EAC LDC Stakeholder's Meeting Agenda 05/22/2009 Q PI
Collier County Government
Communication & Contact: Sandra Arnold-Lawson
Customer Relations Department Public Information Coordinator
3301 East Tamiami Trail (239) 252-8308
Naples, FL 34112
May 8,2009
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Friday, May 22, 2009
9:00 a.m.
A public meeting will be held to discuss environmental Land Development Code amendments on
Friday May 22 at 9:00 a.m. in conference room 610 at the Community Development and
Environmental Services Division Service Center, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples.
Attention: two or more members of the Collier County Planning Commission may be
present and may participate at the meeting. The subject matter of this meeting may be a
future item for discussion and action at a Collier County Planning Commission meeting.
Attention: two or more members of the Environmental Advisory Council may be present
and may participate at the meeting. The subject matter of this meeting may be a future item
for discussion and action at an Environmental Advisory Council meeting.
Attention: two or more members of the Development Services Advisory Committee may be
present and may participate at the meeting. The subject matter of this meeting may be a
future item for discussion and action at a Development Services Advisory Committee
meeting.
Attention: two or more members of the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory
Committee may be present and may participate at the meeting. The subject matter of this
meeting may be a future item for discussion and action at a Conservation Collier Land
Acquisition Advisory Committee meeting.
Attention: two or more members of the Habitat Conservation Advisory Committee may be
present and may participate at the meeting. The subject matter of this meeting may be a
future item for discussion and action at a Habitat Conservation Advisory Committee
meeting.
The meeting is open to the public.
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this
proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please
contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department located at 3301 E. Tamiami Trail,
Naples, FL 34112, (239) 252-8380; assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are
available in the Board of County Commissioners Office.
For more information, call Stephen Lenberger in the Engineering and Environmental Services
Department at 252-2915.
-End-
Environmental LDC Amendments Stakeholders Meeting
May 22, 2009
9:00 a.m.
Signup Sheet
Name E-mail address
S VNE/' Z,01//7_, c Ste/&Zen bNrjet a///N"jot: »(.7
jeren dm.t65anelrneec")
.....c4504 Aka A.) SQ,seyvk IUD 1Pen5 at). ct
lu 'JAI ns,4 -02/_ CICYo / (i-V/1/H 3 (2l1/1/4 ' AA/4
w i a 1441 ‘4264/z.-2,- i i�y 6' /=/. /2)4%, ,4,i) I /. 6 ',e,
IN15 4CSo ii/ ,44g/ /14
Environmental LDC Amendments Stakeholders Meeting
May 22, 2009
9:00 a.m.— 12:30 p.m.
Stephen Lenberger discussed when the next stakeholders meeting might take place.
Probably mid June or July since vacations would occur in the later part of June.
Meeting was open up for discussion of the native vegetation definition LDC amendment.
Items discussed included the following:
Native Vegetation Definition discussion:
LDC amendment language:
Native trees. Where only native trees occur and the native ground
cover replaced with lawn or pasture, then only the native trees
shall be retained. The percent requirement of native trees required
to be retained shall be by tree count based on the percent
requirement for native vegetation pursuant to 3.05.07 B. Only
trees with an 8 inch DBH or greater, or palms with a minimum of 8
foot of clear trunk, shall be used in calculating this requirement.
Native trees shall be retained in clusters with the outer edge of the
cluster no closer than 30 feet or to the drip line of trees within the
cluster, whichever is greater. Encroachment within these
distances shall require evaluation by an arborist to help insure
survival of the trees. Areas of retained trees shall not be subject to
the requirements of 3.05.07 H, unless used to satisfy the native
vegetation retention requirements of this section.
Where trees cannot be retained, the percent requirement of trees
shall be made up elsewhere on-site with trees planted in clusters
utilizing 10 foot high native canopy trees planted on a one for one
basis. Where native trees with a DBH of two feet or more cannot
be retained, a minimum of three 10-foot high native canopy trees
shall be planted per tree removed of this size. Trees planted to
satisfy this requirement shall be planted in open space areas
equivalent in size to the area of canopy of the trees removed. This
planted open space shall be in addition to the area used to satisfy
the minimum landscape requirements pursuant to 4.06. In lieu of
using actual canopy coverage, the following average diameter for
tree canopies may be used to calculate canopy coverage of
existing trees; slash pine 40 feet, cypress 25 feet, live oak 60 feet
and cabbage palm 10 feet. Open space areas not normally
planted with trees, such as stormwater retention areas or lake
banks not planted to meet the LSPA requirement, may be used to
satisfy this requirement. Trees planted to satisfy this requirement
shall be set back a minimum of 30 feet from principal structures
and impervious parking areas.
Use Landscape architect or certified arborist
GMP language regarding 25% coverage of native vegetation should also consider
coverage of Melaleuca in midstory when considering if it viable native vegetation.
LDC amendment language:
5. Where vegetation has been legally cleared, the amount of native
vegetation used to calculate the preservation requirement will be
that amount present at the time of development order or land use
petition application. Where vegetation has been illegally cleared,
the amount of native vegetation used to calculate the
preservation requirement will be that amount present at the time
prior to the illegal clearing. Criteria to determine the process and
criteria for the clearing are found in Sections 10.02.06 and
3.05.05.
a. Re-creation of native vegetation shall not be required
when any one of the following criterion is met:
The parcel was issued a County permit to clear
vegetation and remains cleared of native
vegetation.
ii. The parcel was issued a County permit to clear
vegetation for agricultural purposes prior to July
1993 (the date at which the 10 year agricultural
clearing rezone limitation previously identified in the
GMP is achieved) and which remains cleared of
native vegetation.
iii. If no clearing permit can be found, demonstrations
of continuous bona fide agricultural operation along
with issuance of an after-the-fact agricultural
clearing permit from the County will be evidence of
legal clearing. Demonstrations of continuous bona
fide agricultural activities may include agricultural
classification records from the property appraiser's
office; and may be supported by dated aerial
photographs; occupational license for agricultural
operation; SFWMD consumptive use permits for
the ongoing agricultural use or other information
such as sworn testimony from previous owners
which establishes the commencement date and the
location of the agricultural operation. The rezone
limitation pursuant to 10.02.06 shall apply.
Use clearing permit and AG clearing notification
LDC amendment language:
2. Exceptions. An exception from the vegetation retention standards
above shall be granted in the following circumstances:
a. where the parcel was legally cleared of native vegetation
prior to January 1989;
b. where the parcel cannot reasonably accommodate both
the application of the native vegetation retention
standards and the proposed uses allowed under this Code,
subject to the criteria set forth in section 3.05.07(H)(1)(e).
c. Right-of-way acquisitions by any governmental entity for all
purposes necessary for roadway construction, including
ancillary drainage facilities, and including utilities within the
right-of-way acquisition area.
d. Existing utility easements and easements for ingress or
egress required for neighboring properties.
e. Previously cleared parcels for support of public
infrastructure, and which remain cleared of native
vegetation.
f. Trees and other vegetation planted for landscaping and
which have not been used to satisfy the native vegetation
preservation requirement.
Exceptions look good
LDC amendment language:
3. Native vegetation to be retained as preserve areas shall be
selected in such manner as to preserve the following, in
descending order of priority, except to the extent that preservation
is made mandatory in cection: 3.05.07 F.3- and 3.05.07 G.3.c-:
a. Wetland or upland areas known to be utilized by listed
species or that serve as corridors for the movement of
wildlife;
b. Xeric Scrub, Dune and Strand, Hardwood Hammocks;
c. Onsite wetlands having an accepted functionality WRAP
score of at least 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation
Assessment Score of at least 0.7;
d. Any upland habitat that serves as a buffer to a wetland
area as defined in section 3.05.07 A.3.c above;
e. Dry Prairie, Pine Flatwoods; and
f. All other native habitats.
UMAM used to assess mitigation
Identify that UMAM scores are for existing conditions, at time of application
Only needed UMAM where high quality wetlands are suspected of occurring on site
Use listed animal species and the nests of bald eagle
Or use excluding plants
Use natural wetland and upland areas
Utilized?
By wading birds?
How species classified by FFWCC and USFWS might be a consideration
Maybe use language such as nesting and denning
EIS vs. environmental data discussion:
To be placed in the new administrative code
Discussion on value of an EIS vs.just environmental data
Maybe develop thresholds where public hearings are required
Give the EAC more authority?
Bald eagles a concern
Public involvement issue
Need to discuss EAC code changes when EIS is discussed
Distribute copy of current EIS LDC language to stakeholders when item is discussed by
stakeholders, so they can compare to proposed changes.
EIS has a lot of redundant information.
Consolidate how environmental data is prepared so public to easily view
Need to look carefully at what projects will be reviewed by the EAC
EAC should review more projects
Need public oversight
Should have a workshop with BCC regarding elimination of EIS and what the EAC
should and should not hear
lenberger_s
— From: sulecki_a
Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 4:13 PM
To: lenberger_s
Subject: Off site Preserve LDC amendment
Hi Stephen,
One comment came in so far from a subcommittee member:
Page 198-199 - iii.b. - last line of first paragraph - "...or any other land designated by Conservation Collier"
Committee member asks: How are these lands "designated"? Would this refer to lands on the current
Approved Acquisition List or could this also apply to lands that Conservation Collier has not considered yet
(because they simply have not been nominated)? The point of the question is that there may need to be some
language added to specify that any lands donated outside of the boundaries of approved multi-parcel projects
would have to be approved by majority vote by the CCLAAC...or something like that. The goal is to make sure
that the word "designated" doesn't get us into trouble.
My response was: that we would be developing the specific procedure in a resolution.
The Subcommittee member would prefer that the language be changed to, "as designated y
Conservation Collier donation acceptance procodur,
Is that something you can do at this point?
Nexaircl/v Meet
Coordinator, Conservation Collier Program
Collier County Facilities Management Department
3301 Tamiami Trail East, Building W
Naples, FL 34112
(239)252-2961
1