � s iv"if 'lir-' j' •i 4 r'""; ',1,-'i � ..• , .: t 7.,'': 11 tt;:ii:r ,i. E : 4,1 I , ,,,,,:_,.,„,„,, ,.,..ti _ ., i 1 i (t x ....„$ %.,,,, , .,...-:-..- �' it' - +" �� ' * = z - "r r i�g �, ,__,,, .„ , . . ,,---1 11 �� t , P ., , -s3 i , '__ r$ f tuft r•I Ut'i -- ..,;,,,,t,.,.4 j 1 ' , .;p#4)- ,1-•. , cit ' s , f 1 t. of ::-.-� i ita Y 1 `•'", .` :F .. r a a •I + "ir t.: ca ' ' ' i '' - t.' •, k• l' , %i, ,,i: It': ''''-4 - ' ''''. • ', '',,'"'" ' z w .4 I ., ! 4t t• i' l r-. r .`.•—i. i 4' 3 * ,--/ i ;-.= , ..t= J.- /....----.z.,--- --,, e , . CopyrightiC)ACCCollierCountyProrriyAppraiser ..41pg Fl. ? y_ F.O . 4+�J t!' ' . 8, http://gis.collierappraiser.com/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=ccpa_design... 7/2/2003 c ;I 1 EXISTING AGRICULTURAL ZONING I, €s i!$ j I; i (CITRUS GROVE) 11 p�1(1tpj pi,i — — I' 1I111111f� I 1 n p : g z i),-72`, 5 iiiiiiiflfli Ip 8 A ^ I \ I °. z R Idig N I m 7; i 111111111 I 1 i I t il RD I D we EB. �Vi � > > 1 I .62 -pc> IS. r —2 f Eli I. lig l � � I I ig 'Ill 0 i I . N S> . I > ; I166 i p gi a og 2 c I I p L �. � P iI 11 �o I 67110s' I Z at)A I g <m r9 Z r I _'q� I I I ( ! o ZZ iI 9 �' - - - � Sod - - � — y (RANGE LAND) k , .... I '_ ii 1111111Z10° 1 * T5 II 6s s• sk_1 ,\ II 3 eft •s r . \ mr 1e �•� 'Ic.. � � .. tI Et. t �jkv_� _ . 5iiiffiti!.11/ 5R3ti , = i a,i I , r iclfS :r Tn 11 Po /^. z t` N\ 1 I P C�C gPP P g\ EIJ11IFI al 3 N fili .. w 1 i iii , % r 1 /� 6 1 s Ii ii 11 ► ; Sal �o z` ;" - 4. 8 11!111111/ ; -,!.I- ,. c.'-to ,. I �� ,-, ZPRIT0SLA �tvw ; 3Nn .,_=7= MATCH I UNE I I 3_3 3Z I I reXn I II I eW .. m I I -1 _ 0 x I 0 x c = I CZ Nc g C�C x M 07 3 0: n 0 N : A g xi o8 I S B r N $11 0 > 1 N Z r 1 2 Q Z zxl 11 z I 0 l Z > ii ' ----- Z r FP I 0 Nz 51II a C7.1.,,,, . N _y i �N �jto Zm ^ m .. m /11 1 Cl m n X C x //I I i—'' 174:Pill c z m ' t w`Z N 0 I r4i cz� m4A 1Ii oY Z+ o m x wim A c -gym r r m I as > .- m I 0 N Naz I > I c Z I > r I N y"� z .P z cci� cz, 14 0 > ' z c� C) ` 0 xi O z ri C b 5 'GTA Xy r NN � � N Z I �_ • nak Z Z 4 co g 1% c II , .. I• mo_ • of O X \ lj X 3N11 H0ivw g v Z z 11 _ N { �Nm \ 0 "' "i Z I I 5110 z0 II / Memorandum To: EAC members From: Kim Hadley, Environmental Service r— Date: 07/17/03 Subject: Coconilla Staff Report You are receiving a new copy of the Coconilla staff report due to a typo made in the original staff report you received for the July meeting. The following change was made on page 5, in the last sentence of the second paragraph: "If at such time that the USFWS provides their written biological opinion and their recommendation allows for the multi-story building within the secondary zone and/or allows construction during the non nesting season, the eagle management plan will be consistent with the GMP." Community Development and Environmental Services Division Planning Services Department Current Planning Item IV.B. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF AUGUST 6, 2003 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: PUDZ-2002-AR-3158 Petition Name: Coconilla PUD Applicant/Developer: Eco Venture Wiggins Pass, LTD. Engineering Consultant: RWA Consulting, Inc. Environmental Consultant: Passarella and Associates,Inc. II. LOCATION: The subject site is located on Vanderbilt Drive (CR 901) at the western terminus of Wiggins Pass Road (CR 888) in Section 17, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Surrounding properties are mostly developed with the following zoning classifications: ZONING DESCRIPTION N - PUD Cocohatchee Bay PUD; currently undeveloped, permitted for residential high-rise structures E- Vanderbilt Drive ROW Across Vanderbilt Drive is the Cocohatchee Bay golf course, zoned PUD S - P Cocohatchee River Park (Collier County Parks and Recreation) and open water SE- PUD Undeveloped commercial tract of Wiggins Bay PUD (uses are similar to those in the C-2 commercial district) W- PUD Cocohatchee Bay PUD; currently undeveloped, permitted for residential high-rise structures and preserve EAC Meeting Page 2 of 9 IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The subject site is 10.45 acres in size. It is currently zoned General Commercial (C-4) and is the former site of the Wiggins Pass Marina. The petitioner proposes to rezone the site to PUD. The Coconilla PUD is primarily residential (5.65 acres) with a maximum of 112 dwelling units. 102 dwelling units are proposed for high- rise multifamily buildings and 10 townhouses are also proposed. The maximum density that could be requested for this PUD is 16 dwelling units per acre. The petitioner requests a density of 11.6 dwelling units per acre. Four acres of the site will contain boat slips and other water-related uses which are accessory to the residential units. In addition, 0.8 acre is being dedicated to public use, adjacent to the Cocohatchee River Park. The high-rise building is proposed to be constructed in three tiers. The northern tier is limited to 21 stories over parking with a maximum of 225 feet in height above the required flood elevation. The middle tier is limited to 18 stories over parking with a maximum of 200 feet in height above the required flood elevation. The southern tier is limited to 15 stories over parking with a maximum of 175 feet in height above the required flood elevation. The petitioner states that the highest n point on site today is 9.48 feet NGVD. The flood elevation for the site is currently 12 feet NGVD. 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. The Urban Mixed — Use District permits a variety of residential and non- residential land uses including mixed use developments, such as Planned Unit Developments, including water-dependant and water-related uses and other recreational uses such as parks, marinas (public or private), yacht clubs, and related accessory and recreational uses, such as boat storage, boat launching facilities,boat fueling facilities, and restaurants. The Density Rating System indicates that the site is eligible for a base density of 4 dwelling units per acre, but the site is within the Traffic Congestion Area, resulting in a 1 dwelling unit per acre reduction. However, the petitioner's request to rezone the property from C-4 to PUD meets the criteria of the Density Rating System"Conversion of Commercial Zoning"provision which states: if the project n includes conversion of commercial zoning which is not within a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center and is not consistent with the EAC Meeting Page 3 of 9 Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, a bonus of up to 16 dwelling units may be added for every acre of commercial zoning which is converted. Since the property is proposed for a combination of residential and water-dependent, water- related uses, Staff believes it appropriate to allow a double-counting of the acreage; that is, the entire site acreage is used in calculating residential density, though a portion of the site is used for a water-dependent, water-related use (marina). The FLUE is silent to this issue. Base density= 4 dwelling units per acre Traffic Congestion Area= -1 dwelling unit per acre Conversion of Commercial= +16 dwelling units per acre Total Maximum Density= 19, however, 16 dwelling units per acre is the maximum density permitted by the Density Rating System The Urban-Mixed Use District sets forth any water-dependant and/or water- related land use shall encourage the use of the PUD technique and other innovative approaches to conserve environmentally sensitive features and to assure compatibility with surrounding land uses. In addition to the criteria of n compatibility with surrounding land uses and consistency with the siting policy of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (Policy11.1.4), the following land use criteria shall be used for prioritizing the siting of water-dependant and water-related uses: a) Presently developed sites; b) Sites where water-dependant or water-related uses have been previously established; c) Sites where shoreline improvements are in place; d) Sites where damage to viable, naturally functioning wetlands, or other environmentally sensitive features could be minimized. The subject site is presently developed with a marina, a water-dependent and water-related use. Based upon the above analysis, Staff concludes the proposed use and density for the site can be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element. 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 EAC Meeting Page4of9 standards. This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by the collection of surface water runoff in concrete drainage structures, transportation of the flow in a subsurface conveyance system, and directing the runoff to above ground dry detention in four detention areas and drainage swales. A 25-year storm will discharge through the water management system and not directly to the marina from the uplands. 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. The SFWMD FLUCCS identifies Code 540 (Bay) onsite as "other surface waters" and COE identifies"Waters of the U.S." The proposed marina is for 52 slips. Policy 6.3.1 requires the amount of permitted wet slips for marinas be no more than 18 boat slips per 100 feet of shoreline where impacts to sea grass beds are less than 100 square feet. The proposed marina will not impact any sea grass beds for construction. The existing shoreline is 326 feet, which would allow 58 slips; the applicant is proposing only 52 slips, in accordance with the policy. 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 have been submitted for the bald eagle. The relevant reference to this project that is required by Policy 7.1.2 to be used in preparing the management plan is the"Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region",USFWS, 1987. Policy 7.1.2(2)(d) states, "For the bald eagle, the required habitat management plans shall establish protective zones around the eagle nest restricting certain activities. The plans shall also address restricting certain types of activities during the nesting season." Per the USFWS Bald Eagle Management Guidelines, restrictions are recommended on new commercial and industrial development, construction of multi-story buildings or EAC Meeting Page 5 of 9 /'•• high-density housing developments, construction of roads that increase access to nest sites, and use of chemicals toxic to wildlife. Most other sources of disturbance are allowed within the secondary zone during the non-nesting season. The subject site, located within the secondary zone, is proposing a multi-story residential tower. Consistent with this policy, the bald eagle management plan for the project provides the appropriate restrictions on building height and prohibits construction during nesting season. Policy 7.1.2(3), states, "The County shall consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the FFWCC and the USFWS in issuing development orders on property containing listed species. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case by case basis, may change the requirements contained within these wildlife protection policies and any such change shall be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plans." The USFWS is working on a biological opinion that is expected to be completed sometime in October. The FFWCC does not typically provide technical assistance once a Section 7 consultation(Incidental Take permit application)has been started. If at such time that the USFWS provides their written biological opinion and their recommendation allows for the multi-story building within the secondary zone and/or allows construction during the nesting season, the eagle management plan will be consistent with the GMP. The project is consistent with Policy 7.1.4 in that applicable federal and state permits regarding protected species will be required at the time of Site Development Plan/Construction Plan submittal. A stipulation has been placed in the PUD document. Per Policy 7.2.1, the marina siting criteria was used to determine the appropriate number of docks allowed in order to direct increased boat traffic away from sensitive manatee habitats. Policy 10.1.1 sets priorities for water-dependant uses in order to protect shorelines where activities will damage or destroy coastal resources. The proposed private marina use falls in the middle of the priorities list. However, the shoreline along the property has already been impacted. Similarly, Policy 10.1.3 lists priorities for water-related uses: Recreational facilities, marine supply/repair facility and residential development, respectively. Consistent with the policy, the proposed plan is providing a marina, a marine supply facility as well as a residential development, the first, second and third priorities. Per Policy 10.1.6 regarding new marinas, the applicant has provided vehicular parking, fueling facilities designed to contain spills from on-land and in the water, and accessibility to all public services. Per this policy, a hurricane plan will be stipulated in the PUD document. Sewage pump-out facilities will be required at EAC Meeting Page 6 of 9 the time of site development plan submittal. This policy also states that dry storage should be encouraged over wet storage. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Stormwater Management: The subject site lies in an area referred to in the County Drainage Atlas as "Miscellaneous Coastal Basins" because it discharges directly into the Gulf. Since there are no downstream properties, water quantity(discharge) requirements are not a consideration. There are no County stormwater facilities in the vicinity of the project. Water quality retention must be accounted for in compliance with the requirements and standards of the FDEP and the SFWMD. Environmental: Site Description: The subject site is a 10.45-acre existing commercial marina. No native habitat is present. Wetlands: The subject site contains 0.43 acres of open water, the shoreline composed of sea wall and boat ramps. The submerged bottom of the bay is composed of soft sediment lacking sea grasses within or immediately adjacent to the project boundary. The applicant proposes to excavate a 3.65-acre marina basin and establish a 1,772 linear foot vertical retaining wall for a reconfiguration of the existing 52-slip marina. Preservation Requirements: There is no preservation requirement for the subject property, however the applicant is proposing to enhance the reconfigured marina basin for flushing by planting the terminal ends of the bay with 0.82 acres of mangroves. EAC Meeting Page7of9 Listed Species: The project site is developed and does not contain listed species. The West Indian Manatee may occur within waters near the project site. The majority of the site is located within the secondary protection zone of bald eagle nest CO-019. This nest is located approximately 830 feet northwest of the project site occupied by a pair of eagles that have successfully fledged two young during each of the last four consecutive nesting seasons. VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of Planned Unit Development Amendment No. PUDZ-2002-AR-3158, "Coconilla"with the following stipulations: Stormwater Management: 1. A Surface Water Management Permit or an Environmental Resource Permit must be obtained from SFWMD for this site. SFWMD may defer to FDEP because of the location. Environmental: 1. The bald eagle management plan shall be amended to include the following language: "Construction in the secondary protection zone shall be prohibited during nesting season, unless written authorization is provided by the USFWS." 2. Add the following language to Section 6.9 of the PUD document: a. "Construction within the bald eagle secondary protection zone shall be limited to a maximum height, not to exceed the height of eagle nest CO- 019. However, any construction greater than the height of the nest shall require written approval from the USFWS and that shall become the maximum building height allowed." b. "Any amendment to the Bald Eagle Management Plan shall require review by the Environmental Advisory Council or any successor body." 3. The bald eagle management plan shall be added as an exhibit in the PUD document. EAC Meeting Page 8 of 9 PREPARED BY: 7. 20 JvN 03 STAN CHRZANOWSKI, P.E. DATE ENGINEERING SERVICES MANAGER >c7 ‘40/63JU C. ADARMES MINOR. P.E. DATE ENGINEER SENIOR "6'1\ /4/141 KIM HADLEY / DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST FRE�_' ,CHL, AICP DATE P' rAL PLANNER EAC Meeting Page 9 of 9 REVIEWED BY: al/d92/ta_ ` 6-/q-6-3 BARBARA S. BURGESON DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST FC1i 06. 70`0 LLIAM D. LO NZ, Jr.;P.E. DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR 91)1M_ L GIA,,ow!6 -2°-"3 MARG NFT WUERSTLE, AICP DATE PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: -&3 J•S ,'HK. SCH I T DATE 10 MUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INISTRATOR C: SUSAN MURRAY, AICP CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER Item V.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF AUGUST 6,2003 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2003-AR-3860 Petition Name: Artesa Pointe PUD Applicant/Developer: Gateway Shoppes II, LLC Engineering Consultant: Q. Grady Minor&Associates, P.A. Environmental Consultant: Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. II. LOCATION: The subject property is an undeveloped 82 acre parcel located on the east side of n Collier Boulevard (CR-951) and on the south side of the Tamiami Trail (US-41), in Section 3, Township 51 South,Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Surrounding properties are mostly developed, with the exception of parcels north of the subject property. ZONING DESCRIPTION N - C-4 Undeveloped Agricultural Undeveloped R.O.W. U.S. 41 S - MH Developed E - MH Developed W - C-4 Undeveloped R.O.W. Collier Blvd. EAC Meeting Page2of8 DESCRIPTION: IV. PROJECT The petitioner is requesting a rezone from"RSF-3" and"PUD" (Henderson Creek) to a new PUD to be known as Artesa Point. The project will increase in size from 45 acres to 82 acres; change from a residential project to a mixed-use community consisting of 360 residential dwelling units of which a minimum of 200 units must qualify as affordable housing. The project will also add commercial uses for a maximum of 325,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: The subject property is designated Urban(Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict) on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. Relevant to this petition,this District permits a variety of residential unit types at a base density of 7.66 dwelling units per acre and is consistent with the maximum density permitted by the FLUE Density Rating System and is therefore consistent with FLUE Policy 5.1. The entire subject property qualifies for a base density of three(3)units per acre. Through the affordable housing density bonus provisions of the plan, eight (8)dwelling units per acre may be added to the base density. Base Density 3 dwelling units/acre Affordable Housing Density Bonus 8 dwelling units/acre Maximum Permitted Density 11 dwelling units/acre Requested Density 7.66 dwelling units/acre=360 units The maximum amount of permitted commercial space shall be 325,000 square feet of gross leasable area consistent with recently approved Comprehensive plan Amendment creating the Henderson Creek Mixed Use Subdistrict. In addition, the Artesa Pointe PUD is planned to incorporate natural systems for water management in accordance with their natural functions and capabilities as may be required by Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. Lastly, all final local development orders for this project are subject to the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance,Division 3.15 of the Land Development Code.Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed uses and density may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. EAC Meeting Page 3 of 8 Conservation & Coastal Management Element: Objective 2.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan states"All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards. To accomplish that,policy 2.2.2 states"In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge)to the estuarine system. This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing lakes and interconnected wetlands to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation during storm events. The project is consistent with the Policies in Objective 6.1 and 6.2 of the Conservation& Coastal Management Element, for the following reasons: A minimum of 25 % of the existing native vegetation on-site is being retained and set aside as preserve areas with conservation easements prohibiting further development. Habitat management and exotic vegetation removal/maintenance plans shall be required at the time of Site Development Plan/Construction Plan submittal. Preserve areas shall be maintained free of Category I invasive exotic plants as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. The requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)pursuant to policy 6.1.7 has been satisfied. Jurisdictional wetlands have been identified as required by Policies 6.2.1 and 6.2.2. Agency permits shall be required prior to Site Development Plan/Construction 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. n In accordance with Policy 6.2.6, required preservation areas have been identified on the PUD master plan. Allowable uses within the preserve areas have been EAC Meeting Page 4 of 8 included in the PUD document and are consistent with the uses listed in Policy 6.2.6. A wildlife survey for listed species in accordance with Policy 7.1.2 is included in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 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. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Stormwater Management: According to the Drainage Atlas of Collier County, Artesa Pointe sits in the Henderson Creek Basin, and as such has an allowable discharge rate of 0.15 cfs per acre. The water management proposal for the site consists of one drainage basin with the water management lakes in the residential portion of the project. The site uses a standard design of interconnected lakes, swales and open space areas to achieve water quality retention and peak flow attenuation. Discharge is via a control structure into Henderson Creek to the east. Environmental: Site Description: Native habitats on the subject property include pine flatwoods (33.11 acres), cypress-pine-cabbage palm (17.57 acres) and hydric pine flatwoods (4.34 acres). Also on site are approximately 26.82 acres of abandoned agricultural land, situated in the central portion of the property. Two seasonal high water elevations were marked in the field using biological indicators such as lichen lines, tree staining, etc. The elevation of the high water mark was 4.09 feet NGVD. Ground elevations on-site range from around 3.3 feet NGVD in the pine cypress wetland to 5.2 feet NGVD in the pine flatwoods community. Seven soil types are found on the subject property as mapped by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. These are Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum (Unit 2), Oldsmar fine sand, limestone substratum (Unit 10), Hallendale fine sand (Unit 11), Pineda fine sand, limestone substratum (Unit 14), Ft. Drum and Malabar, high fine sands (Unit 20), Holopaw fine sand (Unit 27), EAC Meeting Page 5 of 8 and Urban land (Unit 32). A map showing the location of each of these soils is included as an Exhibit in the EIS. Wetlands: Wetlands on-site occur on the west side of the property and consist of cypress- pine-cabbage palm and hydric pine flatwoods. This community may have been part of a historic flowway, which has been severed by adjacent roadways and the mobile home park to the south. Approximately 16.79 acres (77%) of the 21.91 acres of SFWMD/Collier County jurisdictional wetlands on-site are proposed for impact. Mitigation for wetland impacts will be provided in accordance with the requirements of the SFWMD. It is anticipated the mitigation will include approximately 5 acres of on-site wetland enhancement, along with upland compensation. The upland preserve area adjacent to Henderson Creek is approximately 7.25 acres in size. The specifics of the off- site wetland mitigation are still being worked out, but the options being reviewed include purchase of lands for enhancement within the same drainage basin and/or the purchase of credits from a mitigation bank that serves the basin. /'"N Preservation Requirements: The subject property contains 55.02 acres of indigenous vegetation. As required in section 3.9.5.5.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code, 25% (13.755 acres) of the existing native vegetation will have to be retained on-site. The fallow farm fields on-site have been excluded from these calculations. The 13.755 acres of native vegetation required for preservation have been identified on the PUD master plan as Preserve/Open Space. Listed Species: A plant and animal survey was conducted according to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission guidelines. The survey was conducted on March 21, March 29, April 2, and April 23, 2002 by two environmental scientists from Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Survey times varied from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., with approximately 30 man-hours logged on the property during the species survey. For this survey, particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of gopher tortoise, red-cockaded woodpeckers, and Big Cypress fox squirrels. The only sign of protected species on the parcel were five abandoned gopher tortoise burrows in the abandoned agricultural field. No other signs of protected species were observed on the property. EAC Meeting Page 6 of 8 VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2003-AR- 3860 "Artesa Pointe PUD"with the following stipulations: Stormwater Management: 1. A Surface Water Management or Environmental Resource Permit from the South Florida Water Management District must be obtained prior to any Site Development Plan approval. Environmental: 1. Amend section 2.15 of the PUD document as follows by deleting the struck through language. Pursuant to Policy 6.4.6 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, a minimum of 25% of the viable naturally functioning native vegetation on site shall be n retained,which is appre*imetely 13.755 acres. 2. Setbacks from preserve areas are required by the Land Development Code to be 25 feet for principle structures and 10 feet for accessory structures (3.9.5.5.6.4 LDC). Include these setbacks in section 4.6 (A) of the PUD document. 3. Delete the following language from section 5.2 of the PUD document. This acreage is based on conceptual designs and is approximate. Actual acreages of preserve areas will be provided at the time of site development plan or preliminary subdivision plat approvals in accordance with Division 3.3, and Division 3.2 respectively, of the LDC. EAC Meeting Page 7 of 8 PREPARED BY: 7 STAN CH' ANOWSKI, P.E. DATE ENGINEERING REVIEW MANAGER 7,//d7C -Y STEPHEN LENBERGER DATE SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST f• YMOND V. BELLOWS /17DATE CHIEF PLANNER REVIEWED BY: �.r�.�•� • . _ —1 R.-a3 BARBARA S. BURGESON . DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST EAC Meeting .� Page 8 of 8 1 / -e- _:_- C��---�0? l o 71 g�az ,4/LLIAM D. LO`'A NZ, J ., P.E. DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR 4 / ,•;,,,., ' g1/, 7-..7-z--63 MARG• I T WUERSTLE, AICP DATE PLANN 4 G SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: 0-. A----"- —��ray 7/03 •SEPH K. S HMITT DATE IMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES • II MINISTRATOR C: SUSAN MURRAY, AICP CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER ., Item V.D ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF AUGUST 6, 2003 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2002-AR-3495 Petition Name: Wentworth Estates PUD Applicant/Developer: V.K. Development Corporation Engineering Consultant: Johnson Engineering, Inc. Environmental Consultant: The Phoenix Environmental Group, Inc. II. LOCATION: The project site is located in Sections 29, 30, 31 & 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Section 5, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, n Florida. Although the project covers several sections of land, the main project entrance is located on the southwest side of U.S. 41 (Tamiami Trail) approximately 11/4 miles southwest of the intersection of U.S. 41 and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Access to the property will also be via Southwest Boulevard. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Surrounding properties include both developed and undeveloped parcels. Those to the south and west are undeveloped. Properties to the north and east are partially developed. ZONING DESCRIPTION N - PUD (Collier DRI) Undeveloped R.O.W. U.S. 41 Agricultural Undeveloped RSF-4 Developed S - Agricultural Undeveloped A-ST Undeveloped PUD (Lands End Preserve) Undeveloped E - R.O.W. U.S. 41 EAC Meeting Page 2 of 11 C-4 Undeveloped PUD (Miceli) Undeveloped Agricultural Partially Developed RSF-4 Partially Developed RMF-6 Partially Developed RSF-3 Partially Developed Agricultural Undeveloped MH Partially Developed PUD (Lands End Preserve) Undeveloped W- PUD (Collier DRI) Undeveloped A-ST Undeveloped Agricultural Undeveloped IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed Wentworth Estates PUD is a 1,558.49-acre parcel currently known as the Lely Lakes PUD. The PUD would allow a maximum of 1,499 residential dwelling units, a golf course, and a maximum of 85,000 square feet of commercial uses. The development will have direct access from Tamiami Trail East and also from Southwest Boulevard. The residential tracts are proposed to have maximum height of 45 feet, except for the"medium-rise" structures, with a maximum height of 100 feet. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: The subject property is designated Urban (Urban - Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict) as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. The Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict permits residential development at a base density of 4 dwelling units per acre. This district is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential uses, including mixed-use developments such as Planned Unit Developments. Review of the Density Rating System deems this project is eligible for a base density of 4 dwelling units per acre and no density bonuses are applicable. The project is also located within a Traffic Congestion Area, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map and described in the FLUE, and so is subject to a 1 dwelling units per acre reduction from the base density of 4 dwelling units per acre and is not eligible for any density bonuses. Therefore, this project is limited to a maximum /'• density of 3 DU/A. EAC Meeting Page 3 of 11 Base Density 4 du/a Traffic Congestion Area -1 du/a Total Eligible Density 3 du/a The 1,559-acre PUD was approved in 1991 and amended in 1998, for 749 dwelling units or .50 units per acre and 10 acres of commercial development. The amended acreage amount of 1044.72, less 10 acres of commercial uses, reduces the non-commercial portion of the PUD to 1034.72 acres, or 1.45 units per acre, and therefore is still within the allowable density of 3 DU/A. Some of the commercial portions of this PUD do not comply with criteria in the FLUE and therefore is not consistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section. However, review of FLUE Policy 5.1 provides property zoned prior to the adoption of the Plan and found to be consistent through the Zoning Re-evaluation Program are consistent with the Growth Management Plan and designated on the Future Land Use Map series as properties Consistent by Policy. Zoning changes will be permitted to these properties, and to other properties deemed consistent with this Future Land Use Element via Policies 5.9 through 5.12, provided the number of dwelling units and overall intensity of the development allowed by the new zoning district, except as allowed in Policy 5.11 n are not increased. The 10-acre commercial-tract in this PUD was previously found to be consistent with the FLUE via Policy 5.1 and 5.11. This PUD amendment does not increase the intensity of development on the 10-acre tract and the residential component is consistent with the Density Rating System. Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes that the proposed PUD can be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: The project is consistent with the Policies in Objective 6.1 and 6.2 of the Conservation & Coastal Management Element, for the following reasons: A minimum of 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 to adjoining off-site preserve areas and wildlife corridors. Habitat management and exotic vegetation removal/maintenance plans shall be required at the time of Site Development Plan/Construction Plan submittal. EAC Meeting Page 4of11 n Preserve areas shall be maintained free of Category I invasive exotic plants as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. The requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)pursuant to policy 6.1.7 has been satisfied. Jurisdictional wetlands have been identified as required by Policies 6.2.1 and 6.2.2. Agency permits shall be required prior to Site Development Plan/Construction 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,required preservation areas have been identified on the PUD master plan. Allowable uses within the preserve areas have been included in the PUD document, and are consistent with the uses identified in Policy 6.2.6. In accordance with Policy 6.5.1, copies of the Environmental Impact Statement and PUD document have been sent to staff at Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve for their review. A wildlife survey for listed species in accordance with Policy 7.1.2 is included in the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS). A bald eagle management plan in accordance with Policy 7.1.2 has been prepared and included as an exhibit in the PUD document. Wildlife habitat management plans for other listed species will 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. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: Stormwater Management: The project site is located within the Naples Manor Drainage Basin of Collier County Water Management District 6 as shown on the Collier County Drainage Atlas. The site also sits within the County's "Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Plan" (LASIP). The site has been divided into four separate drainage basins, each with lakes and wetlands interconnected by swales to provide for water quality retention and peak flow attenuation. EAC Meeting Page 5 of 11 The discharge point for Basin A is being negotiated with permitting agencies. Basin B eventually discharges into the off-site canal along the west property line. Basins C &D discharge toward the south into the Rookery Bay wetlands. Because of the project's discharge into Outstanding Florida Waters (Rookery Bay National Estuarine Preserve), the petitioner will provide water quality retention at 150% of the normal rate. The project will be reviewed and permitted by the South Florida Water management District, and the improvements will be reviewed by Collier County Stormwater Management for compliance with the projected improvements contemplated for the LASIP. Environmental: Site Description: The subject property consists of approximately 1,044.72 acres located in south Naples on U.S. Highway 41 (Tamiami Trail). Originally the project included 1,558.49 acres, however, 513.77 acres has been sold to the State of Florida, and became part of the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. The subject property contains a variety of vegetative communities, including pine flatwoods, hydric pine flatwoods, pine-cypress-cabbage palm, live oak, coastal scrub, cypress, wetland forested mixed and freshwater marsh. Portions of the site have also been cleared in the past for agricultural uses. Seasonal high water elevations for several areas of the site were determined by marking lichen lines with nails in trees, which were subsequently surveyed. These elevations along with historical elevations are included in Table 7 on page 16 of the EIS. Seasonal high water elevations provided in the table range from 2.97 feet NGVD to 4.88 feet NGVD, and average approximately one to two feet below historical high water levels. Ground elevations on the site range from less than one foot NGVD to about 8 feet NGVD. There are 19 soil types on the Wentworth Estates PUD project site, 10 of which are listed as hydric by the National Resources Conservation Service. A map showing the locations of each of these soils is included as Attachment 7 in the EIS. Descriptions of each soil type start on page 10 of the EIS. Wetlands: n � EAC Meeting Page 6 of 11 There are approximately 263.96 acres of jurisdictional wetlands and 45.65 acres of Other Surface Waters on the subject property. These consist of mixed pine and wetland hardwoods (30.6 acres), freshwater marsh (23.35 acres), cypress swamp (158.49 acres), canals (37 acres), borrow areas (13.95 acres) and spoil areas (17.45 acres). Descriptions of each of these habitats are included on page 13 of the EIS. The site plan includes preservation of approximately 221.49 acres (84%) of the jurisdictional wetlands, preservation of approximately 16.61 acres of Other Surface Waters, and 0.35 acres of wetland creation area. The proposed mitigation plan involves removal of exotic vegetation from the proposed on site preserves, filling of existing ditches and canals which drain the area, and directing additional water to jurisdictional wetlands. Upland preservation is also provided within the higher quality uplands adjacent to the major flowway located in the central portion of the property. Jurisdictional wetlands located in the Florida Power and Light easement will not be impacted by the proposed development. These wetlands will not be placed under a conservation easement and are not included in the preservation plan. Exotic vegetation will be removed from the easement, as required by the Collier n County Land Development Code. Preservation Requirements: According to the information provided in the EIS, there are approximately 426.14 acres of native vegetation on the subject property. In accordance with section 3.9.5.5.3 of the Land Development Code and Policy 6.1.1 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan, a minimum of 25% (106.54 acres) of the existing native vegetation on-site shall be retained. This requirement is satisfied by the 307.41 acres identified as preserve on the PUD master plan. Listed Species: The protected animal and plant species observed or expected to occur on the project site are listed in Table 11 on page 21 of the EIS. This table includes all species observed during the field investigations conducted between 1991 and 2002. American alligators were observed in some lakes, canals and ponds within the cypress, and mixed pine and cypress/mixed hardwood wetlands. Most sightings occurred in the northern boundary canal, the pond on Maple Drive and the canals in the major east-west drainageway just south of Maple Drive. A single nest was EAC Meeting Page 7 of 11 found in the mixed wetland hardwood swamp adjacent to the northern boundary canal at the western end of the site. One individual Big Cypress fox squirrel was observed in a cypress wetland. Field investigations were conducted to determine if fox squirrel activity occurred in the pine and open cypress habitats. No nests were observed in any areas. Results from surveys conducted during 1989-1991 revealed the presence of gopher tortoises. An updated gopher tortoise survey was conducted in October 2002. Based on the most recent survey, the highest density of gopher tortoises occurs in the coastal scrub habitat on the northeastern side of the subject site. Additionally, gopher tortoises were concentrated in the southern end of the horse farm that is located to the northeast of the coastal scrub area. The tortoise burrows located during the 2002 survey were GPS located in April 2003. Several newly dug burrows were located during the survey and match the size of juvenile gopher tortoises. A total of 86 active and inactive tortoise burrows were GPS located as shown on the burrow location exhibit in Attachment 12 in the EIS. Using the correction factor recommended for this area results in an estimated density of 34 gopher tortoises within the gopher tortoise habitat. Approximately 7.06 acres of this habitat will be preserved as part of the development plan. Small herons, including little blue heron, snowy egret and tri-color heron were observed feeding in the northern boundary canal and in ditches,ponds and prairies throughout the project site. No roosting or nesting areas were encountered. Wood stork were observed feeding in the northern boundary canal and flying over the western wetland complex. No nesting sites or roosts are reported for the site in the literature, nor were any observed. Osprey, a species of special concern in Monroe County, was observed in the southwestern portion of the project site. An active nest was observed near the southwest boundary of the property. A bald eagle was observed in flight over the canal located in the northwest corner of the north parcel. The approximate location of an eagle nest, based on previous field surveys, is shown on the FLUCFCS map and PUD document. The nest is approximately 280 feet north of the northern property boundary of the project. One fledgling was observed in May of 2001. A bald eagle management plan has been developed for the site, and is included as an attachment to the PUD document. All of the primary nest protection zone and the majority of the secondary nest protection zone lie within the northwestern most preserve. No construction other than exotic plant removal is proposed within EAC Meeting Page 8 of 11 the primary protection zone, and removal of exotics will be conducted during the eagle non-nesting season. In the secondary protection zone, construction will be limited to lake excavation and construction of a water management berm. Construction within this zone will also be conducted during the non-nesting season. Numerous state listed plants were observed on the project site. Most of these species were concentrated in wetland and scrub oak habitats,with the exception of satinleaf and Simpson's stopper, which were found in the mixed pine and cypress communities. Satinleaf is a hardwood hammock species, which will be protected by preservation of the mesic habitat in which it is found, adjacent to the major slough feature that runs diagonally through the property. None of plants found on the property are listed by the federal agencies as threatened or endangered. VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of Planned Unit Development No. PUDZ-2003-AR- 3495 "Wentworth Estates PUD"with the following stipulations: Stormwater Management: /'"\ 1. A Surface Water Management or Environmental Resource Permit from the South Florida Water Management District will be required prior to any Site Development Plan approval. 2. Add the following stipulation to Section 7.6 of the PUD document. A funding mechanism (e.g. Municipal Services Taxing Unit, Community Development District, etc.) shall be established over the boundaries of the entire Wentworth Estates PUD for purposes of funding the operation and maintenance of the proposed stormwater pumping station in the Lely-Manor Eastern Outfall Canal if future decisions of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners establish the need for such funding. Environmental: 1. Add the following stipulation to section 7.9 of the PUD document. The Homeowners Association documents and any other disclosure documents to purchases shall clearly state that Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve staff regularly conduct prescribed fires, remove invasive plants, trap feral and domestic animals, control illegal dumping, and manage visitor access within the Reserve lands. EAC Meeting Page 9 of 10 PREPARED BY: STAN CHRZANOW3KI, P.E. DATE ENGINEERING REVIEW MANAGER Xlebvt- /x4 2-/e-6,3 ROBERT C. WlorEY, P.E. DATE PRINCIPAL PROJECT MANAGER ,-1 Of-Ari STEPHEN LENBERGER DATE SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST rtAk-, 7j 7( V —s FRED AICP DATE PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEWED BY: 0.0/ 7 /ef-e.3 BARBARA S. BURGESON DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST rte. EAC Meeting Page 10 of 10 j // D o C<' ILLIAM D. LO NZ, Jr., P.E. DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR a AttALeig- MA 'GARE J ' STLE, AICP DATE PLANNIN .ERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: s-� -7 .2-E2/6-.3 J• 'EPH K. S HMITT D T V MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES •Al MINISTRATOR C: SUSAN MURRAY, AICP CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER Item V.E. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF AUGUST 6, 2003 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT: Petition No.: EX-2002-AR- 3112 Petition Name: Golden Gate Quarry Applicant/Developer: APAC Engineering Consultant: Hole Montes Associates Environmental Consultant: Southern Biomes II. LOCATION: The subject excavation is in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 21, Township 49 South, Range 27 East, of Collier County Florida, more specifically lying just south of the existing APAC earth mine (all of Section 16) located at the southern end of 5th Street S.W. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Surrounding properties are mostly developed with the following zoning classifications: ZONING DESCRIPTION N - PUD Warren Bros. Pit (Earth mine) E- A (ST/WS4) Vacant S - A (ST/WS4) Vacant W - A (ST/WS4) Vacant EAC Meeting Page 2 of 6 IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The petitioner seeks an Excavation Permit for earth mining. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element: Presently, the subject site is designated Agricultural/Rural, Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, on the Future Land Use Map and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The FLUE (and Final Order issued June 22, 1999 by the Governor and Cabinet sitting as the Administration Commission) allows excavation in this designation. However, the subject site is zoned A, Rural Agricultural; the "A" zoning district requires a conditional use for excavation. This excavation permit has been submitted without a companion conditional use application. The Rural Fringe GMP amendments were adopted on June 19, 2002, but have not yet become effective due to legal challenges. However, it is anticipated that these amendments will be in effect by the end of July 2003. In those amendments, the subject site is designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Receiving Lands, and is within the North Belle Mead Overlay(NBMO). Relevant to this excavation permit, the NBMO states, in part: "Because an earth mining operation and asphalt plant uses have existed for many years in the area, and the surrounding lands in Sections 21, 28 and the western halves of Sections 22 and 27 are reported to contain Florida Department of Transportation grade rock for road construction, these uses are encouraged to remain and expand. However, until June 19, 2004, mining operations and an asphalt plant may be expanded only to the western half of Section 21 and shall not generate truck traffic beyond average historic levels. If by June 19, 2004, an alignment has been selected, funding has been determined, and an accelerated construction schedule established by the Board and the mining operator for an east-west connection roadway from County Road 951 to the extension of Wilson Boulevard, mining operations and an asphalt plant may expand on Sections 21 and 28 and the western quarters of 22 and 27 as a permitted use. If no such designation has been made by June 19, 2004, any mining operations or asphalt plant in these areas, other than continued operations on the western half of Section 21 at historic levels, shall be permitted only as a conditional use, unless the mine operator upon failure to attain Board selection of an alignment commits by June 19, 2004 to construct a private haul road by June 19, 2006 without the allocation of any public funds. The County's existing excavation and explosive regulations shall apply to all mining operations in these areas." EAC Meeting Page 3 of 6 The NBMO provides that excavation is allowed as a permitted use in the western 1/2 of Section 21 at historic levels; that is, the excavation shall not generate truck traffic beyond average historic levels of the mining operation in Section 16 to the north. Under the present FLUE, the proposed excavation is subject to conditional use approval in addition to the subject excavation permit. Once the Rural Fringe GMP amendments become effective, and subject to the traffic generation limitation noted above, the subject excavation permit may be found consistent with the FLUE. Conservation & Coastal Management Element: The NBMO states, "The County's existing excavation and explosive regulations shall apply to all mining operations in these areas." Since the excavation regulations shall be applied to this petition the following related GMP's were addressed. Objective 2.2 of the County's Growth Management Plan states "All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable Federal, State, or local water quality standards." Upon completion, the quarry will provide additional water quality retention well above that existing on the site currently. During construction, the only discharge may be from dewatering, which will be subject to the rules of NPDES and the SFWMD since the project is within the limits of an existing agricultural surface water management permit. The petitioner does not intend dewatering. Objective 5.1 states "Allow the extraction or use of mineral resources in the County provided such activities comply with applicable industry and government standards regarding health, safety and environmental protection." This conditional use will allow the simple extraction of earth (sand and/or rock) and the creation of a lake. Such activities are easily done in compliance with accepted standards of health, safety, and environmental protection. Objective 5.2 states "Continue to reclaim the total disturbed area of extraction sites in order to ensure adequate assessment and mitigation of site specific and cumulative impacts resulting from mineral extraction activities." Excavations such as these, when properly finished, with shallow side slopes and smooth banks can provide opportunities for recreation and wildlife habitat. EAC Meeting Page 4 of 6 n The project is consistent with Policy 6.1.4 in that an invasive exotic vegetation removal and maintenance plan will be required as part of the excavation permit. With regards to the NBMO the following statement applies to the environmental aspects of this project. "Unless otherwise specifically stated, no other Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Future Land Use Element, Conservation and Coastal Management Element, or Public Facilities Element in the Growth Management Plan or implementing LDR's, including specifically but not limited to wetlands and wildlife protection, shall be applicable to the NMB Overlay Receiving Lands other than this NBM Overlay Plan and its implementing LDR's. On Receiving Lands any development shall comply with the non-environmental administrative review procedures of Collier County fro site development plans and platting." As a result of the above statement in the GMP's that are anticipated to become effective by July 30th, this petition was not reviewed for any environmental issues and is consistent with the Collier County GMP's as related to the NMBO. VI. MAJOR ISSUES: n Stormwater Management: The excavation site lies within the Main Golden Gate Canal Basin, but the overall project boundary lies at the upper reaches of the Henderson Creek Basin. Since lakes retain more water than is discharged from the original ground prior to the excavation of the lake, there will be no additional runoff from the completed lake. In this case the whole site will become a lake, so staff has no water management concerns. Environmental: No environmental assessment or review was done for this petition. Preservation Requirements: No preservation is required. Listed Species: No listed species review was required by Collier County, for this site. EAC Meeting Page 5 of 6 VII. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the Golden Gate Quarry with the following stipulations: Stormwater Management: 1. Petitioner will obtain all necessary local, State, and Federal permits for this Excavation. Environmental: None Planning: 1. The excavation shall not generate truck traffic beyond average historic levels of the mining operation in Section 16 to the north. /"N PREP:•` : I BY: j ..�'% _ 23joLO3 STAN CHRZANOW: , P.E. DATE ENGINEERING SE` ICES MANAGER D---‘—jl0 tAiliz----- 1 - 2 3 -(73 DAVID WEEKS, A.I.C.P. DATE CHIEF PLANNER n EAC Meeting Page 6 of 6 REVIEWED BY: a2.4 I7 ,,d /2a , -2- Z3-C3 BARBARA S. BURG :•teo N DATE PRINCIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST 6QdtiA - - `7-23-- 3 WILLIAM D. LORENZ, J , i cfP.E. DATE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR C 1 //),1 MARG., T WUERSTLE, AICP DATE PLAN !' G SERVICES DIRECTOR APPROVED BY: iii . - Atil -��,_ • EPH K. S HMITT DATE •OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT&ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR C: SUSAN MURRAY, AICP CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER Golden Gate Quarry in NBMO G,Comp,David,CD Memos&Ltrs,Other petitions dw/7-14-03 T\ 1 1 tl I I to. N N N CD N N N Z O W F I- Q ^ • m U a. O J U•5 O C K c CO )--- Z z a w LLI CI) r o N N N N n wz } ovoa Ir zz NOOW H NOO NVH IY I 191..t> I J a ........... 31VO5 01 lON / 7 rQ V Z n II- o < O 1 g$ U Z e n. < O Q033 it �$ 1 a sm I;I Z auvnanoe NOS M O g. g. +w� 0 ma ^ F- III 1U 0 0 0 5a go "« n2 6 A2 g, 16o gA h "Vi ^fit 1 mW. " W- 8 n " A „,,, w1 r I...._ t in _ .,,,. - - - : ., ,,,... „ ,--.-, ,.,,,.- -,,...:;_,,,. ....,z......... m, - • � 5�ts_, �� ,,.... 3YryP-r -+ ,� -x ddMr-,. R:7 ."r'- sS-'.i4io -may " :r ,,s *:1<cam , KGsm+ ... - . , n maim” 7;1 Rr" nA, r f f. -;r y. 1 _ m +%. '';-*" II ''''' ' tinaltIgr ' ;- • ,...., . . ..____„i ___.,„. ,....: .,, , , c. i... r"CI? - yi '� 1 -yzS_,k: {2 •.a<:' ter s t tisliall.,,.kK' � +9r SK a._ ._ m,7 1: - yeti z + t n , liffIgay.: , . '-.'.-, --... ir t ft.. T < it J • g _____,--1 ' ..41 ;.' ';'.. . ._..,Liri-2,—; -' .....,`-,, isrHirVf'_'''' zzv # •I� _: i t �+ .. E 14 ',t�UP*-..�..�,.,,:Alig J ;fry Alley r, ,, r .'fit 1� 5 r, r_ AF 4. . +� ^ rf ,. t 4.• it.,,,,' i� ' -• f 'SS vis'•••••(-;,-4'--.1.' '. .70 s Wit*„ � _ * =,-x pay. 4-,w. �_ •. "'•M ><"+q�tigpis. 7.6s f ....%:',..,- 9 S , =F + ',a'1 •y f¢Nr jam} g6. .,rte .:4•N ret.- • r i _ 9M1'" ,0,.. ki'tx_.�f"at, .-,..;Z. Ya .. r ti '-¢�� =ra' ,. t'J -�� •«R. ,_ A sz r- y,-.'. �.> G rg 6 4Y t$ t 1..* -. jit tR ,+` r ` ..c,�f�. I ..:' s•t. ' thilimti jy h .,..„.,41,4r.'..,2, '' if ` : •C �kn ,{- a ` '+fit + A� ___ ttj� � f 0e,,€ s4,..,..4k4-54_.•:,-.7.4''',-;• f : .� i.k,...",,,,,,,..*, :1,4 - S`' ?- s it .t � - ........,..--,143:1....---t. i#� . I -'.._. { { . '' ? fi• r �+ il.,y - ; i }yw" ti�yr'f-tt ,_...., ' I w`Fri ,...-:- .1b., µ s ' pliK' X& yi ' yia v •`� J t• y. t2yI [ tt{ ,VI". A ^ .-1..„M..'-.7-,0*- "1- a[ -firN .... { . ,,..1.,,,,.,„t PT"A ,x -7":,:00."" 7 ::0."t 4',PQ-a. - - . " Th +gy4ix. `>~t... 1 3 +' (4Ti, •1f :F '': } m Et �"� • '11• 4 7 + Etit tFit .- rAti. . �^.•` +r ,8,113f .ws > ..a, ; 0�CollierCouni ProPerY_Ppaae�„r-Na` 4.Fl. ,:mz= -Copyright{C) _____ •