The URL can be used to link to this page

DSAC Agenda 11/02/2022Cofer County Growth Management Department Development Services Advisory Committee Agenda Wednesday, November 2, 2022 3:00 pm 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL 34104 Growth Management Building, Conference Rooms 609/610 NOTICE: Persons wishing to speak on any Agenda item will receive up to three (3) minutes unless the Chairman adjusts the time. Speakers are required to fill out a "Speaker Registration Form", list the topic they wish to address and hand it to the Staff member before the meeting begins. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and speak into a microphone. State your name and affiliation before commenting. During the discussion, Committee Members may direct questions to the speaker. Please silence cell phones and digital devices. There may not be a break in this meeting. Please leave the room to conduct any personal business. All parties participating in the public meeting are to observe Roberts Rules of Order and wait to be recognized by the Chairman. Please speak one at a time and into the microphone so the Hearing Reporter can record all statements being made. 1. Call to order - Chairman 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes: a. DSAC meeting —September 7, 2022 4. Public Speakers 5. Staff Announcements/Updates a. Development Review Division — [Jaime Cook] b. Code Enforcement Division — [Mike Ossorio] c. Public Utilities Department— [Matt McLean] d. Growth Management Dept. Transportation Engineering Division — [Jay Ahmad or designee] e. Collier County Fire Review— [Shar Beddow or Shawn Hanson, Assistant Chief, Fire Marshal] f. North Collier Fire Review — [Chief Sean Lintz or Deputy Director Daniel Zunzunegui] g. Operations & Regulatory Mgmt. Division — [Ken Kovensky] h. Zoning Division — [Mike Bosi] 6. New Business For more information, please contact Trish Mill at (239) 252-8214 or Patricia.Mill @colliercountyfLgov a. Presentation on voting conflicts and ethics [Colleen Greene, CAO] b. PL20220005067 - 2022 Scrivener's Errors [Sean Kingston] c. PL20220003445 - RLSA Updates [Eric Johnson] 7. Old Business 8. Committee Member Comments 9. Adjourn FUTURE MEETING DATES: December 7, 2022 — 3:00 pm January 4, 2023 — 3:00 pm February 1, 2023 — 3:00 pm For more information, please contact Trish Mill at (239) 252-8214 or Patricia.Mill @colliercountyfLgov co ler COUVIty Growth Management Department Development Services Advisory Committee Meeting Wednesday, November 2, 2022 3:00 pm 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 Growth Management Department Conference Room 609/610 If you have any questions or wish to meet with staff, please contact Trish Mill at 252-8214 Cofer County Growth Management Department Development Services Advisory Committee Agenda Wednesday, November 2, 2022 3:00 pm 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL 34104 Growth Management Building, Conference Rooms 609/610 Persons wishing to speak on any Agenda item will receive up to three (3) minutes unless the Chairman adjusts the time. Speakers are required to fill out a "Speaker Registration Form", list the topic they wish to address and hand it to the Staff member before the meeting begins. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and speak into a microphone. State your name and affiliation before commenting. During the discussion, Committee Members may direct questions to the speaker. Please silence cell phones and digital devices. There may not be a break in this meeting. Please leave the room to conduct any personal business. All parties participating in the public meeting are to observe Roberts Rules of Order and wait to be recognized by the Chairman. Please speak one at a time and into the microphone so the Hearing Reporter can record all statements being made. 1. Call to order - Chairman 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes: a. DSAC meeting —September 7, 2022 4. Public Speakers 5. Staff Announcements/Updates a. Development Review Division — [Jaime Cook] b. Code Enforcement Division — [Mike Ossorio] c. Public Utilities Department— [Matt McLean] d. Growth Management Dept. Transportation Engineering Division — [Jay Ahmad or designee] e. Collier County Fire Review — [Shar Beddow or Shawn Hanson, Assistant Chief, Fire Marshal] f. North Collier Fire Review — [Chief Sean Lintz or Deputy Director Daniel Zunzunegui] g. Operations & Regulatory Mgmt. Division — [Ken Kovensky] h. Zoning Division — [Mike Bosi] 6. New Business For more information, please contact Trish Mill at (239) 252-8214 or Patricia. MiII@colliercountyfLgov a. Presentation on voting conflicts and ethics [Colleen Greene, CAO] b. PL20220005067 - 2022 Scrivener's Errors [Sean Kingston] c. PL20220003445 - RLSA Updates [Eric Johnson] 7. Old Business 8. Committee Member Comments 9. Adjourn FUTURE MEETING DATES: December 7, 2022 — 3:00 pm January 4, 2023 — 3:00 pm February 1, 2023 — 3:00 pm For more information, please contact Trish Mill at (239) 252-8214 or Patricia. MiII@colliercountyfLgov September 7, 2022 MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING Naples, Florida, September 7, 2022 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 3 P.M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Collier County Growth Management Department Building, Conference Room #609/610, 2800 Horseshoe Drive North, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Chairman: William J. Varian Vice Chairman: Blair Foley David Dunnavant James E. Boughton Clay Brooker Chris Mitchell Robert Mulhere (excused) Mario Valle Norman Gentry (excused) Marco Espinar Laura Spurgeon-DeJohn Jeremy Sterk Jeff Curl John English Mark McLean ALSO PRESENT: Jaime Cook, Director, Development Review Michael Ossorio, Director, Code Enforcement Anthony Stoltz, Principal Project Manager, Public Utilities Division Lorraine Lantz, Principal Planner, GMD Transportation Ken Kovensky, Director, Operations & Regulatory Management Jamie French, Deputy Department Head, GMD Mike Bosi, Director, Planning & Zoning Michelle Mosca, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Rich Long, Director, Building Department Eric Johnson, LDC Planning Manager Richard Henderlong, Principal Planner Patricia Mill, Senior Operations Analyst/Staff Liaison September 7, 2022 1. Call to Order - Chairman Chairman Varian called the meeting to order at 3 p.m. A quorum consisting of 11 members was convened; two arrived later. 2. Approval of Agenda Mr. Curl moved to approve the agenda, as amended. It was seconded by Vice Chairman Foley. The motion was carried unanimously, 11-0. 3. Approval of Minutes DSAC Meeting — August 3, 2022 Mr. Valle noted that he would be voting on the minutes but would abstain from the portion involving medical marijuana dispensaries. Mr. Dunnavant made a motion to approve the August 3, 2022, meeting minutes. It was seconded by Mr. Curl. The motion was carried unanimously, 11-0; Mr. Valle abstained from the medical marijuana dispensaries portion. 4. Public Speakers (None) Chairman Varian noted that they'd wait for the item the speaker was interested in to allow her to speak. 5. Staff Announcements/Updates a. Development Review Division — [Jaime Cook, Director] Ms. Cook reported that: • We have filled the environmental manager position. The candidate came to us from the state Department of Health in Orlando. Her name is Sarah Harrington. b. Code Enforcement Division — [Mike Ossorio, Director] Mr. Ossorio provided monthly statistics from July 22-August 21 and also reported that: • We had an influx of employees coming and going, which, unfortunately, has been the theme for the last couple of months. • Our numbers indicate that we have leveled off at our 12-month plateau average, which is about 695 cases and 2,500 inspections, so we're back to our 12-month average. • We still have two people in training and we have one job posting that we've had posted for several weeks. • Noise Ordinance: We trained three certified noise specialists last month and signed off on their qualifications. That brings the level of rotation up to five. • We're doing a weed -nuisance abatement on Livingston Road, from Golden Gate Parkway to Immokalee Road. It's massive. Some weeds are about 5 feet high. If you get any complaints, tell them we have a huge task force on Livingston Road who will be there for about a month or two trying to get that cleaned up. • On our central location, we finally got a court order from a judge to board up a nuisance abatement house, a drug house on Seagrape Avenue at Commissioner Taylor's request. 2 September 7, 2022 [Mr. Espinar joined the meeting at 3: 04 p.m.] The CRA has a 17-acre parcel in Bayshore that was one of the biggest homeless camps we had last month, and we took care of that. The feedback we solicited from industry, consumers and homeowners for this month went down a bit in knowledge. There may have been one or two people who were disgruntled, so knowledge was at 72%, courteousness was at 92% and professionalism was at 85%. We had 72 cases in front of the Code Enforcement Board, which is significant. Of those, 69 were within the county and three were in the City of Naples. Chairman Varian asked about the charts on short-term rentals. Does that have to do with the new rules that were put in place? You listed about 3% in cases by category, but there's no description of what the category is. Mr. Ossorio said we hardly ever get complaints on short-term rentals. Usually, those are lumped together as noise or a litter, trash or nuisance complaint. That might relate to the ordinance and getting registered. We work on complaints, so we don't actively look. We're more reactive than proactive. However, that indicates the number of people who called in for service since being registered, not a nuisance or noise complaint. If it's a call, it's usually after 10 p.m. and that's when the Sheriff gets involved and when the noise ordinance kicks in versus the meter, which is usually during the day or involves music. Vice Chairman Foley asked him to elaborate on the Livingston Road work. Mr. Ossorio said there's been a lot of rain soaking in there, so they're working with the Transportation Division. We have two full-time people who will be there for several weeks notifying property owners. Some properties might be FPL, Grey Oaks or an abutting location. We try to be more proactive with weeds and trash, especially with major highways, such as Golden Gate Parkway and Airport Road. Livingston has been hit hard with rain, so we need to do something different due to five-foot weeds. We need to do better on that. c. Public Utilities Department [Anthony Stoltz, Principal Project Manager] Mr. Stoltz reported that: • Level of service reports for Letters of Availability, Utility Deviations and FDEP permits are included in the agenda packet. • When reviewing some PUD rezoning applications, we found that the proposed new uses indicated in the Statement of Utility Provisions do not always appear to be in sync with the use scenarios evaluated in the Traffic -Impact Statement. Sometimes the scenarios evaluated in the Traffic -Impact Statement could result in potentially larger flow demand than the scenario being utilized to calculate flow demand in a Statement of Utility Provisions. What we're interested in is the potential worst -case, new -flow demand that could occur beyond what is already allowed by the existing PUD and that the information presented throughout the submittal documents is consistent. d. GMD Transportation Engineering Division — [Lorraine Lantz, Principal Planner] Ms. Lantz reported that: • The kickoff for the Vanderbilt Beach Road extension project will be held at the IFAS Center by the county fairgrounds from 5-7 p.m. September 15. • The groundbreaking ceremony will be held on the following week, at 11 a.m. September 20 at St. Agnes Church. That project will be moving forward. It's a three-month process for construction. September 7, 2022 Mr. Curl said there's a warning light or flashing light that has been flashing for a long time at Everglades and Randall boulevards. When is that going to be activated? Ms. Lantz said there's a standard process for how long it has to be flashing before it becomes active. She'll look into it. Mr. Curl said he's bringing it up because there are school buses on the road now and there's a lot more stop and go on the road and it's not an active light. Ms. Lantz said she'll find out and provide the answers to Trish (Mill) and she can distribute that information to the DSAC. e. Collier County Fire Review — [Shar Beddow, Deputy Fire Marshal] (None) f. North Collier Fire Review — [Daniel Zunzunegui, Deputy Director] Mr. Zunzunegui detailed June and July Fire Review Statistics and provided updates: • We had a five-day turnaround time for both building and planning reviews. • We conducted 831 reviews as a team in August and 800 of those were building and 31 were planning. [Ms. Spurgeon-DeJohn joined the meeting at 3:11 p.m.] • There's a breakdown on some of the correction reviews and how many are coming through, so he wanted to compare those numbers to volume. About 25 plans came back to the team for a second correction, which is a third review. It's the second time we're looking at correction comments, and four came in for a third correction. So about 96% of plans are getting approved on the first or second submittal. • Our team spends a lot of time talking to the industry, to contractors, architects, engineers and other design professionals. Recently we've been logging the time to try to quantify how much time we spend working with customers. For August, they spent over 65 hours in meetings and conference calls. They only log interactions over 15 minutes that involve correction -type issues or some help in advance. That's quite a bit of time, so that time is well spent and is making a difference in ensuring that we get plans to completion, construction is started and we help customers. • There are 214 permits in the queue assigned to our team of six and they're getting those out as timely as possible. • We recently published a new policy on existing panels fire -alarm systems. We run into this when panels are being changed out because they go bad or there's an elevator recall requirement and they need to upgrade a panel. We're looking at that now as a district. Before, it was more case -by -case, but more of a uniform guideline that as long as there's a like -for -like replacement or it's a replacement in -kind that's compatible with an existing system, it's not going to require a complete upgrade for the building. That's going to be helpful to the industry. Chairman Varian said the industry would probably thank you for taking that time on those phone calls, instead of rerouting. Ten to 15 years ago, we would have to go through resubmittals and wait for comments and then go for the resubmittal, so we really appreciate that time that you put toward that. Mr. Zunzunegui said if they ever get to a pain point and need more help, a meeting or collaboration, please contact them so they can make that happen. El September 7, 2022 g. Operations & Regulatory Management Division — [Ken Kovensky, Director] Mr. Kovensky outlined the August monthly activity report and provided updates: • About 5,200 permits were applied for last month, which is consistent with the last six months. • We're averaging just over 5,000 permits, which is similar to last year, except for a four -month bump in spring. • About 200 permits are in the queue now. • By the end of today, we'll be working on September 6, yesterday's permits. • We have a strong contingent of people who come in over the weekend to work overtime and get the backlog down, so we're managing backlogs. • The Call Center last month handled about 6,300 calls, with less than 300 abandoned, a good number. • We have 34 vacancies now in our department. • In the Operations Regulatory Management Division, we have nine positions open, with five currently posted. Two are going through interviews this week and two are pending. Of those, a senior budget analyst will start next Monday. That position has been vacant for quite some time. The other pending position is our revenue supervisor, which was Evelyn Trimino, who had been there for several years. She was promoted to a CityView support position as an applications analyst, so we've been looking to fill that for a couple of months. A candidate accepted and is going through the process. • We've filled several positions. Trish Mill was promoted to senior operations analyst. We hired Jess Bonilla as an operations analyst and she'll be working in our group and possibly supporting the DSAC. We hired Tommy Thompson as one of our three permitting supervisors, a position vacated by Sonie Clarke -Boyle, who'd been here six or seven years. She was one of many people who left the department, specifically our division, and went to HR. We lost five people to HR in the last several months. Kevin Summers, who is now handling some Zoom meetings, was promoted to Manager of Technical Systems Operations and he'll be continuing to support our internal help desk, as well as Zoom -related items. • We have a couple of other assignments where we're looking at shifting some people and assignments across-the-board. • A code investigator and an operations coordinator who filled a spot in our GIS group started this week. • We've been in the process of contractor licensing renewals over the last several months. We have processed 2,400 state licenses and about 1,140 local licenses out of 9,000 renewal notices we sent out. That breaks down to about 6,000 state licenses. We've done slightly over one-third of those and about one-third of the 3,000 local licenses. • The need for and reliance on addressing checklists can be streamlined, so we have looked at the process and whether it makes sense. Jason Regula, Manager of Technical Assistance Operations, will tell you what we've been doing. Mr. Regula reported the following: • It's a quick and easy change. • We're removing the e-mail process, so the checklist will be submitted with the petition, just like you normally would, and then you'll go through the normal process. • We'll send out a notification between now and when he ends it on September 30. • There's no need to e-mail it to us ahead of time. We'll bring that process inside CityView. That will optimize the process instead of touching these checklists so many times to review them. Because it gets submitted with the petition, we have an obligation to review it, so we end up looking at them more than once and sometimes again later. September 7, 2022 • We're also removing a requirement: There were several applications that we identified that were not required per the Administrative Code, so those applications are getting updated by Development Review & Zoning and will no longer be required. Mr. Curl asked, You're removing address checklists from that requirement? Mr. Regula said it never should have been a requirement. Somehow, it slipped into the submittal items and requirements within CityView, but in our analysis, it was a requirement for the Administrative Code. A board member asked which were being removed. Mr. Regula said the agricultural clearing notification, the agricultural clearing permit, the alternative architectural design, the conditional -use extension, the development -order amendment and the non- conforming use change. Mr. McLean asked if there was an update on the Chief Building Official. Mr. French said he'll be addressing that. h. Zoning Division — [Mike Bosi, Director] Mr. Bosi provided a report on staffing and other issues: • We are hitting the fall season and the Board of County Commissioners is back in session and we have a crush of Land -Use Petitions that are now hitting the CCPC and BCC. On September 15, we have seven petitions. It stems from the length of time it's taken us to get the Isles of Capri petition approved. We spent seven hours on the first and probably spent over four hours. We're not sure how many more petitions we'll be able to push, which complicates things because on October 6, we're hearing Bright Shores SRA, the mental health facility on Golden Gate Parkway and other petitions. He and Jamie just came back from the County Manager's Office briefing of the county, where they presented the 2022 Annual Update Inventory Report CIEE, which for the first five years is about $1.6 million worth of improvements across all divisions and departments. That's coming up. • We are probably going to have to coordinate with the Planning Commission for an overflow day, an additional day, to get enough on the agenda to move them forward and we're also coordinating with the County Manager's Office, which is a little sensitive to how many land - use petitions the Board of County Commissioners will tolerate within one day and how much can it accommodate. • We had a quiet summer, but all the petitions start flooding in fall and we're going to have to deal with that. • Two items have been added to the September 13 Board hearing. One s to require commercially zoned properties adjacent to residential properties to notify adjacent properties if an SDP or an SDP amendment is requested on that commercial property, and another item is proposing a moratorium on self -storage facilities on the East Trail. We proposed this four years ago as part of the East Trail Development Plan. Mr. Mitchell asked what the limits were for the corridor on the East Trail. Mr. Bosi said it was from Price Street and U.S. 41. Michele Mosca could answer that. Ms. Mosca said it was from Palm Drive down U.S. 41 to Port of the Islands. The core area is Palm Drive to U.S. 41. Mr. Mitchell asked what happens if there's an open conditional -use application on a property to do that. n September 7, 2022 Mr. Bosi said if you've got a conditional -use application in process, you can go forward on that conditional use. You won't be able to apply for an SDP and you're not going to be able to apply for a building permit because it's all DOs. It's what the moratorium references, so you can go through the conditional -use, get approved and wait for the moratorium. Michele put together a schedule that tentatively completes the East Naples Community Development Plan in late June 2023, so that would be the anticipated end. Mr. Mitchell asked if the intent is to enact a moratorium or to discuss a moratorium. Mr. Bosi said it's to discuss a moratorium to see if they can gain enough support for a moratorium to direct the County Attorney's Office to advertise and bring back a moratorium. Mr. French said this was initiated at the commissioner level. Staff has had limited visibility on this one. This was not staff initiated, nor did we work on this. Mr. Mitchell asked if the BCC understands this is market -driven. That whole corridor is market driven. Mr. French said this isn't being handled by Growth Management. We consulted with the Manager's Office today only because one of the promises he's continued to make is that he'd give the DSAC visibility on anything coming up. She was in agreement with it, but it'll be a publicly advertised meeting on Tuesday, so we're neither encouraging you nor persuading you, but this is on the agenda, which goes to print this evening. Mr. Mitchell asked if there was a set time. Mr. French said he'd told them all he knew. A discussion ensued about SDP notices and the following points were made: • The SDP amendment on the agenda involves abutting properties, touching the boundaries of the property line. • The County Attorney's staff will return the item to the DSAC based on the BCC recommendation. • This would involve an SDP or SDP amendment, such as a pre-existing gas station that's changing a canopy or adding a new logo, or adding a stairwell to a building, which would require an SDP amendment. Those things would be considered de minimus. • If it's a non -conforming use, all neighboring property owners would have to be notified. • The community has made it clear it wants information fed to them, not made available to them. All this information is already available. • GMD was notified about this yesterday afternoon when it was added to the agenda. Mr. French provided some updates: • He wanted to thank Jason and Ken because when he returned to the GMD last year, addressing was always something he had concerns about, but didn't have an opinion on how it was done. The direction from our office was do everything you can to not necessarily eliminate it because we recognize the importance of the process for the Tax Collector, first responders and the Property Appraiser. But we wanted to make every effort possible to automate that because we've automated so many other things and spent so much money on CityView, so why not automate this? • We're fortunate in this community to have the depth of knowledge we have. It's a continuing struggle to keep up with industry demands and we're appreciative of the staff who gives up their personal time to work overtime or get paid straight time to get work done on weekends. • We're in the negotiation process for the Building Official. There is a dollar figure in mind for this candidate, who he won't name. We have the support of the County Manager's Office. 7 September 7, 2022 • There were two very good candidates, one better than the other if you look at them differently as far as qualifications, licensing and community engagement. One is from Schaumburg, Illinois, and the other is Fred Clum (interim chief building official), who many of you have worked with. • This has identified the need for a Deputy Building Official, so he and Rich wrote a job description, which was sent to all directors to review, and the job description has been submitted. We're trying to create that position. It does not mean he'll be asking for another FTE if it's approved. They can reclassify a vacant FTE position. We've got over 30 vacant positions. • This may help us reconsider the candidate we didn't select to see if there's interest. • Rather than just a single incumbent, we should have multiple incumbents in that job in case there's a vacation, a tragedy or illness, so a licensed person will always be there. • The Deputy Building Official will be paid accordingly based on the job description and license requirements, so it doesn't put you or the community at risk. Chairman Varian thanked him for inviting him to participate in the interviews. Mr. French said the CBIA, Fire Districts and others also participated. We wanted the feedback. Mr. French continued with his updates: • Jake LaRow, from the Housing Department, has joined us and will be heading the Economic Development & Housing Policy division, which used to be within this building. • We're bringing back comprehensive planning and resiliency because there is a relationship there for long-range planning and much of the resiliency efforts we're seeing, especially with the AUIR piece for stormwater economic development, housing, as well as infrastructure needs. We have a candidate in mind. The job was posted for a about a month, there was an extremely light candidate pool and we weren't blown away by anyone, so we're looking at someone internally on an interim basis. We're working on that with Trish through HR. Mr. Brooker said to remember that if you're giving notice to a residential property owner who lives next door to a commercial property owner, that residential property owner bought their property knowing they would be next door to a commercial property. 6. New Business a. LDC Landscape Code Amendments [Jeff Curl] Mr. Curl said we just kept finding more and more inconsistencies in the code, so the request is to get it back down to the subcommittee level, review it, tighten it up and send it back to the DSAC. Chairman Varian asked for a consensus (they agreed). Mr. Curl asked if anyone could sign up for the Subcommittee. We're having a problem with a quorum on the DSAC-LDR. Mr. Johnson noted that the meetings are usually quarterly, but they've had more special meetings lately to try to accommodate LDC amendments. Mr. Mitchell asked for the definition of a quorum on the DSAC-LDR. Mr. Johnson said it was three out of five. The next meeting is September 21. We get a lot of work done and recognize that you're all volunteers. September 7, 2022 Mr. McLean said the meetings last for hours. The problem is that DSAC-LDR meets on Wednesdays and he's on the Design Review Board in Naples then, which is a conflict, because the city's schedule was wrong. Mr. Johnson noted there are a lot of conflicts, but they need to ensure this room or another is available and they need five or more business days so they can send a press release. He suggested they vote on the LDC code amendment. Vice Chairman Foley made a motion to send the LDC Code Amendments back to the DSAC-LDR Subcommittee. Second by Mr. English. The motion passed unanimously, 11-0. A discussion ensued over the DSAC-LDR's need for more members: • Sometimes there are conflicts of interest and members can't vote on an item. • It's rare that the meetings last over two hours. • The September 21 meeting will be 2 p.m., not the usual 3 p.m. start time. • A DSAC member could show up to a Subcommittee meeting. • They could choose backups or all DSAC members could be backups. • The Subcommittee meetings are very important. • They could meet on the third Tuesday so it's fresh in their minds before the DSAC meeting. • Members prefer a time later in the day. • They could consider an alternate location for a meeting room. • Trish could alert them if there won't be a quorum for a meeting or if someone has a conflict and can't vote on an item, so there wouldn't be a quorum. • Backup members who show up beyond the five Subcommittee members would be non -voting members but could participate in the discussion. • The DSAC vote is the one that matters and goes to the Planning Commission and BCC. • They can work with the County Attorney's Office to ensure there's no conflict. • Members would be interested in participating in the Subcommittee if an item involving their expertise is being discussed; they'd like to be notified about that. b. Building Recertification Inspection Program [Rich Long] Mr. Long said the County Attorney's Office put together a draft ordinance that mirrors state statute requirements and identifies Code Enforcement as being the enforcement arm in the event of non-compliance by a community. It covers the ability to ask for extensions. We're working on putting some initial information on our website and hope to get that done by this week. Ken's group is working on where it's going on CityView, whether it's going to be done through the portal. We created an e-mail address, in case the portal is not up and running. Once an executive summary is put together and it goes through the BCC, then we'll start putting it into place. A discussion ensued and the following points were made: • The County is required to send a notice to HOAs, saying your building is due for an inspection within this fiscal year. • Under the statute, an HOA has 180 days after that to send the county a Phase 1 report. • If they ignore that, we need something in place, so we'll send another notice to say their time has expired and ask if they need an extension. • If they don't respond, Code Enforcement would open a case and go through their process. • Code Enforcement's only duty is to say the HOA did not provide a report. The Code Enforcement case would reference that. • The report will be reviewed by staff. I September 7, 2022 • The state statute lays out what's required in the report. • The report must be completed by a licensed architect or engineer. • This item will go before the BCC in October. c. Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) potential improvements [Mike Bosi] Chairman Varian noted that they have a public speaker for this item. Mr. Bosi said the executive summary he provided the Board of County Commissioners shows five base components as potential options to incorporate into the Neighborhood Information Meeting. He reported that: • This stems from the Neighborhood Information Meeting that was held at Paradise Coast Sports Complex that couldn't move forward. • The Board of County Commissioners was concerned with extending rules of decorum that apply to the BCC and Planning Commission to a public meeting that's required by the county and presented by applicants. • One option was to allow an applicant to hold two Neighborhood Information Meetings, one in person and one remote, which allows you to have much better control over how people interact and how the meeting flows. • One concern related to the Collier -Vanderbilt project was that the public never got to hear the specifics of the project from the applicant because one meeting was canceled because there were too many people in the facility and the second was canceled because some attendees refused to allow speakers to talk. • We're proposing an option to require standard language about rules of decorum within the public notice and advertising of NIMS. • Another petition the County Attorney's Office has on the September 13 agenda is an update to a 1975 resolution that deals with public decorum at Board of County Commissioners meetings. It would give more specificity to when the BCC can ask people to leave, and if that doesn't work, to have them be removed from the premises. • This request would extend the rules of decorum to advisory boards, so the Planning Commission and the DSAC would have the same opportunity if people were problematic. • Another option would be to require security details at NIMs. That's when the DSSAC would want to provide input. The majority of NIMs go well, so is it fair to make a requirement for all NIMs to have security or would it be only for NIMs where opposition is anticipated? That's a hard decision and there are pros and cons. • Another rule would be to require that all speakers state their names and addresses. That's hard to enforce but at the NIMs, we reiterate to the crowd that when you get up to speak, please state your name and address. Sometimes the public complies and sometimes the public doesn't want to comply. • We are contemplating incorporating these suggestions into the Administrative Code that deals with the Neighborhood Information Meeting conduct. • We also were contacted earlier by (the public speaker) Ms. Emblidge, who indicated she had suggestions for modifications to the Neighborhood Information Meetings. • We also wanted to hear what suggestions the DSAC has based on conditions we're facing. Chairman Varian asked the speaker to come to the podium. Margaret Emblidge said she recently joined Agnoli, Barber & Brundage Inc. as planning director. She knows a few DSAC members from years ago and she's been around for about 30 years in the industry. She stated that: 10 September 7, 2022 • We recently conducted a Neighborhood Information Meeting and the number of property owners who had to be notified was out of this world. The cost was over $1,000 or more when you add staff time and the cost of mailings, etc., so we looked at other options. • She recently worked for Hendry County as its Planning and Community Development director for 7%2 years and we engaged in a transportation land -use study and contacted the property owners surrounding the Everglades Airport to say we were conducting a study. We used postcards to contact them. • Collier County could use postcards for NIMs, which would save time and money and translate into a savings for county staff time and money for the notifications they have to send out, but her focus is NIMs. • [She handed out examples] They used Instaprint, which takes care of addressing and postage. You provide a basic design and they give you a mockup. • You can save a half to one-third of the cost of what we went through for that one NIM. • She told Mike Bosi and Ray Bellows about the idea and asked if they'd consider it as an option. Her understanding is that they both liked the idea. Hopefully, they can speak to the County Attorney's office about this approach after this meeting to see if it meets legal requirements. • We took the letter we sent for the NIM and put all the elements on a postcard and it's legible, so you're not missing anything that would be on an 8'/2-by-11 letter folded in an envelope. Mr. Brooker said that his knowledge, there are no state statutory requirements regarding notices of NIMs, so this would be the county's decision on whether they want to adopt this. Ms. Emblidge said that's her understanding and she believes the LDC language is flexible enough that they could pursue it without an amendment, or they could pursue an amendment. Mr. Mitchell said he's a big property owner rights advocate and one of the other options that you can present is that if speakers don't follow the rules of decorum, then that's considered a public meeting and they don't get input because they're disrupters and all they want to do is shut everything down. That's where we are in society. If they can't conduct themselves, why should the property owner get punished for behavior they can't control? The property owner mailed notices, paid the costs and did what they're supposed to do. If a meeting is held and a property owner follows all the rules and participants can't conduct themselves in a professional manner, then that should count as a NIM. Mr. Bosi said he was at the Collier Vanderbilt Neighborhood Information Meeting and there were 125 people there, the majority were quiet and eight people disrupted it, so he understands what they're saying. The people who wanted to participate were punished, as well. If the DSAC's suggestion is that it satisfies the requirement, we have the option for a virtual -only NIM, which is not as costly and can be better controlled. Mr. English asked if virtual could be the only option. He thought they had to have both. Mr. Bosi said it's one of the options. If the meeting is disruptive, the petitioner can reschedule it using a virtual -only NIM. Is the DSAC saying why not have a virtual -only option? A discussion ensued and the following points were made: • If people truly want to hear and have legitimate question and you have to cancel because the venue is not large enough or people are disruptive, the problem can be solved with a virtual - only NIM. Someone from planning can be there. There will never be a capacity issue and you can mute disruptive people, so everybody gets the benefit of a presentation. • The DSAC votes have consequences and have expanded the LDC. • If the county keeps expanding the notifications, we can expect more disruptions. 11 September 7, 2022 • Mr. McLean participated in a virtual -only NIM with 50 people and it was very organized. He believes someone muted people until it was their turn to speak. That sets the standard. • You could make a rule that if they're disruptive, that will count against them. • Another benefit of a virtual NIM or Zoom meeting is that the county requires a transcription, audio or video recordings, so Zoom recordings can be provided. It's easy to satisfy that requirement. • Mr. McLean attended a virtual NIM out-of-state with 50 people and county planning staff moderated, which provides a shield, a buffer to disruption. The county planning staff person turned it over to the applicant, who makes a presentation, and then it's turned over to a county staff person who mutes people until it's their time to speak. • Reasonable people can still ask questions and it removes the possibility of violence. • People have refused to state their names or addresses at NIMs and then they rant. If virtual - only were provided, disruptive speakers like that could be muted. • If disruptions occur after a warning, people will be told this will be considered a positive meeting for the petitioner. • Virtual NIMs would make it all transparent. • A property owner's burden is ever increasing. • If this occurs and the county amends its LDC and the Administrative Code to incorporate these changes, the DSAC will have another opportunity to weigh in and develop the language. • This meeting today is to get suggestions from the DSAC. • Can the county consider criminal charges if there is disruptive behavior that holds up an official proceeding? Until you do that, there are no consequences. Mr. Bosi said he'd consider that advice when drawing up a proposal. d. PL20200002482 Eliminate $25K Minimum Value of the TDR Base Credit in RFMUD [Michele Mosca] Ms. Mosca said this item comes at the direction of the BCC and reported that: • The genesis of this is from the Rural -Fringe Mixed -Use District (RFMUD) Re -study that occurred in 2017 and it's been moving forward slowly. • This would remove that minimum value for the base TDR credit. • The DSAC-LDR Subcommittee reviewed this in December of 2020 and unanimously recommended approval. Ms. Mosca asked if the DSAC had questions or a recommendation. Vice Chairman Foley recommended they approve it. Mr. Curl said he'd second it and asked if Ms. Mosca found anyone in favor of keeping the dollar value of the credit. Ms. Mosca said she'd spoken to several property owners and a group of property owners within the one - mile distance from S.R. 951, one mile east of that. They're concerned that the value of their sending lands is much greater. She's also spoken to several property owners farther east and they don't have an issue with it, so there's still a mix. Mr. Curl said if the market is going determine the value, then why are you setting a minimum? Why would anyone be in favor of this. Ms. Mosca said she didn't set the minimum. She can't answer that. 12 September 7, 2022 Mr. Curl said he heard all five master plans years ago, and resoundingly, there was no good reason for that, except to say that Commissioner Coletta established it 20 years ago and it was just a vague number and had no real meaning. Ms. Mosca said your question was, "Did she talk to anybody?" She did and some people have concerns. They didn't elaborate what those concerns were. She had a conversation with the County Attorney's Office and because that initial credit was established at $25,000, the three additional credits add more value at the market rate. She can't say if people will be upset about it, but there's no additional takings issue with this change. Mr. Brooker said he was on the Subcommittee and asked why it had taken a year and eight to nine months to get to this point. Ms. Mosca said we're doing this because of the RFMUD amendments. They've been delayed multiple times. We had a backlog because of the COVID pandemic and we got caught up, but the Planning Commission delayed the transmittal of the amendments. The BCC then delayed the transmittal of these amendments. What staff wanted to do was wait until we received transmittal from the BCC approving that to move forward with an LDC amendment. That's what we typically do. Now it's been through the state. We're coming back for adoption hearings and are looking toward the end of December to accomplish that. Vice Chairman Foley made a motion to eliminate the $25,000 minimum value of the TDR base credit in the RFMUD. Second by Mr. Curl. The motion passed unanimously, 13-0. 7. Old Business a. LDR Subcommittee's recommendation and report back to DSAC on CBIA's request to increase automobile parking within front yards on pie -shaped or cul-de-sac lots for Single - Family Dwelling units [Rich Henderlong] Mr. Henderlong said the DSAC Subcommittee met to talk about this action item that was brought to the full DSAC by the CBIA, which asked the DSAC to take a look at and reevaluate the 40% rule for designated parking in the front yard setback for single-family residential on pie -shaped or cul-de-sac lots. He noted that: • The CBIA submitted documentation on four projects, and it was specifically identified as a problem related to high -end communities like Vanderbilt -Connors and Pelican Bay subdivision. • Staff presented a problem statement and gave six or seven questions to the Subcommittee to consider. At their last meeting, they went through the documentation. • The Subcommittee unanimously made a recommendation not to go forward with changing the current regulation because there wasn't enough evidence to prove this is a problem that warrants reconsideration. • In fact, the four homes in question were able to go ahead, redesign and come up with a building structure with a parking garage within the principal structure. • Another concern was that if we try to go beyond the 40%, we're moving closer to covering up the entire front lot of a single-family lot, specifically as it relates to a cul-de-sac or pie -shaped lot. That was the problem. • We researched and found that in 2002, when that rule was first codified, it was tied to a duplex in Golden Gate City. There were 11 parking lots. People were parking on a corner lot on a duplex and you had cars parking there, 11 spots. That's how it got the attention of the BCC and the community at large and got codified in the rules. • The bottom line is this Subcommittee is saying there isn't enough information to justify a change in the rule. 13 September 7, 2022 Mr. Curl said he expected to oppose this and praised staff for presenting a good argument for not moving forward. Mr. Brooker said the telling fact for him was that the four major problem cases were all resolved. The question was: Is the problem large enough to change the code for? The Subcommittee unanimously felt it wasn't. Mr. Curl made a motion to recommend that the designated parking requirement remain as adopted in LDC 40503A for single-family dwelling units on cul-de-sacs and pie -shaped lots. Second by Mr. Brooker. The motion passed unanimously, 13-0. 8. Committee Member Comments (None) 9. Adjourn Future Meeting Dates: Oct. 5, 2022, 3 p.m. Nov. 2, 2022, 3 p.m. Mr. Brooker made a motion to adjourn the meeting. It was seconded by Mr. Curl. The motion passed unanimously, 13-0. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the chairman at 4:23 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Chairman: William Varian These minutes were approved by the Committee/Chairman on as presented (choose one) , or as amended 14 September 22, 2021— October 21, 2022 Code Cases by Category Code Enforcement Division Monthly Report September 22, 2022 — October 21, 2022 Highlights • Cases opened: 384 • Cases closed due to voluntary compliance: 209 • Property inspections: 1979 • Lien searches requested: 640 Trnndc Cases Opened Per Month 665 669 665 700 652 604 642 628 622 600 545 529 500 435 384 400 300 200 100 0 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21 Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22 Jul-22 Aug-22 Sep-22 Code Inspections Per Month 3000 2703 2566 2508 2516 2594 2500 2352 2274 2264 2334 1979 2000 1747 1500 1229 1000 500 0 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21 Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22 Jul-22 Aug-22 Sep-22 This report reflects monthly data from September 22, 2022 —October 21, 2022 September 22, 2021— October 21, 2022 Code Cases by Category 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 2021 2022 Bayshore Immokalee Origin of Case ■ Code Div. Initiated Cases ■ Complaint Initiated Cases CRA Case Opened Monthly g Monthly Open Oases Total Opened Oases to Date (Report initiated September 2018) This report reflects monthly data from September 22, 2022 —October 21, 2022 September 22, 2021— October 21, 2022 Code Cases by Category Short-term Rentals 1% Site Development Signs 2% Property Maintenance 20% Vegetation Requirements 4%_\ Animals 9% Case Type Common Issues Associated with Case Type Accessory Use Parking Enforcement Noise 3% Nuisance Abatement 25% Occupational Licensing Accessory Use — Fence permits, fence maintenance, canopies, shades, guesthouse renting etc. Animals — Prohibited animals, too many animals, etc. Commercial - Shopping carts Land Use — Prohibited land use, roadside stands, outdoor storage, synthetic drugs, zoning issues, etc. Noise - Construction, early morning landscaping, bar or club, outdoor bands, etc. Nuisance Abatement — Litter, grass overgrowth, waste container pits, exotics, etc. Occupational Licensing — Home occupation violations, no business tax receipts, kenneling. etc. Parking Enforcement - Parking within public right-of-way, handicap parking, etc. Property Maintenance - Unsanitary conditions, no running water, green pools, structure in disrepair, etc. Protected Species - Gopher Tortoise, sea turtles lighting, bald eagles, etc. Right of Way - Construction in the public right-of-way, damaged culverts, obstruction to public right-of-way, etc. Signs - No sign permits, illegal banners, illegal signs on private property, etc. Site Development -Building permits, building alterations, land alterations, etc. Temporary Land Use - Special events, garage sales, promotional events, sidewalk sales, etc. Vegetation Requirements — Tree maintenance, sight distance triangle, tree pruning, land clearing, landfill, preserves, etc. Vehicles - License plates invalid, inoperable vehicles, grass parking, RV parking, other vehicle parking etc This report reflects monthly data from September 22, 2022 —October 21, 2022 August 22, 2021— September 21, 2022 Code Cases by Category Short Site DevE 17 Sigr 2% Rid Animals Veeetation Requirements — Accessory Use 2% 2% Case Type Common Issues Associated with Case Type' lance Abatement 34% Accessory Use — Fence permits, fence maintenance, canopies, shades, guesthouse renting etc. Animals — Prohibited animals, too many animals, etc. Commercial - Shopping carts Land Use — Prohibited land use, roadside stands, outdoor storage, synthetic drugs, zoning issues, etc. Noise - Construction, early morning landscaping, bar or club, outdoor bands, etc. Nuisance Abatement — Litter, grass overgrowth, waste container pits, exotics, etc. Occupational Licensing — Home occupation violations, no business tax receipts, kenneling. etc. Parking Enforcement - Parking within public right-of-way, handicap parking, etc. Property Maintenance - Unsanitary conditions, no running water, green pools, structure in disrepair, etc. Protected Species - Gopher Tortoise, sea turtles lighting, bald eagles, etc. Right of Way - Construction in the public right-of-way, damaged culverts, obstruction to public right-of-way,tc. Signs - No sign permits, illegal banners, illegal signs on private property, etc. Site Development -Building permits, building alterations, land alterations, etc. Temporary Land Use - Special events, garage sales, promotional events, sidewalk sales, etc. Vegetation Requirements — Tree maintenance, sight distance triangle, tree pruning, land clearing, landfill, preserves, etc. Vehicles - License plates invalid, inoperable vehicles, grass parking, RV parking, other vehicle parking etc. This report reflects monthly data from September 22, 2022 —October 21, 2022 July 22, 2022 — August 21, 2022 Code Cases by Category Site Vehid 11% Right of Wayf 3% Property Maintenance _ 10% Short-term Rentals Animals Vegetation Rec}uirements� 3 1 1% Accessory Use 2% Land Use 495 8% es Parking Enforcement 2% Occupational Licensing 2% Case Type Common Issues Associated with Case Type Noise 2% Nuisance Abatement 3596 Accessory Use — Fence permits, fence maintenance, canopies, shades, guesthouse renting etc. Animals — Prohibited animals, too many animals, etc. Commercial - Shopping carts Land Use — Prohibited land use, roadside stands, outdoor storage, synthetic drugs, zoning issues, etc. Noise - Construction, early morning landscaping, bar or club, outdoor bands, etc. Nuisance Abatement — Litter, grass overgrowth, waste container pits, exotics, etc. Occupational Licensing — Home occupation violations, no business tax receipts, kenneling. etc. Parking Enforcement - Parking within public right-of-way, handicap parking, etc. Property Maintenance - Unsanitary conditions, no running water, green pools, structure in disrepair, etc. Protected Species - Gopher Tortoise, sea turtles lighting, bald eagles, etc. Right of Way - Construction in the public right-of-way, damaged culverts, obstruction to public right-of-way,tc. Signs - No sign permits, illegal banners, illegal signs on private property, etc. Site Development -Building permits, building alterations, land alterations, etc. Temporary Land Use - Special events, garage sales, promotional events, sidewalk sales, etc. Vegetation Requirements — Tree maintenance, sight distance triangle, tree pruning, land clearing, landfill, preserves, etc. Vehicles - License plates invalid, inoperable vehicles, grass parking, RV parking, other vehicle parking etc. This report reflects monthly data from September 22, 2022 —October 21, 2022 80 Response Time - Letters of Availabilit 70 60 50 30 20 10 C Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22 Jul-22 � Requests Completed � Minimum Average � Maximum --* Response Time - Utility Deviations 35 30 25 15 10 Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22 Jul-22 � Requests Completed � Sufficiency Review Time � Substantive Review Time 40 Response Time - FDEP Permits c .N m 35 30 25 20 15 10 17 Apr-22 May-22 Jun-22 Jul-22 � Requests Completed � Initial Review Time � Revision Review Time � Director I Co er County September 2022 .Monthly Statistics 2BO COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 9/2022 Growth Management Department 1 Building Plan Review Statistics All Permits Applied by Month 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 O O O O T- T- T- T- T- T- r T- T- T- r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q. t i V a -0 L L a IM Q i ci a .0 L L i+ a IM Q. COI)) O Z o n LL Q g- Q 0 O Z 0 n LL Q - Q Co Top 15 of 35 Building Permit Types Applied Plumbing, 389 Mechanical, 555 Pool, 135 Solar, 140 Gas, 201 Roof, 341 Shutters/Doors/ Windows, 393 Bldg Bld� Electrical, ew 1 8� Add/Alt, 263 2 Res, 215 218 Fence, 133 Demolition 68 ROW Residential, 83 Sign/Flagpole, 58 Aluminum Structure, 158 Building Plan Review Statistics Monthly 1 & 2 Family Total Construction Value by Applied Date $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 s.L O O - - - - N N N N N N N N N N N N Q U L C a— s 1 &2 Family Monthly Total Construction Value by Applied Date $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 Monthly Multi -family & Commercial Total Construction Value by Applied Date $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 O O - - - N N N N N N N N N N N N Q U L C Q U L C Q cv cv (Multi -family Commercial O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q U U C >, C LA L1 1 U C Q >. C 0)Q (n Z 0 - U_ Q 2 Q 0 O Z 0 - LT Q Cn --*--1&2 Family —0--Multi-family Commercial Building Plan Review Statistics 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 New Construction Building Permits Issued by Month O O O O T- T T- T- T T- T- T T- r T T" N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Sep- 20 Oct- 20 Nov- 20 Dec- 20 Jan- 21 Feb- 21 Mar- 21 Apr- 21 May- 21 Jun- 21 Jul- 21 Aug- 21 Sep- 21 Oct- 21 Nov- 21 Dec- 21 Jan- 22 Feb- 22 Mar- 22 Apr- 22 May- 22 Jun- 22 Jul- 22 Aug- 22 Sep- 22 ■ Commercial 3 3 3 6 7 5 11 8 12 9 6 13 13 3 4 8 5L2217 4 4 4 7 4 4 4 ■ Multi -family 11 1 7 7 11 19 11 6 6 17 11 15 5 6 12E295 10 15 3 1 8 2 2 3 0 1&2 Family 248 352 244 314 357 195 386 412 460 445 374 403 218 330 286 34 333 255 284 316 248 280 234 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 New Multi -family Building Permits Issued by Month O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O (6 L f6 O O O N L > O a)U) Z U) Z 2 U) New Commercial Building Permits Issued by Month 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 O I! LS L! L LS L! L�L LS LS L L L L L L L L L L L L• L< L L L N N N N N N N N N N N N N L N O M M f6 , N O M (6 � N U) Z� 2 g U) Z-5 2 g U) Building Inspections Statistics Building Inspections 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 O O O O — — — — N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N CV N N 1V CV N N N 15 > U C n L L T C ai Q Z 0 � LL 2i Q 2 Q U) Z 0 � LL. 2 Q c6 � N cn � Q Cn Types of Building Inspections ROW, /ell, 107 Land Development Services Statistics All Land Development Applications Applied by Month 250 200 150 100 50 O O O O T- T- T- T T- T- T T- T- r T- r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q - > U C .0 L L >, C 0) Q- > 0 C M i L �, C 0 Q fA O z o� LL 2 Q 2 Q 0 O z o n 1L 2 Q 2" Q cn Top 5 Land Development Applications Applied within the Last 6 Months 600 537 500 400 300 200 100 0 Short -Term Vacation Rental Registration 438 145 108 100 0 E 1 Garage Sale Permit Zoning Verification Site Development Plan Vegetation Removal Letter Insubstantial Change Permit Land Development Services 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 120 100 80 60 40 20 Statistics Pre -application Meetings by Month O O O O V- r T- r r r V- r T" N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N CL } > V C -0 L L >, C M Q— > U C -0 L L >, C M Q 0 0 z o n Li 2 Q `° ' 0 0 z 0 n LL Q f° ) Front Zoning Counter Permits Applied by Month N N CV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q } > V C -0 C cn Q > U C .0 M Q in 0 z c n LL Q ' ) 0 z a n LL � Q f° �' 0 a) 0 Temporary Use Commercial Certificates Land Development Services 0 .� 5 4 w 0 y 3 E 3 2 Z 1 Statistics Number of New Subdivisions Recorded per Month O O O O T- r. T- T- r. T- � r. T- � T- T" N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0. "' > U C.0 U. U. i+ C 0 0. *1 > U C-0 i L >% C a1 Q 0 z o n Li 2 Q 2 n Q 0 0 z o n Li 2 Q 2 n Q cn cA Plat Pages Recorded per Month 60 59 54 50 '0i 40 a> c� a ° 30 E 21 Z 20 15 17 12 10 8 9 9 10 7 11 9 11 10 9 9 5 0 1■ ♦1 .. M ■ O O O O r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N i i Q. } U C L L �, C Q Y U C L L C al Q v)0Z0nLL Q Q00Z nLL Q Qv) Yearly Totals 2020 - 25 2021- 33 2022 - 21 Yearly Totals 2020 - 152 2021- 188 2022 - 128 Land Development Services Statistics Monthly Total of Subdivision Applications (PSPA, PSP, PPL, PPLA, ICP, FP, CNST) by Month 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 O O O O r r r r r r r r r r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N a — > U C .0 L L >+ C 0 a > U C -0 L i �+ C al a to 0 Z 0 LL 2 Q 2 3' cn 0 Z 0 n LL 2 Q � m 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Monthly Total of Subdivision Re-submittals/Corrections (PSPA, PSP, PPL, PPLA, ICP, FP, CNST) by Month O O O O r r r r r r r r r r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N a — > V C .0 L L C tm a — > V C .0 0 0 Z 0 n LL Q 3 = 0 0 Z 0�� Q f6 m Land Development Services 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Statistics Monthly Total of Site Plan Applications (SIP, SIPI, SDP, SDPA, SDPI, NAP) by Month O O O O r r r r r r r r r r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q ri 0 C .0 L L �, C M Q r i u C -0 L L >, C M Q m 0 z a n LL � Q � �' M d 0 z 0 n Li 2 Q M �� ) Monthly Total of Site Plan Re-submittals/Corrections (SIP, SIPI, SDP, SDPA, SDPI, NAP) by Month O O O O r r r r r r r r r r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q - i 0 C M L L �, C � Q � i u C -0 in 0 z 0-) LL Q ) 0 z 0 n LL Q �°n U) Reviews for Land Development 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 Services Number of Land Development Reviews N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 O O 0 cC G> � = cC 3 � � G) v O 0 � � � G) Z 0 n LL Q Q N O Z 0 n � Q Q N Percentage Ontime for the Month 0 Ontime 0 Late Land Development Services Statistics Total Applied Construction Valuation Estimate Ann nnn nnn �JV,VVV,VVV $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 O O CO O T- T- T- T- T- T- T- T- T- T- � T- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q i 0 C M L i >, C M a— i U C M L L >, C 0 Q U) 0 z 0 -) LL � Q �° � ' 3 ch m 0 z a -) LL � Q M � ' � d ■ Construction Estimate Utility Estimate Site & Utility Inspections 80 70 60 � l 0 o 50 � a 40 1 ] 1 c 30 0 a 20 ] c 10 0 O O O O C-1 c-I 1-1 c-1 r-I 1-1 c-1 .--I c-i N N N N N N fV N N N N N N 1-1 ci rl N fV N N N N N N N N N N N fV N N N N N N N Q — > U c -0 a c on n IN O z O LLG Q G 3 Q V) - > U C -0 a c 5 on Q o z o LLG Q G Q V) ■ Final Subdivision Inspection ■ Final Utility Inspection Preliminary Subdivision Inspection ■ Preliminary Utility Inspection ■ Tie In Inspection Fire Review Statistics Building Fire Review Average Number of Days 10 9 8 7 6 m 5 0 4 3 2 1 0 O O O O -1 r-I r-I -1 .--I .--I r-I .--I r-I -1 -1 r-I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N rV N N N N N N N N N N N rV N N N N Q > ° U a, C -0 L � - i` C an Q +--� > U C -0 i i` f6 C: 75 W Q N o LL 2 Q — Q V) o z C) LL 2¢ g Q V) Total Number of Building Fire Reviews by Month Fire District Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 ■ North Collier 558 588 429 586 427 482 630 706 741 1044 687 775 608 654 504 449 470 503 671 646 777 855 637 800 525 Collier County (Greater Naples) 400 439 403 446 460 475 451 473 456 586 401 480 382 411 409 393 323 503 613 538 576 623 383 481 350 Planning Fire Review Average Number of Days 10 9 8 7 6 5 0 4 3 2 1 0 O O N N O O r-I r-I r-I —I —i r-I -i r-I r-I ci ci —1 N N N N N N N N N N N N rV rV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Q +-� a) O > U C -0 i i a c - W Q -U > U C -0 i i >, O a) co U) Q- cc 7 7 6) O a) ro U) Q- cc c 7 W = a 6) — z o LL g a g, a V) O z o, LL g a g a V) Total Number of Planning Fire Reviews by Month Fire District Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 ■ North Collier 47 44 37 32 25 33 37 39 39 55 32 43 23 48 41 49 29 31 29 49 43 48 36 31 29 Collier County(Greater Naples) 59 62 61 51 44 53 71 72 60 74 61 39 53 80 70 68 56 56 62 69 59 56 65 73 41 CO ter C01.vtty Growth Management Community Development Department LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT PETITION SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT PL20220005067 This amendment corrects scrivener's errors and updates cross-references ORIGIN related to various Land Development Code (LDC) sections. Growth Management Community Development Department (GMCDD) HEARING DATES LDC SECTION TO BE AMENDED BCC TBD 1.08.02 Definitions CCPC TBD 2.03.03 Commercial Zoning Districts DSAC 11/2/2022 2.03.07 Overlay Zoning Districts DSAC-LDR 8/24/2022 2.03.08 Rural Fringe Zoning Districts 5.05.15 Conversion of Golf Courses 6.01.02 Easements 10.02.04 Requirements for Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plats 10.02.08 Requirements for Amendments to the Official Zoning Atlas ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS DSAC-LDR DSAC CCPC Approved TBD TBD BACKGROUND This LDC amendment corrects scrivener's errors and updates various citations/references throughout the LDC. This staff -led effort required collaboration between Zoning and Development Review divisions in the GMCDD. These changes are necessary to keep citations current and language appropriate. Research to relevant codes was applied for validity. This amendment makes corrections in the following LDC sections: LDC section 1.08.02: An editorial error was made between Ordinance Numbers 1991-34 and 1992-73 where the closed parenthesis was removed. This returns it to its correct location. LDC section 2.03.03 B.1.c.8.: The word "principle" should read "principal." The word has a different meaning. This section is referring to the primary uses listed in LDC section 2.03.03 B. La. LDC section 2.03.03 C.La.42.: The chapter citation of the Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) is cited incorrectly. There is no chapter 589A-36. Chapter 59A-36 is appropriate, it being entitled "Assisted Living Facility," with this LDC section referring to this subject. LDC section 2.03.07 F.2.b.: LDC section 4.02.06 is referenced as it pertains to the design standards for the GGPOD zoning overlay. This citation is incorrect. The GGPOD zoning overlay should cite LDC section 4.02.26. These design standards have been in this section since their adoption in the LDC. LDC section 2.03.08 B. La. (5): The LDC section citation for 2.03.08 C. is incorrect. The LDC section for Natural resource protection area overlay district (NRPA) was changed from 2.03.08 C. to 2.03.08 B. with Ordinance Number 2005-27 and this citation was not updated with it. LDC section 2.03.08 B.1.b.: The typo, "eth" has remained in this section since the current, amended LDC Ordinance 2004-41 was adopted. LDC section 5.05.15 C.2.a.: This is an editorial correction to correct the labelling. 1 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\Nov 02\Materials\Word Versions\DSAC - 10-26-2022 (LDCA- PL20220005067).docx CO ter C01.vtty Growth Management Community Development Department LDC section 6.01.02 C.: The word "principle" should read "principal." The word has a different meaning. This section is referring to the primary structures located on a lot. LDC section 10.02.04 B.: This adds a missing LDC section reference for construction plan review. LDC section 10.02.08 B.: This corrects letter capitalization. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS GMP CONSISTENCY There are no anticipated fiscal or operational The proposed LDC amendment has been reviewed by impacts associated with this amendment. Comprehensive Planning staff and may be deemed consistent with the GMP. 2 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\Nov 02\Materials\Word Versions\DSAC - 10-26-2022 (LDCA- PL20220005067).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Amend the LDC as follows: 1.08.02 — Definitions Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh 'c Gurrono text to he deleted Family care facility: A residential facility designed to be occupied by not more than 6 persons under care, plus staff as required by rule 59A-36.010, F.A.C., and constituting a single dwelling unit (i.e., adult congregate living facility for: aged persons; developmentally disabled persons; physically disabled or handicapped persons; mentally ill persons; and persons recovering from alcohol and/or drug abuse). Foster care facilities are also included, but not the uses listed under group care facility (category II). This use shall be applicable to single-family dwelling units and mobile homes. # # # # # # # # # # # # # 2.03.03 — Commercial Zoning Districts B. Commercial Convenience District (C-2). The purpose and intent of the commercial convenience district (C-2) is to provide lands where commercial establishments may be located to provide the small-scale shopping and personal needs of the surrounding residential land uses within convenient travel distance except to the extent that office uses carried forward from the C-1 district will expand the traditional neighborhood size. However, the intent of this district is that retail and service uses be of a nature that can be economically supported by the immediate residential environs. Therefore, the uses should allow for goods and services that households require on a daily basis, as opposed to those goods and services that households seek for the most favorable economic price and, therefore, require much larger trade areas. It is intended that the C-2 district implements the Collier County GMP within those areas designated agricultural/rural; estates neighborhood center district of the Golden Gate Master Plan; the neighborhood center district of the Immokalee Master Plan; and the urban mixed use district of the future land use element permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for commercial and the goals, objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible in the C-2 district and the urban mixed use land use designation shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in a district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the C-2 commercial convenience district. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permissible as conditional uses in the commercial convenience district (C-2), subject to the standards and procedures established in LDC section 10.08.00. 3 G:\LDC Amend ments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\Nov 02\Materials\Word Versions\DSAC - 10-26-2022 (LDCA-PL20220005067). docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh 'c ono text to he deleted 8. Personal services, miscellaneous (7299 - not listed as prinGipie principal uses and limited to babysitting bureaus; birth certificate agencies; car title and tag services; computer photography or portraits; dating service; diet workshops; dress suit rental; tux rental; genealogical investigation service; hair removal; shopping service for individuals only; wardrobe service, except theatrical; wedding chapels, privately operated) with 1,800 square feet or less of gross floor area in the principal structure. C. Commercial Intermediate District (C-3). The purpose and intent of the commercial intermediate district (C-3) is to provide for a wider variety of goods and services intended for areas expected to receive a higher degree of automobile traffic. The type and variety of goods and services are those that provide an opportunity for comparison shopping, have a trade area consisting of several neighborhoods, and are preferably located at the intersection of two -arterial level streets. Most activity centers meet this standard. This district is also intended to allow all of the uses permitted in the C-1 and C-2 zoning districts typically aggregated in planned shopping centers. This district is not intended to permit wholesaling type of uses, or land uses that have associated with them the need for outdoor storage of equipment and merchandise. A mixed -use project containing a residential component is permitted in this district subject to the criteria established herein. The C-3 district is permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for commercial and the goals, objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible in the C-3 district and the urban mixed use land use designation shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in the C-3 district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density rating system. 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the commercial intermediate district (C-3). a. Permitted uses. 42. Group care facilities (category I and 11, except for homeless shelters); care units, except for homeless shelters; nursing homes; assisted living facilities pursuant to § 429.02 F.S. and ch. FR�o 59A-36 F.A.C.; and continuing care retirement communities pursuant to ch. 651 F.S. and ch. 690-193 F.A.C.; all subject to LDC section 5.05.04. 4 G:\LDC Amend ments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\Nov 02\Materials\Word Versions\DSAC - 10-26-2022 (LDCA-PL20220005067). docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 2 3 2.03.07 — Overlay Zoning Districts 4 5 6 7 F. Golden Gate Parkway Overlay District (GGPOD) 8 9 10 11 2. Applicability. 12 13 14 15 b. Property owners within the GGPOD may establish uses, densities, and 16 intensities in accordance with the underlying zoning classification of the 17 GGPOD. The design standards of the GGPOD pursuant to LDC section 18 4.02.86-26 shall apply. 19 20 21 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 22 23 2.03.08 — Rural Fringe Zoning Districts 24 25 26 27 B. Natural resource protection area overlay district (NRPA). 28 1. Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of the Natural Resource Protection 29 Area Overlay District (NRPA) is to: protect endangered or potentially endangered 30 species by directing incompatible land uses away from their habitats; to identify 31 large, connected, intact, and relatively unfragmented habitats, which may be 32 important for these listed species; and to support State and Federal agencies' 33 efforts to protect endangered or potentially endangered species and their habitats. 34 NRPAs may include major wetland systems and regional flow -ways. These lands 35 generally should be the focus of any federal, state, County, or private acquisition 36 efforts. Accordingly, allowable land uses, vegetation preservation standards, 37 development standards, and listed species protection criteria within NRPAs set 38 forth herein are more restrictive than would otherwise be permitted in the 39 underlying zoning district and shall to be applicable in addition to any standards 40 that apply tin the underlying zoning district. 41 42 43 44 a. NRPA overlay areas. NRPAs are located in the following areas: 45 46 47 48 (5) South Golden Gate Estates. 49 The NRPA lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District to which 50 the Section 2.03.08 �,'.B. regulations apply (i.e. - numbers 3 and 4 51 above) are depicted by the following map: 5 G:\LDC Amend ments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\Nov 02\Materials\Word Versions\DSAC - 10-26-2022 (LDCA-PL20220005067). docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh 'c ono text to he deleted LEE COUNSY RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS IMM41G41EE ROAD s 0 J O R1 LEE COUNTY y Uj 'yz W 0 O m IMMO(ALEE nROADRANDALL BLVD z a }J_ T z GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD a m m Fu J O v IRTERSTATE - 75 t-t fY JS �i }r ,n w 0 C w a 1 2 3 4 6 GALDC Amend ments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\Nov 02\Materials\Word Versions\DSAC - 10-26-2022 (LDCA-PL20220005067). docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh is ono text to he deleted b. NRPAS designated as RFMU sending lands within the RFMU district. NRPAs located in the RFMU district are identified as RFMU sending lands and are further subject to the provisions, conditions and standards set forth in section 2.03.08 (A)(4). Private property owners within these NRPAs may transfer residential development rights from these important environmentally sensitive lands to other identified "receiving" lands pursuant to eth specific provisions set forth in section 2.01.03 of this Code. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 5.05.15 — Conversion of Golf Courses * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. Application process for conversion applications. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. Developer's Alternatives Statement requirements. The purpose of the Developer's Alternatives Statement (DAS) is to serve as a tool to inform stakeholders and the County about the applicant's development options and intentions. It is intended to encourage communication, cooperation, and consensus building between the applicant, the stakeholders, and the County. Via. Alternatives. The DAS shall be prepared by the applicant and shall clearly identify the goals and objectives for the conversion project. The DAS shall address, at a minimum, the three alternatives noted below. The alternatives are not intended to be mutually exclusive; the conceptual development plan described below may incorporate one or more of the alternatives in the conversion project. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 6.01.02 — Easements If applicable, easements shall be provided along lot lines or along the alignment of the improvements requiring easements in accordance with all design requirements so as to provide for proper access to, and construction and maintenance of, the improvements. All such easements shall be properly identified on the preliminary subdivision plat and dedicated on the final subdivision plat. * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. Protected/preserve area and easements. A nonexclusive easement or tract in favor of Collier County, without any maintenance obligation, shall be provided for all "protected/preserve" areas required to be designated on the preliminary and final subdivision plats or only on the final subdivision plat if the applicant chooses not to submit the optional preliminary subdivision plat. Any buildable lot or parcel subject to or abutting a protected/preserve area required to be designated on the preliminary and final subdivision plats, or only on the final subdivision plat if the applicant chooses not to submit 7 G:\LDC Amend ments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\Nov 02\Materials\Word Versions\DSAC - 10-26-2022 (LDCA-PL20220005067). docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh 'c ono text to he deleted the optional preliminary subdivision plat, shall have a minimum setback as required by the LDC, or other setback that may be approved as a deviation through the PUD approval process by the Board of County Commissioners from the boundary of such protected/preserve area in which no pFO rinci al structure may be constructed. The required preserve principal structure setback line and the accessory structure setback lines shall be clearly indicated and labeled on the final plat where applicable. Further, the preliminary and final subdivision plats, or only on the final subdivision plat if the applicant chooses not to submit the optional preliminary subdivision plat, shall require that no alteration, including accessory structures, fill placement, grading, plant alteration or removal, or similar activity shall be permitted within such setback area without the prior written consent of the County Manager or designee; provided, in no event shall these activities be permitted in such setback area within ten feet of the protected/preserve area boundary. Additional regulations regarding preserve setbacks and buffers are located in Chapters 4 and 10, and shall be applicable for all preserves, regardless if they are platted or simply identified by a recorded conservation easement. The boundaries of all required easements shall be dimensioned on the final subdivision plat. Required protected/preserve areas shall be identified as separate tracts or easements having access to them from a platted right-of-way. No individual residential or commercial lot or parcel lines may project into them when platted as a tract. If the protected/preserve area is determined to be jurisdictional in nature, verification must be provided which documents the approval of the boundary limits from the appropriate local, state or federal agencies having jurisdiction and when applicable pursuant to the requirements and provisions of the growth management plan. All required easements or tracts for protected/preserve areas shall be dedicated and also establish the permitted uses for said easement(s) and/or tracts on the final subdivision plat to Collier County without the responsibility for maintenance and/or to a property owners' association or similar entity with maintenance responsibilities. An applicant who wishes to set aside, dedicate or grant additional protected preserve areas not otherwise required to be designated on the preliminary subdivision plat and final subdivision plats, or only on the final subdivision plat if the applicant chooses not to submit the optional preliminary subdivision plat, may do so by grant or dedication without being bound by the provisions of this section. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 10.02.04 — Requirements for Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plats E. General Requirements for Construction Plans (CNSTR). * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. Application and process. * * * * * * * * * * * * C. Construction plans shall be reviewed and approved pursuant to LDC section 10.02.04 B.3. and B.4, as applicable. * * * * * * * * * * * * 8 G:\LDC Amend ments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\Nov 02\Materials\Word Versions\DSAC - 10-26-2022 (LDCA-PL20220005067). docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh 'c ono text to he deleted # # # # # # # # # # # # # 10.02.08 — Requirements for Amendments to the Official Zoning Atlas * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. Amendment of the zoning atlas. A zoning atlas amendment may be proposed by: 1. Board of sCounty GCommissioners. 2. Planning eCommission. 3. Board of zZoning aAppeals. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 9 G:\LDC Amend ments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\Nov 02\Materials\Word Versions\DSAC - 10-26-2022 (LDCA-PL20220005067). docx Co -per County Growth Management Community Development Department 1/ 0 1 ..• To: Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC) From: Eric Johnson, AICP, CFM, LDC Planning Manager Date: September 27, 2022 Re: PL20220003445 — RLSA Updates LDC Amendment This memorandum serves to advise the DSAC that the DSAC-LDR Subcommittee (Subcommittee) reviewed the above referenced LDC amendment at their hearing on September 21, 2022. The Subcommittee's vote and conditions are summarized as follows: DSAC-LDR Subcommittee Recommendation: The DSAC-LDR Subcommittee recommended approval of this LDC amendment on September 21, 2022, subject to the following: 1. Wherever it states dark sky compliant lighting principles, the Subcommittee is not in favor of that terminology and to instead use the language from Policy 5.7 of the GMP, and that a future LDC amendment should be considered for lighting guidance in general. 2. Clarify the sentence on lines 16-18 on page 33 (LDC section 4.08.06 13.6.f.), which currently reads: "Only one type of restoration shall be rewarded with these Credits for each acre designated for restoration and in no case shall more than ten (10) Credits be awarded per acre," and that staff would consider inserting a chart to makes it easier to follow. 3. Clarify the verbs on page 31 (i.e., received, awarded, assigned, rewarded) under restoration stewardship credits, to be made consistent to the extent necessary to understand the intent. 4. Include the walk-on changes to the LDC amendment, as presented by staff at the meeting. 5. Include the administrative code changes, provided the changes are consistent with what we just discussed. The enclosed packet represents the document that was presented to the Subcommittee. I intend to provide the DSAC will an updated version prior to the meeting. Please contact me at (239) 252-2931 or Eric.Johnsonkcolliercountyfl.gov if you have any questions. CO Ter C014ftty Growth Management Department - LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT PETITION PL20220003445 ORIGIN Growth Management Plan (GMP) SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT This Land Development Code (LDC) amendment shall update the Rural Land Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSA District) Standards and Procedures to ensure consistency with the recently adopted changes that were made to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP, pursuant to Ordinance 2021-28. HEARING DATES LDC SECTIONS TO BE AMENDED BCC TBD 1.08.01 Abbreviations CCPC TBD 2.01.03 Essential Services DSAC TBD 2.03.07 Overlay Zoning Districts DSAC-LDR 08/24/2022 2.05.02 Density Blending 3.04.01 Generally 3.05.07 Preservation Standards 3.08.00 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REQUIREMENTSI 4.08.01 Specific Definitions Applicable to the RLSA District 4.08.02 Establishment of RLSA Zoning Overlay District 4.08.03 Establishment of land uses allowed in the RLSA District. 4.08.04 Implementation of Stewardship Credits 4.08.05 Baseline Standards 4.08.06 SSA Designation 4.08.07 SRA Designation 10.02.06 Requirements for Permits ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS DSAC-LDR DSAC CCPC TBD TBD TBD BACKGROUND In 1999, the State of Florida imposed a Final Order (Case No. ACC-99-002 and DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM) on Collier County, directing the County to perform a three-year Rural and Agricultural Assessment of the GMP to identify measures to protect agricultural areas, direct incompatible land uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, and to assess the growth potential of the County's rural areas. The was to occur while discouraging urban sprawl, directing incompatible land uses away from critical habitat, and encouraging development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques. In 2002, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) established the Rural Lands Stewardship Area program under the FLUE of the GMP, pursuant to Ord. 2002-54. The objective was to create an incentive -based land use overlay system founded upon the principles of rural land stewardship as defined in Chapter 163.3177(11), F.S., now in Chapter 163.3248, F.S. The Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSA District) regulations were initially adopted into the LDC on June 16, 2003, pursuant to Ord. 2003-27. Subsequent amendments to the RLSA District in the LDC occurred in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2010. The RLSA District includes important environmental and agricultural assets, most of which are on privately held land. The RLSA District is designated as "RLSAO" on the Official Zoning Atlas Maps and as such, the LDC terminology is being modified to be consistent with the G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17- 2022).docx CO Ter C014ftty Growth Management Department maps. On February 10, 2015, the Board directed staff to initiate "restudies" of four GMP master plans, one of which being the RLSA. The RLSA restudy began in January 2018, culminating in the creation of an RLSA White Paper, which was presented to the Board in October 2019. At this meeting, the Board directed staff to (1) bring forward GMP amendments for the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay in the FLUE, (2) develop a regional water partnership to address regional water matters, and (3) draft LDC amendments to address the characteristics of the Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA). A GMP amendment (PL20190002292) involving the RLSA Overlay in the FLUE was approved by the Board on July 13, 2021, pursuant to Ord. 2021-28. The LDC and administrative code are being updated with the "RLSAO" acronym to be consistent with the same designations on the applicable Official Zoning Atlas Maps. The changes to the administrative code are shown in Exhibit A and will require a separate resolution. This LDC amendment shall implement the updates that were made to the GMP last summer. The noteworthy LDC amendment changes are identified and summarized in Exhibit B. The pertinent GMP Policies are summarized in Exhibit C. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS GMP CONSISTENCY There are no fiscal or operational impacts to To be provided by Comprehensive Planning Staff prior the County. Developers will be required to to DSAC-LDR Subcommittee meeting. submit an SRA Mobility Plan. EXHIBITS: A) Changes to Adminstrative Code; B) Summary of Proposed Changes; C) Policy Direction Chart; D) Ordinance 2021-28; E) Conservancy Letter and Backup 2 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17- 2022).docx Text underlined is new text to be added Amend the LDC as follows: 1 2 1.08.01 — Abbreviations 3 4 5 RLSA Rural Lands Stewardship Area RLSAO Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Over District RNC Residential Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict 6 7 8 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 9 10 2.01.03 — Essential Services 11 12 13 14 B. Permitted essential services in CON districts, RFMU sending lands, NRPAs, HSAs, and 15 FSAs. 16 17 1. Within CON districts, Sending Lands in the RFMU district, NRPAs, and within 18 designated Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSA) and Flow way Stewardship Areas 19 (FSA) within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSAO) 20 everlay diStFiGt subject to the limitations set forth in section 4.08.08 C., the following 21 essential services are permitted: 22 23 24 25 G. Conditional uses. The following uses require approval pursuant to section 10.08.00 26 conditional uses: 27 28 1. Conditional essential services in every zoning district excluding the RFMU district 29 sending lands, CON districts, NRPAs, and RLS designated HSAs and FSAs on 30 the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element 31 of the Growth Management Plan (RLSA Overlay Map). In every zoning district, 32 unless otherwise identified as permitted uses, and excluding RFMU district 33 Sending Lands, CON districts, and NRPAs, the following uses shall be allowed as 34 conditional uses: 35 36 37 38 2. Conditional essential services in RFMU sending lands, NRPAs, CON districts, and 39 RLS designated HSAs and FSAs on the RLSA Overlay Map. Within RFMU 40 District Sending Lands, NRPAs, CON districts, and the RFLA designated HSAs 41 and FSAs on the RLSA Overlay Map, subject to the limitations set forth in LDC 42 section 4.08.05 H.3, the following additional essential services are allowed as 43 conditional uses: 44 45 46 3 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethri. gh 'c GUFF8Rt tGXt to ho .d A'At8 d 5. Conditional uses that include the installation of structures: a. Where structures are involved other than structures supporting lines or cables, such structures shall comply with the regulations for the district in which they are located, or as may be required on an approved site development plan under LDC section 10.02.03. In addition, the structures shall conform insofar as possible to the character of the district in which they are located as to development standards, as well as architecture and landscaping, with utilization of screening and buffering to ensure compatible with the surrounding and nearby existing and future uses. b. Within the RFMU district sending lands, NRPAs, Conservation Districts, and the RLS HSAs and FSAs on the RLSA Overlay Map, structures supporting the conditional use shall be located so as to minimize any impacts on native vegetation and on wildlife and wildlife habitat. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 2.03.07 — Overlay Zoning Districts * * * * * * * * * * * * * D. Special Treatment Overlay (ST). * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). * * * * * * * * * * * * * iii. Applicability. These TDR provisions shall be applicable to those areas specifically identified in (b), (c) and (d) below. These TDR provisions shall not be applicable to the any transfer of development rights within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSAO) RLSA District * * * * * * * * * * * * * G. Immokalee Urban Overlay District. To create the Immokalee Urban Overlay District with distinct subdistricts for the purpose of establishing development criteria suitable for the unique land use needs of the Immokalee Community. The boundaries of the Immokalee Urban Overlay District are delineated on the maps below. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 7. Interim Deviations: Property owners within the Immokalee Urban Overlay District may request deviations from specific dimensional requirements as described in this section. A deviation request may be reviewed administratively or by the 4 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethreu nh is ent text to he deleted 1 Planning Commission depending upon its scope. This section addresses the 2 permissible deviations, limitations thereon, and the review process. 3 4 5 e. Applicability - List of Development Standards Eligible for Deviation 6 Requests. Property owners shall be eligible to seek a deviation from the 7 dimensional requirements of the following LDC sections, unless otherwise 8 noted. 9 10 11 12 iv. 3.05.07 B.1 Preservation Standards, Specific Standards Applicable 13 Outside the RMFU and RLSAO districts, Required Preservation 14 Percentages (Table 1 inset). 15 16 17 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 18 19 2.05.02 — Density Blending 20 21 22 23 B. Conditions and limitations. 24 25 26 27 3. Properties straddling the Immokalee urban area and the Rural Lands Stewardship 28 Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSAO) PLSA .disci i-+ Density and intensity 29 blending between properties straddling the Immokalee Urban Area and the RLSAO 30 DistriGtshall be permitted, subject to all of the following conditions and limitations: 31 32 33 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 34 35 3.04.01 — Generally 36 37 38 39 B. Applicability. 40 41 42 43 2. Exemptions: The following are exempt from the provisions of this Section: 44 45 46 47 b. All development within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay 48 District RLSA Distric-t, except as specifically provided in section 4.08.00; 49 and 50 5 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethri. gh is ent text to he .deleted * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 3.05.02 — Exemptions from Requirements for Vegetation Protection and Preservation * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. Agricultural exemption. Agricultural operations that fall within the scope of Florida Statutes sections 163.3162(4) and 823.14(6), Florida Statutes, are exempt from the provisions of section 3.05.03 through 3.05.09, provided that any new clearing of land for agriculture outside of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District RLSA District shall not be converted to non-agricultural development for 25 years, unless the applicable provisions set forth in LDC sections 3.05.04 through 3.05.07 G. are adhered to at the time of the conversion. The percentage of native vegetation preserved shall be calculated on the amount of vegetation occurring at the time of the agricultural clearing, and if found to be deficient, a native plant community shall be restored to re-create a native plant community in all three strata (ground covers, shrubs and trees), utilizing larger plant materials so as to more quickly re-create the lost mature vegetation. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 3.05.07 — Preservation Standards * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. Specific standards applicable outside the RFMU and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSAO) RLSA do StF'Gt . Outside the RFMU and RLSAO DoStroGtS, native vegetation shall be preserved on site, except for single family residences, through the application of the following preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria. The single family exception is not to be used as an exception from any calculations regarding total preserve area for a development containing single family lots. For properties not previously within the Coastal High Hazard Area but now within the Coastal High Hazard Area due to adoption of a revised Coastal High Hazard Area boundary in 2013, the native vegetation preservation and retention standards of the Non -Coastal High Hazard Area shall continue to apply. (Reference the Coastal High Hazard Area Comparison Map in the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan.) * * * * * * * * * * * * * D. Specific standards for the RLSAO d+StKiGt. For lands within the RLSAO DistriGt, native vegetation shall be preserved pursuant to the RLSAO DiStFiGRegulations set forth in section 4.08.00 of this Code. * * * * * * * * * * * * * F. Wetland preservation and conservation. 6 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh is on+ tGA to be deleted 1. Purpose. The following standards are intended to protect and conserve Collier County's valuable wetlands and their natural functions, including marine wetlands. These standards apply to all of Collier County, except for lands within the RLSAO DiStr+et. RLSAO DiStFiG lands are regulated in LDC section 4.08.00. Wwetlands shall be protected as follows, with total site preservation not to exceed those amounts of vegetation retention set forth in LDC section 3.05.07(C), unless otherwise required. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 5. RLSAO diStriGt. Within the RLSAO DistriGt, wetlands shall be preserved pursuant to LDC section 4.08.00. * * * * * * * * * * * * * H. Preserve standards. 1. Design standards. * * * * * * * * * * * * * f. Off -site vegetation retention i. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this subsection f. is to identify the criteria to satisfy on -site preserve requirements off site. The intent of the on -site preserve requirement is to retain, maintain, and preserve existing native vegetation on site as provided for in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP. However, in limited situations on -site preserve may be considered less viable as a functional preserve if it is 21,780 square feet (one- half acre) or less and isolated. Therefore, in limited situations, providing for a preserve off site can achieve the goals and objectives of the GMP. This section shall not apply to lands located within the RLSAO or RFMU districts. * * * * * * * * * * * * * h. Allowable uses within County required preserves. Passive uses are allowed within preserves to provide for access to the preserve, as long as any clearing required to facilitate these uses does not impact the minimum required native vegetation or cause loss of function to the preserve. Loss of function to the preserve includes unacceptable changes in vegetation within the preserve or harming any listed species present in the preserve. Unacceptable changes in vegetation within preserves include replacement of indigenous vegetation with non-native species, changes in vegetative composition which are inconsistent with target plant communities or die - offs of vegetation which are inconsistent with target plant communities. Determinations of harm to listed species shall be made by FFWCC or USFWS, and pathways, structures or improvements within preserves 7 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh io 8Rt tGA to ho doiotPd containing listed species shall be in accordance with permits or authorizations from these agencies. * * * * * * * * * * * * * ii. Stormwater subject to the following criteria. * * * * * * * * * * * * * h) Stormwater shall be allowed in preserves in the RIBS" - WRA areas on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan in accordance with standards and procedures of the RLSAO, pursuant to LDC section 4.08.00 Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Dictrint standards and PFOGeduires. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 3.08.00 — ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REQUIREMENTS A. Environmental Data Requirements. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4. Environmental Data. The following information shall be submitted, where applicable, to evaluate projects. * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. Native vegetation preservation. iii. Include on a separate site plan, the project boundary and the land use designations and overlays for the Rural Land Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District, RLSPr, RFMU, ST and ACSC-ST districts. Include this information on the SDP or PPL. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 4.08.01 — Specific Definitions Applicable to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District RLSA Dmstr,,.+ As used in the RLS Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District RL( SAO) Ronal,&, the terms below shall have the following meanings, set forth below, to the exclusion of any meanings ascribed to such terms in LDC section 1.08.00: A. Accessory dwelling unit. A dwelling unit that is supplemental and subordinate to a primary dwelling on the same premises, limited to 900 square feet. 8 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethreugh 66 GLIFFeRt text to be, deleted B. Agricultural Stewardship Area (ASA). Privately owned lands delineated on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan within Open Lands that are retained for agricultural activities and protected through the use of stewardship credits. Cif. Baseline standards Stands. Baseline Sstandards are the allowable uses, densities, intensities, den i+., in+ensi+!, and other land development regulations assigned to land within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlav of the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan and A SA Dietn t by the GMP, GemneGe my Land Development Code deyelepmen+ Regulations and Collier County Zoning Regula+inns In effect prior to July 25, 2000, and subject to the further provisions of LDC section 4.08.05. DG. Building heig Height. Refers to the vertical extent of a building. Building height is measured in Stories. ED. Building height to street width ratio Height to Street Width Ra+ie. The maximum height of the tallest building divided by the width of the street. The street width is the distance between two building fagades. F€. Civic and institutional uses institutional Uses. Structures and facilities developed for and/or used by established organizations or foundations dedicated to public service or cultural activities including the arts, education, government and religion. GF-. Compact Rural Development development (CRD). Compact Rural Development is developments are a form of SRA that is intended to support and further Collier County's valued attributes of agriculture, natural resources, and economic diversity. The size of a CRD shall not exceed 300 acres. A CRD shall include uses associated with and needed to support research, education, convenience retail, tourism, or recreation. A CRD may include but is not required to have permanent residential housing and the services and facilities to support permanent residents provide flexibility with respen+ +n the mix of ,ions and the serviGes and faGilities that support permanent residents. AR example ef a GR6 without permaneRt resideRtial heusing i's aR eGGtGUF!SM village that would have a URique- set of uses and suppeFt seFViGes diffeFeRt from a traditional residential v 11age. it wel Village. A CRD may inGlude, but is not required to have perrnaReRt Fesidential he i but rRay net provide for the range of se. sep,ines nereooan, to support permanent reoiden+s HG. Context Zzones. Areas that establish the use, intensity, and diversity within a town or village, village or hamlet. Context zones specify permitted land uses, FARs, building height, setbacks, and other regulating elements to guide the establishment of the urban to rural continuum. IH. Designation. Application of the SSA or SRA concepts through a formal application, review, and approval process as described in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay RLSA District Regulations. it. €SA Flow way Stewardship Area ESA . Privately owned lands delineated on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area RLS Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the 9 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh io Gurrent text to be deleted Growth Management Plan, which primarily include privately owned wetlands that are located within the Camp Keais Strand and Okaloacoochee Slough. FSAs form the primary wetland flow way systems in the RLSAO DistriGt. K. HSA- Habitat Stewardship Area (HSA). Privately owned lands delineated on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area RLSA Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan, which include both areas with natural characteristics that make them suitable habitat for listed species and areas without these characteristics. These latter areas are included because they are located contiguous to habitat with natural characteristics, thus forming a continuum of landscape that can augment habitat values. Incidental clearing GleaFiRg. Clearing of no more than one percent 4-0/6 of the area of an SSA, which is conducted to accommodate the ability to convert from one Ag 1 use to another Ag 1 use and which connects existing Ag 1 acres, squares up existing Ag 1 farm fields, or provides access to or from Ag 1 areas. M. Landmark building. A prominent civic, or institutional building that creates a significant community feature, focal point, or terminating vista. N. Land Use - Land Cover Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon land use and land cover characteristics as mapped using the Florida Land Use, Cover, and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) (FDOT 1999). For purposes of assigning values, land use and land cover codes are grouped as follows: Group 1 (Codes 617, 6172, 621, 6218, 6219, 624, 630, 641, 643); Group 2 (Codes 321, 411, 4119, 425, 434, 439, 428); Group 3 (211, 212, 213, 214, 221, 222, 241, 242, 243, 250, 260, 261, 310, 329, 330, 422, 510, 521, 523, 533, 534); and Group 4 (all others). O. Land Use Layer (Layer). Permitted and conditional land uses within the Bbaseline Sstandards that are of a similar type or intensity and that are grouped together in the same column on the Land Use Matrix. P. Land Use Matrix (Matrix). The tabulation of the permitted and conditional land uses within the Sbaseline Sstandards set forth in LDC section SeGtien 4.08.06 B.64., with each Land Use Layer displayed as a single column. Q. Listed Species Habitat Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value, with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for listed species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species with land cover identified as preferred or tolerated habitat for that species. Land mapped, using FLUCFCS, as 310, 321, 411, 425, 428, 434, 617, 6172, 621, 6218, 6219, 624, and 630 is deemed to be preferred or tolerated habitat for panthers for the purpose of assigning a value for these indices. An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of preferred or 10 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh io 8Rt tGA to ho doiotPd tolerated habitat for that species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat. R. Natural Resource Index (Index). A measurement system that establishes the relative natural resource value of each acre of land by objectively measuring six different characteristics of land and assigning an index factor based on each characteristic. The sum of these six factors is the Index value for the land. The six characteristics measured are: Stewardship Overlay Delineation, Proximity, Listed Species Habitat, Soils/Surface Water, Restoration Potential, and Land Use/Land Cover. S. Natural Resource Index Map Series (Index Maps). The Rural Lands Study Area Natural Resource Index Map Series adopted as part of the GMP. T. Natural Resource Index Value (Index Value). The sum of the values assigned to each acre, derived through the calculation of the values assigned to each of the six (6) characteristics included in the Index. U. Neighborhood Edge Context Zone. A defining Gcontext Zzone that includes the least intensity and diversity within the Town town or Village, village or hart. The Neighborhood Edge ZGRe is predominantly single-family residential and recreational uses and may be used to provide a transition to adjoining rural land uses. The Neighberheed Edge may be used to provide a transition to adjoining rural land uses. V. Neighborhood General Context Zone (Neighborhood General). A defining Gcontext Zzone that creates community diversity with the inclusion of a mix of single and multi -family housing, neighborhood scale goods and services, schools, parks and other recreational uses, and open space. W. Neighborhood Goods and Services Context Zone (Neighborhoods Goods and Services). Zone located within the Neighborhood General Context Zone. These zones are intended to provide convenient neighborhood scale retail and office use within proximity to the residential uses in order to support community walkability. X. Open space. Open space includes active and passive recreational areas such as parks, playgrounds, ball fields, golf courses, lakes, waterways, lagoons, flood plains, nature trails, native vegetation preserves, landscape areas, public and private conservation lands, agricultural areas (not including structures), and water retention and management areas. Buildings shall not be counted as part of any open space calculation. Vehicular use surface areas of streets, alleys, driveways, and off-street parking and loading areas shall not be counted as part of any open space calculation. Y. Pathway. A defined corridor for the primary use of non -motorized travel. Z. Post -Secondary Institution Ancillary Uses. Any use or facility owned by a public or private post -secondary institution that is of a type commonly found on public or private post: secondary institution campuses. AA. Proximity Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon the proximity of the land to areas designated on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area RLSA Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the 11 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethreugh 66 GUFFeRt text to be, deleted Growth Management Plan as FSA, HSA, or WRA and to either public or private preserve lands. No additional value shall be added under the Proximity Indices for land that is within an FSA, HSA, WRA, or public or private preserve. BB. Restoration Potential Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based both upon the potential for restoration and the historic use or character of the land as a large mammal corridor, connector wetlands and flow way, wading bird habitat, or other listed species habitat. CC. Restoration Area Zone. Privately owned lands delineated on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area RLS Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan that are located within 500 feet of an FSA; but are not otherwise included in an HSA or WRA. DD. RLSA D;str;,.+ Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSAO). The area generally depicted on the Future Land Use Map and specifically depicted on the Official Zoning Atlas Maps as the RLSAO Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, including lands within the Immokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment referred to in the State of Florida Administration Commission Final Order No. AC-99-002. The RLSAO DiStFiGgenerally includes rural lands in northeast Collier County lying north and east of Golden Gate Estates, north of the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and Big Cypress National Preserve, south of the Lee County Line, and south and west of the Hendry County Line. The regulations pertaining to the RLSAO are known as the "RLSAO Regulations," which comprise the entirety of LDC section 4.08.00. EE. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA Overlay). The Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay of the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan (FLUE), adopted pursuant to Ordinance 2002-54, as amended. RLSA verlay Map The map eRtitled "GE)"ieF GGYRty RuFal & AgFiGUItuFal Area Assessment Stewardship Overlay MaiD-,-" whiGh identifies these areas delineated as FSA, HSA, WRA, Restoration ZGRe, and Qpe-n-. FF. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map (RLSA Overlay Map). The map entitled "Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map" in the FLUE, which identifies those areas delineated ash� "��F��+ S+Aom° D�ct ," "HSA," "WRA," "Restoration Area," and "Open." RLSA GG. Soils/Surface Water Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon soil types classified using the following Natural Soils Landscape Positions (NSLP) categories: Open Water and Muck Depression Soils (NSLP Categories 1 and 5); Sand Depression Soils (NSLP Category 6); Flats Soils (NSLP Category 7); and Non-Hydric Soils (NSLP Categories 8, 9, and 11). HH. Special Districts. An area dedicated for certain uses that cannot be incorporated into one of the Gcontext Zzones. Special Districts provide for the inclusion of unique uses and development standards not otherwise defined in a context zone. SRC— Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA). A designated area within the RLSAO D istriGt that has been approved for the development of a Harnle+ gill Town., Village, or CRD and that requires the consumption of Stewardship Credits. 12 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 JJ. SSA -Stewardship Sending Area (SSA). A designated area within the RLSAO D that has been approved for the generation of Stewardship Sending Area Credits in exchange for the elimination of one or more Land Use Layers. KK. Stewardship Sending Area Credit (SSA Credit). A transferable unit of measure generated by an SSA and consumed by an SRA. Where SSA Credits were created from an SSA approved prior to July 13, 2021, eight (8) €kghf credits are transferred to an SRA in exchange for the development of one acre of land as provided in LDC section SeEtien 4.08.06 B. Where such SSA Credits were created from an SSA approved after July 13, 2021, ten (10) credits are transferred to an SRA in exchange for the development of one acre of land as Drovided in LDC section 4.08.06 B. LL. Stewardship Credit Database. A database maintained by the County that keeps track of all of the credit transactions (generation of Credits through SSA designation and the consumption of credits through SRA designation) approved by the County. MM. Stewardship Credit System. A system that creates incentives to protect and preserve natural resources and agricultural areas in exchange for the generating and use of credits to entitle compact forms of rural development. The greater the value of the natural resources being preserved and the higher the degree of preservation, the greater the number of credits that can be generated. Credits are generated through the designation of SSAs and consumed through the designation of SRAs. NN. Stewardship Credit Worksheet. An analytical tool that manually describes the Stewardship Credit calculation process including the Natural Resource Index and Land Use Layer components. The worksheet can be used to document proposed changes to the Index component during the SSA and SRA designation processes. 00. Stewardship Overlay Designation. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value of land, with values assigned based upon the designation of the land on the RLSA Overlay Map as FSA, HSA, WRA, or ACSC, or Restoration Area, where Land Use Layers 1 through 43 are eliminated --eyed ResteratiGR Z no. Land that is designated as ACSC, as well as FSA, HSA, or WRA shall receive value for the designation with the higher value but shall not receive value for both designations. PP. Story. That portion of a building included between a floor which is calculated as part of the building's habitable floor area and the floor or roof next above it. QQ. Story, half. The designation of a space on the upper level of a building in which the walls at the eaves are zero to four feet. RR. Town. Towns are a form of SRA and are the largest and most diverse form of SRA, with a full range of housing types and mix of uses. Towns have urban level services and infrastructure which support development that is compact, mixed use, human scale, and provides a balance of land uses to reduce automobile trips and increase livability. Towns are comprised of several Villages and/or neighborhoods that have individual identity and character. 13 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strkethreu nh is Gurrent text to he deleted SS. Town Center Context Zone (Town Center). A defining Scontext Zzone that is intended to provide a wide range of uses, including daily goods and services, culture and entertainment, and residential uses within a Town. The Town Center is an extension of the Town Core, however the intensity is less as the Town Center serves as a transition to surrounding neighborhoods. TT. Town Core Context Zone (Town Core). A defining Scontext Zzone within a Town. The Town Core is the most dense and diverse Scontext Zzone with a full range of uses. The Town Core is the most active area within the Town with uses mixed vertically and horizontally. UU. Village. Villages are a form of SRA and are primarily residential communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed -use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. VV. Village Cc -enter Context Zone (Village Center). A defining Scontext Zzone within a Village that is intended to provide a wide range of uses including daily goods and services, culture and entertainment, and residential uses. WW. Walkability. The suitabilitv for Dedestrians to walk safelv and comfortablv within a community or distinct neighborhood to a destination, generally within a quarter -mile radius. Walkable communities are typically characterized by sidewalks and curbs and/or roadways designed to protect pedestrians from moving traffic, including the use of street trees separating the street from the sidewalk. XXWW.WRA Water Retention Area (WRA). Privately owned lands delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map, that have been permitted by the SFWMD to function as agricultural water retention areas and that provide surface water quality and other natural resource value. # # # # # # # # # # # # # 4.08.02 - Establishment of Rural Land Stewardship Area RLSA Zoning Overlay District The Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zonina Overlav District (RLSAO) is established in order to implement the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan (RLSA Overlay). These regulations shall apply to all lands in the RLSAO as identified by the designation "RSLAO" on the applicable Official Zoning Atlas Maps. .I I. OR the Official ZGRiRg atlas, is hereby established A. The lands included in the RLSAO District and to which the RLSAO nip Regulations apply are depicted by the following map: B. Within the RLSAO Dis#riet, additional lands may be designated to implement the Stewardship Credit System s+o,nMrrlship Gredit systo.,, as follows: 14 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Establishment of SSA designations. An RLSAO DiStFiGt classification to be known as SSAs, and to be designated on the official zoning atlas by the symbol "A- RLSAO-SSA", is hereby established. This overlay district classification will be used for those lands within the RLSAO DiStFiGt that are designated by the Bboard of Ceounty Csommissioners (BCC) as SSAs. The placement of this designation shall be governed by the procedures as prescribed in the RLSAO District Regulations. 2. Establishment of SRA designations. An RLSAO DiStriGt classification to be known as SRAs, and to be designated on the official zoning atlas by the symbol "A- RLSAO-SRA", is hereby established. This overlay district classification will be used for those lands within the RLSAO DiStFiGthat are designated by the BCC as SRAs. The placement of this designation shall be governed by the procedures as prescribed in the RLSAO 9+sff+ct Regulations. 4.08.03 - Establishment of land uses allowed in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay RLSA District: Land uses allowed within the RLSAO DistriG are of two types: those allowed in the baseline standards prior to designation of SSAs and SRAs, and; those uses provided for in SSAs and SRAs after designation. The underlying land uses allowed within the RLSAO DiStriGt are included in the baseline standards. Upon designation of SSAs and SRAs pursuant to the RLSAO DiStFiGt Regulations, the land uses allowed shall be as provided in LDC sections 4.08.06 and 4.08.07, respectively. 4.08.04 - Implementation of Stewardship Credits A. Establishment of a Stewardship Credit Database. As part of the initial implementation of the Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan (RLSA Overlay), the County Manager or designee shall cause to be developed a Stewardship Credit Database to track the generation (by SSAs) and consumption (by SRAs) of Stewardship Credits within the RLSAO DiStriGt. The database shall be in an electronic form that can be linked to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan (RLSA Overlay Map) and can readily produce reports that will afford convenient access to the data by the public. The database shall be updated upon approval of an SSA or SRA Designation Application and Credit Agreement. B. Authorization to Establish a Stewardship Credit Trust. As part of the implementation of the RLSA Overlay, the County may elect to acquire Credits through a publicly funded program. Should the County pursue this option, the County shall establish a Stewardship Credit Trust to receive and hold Credits until such time as they are sold, transferred or otherwise used to implement uses within SRAs. Nothing herein shall preclude the County from permanently "retiring" those credits received or held. C. Density. Except as provided in herein, there shall be no change to the underlying density and intensity of permitted uses of land within the RLSAO DiStFiGt, as set forth in the Sbaseline Sstandards, until a property owner elects to utilize the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System pursuant to the provisions of LDC section SeEtieR 4.08.04. No part of the Stewardship Credit System shall be imposed upon a property owner without that owner's written consent. It is the intent of the RLSAO DiStFiGt Regulations that a 15 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strkethre, nh 'c current text to he deleted property owner will be compensated consistent with Policy 3.8 of the RLSA Overlay for the voluntary stewardship and protection of important agricultural and natural resources. The Sbaseline Sstandards will remain in effect for all land not subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits. D. Creation of Stewardship Credits/General. Stewardship Sending Area Credits (Credits) may be created from any lands within the RLSAO DistriGt from which one or more Land Use Layers are eliminated,eT,evea. These lands will be identified as SSAs. All privately owned lands within the RLSAO DiStFiG are candidates for designation as an SSA. Land becomes designated as an SSA upon petition by the property owner seeking such designation as outlined herein. A Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement shall be developed that identifies those land uses, which have been eliminated,�,evea. Once land is designated as an SSA and Credits or other compensation is granted to the owner, no increase in density or additional uses that are not expressly identified in the Stewardship Sending Area Agreement shall be allowed on such property. E. Transfer of Stewardship Credits/General. Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSAO DiStFiGtthat meet the defined suitability criteria and standards set forth in LDC section SeEtien 4.08.07 A.1. and that have been designated as SRAs. The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein. Stewardship Credits will be exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis. SRA density and intensity will thereafter differ from the Sbaseline Sstandards. F. Allocation of Stewardship Credits/General. Stewardship Credits generated from one SSA may be allocated to one or more SRAs, and an SRA may receive Stewardship Credits generated from one or more SSAs. G. SevenFive Year Comprehensive Review. Many of the tools, techniques, and strategies of the RLSA Overlay are new, innovative, and incentive -based_ and have yettobe tested in aGtual �nlementatmen Consequently, by li i ie 2008 and at S inh subsequent lent times as deernedapprepriatebythe BGG, e The County shall prepare and submit t„ DC for review a comprehensive analysis of the RLSA Overlay every seven (7) years, beginning on July 13, 2021, to assess the participation and effectiveness of the RLSA Overlay implementation in meeting the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the RLSA Overlay by utilizing the measures of review delineated in Policy 4-.2-2 1.21 of the FLUE. The County shall encourage public participation in the review process through publicly noticed workshops and meetings and through the solicitation of public input. 2. Subsequent to the june 2 review, the RLSA Overlay and RLSAO DiStFi£t Regulations may be amended in response to the County's assessment and evaluation of the participation in and effectiveness of the Stewardship Credit System. 3. The value, exchange rate, and use of Stewardship Credits shall be governed by the RLSA Overlay and RLSAO DiStriGt Regulations in effect at the time the SSA from which those credits are generated is approved. The Restoration Stewardship 16 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre gh is ent text to he deleted Credits shall be governed by the RLSA Overlay and RLSAO DiStriGt Regulations in effect at the time that such Restoration Stewardship Credits are authorized by the BCC. H. Stewardship Credit Cap. The total number of Stewardship Credits shall be capped at 404,000 to entitle no more than 45,000 acres of Stewardship Receiving Areas. Generating Stewardship Credits does not Dresume aDDroval of Stewardship Receivina Areas. 4.08.05 - Baseline Sstandards All lands within the RLSAO DostriGt have been delineated on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan (RLSA Overlay Map). Unless and until designated as an SSA or SRA, lands within the RLSAO D istriGt shall remain subject to the Sbaseline Sstandards. A. Purpose and intent. These Sbaseline Sstandards will remain in effect for all land within the RLSAO D*stF0Gt unless or until such land becomes subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits, except as to those agricultural uses subject to Florida Statutes sections §§163.3162M463 T) and 823.14(6), Florida Statutes. The 8baseline Sstandards are intended to protect water quality and quantity, maintain the natural water regime, and protect listed animal and plant species or species of special concern (SSC) as defined by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and their habitats on land that has not been designated as an SSA or SRA. The opportunity to voluntarily participate in the Stewardship Credit Program, as well as the right to sell conservation easements or a fee or lesser interest in the land, shall constitute compensation for the loss of any development rights related to these standards. B. Applicability of code. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this LDC section 4.05.00, those provisions of this Code in effect as of July 25, 2000, shall apply to all land within the RLSAO DiStFiGunless or until such lands become subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits. C. Private lands delineated FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs, and Restoration Areas. Lands delineated FSA, HSA, or WRA, or Restoration Areas on the RLSA Overlay Map ^may map have been identified through data and analysis as having a higher quality natural resource value than those lands not delineated. Although any land within the RLSAO DostriGtcan be designated as an SSA, generally those lands delineated FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs are the most likely candidates for designation because of the higher credit values applied to lands with those delineations. D. Private lands delineated as open. Lands not otherwise classified as FSA, HSA, GF WRA, or Restoration Areas are delineated as "open" on the RLSA Overlay Mapnx—rinxi � and are generally of a lower natural resource quality. Open lands may be designated as either SSAs or SRAs. E. Area of critical state concern (ACSC). The RLSAO DiStFiGt includes lands that are within the ACSC. Those ACSC lands are depicted on the RLSA Overlay Map ^"^map and are eligible for designation as SRAs, subject to additional standards set forth in subsection 4.08.07 A.2. All ACSC regulations continue to apply to ACSC lands within the RLSAO 91str+Et regardless of designation. 17 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c Gurr8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d F. Public or private conservation lands. Those lands within the RLSAO BfstriGt that are held in public ownership or in private ownership as conservation lands may be delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map overlay rnap as FSA, HSA, or WRA but are not eligible for designation as either an SSA or SRA. G. No increase in density or intensity within the RLSAO DistriGt is permitted beyond the Sbaseline Sstandards except in areas designated as SRAs. Within SRAs, density and intensity may be increased through the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System and, where applicable, through the affordable housing density Bonus as referenced in the density Rating System of the FLUE, and the density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. H. Allowable uses. The permitted, accessory, and conditional uses allowed shall be those set forth in LDC section 2.03.00 in effect as of July 25, 2000, with the following exceptions: Residential Uses, General conditional uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1-4) as listed in the Matrix of in LDC section 4.08.00 shall be eliminated in all FSAs and designated Restoration Areas, as provided in LDC section 4.08.00. 2. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, except those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety as described in LDC section 2.01.03 G.2, shall not only be allowed in FSAs with on Ingox value of 1.2 or less as provided in con4inn it 08 nn 3. Directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development and production activities in FSAs and HSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats, when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit in compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Watershed, as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Sectien Florida Statutes section 377.42—_F-&, to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62-30.005(2)(a) 1 through 12, F.A.C. 4. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants shall be prohibited in areas mapped as HSAs. 18 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 5. Any development not participating in the RLSA Program shall be compatible with surrounding land uses and implement appropriate lighting controls for permitted uses, including "dark sky compliant" lighting principles. Standards applicable inside the ACSC. RLSAO DiStFiGlands within the ACSC shall be subject to all ACSC regulatory standards, including those that strictly limit non-agricultural clearing. Standards applicable outside the ACSC. Except to the extent superseded by L. or M. below, the following standards shall apply to all development within those areas of the RLSAO B+str+cthat are outside of the ACSC, other than agricultural operations that fall within the scope of sections W 63.3162(3) 163.3162 (^ ` and 823.14 (6), F.S., and single family residential dwellings, unless or until such lands are subject to transmittal or receipt of Stewardship Credits: A wildlife survey, as set forth in Chapter 10, shall be required for all parcels when listed species or SSC, as defined by the FFWCC, are known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site or where listed species or SSC are directly observed on the site. 2. If listed species or SSC, as defined by the FFWCC, are utilizing a site or indicated by evidence. such as dennina. foraaina. or other indications. the first orioritv shall be given to are reGtIY observed on the site of f�pir(�cn+ l,r aFe iRdiGate ! by given preserving the habitat of such listed species or SSC. A a minimum of 40 percent % of native vegetation on site shall be retained, with the exception of clearing for agricultural ORGidental purposes. 3. If the wildlife survey indicates that listed species or SSC, as defined by the FFWCC, are utilizing the site, or the site is capable of supporting and is likely to support listed species, a wildlife habitat management plan shall be prepared and submitted to the County. a. The wildlife habitat management plan within the RLSAO DiStFiGshall include the following techniques to protect listed species or SSC from the negative impacts of development: Fencing, walls, other obstructions, or other provisions shall be used to minimize development impacts to the listed species or SSC and to encourage wildlife to use wildlife corridors. N. Roadways crossings, underpasses, and signage shall be used where roads must cross wildlife corridors as determined by the authorities governing crossing locations. The wildlife habitat management plan shall also incorporate the following: 19 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh io GLIFFeRt text to be, deleted A description of the techniques used to direct incompatible land uses away from listed species or SSC and their habitats and to comply with the criteria identified in 1 and 2 above, as applicable.; Identification of appropriate lighting controls for permitted uses, including "dark sky compliant" lighting principles, and a consideration of the opportunity to utilize prescribed burning to maintain fire -adapted preserved vegetation communities and provide browse for white-tailed deer, consistent with the USFWS South Florida Multi -Species Recovery Plan, May 1999, except as recommended otherwise by the USFWS or FFWCC_; and LidTom:R�l4T------ :S HI T7GTl.'R'i�:�t:tifi iii. A description of provisions to minimize human and wildlife interactions based on the most current FFWCC guidelines and regulations on techniques to reduce human -wildlife contact, consistent with the baseline standards provided in LDC section 4.08.05 J.3.a. Low intensity land uses, such as lakes, parks, or passive recreation areas, vegetation preserves, and agriculture shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat and areas dominated by human activities. iv. The strategy for disseminating information to local residents, visitors, and businesses about the presence of wildlife and practices that enable coexistence and minimized interaction such as appropriate waste disposal practices. V. Mitigation for impacting listed species or SSC habitat shall be considered in the management plan, as appropriate. vi. A monitoring program if the development will be greater than 10 ACrPS C. The most current and comDleted data and local. state. and federal guidelines and regulations shall be utilized to prepare the required management plans. Management guidelines contained in publications used by the FFWCC and USFWS for technical assistance shall be used for developing required management plans, but the County shall consider any other techniques recommended by the FFWCC and the USFWS, consistent with LDC section 4.08.05 J.4. The following referennes shall be usedappropriate, to prepare the wildlife habitat management plan: 20 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 r .:.,: MMIII ncst.,:rs�,n:♦:r,:��:r rzzesr_r:E . 1987. 21 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre ugh io GUFFeRt text to be, deleted 4. On property where the wildlife survey establishes that listed species or species of special concern, as defined by the FFWCC, are utilizing the site or where the site is capable of supporting listed species and such listed species can be anticipated to potentially occupy the site, the County shall, consistent with the Rural Land Stewardship Area in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan R SA Overlay of the GM-P, consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the FFWCC State of Florida Lich and Wildlife Conconrotmen Commission and recommendations from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing development orders. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case -by -case basis may strengthen rho the requirements contained herein and any such change shall be deemed consistent with this Code. However, no reduction of the wildlife protection standards herein will be considered as these shall constitute minimum standards for wildlife protection. K. Golf course standards. Except as otherwise required by L. or M. below, all golf courses within the RLSAO O+str+et that are not within an SRA shall be subject to the following requirements: Golf courses shall be desianed. constructed. and manacled in accordance with the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program for Golf Courses (ACSP). The project shall demonstrate that the ACSP's Environment Management Practices for Golf Courses have been incorporated into the golf course design or operational procedure. rIfGeUryes shall bedesigned,GenStrUcted, and managed On aGG9rda—e—with Audubon international's Geld Signature Program. The projeGt shall dernenstrate that the PrinGiples fer ReseurGe Management required by the Gold Signature Pregrarn (Site SpeGifiG Assessment, Habitat Sensitivity, Native ancl NatururozedPlantsand Natural—LandSEaning, Water Conservation, Waste Management. €eergy Gensep,�atQaie!R & —ReRew able—€eergy—SS, been —inGe ated onto the gGIf GGurse's designand operational GGedures In 22 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str Lethre, gh is ent text to he deleted addition to addressing these requirements, golf courses shall meet the following specific criteria: a. In order to prevent the contamination of soil, surface water and ground water by the materials stored and handled by golf course maintenance operations, golf courses shall comply with the Best Management Practices for Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida Golf Courses nn TtenaRGe—Departm I prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, September 2012, as amended May 1995. To protect ground and surface water quality from fertilizer and pesticide usage, golf courses shall demonstrate the following management practices: The use of slow release nitrogen sources; The use of soil and plant tissue analysis to adjust timing and amount of fertilization applications; iii. The use of an integrated pest management program using both biological and chemical agents to control various pests; iv. The coordination of pesticide applications with the timing and application of irrigation water; and V. The use of the —proGed u re—Gonta-ined on I F o S G i rG6l I, 4, ��in g Decti�forGelfCoi�rceMaintenanGe1d Quality DreteGtir�n May 1991 (revised 1995) to se!eGtDreteGt�R, May 1991 (revised 1995) to se!eGt pesticides e that will have a minimum adverse impact on water quality, in compliance with Best Management Practices for the Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida Golf Courses, FDEP, September 2012, as amended. 2. To ensure water conservation, golf courses shall incorporate the following in their design and operation: a. Irrigation systems shall be designed to use weather station information and moisture -sensing systems to determine the optimum amount of irrigation water needed considering soil moisture and evapotranspiration rates. As available, golf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water consistent with Wastewater Treatment Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element Objective 4--.4 and its policies-,- C. Native plants shall be used exclusively except for special purpose areas such as golf greens, fairways, and building sites. Within these excepted areas, landscaping plans shall require that at least 75 ep rcent % of the trees and 50 percent % of the shrubs be freeze -tolerant native Floridian species. At least 75 percent % of the required native trees and shrubs shall also be drought tolerant species. 23 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c Gurr8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d 3. Stormwater management ponds shall be designed to mimic the functions of natural systems: by establishing shorelines that are sinuous in configuration in order to provide increased length and diversity of the littoral zone. A Littoral shelf shall be established to provide a feeding area for water dependent avian species. The combined length of vertical and rip -rapped walls shall be limited to 25 percent of the shoreline. Credits to the site preservation area requirements, on an acre -to - acre basis, shall be given for littoral shelves that exceed these littoral shelf area requirements. Standards applicable in FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs that are outside of the ACSC. The provisions of Chapters 3, 4, and 10 in effect as of July 25, 2000, shall apply to FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs outside of the ACSC, with the following exceptions: Site clearing and alteration shall be limited to 20 ep rcent % of the property and nonpermeable surfaces shall not exceed 50 percent % of any such area. 2. Except for roads and lakes, any nonpermeable surface greater than one acre shall provide for release of surface water run off, collected or uncollected, in a manner approximating the natural surface water flow regime of the surrounding area. 3. Roads shall be designed to allow the passage of surface water flows through the use of equalizer pipes, interceptor spreader systems or performance equivalent structures. 4. Revegetation and landscaping of cleared areas shall be accomplished with predominantly native species and planting of undesirable exotic species shall be prohibited. M. Standards applicable to wetlands outside of FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and the ACSC. Wetlands located outside of FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and the ACSC shall be preserved in accord with the following criteria: The vegetative preservation requirement set forth in J.2. above shall first be met through preservation of wetlands having a functionality assessment score of 0.65 or greater. Applicants shall establish the wetland functionality score of wetlands using the South Florida Water Management District's Unified Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method, F.A.C. 62-345. Upland vegetative communities may be utilized to meet the vegetative, open space, and site preservation requirements when the wetland functional assessment score of on -site wetlands is less than 0.65. 2. Wetlands and contiguous upland buffers that are utilized by listed species or SSC, as defined by the FFWCC, or serving as corridors for the movement of listed species or SSC shall be preserved on site. 3. Wetland flow —way functions through the project shall be maintained. 4. Ground water table drawdowns or diversions shall not adversely change the hydroperiod of preserved wetlands on or off -site and detention and control 24 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 elevations shall be set to protect surrounding wetlands and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. In order to meet these requirements, projects shall be designed in accordance with the current SFWMD Basis of Review SeEtiens 4.2..2.4.6.11 and 6.12 of QC\A MD's Racist Review, lone ions 2004-. 5. All direct impacts shall be mitigated for as required by applicable federal or state agencies and in the same manner as set forth in LDC section 4.06.04 of this Code. 6. Single family residences shall follow the requirements contained within Policy 6.2.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. 7. Appropriate buffering shall be provided to separate preserved wetlands from other land uses. A minimum 50-foot vegetated upland buffer is required adjacent to a natural water body and for other wetlands a minimum 25-foot vegetated upland buffer adjacent to the wetland. A structural buffer, consisting of a stem -wall, a berm, or a vegetative hedge with suitable fencing, may be used in conjunction with a vegetative buffer that would reduce the vegetative buffer width by 50 percent %. A structural buffer shall be required adjacent to wetlands where direct impacts are allowed. Wetland buffers shall conform to the following standards: a. The buffer shall be measured landward from the approved jurisdictional line. The buffer zone shall consist of preserved native vegetation. Where native vegetation does not exist, native vegetation compatible with the existing soils and expected hydrologic conditions shall be planted. C. The buffer shall be maintained free of Category I Exotics. d. The following land uses are considered to be compatible with wetland functions and are allowed within the buffer: Passive recreational areas, boardwalks and recreational shelters; Pervious nature trails; iii. Water management structures; iv. Mitigation areas; V. Any other conservation and related open space activity or use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses. 8. Mitigation Requirements. Mitigation shall be required for direct impacts to wetlands, such that the wetland functional score of the mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland functional score of the impacted wetlands. a. Priority shall be given to mitigation within FSAs and HSAs. 25 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 Loss of storage or conveyance volume resulting from direct impacts to wetlands shall be compensated for by providing an equal amount of storage or conveyance capacity on site and within or adjacent to the impacted wetland. C. Protection shall be provided for preserved or created wetland or upland vegetative communities offered as mitigation by placing a conservation easement over the land in perpetuity, providing for initial exotic plant removal (Class I invasive exotic plants defined by the Florida Exotic Plant Council) and continuing exotic plant maintenance, or by appropriate ownership transfer to a state or federal agency along with sufficient funding for perpetual management activities. d. The removal of exotics may be considered as acceptable mitigation as determined by the County Manager or designee or by the applicable permitting agencies. 9. Prior to issuance of any final development order that authorizes site alteration, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with paragraphs 8.a. through 8.de. above, as applicable and SFWMD standards. If state or federal agency permits have not provided mitigation consistent with paragraphs 8 above, the County shall require mitigation exceeding that of the jurisdictional agencies. 10. Wetland preservation, buffer areas, and mitigation areas shall be identified or platted as separate tracts. In the case of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), these areas shall also be depicted on the PUD Master Plan. These areas shall be maintained free from trash and debris and from Category I Exotics. Land uses allowed in these areas shall be limited to those identified in 7.d. above. 4.08.06 - SSA Designation Lands within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District (RLSAOJ D may be designated as SSAs subject to the following regulations: A. Lands Within the RLSAO DwstriGt that can be Designated as SSAs. Any privately held land within the RLSAO DiStriGt delineated on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overly Map in the Future Land Use Element of the GMP (RLSA Overlay Map) as FSA, HSA, WRA, Restoration Area, or Open, may be designated as an SSA, including lands within the ACSC. 1. May be within an SRA Boundary. A WRA, whether designated as an SSA or not, may be contiguous to or surrounded by an SRA. Should a WRA be used to provide water retention for an SRA, the provisions of LDC section 4.08.06 AA.b. shall apply. 2. FSA Delineated Lands. a. In the case where lands delineated as FSA are designated as an SSA, at a minimum, Residential uses, General conditional uses, Earth Mining and 26 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh 66 8Rt tGA to be deleted Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1-4) as listed in the Land Use Matrix shall be eliminated as permitted land uses. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, other than those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety as described in LDC section 2.01.03 G.2., shall not be allowed in FSAs with a Natural Rose FGe StewardshiI' if a of 9 2 er lose C. Directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development, and production activities in FSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit requiring compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on June 16, 2005, regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Swamp as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, FAC. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protect from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C-30.005(2)(a)1 through 12, FAC. Nothing contained herein alters the requirement to obtain conditional use permits for oil and gas field development and production activities. Directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development and production activities in FSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit requiring compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C- 30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on January 14, 2005, regardless of whether the FSA in which oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development and production activities is within the Big Cypress Swamp as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C- 25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. Nothing contained herein alters the requirement to obtain conditional use permits for oil and gas field development and production activities. d. The elimination of the Earth Mining layer (Layer 3) shall not preclude the excavation of lakes or other water bodies if such use is an integral part of a restoration or mitigation program within an FSA. 27 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c GUFF8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d e. Once land in an FSA is designated as an SSA, no expansion of Agriculture Group 1 (Layer 5) or Agriculture Group 2 (Layer 7) and no conversion of Agriculture Group 2 to Agriculture Group 1 shall be allowed beyond those land uses in existence or allowed by applicable permits as of the date that the SSA designation is approved other than incidental clearing as set forth in f. below. Incidental clearing is permitted, provided that the Ag 1 Land Use Layer has been retained on the areas to be incidentally cleared and the Natural Resource Index Value score has been adjusted to reflect the proposed change in land cover. In the event said incidental clearing impacts lands having a Natural Resource Index Value in excess of 1.2, appropriate mitigation shall be provided. 3. HSA Delineated Lands. a. In the case where lands delineated as HSA are designated as an SSA, at a minimum, Residential Land Uses (Layer 1), as listed in the Matrix, shall be eliminated. General conditional uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses shall be allowed only on HSA lands with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. C. In addition to the requirements imposed in the LDC for approval of a conditional use, uses listed in b. above will only be approved upon submittal of Environmental Data an €4S which demonstrates that clearing of native vegetation has been minimized, the use will not significantly and adversely impact listed species and their habitats and the use will not significantly and adversely impact aquifers. This demonstration shall be made by establishing the following: (1) Clearing of native vegetation shall not exceed 15 percent % of the native vegetation on the parcel. (2) Priority shall be given to utilizing contiguous areas of previously cleared land before native vegetated areas. (3) Buffering to Conservation Land shall comply with LDC section SeEtleR 4.08.07 1.5.d.iii.6.10. (4) Stormwater Management design shall base water control elevations on seasonal high water elevations of adjacent wetlands to protect wetland hydroperiods in accord with the SFWMD Basis of Review. (5) The area has a Listed Species Habitat Indices Value of 0.4 or less and no state or federal direct impact take permit is required for the use. 28 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c GUFF8Rt tout to ho dk-lPt8d (6) Activities that are the subject of an approved SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit or Consumptive Use Permit and that utilize best management practices designed to protect groundwater from contamination from allowable land uses are deemed not to significantly and adversely impact aquifers. d. As an alternative to the submittal of the Environmental Data required in LDC section 4.08.06 A.3.c. an EIS, the applicant may demonstrate that such use is an integral part of a State or Federally approved restoration plan or mitigation program. e. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, other than those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety as described in LDC section 2.01.03 G.2., shall only be allowed in HSAs with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants are prohibited in all HSAs. g. Directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas exploration and oil and gas field development, and production activities in HSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats when determined to be practicable. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied upon issuance of a state permit requiring compliance with the criteria established in Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C., as those rules existed on June 16, 2005, regardless of whether the activity occurs within the Big Cypress Swamp as defined in Rule 62C-30.001(2), F.A.C. All applicable Collier County environmental permitting requirements shall be considered satisfied by evidence of the issuance of all applicable federal and/or state oil and gas permits for proposed oil and gas activities in Collier County, so long as the state permits comply with the requirements of Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, FAC. For those areas of Collier County outside the boundary of the Big Cypress Watershed, the applicant shall be responsible for convening the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee as set forth in Section 377.42, F.S., to assure compliance with Chapter 62C-25 through 62C-30, F.A.C. even if outside the defined Big Cypress Watershed. All oil and gas access roads shall be constructed and protected from unauthorized uses according to the standards established in Rule 62C- 30.005(2)(a)1 through 12, FAC. Nothing contained herein alters the requirement to obtain conditional use permits for oil and gas field development and production activities. Golf Course design, construction, and operation in any HSA shall comply with the best management practices of Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary International's ("_old Program for Golf (ASCP) and the Florida DEP, whiGh standards shall be adopted by DeGemhor 13, 20 Once land in an HSA is designated as an SSA, no expansion of Agriculture Group 1 (Layer 5) or Agriculture Group 2 (Layer 7) and no conversion of 29 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 Agriculture Group 2 to Agriculture Group 1 shall be allowed beyond those land uses in existence or allowed by applicable permits as of the date that the SSA designation is approved other than incidental clearing as set forth in j. below. Incidental clearing is permitted, provided that the Ag 1 Land Use Layer has been retained on the areas to be incidentally cleared and the Natural Resource Index Value score has been adjusted to reflect the proposed change in land cover. In the event said incidental clearing impacts lands having a Natural Resource Index Value in excess of 1.2, appropriate mitigation shall be provided. 4. WRA Delineated Lands. a. In the case where lands delineated as WRA are designated as an SSA, at a minimum, Residential Land Uses (Layer 1), as listed in the Matrix, shall be eliminated as permitted land uses. During permitting to serve new uses within an SRA, additions and modifications to WRAs may be required, including but not limited to changes to control elevations, discharge rates, storm water pre-treatment, grading, excavation or fill. Such additions and modifications shall be allowed subject to review and approval by the SFWMD in accordance with best management practices. Such additions and modifications to WRAs shall be designed to ensure that there is no net loss of habitat function within the WRAs unless there is compensating mitigation or restoration in other areas of the RLSAO DiStFiGtthat will provide comparable habitat function. Compensating mitigation or restoration for an impact to a WRA contiguous to the Camp Keais Strand or Okaloacoochee Slough shall be provided within or contiguous to that Strand or Slough. 5. Restoration Area Zone Delineated Lands. To further direct other uses away from and to provide additional incentive for the protection, enhancement, and restoration of the Okaloacoochee Slough and Camp Keais Strand, when lands within a Restoration Area ZOPle are designated as an SSA and at least Land Use Layers 1 through 4 are eliminated as permitted uses, such Restoration Area ate shall receive a Stewardship Overlay Designation value of 0.6. B. SSA Credit Generation - Stewardship Credit System. Stewardship Credits (Credits) are created from any lands within the RLSAO DiStFiG from which one or more Land Use Layers are eliminated removed and that are designated as SSAs. Once land is designated as an SSA and Credits or other compensation consistent with Policy 3.8 of the Rural Land Stewardship Area in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan �RLSA Overlayl is granted to the owner, no increase in density or additional uses not expressly identified in the Stewardship Sending Area Agreement shall be allowed on such property. A methodology has been adopted in the GMP for the calculation of credits based upon: 1) the Natural Resource Index Value of the land being designated as an SSA, and 2) the number of land use layers being eliminated. 30 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh io GUFFeRt teXt to be deleted Early Entry bonus credits. Early Entry bonus credits were or�by established to encourage the voluntary designation of SSAs within the RLSA District. The bonus shall be was in the form of an additional one Stewardship Credit per acre of land designated as an SSA that is within an HSA located outside of the ACSC and one-half Stewardship Credit per acre of land designated as an SSA that is within an HSA located inside the ACSC. a. The early entry bonus was shall be available until January 30, 2009. bs. Credits generated under the early entry bonus may be used after the termination of the bonus period. ce. Early Entry bonus credits shall not be transferred into or otherwise used to entitle an SRA within the ACSC. 2. Aaricultural Stewardship Area (ASA). Open Lands are eliaible for desianation as Agricultural Stewardship Areas. In lieu of applying the Natural Resource Index, lands designated as ASAs shall be assigned two (2.0) Stewardship Credits per acre. All non -agriculture uses shall be eliminated from the property and the remaining uses shall be limited to agricultural Land Use Layers 5, 6 and 7 on the Land Use Matrix. 3. Panther Corridor Credits. As generally illustrated in the RLSA Overlay Map, there may be opportunities to create, restore, and enhance a northern panther corridor connection and a southern panther corridor connection. Should a property owner in a federally approved corridor designate the required property for such corridor, two (2) Stewardship Credits shall be assigned for each acre of land so dedicated. Should an owner also effectively complete the corridor restoration, this shall be rewarded with eight (8) additional Credits per acre of restored land upon demonstration that the restoration met applicable success criteria as determined by the federal permit agency authorizing said restoration. Issuance of the eight (8) restoration implementation credits may be phased to coincide with a phased imDlementation Drocess in accordance with the federal Dermit. 4. Wetland Wading Bird Habitat Restoration Credits. Dedication of any area for seasonal wetland restoration inside an FSA, HSA, or WRA shall be rewarded with two (2) additional Credits per acre. Should the landowner successfully complete the restoration, an additional eight (8) Credits per acre shall be awarded. 52. The Stewardship Credit Worksheet, adopted as Attachment "A" of the GMP RLSA Goals, Objectives, and Policies, sets out the mathematical formula that shall be used to determine the number of credits available for each acre of land being considered for an SSA. 31 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c GUFF8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d 63. Natural Resource Indices and Values. A set of Natural Resource Indices has been established as part of the Stewardship Credit Worksheet. a. Natural Resource Indices. Stewardship Overlay Designation Proximity Indices Listed Species Habitat Indices Soils/Surface Water Indices Restoration Potential Indices Land Use - Land Cover Indices Index Values. During the RLSA Study, based upon data and analysis, each acre within the RLSAO n'�was assigned a value for each Index except for the Restoration Potential Index. The Restoration Potential Index is assigned during the SSA designation process if appropriate, and credit adjustments are made at that time. C. Restoration Areas SloughiStra Index Score Upgrade. An index score upgrade is hereby established as an incentive for the protection, enhancement and restoration of the Okaloacoochee Slough and Camp Keais Strand. All lands within 500 feet of the delineated FSAs that comprise the Slough or Strand that are not otherwise included in an HSA or WRA shall receive the same natural index score (0.6) that an HSA receives, if such property is designated as an SSA and retains only agricultural; FeGreatiOlRal and/or conservation, restoration, and natural resource layers of land use (Layers 5-8 on the Land Use Matrix). d. Index Map. A Natural Resource Index Map adopted as a part of the RLSA Overlay, indicates the Natural Resource Stewardship Index Value for all land within the RLSAO Oise . Credits from any lands designated as SSAs, shall be based upon the Natural Resource Index values in effect at the time of designation. At the time of designation, the Natural Resource Index Assessment required in LDC section SeEtion 4.08.06 C.3. shall document any necessary adjustments to the index values reflected on the Index Map. Any change in the characteristics of land due to alteration of the land prior to the designation of an SSA that either increases or decreases any Index Value shall result in a corresponding adjustment in the credit value. e. Restoration Potential Index Value. If the applicant asserts that the land being designated as an SSA has a Restoration Potential Index Value of greater than zero (0), an evaluation of the restoration potential of the land being designated shall be prepared by a qualified environmental consultant 32 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethreugh io GUFFeRt text to he deleted (per Chapter 34-0 of the LDC) on behalf of the applicant and submitted as part of the SSA Designation Application Package. In the event that restoration potential is identified, the appropriate Restoration Potential Index Value shall be determined in accord with the Credit Worksheet. The credit value of each acre to which the Restoration Potential Index Value is applied shall be recalculated by adding the Restoration Potential Index Value to that acre's total Index Value. Restoration Stewardship Credits. Restoration Stewardship Credits are hereby established in addition to the Restoration Potential Index Value. In certain locations there may be the opportunity for flow way or habitat restoration such as locations where flow ways have been constricted or otherwise impeded by past activities or where additional land is needed to enhance wildlife corridors. Restoration Stewardship Credits shall be applied to an SSA subject to the following regulations.: Only one type of restoration shall be rewarded with these Credits for each acre designated for restoration and in no case shall more than ten (10) Credits be awarded per acre. (1) Should a property owner dedicate land for restoration activities within an FSA or HSA, one (1) additional Stewardship Credit shall be assigned for each acre of land so dedicated and identified as Restoration I (R 1) on the Restoration Lands Map. Rrierity has heap giV tG Festeratien within the ampTeais Strand FSA or Jrreri�v—rcar�utivrr—w-nrm�--mc� T � rra--r-�-r—vr Gentig sus HSA . Thoref�efo r (4) additional Steward&40 GFerdits shall he generated fir eanh anre of herd rdedinaterd by theshall hegeneratedfGF eaGh aGFe Of by44e. applicant fer restoration activities within any of the follewing areasresteratinnantivities within the the Camp Kea's Strand FSA, rentigueus HSAse or these portions of the Restoration Zone rdepiGterd on the RI SA Overlay Map that are nentig iei is to the romp Keais Strand. (2) Dedication of any area inside an FSA, HSA, or WRA for restoration of seasonal, shallow wetland wading bird foraging habitat, or designation of a panther corridor connection in a federally approved corridor is awarded two (2) Credits per acre of land so dedicated and identified as Restoration I (R 1) on the Restoration Lands Map. Two (2) additional Stewardship Credits shall he generatedfor each acre of Iand restoration+,dediGated for restoration ac 'crvities withi the Okaleanoorhee SloughGentigs i ins HSAs Or these portions of the e e ResteratiOR Zone deped—eta that are eent„�eus to the OkaleaGOeGhee Slough. (3) The actual implementation of restoration improvements is not required for the owner to receive such credits referenced in (1) and (2) above. (4) On lands Lands designated "Restorations' Land Use Layers 1 through 6 must be eliminated and allowable uses shall be limited reSt,�a to Agriculture - Group 2 and conservation uses and all natural areas shall be maintained in their existing natural condition 33 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethreugh io GUFFeRt teXt tO ho dAlot8d until such time as restoration activities occur. Upon completion of restoration, the land shall be managed in accordance with the applicable restoration permit conditions, which may impose further restriction on the allowed use of the property. (5) If the applicant agrees to completes the restoration identified as Restoration II (R II) on the Restoration Lands Map imr,re„emeri+s and the eligibility criteria below are satisfied, feu (4) additional Stewardship Credits shall be awarded when it is autherized at the time of SSA designatieri but shall netbe-emeeneme availahle fer transfer , until has has been demonstrated that the restoration activities have met applicable success criteria as determined by the permitting or commenting agency authorizing the said restoration. The additional Credits shall be rewarded for either Caracara habitat restoration at two (2) Credits per acre, exotic control/burning at five (5) Credits per acre, flow way restoration at five (5) Credits per acre, native habitat restoration at seven (7) Credits per acre, or panther corridor restoration improvements at eight (8) Credits per acre. Should the landowner successfully complete the restoration, an additional eight (8) Credits per acre shall be awarded upon demonstration that the restoration met applicable success criteria as determined by the permit agency authorizing said restoration. One or more of the following eligibility criteria shall be used in evaluating an applicant's request for these additional Restoration Stewardship Credits: (a) FSA and/or HSA lands where restoration would increase the width of flow way and/or habitat corridors along the Camp Keais Strand or Okaloacoochee Slough so that, in the opinion of the applicant's environmental consultant and County environmental or natural resources staff, there will be functional enhancement of the flow way or wildlife corridor; (b) FSA and/or HSA lands where restoration would increase the width of flow way and/or habitat corridors within two miles of existing public lands so that, in the opinion of the applicant's environmental consultant and County environmental or natural resources staff, there will be a functional enhancement of the flow way or wildlife corridor; (c) Documentation of state or federal listed species utilizing the land or a contiguous parcel; (d) Lands that could be restored and managed to provide habitats for specific listed species (e.g., gopher tortoise, Big Cypress fox squirrel, red -cockaded woodpecker, etc.), or; (e) Occurrence of a land parcel within foraging distance from a wading bird rookery or other listed bird species colony, 34 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethro gh is ent text to he deleted where restoration and proper management could increase foraging opportunities (e.g., wood storks). 74. Land Use Layers to be Elimi^. A set of Land Use Layers has been established as part of the Stewardship Credit Worksheet and adopted as the Land Use Matrix set forth below. Each Layer incorporates a number of the permitted or conditional uses allowed under the Sbaseline Sstandards. Each Layer listed below has an established credit value (percentage of a base credit) developed during the RLSA Study. At the time of designation application, a landowner wishing to have h'�er land designated as an SSA determines how many of the Land Use Layers are to be eliminated removed from the designated lands. A Land Use Layer can only be eliminated r,�,evea in its entirety (all associated activities/land use are eliminated removed), and Layers shall be eliminated removed sequentially and cumulatively in the order listed below. a. Land Use Layers. 1 - Residential Land Uses 2 - General conditional uses 3 - Earth Mining and Processing Uses 4 - Recreational Uses 5 - Agriculture - Group 1 6 - Agriculture - Support Uses 7 - Agriculture - Group 2 8 - Conservation, Restoration and Natural Resources Land Use Matrix Residential Land Uses General Conditional Uses Earth Mining and Processing Uses Recreational Uses Agriculture Group 1 Agriculture Support Uses Agriculture Group 2 Conservation, Restoration and Natural Resources Single-family Family care Excavation, Golf courses Crop Farm labor Unimproved Wildlife dwelling, incl. facilities (P) extraction or and/or golf raising; housing pasture and management, Mobile Home earthmining and driving horticulture; (A) grazing, plant and wildlife (P) related ranges (CU) fruit and nut forestry (P) conservancies, processing and production; refuges and production (CU) groves; sanctuaries (P) nurseries; improved pasture P Mobile homes Collection Asphaltic and Sports Animal Retail sale Ranching; Water [(P) in MH and transfer concrete batch instructional breeding of fresh, livestock management, Overlay; (A) as sites for making plants schools and (other than unprocess raising (P) groundwater temporary use] resource (CU) camps (CU) livestock), ed recharge (P) recovery raising, agricultura CU training, I products; 35 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh io GurreRt text to be deleted stabling or grown kenneling primarily (P) on the property A Private Veterinary Sporting and Dairying, Retail Hunting Restoration, boathouses clinic (CU) recreational beekeeping plant cabins (CU) mitigation (P) and docks on camps (CU) poultry nurseries lake, canal or and egg (CU) waterway lots production; (A) milk production P Recreational Child care AqUaGUItur Packingho Cultural, Water supply, facilities centers and P for native use or educational, wellfields (P); oil integral to adult day similar or and gas residential care centers and Ron agricultura recreational exploration (P) nee development, I facilities and e.g., golf species processin their related course, (CAJ) g of farm modes of clubhouse, products transporting community produced participants, center building on the viewers or and tennis property patrons; tour facilities, parks, (A) operations, playgrounds such as, but and playfields not limited to (A) airboats, swamp buggies, horses and similar modes of transportation CU Guesthouses Zoo, The Sawmills Excavation Boardwalks, (A) aquarium, commercial (CU) and related nature trails (P) aviary, production, processing botanical raising or incidental to garden, or breeding or Ag(A) other similar exotic uses (CU) animals CU Churches Wholesale Natural resources and other reptile not otherwise places of breeding listed (P) worship (CU) and raising - non- venomous (P) and venomous CU Communicat Essential services ions towers (P and CU) (P)(CU) Social and Oil and gas field fraternal development and organization production (CU) s CU Private landing 36 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 strips for general aviation CU Cemeteries CU Schools CU Group care facilities, ALF CU Uses as listed in LDC- Rural Agricultural District (P) principal use, (a) accessory use, (CU) conditional use C. Any development participating in the RLSA Program shall be compatible with surrounding land uses and implement appropriate lighting controls for permitted uses, including "dark sky compliant" lighting principles. 85. Matrix Calculation. The maximum number of credits generated through designation as an SSA is established in a matrix calculation that multiplies each Natural Resource Index Value by the value of each Land Use Layer, thereby establishing a credit value for each acre in the RLSAO Overlay, weighted by the quality of its natural resources. As Land Use Layers are eliminated remeved, the sum of the percentages of those Layers eliminated removed is multiplied by the Natural Resource Index Values to determine the Stewardship Credits to be generated by each acre being designated as an SSA. C. SSA Designation Application Package. A request to designate lands(s) within the RLSAO DfstFiGt as an SSA shall be made pursuant to the regulations of this Section. An SSA Application Package shall include the following: SSA Designation Application. A landowner or his/her agent, hereafter "applicant," shall submit a request for the designation of SSA for lands within the RLSAO D+stFiGt to the County Manager or his designee, on an approved application form. The application shall be accompanied by the documentation as required by this Section. 2. Application Fee. An application fee shall accompany the application. 3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. The applicant shall prepare and submit as part of the SSA Designation Application a report entitled Natural Resource Index Assessment that documents the Natural Resource Index Value scores. The Assessment shall include a summary analysis that quantifies the number of acres by Index Values, the level of conservation being proposed, and the resulting number of Credits being generated. The Assessment shall: a. Verify that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are still valid through recent aerial photography or satellite imagery, agency - approved mapping, or other documentation, as verified by field inspections. 37 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c GUFF8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d If if this Assessment establishes that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are no longer valid, document the Index Value of the land as of the date of the SSA Designation Application. C. Establish the suggested "Restoration Potential" Index Value for any acres as appropriate and provide evidence/documentation supporting the suggested Index Value; d. Quantify the acreage of agricultural lands, by type, being preserved; e. Quantify the acreage of non-agricultural acreage, by type, being preserved; Quantify the acreage of all lands by type within the proposed SSA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2; and g. Quantify all lands, by type, being designated as SSA within the ACSC, if any. 4. Support Documentation. In addition, the following support documentation shall be provided for each SSA being designated: a. Legal description, including sketch or survey; Acreage calculations, e.g., acres of FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs, etc., being put into the SSA; C. RLSA Overlay Map delineating the area of the RLSAO DiStFiGbeing designated as an SSA; d. Aerial photograph(s) having a scale of one (1) inch equal to at least 200 feet when available from the County, otherwise, a scale of at least one (1) inch equal to 400 feet is acceptable, delineating the area being designated as an SSA; e. Natural Resource Index Map of area being designated as an SSA; FDOT Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SSA on an aerial photograph having a scale of one (1) inch equal to at least 200 feet when available from the County, otherwise, a scale of at least one (1) inch equal to 400 feet is acceptable; g. Listed species occurrence map(s) from United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) Fleroda Fish Wildlife Conservation Commission and Florida Natural Areas Inventory, delineating the area being designated as an SSA; 38 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 h. United States Department of Agriculture -Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) Soils map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SSA; Documentation to support a change in the related Natural Resource Index Value(s), if appropriate; and Calculations that quantify the number of acres by Index Values, the level of conservation being offered, and the resulting number of credits being generated. 5. SSA Credit Agreement. Any landowner petitioning to have all or a portion of land owned within the RLSAO DiStFi£t designated as an SSA and who is to obtain SSA credits for the land so designated shall enter into a SSA Credit Agreement with the County. SSA Credit Agreements entered into by and between a landowner and the County shall contain the following: a. The number of acres, and a legal description of all lands subject to the SSA Credit Agreement; A map or plan (drawn at a scale of 1"= 500') of the land subject to the agreement which depicts any lands designated FSAs, HSAs, or WRAs and the acreage of lands so designated; C. A narrative description of all land uses, including conditional uses, if any, that shall be eliminated,�,evea from the land upon approval of the SSA Credit Agreement; d. Calculations that support the total number of SSA credits that result from the Natural Resource Index Assessment; e. A copy of the Stewardship easement, (or deed if a fee simple transfer is proposed) applicable to the land, which shall be granted in perpetuity and shall be recorded by the County upon approval of the SSA Credit Agreement; Land management measures; g. Provisions requiring that, upon designation of land as an SSA, the owner shall not seek or request, and the County shall not grant or approve, any increase in density or any additional uses beyond those specified in the SSA Credit Agreement on the land; Provisions requiring that, upon designation of land within either an FSA or an HSA as an SSA, the owner shall not thereafter seek or request, and the County shall not thereafter grant or approve any expansion or conversion of agricultural land uses in violation of sections 4.08.06 A.2 and A.3.; Provisions regarding and ensuring the enforceability of the SSA Credit Agreement; and 39 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c GUFF8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d If applicable, the number of credits to be granted for restoration (Restoration Credits), together with the following information: (1) A legal description of lands to be designated for restoration; (2) A map depicting the land being designated as SSA, with the lands to be dedicated for restoration, but which the applicant makes no commitment to undertake restoration, identified as Restoration I ("R I"); and the lands dedicated for restoration and for which the applicant has committed to carry out the restoration identified as Restoration II ("R II"); (3) The number of Restoration Credits to be granted for the lands designated R I and R 11; (4) A Restoration Analysis and Report, which shall include a written evaluation of the restoration area's existing ecological/habitat value and the necessary restoration efforts required to reestablish original conditions; enhance the functionality of wetlands or wildlife habitat; or remove exotics so as to enhance the continued viability of native vegetation and wetlands; and (5) When the restoration is to be undertaken by the applicant, a Restoration Plan that addresses, at a minimum, the following elements: (a) Restoration goals or species potentially affected; (b) Description of the work to be performed; (c) Identification of the entity responsible for performing the work; (d) Work Schedule; (e) Success Criteria; and (f) Annual management, maintenance and monitoring. 6. Public Hearing for Credit Agreement. The SSA Credit Agreement shall be approved by a resolution of the BCC at an advertised public meeting by majority vote. 7. Recording of SSA Memorandum. Following approval by the County, an SSA Memorandum shall be prepared and recorded in the public records, together with the following portions or exhibits of the SSA Credit Agreement as attachments: a. The legal description of the lands subject to the SSA Credit Agreement and the number of SSA Credits assigned to the land designated as SSA, 40 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added including lands designated for restoration, if any, and the Restoration Credits assigned to such land; The Stewardship Easement oaten Agreement on the SSA lands, describing the land uses remaining on the land; C. A summary of the Restoration Plan, if restoration is to be undertaken by the applicant, to include the elements set forth in Section 4.08.06 C.S. 8. Stewardship Sending Area Easement easement Agreement or Deed. The applicant shall prepare and submit a Stewardship Easement oa�Tt Agreement in all cases except when the property is being deeded in fee simple to a "conservation/preservation agency." a. The Agreement shall impose a restrictive covenant or grant a perpetual restrictive easement that shall be recorded for each SSA. The Agreement shall run with the land and s4a14 be in favor of Collier County and FFWCC and one or more of the following: Florida DEP, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, SFWMD, or a recognized land trust. The Stewardship Sending Area Easement oa�Tt Agreement shall identify the specific land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures. C. In the event that the land being designated as an SSA is being transferred to a conservation entity by fee simple title, a deed shall be submitted in lieu of the Stewardship Sending Area Easement easement Agreement. d. The Stewardship Sending Area Easement Agreement shall comply with FLUE Policy 1.6.1 Termination of the Agreement shall be done in compliance with LDC section 4.08.06 F. and in conjunction with the County Attorney's Office. D. SSA Application Review Process. Pre -application Conference with County Staff. Prior to the submission of a formal application for SSA designation, the applicant shall attend a pre -application conference with the County Manager or his designee and other county staff, agencies, and officials involved in the review and processing of such applications and related materials. If an SRA designation application is to be filed concurrent with an SSA application, only one pre -application conference shall be required. This pre -application conference should address, but not be limited to, such matters as: a. Conformity of the proposed SSA with the goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP; Review of the Stewardship Credit Worksheet and Natural Resource Index Assessment for the property; 41 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added C. Identification of the recognized entity to be named in the covenant or perpetual restrictive easement, and; d. Identification of the proposed land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures. 2. Application Package Submittal and Processing Fees. The required number of copies of each SSA Application and the associated processing fee shall be submitted to the County Manager or his designee. The contents of said application package shall be in accordance with Section 4.08.06 C. 3. Application Deemed Sufficient for Review. Within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of the SSA Application, the County Manager or his designee shall advise the applicant in writing that the application is complete and sufficient for agency review or advise what additional information is needed to find the application sufficient. If required, the applicant shall submit additional information. Within ten (10) working days of receipt of the additional information, the County Manager or his designee shall advise the applicant in writing that the application is complete, or, if additional or revised information is required, the County manager shall again inform the applicant what information is needed, and the timeframe outlined herein shall occur until the application is found sufficient for review. 4. Review by County Reviewing Agencies: Once the SSA application is deemed sufficient, the County Manager or his designee will distribute it to specific County staff for their review. 5. Designation Review. Within sixty (60) days of receipt of a sufficient application, county staff shall review the submittal documents and provide written comments, questions, and clarification items to the applicant. If deemed necessary by county staff or the applicant, a meeting shall be held to resolve outstanding issues and confirm public hearing dates. 6. Designation Report. Within ninety (90) days from the receipt of a sufficient application, county staff shall prepare a written report containing their review findings and a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions or denial. This timeframe may be extended upon written agreement by the applicant. E. SSA Application Approval Process. Public Hearing. The BCC shall hold an advertised public hearing on the proposed resolution approving an SSA Application and SSA Credit Agreement. Notice of the Board's intention to consider the Application and proposed SSA Credit Agreement shall be given at least fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the County. A copy of such notice shall be kept available for public inspection during regular business hours of the Office of Clerk to the BCC. The notice of proposed hearing shall state the date, time and place of the meeting, the title of the proposed resolution, and the place or places within the County where the proposed resolution and agreement may be inspected by the public. The notice shall provide a general description and a map or sketch of the affected land and shall advise that interested parties may appear at the meeting 42 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethro gh 'c GurF8Rt text to he deleted and be heard with respect to the proposed resolution. The BCC shall review the staff report and recommendations and, if it finds that all requirements for designation have been met, shall, by resolution, approve the application. If it finds that one or more of the requirements for designation have not been met, it shall either deny the application or approve it with conditions mandating compliance with all unmet requirements. Approval of such resolution shall require a majority vote by the BCC. 2. Legal Description. Following the BCC's approval of the SSA Application and SSA Credit Agreement, a legal description of the land designated SSA, the SSA credits granted, and the Stewardship easement applicable to such lands, shall be provided to the Collier County Property Appraiser and the applicant, and shall be recorded within thirty (30) days by the applicant in the public records. 3. Update the RLSA Overlay Map and Official Zoning Atlas. The Official Zoning Atlas shall be updated to reflect the designation of the SSA. Sufficient information shall be included on the updated zoning maps so as to direct interested parties to the appropriate public records associated with the designation, including but not limited to Resolution number and SSA Designation Application number. The RLSA Overlay Map shall be updated to reflect the SSA designation during a regular growth management cycle no later that twelve months from the effective date of the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement SSA Agreement. F. StewardshiD Easement Aareement Process. 1. Conditional Period. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, upon initial approval of a Stewardship Sending Area (SSA), the Stewardship Easement Agreement (Stewardship Easement) shall be held pursuant to an Escrow Accounty for a term of five years ("Conditional Period") and shall be deemed a Conditional StewardshiD Easement. The Conditional Period may be extended for one additional year at the option of the owner by providing written notice to the County prior to the expiration of the initial five-year period. All conditions and restrictions of the Stewardship Easement related to maintaining the existing property conditions, including all management obligations of the owner of the SSA lands, as well as other terms and conditions, shall be in full force throughout the Conditional Period as required by the Stewardship Easement and/or an Escrow Agreement in a form approved by the County Attorney prior to submittal for Board approval. 2. Automatic Conversion of StewardshiD Easement. a. If at anv time durina the Conditional Period anv of the followina events occur, then the Conditional Stewardship Easement shall automatically covert into a Permanent Stewardship Easement by operation of the Escrow Agreement and/or Stewardship Easement, which shall be final, perpetual and non -revocable. i. Stewardship Credits from the SSA have been assigned to entitle an approved Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA), and the SRA has received all necessary final and non -appealable development 43 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFTText underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh 'c current text to he deleted orders, permits, or other discretionary approvals necessary to commence construction, including subdivision plat and site development plan approval, but not building permits. If Stewardship Credits from the SSA have been assigned to more than one SRA, then the receipt of all necessary governmental final and non - appealable development orders, permits, or other discretionary approvals necessary to commence construction of any SRA shall automatically cause the Conditional Stewardship Easement to become a Permanent Stewardship Easement; The owner of the SSA lands has sold or transferred any Stewardship Credits to another person or entity, including a Stewardship Credit Trust as described in Policy 1.20 of the FLUE, the closing has occurred, and the owner has received the consideration due from such sale or transfer, but not expressly excluding: a) A sale or transfer of the Stewardship Credits ancillary to the sale or transfer of the underlying fee title to the land, or b) Instances where a landowner establishes an SSA for a specific SRA, whether the SRA is owned or developed by a separate or related entity, and the Stewardship Credits are transferred as required by the Growth Management Plan or Land Development Code for SRA approval; or iii. The owner of the SSA lands has received in exchange for the creation of the Stewardship Easement Agreement other compensation from local, state, federal or private revenues (collectivelv. the "Events"). b. If a Notice of Termination has not been recorded or the Conditional Stewardship Easement was otherwise not terminated, the Permanent Stewardship Easement, by operation of the Escrow Agreement and/or Stewardship Easement upon the earliest to occur of: (a) any of the foregoing events during the Conditional Period, or (b) 180 days after the last day of the Conditional Period, as and to the extent it is extended. 3. Notice of Termination. a. 180 Day Termination Window. In the event that the Conditional Stewardship Easement has not automatically converted into a Permanent Stewardship Easement and none of the events have occurred during the Conditional Period, then the owner of the SSA lands may within 180 days after the last day of the Conditional Period terminate the Conditional Stewardship Easement by operation of the Escrow Agreement or by recordina a Notice of Termination. b. Effect of Termination. 44 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFTText underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh 'c current text to he deleted Upon Termination, the Stewardship Easement Agreement and corresponding Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement and/or Escrow Agreement shall expire and terminate, the Stewardship Credits generated by the SSA shall cease to exist, the rights and obligations set forth in the Stewardship Easement shall no longer constitute an encumbrance on the property, and the SSA Memorandum shall be revised accordingly. The owner of the SSA lands shall provide a copy of the Notice of Termination to the County. In the event that a Conditional Stewardship Easement is terminated, all benefits, rights, privileges, restrictions and obligations associated with the SSA shall be null and void, and the land shall revert to its underlying zoning classification, free and clear of any encumbrance from the Conditional Stewardship Easement and SSA Credit Agreement. If requested by the owner of the SSA lands, Collier County and the other grantees under the Stewardship Easement Agreement shall provide a written release and termination of easement and credit agreements for recording in the public records within 15 days of request from the owner of the SSA lands. Collier County shall update the RLSA Overlay Map to reflect the termination of any SSA or SRA. 4. Extension of Conditional Period During Challenge or Appeal. If a challenge and/or appeal of a necessary development order, permit or other discretionary approval is filed, the owner of the SSA lands may elect to extend the Conditional Period until the challenge or appeal is finally resolved. If the challenge or appeal is not resolved such that the construction may commence under terms acceptable to the owner of the SSA lands, the owner of the SSA lands may within 180 days of the final disposition of the challenae or aDoeal record a Notice of Termination. 5. SRAs Affected by Termination. In the event that the Stewardship Credits from an SSA have been used to obtain one or more SRA approvals, but none of the foregoing events has occurred during the Conditional Period, then the Notice of Termination shall also provide for termination of any SRAs that have been assigned credits from the SSA, unless the SRA owner has obtained sufficient Stewardship Credits from another source and such Stewardship Credits have been applied to the SRA. In the event that a Notice of Termination does terminate an SRA, the owner of the SRA lands shall join in the Notice of Termination. G1=. SSA Amendments. Collier County shall consider an amendment to an approved SSA in the same manner described in this Section for the designation of an SSA. Amendment(s) to approved SSAs shall only be considered if the application eliminates removes one or more additional Land Use Layers from the existing SSA. Under no circumstances shall Land Use Layers, once eliminated removed as part of an SSA designation, be added back to the SSA. The application to amend the SSA may be submitted as part of an application to designate a new SSA provided such lands are contiguous to the previously approved SSA and are under the same ownership. 4.08.07 - SRA Designation 45 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 SRA designation is intended to encourage and facilitate uses that enable economic prosperity and diversification of the economic base of the RLSAO D , and encourage development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques and facilitates a compact form of development to accommodate population growth by the establishment of SRAs. Stewardship Credits generated from SSAs are exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis as set forth herein. Density and intensity within the RLSAO DiStr+eshall not be increased beyond the baseline Sstandards except through the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System, the affordable housing density Bonus as referenced in the density Rating System of the FLUE, and the density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein. Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSAO DiStFiGt that meet the defined suitability criteria and standards set forth herein. Land becomes designated as an SRA on the date that the SRA Credit Agreement becomes effective pursuant to Section 4.08.07 D.124. Any change in the residential density or non-residential intensity of land use on a parcel of land located within an SRA shall be specified in the resolution, which shall reflect the total number of transferable Credits assigned to the parcel of land. A. Lands Within the RLSAO DiStFiGt that can be Designated as SRAs. All privately owned lands within the RLSAO DostriGt that meet the suitability criteria contained herein may be designated as SRA, except lands delineated on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan (RLSA Overlay Map) as FSA, HSA, or WRA, or lands already designated as an SSA. WRAs may be located within the boundaries of an SRA and may be incorporated into an SRA Master Plan to provide water management functions for properties within such SRA, subject to all necessary permitting requirements. If all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, the pro rata acreage of the WRA shall be required to consume SRA credits but shall not be included within the SRA acreage. Suitability Criteria. The following suitability criteria are established to ensure consistency with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan (RLSA Overlay). a. An SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate the planned development. Any development participating in the RLSA Program shall be comDatible with surroundina land uses and imDlement aDDroDriate lighting controls for permitted uses, including "dark sky compliant" lighting principles. Residential, commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, and transient housing, institutional, civic and community service uses within an SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. C. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services; with the eXGpptiOR of these eGessary _}o_ serve permitted uses and fer publi" safety, shall not be sited on land that receives a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2, regardless of size of the land or peYGel unless such service is deemed necessary for public safety as described in 46 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethreugh 66 GUFFeRt text to be deleted LDC section 2.01.03 G.2 and is designed to minimize impacts to natural resources. d. Except as provided in c. above, lands Lands or parcels that are greater than one acre and have an Index Value greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space and maintained in a predominantly natural vegetated state. e. Open space shall also comprise a minimum of thirty-five percent of the gross acreage of an individual SRA Town or; Village, or these G eXGeed+eg 100 acres. Gross acreage includes only that area of development within the SRA that requires the consumption of Stewardship Credits. fg. An SRA may be contiguous to an FSA or HSA, but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in Section 4.08.07 1_5J-.6. An SRA may be contiguous to, or encompass a WRA. If all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, the prorata acreage of the WRA shall be required to consume SRA credits but shall not be included within the SRA acreaae. gh. The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector or arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer that has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development in accordance with accepted transportation planning standards h. An SRA shall provide direct vehicular and pedestrian connections to the County's arterial/collector roadway network as shown on the MPO's Long Range Transportation Needs Plan. The SRA shall include a Mobilitv Plan in accordance with LDC section 4.08.07 D.10. that includes vehicular, bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas of outside development and land uses. Strategies shall encourage the use of mass transit services such as subsidies. route saonsorshiD. or other incentives. i. Any mitigation measures required to offset an SRA's traffic impacts, including but not limited to provisions for the construction and/or permitting of wildlife crossings, environmental mitigation credits, right-of-way dedication(s), water management and/or fill materials that may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network, public utilities, or parks, shall be memorialized in a developer contribution agreement. Actions shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the project traffic on existing or proposed roadways. 47 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh is Gwrr8Rt tGXt to ho .dolodo.d 2. SRAs Within the ACSC. SRAs are permitted within the ACSC subject to limitations on the number, size, location, and form of SRA described herein. Nothing within this Section shall be construed as an exemption of an SRA from any and all limitations and regulations applicable to lands within the ACSC. Lands within the ACSC that meet all SRA suitability criteria shall also be restricted such that credits used to entitle an SRA in the ACSC must be generated exclusively from SSAs within the ACSC. No early entry bonus credits generated prior to the termination of the bonus period can be used to entitle an SRA within the ACSC. a. The only forms of SRAs allowed in the ACSC east of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be Hamlets and CRDs of 100 acres or less, and the only forms of SRAs allowed in the ACSC west of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be CRDs and Villages andRDS of not more than 300 acres and Hamlets. In addition, not more than 1,000 acres of SRA development in the form of Villages or CRDs, Provided, however, two SRAs, Gonsist;TTg of any mhina+inn of lags or GRD of no+ more than 500 a ee„ V+I,�s��s than eaGh, exclusive of any lakes created prior to June 30, 2002, the effen+iye date of this ameRdmeR as a result of mining operations, shall be allowed in areas that have a frontage on State Road 29 and which that as of the effenti„e date of the RI en Oyeria- had been predominantly cleared as a result of Ag Group I (Layer 5) or Earth Mining or Processing Uses (Layer 3). The Town form of an SRA shall not be located within the ACSC. B. Establishment and Transfer of Stewardship Credits. The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein. Stewardship Credits will be exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis, as described in Section 4.08.07 13.2. Stewardship density and intensity will thereafter differ from the l3baseline Sstandards. Transfer of Credits. The transfer or use of Stewardship Credits shall only be in a manner as provided for herein. a. Stewardship Credits generated from any SSA may be transferred to entitle any SRA, except where the SRA is within the ACSC, in which case only Stewardship Credits that have been generated from an SSA within the ACSC can be used to entitle such SRA. No early entry bonus credits generated prior to the termination of the bonus period can be used to entitle an SRA within the ACSC. Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSAO that meet the defined suitability criteria and standards set forth herein. C. Stewardship Credits may be transferred between different parcels or within a single parcel, subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of these policies. Residential clustering shall only occur within the RLSAO DiStriGt through the use of the Stewardship Credit System, and other forms of residential clustering shall not be permitted. 48 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethrn nh 'c current text to he deleted d. Stewardship Credits may be acquired from any credit holder and transferred to an SRA subject to the limitations contained in this Section. e. Stewardship Credits may be acquired from a Stewardship Credit Trust established pursuant to Section 4.08.04 B., and transferred to an SRA subject to the limitations contained in this Section. 2. Stewardship Credit Exchange. Stewardship Credits shall be exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in an SRA on a per acre basis at a rate of eight (8) Stewardship Credits per gross acre for SSA/Credits that were created from an SSA approved prior to July 13, 2021, and a rate of ten (10) Stewardship Credits per gross acre for SSA/Credits where such Credits were created from SSAs established after July 13, 2021 . Except for infrastructure deemed necessary for public safety and designed to minimize impacts to natural resources as provided in Section 4.08.07.A.1.c above, lands. Lands within an SRA greater than one acre, with Index Values of greater than 1.2, shall be retained as open space and maintained in a urspredomi++n��..antly natural, vegetated ,. state. Any Ianmrrds within an SRA IeGated e�its�idTthe AGSG AG eXGeed'Rg t�equired they fide (` 5) nernent shall net he required to nensi Rqe Stewardship Grerdits 3. Public Benefit Uses. The acreage within an SRA devoted to a public benefit use shall not be required to consume Stewardship Credits aP4 but shall not count toward the maximum acreage limits of an SRA unless such public benefit uses were approved as part of an SRA approved prior to July 13, 2021, in which case such public benefit uses shall continue to be excluded from the maximum acreage limitation pursuant to the policy in effect at the time of approval. For the purpose of this Section, public benefit uses are limited to: affordable housing as defined in the LDC, public schools (preK-12)1 and public or private post -secondary institutions, pest SeGenldary Instit itien Ancillary Uses, community parks exceeding the minimum requirement of 200 square feet per dwelling unit, municipal golf courses, regional parks, and governmental facilities eXG! i.d'Rg essential seFVires as defined in the I DG- 4. Mixed Land Use Entitlements. In order to promote compact, mixed use development and provide the necessary support facilities and services to residents of rural areas, the SRA designation and the transfer of the Stewardship Credits allows for a full range of uses, accessory uses and associated uses that provide a mix of services to and are supportive to the residential population of an SRA and the RLSAO DiStFiGt. SRAs are intended to be mixed use and shall be allowed the full range of uses permitted by the Urban Designation of the FLUE, as modified by Policies 4.7, 4.7.1, 4.7.2, 4.7.3, 4.7.4 and RLSA Overlay Attachment C. Depending on the size, scale, and character of an SRA, it shall be designed to include an appropriate mix of retail, office, recreational, civic, governmental, and institutional uses, in addition to residential uses. Towns and Villages shall be the preferred locations for business and industry, including environmental research, agricultural research, aviation and aerospace, health and life sciences, corporate headquarters, computer hardware, software and services, information technology, manufacturing, research and development, wholesale trade and distribution and similar uses, including Florida Qualified Target Industries. 49 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh 'c current text to he deleted 5. Affordable Housing. To address the accommodation of Affordable Housing in a Town or Village, the SRA applicant shall utilize one of the following options: a. Affordable Housing Land Reservation. Reservation of one or more site() within the SRA or within a proximal SRA in the RLSAO with densities and development standards that accommodate Affordable Housing residential uses at a minimum density of 10 units per acre, for acquisition by Collier County, a Community Land Trust, a private developer, or any other affordable housing provider. (2) The aggregate acreage of such site(s) shall be equal to or greater than two and one-half percent (2.5%) of the gross area of the SRA. (3) The acreage of land reserved for Affordable Housing will be considered as a Public Benefit Use. (4) The County shall verify the site(s) is/are appropriate and approve the site(s) at time of SRA approval, subject to standards to be established in the LDC. 5) Affordable Housing units shall be excluded from the Traffic Impact Statement or triD caD for the SRA in which thev are located. b. Alternatives proposed by the SRA Applicant. While compliance with the Land Reservation described above shall be deemed to satisfy affordable housing requirements, other options may be proposed by the SRA applicant and approved by the BCC to address housing affordability. C. Forms of SRA developments. SRA developments are a compact form of development, which accommodate and promote uses that utilize creative land use planning techniques. SRAs shall be used to facilitate the implementation of innovative planning and flexible development strategies described in § Florida Statutes section 163.3248163.3177 (14) F.S. Rule 9i 5 006(5)(1) F.A.G. Therese —planning strategies and techniques are intended to minimize the conversion of rural and agricultural lands to other uses while discouraging urban sprawl, protecting environmentally sensitive areas, maintaining the economic viability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and, providing for the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. Only the following four specific forms of rural development in SRAs are permitted within the RLSAO D . Towns. Towns are the largest and most diverse form of SRA, with a full range of housing types and mix of uses. Towns have urban level services and infrastructure which support development that is compact, mixed use, human scale, and provides a balance of land uses to reduce automobile trips and increase livability. The mixture of land uses shall accommodate services that would increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long-distance travel. Towns shall be rg eater than 1,500 acres but not more than 5,000 acres RGt loss than 1,000 aGres „r mere than 4,000 aGres and are comprised of several villages and/or neighborhoods that have individual identity and character. Towns shall have a mixed -use town center 50 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethreugh 66 GUrrent text to be deleted that will serve as a focal point for community facilities and support services. Towns shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. The Town transportation network shall be based upon a Mobility Plan in accordance with LDC section 4.08.07 D.10. and shall include a transfer station or park and ride area that is appropriately located within the Town to serve the connection point for internal and external public transportation. Towns shall have at least one community park with a minimum size of 200 square feet per dwelling unit in the Town, subject to Level of Service Requirements. Towns shall also have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Towns shall include both community and neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.07 14.1. Towns may also include those compatible corporate office, research and development companies, and light industrial uses, such as those included in Policy 4.7.4 ;�erfted in +ho Ri ieinoc� o��- aT� Researnh and TeGhneleg y Darla Subdis of the FLUE. Towns shall be the preferred location for the full range of schools, and to the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. Towns shall not be located within the ACSC. 2. Villages. Villages are primarily residential communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be greater than 300 acres but not more than 1,500 acres, except that if any portion is designated ACSC, the maximum size shall be no more than 1,000 acres REA loos than 100 anroo or mere than 1,000 anroo. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed -use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Section 4.08.07 14.1. Villages may contain appropriately scaled uses that are permitted in CRDs. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. The Village form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.07 A.2. Villages greater than 500 acres shall require a Mobility Plan in accordance with LDC section 4.08.07 D.10., to include either a transfer station or park -and -ride area that is appropriately located within the village to serve as the connection point for internal and external public transportation. 51 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethreugh 66 GLIFFeRt text to be, deleted 34. Compact Rural developments (CRDs). Compact Rural development (CRD) is a form of SRA that is a maximum of 300 acres and intended to support and further Collier County's valued attributes of agriculture, natural resources, and economic diversity. Primary CRD uses shall be those associated with and needed to support research, education, convenience retail, tourism or recreation will preyide flexibility ,w;th the standards of a Hamlet or Village. A CRD may include; but is not required to have permanent residential housing and the services and facilities that support permanent residents. The number of residential units shall be equivalent with the demand generated by the primary CRD use but shall not exceed two units per gross acre. Except as described above, a CRD shall wW conform to the characteristics of a Village or Hamlet as set forth in Section 4.08.07 IJ.1. based on the size of the GRID. As residential units are not a required use, those goods and services that support residents such as retail, office, civic, governmental and institutional uses shall also not be required. However for any GRID that does above shall be previded OR aGGerdaRGe with the standards for the MOSt GOMparabL- foorm of SRA as deSGrrbed on SeGtinn n 08 07 r 2 eF 3. � ■ - - �l-7GiT _ ■ - a. CRDs within the ACSC. The CRD form of rural land development is permitted within the ACSC subject to the limitations of Section 4.08.07 A.2. 40. Proportion of HamR�+�,a CRDs to Villages and Towns. In order to maintain the correct proportion of Hamlets anal CRDs of 300 4-90 acres or less to the number of Villages and Towns approved as SRAs, not more than five (5) of any romhinatinn „f�l�+�a CRDs of 300 4-90 acres or less shall nr4ay be approved prior to the approval of a Village or Town. In order to maintain that same proportion thereafter, not more than five (5) additional of any nomhinatinn of Hamlets and CRDs of 300 4-00 acres or less n4ay shall be approved for each subsequent Village or Town approved. 52 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethreugh 66 GLIFFeRt text to be, deleted D. SRA Designation Application Package. A Designation Application Package to support a request to designate land(s) within the RLSAO n'�as an SRA shall be made pursuant to the regulations of the RLSAO DiStFi£t Regulations. The SRA Application Package shall include the following: SRA Designation Application. An application shall be submitted by a landowner or his/her agent, hereafter "applicant," to request the designation of an SRA within the RLSAO DiStriGt. The Application shall be submitted to the County manager or his designee, on a form provided. The application shall be accompanied by the documentation as required by this Section. 2. Application Fee. An application fee shall accompany the application. 3. Natural Resource Index Assessment. An assessment that documents the Natural Resource Index Value scores shall be prepared and submitted as part of the SRA Application. The Assessment shall include an analysis that quantifies the number of acres by Index Values. The Assessment shall: a. Identify all lands within the proposed SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2; Verify that the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are still valid through recent aerial photography or satellite imagery or agency - approved mapping, or other documentation, as verified by field inspections; C. If the Index Value scores assigned during the RLSA Study are no longer valid, document the current Index Value of the land. d. Quantify the acreage of agricultural lands, by type, being converted; e. Quantify the acreage of non-agricultural acreage, by type, being converted; Quantify the acreage of all lands by type within the proposed SRA that have an Index Value greater than 1.2; g. Quantify the acreage of all lands, by type, being designated as SRA within the ACSC, if any; and Demonstrate compliance with the Suitability Criteria contained in Section 4.08.07 A.1. 53 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c Gurr8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d 4. Natural Resource Index Assessment Support Documentation. Documentation to support the Natural Resource Index Assessment shall be provided for each SRA being designated to include: a. Legal Description, including sketch or survey; Acreage calculations of lands being put into the SRA, including acreage calculations of WRAs (if any) within SRA boundary but not included in SRA designation, and if all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, the pro rata acreage of the WRA shall be required to consume SRA credits but shall not be included within the SRA acreaae: C. RLSA Overlay Map delineating the area of the RLSAO D being designated as an SRA; d. Aerial photograph delineating the area being designated as an SRA; e. Natural Resource Index Map of area being designated as an SRA; FLUCFCS map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SRA; g. Listed species map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SRA; Soils map(s) delineating the area being designated as an SRA, and; Documentation to support a change in the related Natural Resource Index Value(s), if appropriate. 5. SRA Master Plan. A Master Plan shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of an SRA. The SRA Master Plan shall be consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.07 G. 6. SRA Development Document. A Development Document shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of an SRA. The SRA Development Document shall be consistent with the requirements of Section 4.08.07 H. 7. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessment Report. An Impact Assessment Report shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of a SRA. The SRA Impact Assessment Report shall address the requirements of Section 4.08.07 JK 8. SRA Economic Assessment Report. An Economic Assessment Report shall be prepared and submitted by the applicant as part of the SRA Application for Designation of an SRA. The SRA Economic Assessment Report shall address the requirements of Section 4.08.07 KL-. 9. Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Application. A Credit Use and Reconciliation Application shall be submitted as part of an SRA Designation 54 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Application in order to track the transfer of credits from SSA(s) to SRA(s). The Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Application shall be in a form provided by the County Manager, or his designee. The application package shall contain the following: a. The legal description of, or descriptive reference to, the SRA to which the Stewardship Credits are being transferred; Total number of acres within the proposed SRA and the total number of acres of the proposed SRA within the ACSC (if any); C. Number of acres within the SRA designated "public use" that do not require the redemption of Stewardship Credits in order to be entitled (does not consume credits); d. Number of acres of "excess" open spaces within the SRA that do not require the consumption of credits; e. Number of acres of WRAs inside the SRA boundary but not included in the SRA designation, and if all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, the pro rata acreage of the WRA shall be required to consume SRA credits but shall not be included within the SRA acreage; Number of acres within the SRA that consume Credits; g. The number of Stewardship Credits being transferred (consumed by) to the SRA and documentation that the applicant has acquired or has a contractual right to acquire those Stewardship Credits; h. An accounting acreage associated with Credits that were created from an SSA submitted for review or approved prior to July 13, 2021, under the eight (8) credit allocation and the acreage associated with Credits created from any other SSA under the ten (10) credit allocation, Number of onrec to Whinh oreldits are to he transferred (hens rn 1) mi i.... I.ed by eight (& Credits l orre equals the ni imher of Credits to he transferred (Grind rnerd)• e A descriptive reference to one (1) or more approved or pending SSA Designation Applications from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained. Copies of the reference documents, e.g., SSA Stewardship Credit Agreement, etc., shall be provided, including: (1) SSA application number; (2) Pending companion SRA application number; (3) SSA Designation Resolution (or Resolution Number); (4) SSA Credit Agreement (Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement); G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFTText underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh 'c current text to he deleted (5) Stewardship Credits Database Report. A descriptive reference to any previously approved Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Applications that pertain to the referenced SSA(s) from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained; and A summary table in a form provided by Collier County that identifies the exchange of all Stewardship Credits that involve the SRA and all of the associated SSAs from which the Stewardship Credits are being obtained. 10. SRA Mobility Plan. A Mobility Plan in connection with a Transportation Impact Statement (TIS) that includes vehicular, bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas of outside development and land uses. The Mobility Plan shall provide mobility strategies such as bus subsidies, route sponsorship, or other incentives to encourage the use of mass transit services. The Mobility Plan shall further the objectives of the Collier County Master Mobility Plan. The Mobility Plan shall also consider the needs identified in the MPO Lona Ranae Transportation Needs Plan. and plan land uses to accommodate services that would increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long-distance travel. Such development strategies are recognized as methods of discouraging urban sprawl, encouraging alternative modes of transportation, increasing internal capture, and reducing vehicle miles traveled _ 1140. Conditional SRA Designation. If at the time of the approval of the SRA Designation Application, the applicant has not acquired the number of credits needed to entitle the SRA, then the SRA Designation approval shall be conditional. The applicant shall have sixty (60) days from the date of the conditional approval to provide documentation of the acquisition of the required number of Stewardship Credits. If the applicant does not provide such documentation within sixty (60) days, the conditional SRA Designation approval shall be null and void. The Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Application shall be amended to accurately reflect the transfer of credits that occurred following the conditional approval of the SRA. 1244. SRA Credit Agreement. a. Any applicant for designation of an SRA shall enter into an SRA Credit Agreement with the County. The SRA Credit Agreement shall contain the following information: (1) The number of SSA credits the applicant for an SRA designation is utilizing and which shall be applied to the SRA land in order to carry out the plan of development on the acreage proposed in the SRA Development development Documents; (2) A legal description of the SRA land and the number of acres; (3) The SRA master plan depicting the land uses and identifying the number of residential dwelling units, gross leasable area of retail 56 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh io 8Rt tGA to be deleted and office square footage and other land uses depicted on the master plan; (4) A description of the SSA credits that are needed to entitle the SRA land and the anticipated source of said credits; (5) The applicant's acknowledgement that development of SRA land may not commence until the applicant has recorded an SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum with the Collier County Clerk of Courts; and (6) The applicant's commitments, if any, regarding conservation, or any other restriction on development on any lands, including wetlands, within the SRA, as may be depicted on the SRA Master Plan for special treatment. C. The SRA Credit Agreement shall be effective on the latest of the following dates: (1) The date that the County approves the SRA Application; (2) The date that documentation of the applicant's acquisition of the Stewardship Credits to be utilized for the SRA is found by the County to be sufficient; or (3) Five (5) working days after the date on which the applicant submits documentation of the acquisition of the Stewardship Credits to be utilized, if the County fails to make a sufficiency determination prior to that date. d. Following approval of the SRA Application, the applicant shall record a SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum, which shall include the following: (1) A cross reference to the recorded SSA Credit Agreement Memorandum or Memoranda for the SSA lands from which the credits being utilized are generated and identification of the number of credits derived from each SSA; and (2) a legal description of the SRA lands. e. If the development provided for within an SRA constitutes, or will constitute, a development of regional impact ("DRI") pursuant to Florida Statutes sections § 380.06 and 380.0651, F.5 and if the applicant has obtained a preliminary development agreement ("PDA") from the Florida Department of Community Affairs for a portion of the SRA land, the applicant may request the County to enter into a Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement for those Stewardship Credits needed in order to develop the PDA authorized development. Commencement of the PDA authorized development may not proceed until the applicant has recorded a Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum. The Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement and 57 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethreu gh is current text to he deleted Preliminary SRA Credit Agreement shall include the same information and documentation as is required for an SRA Credit Agreement and an SRA Credit Agreement Memorandum. E. SRA Application Review Process. Pre -Application Conference with County Staff: Prior to the submission of a formal application for SRA designation, the applicant shall attend a pre -application conference with the County Manager or his designee and other county staff, agencies, and officials involved in the review and processing of such applications and related materials. If an SRA designation application will be filed concurrent with an SSA application, only one pre -application conference shall be required. This pre -application conference should address, but not be limited to, such matters as: a. Conformity of the proposed SRA with the goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP; Consideration of suitability criteria described in LDC section 4.08.07 A.1. and other standards of this Section; C. SRA master plan compliance with all applicable policies of the RLSAO DfstFiGt Regulations, and demonstration that incompatible land uses are directed away from FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and Conservation Lands; d. Assurance that applicant has acquired or will acquire sufficient Stewardship Credits to implement the SRA uses; and; e. Consideration of impacts, including environmental and public infrastructure impacts. 2. Application Package Submittal, Processing Fees, and Review. The required number of SRA Applications and the associated processing fee shall be submitted to the County Manager or his designee. The contents of said application package shall be in accordance with LDC section 4.08.07 D. The review and approval of the application shall be in accordance with Florida Statutes section 125.022; Flerida Statutes. 3. Public notice and required hearings shall be as established in LDC section 10.03.06 M. F. SRA Application Approval Process. Public Hearings Required. The BCC shall review the staff report and recommendations and the recommendations of the EAC and CCPC, and the BCC shall, by resolution, approve, deny, or approve with conditions the SRA Application only after advertised public notices have been provided and public hearings held in accordance with LDC section 10.03.06 M. 58 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strkethreu gh is Gwrr8Rt text to he deleted 2. Update Stewardship Credits Database. Following the effective date of the approval of the SRA, the County shall update the Stewardship Credits Database used to track both SSA credits generated and SRA credits consumed. 3. Update the Official Zoning Atlas and the RLSA Overlay Map. Following the effective date of the approval of the SRA, the County shall update the Official Zoning Atlas to reflect the designation of the SRA. Sufficient information shall be included on the updated maps so as to direct interested parties to the appropriate public records associated with the designation, e.g., Resolution number, SRA Designation Application number, etc. The RLSA Overlay Map shall be updated to reflect the SRA designation during a regular GMP amendment cycle, no later than twelve months from the effective date of the SRA Credit Agreement. 4. SRA Amendments. Amendments to the SRA shall be considered in the same manner as described in this Section for the establishment of an SRA, except as follows: a. Waiver of Required SRA Application Package Component(s). A waiver may be granted by the County Manager or his designee, if at the time of the pre -application conference, in the determination of the County Manager or designee, the original SRA Designation Application component(s) is (are) not materially altered by the amendment or an updated component is not needed to evaluate the amendment. The County Manager or designee shall determine what application components and associated documentation are required in order to adequately evaluate the amendment request. Substantial changes. Any substantial change(s) to an SRA Master Plan or Development Document shall require the review and recommendation of the Planning Commission and approval by the BCC G0MM!SS!GRers as a SRA amendment prior to implementation. Applicants shall be required to submit and process a new application complete with pertinent supporting data, as set forth in the Administrative Code. For the purpose of this section, a substantial change shall be deemed to exist where: (1) A proposed change in the boundary of the SRA; (2) A proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development; (3) A proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation or open space areas within the development not to exceed 5 percent of the total acreage previously designated as such, or 5 acres in area; (4) A proposed increase in the size of areas used for nonresidential uses, to include institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation, conservation nor open spaces), or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses; 59 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c GUFF8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d (5) A substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but are not limited to, increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or impacts on other public facilities; (6) A change that will result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers; (7) A change that will result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or will otherwise increase stormwater discharges; (8) A change that will bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be incompatible with an adjacent land use; (9) Any modification to the SRA master plan or SRA document which is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element or other element of the Growth Management Plan or which modification would increase the density or intensity of the permitted land uses; (10) Any modification in the SRA master plan or SRA document which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial modification as described under this LDC section 4.08.07. C. Insubstantial change determination. An insubstantial change includes any change that is not considered a substantial or minor change. An insubstantial change to an approved SRA Development Document or master plan shall be based upon an evaluation of LDC subsection 4.08.07 FA.b., above and shall require the review and approval of the Hearing Examiner or Planning Commission. The approval shall be based on the findings and criteria used for the original application and be an action taken at a regularly scheduled meeting. (1) The applicant shall provide the Planning and Zoning Department Director documentation which adequately describes the proposed changes as described in the Administrative Code. d. Approval of Minor Changes by County Manager or Designee. County Manager shall be authorized to approve minor changes and refinements to an SRA Master Plan or Development Document upon written request of the applicant. Minor changes and refinements shall be reviewed by appropriate County staff to ensure that said changes and refinements are otherwise in compliance with all applicable County ordinances and regulations prior to the County Manager or designee's consideration for approval. The following limitations shall apply to such requests: (1) The minor change or refinement shall be consistent with the RLSA Overlay, the RLSAO DiStFiGtRegulations, and the SRA development Document's amendment provisions. 60 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh is on+ tGA to be deleted (2) The minor change or refinement shall be compatible with contiguous land uses and shall not create detrimental impacts to abutting land uses, water management facilities, and conservation areas within or external to the SRA. (3) Minor changes or refinements, include but are not limited to: (a) Reconfiguration of lakes, ponds, canals, or other water management facilities where such changes are consistent with the criteria of the SFWMD and Collier County; (b) Internal realignment of rights -of -way, other than a relocation of access points to the SRA itself, where water management facilities, preservation areas, or required easements are not adversely affected; and (c) Reconfiguration of parcels when there is no encroachment into the conservation areas or lands with an Index Value of 1.2 or higher. e. Relationship to Subdivision or site Development Approval. Approval by the County Manager or designee of a minor change or refinement may occur independently from, and prior to, any application for subdivision or Site Development Document approval. However, such approval shall not constitute an authorization for development or implementation of the minor change or refinement without first obtaining all other necessary County permits and approvals. G. Master Plan. To address the specifics of each SRA, a master plan of each SRA will be prepared and submitted to Collier County as a part of the petition for designation as an SRA. The master plan will demonstrate that the SRA complies with all applicable GMP policies and the RLSAO D and is designed so that incompatible land uses are directed away from lands identified as FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and Conservation Lands on the RLSA Overlay Map. Master Plan Requirements. A master plan shall accompany an SRA Designation Application to address the specifics of each SRA. The master plan shall demonstrate that the SRA is designed so that incompatible land uses are directed away from lands identified as FSAs, HSAs, WRAs and Conservation Lands on the RSLA Overlay Map. The plan shall be designed by an urban planner who possesses an AICP certification, together with at least one of the following: a. A professional engineer (P.E.) with expertise in the area of civil engineering licensed by the State of Florida; A qualified environmental consultant per Chapter 10 of the LDC; orc.A practicing architect licensed by the State of Florida. 2. Master Plan Content. At a minimum, the master plan shall be consistent with the County's then -adopted Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), Collier County 61 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Master Mobility Plan, and Access Management procedures and include the following elements: a. The title of the project and name of the developer; b. Scale, date, north arrow; C. Location map that identifies the relationship of the SRA to the entire RLSAO DiStFiGt, including other designated SRAs; d. Boundaries of the subject property, all existing roadways within and adjacent to the site, watercourses, easements, section lines, and other important physical features within and adjoining the proposed development; e. Identification of all proposed tracts or increments within the SRA such as, but not limited to: residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, conservation/ preservation, lakes and/or other water management facilities, the location and function of all areas proposed for dedication or to be reserved for community and/or public use, and areas proposed for recreational uses including golf courses and related facilities; f. Identification, location and quantification of all wetland preservation, buffer areas, and open space areas; g. The location and size (as appropriate) of all proposed drainage, water, sewer, and other utility provisions; h. The location of all proposed major internal rights of way and pedestrian access ways; Typical cross sections for all arterial, collector, and local streets, public or private, within the proposed SRA; Identification of any WRAs that are contiguous to or incorporated within the boundaries of the SRA, and if all or part of the WRA provides stormwater aualitv treatment for an SRA. the Dro rats acreaae of the WRA shall be reauired to consume SRA credits but shall not be included within the SRA acreage; and k. A Wildlife Management Plan for minimizing human and wildlife interactions, including the baseline standards techniques provided in Section 4.08.05 J.3.a; and Ik. Documentation or attestation of professional credentials of individuals preparing the master plan. H. Development Document. Data supporting the SRA Master Plan, and describing the SRA application, shall be in the form of a Development Document that shall consist of the 62 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 information listed below, unless determined at the required pre -application conference to be unnecessary to describe the development strategy. The document shall be prepared by an urban planner who possesses an AICP certification, together with at least one of the following: a. A professional engineer (P.E.) with expertise in the area of civil engineering licensed by the State of Florida; A qualified environmental consultant per Chapter 10 of the LDC orc.A practicing landscape architect licensed by the State of Florida. 2. The document shall identify, locate, and quantify the full range of uses, including accessory uses that provide the mix of services to, and are supportive of, the residential population of an SRA or the RSLA District, and shall include, as applicable, the following: a. Title page to include name of project; Index/table of contents; C. List of exhibits; d. Statement of compliance with the RSLA Overlay and the RLSAO D'striGt Regulations; e. General location map showing the location of the site within the boundaries of the RLSA Overlay Map and in relation to other designated SRAs and such external facilities as highways; Property ownership and general description of site (including statement of unified ownership); g. Description of project development; Legal description of the SRA boundary, and for any WRAs encompassed by the SRA; The overall acreage of the SRA that requires the consumption of Stewardship Credits and proposed gross density for the SRA; Identification of all proposed land uses within each tract or increment describing: acreage; proposed number of dwelling units; proposed density and percentage of the total development represented by each type of use; or in the case of commercial, industrial, institutional or office, the acreage and maximum gross leasable floor area within the individual tracts or increments; 63 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strkethreu nh is ent text to he deleted k. Design standards for each type of land use proposed within the SRA. Design standards shall be consistent with the Design Criteria contained in Section 4.08.07 1J.; The Development Document, including any amendments, may request deviations from the LDC. The Development Document application shall identify all proposed deviations and include justification and any proposed alternatives. See LDC section 4.08.07 1.7.E for the deviation requirements and criteria. m. The proposed schedule of development, and the sequence of phasing or incremental development within the SRA, if applicable; n. A Natural Resource Index Assessment as required in Section 4.08.04 C.3.; o. The location and nature of all existing or proposed public facilities (or sites), such as schools, parks, fire stations and the like; p. A plan for the provision of all needed utilities to and within the SRA; including (as appropriate) water supply, sanitary sewer collection and treatment system, stormwater collection and management system, pursuant to related county regulations and ordinances; q. Typical cross sections for all arterial, collector, and local streets, public or private, within the proposed SRA; Agreements, provisions, or covenants, which govern the use, maintenance, and continued protection of the SRA and any of its common areas or facilities; S. Development commitments for all infrastructure; t. When determined necessary to adequately assess the compatibility of proposed uses within the SRA to existing land uses, their relationship to agriculture uses, open space, recreation facilities, or to assess requests for deviations from the Design Criteria standards, the County Manager or designee may request schematic architectural drawings (floor plans, elevations, perspectives) for all proposed structures and improvements, as appropriate; Development Document amendment provisions; a44d-, V. An inventory of historic or cultural resources identified within the RLSAO and in conjunction with the Florida Division of Historic Resources, an assessment of their historic or cultural significance in accordance with LDC section 2.03.07 E., and proposed strategies to promote educational and Dublic awareness reaardina those sianificant resources: and w_v. Documentation or attestation of professional credentials of individuals preparing the development document. 64 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre ugh io GLIFFeRt teXt to be, deleted Id. Design Criteria. Criteria are hereby established to guide the design and development of SRAs to include innovative planning and development strategies as set forth in §§ Florida Statutes section 163.3248163.317' (11), F.S. and Chapter 9 I_F 006(5) (1) F.A.G. The size and base density of each form of SRA shall be consistent with the standards set forth below. The maximum base residential density as specified herein for each form of SRA may only be exceeded through the density blending process as set forth in density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan or through the affordable housing density bonus as referenced in the Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element. The base residential density is calculated by dividing the total number of residential units in an SRA by the acreage therein that is entitled through Stewardship Credits. The base residential density does not restrict net residential density of parcels within an SRA. The location, size and density of each SRA will be determined on an individual basis, subject to the regulations below, during the SRA designation review and approval process. SRA Characteristics. Characteristics for SRAs designated within the RLSAO DiStr+ct have been established in the Goals, Objectives, and Policies, of the RLSA Overlay. All SRAs designated pursuant to this Section shall be consistent with the characteristics identified on the RLSAO Overlay SRA Characteristics Chart and the design criteria set forth in 2. through 56. below. a. SRA Characteristics Chart consists of the following Tables: A - Town, B - Village, C - Harnlo+ n 1 - Compact Rural Development: Inn Gross Gros ��L�Send n 2 - Gernpan+ Rural Development: Greater than 100 Gross �-urra--��w-rn-pucc-r-cara-rvcv c�nTcnr-�rcazcr Aeres. Table A — Town Typical Town Characteristics (Towns are prohibited within the ACSC, per LDC section 4.08.07 A.2.b.) Size (Gross Acres) 1,000 4,0Greater than 1,500 but no more than 5,000 acres Residential Units 1-4 DUs per gross acre (DUs) per gross (Density can be increased beyond the base density through the affordable acre base density workforce housing density bonus or through the density blending provision, per RLSA policy 4.7 in of the FLUE of the P.) Required Uses Uses Allowed But Not Required 65 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Typical Characteristics Residential Housing Styles Maximum Floor Area Ratio or Intensity ep r use Town (Towns are prohibited within the ACSC, per LDC section 4.08.07 A.2.b.) Full range of single family and multi -family housing types, styles, lot sizes Retail & Office - .5 Manufacturing/Light Industrial and Research and Development Companies - .45 Group Housing - .45 Civic/Governmental/Institution - .6 Transient Lodging - 26 upa net Town Center with Community and Neighborhood Goods and Services in Town Corporate Office, Manufacturing and Light Goods and and Village Centers: Minimum 6-55-170 SF gross Industrial and Research Services building area per DU; Corporate Office, and Development Manufacturing and Light Industrial and Companies research companies. Water and Centralized or decentralized community Interim Well and Septic Wastewater treatment system Community Parks (200 SF/DU), subject to level of service requirements Recreation and Parks & Public Green Spaces w/n Active Recreation/Golf Open Space Neighborhoods Courses F Lakes Open Space Minimum 35% of SRA Governmental and Wide Range of Services - minimum 15 SF of Full Range of Schools Institutional gross land area /DU Services Auto - interconnected system of collector and Transportation local roads; required connection to collector or arterial 66 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text nt.iLethrough is GUFFent text to he .delete., Typical Town Characteristics I (Towns are prohibited within the ACSC, per LDC section 4.08.07 A.2.b.) Interconnected sidewalk and pathway system County Transit AGGessaF@a station or a park and ride facility Table B —Village Typical Characteristics Village Greater than 300 acres but not more than 1,500 acres, except that if any portion is designated ACSC, the maximum size shall be no more than Size (Gross Acres) 1,000 acres! 00 � nn�es (Villages within the ACSC are subject to location and size limitations per LDC section 4.08.07.A.2. and are subject to Chapter 28-25, FAC.) 1-4 DUs per gross acre Residential Units (Density can be increased beyond the base density through the (DUs) per gross affordable workforce housing density bonus or through the density acre base density blending provision, per RLSA PolicypG4Gy 4.7 of in the FLUE efthe GMP.) Residential Housing Styles Maximum Floor Area Ratio or Intensity per use Goods and Services Required Uses Diversity of single family and multi -family housing types, styles, lot sizes Retail & Office - .5 Civic/Governmental/Institution - .6 Village Center with Neighborhood Goods and Services in Village Centers: Minimum 2-5 53 SF gross building area per DU 67 Uses Allowed But Not Required Group Housing - .45 Transient Lodging - 26 upa net Corporate Office, Manufacturing and Light Industrial and Research and Development Companies: appropriately scaled G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Typical Characteristics Water and Wastewater Recreation and Open Space Civic Governmental and Institutional Services Text underlined is new text to be added Text ntriLethro gh is GUFFono text to he .delete., Village Centralized or decentralized community treatment system Parks & Public Green Spaces w/n Neighborhoods (minimum 1 % of gross acres) Lakes r Open Space Minimum 35% of SRA Interim Well and Septic Active Recreation/Golf Courses Moderate Range of Services - minimum Full Range of Schools 10 SF/DU Auto - interconnected system of collector and local roads; required connection to Equestrian Trails collector or arterial Transportation Interconnected sidewalk and pathway County Transit AGGess system county Transit station or a park and ride facility 1 2 Table C — Hamlet 3 (DeRSity Gan be inGreased beyond the base density threugh the 68 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Residential Housing Lingle Famihy GenvennenGe Goods and Goods and SeFV'GeS CeFViGes' Minimum 10 SF gross buildiRg aFea per DU Water and Findiiviid col Well and Septic- WastewAtcT Di ihlig Green Cnore for Denreotien and Neighborhoods (minimum 'I a/_ (loon Space of grass ogres) Graine Governmental af4 Instit itinnol SerViGes Acute of Tronsnnrtotien IeG�ads Pedestrian Pathways Text underlined is new text to be added Text ntriLethro ugh is GUFFono text to he .delete., 1 2 Table D.1 - Compact Rural Development-3004N Gross Acres or Less in Size 3 Typical Compact Rural Development-300 Gross Acres or Less Characteristics (Compact Rural developments within the ACSC are subject to location and size limitations, LDC section 4.08.07.A.2. of this Code, and are subject to Chapter 28-25, FAC.) Residential Units (DUs) per gross %-2 DUs per gross acre /Density Gan he innreased heyend the hose density thregh the affordable acre base density e i 69 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text nt.iLethrough is GUFFent text to he .delete., Typical Compact Rural Development-300 Gross Acres or Less Characteristics werkferre housing density bonus er three inI +he r+enci+\i hlenrlinn nrn\ii per RLSA peliGyit 7 in the FLUE E of the GM \ Required Uses Uses Allowed But Not Required I 7- Single Family and limited multi -family Residential (Those CRDs that include single or multi - Housing Styles family residential uses shall include proportionate support services.) Retail & Office* - .5 Business, industry and uses associated with and needed Maximum Floor to support research, Civic/Governmental/Institution - .6 Area Ratio or education, tourism or Intensity per use recreation - .6 Group Housing - .45 Transient Lodging - 26 upa net Goods and Services Business. industry and uses associated with and needed to support research, education, convenience retail, tourism, or recreation, appropriately scaled Water and Individual Well and Septic Wastewater System P blin Green Cnone fnr Recreation and ; of Open Space of nrncc onrecl 70 Convenience Goods and Services*: Minimum 10 SF gross building area per DU Centralized or decentralized community treatment system Public Green Space for Neighborhoods (minimum 1 % of gross acres)* Open Space Minimum 35% of SRA* Limited Services G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 DRAFT Typical Characteristics Civic, Governmental and Institutional Text underlined is new text to be added Text nt.iLethro gh is GUFFono text to he .delete., Compact Rural Development-300 40&-Gross Acres or Less Services Auto - interconnected system of local roads Transportation Pedestrian Pathways In coniunction with residential units Dr000sei yp iGal /�T 1 hara Gter'StI S Pre-K through Elementary Schools Equestrian Trails County Transit station or a facility within the CRD. 71 and ride G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text nt.iLethro gh is GLIFFono text to he .delete., Rorke & P blir tree (minimum r9Q0�/,`of press ReGreatmen and one (lno SpaGe F_ Lakes �. M b. Streets within SRAs shall be designed in accord with the cross -sections set forth in Figures 1-18 below, as more specifically provided in J.2 through J.5. Alternatively, Collier County Transportation Services may approve additional cross -sections as needed to meet the design objectives. Deviations from the cross sections set forth in Figures 1-18 may be requested in the SRA Development Document or an amendment to the SRA Development Document. Please see LDC section 4.08.07 1.7.d-8 for the deviation requirements and criteria. 72 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 (1) Figure 1: Town Core/Center. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. Town Design Criteria. a. General design criteria. Shall be compact, pedestrian -friendly and mixed -use; ii. Shall create an interconnected street system designed to disperse and reduce the length of automobile trips; iii. Shall offer a range of housing types and price levels to accommodate diverse ages and incomes; Accessory dwelling unit shall not count towards the total approved number of units, provided that the total number of units does not exceed the maximum density allowed by the GMP. iv. Shall include school sites that are sized and located to enable children to walk or bicycle to them; V. Shall provide a range of open spaces including neighborhood and community parks, squares and playgrounds distributed throughout the community; vi. Shall include both community and neighborhood scaled retail and office uses; vii. Shall have urban level services and infrastructure which supports development that is compact, including water management facilities and related structures, lakes, community and neighborhood parks, trails, temporary construction, sales and administrative offices for authorized contractors and consultants, landscape and hardscape features, fill storage, and site filling and grading, which are allowed uses throughout the community. viii. Shall be designed in a progressive rural to urban continuum with the greatest density, intensity and diversity occurring within the Town Core, to the least density, intensity and diversity occurring within the Neighborhood Edge; ix. Shall provide sufficient transition to the adjoining use, such as active agriculture, pasture, rural roadway, etc., and compatibility through the use of buffering, open space, land use, or other means; X. Shall include a minimum of three Gcontext Zzones: Town Core, Town Center and Neighborhood General, each of which shall blend into the other without the requirements of buffers; 73 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh io Gurrent text to be, deleted xi. May include the Scontext Zzone of Neighborhood Edge; and xii. Shall allow signs typically permitted in support of residential uses including for sale, for rent, model home, and temporary construction signs. Specific design and development standards shall be set forth in the SRA document for such signs permitted in residential areas or in conjunction with residential uses. xiii. To the extent that section 5.05.08 is applicable within the Urban designated area, SRA Architectural Design Standards shall comply with the provisions of section 5.05.08, unless additional or different design standards that deviate from section 5.05.08, in whole or part, are submitted to the County as part of the SRA Development Document or any amendment to the SRA Development Document. See LDC section 4.08.07 1.7.E for the deviation requirements and criteria. xiv. To the extent that section 4.06.00 is applicable within the Urban designated area, SRA Landscape Design and Installation Standards shall comply with the provisions of section 4.06.00, unless additional or different design and installation standards that deviate from section 4.06.00, in whole or in part, are submitted to the County as part of the SRA Development Document or any amendment to the SRA Development Document. Please see LDC section 4.08.07 1.7.E for the deviation requirements and criteria. Transportation Network. The transportation network shall provide for a high level of mobility for all travelers resi��S through a design that respeGtS the pedestriaR accommodates all means of multi -modal travel44e auterneb+le. The transportation network shall be designed in an interconnected system of streets, sidewalks, and pathways. iii. A transfer station or park and ride area shall be appropriately located within the Town to serve the connection point for internal and external public transportation. iv. The transportation network shall include vehicular, bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas outside development and land uses. V. Any mitigation measures required to offset an SRA's traffic impacts, such as Drovisions for the construction and/or Dermittina of wildlife crossings, environmental mitigation credits, right of way dedication(s), water management and/or fill materials which may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network, shall 74 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 be memorialized in a developer contribution agreement. Actions shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the protect traffic on existing or proposed roadways. C. Open space and Parks. Towns shall have a minimum of 35 percent % open space. Towns shall have community parks that include sports fields and facilities with a minimum level of services of 200 square feet per dwelling unit in the Town, subject to level of service requirements. iii. Towns shall have passive or active parks, playgrounds, public plazas or courtyards as appropriate within each Scontext Zzone. d. Context Zzones. Context Zzones are intended to guide the location of uses and their intensity and diversity within a Town; and provide for the establishment of the urban to rural continuum. Town Core. The Town Core shall be the civic center of a Town. It is the most dense and diverse zone, with a full range of uses within walking distance. The Core shall be a primary pedestrian zone with buildings positioned near the right-of-way, wide sidewalks shall be shaded through streetscape planting, awnings and other architectural elements. Parking shall be provided on street and off street in the rear of buildings within lots or parking structures. Signage shall be pedestrian scale and designed to complement the building architecture. The following design criteria shall apply within the Town Core, with the exception of civic or institutional buildings, which shall not be subject to the building height, building placement, building use, parking, and signage criteria below, but, instead, shall be subject to specific design standards set forth in the SRA development Document and approved by the BCC that address the perspective of these buildings' creating focal points, terminating vistas and significant community landmarks. a) Uses - commercial, retail, office, civic, institutional, light industrial and manufacturing, essential services, residential, parks and accessory uses. Such uses may occur in shared use buildings or single use buildings. b) The total building area within each block shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 3. c) Retail and offices uses per block shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 0.5. d) Civic uses per block shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 0.6. 75 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre gh is ent text to he deleted e) Light industrial and manufacturing uses per block shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 0.45. f) The density of transient lodging uses shall not exceed 26 dwelling units per Town Core gross acre. g) The maximum building height shall be 6 stories, excluding roofs and architectural features. h) There shall be no minimum lot size. The maximum block perimeter shall be 2,500 feet. j) Minimum setbacks from all property boundaries shall be 0 feet and the maximum setback from the front boundary shall be 10 feet. The maximum setback from the front boundary may be increased in order to create public spaces such as plazas and courtyards. k) Overhead encroachments such as awnings, balconies, arcades and the like, shall maintain a clear distance of 9 feet above the sidewalk and 15 feet above the street. Seating for outdoor dining shall be permitted to encroach into the public sidewalks and shall leave a minimum 6-foot clear pedestrian way between the outdoor dining and the streetscape planting area. m) Buildings within the Town Core shall be made compatible through similar massing, volume, frontage, scale and architectural features. n) The majority of parking spaces shall be provided off-street in the rear of buildings, or along the side (secondary streets), organized into a series of small bays delineated by landscape islands of varied sized. A maximum spacing between landscape islands shall be ten (10) spaces. Landscape islands and tree diamonds shall have a minimum of one tree. Parking is prohibited in front of buildings, except within the right-of-way. Parking structures fronting on a primary street shall either include ground floor retail or have a minimum ten (10) foot wide landscaped area at grade, including one tree per five (5) square feet of landscaped area. Parking structures fronting on a secondary street shall have a minimum ten (10) foot wide, densely landscaped area at grade, including one tree per 250 square feet of landscaped area or 25 linear feet on center. The amount of required parking shall be demonstrated through a shared parking analysis submitted with an SRA designation application. Parking shall be 76 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 determined utilizing the modal splits and parking demands for various uses recognized by ITE, ULI or other sources or studies. The analysis shall demonstrate the number of parking spaces available to more than one use or function, recognizing the required parking will vary depending on the multiple functions or uses in close proximity which are unlikely to require the spaces at the same time. The shared parking analysis methodology will be determined and agreed upon by the County Transportation staff and the applicant during the pre -application meeting. The shared parking analysis shall use the maximum square footage of uses proposed by the SRA development document. o) Streets shall adhere to Id.1.b. and Figures 1, 2, 3, or 4. At a minimum all proposed streets shall include sidewalks on both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-way, and a five (5) foot streetscape area between the back of curb and the sidewalk. In these areas, sidewalk protection such as root barriers, a continuous tree pit, and/or structural soils shall be provided. streets shall maintain a minimum average building height to street width ratio of 1:1, excluding landmark buildings. p) Landscaping minimums within the Town Core shall be met by providing landscaping within parking lots as described, and by providing a streetscape area between the sidewalk and curb at a minimum of five (5) feet in width, with trees planted forty (40) feet on -center. The five-foot minimum wide of planting area may be reduced to three (3) feet if sidewalk protection such as root barriers, continuous tree pits, and/or structural soils are provided. The street tree pattern may be interrupted by architectural elements such as arcades and columns. q) General signage standards. Signage requirements shall be as provided for in section 5.06.00, the "Collier County Sign Code." Town Center. The Town Center shall provide a wide range of uses including daily goods and services, culture and entertainment, within walking distance. Like the Town Core, the Town Center is the primary pedestrian zone, designed at human scale to support the walking environment. It is the Main street area of the Town. buildings shall be positioned near the right-of-way line, wide sidewalks shall be shaded by street trees and architectural elements. The following design criteria shall apply within the Town Center, with the exception of civic or institutional buildings, which shall not be subject to the height, building placement, building use, parking, and signage criteria below, but, instead, shall be subject to specific design standards that address these buildings' creating rrl G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added focal points, terminating vistas, and significant community landmarks and that are set forth in the SRA Development development Document and approved by the BCC. a) Commercial, retail, office, civic, institutional, light industrial and manufacturing, essential services, parks, residential and schools and accessory uses shall be permitted. These uses may occur in shared use buildings or single use buildings. b) The floor area ratio for the total building area within each block shall not exceed 2. c) The floor area ratio for retail and office uses per block shall not exceed 0.5. d) The floor area ratio for civic uses per block shall not exceed 0.6. e) The floor area ratio for light industrial and manufacturing uses per block shall not exceed 0.45. f) The maximum density for transient lodging shall be 26 dwelling units per Town Center gross acre. g) The maximum building height shall be 5 stories, excluding roofs and architectural features. h) The minimum lot area shall be 1,000 square feet. The maximum block perimeter shall be 2,500 feet. j) The minimum setbacks shall be 0 from all property boundaries and the maximum setback shall be 10 feet from the front right of way line. k) Overhead encroachments such as awnings, balconies, arcades and the like, must maintain a clear distance of 9 feet above the sidewalk and 15 feet above the street. Seating for outdoor dining shall be permitted to encroach the public sidewalks and shall leave a minimum 6-foot clear pedestrian way between the outdoor dining and the streetscape planting area. m) Buildings within the Town Center shall be made compatible through similar massing, volume, frontage, scale and architectural features. 78 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre nh 'c current text to he deleted n) Streets shall adhere to Id.1.b. and Figures 1, 2, 3, or 4. At a minimum all proposed streets must include sidewalks on both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-way, and a 5 Ft. streetscape area between the back of curb and the sidewalk. streets shall maintain a minimum average building height to street width ratio of 1:1, excluding landmark buildings. o) Parking space requirements and design are the same as in the Town Core. p) Landscape minimums are the same as in the Town Core. q) Signage requirements are the same as in the Town Core. iii. Neighborhood General. Neighborhood General is predominately residential with a mix of single and multi -family housing. Neighborhood scale goods and services, schools, parks and open space diversify the neighborhoods. The interconnected street pattern is maintained through the Neighborhood General to disperse traffic. Sidewalks and streetscape support the pedestrian environment. The following design criteria shall apply within Neighborhood General: a) Residential, neighborhood scale goods and services, civic, institutional, parks, schools and accessory uses shall be permitted. b) The maximum allowable building height shall be 3.5 stories. c) The maximum block perimeter shall be 3500 feet, except that a larger block perimeter shall be allowed where an alley or pathway provides through access, or the block includes water bodies or public facilities. d) The SRA Development Document shall set forth the development standards for all allowable types of single- family development, which shall, at a minimum, adhere to the following: i) The minimum lot area shall be 1,000 square feet. ii) Parking space requirements and design are the same as in the Town Core, inclusive of garage spaces, with an additional parking space required if an accessory dwelling unit is built. iii) Landscaping shall include a minimum of sixty (60) square feet of shrub planting per lot, on lots that are 3,000 square feet or less in area; eighty (80) square 79 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethreugh s current text te be, deleted feet on lots that are greater than 3,000 square feet but less than 5,000 square feet in area; and 100 square feet for lots 5,000 square feet or larger in area. Plantings shall be in identified planting areas, raised planters, or planter boxes in the front of the dwelling, with, at a minimum, turf grass for the remainder of the property. e) Multi -family residential uses shall adhere to the following: i) Lots shall be a maximum of 4 acres. ii) Front and side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 10 feet and rear yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 20 feet for the primary structure and 5 feet for any accessory structures. iii) Porches, stoops, chimneys, bays canopies, balconies and overhangs may encroach into the front yard a maximum of 3 ft. 6 in and a maximum of 3 Ft. into side yards, but no element may encroach into a side yard such that the distance to the property line from the encroaching element is less than 3 Ft. 2 In., except that overhangs may encroach no more than 2 Ft. into any yard. iv) Parking space requirements and design are the same as in the Town Core. v) A minimum of 100 Sq. Ft. of shrub planting shall be required for each 2,000 Sq. Ft. of building footprint, and one tree shall be required for each 4,000 Sq. Ft. of lot area, inclusive of street trees, with such plantings in planting areas, raised planters, or planter boxes in the front of the building and a minimum of turf grass for the remainder of the property. f) Non-residential uses shall adhere to the following: i) All such uses shall be located at intersection corners or street bends and shall not be permitted at mid - block locations; ii) If the non-residential use is a restaurant, grocery store, or convenience store, it shall be located on an alley loaded site; 80 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 iii) The minimum distance between non-residential uses shall be 1,000 feet, as measured along the street frontage at the right-of-way line; iv) The maximum square footage per use shall be 3,000 square feet and per location shall be 15,000 square feet; v) The use shall have a minimum lot area of not less than the size of the smallest adjacent lot. vi) The minimum setbacks shall be as follows: 0 feet from the front property boundary, a distance from the side property boundary that is equal to the setback of the adjacent property, and a minimum of 20 feet from the rear property boundary for the principal structure and 5 feet from the rear property boundary for any accessory structures. vii) Parking space requirements and design are the same as in the Town Core, with on -street parking provided only along the lot street frontage. No off- street parking shall be permitted between the front fagade and the front property line. No off-street parking shall be permitted between the side fagade and the street side property line for corner lots. All off-street parking shall be screened from the street and adjacent property by wall, fence and/or landscaping. viii) Landscaping shall include a minimum of 100 Sq. Ft. of shrub planting per 2,000 Sq. Ft. of building footprint, and one tree per 4,000 Sq. Ft. of lot area, inclusive of street trees. Plantings shall be in planting areas, raised planters, or planter boxes in the front of the building. Minimum of turf grass for the remainder of the property. g) General signage requirements shall be as provided for in section 5.06.00. h) Signage within Neighborhood Goods and Service Zones shall be as provided for in section 5.06.00. Streets shall adhere to Id.1.b and Figures 5, 6, 7, 8, or 10. At a minimum all proposed streets must include sidewalks on both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-way, and a 5 Ft. streetscape area between the back of curb and the sidewalk. 81 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh is and tGXt to be deleted iv. Neighborhood Edge (optional). Neighborhood Edge is predominately a single-family residential neighborhood. This zone has the least intensity and diversity within the Town. The mix of uses is limited. Residential lots are larger and more open space is evident. The Neighborhood Edge may be used to provide a transition to adjoining rural land uses. The following standards shall apply with the Neighborhood Edge: a) The permitted uses within the Neighborhood Edge are residential, parks, open space, golf courses, schools, essential services, and accessory uses. b) Building heights shall not exceed 2 stories. c) Lots shall have a minimum area of 5,000 square feet with lot dimensions and setbacks to be further defined with the SRA development Document. d) The perimeter of each block may not exceed 5,000 feet, unless an alley or pathway provides through access, or the block includes water bodies or public facilities. e) Parking space requirements and design are the same as in the Town Core, inclusive of garage spaces, with provision for an additional parking space if an accessory dwelling unit is built. f) Landscaping shall include a minimum of 100 Sq. Ft. of shrub planting per lot, with plantings in planting areas, raised planters, or planter boxed in the front of the dwelling and a minimum of turf grass for the remainder of the property. g) Streets shall adhere to IJ.1.b. and to Figures 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, or 18. At a minimum all proposed streets must include a 10-foot pathway on one side of the street with an 8-foot streetscape area between the edge of curb and the pathway. V. Special District (optional). The Special District is intended to provide for uses and development standards not otherwise provided for within the Scontext Zzones. Special Districts would be primarily single use districts, such as universities, business parks, medical parks and resorts that require unique development standards to ensure compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. The location of Special Districts shall be illustrated on the SRA Master Plan, and uses and development standards shall be defined in detail within the SRA development application for review by Collier County staff. Special Districts could be for uses such as Universities, business or industrial parks, retirement communities, resorts, etc. 82 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT 3 Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c Gurr8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d Village Design Criteria. a. General criteria. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed -use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed in a compact, pedestrian -friendly form. iii. Create an interconnected street system designed to disperse and reduce the length of automobile trips. iv. Offer a range of housing types and price levels to accommodate diverse ages and incomes. Accessory dwelling units shall not count towards the maximum allowed density. V. Be developed in a progressive rural to urban continuum with the greatest density, intensity and diversity occurring within the village center, to the least density, intensity and diversity occurring within the Neighborhood Edge. vi. The SRA document shall demonstrate the urban to rural transition occurring at the Villages limits boundary provides sufficient transition to the adjoining use, such as active agriculture, pasture, rural roadway, etc., and compatibility through the use of buffering, open space, land use, or other means. vii. Shall allow signs typically permitted in support of residential uses including for sale, for rent, model home and temporary constructions signs. Specific design and development standards shall be set forth in the SRA document for such signs permitted in residential areas or in conjunction with residential uses. viii. To the extent that section 5.05.08 is applicable within the Urban designated area, SRA Architectural Design Standards shall comply with the provisions of section 5.05.08, unless additional or different design standards that deviate from section 5.05.08, in whole or part, are submitted to the County no later than when the first SRA Site Development Document is submitted for approval. ix. To the extent that section 4.06.00 is applicable within the Urban designated area, SRA Landscape Design and Installation Standards shall comply with the provisions of section 4.06.00, unless additional or different design and installation standards that deviate from section 4.06.00, in whole or in part, are submitted to the County no later than when the first SRA Site Development Document is submitted for approval. 83 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text str'Lethre, gh is current text to he deleted b. Transportation Network. The transportation network for a Village shall adhere to the same standards provided for within a Town in accordance with LDC section 4.08.07 1.2.b. C. Parks. A Village shall provide a range of active and passive parks, squares and playgrounds as appropriate to be located within each Scontext Zzone and Special District. d. Context Zzones. General. a) Villages shall be designed to include a minimum of two Context Zones: Village Center and Neighborhood General. b) Each Zone shall blend into the other without the requirements of buffers. c) Villages may include the Context Zone of Neighborhood Edge. d) Villages may include Special Districts to accommodate uses that require use specific design standards not otherwise provided for within the Scontext Zzones. e) The SRA Master Plan shall designate the location of each Scontext Zzone and each Special District. The village center shall be designated in one location. Neighborhood General, Neighborhood Edge and Special District may be designated in multiple locations. f) Context Zzones are intended to guide the location of uses and their intensity and diversity within a Village, and provide for the establishment of the urban to rural continuum. ii. Village center. a) The allowable uses within a village center are commercial, manufacturina/liaht industrial. research and develoDment businesses, retail, office, civic, institutional, essential services, parks, residential and schools and accessory uses. b) Uses may occur in shared use buildings or single use buildings. c) The floor area ratio of any use shall not exceed 2 for the total building area within each block, shall not exceed 0.5 for retail and office uses per block shall not exceed 0.6 for civic uses per block, manufacturing/light industrial, and research 84 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh is on+ tGA to be deleted and development businesses shall not exceed 0.45 per block. d) Transient Lodging - 26 dwelling units per village center gross acre e) Maximum building height - 5 Stories, excluding roofs and architectural features. f) Minimum lot area: 1,000 SF g) Block Perimeter: 2,500 Ft. max h) Front setbacks - 0 to 10 feet from the right-of-way line Side setbacks - 0 feet j) Rear setbacks - 0 feet k) Overhead encroachments such as awnings, balconies, arcades and the like, must maintain a clear distance of 9 feet above the sidewalk and 15 feet above the street. Seating for outdoor dining shall be permitted to encroach the public sidewalks and shall leave a minimum 6-foot clear pedestrian way between the outdoor dining and the streetscape planting area. m) The design of civic or institutional buildings shall not be subject to the specific standards of this subsection which regulate building height, building placement, building use, parking, and signage but, instead, shall be subject so specific design standards that address the perspective of these buildings' creating focal points, terminating vistas, and significant community landmarks and that are set forth in the SRA Development development Document and approved by the BCC. n) Buildings within the village center shall be made compatible through similar massing, volume, frontage, scale and architectural features. o) Streets shall adhere to 14.1.b. and Figures 1, 2, 3, or 4. At a minimum all proposed streets shall include sidewalks on both sides of the street, parallel to the right-of-way, and a 5 Ft. streetscape area between the back of curb and the sidewalk. Streets streets shall maintain a minimum average building height to street width ratio of 1:1, excluding landmark buildings. 85 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 p) General parking criteria i) On -street parking spaces within the limits of the front property line, as projected into the right-of-way, shall count towards the required number of parking spaces. ii) The majority of parking spaces shall be provided off- street in the rear of buildings, or along the side (secondary streets). Parking is prohibited in front of buildings. iii) Parking areas shall be organized into a series of small bays delineated by landscape islands of varied sized. A maximum spacing between landscape islands shall be 10 spaces. Landscape islands shall have a minimum of one canopy tree. iv) Parking lots shall be accessed from alleys, service lanes or secondary streets. q) The majority of parking spaces shall be provided off-street in the rear of buildings, or along the side (secondary streets), organized into a series of small bays delineated by landscape islands of varied sized. A maximum spacing between landscape islands shall be 10 spaces. Landscape islands and tree diamonds shall have a minimum of one tree. Parking is prohibited in front of buildings, except within the right-of-way. Parking lots shall be accessed from alleys, service lanes or secondary streets. Parking structures fronting on a primary street shall include ground floor retail. Parking structures fronting on a secondary street shall have a minimum 10 Ft. wide, densely landscaped area at grade, including one tree per 250 square feet of landscaped area or twenty-five (25) lineal feet on -center. The amount of required parking shall be demonstrated through a shared parking analysis submitted with an SRA designation application. Parking shall be determined utilizing the modal splits and parking demands for various uses recognized by ITE, ULI or other sources or studies. The analysis shall demonstrate the number of parking spaces available to more than one use or function, recognizing the required parking will vary depending on the multiple functions or uses in close proximity which are unlikely to require the spaces at the same time. r) Landscaping minimums within the village center shall be met by providing landscaping within parking lots as described, and by providing a streetscape area between the sidewalk and curb at a minimum of 5 Ft. in width. In these 86 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 areas, sidewalk protection such as root barriers, continuous three pits, and/or structural soils shall be provided. Trees shall be planted forty (40) feet on -center. The street tree pattern may be interrupted by architectural elements such as arcades and columns. s) Signage standards within the village center shall comply with those provided in the Town Center. iii. Neighborhood General. Design standards for the Neighborhood General within a Village shall be the same as defined within a Town. iv. Neighborhood Edge (optional). Design standards for the Neighborhood Edge within a Village shall be the same as defined within a Town. V. Special District (optional). The Special District is intended to provide for uses and development standards not otherwise provided for within the Scontext Zzones. Uses and development standards shall be defined in detail within the SRA development application for review by Collier County staff. 87 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre ugh io GUFFeRt teXt to be, deleted a) Ise _ro�R��kjppjgnrheed cGalo `roods and se. G OVOG institutional, parrs and cnhnnlc 88 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethre gh io GUFFeRt teXt to be deleted 89 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added +,. +�, ,., II adhere strikethre ugh io eRt text to be, deleted xi) Streets shall to I. i ,h, and Figures 5, 6, 7,8, E)- 1„0. At � all proposed streets Fn �s+ 0RClude sidewalks en heth sides of street parallel rcr��ra �zm�vcrrarac�vr cc�rarrcr to the right of way, and a 5 f�.streetSGappe arcs` between the haGk of GUrh and the sidewalk 45. Compact Rural Development deyelepmeYlt Criteria. a. General criteria. Compact Rural Development (CRD) is a form of SRA that is a maximum of 300 acres and intended to support and further Collier County's valued attributes of agriculture, natural resources, 90 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text ntri.kethrough 66 eRt text to he deleted and economic diversity will provide flexibility with respent to the mix of uses and development stanrdaFds, but shall ethepNise nemply with the design standards of o Hamlet or Village ii. Primary CRD uses shall be those associated with and needed to support agriculture, natural resources, research, education, convenience retail, tourism, or recreation. iii++. Permanent A GRID may in e, but is not required two have pent residential housing and the services and facilities that support permanent residents. MVO 1=XGept as de Gribed above, a GRID Will Gonform to the d i standards of o Village or Hamlet as set forth herein based en the size of the GRID. As residential units are not a required use, those goods and services that support residents such as retail, office, civic, governmental and institutional uses shall also not be required, however for any CRD that does include permanent residential housing, the proportionate support services shall be provided in accordance with LDC section 04.08.07 1.1. Transportation Network Example. An example of a CRD is an ecotourism village that would have a unique set of uses and support services different from a traditional residential village. It would contain transient lodging facilities and services appropriate to eco-tourists, but may not provide for the range of services that necessary to support permanent residents. i. The transportation network shall provide for a high level of mobility for all travelers through a design that accommodates all means of multi -modal travel. ii. The transportation network shall be designed in an interconnected system of local roads and pathways. C. Parki i. Parking for non-residential uses may be provided on -street, off- street, and within parking structures. Parkina shall be determined utilizina the modal sDlits and Darkin demands for various uses recognized by ITE, ULI or other sources or studies. The analysis shall demonstrate the number of parking spaces available to more than one use or function, recognizing the required parking will vary depending on the multiple functions or uses in close Droximitv which are unlikelv to reauire the spaces at the same time. d. Landscaping and buffering. Landscaping and buffering shall be provided in accordance with LDC section 4.06.00, except a Type B Buffer shall also 91 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added be required around the perimeter of the CRD in accordance with LDC section 4.06.02. e. General signage standards. Signage requirements shall be as provided for in LDC section 5.06.00. f. Open space. i. For CRDs that include residential: a) A minimum of 35 percent of the gross acreage of the CRD must be provided as open space within the CRD; and b) A minimum of one percent of the gross acreage of the CRD shall be provided as public preen within neighborhoods. ii. For CRDs with only non-residential uses, a minimum of 30 percent of the gross acreage of the CRD must be provided as open space within the CRD. q. Primary non-residential CRD uses shall adhere to the following: Non-residential uses are limited to business, industry, and uses associated with and needed to support agriculture, natural resources, research, education, convenience retail, tourism, or recreation. ii, Civic, institutional, and governmental uses are permitted. iii. Uses may occur in shared use buildinas or sinale use buildin iv. See LDC section 4.08.07.1, Table D.1. for maximum floor area ratios. V. The maximum building height shall be 4 stories, excluding roofs and architectural features. vi. Setbacks and allowable encroachments shall be further defined within the SRA Development Document. h. Residential and supporting non-residential uses shall adhere to the following: i, If permanent residential housing is included in the CRD, the number of residential units shall be limited to be equivalent with the demand aenerated by the Drimary CRD use but shall not exceed the maximum of two (2) units Der aross acre. 92 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added ii. Retail and office uses may be permitted in conjunction with residential uses in the CRD but shall not exceed a floor area ratio of 0.5 per block. iii. Convenience goods and services may be permitted in conjunction with residential uses in the CRD but shall be built at a minimum of 10 square feet of gross building area per residential dwelling unit within the CRD. Such uses shall be located at intersection corners or street bends and shall not be permitted at mid -block locations. iv. The maximum building height shall be 3 stories, but no greater than 35 feet_ V. Residential uses in the CRD shall be located abutting residentially zoned land where feasible. vi. Setbacks and allowable encroachments shall be based upon the most similar residential zoning district to the proposed residential use found in LDC section 04.02.01. For non-residential support services, the minimum setbacks shall be consistent with the least restrictive setbacks of the adjoining property. 56. Design Criteria Common to SRAs. a. Parcels of one (1) acre or more, with a Natural Resource Index rating greater than 1.2, must be preserved as open space and maintained in a predominantly naturally vegetated state, except the infrastructure necessary to serve the permitted uses may be exempt from this restriction if such infrastructure is desianed to minimize the impacts to anv such areas. A minimum of thirty-five (35) percent of the SRA land designated as Town or Village shall be kept in open space. C. SRA design shall demonstrate that ground water table draw down or diversion will not adversely impact the hydroperiods of adjacent FSA, HSA, WRA or Conservation Land and will not adversely affect the water use rights of either adjacent developments or adjacent agricultural operations and will comply with the SFWMD Basis of Review. Detention and control elevations shall be established to protect natural areas and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. d. Where an SRA adjoins an FSA, HSA, WRA or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map, best management and planning practices shall be applied to minimize adverse impacts to such lands. Best management practices shall include the following: The perimeter of each SRA shall be designed to provide a transition from higher density and intensity uses within the SRA to lower density and intensity uses on adjoining property. The edges of SRAs shall be well defined and designed to be compatible with the 93 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strkethro gh is and tGA to be deleted character of adjoining property. Techniques such as, but not limited to setbacks, landscape buffers, and recreation/open space placement may be used for this purpose. Open space within or contiguous to an SRA shall be used to provide a buffer between the SRA and any adjoining FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the RLSA Overlay Map. open space contiguous to or within 300 feet of the boundary of an FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land may include: natural preserves, lakes, golf courses provided no fairways or other turf areas are allowed within the first 200 feet, passive recreational areas and parks, required yard and set -back areas, and other natural or man-made open space. Along the west boundary of the FSAs and HSAs that comprise Camp Keais Strand, i.e., the area south of Immokalee Road, this open space buffer shall be 500 feet wide and shall preclude golf course fairways and other turf areas within the first 300 feet. e. Where a WRA is incorporated into the stormwater system of an SRA, the provisions of LDC section 4.08.06 AA.b. SeGtien n 08 04 A n h apply. Where existing agricultural activity adjoins an SRA, the design of the SRA must take this activity into account to allow for the continuation of the agricultural activity and to minimize any conflict between agriculture and SRA uses. g. An SRA or lands designated as Open Lands shall provide the opportunity for direct vehicular and pedestrian connections from said areas to the County's arterial/collector roadway network as shown on MPO's Long Range Transportation Needs Plan. h. Public and private roads within an SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. To the extent reauired to mitiaate an SRA's traffic impacts. actions may be taken to include, but shall not be limited to, provisions for the construction and/or permitting of wildlife crossing, environmental mitigation credits, right of way dedication(s), water management and/or fill material which may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network. Any such actions to offset traffic impacts shall be memorialized in a developer's contribution agreement. These actions shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the project traffic on existing or proposed roadways that are anticipated to be expanded or constructed. 67. Infrastructure Required. An SRA shall have adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed development, or such infrastructure must be provided concurrently with the demand as identified in Chapter 6 of the LDC. The level of infrastructure required will depend on the type of development, accepted civil engineering practices, and the requirements of this Section. 94 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strokethre gh is 8Rt tGA to be .dolAtA d a. The capacity of infrastructure serving the SRA must be demonstrated during the SRA designation process in accordance with the provisions in Chapter 6 of the LDC in effect at the time of SRA designation. Infrastructure to be analyzed will include facilities for transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, and solid waste. C. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities are required in Towns and- Villages, and these GRDs eXGeed'ng Inn onres on s+ze. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities shall be constructed, owned, operated and maintained by a private utility service, the developer, a Community development District, other special districts the Immokalee Water Sewer Service District, Collier County Water and Sewer District, or other governmental entity. This Section shall not prohibit innovative alternative water and wastewater treatment systems such as decentralized community treatment systems provided that they meet all applicable regulatory criteria. d. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems, limited to a maximum of 100 acres of any Town or; Village or GRD are permitted on an interim basis until services from a centralized/decentralized community system are available. e. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems are permitte Hamlets ancl may be permitted in CRDs of 100 acres or loss in size 79. Requests for Deviations from the LDC. The SRA Development Document or any amendments to the SRA Development Document may provide for nonprocedural deviations from the LDC, provided that all of the following are satisfied: a. The deviations are consistent with the RLSAO Overlay; and It can be demonstrated that the proposed deviation(s) further enhance the tools, techniques and strategies based on principles of innovative planning and development strategies, as set forth in §§ Florida Statutes section 163.324863.3177 (11) F.S. JIB. SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessments. Impact assessments are intended to identify methods to be utilized to meet the SRA generated impacts on public facilities and to evaluate the self-sufficiency of the proposed SRA with respect to these public facilities. Information provided within these assessments may also indicate the degree to which the SRA is consistent with the fiscal neutrality requirements of Section 4.08.07 KL Impact assessments shall be prepared in the following infrastructure areas: Transportation. A transportation impact assessment meeting the requirements of Chapter 10 of the LDC or its successor regulation or procedure, shall be prepared by the applicant as component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. 95 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFTText underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 a. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required above, the transportation impact assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the following issues related to the highway network: (1) Impacts to the level of service of impacted roadways and intersections, comparing the proposed SRA to the impacts of conventional Sbaseline Sstandard development; (2) Effect(s) of new roadway facilities planned as part of the SRA Master Plan on the surrounding transportation system; and (3) Impacts to agri-transport issues, especially the farm -to -market movement of agricultural products. (4) Consistency with the County's then -adopted Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), Collier County Master Mobility Plan, and Access Management procedures. 5) Anv mitiaation measures reauired to offset an SRA's traffic impacts such as provisions for the construction and/or permitting of wildlife crossings, environmental mitigation credits, right of way dedication(s), water management and/or fill materials which may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network, shall be memorialized in a developer contribution agreement. Actions shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the project traffic on existing or proposed roadways. The transportation impact assessment, in addition to considering the impacts on the highway system, shall also consider that further the obiectives of the Collier Countv Master Mobilitv Plan. such as vehicular. bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas outside development and land uses p blin transportation (transit) and hiG„n'e and pedestrian issues to the extent annlinahle C. No SRA shall be approved unless the transportation impact assessment required by this Section has demonstrated through data and analysis that the capacity of County/State collector or arterial road(s) serving the SRA to be adequate to serve the intended SRA uses in accordance with Chapter 6 of the LDC in effect at the time of SRA designation. 2. Potable Water. A potable water assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall illustrate how the applicant will conform to either Florida Administrative Code for private and limited use water systems, or for Public Water Systems. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required above, the potable water assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products, if any, generated by the proposed treatment process. The applicant shall identify the sources of water proposed for potable water supply. 96 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c Gurr8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d 3. Irrigation Water. An irrigation water assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall quantify the anticipated irrigation water usage expected at the buildout of the SRA. The assessment shall identify the sources of water proposed for irrigation use and shall identify proposed methods of water conservation. 4. Wastewater. A wastewater assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall illustrate how the applicant will conform to either Standards for Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems, contained in Florida Administrative Code for systems having a capacity not exceeding 10,000 gallons per day or for wastewater treatment systems having a capacity greater than 10,000 gallons per day. In addition to the standard requirements of the analyses required above, the wastewater assessment shall specifically consider, to the extent applicable, the disposal of waste products generated by the proposed treatment process. 5. Solid waste. A solid waste assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as part of an SRA Designation Application package. The assessment shall identify the means and methods for handling, transporting and disposal of all solid waste generated including but not limited to the collection, handling and disposal of recyclables and horticultural waste products. The applicant shall identify the location and remaining disposal capacity available at the disposal site. 6. Stormwater Management. A stormwater management impact assessment shall be prepared by the applicant as a component of an Impact Assessment Report that is submitted as a part of an SRA Designation Application Package. The stormwater management impact assessment shall, at a minimum, provide the following information: a. An exhibit showing the boundary of the proposed SRA including the following information: (1) The location of any WRA delineated within the SRA, and if all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, the pro rata acreage of the WRA shall be required to consume SRA credits but shall not be included within the SRA acreaae: (2) A generalized representation of the existing stormwater flow patterns across the site including the location(s) of discharge from the site to the downstream receiving waters; (3) The land uses of adjoining properties and, if applicable, the locations of stormwater discharge into the site of the proposed SRA from the adjoining properties. A narrative component to the report including the following information: 97 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethro gh 'c GUFF8Rt tGXt to ho dk-lPt8d (1) The name of the receiving water or, if applicable, FSA or WRA to which the stormwater discharge from the site will ultimately outfall; (2) The peak allowable discharge rate (in cfs/acre) allowed for the SRA per Collier County Ordinance No. 90-10 or its successor regulation; (3) If applicable, a description of the provisions to be made to accept stormwater flows from surrounding properties into, around, or through the constructed surface water management system of the proposed development; (4) The types of stormwater detention areas to be constructed as part of the surface water management system of the proposed development and water quality treatment to be provided prior to discharge of the runoff from the site; and (5) If a WRA has been incorporated into the stormwater management system of an SRA, the report shall demonstrate compliance with provisions of Section 4.08.04 AA.b. 7. Public Schools. The applicant shall coordinate with the Collier County School Board to provide information and coordinate planning to accommodate any impacts that the SRA has on public schools. As part of the SRA application, the following information shall be provided: a. School Impact Analysis (SIA) for a determination of school capacity only (refer to section 10.04.09 for SIA requirements); and The potential for locating a public educational facility or facilities within the SRA, and the location(s) of any site(s) that may be dedicated or otherwise made available for a public educational facility. KL. SRA Economic Assessment. An Economic Assessment meeting the requirements of this Section shall be prepared and submitted as part of the SRA Designation Application Package. At a minimum, the analysis shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire, and schools. Development phasing and funding mechanisms shall address any adverse impacts to adopted minimum levels of service pursuant to Chapter 6 of the LDC. Demonstration of Fiscal Neutrality. Each SRA must demonstrate that its development, as a whole, will be fiscally neutral or positive to the Collier County tax base. This demonstration will be made for each unit of government responsible for the services listed above, using one of the following methodologies: a. Collier County Fiscal Impact Model. The fiscal impact model officially adopted and maintained by Collier County. 98 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 b. Alternative Fiscal Impact Model. If Collier County has not adopted a fiscal impact model as indicated above, the applicant may develop an alternative fiscal impact model using a methodology approved by Collier County. The BCC may grant exceptions to this policy of fiscal neutrality to accommodate affordable or workforce housing. 2. Imposition of Special Assessments. If the Report identifies a negative fiscal impact of the project to a unit of local government referenced above, the landowner will accede to a special assessment on his property to offset such a shortfall or in the alternative make a lump sum payment to the unit of local government equal to the present value of the estimated shortfall. The BCC may grant a waiver to accommodate affordable housing. 3. Special Districts Encouraged in SRAs. The use of community development districts (CDDs), Municipal Service Benefit Units (MSBUs), Municipal Service Taxing Units (MSTUs), or other special districts shall be encouraged in SRAs. When formed, the special districts shall encompass all of the land designated for development in the SRA. Subsequent to formation, the special district will enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the County to assure fiscal neutrality. As outlined above, if the monitoring reveals a shortfall of net revenue, the special district will impose the necessary remedial assessment on lands in the SRA. LEA. The BCC may, as a condition of approval and adoption of an SRA development, require that suitable areas for parks, schools, and other public facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use. When the BCC requires such a set aside for one or more public facilities, the set aside shall be subject to section 2.03.06, in the same manner as are public facility dedications required as a condition of PUD rezonings. 10.02.06 — Requirements for Permits C Agricultural land clearing. * * * * * * * * * * * * 2. Agricultural clearing notice. No later than 60 days prior to vegetation removal as part of agricultural operations that fall within the scope of F.S.§§ Florida Statutes section 163.3162(4) or 823.14(6), the property owner shall provide notice to the County Manager or designee that the removal will occur. a. The Administrative Code shall establish the submittal requirements for the agricultural clearing notice, including the following: * * * * * * * * * * * * ii. If the land is outside the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District LA, a signed agreement acknowledging that, if 99 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethreugh 68 GUFFeRt text to be deleted the land being cleared for agricultural operations is converted to a non-agricultural uses within 25 years after the clearing occurs, the property shall become subject to the requirements of LDC section 3.05.07, as provided in LDC section 3.05.02. * * * * * * * * * * * * * # # # # # # # # # # # # # 100 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit A — Changes to Administrative Code Chapter 12. Acronyms A— Rural Agricultural Zoning District ACC+E—Army Carps of Engineers ACP — Agricultural Clearing Permit ACSC — Area of Critical State Concern ADT—Average Daily Trips ASI — Area of Sign ifi ra nt Influenre BCC — Board of Collier County Commissioners BID — Boat dock Petition BZO— Bayshore Zoning Overlay District BP — Business Park District BZA— Board of Zoning Appeals C-1—Commerciall Professional General Cfffice District C-Z—Commercial Convenience District C-3— Commercial Intermediate District C-4— Genera l Commercial District C-5— Heavy Commercial District CCME — Conservation and Coastal Management Element CCPC— CollierCountyPlanning Commission CCSL(P)— Coastal Construction Setback Line [Perm it} CID D—CommunityDevelopment District CEB— Code Enforcement Board CIF — Community Facility CIE —Capital Improvement Element CIP— CapitaJ Improvement Program CM0 — Corridor Management Overlay C_Q_ — Certificate of Occupancy CON —Conservation Zoning District CRD — Compact Rural JDevelopment CSP—Conceptual Site Plan CU — Conditional Use DISH — Diameter at Breast Height DIED — Department of Economi€ Opportunity D.D. — Development Order DRI — Development of Regional Impact DSVdT— Dry Season Water Table E — Estates Zoning District EAC — Environmental Advisory Council EIS — Environmental Impart Statement EPA —Environmental Protection Agency EXP — Excavation Permit FAC —Florida Adm in istrative Cade FDEP—Florida Department of Environmental Protection FOOT— Florida Department of Transportation FFWCC — Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission FIRM — Financial Impact Analysis Module 101 FIHS — FI on da I nterstate Highway System FLU CFCS - Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System FLUE —Future Land Use Element FLU M — Future Land Use Map FP — Final Plat FS—Florida Statutes FSA— Flaw way Stewardship Area GC— Golf Course GGAMP—Golden Gate Area Master PI an GGPPOCO—Golden Gate Pkwy ProfessionalOffiice Commercial Overlay District GMP—Growth Management Plan GPCD — Gallons Per Capita per Day GT — Gopher Tortoise GTZ0— Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay District GWP — Ground Water Protection Zone GZ0— Goodland Zoning Overlay HSA— Habitat Stewardship Area I — Industrial Zonir►g District ICBSD —I mmokalee Central Business Subdistrict LDC — Land DevelopmentGode LOS — Level of 5e rvi ce LPA—Local Plan ningAgericy LSPA— LittoraI Shelf Planting Area MIF — Multi -family Use or Zoning MH— Mobile Home MHO— Mobile Home Overlay MLW— Mean Low Water MPP— Manatee Protection Plan NBMO—North Belle Meade Overlay NC —Neighborhood Commercial District NRPA—Natural Resource Protection Area O.C. — On Center P — Public Use District PPL— Plans and Plat P51—Pounds Per Square I n€h P5 P — Preli 4ary Subdivisi on Plat PU D —Planned Unit Development RSF — Residential Single-Fami ly Districts RCW— Red Cockaded Woodpecker RFMU—Rural Fringe Mixed Use district RLS — Request for Legal Service RLSAK4—Rural Lands Stewa rdshi p Area Zoning {CverlaV�District RM F — Residential M ulti-FamiJy Districts RN C — Residential Neighborhood Comme rcial Subdistrict R_O-W. — Right of Way RSF— Residential 5ingle-Family SBCO — Santa Barbara Cammer€ial Overlay District SBR — School Board Review G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit B — Summary of Proposed Changes Multiple LDC sections • Updating obsolete code references of the Florida Statutes and Florida Administrative Code and properly referencing the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) throughout the RLSA provisions. • Requiring compliance with "dark sky" lighting principles as a baseline standard, to conform with GMP Policies 3.15, 4.23, and 5.7. • Removing Hamlets as an allowable form of SRA development, to conform with GMP Policy 4.7. LDC section 4.08.01 Amending the definitions that are specific to the RLSA, by creating new definitions for Agricultural Stewardship area (ASA) and Walkable, redefining Compact Rural Development (CRD), deleting Hamlet, and updating Stewardship Credits, to conform to GMP Policies 2.2, 4.7.3 and 4.19 and the Community Character Plan. LDC section 4.08.04 • Changing the required comprehensive review of stewardship credits from 5 years to 7 years, as well as establishing a Stewardship Credit Cap at 404,000 to entitle no more than 45,000 acres of Stewardship Receiving Areas (in LDC section 4.08.04), to conform with GMP Policies 1.21 and 1.22. LDC section 4.08.05 • Including Restoration Areas so they have the same restrictions as FSAs, to conform to GMP Policy 5.1. • Prohibiting conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, except those described in LDC section 2.01.03 G.2., to conform to GMP Policy 5.1. • Exempting "agricultural purposes" from the 40% native vegetation preserve requirement in the RLSA for sites having evidence of species of special concern and changing the method for determining if such species are present by deleting the "directly observed" requirement and relying solely upon evidence, such as denning, foraging, or other indications, to conform with GMP Policy 5.5. • Deleting open space and vegetation preservation requirements as a means for establishing buffer areas between human and wildlife habitats, to conform with GMP Policy 5.5. • Updated wildlife habitat management plan requirements to include determination within each SRA by the authority having jurisdiction over wildlife crossing locations to conform with GMP Policy 5.4. • Updating wildlife habitat management plan requirements to include provisions to minimize human and wildlife interactions and strategies for disseminating information to residents and visitors to encourage the responsible coexistence with such wildlife, to conform with GMP Policies 4.5 and 5.5. • Updating the monitoring program requirements for sites 10 acres or larger, to utilize the current guidelines of the FFWCC and USFWS and deleting the existing references in the LDC, to conform with GMP Policy 5.5. • Updating the wildlife protection standards to further stipulate that the County will not consider any recommendations from the FFWCC or USFWS that reduces the minimum standards for wildlife protection, to conform with GMP Policy 5.5.3. • Updating the golf course standards by requiring that golf courses be designed in accordance with the 102 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit B — Summary of Proposed Changes Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program for Golf and requiring the use of pesticides follow Best Management Practices for the Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida Golf Courses, FDEP, to conform to GMP Policy 3.7. • Including upland buffers that are contiguous to wetlands to be considered for preservation, to conform with GMP Policy 5.6. • Allows the removal of exotic plant species to be an acceptable form of wetland mitigation, to conform with GMP Policy 5.6. • Requiring compliance with SFWMD standards prior to the issuance of a development order, to conform with GMP Policy 5.6. LDC section 4.08.06 • Updating SSA to prohibit conditional use and governmental essential services, other than those necessary to service permitted uses or public safety within Restoration Areas, to conform to GMP Policy 5.1. • Changing EIS to "Environmental Data," in HSA Delineated Lands, to conform to GMP Policy 3.7. • Updating Restoration Area Delineated Lands by referencing the appropriate layers in the GMP Policy 5.1. • Updating SSA Credit Generation to accurately reference SSA Credit Agreement in GMP Policy 1.6. • Deleting language that refers to earning early entry bonus credits since the availability period to award bonus credits has ended. • Adding provisions for Agricultural Stewardship Area in Open Lands to include two Stewardship Credits per acre in lieu of using the NRI, to conform to GMP Policy 2.2. • Adding provisions for Panther Corridor Credits, to conform to GMP Policy 3.11.2. • Adding provisions for Wetland Wading Bird Habitat Restoration Credits, to conform to GMP Policy 3.11.3. • Updating Restoration Areas Index Score Upgrade to reference Layers 5-8 on the Land use Matrix, to conform to GMP Policy 3.12. • Restricting only one type of restoration shall be rewarded toward Restoration Stewardship and allowing up to 10 credits per acre, to conform to GMP Policies 3.11 and 3.11.4. • Adding 1 additional Stewardship Credit per acre for lands identified as Restoration I and 2 additional credits per acre for the dedication of lands inside an FSA, HAS, or WRA. A landowner who successfully completes restoration shall be awarded up to eight additional credits, to conform to GMP Policies 3.11.1 through 3.11.3. • Removing "Aquaculture for native species and non-native species" from the Land Use Matrix under the SSA, because it was stricken from the Land Use Matrix in the GMPA approved in July 2021. • Updated SSA Easement Agreement by capitalizing "Easement" and specifying easement shall be in favor of Collier County and the FFWCC, to conform to GMP Policies GMP 1.6 and 1.7. • Creating a conditional period of 5 years when a stewardship easement is established in the SSA, to conform to GMP Policy 1.6.1. LDC section 4.08.07 • Adding a provision that if all or part of the WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA, 103 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit B — Summary of Proposed Changes the pro rata acreage of the WRA shall be required to consume SRA credits but shall not be included within the SRA acreage, to conform to GMP Policies 3.13, 4.2, and 4.9. This will be reflected in the requirements for Master Plan Content. • Updating SRA to prohibit conditional use and governmental essential services, unless such service is deemed necessary for public safety or to minimize impacts to natural resources, to conform to GMP Policy 4.9. Infrastructure necessary to serve permitted uses may be exempt from this restriction, if designs seek to minimize the extent of impacts to any such areas. • Deleting the 35% minimum open space requirement for "those CRDs exceeding 100 acres," to conform with GMP Policy 4.10. • Requiring an SRA to include land uses that reduce vehicle trip lengths and long distance travel, to conform to GMP Policy 4.6. • Requiring direct pedestrian/vehicular connections from an SRA to a County arterial or collector roadway (when lands adjoin), to conform to GMP Policy 4.14. • Requiring a Mobility Plan in an SRA, including strategies to encourage mass transit, to conform to GMP Policy 4.6. • Adding mitigation provisions to offset the traffic impacts of an SRA, to conform to GMP Policy 4.14. • Modifying Stewardship Credit Exchange provisions by allowing a total of 10 stewardship credits per gross acre that may be used where such credits were created from other SSAs and to exempt infrastructure deemed necessary for public safety and minimize impacts to natural resources on lands having a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2, to conform with GMP Policies 4.9 and 4.19. Deleting "Any such lands within an SRA located outside of the ACSC exceeding the required thirty- five (35) percent shall not be required to consume Stewardship Credits," to conform to GMP Policy 4.10. • Updating Public Benefit Uses provisions to require them to count toward the maximum acreage limits of an SRA (except those approved prior to July 13, 2021) but not counting against the consumption of Stewardship Credits in an SRA, to conform to GMP Policy 4.20. In addition, affordable housing will now be considered as a public benefit use. • Updating Mixed Land Use Entitlement provisions to indicate Towns and Villages shall be "the preferred locations for business and industry, including environmental research, agricultural research, aviation and aerospace, health and life sciences, corporate headquarters, computer hardware, software and services, information technology, manufacturing, research and development, wholesale trade and distribution and similar uses, including Florida Qualified Target Industries," to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.4. • Adding affordable housing provisions to an SRA, to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.5. • Increasing the minimum size of a Town from 1,000 acres 1,500 acres and the maximum size from 4,000 acres to 5,000 acres, requiring the Town transportation network be based on an internal mobility plan, requiring a transfer station or park -and -ride area, and including research and development companies as allowable uses, to conform to GMP Policies 4.6 and 4.7.1. • Increasing the minimum size of a Village from 100 acres to 300 acres and the maximum size shall be 1,000 acres (in the ACSC) and 1,500 acres (outside the ACSC), requiring an internal mobility plan when Villages are greater than 500 acres, which includes a transfer station or park -and -ride, to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.2 • Increasing the maximum allowable size of Compact Rural Development from 100 acres to 300 acres, 104 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit B — Summary of Proposed Changes updating the purpose and intent of a CRD, and limiting the number of dwelling units to be equivalent to the demand generated by the primary CRD use (and no greater than 2 d/u per acre), and stipulating that no more than five CRDs may be approved prior to the approval of a Village or Town, to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.3. • Updating Stewardship Credit Use and Reconciliation Application to indicate, "An accounting acreage associated with Credits that were created from an SSA submitted for review or approved prior to July 13, 2021, under the eight (8) credit allocation and the acreage associated with Credits created from any other SSA under the ten (10) credit allocation," to conform to GMP Policy 4.19. • Updating SRA Designation Application Package to include "SRA Mobility Plan," which includes vehicular, bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas of outside development and land uses. The Mobility Plan shall provide mobility strategies such as bus subsidies, route sponsorship, or other incentives to encourage the use of mass transit services. The Mobility Plan shall also consider the needs identified in the MPO Long Range Transportation Needs Plan, and plan land uses to accommodate services that would increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long-distance travel. Such development strategies are recognized as methods of discouraging urban sprawl, encouraging alternative modes of transportation, increasing internal capture, and reducing vehicle miles traveled. • Updating Master Plan content to include consistency with Long Range Transportation Plan and Access Management procedures and to require a Wildlife Management Plan, to conform to GMP Policy 4.5. • Updating Development Document to include an inventory of historic or cultural resources, to conform to GMP Policy 4.22. • Deleting the provision for SRAs as an allowable part of a Development of Regional Impact. • Updating Town Characteristic Chart to (1) indicate a proposed minimum and maximum acreages, (2) indicate the maximum FAR is based on a "per use" basis and that research companies be assigned a maximum FAR of 0.45, (3) increase the minimum Goods and Services from 65 square feet to 170 square feet of gross building area per dwelling unit and include "Research and Development companies" as an allowable use under this category [to conform to GMP Policies 4.7.1 and 4.7.4], (4) amend community parks under Recreation and Open Space by indicating "subject to level of service requirements" [to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.1], (5) update Civic, Governmental and Institutional Uses to specify a minimum of 15 square feet of gross land area is required per each dwelling unit, and (6) include a transfer station or park -and -ride as a required use under Transportation [to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.1]. • Updating Village Characteristic Chart to (1) indicate the minimum acreage be 300 acres and a maximum of 1,000 acres inside the ACSC and 1,500 acres outside the ACSC [to conform to GMP Policy 4.7.2], (2) indicate the maximum FAR is based on a "per use" basis, (3) increase the minimum Goods and Services from 25 square feet to 53 square feet of gross building area per dwelling unit and include "Corporate Office, Manufacturing and Light Industrial, and Research and Development companies: appropriately scaled" as an allowed use under Goods and Services [to conform to GMP Policies 4.7.2 and 4.7.4], and (4) include a transfer station or park -and -ride as a required use and delete "county transit access" as an allowable use under Transportation. • Updating CRD Chart to (1) change the maximum acreage from 100 acres to 300 acres, (2) delete the note regarding density, (3) indicate the maximum FAR is based on a "per use" basis and that "Business, industry and uses associated with and needed to support research, education, tourism or recreation be a 105 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit B — Summary of Proposed Changes required use with a maximum FAR of 0.6," (4) stipulate that retail and office uses are allowed "in conjunction with residential units proposed within the CRD," (5) include "Business, industry and uses associated with and needed to support research, education, convenience retail, tourism or recreation, appropriately scaled" as a required use under Goods and Services [to conform to GMP Policies 4.7.2 and 4.7.3] and that "Convenience Goods and Services*: Minimum 10 SF gross building area per DU" in conjunction with residential units proposed within the CRD be an allowable use under the same category, (6) delete public green space for neighborhoods but include a minimum open space of 30% of the SRA as a required use, (7) include "Public Green Space for Neighborhoods* (minimum 1% of gross acres)" and "Open Space Minimum 35% of SRA*" "in conjunction with residential units proposed within the CRA" as an allowable use under Recreation and Open Space, and (8) allowing "County Transit station or a park and ride facility" as an allowing use under the Transportation category. • Adding new standards to CRDs relative to parking, landscaping, signage, open space, and uses. The new parking standard, which indicates, "Parking for non-residential uses may be provided on -street, off-street, and within parking structures" was modeled after the Babcock Mixed Use Residential Commercial (MURC) Subdistrict in Charlotte County, Florida. In addition, new standards, which are duplicated in the Village Center criteria, include parking requirements based on modal splits and demands from reputable industry leaders, such as the ITE, ULI, or other source or study. The new sign standards were modeled after the Town Core criteria. The standards relative the uses were modeled upon Table D.1 and the Babcock MURC. The new maximum building height of 4 stories was developed as a comprise between the old Hamlet limitation (3.5 stories) and the Village Center limitation (5 stories). The new setbacks standards were developed using the old Hamlet Neighborhood Edge criteria. The new standards relative to residential and supporting non-residential uses were developed by using Table D.1. and the old Town Neighborhood General criteria from Hamlets. The maximum building height of 3 stories was derived as a compromise between old Hamlet criteria (3.5 stories) and RSF-1 and RSF-2 standards (35 feet). The "Residential uses in the CRD shall be located abutting residentially zoned lands where feasible" reflects strategic opportunity signs subdistricts standards in a newly proposed and independent GMP amendment. • Updating Design Criteria Common to SRAs relative to infrastructure, vehicular and pedestrian connections, roads and signalized intersections, and the mitigation of traffic impacts are being added, to conform to GMP Policy 4.14. • Updating SRA Public Facilities Impact Assessments by requiring consistency between the LRTP and Access Management procedures, to conform to GMP Policy 4.5 and adding mitigation measures, to conform to GMP Policy 4.14. Updating the transportation impact assessment to consider the inclusion of mobility strategies, to conform to GMP Policy 4.6. 106 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based Recommendation on 2021 Adopted GMP Goal Recommended Housekeeping revisions Same amendment Objective Recommended Housekeeping revisions Same amendment Group 1 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.1 Recommended n/a Same amendment Policy 1.2 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.3 Unchanged Housekeeping revisions Same Policy 1.4 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.5 Recommended Housekeeping revisions Same amendment Policy 1.6 Recommended Housekeeping: revise references to Periodically updating the amendment Stewardship Sending Area Credit Future Land Use Map to Agreement throughout 4.08.00. indicate SSAs now done note: reference to EAR based periodically as initiated by the amendment process County. Ensure all references to Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement are updated as noted. Policy 1.6.1 Recommended new Add language introducing new Same policy concept of a 5-year "Conditional Period" and Conditional Stewardship Easement for Sending Areas (SSAs) subject to terms and conditions for termination or conversion to a Permanent Stewardship Easement. Policy 1.7 Recommended Revision to specify that SSA easement Same amendment is to be in favor of Collier County and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Policy 1.8 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.9 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.10 Unchanged n/a Same 107 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based Recommendation on 2021 Adopted GMP Policy 1.11 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.12 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.13 Unchanged Housekeeping revisions Same Policy 1.14 Recommended Housekeeping revisions Same amendment (renumber) Policy 1.15 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.16 Unchanged Housekeeping revisions — note: Same reference to F.S. and 91-5 Policy 1.17 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.18 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.19 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 1.20 Unchanged n/a Same Old Policy 1.21 Recommended n/a Policy deleted. amendment Old Policy 1.22 Recommended n/a — note: reference to horizon year Changed review cycle to every New Policy 1.21 amendment of 2025; reference to DCA and EAR 7 years (vs 5 years). process Horizon year deleted. References to DEO/DCA stricken since state review is not required. Bullet 8 deleted. (n/a no reference in LDC) Language added that additional review measures be considered at the direction of the BCC. (n/a no reference in LDC) New Policy 1.22 n/a n/a New policy added capping the number of Stewardship Credits and acreage. Group 2 Recommended n/a Same amendment 108 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based Recommendation on 2021 Adopted GMP Policy 2.1 Recommended n/a Same amendment Policy 2.2 Recommended Insert language introducing new Policy was revised to assign amendment option to designate an Agricultural 2.0 Credits for any SSA in Open Lands, with 2 Agricultural Stewardship Area Stewardship Credits per acre outside in Open Lands regardless of of ACSC and 2.6 Credits per acre location (2.6 Credits per acre within the ACSC in lieu of using the deleted). NRI. Added the sentence: "SSA's created under this Policy will be known as an Agricultural Stewardship Area (ASA)." Add definition to LDC. Revised to state: "Following approval of an Agricultural Stewardship Area, Collier County shall periodically update..." (n/a no reference in LDC) Policy 2.3 Recommended n/a — eliminates the Agriculture Removed "Within one (1) year deletion Advisory Council from the effective date of these amendments," (n/a no reference in LDC) Policy 2.4 Recommended n/a Same deletion Policy 2.5 Renumber n/a Same Policy 2.6 Renumber n/a Same Group 3 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 3.1 Unchanged n/a (acreages of FSAs, range and Same average Index score of FSA land) Policy 3.2 Recommended n/a (acreages of HSAs, cleared Same amendment agricultural fields in HSAs & average Index score of HSA land and vegetated areas) Policy 3.3 Unchanged n/a (acreages of WRAs, range and Same average Index score of WRA land) Policy 3.4 Unchanged n/a Same 109 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based Recommendation on 2021 Adopted GMP Policy 3.5 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 3.6 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 3.7 Recommended n/a (references golf courses in HSAs Change "EIS" to amendment complying with Audubon) "Environmental Data". Reference to "International's Gold Program" updated to "Cooperative Sanctuary Program (ASCP)". Policy 3.8 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 3.9 Recommended Revise list of Ag 1 group activities: Recommended language amendment aquaculture [limited to Open Land aquaculture [limited to Open designation only] Land designation only] was not adopted so it is not added to the LDC. Policy 3.10 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 3.11 Recommended Revise Restoration Stewardship Additional Stewardship amendment Credits language per the species Credits for designating land specific restoration credits, including: for restoration activities "The specific process for assignment within a FSA or HSA revised of additional restoration Credits shall one additional Credit for each be included in the Stewardship acre. District of the LDC." Credits for exotic control/burning revised to five per acre, flow way restoration revised to five per acre, and native habitat restoration revised to seven per acre. Language added to assign eight additional Credits for each acre that completes panther corridor restoration improvements. Policy states that procedures shall be set forth in the LDC. Credits for successful completion of restoration of shallow wetland wading bird 110 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based Recommendation on 2021 Adopted GMP foraging habitat revised to eight per acre. Changed "caracara restoration" to "caracara habitat restoration" in LDC. Reorganize section in the LDC to identify the assignment of credits for lands dedicated for restoration separately from credits for owner -completed restoration, Restoration I and Restoration II identified on the Restoration Lands Map. Policy 3.12 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 3.13 Recommended Update multiple code references to This was updated to include a amendment WRAs in SRAs to reflect new policy: prorata acreage of a WRA if "If the WRA provides water treatment "all or part" of it is within the and retention exclusively for a SRA, SRA and used to meet water the acreage of the WRA shall be quality treatment volume and included in the SRA." reference to the section of the SFWMD handbook. Policy 3.14 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 3.15 n/a n/a Language added that any development on lands participating in the RLSA Overlay shall be compatible with surrounding land uses and regulations shall be implemented for outdoor lighting to protect the nighttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Group 4 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 4.1 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 4.2 Recommended n/a - Revisions to acreages eligible for This was updated to allow amendment SRA designation, and new policy WRAs providing stormwater defining maximum SRA area of 45,000 quality treatment for an SRA acres. then the acreage of the WRA 111 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based Recommendation on 2021 Adopted GMP used for treatment for the SRA shall be included in the SRA. Horizon year deleted. (n/a no reference in LDC) Updated F.S. references (n/a no reference in LDC) Policy 4.3 Recommended n/a — deleted: LDC to establish the Policy was not deleted. (No amendment procedures and submittal change to LDC is required) requirements for designation as a SRA, to include provisions for consideration of impacts, including environmental and public infrastructure impacts, and provisions for public notice of and the opportunity for public participation in any consideration by the BCC of such a designation. Policy 4.4 Unchanged n/a Revised to allow for delineation of SRA boundaries on the adopted Overlay Map by amendment as "periodically initiated by the County", rather than at the time of EAR amendments. (n/a —There are no LDC regulations detailing when the Overlay may be updated.) Policy 4.5 Recommended Add criteria for SRA Master Plan Compliance with County amendment consistency with LRTP, Build -out Vision Plan has Transportation Element Policy 3.7, been removed. and Access Management standards. Language revised to add Add Master Plan requirement of a "...Florida Fish and Wildlife Management Plan for minimizing Conservation Commission human -wildlife interactions including guidelines and regulations..." specified techniques. Policy 4.6 Recommended Add SRA requirement for a mobility Compliance with County amendment plan for within and between SRAs Build -out Vision Plan has and areas outside development and been removed. land uses. Also plan land uses that would increase internal capture, and reduce trip length. 112 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based Recommendation on 2021 Adopted GMP note: reference to F.S. and 9J-5 Policy 4.7 Recommended Eliminate numerous references in References to Hamlet need to amendment LDC to Hamlets as a form of SRA. be stricken. note: reference to F.S. and 9J-5 Added new Compact Rural Development (CRD) development standards. Policy 4.7.1 Recommended Town size adjusted to 1,500 — 5,000 Revised to add "subject to amendment acres; add that Towns include an Level of Service requirements" internal mobility plan and include a regarding park size. transfer station or a park and ride area; add research, development companies as allowable use. Policy 4.7.2 Recommended Village size adjusted to 1,500 acres Language stricken that amendment outside the ACSC. referred to villages as "primarily residential" communities. Village size adjusted to not less than 300 acres and up to 1,000 acres inside the ACSC and up to 1,500 acres outside the ACSC. Policy 4.7.3 Recommended Elimination of Hamlets References to Hamlet need to deletion be stricken. Added new Compact Rural Development (CRD) development standards. Old Policy 4.7.4 Recommended CRD purpose updated to support Convenience retail was added amendment agriculture, natural resources and to the list of primary CRD New Policy 4.7.3 (renumbered) economic diversity. Uses shall be uses. associated with research, education, Maximum size of CRD revised tourism or recreation. Housing up to from 100 acres to 300 acres. 2 du/ gross acre, and maximum CRD size of 100 acres. New Policy 4.7.4 Recommended new Add business and industry permitted Language added: "The policy (renumbering) uses in Urban areas, Towns and business and industry use Villages, including research, allowed includes, but is not corporate headquarters, technology, limited to, those as defined as manufacturing, distribution, etc. Florida Qualified Target Industries. The appropriate scale and compatibility of 113 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review Recommendation 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based on 2021 Adopted GMP these uses within a Town or Village will be addressed during SRA application process." Add including Florida Qualified Target Industries." New Policy 4.7.5 n/a n/a New policy added regarding accommodation of Affordable Housing in a Town or Village, providing for several options. Policy 4.8 Unchanged n/a Updated to strike language stating "without requiring the WRA to be designated as a SRA". (n/a no reference in LDC) Policy 4.9 Recommended Additional allowance for Language added to allow SRAs amendment development in SRA lands with NRI in WRAs if it "...is being used score over 1.2: Infrastructure to provide water quality necessary to serve permitted uses treatment..." (refer to Policy may be exempt from this restriction, 3.13) provided that designs seek to minimize the extent of impacts to any such areas. Policy 4.10 Recommended Delete reference to SRA location Entire sentence was deleted, amendment outside of ACSC for relief from not just reference to "outside consuming Stewardship Credits for of ACSC'. open space in excess of 35%. Policy 4.11 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 4.12 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 4.13 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 4.14 Recommended Additional criteria for transportation Compliance with County amendment network, access, interconnection, Build -out Vision Plan has maintenance, and mitigation for been removed. traffic and environmental impacts of roadways. 114 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based Recommendation on 2021 Adopted GMP Policy 4.15.1 Recommended n/a Same amendment Policy 4.15.2 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 4.15.3 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 4.16 Recommended n/a Same amendment Policy 4.17 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 4.18 Recommended n/a — recognizing potential for surplus Same amendment revenues, which County may allocate for economic development purposes Policy 4.19 Recommended Update to reflect vested Credit No change except revised to amendment calculation for SRA development at 8 include GMP adoption date. Credit ratio, and updated calculation to 10 Credits per acres Policy 4.20 Recommended Public benefit uses changed to count Additional exception added if amendment toward max. acreage, but not count the public benefit use was against consumption of Stewardship approved as part of an SRA Credits. approved prior to the date of the adoption of the ordinance. Affordable housing was added as a listed public benefit. Update LDC to refer to LDC definition of affordable housing. Policy 4.21 Recommended n/a same amendment New Policy Recommended new Add provisions for addressing historic Added references to LDC 4.22 policy or cultural resources identified section regarding historic or through the SRA designation process. culturally significant resources. New Policy n/a n/a Language added that any 4.23 development on lands participating in the RLSA Overlay shall be compatible with surrounding land uses and regulations shall be implemented for outdoor lighting to protect the 115 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based Recommendation on 2021 Adopted GMP nighttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Group 5 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 5.1 Recommended Add that designated Restoration "Restoration Zones" changed amendment Zones are subject to same use to "Restoration Areas:" restriction as FSAs, and that conditional uses are no longer allowed in FSAs. Added references to LDC section 2.01.03.G.S to clarify conditional use essential services Policy 5.2 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 5.3 Unchanged n/a Same Policy 5.4 Recommended Map of wildlife crossings to be A Wildlife Management Plan is amendment developed and used for planning required. purposes. Add master plan or design Updated to state that criteria requiring applicant to show crossings will be determined compliance with the wildlife crossing by the authority having map jurisdiction over wildlife crossing locations. Policy 5.5 Recommended Addition of "or protected species" The phrase "or protected amendment Add reference to use of most current species" was not adopted. and complete guidelines and Instead, "species of special regulations for preparing wildlife local concern (SSC), as defined management plans. Delete specific by Florida Fish and Wildlife document references. Conservation Commission...". Update LDC to use this Add requirement that management language. plans shall include provisions for minimizing human and wildlife Sentence that ties open space interactions... and vegetation preservation Delete species -specific standards. requirements to the Add language asserting wildlife establishment of buffer areas protection policies may be was deleted. Update LDC to strengthened through FWCC and strike language. FWS technical assistance, but not reduced. Policy 5.6 Recommended Add reference to preserve of upland Change "wetlands permits" to amendment buffers contiguous to wetlands. "Environmental Resource 116 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx Exhibit C — GMP Policy Direction Chart Policy 5-Year Review 2019 Proposed LDC Revision Updated LDC Revision based Recommendation on 2021 Adopted GMP Add that exotics removal may be Permit". (n/a — no LDC acceptable as mitigation. reference) The phrase "or protected species" was not adopted. Instead, "species of special local concern (SSC), as defined by Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission...". Update LDC to use this language. Remove reference to September 1997, and add "as amended". (n/a — no LDC reference) Change "EIS" to "Environmental Data". Update paragraph reference and reference to "SFWMD standards". Policy 5.7 Recommended new Add that development outside the Language added that any policy RLS program must be compatible development not participating with surrounding land uses. in the RLSA program shall be Add that outdoor lighting shall be compatible with surrounding managed. land uses and regulations shall be implemented for outdoor lighting to protect the nighttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Policy 5.8 Recommended new Add provisions for addressing historic This policy was not adopted in policy or cultural resources identified within this section. See Policy 4.22 the RLSA. 117 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC-LDR\2022\Aug 24\Materials\PL20220003445 RLSA Updates (08-17-2022).docx ORDINANCE NO. 2021- 28 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY RESTUDY SPECIFICALLY TO AMEND THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, TO CHANGE ACREAGES, STEWARDSHIP CREDITS, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20190002292] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163:3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, staff has prepared an amendment to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Economic Opportunity for preliminary review'on December 11, 2020, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Economic Opportunity reviewed the amendment to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has 180 days from receipt of the Comments Report from the Department of Economic Opportunity to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and [19-ENS-00625/1631679/1] 223 1 of 3 RLSA Restudy / PL20190002292 5/11/21 WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of these amendment, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on May 6, 2021, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on July 13, 2021; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendment to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay of the Future Land Use Element, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. [19-ENS-00625/1631679/1]223 2 of 3 RLSA Restudy / PL20190002292 5/11/21 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this I-Y'` day of q 12021. ATTEST: CRYSLERK By: ��'� Clerk spa Approved as to form and legality: A tL, Heidi Ashton -Cie o Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLI40TY, LORIDA By: hairma Attachment: Exhibit A — Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Future Land Use Element 7hiS ordinance filed wits Mnwry of $tot�e's office >i •e ay of>l�l_ WW acknowledgernenL thot >Eiiin eivecjt�" 4Y Of c [19-ENS-00625/1631679/1] 223 3 of 3 RLSA Restudy / PL20190002292 5/11/21 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Prepared by Collier County Planning and Zoning Department Comprehensive Planning Section Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Adopted October, 1997 Text underlined is added; text stFike##i=eugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 1 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft II. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** D. Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Goal: To address the long-term needs of residents and property owners within the Immokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment by prete6fiRg retaining agricultural activities, directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, enabling the conversion of rural land to other uses in appropriate locations, discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that its employs creative land use planning techniques through the use of established incentives. Objective: Create an incentive based land use overlay system, herein referred to as the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, based on the principles of rural land stewardship as defined in Chapter 163.3248, F.S. The Policies that implement this Goal and Objective are set forth below in groups relating to each aspect of the Goal. Group 1 policies describe the structure and organization of the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. Group 2 policies relate to agriculture, Group 3 policies relate to natural resource protection, and Group 4 policies relate to conversion of land to other uses and economic diversification. Group 5 are regulatory policies that ensure that land that is not voluntarily included in the Overlay by its owners shall nonetheless meet the minimum requirements of the Final Order pertaining to natural resource protection. Group 1 — General purpose and structure of the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Policy 1.1: To promote a dynamic balance of land uses in the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) that collectively contributes to a viable agricultural industry, protects natural resources, and enhances economic prosperity and diversification, Collier County hereby establishes the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (Overlay). The Overlay was created through a collaborative community -based planning process involving county residents, area property owners, and representatives of community and governmental organizations under the direction of a citizen oversight committee. Policy 1.2: The Overlay protects natural resources and retains viable agriculture by promoting compact rural mixed -use development as an alternative to low -density single use development, and provides a system of compensation to private property owners for the elimination of certain land uses in order Text underlined is added; text stFike thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 2 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft to protect natural resources and viable agriculture in exchange for transferable credits that can be used to entitle such compact development. The strategies herein are based in part on the principles of Florida's Rural Lands Stewardship Act, Section 163.3248, Florida Statutes. The Overlay includes innovative and incentive based tools, techniques and strategies that are not dependent on a regulatory approach, but will complement existing local, regional, state and federal regulatory programs. Policy 1.3: This Overlay to the Future Land Use Map is depicted on the Stewardship Overlay Map (Overlay Map) and applies to rural designated lands located within the Immokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment referred to in the State of Florida Administration Commission Final Order No. AC-99-002. The RLSA generally includes rural lands in northeast Collier County lying north and east of Golden Gate Estates, north of the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and Big Cypress National Preserve, south of the Lee County Line, and south and west of the Hendry County Line, and includes a total of approximately 46-185,935 acres, The Overlay Map is an adopted overlay to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Policy 1.4: Except as provided in Group 5 Policies, there shall be no change to the underlying density and intensity of permitted uses of land within the RLSA, as set forth in the Baseline Standards, as defined in Policy 1.5, unless and until a property owner elects to utilize the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System. It is the intent of the Overlay that a property owner will be compensated for the voluntary stewardship and protection of important agricultural and natural resources. Compensation to the property owner shall occur through one of the following mechanisms: creation and transfer of Stewardship Credits, acquisition of conservation easements, acquisition of less than fee interest in the land, or through other acquisition of land or interest in land through a willing seller program. Policy 1.5: As referred to in these Overlay policies, Baseline Standards are the permitted uses, density, intensity and other land development regulations assigned to land in the RLSA by the GIVI Growth Management Plan (GMP), Collier County Land Development Regulations L( DRs) and Collier County Zoning Regulations in effect prior to the adoption of Interim Amendments and Interim Development Provisions referenced in Final Order AC-99-002. The Baseline Standards will remain in effect for all land not subject to the transfer or receipt of Stewardship Credits, except as provided for in Group 5 Policies. No part of the Stewardship Credit System shall be imposed upon a property owner without that oweem owner's consent. Policy 1.6: Stewardship Credits (Credits) are created from any lands within the RLSA that are to be kept in permanent agriculture, open space or conservation uses. These lands will be identified as Stewardship Sending Areas or SSAs. All privately owned lands within the RLSA are a candidate for designation as a SSA. Land becomes designated as a SSA upon petition by the property owner seeking such designation and the adoption of a resolution by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC), which acknowledges the property owner's request for such designation and assigns Stewardship Credits or other compensation to the owner for such designation. Collier County will update the Overlay Map to delineate the boundaries of each approved SSA. Designation as an SSA shall be administrative and shall not require an Text underlined is added; text stFike thFouggh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 3 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft amendment to the Growth Management Plan, but shall be retroactively incorporated into the adopted Overlay amendment as may be periodically initiated by the County, or sooner at the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners. A Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement shall be developed that identifies those allowable residential densities and other land uses which remain. Once land is designated as a SSA and Credits or other compensation is granted to the owner, no increase in density or additional uses unspecified in the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement shall be allowed on such property unless the SSA is terminated as provided in Policy 1.6.1. Policy 1.6.1 Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, upon initial approval of a Stewardship Sending Area ("SSA") the Stewardship Easement shall be established for a term of five years ("Conditional Period") and shall be deemed a Conditional Stewardship Easement. The Conditional Period may be extended for one additional year at the option of the owner by providing written notice to the County prior to the expiration of the initial five-year period. All conditions and restrictions of the Stewardship Easement related to maintaining the existing property conditions, including all management obligations of the owner of the SSA lands shall be in full force throughout the Conditional Period. If at any time during the Conditional Period any of the following events occur, then the Conditional Stewardship Easement shall become a Permanent Stewardship Easement which shall be final perpetual and non -revocable in accordance with the terms set forth therein: 1. Stewardship Credits from the SSA have been assigned to entitle an approved Stewardship Receiving Area ("SRA") and the SRA has received all necessary final and non -appealable development orders, permits, or other discretionary approvals necessary to commence construction including subdivision plat and site development plan approval but not building permits. If Stewardship Credits from the SSA have been assigned to more than one SRA then the receipt of all necessary governmental final and non -appealable development orders permits or other discretionary approvals necessary to commence construction of any SRA shall automatically cause the Conditional Stewardship Easement to become a Permanent Stewardship Easement; 2. The owner of the SSA lands has sold or transferred any Stewardship Credits to another person or entity, including a Stewardship Credit Trust as described in Policy 1.20, the closing has occurred and the owner has received the consideration due from such sale or transfer, but not expressly excluding: a) a sale or transfer of the Stewardship Credits ancillary to the sale or transfer of the underlying fee title to the land, or (b) instances where a landowner establishes an SSA for a specific SRA, whether the SRA is owned or developed by a separate or related entity, and the Stewardship Credits are transferred as required by the Growth Management Plan or Land Development Code for SRA approval; or 3 The owner of the SSA lands has received in exchange for the creation of the Stewardship Easement Agreement other compensation from local state federal or private revenues (collectively, the "Events"). Text underlined is added; text stFike thFOUgh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 4 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A I PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft The LDC shall specify how, assuming a Notice of Termination (as hereafter described) has not been recorded, the Conditional Stewardship Easement shall automatically convert to a Permanent Stewardship Easement upon the earliest to occur of (a) any of the foregoing Events during the Conditional Period, or (b) 180 days after the last day of the Conditional Period, as and to the extent extended hereunder. In the event that none of the foregoing events has occurred during the Conditional Period, then the owner of the SSA lands may within 180 days after the last day of the Conditional Period terminate the Conditional Stewardship Easement by recording a Notice of Termination. In addition, if a challenge and/or appeal of a necessary development order, permit or other discretionary approval is filed, the owner of the SSA lands may elect to extend the Conditional Period until the challenge or appeal is finally resolved. If the challenge or appeal is not resolved such that the construction may commence under terms acceptable to the owner of the SSA lands, the owner of the SSA lands may within 180 days of the final disposition of the challenge or appeal record a Notice of Termination. Upon the recording of such Notice of Termination, the Stewardship Easement Agreement and corresponding Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement shall expire and terminate, the Stewardship Credits generated by the SSA shall cease to exist, the rights and obligations set forth in the Stewardship Easement shall no longer constitute an encumbrance on the property, and the SSA Memorandum shall be revised accordingly. The owner of the SSA lands shall provide a copy of the Notice of Termination to the County. In the event that the Stewardship Credits from an SSA have been used to obtain one or more SRA approvals, but none of the foregoing events has occurred during the Conditional Period, then the Notice of Termination shan also provide for termination of any SRAs that have been assigned credits from the SSA, unless the SRA owner has obtained sufficient Stewardship Credits from another source and such Stewardship Credits have been applied to the SRA. In the event that a Notice of Termination does terminate an SRA, the owner of the SRA lands shall loin in the Notice of Termination. In the event that a Conditional Stewardship Easement is terminated, all benefits, rights, privileges, restrictions and obligations associated with the SSA shall be null and void, and the land shall revert to its underlying zoning classification, free and clear of any encumbrance from the Conditional Stewardship Easement and SSA Credit Agreement. If requested by the owner of the SSA lands, Collier County and the other grantees under the Stewardship Easement Agreement shall provide a written release and termination of easement and credit agreements for recording in the public records within 15 days of request from the owner of the SSA lands. Collier County shall update the overlay map to reflect the termination of any SSA or SRA. This policy shall be implemented in the LDC within 12 months after adoption hereof. For SSAs approved prior to this Policy 1.6.1 being adopted but have not changed ownership in whole or part since the creation of the SSA and have not transferred, sold or utilized Credits generated from the SSA, the property owner may withdraw the SSA designation provided an application for such withdrawal is implemented within 6 months of the adoption of this Policy 1.6.1. Text underlined is added; text stfike-thFoudh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 5 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Policy 1.7: The range of Stewardship Credit Values is hereby established using the specific methodology set forth on the Stewardship Credit Worksheet (Worksheet), incorporated herein as Attachment A. This methodology and related procedures for SSA designation will also be adopted as part of the Stewardship Overlay District in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). Such procedures shall include but not be limited to the following: (1) All Credit transfers shall be recorded with the Collier County Clerk of Courts; (2) a covenant or perpetual restrictive easement shall also be recorded for each SSA, shall run with the land and shall be in favor of Collier County, and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and one of the following: Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, South Florida Water Management District, or a recognized statewide land trust; and (3) for each SSA, the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement will identify the specific land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures. Policy 1.8: The natural resource value of land within the RLSA is measured by the Stewardship Natural Resource Index (Index) set forth on the Worksheet. The Index established the relative natural resource value by objectively measuring six different characteristics of land and assigning an index factor based on each characteristic. The sum of these Six factors is the index value for the land. Both the characteristics used and the factors assigned thereto were established after review and analysis of detailed information about the natural resource attributes of land within the RLSA so that development could be directed away from important natural resources. The six characteristics measured are: Stewardship Overlay Designation, Sending Area Proximity, Listed Species Habitat, Soils/Surface Water, Restoration Potential, and Land Use/Land Cover. Policy 1.9: A Natural Resource Index Map Series (Index Map Series) indicates the Natural Resource Stewardship Index value for all land within the RLSA. Credits from any lands designated as SSAs, will be based upon the Natural Resource Index values in effect at the time of designation. Any change in the Characteristics of land due to alteration of the land prior to the establishment of a SSA that either increases or decreases any Index Factor will result in an adjustment of the factor values and a corresponding adjustment in the credit value. The Index and the Index Map Series are adopted as a part of the RLSA Overlay. Policy 1.10: In SSAs, the greater the number of uses eliminated from the property, and the higher the natural resource value of the land, the higher the priority for protection, the greater the level of Credits that are generated from such lands, and therefore the greater the incentive to participate in the Stewardship Credit System and protect the natural resources of the land. Policy 1.11: The Land Use Matrix, Attachment B, lists uses and activities allowed under the A, Rural Agricultural Zoning District within the Overlay. These uses are grouped together in one of eight separate layers in the Matrix. Each layer is discrete and shall be removed sequentially and cumulatively in the order presented in the Matrix, starting with the residential layer (layer one) and ending with the conservation layer (layer eight). If a layer is removed, all uses and activities in that layer are eliminated and are no longer available. Each layer is assigned a percentage of a base credit in the Worksheet. The assigned percentage for each layer to be removed is added Text underlined is added; text stFike thmugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 6 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft together and then multiplied by the Index value on a per acre basis to arrive at a total Stewardship Credit Value of the land being designated as a SSA. Policy 1.12: Credits can be transferred only to lands within the RLSA that meet the defined suitability criteria and standards set forth in Group 4 Policies. Such lands shall be known as Stewardship Receiving Areas or SRAs. Policy 1.13: The procedures for the establishment and transfer of Credits and SRA designation are set forth herein and are part of athe Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District in the LDC (District) Policy 1.14: Stewardship Credits will be exchanged for additional residential or non-residential entitlements in a SRA on a per acre basis, as described in Policy-18 4.19. Stewardship density and intensity will thereafter differ from the Baseline Standards. The assignment or use of Stewardship Credits shall not require a GMP Amendment. Policy 1.16: Land becomes designated as an SRA upon the adoption of `a resolution by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approving the petition by the property owner seeking such designation. Any change in the residential density or non-residential intensity of land use on a parcel of land located within a SRA shall be specified in the resolution reflecting the total number of transferable Credits assigned to the parcel of land. Density and intensity within the RLSA or within an SRA shall not be increased beyond the Baseline Standards except through the provisions of the Stewardship Credit System, the Affordable Housing Density Bonus as referenced in the Density Rating System of the FLUE, and the density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. Policy 1.16: Stewardship Receiving Areas will accommodate uses that utilize creative land use planning techniques and Credits shall be used to facilitate the implementation of innovative and flexible development strategies described in Section 163.31 )163.3248, Florida Statutes. Policy 1.17: Stewardship Credits may be transferred between different parcels or within a single parcel, subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of these policies. Residential clustering shall only occur within the RLSA through the use of the Stewardship Credit System, and other forms of residential clustering shall not be permitted. Policy 1.18: A blend of Local, State, Federal and private revenues, such as but not limited to Florida Forever, Federal and State conservation and stewardship programs, foundation grants, private conservation organizations, local option taxes, general county revenues, and other monies can augment the Stewardship program through the acquisition of conservation easements, Credits, or land that is identified as the highest priority for natural resource protection, including, but is not limited to, areas identified on the Overlay Map as Flow way Stewardship Areas (FSAs), Habitat Text underlined is added; text stFike thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 7 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Stewardship Areas (HSAs), Water Retention Areas (WRAs) and land within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC). Policy 1.19: All local land or easement acquisition programs that are intended to work within the RLSA Overlay shall be based upon a willing participant/seller approach. It is not the intent of Collier County to use eminent domain acquisition within this system. Policy 1.20: The County may elect to acquire Credits through a publicly funded program, using sources identified in Policy 1.18. Should the County pursue this option, it shall establish a Stewardship Credit Trust to receive and hold Credits until such time as they are sold, transferred or otherwise used to implement uses within Stewardship Receiving Areas. PG i O*-�T The iRG_P_Rtive based Stewardship GFedit ry6tem relies OR the pFejeGted demand for GFedit6 As the entFy bonus shall be available feF five years #em the e#eGtbye date of the adeptieR of the Policy1.22 1.21: The RLSA Overlay was designed to be a long-term strategic plan_ with a plan""'^ h9F*Zen YeaF e 2025:- Many of the tools, techniques and strategies of the Overlay are new, Innovative, and incentive based_, and have yet to be tested in tual A Comprehensive review of the Overlay shall be prepared for and reviewed by Collier County every seven (7) years beginninq [date of adoption of this Ordinancel. Stewardship 9i6tFiGt ih the L r,G The purpose of the review shall be to assess the participation in and effectiveness of the Overlay implementation in meeting the Goal, Objective and Policies set forth herein. The specific measures of review shall be as follows: 1. The amount and location of land designated as FSAs, HSAs, WRAs and other SSAs. 2. The amount and location of land designated as SRAs. 3. The number of Stewardship Credits generated, assigned or held for future use. 4. A comparison of the amount, location and type of Agriculture that existed at the time of a Study and time of review. 5. The amount, location and type of land converted to non-agricultural use with and without participation in the Stewardship Credit System since its adoption. Text underlined is added; text stFike thFeUg# is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 8 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft 6. The extent and use of funding provided by Collier County and other sources Local, State, Federal and private revenues described in Policy 1.18. 7. The amount, location and type of restoration through participation in the Stewardship Credit System since its adoption. 8. . At the direction of the Board of County Commissioners, additional review measures may be considered. Policy 1.22 The total number of Stewardship Credit shall be capped at 404,000 to entitle no more than 45,000 acres of Stewardship Receiving Areas. Generating Stewardship Credits does not presume approval of Stewardship Receiving Areas. Group 2 — Policies to ate -retain land for agricultural activities through the use of established incentives in order to continue the viability of agricultural production througo the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. Policy 2.1: Agriculturale landowners will be provided with te 9theF uses by incentives that encourage the voluntary elimination of the property owner's right to convert agriculture land to non-agricultural uses in exchange for compensation as described in Policiesy 1.4 and 2.2 and by the establishment of SRAs_ as the fGFFF1 of 69FApaG tzrw Policy 2.2: Agriculture lands protected through the use of Stewardship Credits shall be designated as Stewardship Sending Areas (SSAs) as described in Policy 1.6. The protection measures for SSAs are set forth in Policies 1.6, 1.7, 1.10 and 1.17. In addition to protecting agriculture activities in SSAs within FSA, HSA, and WRA, as further described in Policies 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3, additional incentives are desired to retain agriculture within Open Lands as an alternative to conversion of such lands to other uses, using Baseline Standards as described in Policy 1.5. Open Lands are those lands not designated SSA, SRA, WRA, HSA, FSA, or public lands on the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Map. Open Lands are those lands described in Policy 4.2. Therefore, in lieu of using the Natural Resource Index on land designated Open Lands, these lands shall be assigned two (2.0) Stewardship Credits per acre. All non -agriculture uses shall be removed from Open Lands and the remaining uses are limited to agriculture Land Use Levels 5, 6 and 7 on the Land Use Matrix. Each laver is discrete and shall be removed sequentially and cumulatively in the order presented in the Matrix. If a laver is removed, all uses and activities in that laver are eliminated and no longer available. SSA's created under this Policy will be known as an Agricultural SSA Following approval of an Agricultural SSA Collier County shall periodically update the RLSA Zoning Overlay District Map to delineate the boundaries of the Agricultural SSA. Text underlined is added; text stFike thFeUgh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 9 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Policy 2.3: Within ene (1) ..ear from the e#en+ive date of these emeRdmen+_; Collier County YY&Tay establish an Agriculture Advisory Council comprised of not less than five nor more than nine appointed representatives of the agriculture industry, to advise the BCC on matters relating to Agriculture. The Agriculture Advisory Council (AAC) will work to identify opportunities and prepare strategies to enhance and promote the continuance, expansion and diversification of agriculture in Collier County. The AAC will also identify barriers to the continuance, expansion and diversification of the agricultural industry and will prepare recommendations to eliminate or minimize such barriers in Collier County. FeG9FnFnemd_.;#iA_mr_, to the BGG. Policy 2.4: The BCC will consider the recommendations of the AAC and facilitate the implementation of strategies and recommendations identified by the ACC that are determined to be appropriate. The BCC may adopt amendments to the LDC that implement policies that support agriculture activities. Policy 2.5: Agriculture is an important aspect of Collier County's quality of life and economic well-being. Agricultural activities shall be protected from duplicative regulation as provided by the Florida Right -to -Farm Act. Policy 2.6: Notwithstanding the special provisions of Policies 3.9 and 3.10, nothing herein or in the implementing LDRs, shall restrict lawful agricultural activities on lands within the RLSA that have not been placed into the Stewardship program. Group 3 — Policies to protect water quality and quantity and maintain the natural water regime, as well as listed animal and plant species and their habitats by directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat through the establishment of Flow way Stewardship Areas, Habitat Stewardship Areas, and Water Retention Areas, where lands are voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area program. Policy 3.1: Protection of water quality and quantity, and the maintenance of the natural water regime shall occur through the establishment of Flowway Stewardship Areas (FSAs), as SSAs within the RLSA Overlay. FSAs are delineated on the Overlay Map and contain approximately 31,-109 30,869 acres. FSAs are primarily privately owned wetlands that are located within the Camp Keais Strand and Okaloacoochee Slough. These lands form the primary wetland Fowway systems in the RLSA. The Overlay provides an incentive to permanently protect FSAs by the creation and transfer of Credits, elimination of incompatible uses, and establishment of protection measures described in Group 1 Policies. Not all lands within the delineated FSAs are comparable in terms of their natural resource value; therefore the index shall be used to differentiate higher value from lower value lands for the purpose of Overlay implementation. Analysis of the Index Map Series shows that FSA lands score within a range of 0.7 to 2.4; approximately 96% score greater than 1.2 while 4% score 1.2 or less. The average Index score of FSA land is 1.8. Text underlined is added; text sag# is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 10 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments - BCC Adoption Draft Policy 3.2: Listed animal and plant species and their habitats shall be protected through the establishment of Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSAs), as SSAs within the RLSA Overlay. HSAs are delineated on the Overlay Map and contain approximately 48,00�39.991 acres. HSAs are privately owned agricultural areas, which include both areas with natural characteristics that make them suitable habitat for listed species and areas without these characteristics. These latter areas are included because they are located contiguous to habitat to help form a continuum of landscape that can augment habitat values. The Overlay provides an incentive to permanently protect HSAs by the creation and transfer of Credits, resulting in the elimination of incompatible uses and the establishment of protection measures described in Group 1 Policies. Not all lands within the delineated HSAs are comparable in terms of their habitat value; therefore, the index shall be used to differentiate higher value from lower value lands for the purpose of Overlay implementation. Analysis of the Index Map Series shows that HSA lands score'within a range of 0.6 to 2.2. There are approximately 13,80A-15.156 acres of cleared agricultural fields located in HSAs. The average Index score of HAS HSA designated lands is 1.3, however, the average index score of the naturally vegetated areas within HSAs is 1.5. Policy 3.3: Further protection for surface water quality and quantity shall be through the establishment of Water Retention Areas (WRAs), as SSAs within the RLSA Overlay. WRAs are delineated on the Overlay Map and contain approximately 19,200-18.428 acres. WRAs are privately owned lands that have been permitted by the South Florida Water Management District to function as agricultural water retention areas. In many instances, these WRAs consist of native wetland or upland vegetation; in other cases they are excavated water bodies or may contain exotic vegetation. The Overlay provides an incentive to permanently protect WRAs by the creation and transfer of Credits, elimination of incompatible uses, and establishment of protection measures described in Group 1 Policies. Not all lands within the delineated WRAs are comparable in terms of their natural resource value; therefore the index shall be used to differentiate higher value from lower value lands for the purpose of Overlay implementation. Analysis of the Index Map Series shows that WRA lands score within a range of 0.6 to 2.4; approximately 74% score greater than 1.2 while 26% score 1.2 or less. The average Index score of WRA land is 1.5. Policy 3.4: Public and private conservation areas exist in the RLSA and serve to protect natural resources. Corkscrew Marsh and Okaloacoochee Slough State Forest include approximately 13,500 acres. Analysis shows that they score within an Index range of 0.0 to 2.2; with an average Index score of 1.5. Because these existing public areas, and any private conservation areas, are already protected, they are not delineated as SSAs and are not eligible to generate Credits, but do serve an important role in meeting the Goal of the RLSA. Policy 3.5: Residential uses, General Conditional uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1-4) as listed in the Matrix shall be eliminated in FSAs in exchange for compensation to the property owner as described in Policy 3.8. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, other than those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety, shall only be allowed in FSAs with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. Where practicable, directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed Text underlined is added; text stFike thmu6h is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 11 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft areas shall be utilized for oil and gas extraction in FSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats. Other layers may also be eliminated at the election of the property owner in exchange for compensation. The elimination of the Earth Mining layer shall not preclude the excavation of lakes or other water bodies if such use is an integral part of a restoration or mitigation program within a FSA. Policy 3.6: Residential Land Uses listed in the Matrix shall be eliminated in Habitat Stewardship Sending Areas in exchange for compensation to the property owner as described in Policy 3.8. Other layers may also be eliminated at the election of the property owner in exchange for compensation. Policy 3.7: General Conditional Uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses shall be allowed only on HSA lands with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, other than those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety, shall only be allowed in HSAs with a Natural Resource Stewardship Index value of 1.2 or less. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants are prohibited in all HSAs. Where practicable, directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil and gas Extraction in HSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats. In addition to the requirements imposed in the LDC for approval of a Conditional Use, such uses will only be approved upon submittal of an EIS Environmental Data which demonstrates that clearing of native vegetation has been minimized, the use will not significantly and adversely impact listed species and their habitats and the use will not significantly and adversely impact aquifers. As an alternative to the foregoing, the applicant may demonstrate that such use is an integral part of an approved restoration or mitigation program. Golf Course design, construction, and operation in any HSA shall comply with the best management practices of Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program (ASCP) for Golf and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Compliance with the following standards shall be considered by Collier County as meeting the requirement for minimization of impact: • Clearing of native vegetation shall not exceed 15% of the native vegetation on the parcel. • Areas previously cleared shall be used preferentially to native vegetated areas. • Buffering to Conservation Land shall comply with Policy 4.13. Policy 3.8: Compensation to the property owner may occur through one or more of the following mechanisms: creation and transfer of Stewardship Credits, acquisition of conservation easements, acquisition of less than fee interest in the land, or through other acquisition of land or interest in land through a willing seller program. Policy 3.9: Agriculture will continue to be a permitted use and its supporting activities will continue to be permitted as conditional uses within FSAs and HSAs, pursuant to the Agriculture Group classifications described in the Matrix. The Ag 1 group includes row crops, citrus, specialty farms, horticulture, plant nurseries, improved pastures for grazing and ranching, aquaculture and similar activities, including related agricultural support uses. In existing Ag 1 areas within FSAs and HSAs, all such activities are permitted to continue, and may Text underlined is added; text stFike thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 12 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft convert from one type of Agriculture to another and expand to the limits allowed by applicable permits. Once the Stewardship Credit System is utilized and an owner receives compensation as previously described, no further expansion of Ag 1 will be allowed in FSAs and HSAs beyond existing or permitted limits within property subject to a credit transfer, except for incidental clearing as set forth in Paragraph 2 below. 2. In order to encourage viable Ag 1 activities, and to accommodate the ability to convert from one Ag 1 use to another, incidental clearing is allowed to join existing Ag 1 areas, square up existing farm fields, or provide access to or from other Ag 1 areas, provided that the Ag 1 Land Use Layer has been retained on the areas to be incidentally cleared, and the Natural Resource Index Value score has been adjusted to reflect the proposed change in land cover. Incidental clearing is defined as clearing that meets the above criteria and is limited to 1 % of the area of the SSA. In the event said incidental clearing impacts lands having a Natural Resource Index Value in excess of 1.2, appropriate mitigation shall be provided. Policy 3.10: ' Ag 2 includes unimproved pastures for grazing and ranching, forestry and similar activities, including related agricultural support uses. In existing Ag 2 areas within FSAs and HSAs, such activities are permitted to continue, and may convert from one type of Agriculture to another and expand to the limits allowed by applicable permits. Once the Stewardship Credit System is utilized and an owner receives compensation as previously described, no further expansion of Ag 2 or conversion of Ag 2 to Ag 1 will be allowed in FSAs or HSAs beyond existing or permitted limits within property subject to a credit transfer. Policy 3.11: In certain locations there may be the opportunity for flow -way or habitat restoration. Examples include, but are not limited to, locations where flow -ways have been constricted or otherwise impeded by past activities, or where additional land is needed to enhance wildlife corridors. Drierity shall he given to rer�tnra4tion Within Should a property owner be willing to dediGateesignate land for restoration activities within a FSA or HSA #die Camp Keai6 Strand FSA OF GORtigUGUG HSAs, one additional Stewardship Credits shall be assigned ,''for ^each acre of land so dedicated. Stewardship ed+t6 shall--fie•—assigned f9F eaGhra'bre of land dedicated for restoration aoti.iitieg IN thin ether FSAs acid H The actual implementation of rc� rrrcrrn-rvrrtcr'r-vr-ca't�� ra�Tvr cv. restoration improvements is not required for the owner to receive such credits and the costs of restoration shall be borne by the governmental agency or private entity undertaking the restoration. Should an owner also complete restoration improvements, this shall be rewarded with #eu+r-additional Credits for each acre of restored land upon demonstration that the restoration met applicable success criteria, as defined in the Land Development Code as determined by the permit agency authorizing said restoration. The additional Credits shall be rewarded for either caracara restoration at 2 Credits per acre, or for exotic control/burning at 5 Credits per acres or for flow way restoration at 5 Credits per acre, or for native habitat restoration at 7 Credits per acre. Within the area proposed for restoration, Land Use Lavers 1-6 must Text underlined is added; text stFike thFOUgh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 13 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft be removed The specific process for assignment of additional restoration Credits shall be included in the Stewardship District of the LDC. 2 In certain locations as generally illustrated in the RLSA Overlay Map, there may be opportunities to create restore and enhance a northern panther corridor connection and a southern panther corridor connection. Should a property owner in a federally approved corridor designate the required orooertv for such corridor, 2 Stewardship Credits shall be corridor restoration improvements this shall be rewarded with fe+F 8 additional Credits for each acre of restored land upon demonstration that the restoration met applicable success criteria as determined by the federal permit agency authorizing said restoration. Issuance of the 8 restoration implementation credits may be phased to coincide with a phased implementation process in accordance with the federal permit. The procedures shall be set forth in the LDC 3. In order to address a significant loss in Southwest Florida of seasonal, shallow wetland wading bird foraging habitat restoration of these unique habitats will be incentivized in the RLSAO Designation of any area inside an FSA HSA, or WRA for such seasonal wetland restoration shall be rewarded with 2 additional Credits per acre. Should the landowner successfully complete the restoration an additional 8 Credits per acre shall be awarded upon demonstration that the restoration met applicable success criteria as determined by the permit agency authorizing said restoration. 4. Only one type of restoration shall be rewarded with these Credits for each acre designated for restoration and in no case shall more than 10 Credits be awarded per acre. This Policy does not preclude other forms of compensation for restoration which may be addressed through public -private partnership agreement such as a developer contribution agreement or stewardship agreement between the parties involved. Also not precluded are various private and publicly funded restoration programs such as the federal Farm Bill conservation programs. The specific process for assignment of additional restoration credits shall be included in the Stewardship District of the LDC. Policy 3.12: Based on the data and analysis of the Study, FSAs, HSAs, WRAs, and existing public/private conservation land include the land appropriate and necessary to accomplish the Goal pertaining to natural resource protection. To further direct other uses away from and to provide additional incentive for the protection, enhancement and restoration of the Okaloacoochee Slough and Camp Keais Strand, all land within 500 feet of the delineated FSAs that comprise the Slough or Strand that is not otherwise included in a HSA or WRA shall receive the same natural index score (0.6) that a HSA receives if such property is designated as a SSA and retains only agricultural, recreational and/or conservation layers within the matrix. Policy 3.13: Water Retention Areas (WRAs) as generally depicted on the Overlay Map have been permitted for this purpose and will continue to function for surface water retention, detention, treatment and/or conveyance, in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) permits applicable to each WRA. WRAs can also be permitted to provide such functions for new uses of land allowed within the Overlay. WRAs may be incorporated into a SRA master plan to Text underlined is added; text s#ike theme is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 14 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments - BCC Adoption Draft provide water management functions for properties within such SRA, but are not required to be designated as a SRA in such instances. However, if all or part of a WRA provides stormwater aualitv treatment for a SRA, the prorata acreage of the WRA used to meet the water quality treatment volume required per Section 4.2 of the SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit Aoolicant's Handbook Volume II shall be included in the SRA credit calculation and the calculation of total SRA acreage. WRA boundaries are understood to be approximate and are subject to refinement in accordance with SFWMD permitting. Policy 3.14: During permitting to serve new uses, additions and modifications to WRAs may be required or desired, including but not limited to changes to control elevations, discharge rates, storm water pre-treatment, grading, excavation or fill. Such additions and modifications shall be allowed subject to review and approval by the SFWMD in accordance with best management practices. Such additions and modifications to WRAs shall be designed to ensure that there is no net loss of habitat function within the WRAs unless there is compensating mitigation or restoration in other areas of the Overlay that will provide comparable habitat function. Compensating mitigation or restoration for an impact to a WRA contiguous to the Camp Keais Strand or Okaloacoochee Slough shall be provided within or contiguous to that Strand or Slough. Policy 3.15 Any development on lands participating in the RLSA Overlay shall be compatible with surrounding land uses By 11 year of the date of adoption of the ordinance) LDC regulations shall be initiated for outdoor liahtina to protect the niqhttime environment conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Group 4 - Policies to enable conversion of rural lands to other uses in appropriate locations, while discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques by the establishment of Stewardship Receiving Areas. Policy 4.1: Collier County will encourage and facilitate uses that enable economic prosperity and diversification of the economic base of the RLSA. Collier County will also encourage development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques and facilitates a compact form of development to accommodate population growth by the establishment of Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRAs). Incentives to encourage and support the diversification and vitality of the rural economy such as flexible development regulations, expedited permitting review, and targeted capital improvements shall be incorporated into the LDC Stewardship District. Policy 4.2: All privately owned lands within the RLSA which meet the criteria set forth herein are eligible for designation as a SRA, except land delineated as a FSA, HSA, WRA or land that has been designated as a Stewardship Sending Area. The exception consistent with Policy 3.13, is when a WRA provides stormwater quality treatment for an SRA then the acreage of the WRA used for stormwater quality treatment for the SRA shall be included in the SRA. Land proposed for SRA designation shall meet the suitability criteria and other standards described in Group 4 Policies. Due to the long-term vision of the RLSA Overlay, e)dand*Rg to a-;onG^yec' of 2025, and in accordance with the guidelines established in Section 463.3469(2)163.3248, Florida Statutes, the specific location, size and composition of each SRA cannot and need not be predetermined in the Text underlined is added; text sif+ke thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing J Page 15 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft GMP. In the RLSA Overlay, lands that are eligible to be designated as SRAs generally have similar physical attributes as they consist predominately of agriculture lands which have been cleared or otherwise altered for this purpose. Lands shown on the Overlay Map as eligible for SRA designation include approximately 7-4,69)--72.0 00 acres outside of the ACSC and approximately 4B,15,000 acres within the ACSC. Total SRA designation shall be a maximum of 45,000 acres. ° • Because the Overlay requires SRAs to be compact, mixed -use and self sufficient in the provision of services, facilities and infrastructure, traditional locational standards normally applied to determine development suitability are not relevant or applicable to SRAs. Therefore the process for designating a SRA follows the fuFther procedures set forth herein and the adopted RLSA Zoning Overlay District. Policy 4.3: Land becomes designated as a SRA upon petition by a property owner to Collier County seeking such designation and the adoption of a resolution by the BCC granting the designation. The petition shall include a SRA master plan as described in Policy 4.5. The basis for approval shall be a finding of consistency with the policies of the Overlay, including required suitability criteria set forth herein, compliance with the LDC Stewardship District, and assurance that the applicant has acquired or will acquire sufficient Stewardship Credits to implement the SRA uses. The County has adopted LDC amendments to establish the procedures and submittal requirements for designation as a SRA, providing for consideration of impacts, including environmental and public infrastructure impacts, and for public notice of and the opportunity for public participation in any consideration by the BCC of such a designation. Policy 4.4: Collier County will update the Overlay Map to delineate the boundaries of each approved SRA. Such updates shall be incorporated into the adopted Overlay Map & Rg the EAR b med--�y amendment PF99e66 wheR4periodically initiated by the County essUFs, or sooner at the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners. Policy 4.5: To address the specifics of each SRA, a master plan of each SRA will be prepared and submitted to Collier County as a part of the petition for designation as a SRA. The master plan will demonstrate that the SRA complies with all applicable policies of the Overlay and the LDC Stewardship District and is designed so that incompatible land uses are directed away from wetlands and critical habitat identified as FSAs and HSAs on the Overlay Map. The SRA Master Plan shall comply with the County's then -adopted MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), and Access Management procedures. Each SRA master plan shall include a Management Plan with provisions for minimizing human and wildlife interactions Low intensity land uses (e.g. passive recreation areas, golf courses) and vegetation preservation requirements including agriculture shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and areas dominated by human activities. Consideration shall be given to the most current Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission guidelines and regulations on techniques to reduce human wildlife conflict. The management plans shall also require the dissemination of information to local residents businesses and governmental services about the presence of wildlife and practices that enable responsible coexistence with wildlife, while minimizing opportunities for negative interaction such as appropriate waste disposal practices. Text underlined is added; text strike through is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 16 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Policy 4.6: SRA characteristics shall be based upon innovative planning and development strategies referenced in Section 6(2)163.3248, Florida Statutes. These planning strategies and techniques include urban villages, new towns, satellite communities, area -based allocations, clustering and open space provisions, and mixed -use development that allow the conversion of rural and agricultural lands to other uses while protecting environmentally sensitive areas, maintaining the economic viability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and providing for the cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. The SRA shall also include a mobility plan that includes vehicular, bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, internal circulators, and other modes of travel/movement within and between SRAs and areas of outside development and land uses The mobility plan shall provide mobility strategies such as bus subsidies, route sponsorship or other incentives which encourage the use of mass transit services. The development of SRAs shall also consider the needs identified in the MPO Long Range Transportation Needs Plan and plan land uses to accommodate services that would increase internal capture and reduce trip length and long-distance travel. Such development strategies are recognized as methods of discouraging urban sprawl, encouraging alternative modes of transportation increasing internal capture and reducing vehicle miles traveled. Policy 4.7: There are #sup three specific forms of SRA permitted within the Overlay. These are Towns, Villages, Hamlets, and Compact Rural Development (CRD). The Characteristics of Towns, Villages, u,, -^SG, and CRD are set forth in Attachment C and are generally described in Policies 4.7.1, 4.7.2, and 4.7.3 and 4.7.4. GallieF GewRty 6hall e6tablirh MOF Specific regulations, guidelines and standards within the LDC Stewardship District to guide the design and development of SRAs to include innovative planning and development strategies as set forth in Section a63.(2)163.3248, Florida Statutes. The size and base density of each form shall be consistent with the standards set forth on Attachment C. The maximum base residential density as set forth in Attachment C may only be exceeded through the density blending process as set forth in density and intensity blending provision of the Immokalee Area Master Plan or through the affordable housing density bonus as referenced in the Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element. The base residential density is calculated by dividing the total number of residential units in a SRA by the overall area therein. The base residential density does not restrict net residential density of parcels within a SRA. The location, size and density of each SRA will be determined on an individual basis during the SRA designation review and approval process. Policy 4.7.1: Towns are the largest and most diverse form of SRA, with a full range of housing types and mix of uses. Towns have urban level services and infrastructure that support development that is compact, mixed use, human scale, and provides a balance of land uses to reduce automobile trips and increase livability. Towns shall be not less than 1,000 greater than 1,500 acres and u to GF more than 4,000 5,000 acres and are comprised of several villages and/or neighborhoods that have individual identity and character. Towns shall have a mixed -use town center that will serve as a focal point for community facilities and support services. Towns shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including, an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Towns shall include an internal mobility plan which shall include a transfer station or park and ride area that is appropriately located within the town to serve the connection point for internal and external public transportation. Towns shall Text underlined is added; text stFike thmugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 17 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft have at least one community park with a minimum size of 200 square feet per dwelling unit in the Town, subject to Level of Service requirements. Towns shall also have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Towns shall include both community and neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, iR a Fri as wed -described in Policy4.15 4.15.1. Towns may also include those compatible corporate office, research, development companies, and light industrial uses such as those permitted in the Business Park and Research and Technology Park Subdistricts of the FLUE and those included in Policy 4.7.4. Towns shall be the preferred location for the full range of schools, and to the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located abutting each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities and as provided in Policies 4.15.2 and 4.15.3. Design criteria for Towns shall be included in the LDC Stewardship District. Towns shall not be located within the ACSC. Policy 4.7.2: Villages are pFimaFily Fesidential communities with a diversity of housing types and mix of uses appropriate to the scale and character of the particular village. Villages shall be not less than 4-W 300 acres and up to GF MgFe than.1,000 acres inside the Area of Critical State Concern and up to 1,500 acres outside the Area of Critical State Concern. Villages are comprised of residential neighborhoods and shall include a mixed -use village center to serve as the focal point for the community's support services and facilities. Villages shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation by including an interconnected sidewalk and pathway system serving all residential neighborhoods. Villages shall have parks or public green spaces within neighborhoods. Villages shall include neighborhood scaled retail and office uses, in a ratio as provided in Policy 4.15. Appropriately scaled uses described in Policy 4--3-4.7.3 shall also be permitted in Villages. Villages are an appropriate location for a full range of schools. To the extent possible, schools and parks shall be located adjacent to each other to allow for the sharing of recreational facilities. Design criteria for Villages shall be included in the LDC Stewardship District. Villages greater than 500 acres shall include an internal mobility plan which shall include a transfer station or park and ride area that is appropriately located within the village to serve the connection point for internal and external public transportation. GUFFGRtly allowed in the baseliRe 6tandaFds. Hamlets shall have a publie, gFeeR rpaee fe caubsequent Village eF TewR Policy 4:7 4 4.7.3: Compact Rural Development (CRD) is a form of SRA that will pFevide flexibility with Fe6peGt to the Village —shall support and further Collier County's valued attributes of agriculture, natural resources and economic diversity. CRDs shall demonstrate a unique set of uses and support services necessary to further these attributes within the RLSA. Primary CRD uses shall be those Text underlined is added; text stFike thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 18 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft associated with and needed to support research education convenience retail, tourism or recreation. A CRD may include, but is not required to have permanent residential housing the —eeMraes—and fasilities that pp ,+ M maReRt .es*dent . and the services that support permanent residents The number of residential units shall be equivalent with the demand generated by the primary CRD use but shall not exceed the maximum of two units per gross acre. A CRD shall be a maximum size of 300 acres. -An example of a GIRD is aR eGGtGWFi6M village that on AttaGhment G based OR the size of the GIRD. As Fe6idential UI*6 aFe not a FequdFed use, these additional GRI)s ef 100 aGFes GF less, *F; rembinatieR with Hamlets, may be appFeved f9F eaGh To maintain a proportion of CRDs of 300 acres or less to Villages and Towns not more than 5 CRDs of 300 acres or less may be approved as SRAs prior to the approval of a Village or Town and thereafter not more than 5 additional C_ RDs of 300 acres or less may be approved prior to each subsequent Village or Town. Policy 4.7.4 Existing urban areas Towns and Villages shall be the preferred location for business and industry within the RLSA to further promote economic sustainability and development, diversification and job creation The business and industry use allowed includes but is not limited to, those as defined as Florida Qualified Target Industries The appropriate scale and compatibility of these uses within a Town or Village will be addressed during SRA application process. Policy 4.7.5 To address the accommodation of Affordable Housing in a Town or Village the SRA applicant shall utilize one of the following options: 1) Affordable Housing Land Reservation a) Reservation of one or more site(s) within the SRA or within a proximal SRA in the RLSAO with densities and development standards that accommodate Affordable Housing residential uses at a minimum density of 10 units per acre for acquisition by either Collier County, a Community Land Trust a private developer or any other affordable housing provider. b) The aggre-gate acreage of such site(s) shall be equal to or greater than 2.5% of the gross area of the SRA. c) The acreage of land reserved for Affordable Housing will be considered as a Public Benefit Use and not require the consumption of Stewardship Credits but shall be included in the calculation of total SRA acreage. d) The County shall verify the site(s) is/are appropriate and approve the site(s) at time of SRA approval subject to standards to be established in the LDC. Text underlined is added; text s#Fikeeegh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing j Page 19 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft e) Affordable Housing units shall be excluded from the Traffic Impact Statement or trip cap for the SRA in which they are located. 2) Alternatives proposed by the SRA Applicant a) While compliance with the Land Reservation described above shall be deemed to satisfy affordable housing requirements other options may be proposed by the SRA applicant and approved by the Board of County Commissioners to address housing affordability issues in the subject SRA. 3) The process and procedures to implement this policy, including a definition to be used to determine "proximal SRA" and specific guidelines and standards in those instances in which alternative options may be proposed shall be set forth in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District. Policy 4.8: An SRA may be contiguous to a FSA or HSA, but shall not encroach into such areas, and shall buffer such areas as described in Policy 4.13. A SRA may be contiguous to and served by a WRA without requiring the VVRA to he designated a6 a SRA in accordance with Policy 3.12 and 3.13. Policy 4.9: A SRA must contain sufficient suitable land to accommodate the planned development in an environmentally acceptable manner. The primary means of directing development away from wetlands and critical habitat is the prohibition of locating SRAs in FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs unless the WRA is being used to provide water quality treatment volume as referenced in Policy 3.13, in which case the WRA shall retain its WRA Overlay classification and be included in the SRA acreage total. To further direct development away from wetlands and critical habitat, residential; commercial, manufacturing/light industrial, group housing, and transient housing, institutional, civic and community service uses within a SRA shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. In addition, conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, with the exception of those necessary to serve permitted uses and for public safety, shall not be sited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2. Infrastructure necessary to serve permitted uses may be exempt from this restriction, provided that designs seek to minimize the extent of impacts to any such areas. The Index value of greater than 1.2 represents those areas that have a high natural resource value as measured pursuant to Policy 1.8. Less than 2% of potential SRA land achieves an Index score of greater than 1.2. Policy 4.10: Within the RLSA Overlay, open space, which by definition shall include public and private conservation lands, underdeveloped areas of designated SSAs, agriculture, water retention and management areas and recreation uses, will continue to be the dominant land use. Therefore, open space adequate to serve the forecasted population and uses within the SRA is provided. To ensure that SRA residents have such areas proximate to their homes, open space shall also comprise a minimum of thirty-five percent of the gross acreage of an individual SRA Town, or Village_, GF these GRI), evneeding Inn anror- Lands within a SRA greater than one acre with Index values of greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open space except for the allowance of uses described in Policy 4.9. Text underlined is added; text stFike thmugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 20 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Policy 4.11: The perimeter of each SRA shall be designed to provide a transition from higher density and intensity uses within the SRAto lower density and intensity uses on adjoining property. The edges of SRAs shall be well defined and designed to be compatible with the character of adjoining property. Techniques such as, but not limited to setbacks, landscape buffers, and recreation/open space placement may be used for this purpose. Where existing agricultural activity adjoins a SRA, the design of the SRA must take this activity into account to allow for the continuation of the agricultural activity and to minimize any conflict between agriculture and SRA uses. Policy 4.12: Where a SRA adjoins a FSA, HSA, WRA or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the Overlay Map, best management and planning practices shall be applied to minimize adverse impacts to such lands. SRA design shall demonstrate that ground water table draw down or diversion will not adversely impact the adjacent FSA, HSA, WRA or conservation land. Detention and control elevations shall be established to protect such natural areas and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. Policy 4.13: Open space within or contiguous to a SRA shall be used to provide a buffer between the SRA and any adjoining FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land delineated on the Overlay Map. Open space contiguous to or within 300 feet of the boundary of a FSA, HSA, or existing public or private conservation land may include: natural preserves, lakes, golf courses provided no fairways or other turf areas are allowed within the first 200 feet, passive recreational areas and parks, required yard and set -back areas, and other natural or man-made open space. Along the west boundary of the FSAs and HSAs that comprise Camp Keais Strand, i.e., the area south of Immokalee Road, this open space buffer shall be 500 feet wide and shall preclude golf course fairways and other turf areas within the first 300 feet. ' Policy 4.14: The SRA must have either direct access to a County collector or arterial road or indirect access via a road provided by the developer that has adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed development in accordance with accepted transportation planning standards. At the time of SRA approval, an SRA proposed to adjoin land designated as an SRA or lands designated as Open Lands shall provide for the opportunity to provide direct vehicular and pedestrian connections from said areas to the County's arterial/collector roadway network as shown on the MPO's LRTP Needs Plan so as to reduce travel time and travel expenses, improve interconnectivity, increase internal capture and keep the use of county arterial roads to a minimum when traveling between developments in the RLSA. Public and private roads within an SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. Signalized intersections within or adjacent to an SRA that serves the SRA shall be maintained by the SRA it serves. No SRA shall be approved unless the capacity of County collector or arterial road(s) serving the SRA is demonstrated to be adequate in accordance with the Collier County Concurrency Management System in effect at the time of SRA designation. A transportation impact assessment meeting the requirements of Section 2.7.3 of the LDC, or its successor regulation shall be prepared for each proposed SRA to provide the necessary data and analysis. To the extent required to mitigate an SRA's traffic impacts, actions may be taken to include, but shall not be limited to provisions for the construction and/or permittinq of wildlife crossings, environmental mitigation credits right of way dedication(s), water management and/or fill material Text underlined is added; text eta$ #FOUgh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 21 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft which may be needed to expand the existing or proposed roadway network. Any such actions to offset traffic impacts shall be memorialized in a developer contribution agreement. These actions shall be considered within the area of significant influence of the project traffic on existing or Proposed roadways. Policy 4.15.1: SRAs are intended to be mixed use and shall be allowed the full range of uses permitted by the Urban Designation of the FLUE, as modified by Policies 4.7, 4.7.1, 4.7.2, and 4.7.3, 4 7 4and Attachment C. An appropriate mix of retail, office, recreational, civic, governmental, and institutional uses will be available to serve the daily needs and community wide needs of residents of the RLSA. Depending on the size, scale, and character of a SRA, such uses may be provided either within the specific SRA, within other SRAs in the RLSA or within the Immokalee Urban Area provided the capacity of those adjoining area's facilities as described in Attachment C to be utilized by the newly created SRA can demonstrate sufficient capacity exists for their desired uses per the standards of Attachment C.. By example, each Village or Town shall provide for neighborhood retail/office uses to serve its population as well as appropriate civic and institutional uses, however, the combined population of several Villages aF;d HaMletG may be required to support community scaled retail or office uses in a nearby Town. Standards for the minimum amount of non-residential uses in each category are set forth in Attachment C, and shall be also included in the Stewardship LDC District. Policy 4.15.2: The Board of County Commissioners (BCC) may, as a condition of approval and adoption of an SRA development, require that suitable areas for parks, schools, and other public facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use. When the BCC requires such a set aside for one or more public facilities, the set aside shall be subject to the same provisions of the LDC as are applicable to public facility dedications required as a condition for PUD rezoning. Policy 4.15.3: Applicants for SRA designation shall coordinate with Collier County School Board staff to allow planning to occur to accommodate any impacts to the public schools as a result of the SRA. As a part of the SRA application, the following information shall be provided: 1. Number of residential units by type; 2. An estimate of the number of school -aged children for each type of school impacted (elementary, middle, high school); and 3. The potential for locating a public educational facility or facilities within the SRA, and the size of any sites that may be dedicated, or otherwise made available for a public educational facility. Policy 4.16: A SRA shall have adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed development, or such infrastructure must be provided concurrently with the demand. The level of infrastructure provided will depend on the form of SRA development, accepted civil engineering practices, and LDC requirements. The capacity of essential services and infrastructure necessary to serve the SRA at build -out must be demonstrated during the SRA designation process. Infrastructure to be analyzed includes but not limited to, transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, and solid waste. Transportation infrastructure is discussed in Policy 4.14. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities are required in Text underlined is added; text is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 22 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Towns; and Villages, and may be required in CRDs , depending upon the permitted uses approved within the CRD. Centralized or decentralized community water and wastewater utilities shall be constructed, owned, operated and maintained by a private utility service, the developer, a Community Development District, the Immokalee Water Sewer Service District, Collier County, or other governmental entity. Innovative alternative water and wastewater treatment systems such as decentralized community treatment systems shall not be prohibited by this Policy provided that they meet all applicable regulatory criteria. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems, limited to a maximum of 100 acres of any Town, Village or CRD of 100 acres are permitted on an interim basis until services from a centralized/decentralized community system are available. Individual potable water supply wells and septic systems ale peFFnitted in Hamlets may be permitted in CRDs of 100 acres or less in size. Policy 4.17: The BCC will review and approve SRA designation applications in accordance with the provisions of Policy 1.4-.2 of the Capital Improvement Element of the GMP and public facilities pursuant to Policy 1.1 of the Capital Improvement Element in addition to the following: fails, law enforcement, emergency medical services, fire service, government buildings and libraries. mil+^ faGilities. Final local development orders will be approved within a SRA designated by the BCC in accordance with the Concurrency Management System of the GMP and LDC in effect at the time of final local development order approval. Policy 4.18: The SRA will be planned and designed to be fiscally neutral or positive to Collier County at the SRA horizon year based on a public facilities impact assessment, as identified in LDC 4.08.07.K. The BCC may grant exceptions to this Policy to accommodate affordable housing, as it deems appropriate. Techniques that may promote fiscal neutrality such as Community Development Districts, and other special districts, shall be encouraged. At a minimum, the assessment shall consider the following public facilities and services: transportation, potable water, wastewater, irrigation water, stormwater management, solid waste, parks, law enforcement, and schools. Development phasing, developer contributions and mitigation, and other public/private partnerships shall address any potential adverse impacts to adopted levels of service standards. In the event that an SRA development, generates surplus revenues to Collier County, Collier County may choose to allocate a portion of such surplus revenues to ensure that sufficient resources are available to allow Collier County to respond expeditiously to economic opportunities and to compete effectively for high -value research, development and commercialization, innovation, and alternative and renewable energy business projects. Policy 4.19: Eight (8) credits shall be required for each acre of land included in a SRA, where such Credits were created from a Stewardship Sendina Area submitted for review or -approved prior to (the adoption date of this Ordinance). Ten Credits per acre shall be required for each acre of land included in an SRA, where such Credits were created from any other Stewardship Sending Area. fw l-and that is designated for a public benefit use described in Policy4 19 4.20 do not require the use of Credits. In order to promote compact, mixed use development and provide the necessary support facilities and services to residents of rural areas, the SRA designation entitles a full range of uses, accessory uses and associated uses that provide a mix of services to and Text underlined is added; text stFik thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 23 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments - BCC Adoption Draft are supportive to the residential population of a SRA, as provided for in Policies 4.7, 4-4-5 4.15.1 and Attachment C. Such uses shall be identified, located and quantified in the SRA master plan. Policy 4.20: The acreage of a public benefit use shall count toward the maximum acreage limits of an SRA, unless such public benefit uses were approved as part of an SRA approved prior to [adoption date of this Ordinancel in which case such public benefit uses shall continue to be excluded from the maximum acreage limitation pursuant to the policy in effect at the time of approval. Public benefit uses shall not count toward the consumption of Stewardship Credits. For the purpose of this Policy, public benefit uses include: affordable housing as defined in the LDC, public schools (preK-12) and public or private post secondary institutions, including ancillary uses; community parks exceeding the minimum acreage requirements of Attachment C, municipal golf courses; regional parks; and governmental facilities G!ud*Rg e66eRtial 6ewiGes as defined in the LDC. The location of public schools shall be coordinated with the Collier County School Board, based on the interlocal agreement, Section 163,3248 77 F.S. and in a manner consistent with 235.193 F.S. Schools and related ancillary uses shall be encouraged to locate in or proximate to Towns; and Villages_, and Hamlets subject to applicable zoning and permitting requirements. Policy 4.21: Lands within the ACSC that meet all SRA criteria shall also be- restricted such that credits used to entitle a SRA in the ACSC must be generated exclusively from SSAs within the ACSC. Further, the only form of SRA allowed in the ACSC east of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be Hamlets of -CRDs of 100 acres or less and the only form of SRA allowed in the ACSC west of the Okaloacoochee Slough shall be CRDs and Villages and GRIDS -of not more than 300 acres -and Hamlets. Provided, not more than 1,000 aces of SRA development in the form of Villages or CRDs , exclusive of any lakes created prior to the effeoti ,e date of this amendment June 30, 2002 as a result of mining operations, shall be allowed in areas that have a frontage on State Road 29 and that, asef #e had been predominantly "cleared as a result ofAg Group I or Earth Mining or Processing Uses. This Policy is intended to assure that the RLSA Overlay is not used to increase the development potential within the ACSC but instead is used to promote a more compact form of development as an alternative to the Baseline Standards already allowed within the ACSC. No policy of the RLSA Overlay shall take precedence over the Big Cypress ACSC regulations and all regulations therein shall apply. Policy 4.22 When historic or cultural resources are identified within the RLSA through the SRA designation process, the applicant in conjunction with the Florida Divisiori of Historic Resources will assess the historic or cultural significance and explore the educational and public awareness opportunities regarding significant resources. Policy 4.23 Any development on lands participating in the RLS Program shall be compatible with surrounding land uses. Within one year of the effective date of this Policy LDC regulations shall be implemented for outdoor lighting to protect the nighttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Text underlined is added; text strike thFough is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 24 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments - BCC Adoption Draft Group 5 - Policies that protect water quality and quantity and the maintaining of the natural water regime and protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats on land that is not voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area program. Policy 5.1: To protect water quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural water regime in areas mapped as FSAs and designated Restoration Areas as shown on the Overlay Map prior to the time that they are designated as SSAs under the Stewardship Credit Program. Residential Uses, General Conditional Uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1- 4) as listed in the Matrix shall be eliminated in FSAs. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, except those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety, shall e+4y not be allowed in FSAs. Infrastructure necessary to serve permitted uses may be exempt from this restriction, provided that designs seek to minimize the extent of impacts to any such areas. with a NatWal Resewee SteWaFdship index value of 1.2 OF less. Where practicable, directional -drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil or gas extraction in FSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants shall be prohibited in areas mapped as HSAs. The opportunity to voluntarily participate in the Stewardship Credit Program, as well as the right to sell conservation easements or a free or lesser interest in the land, shall constitute compensation for the loss of these rights. Policy 5.2: To protect water quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural water regime and to protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats in areas mapped as FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs on the Overlay Map that are within the ACSC, all ACSC regulatory standards shall apply, including those that strictly limit non-agricultural clearing. Policy 5.3: To protect water quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural water regime and to protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats in areas mapped as FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs on the Overlay Map that are not within the ACSC, if a property owner proposes to utilize such land for a non-agricultural purpose under the Baseline Standards referenced in Policy 1.5 and does not elect to use the Overlay, these Group 5 policies apples -shall be incorporated into the LDC, and shall supersede any comparable existing County regulations that would otherwise apply. These regulations shall only apply to non- agricultural use of land prior to its inclusion in the Overlay system: 1. Site clearing and alteration shall be limited to 20% of the property and nonpermeable surfaces shall not exceed 50% of any such area. 2. Except for roads and lakes, any nonpermeable surface greater than one acre shall provide for release of surface water runoff, collected or uncollected, in a manner approximating the natural surface water flow regime of the surrounding area. 3. Revegetation and landscaping of cleared areas shall be accomplished with predominantly native species and planting of undesirable exotic species shall be prohibited. 4. An Environmental Impact Statement shall be prepared by the applicant and reviewed by Collier County in accordance with County regulations. 5. Roads shall be designed to allow the passage of surface water flows through the use of equalizer pipes, interceptor spreader systems or performance equivalent structures. Text underlined is added; text strip is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 07/13/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 25 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft Policy 5.4: Collier County will coordinate with appropriate State and Federal agencies concerning the provision of wildlife crossings at locations determined to be appropriate. A map of these potential crossina locations will be initiated by 112 months of the adoption of this Ordinancel, updated periodically, and shall be incorporated into community, cultural and historical, and transportation planning for the RLSA, including all SRAs described in Group 4 Policies. Policy 5.5: For those lands that are not voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship program, non- agricultural development, excluding individual single family residences, shall be directed away from the listed species and species of special local concern (SSLC), as defined by Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission, and their habitats by complying with the following guidelines and standards_ 1. A wildlife survey shall be required for all parcels when listed species or SSLC are known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site or where listed species or SSLC are utilizin the site. The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) guidelines. The County shall notify the FFWCC and USFWS of the existence of any listed species or SSLC that may be discovered. 2. Wildlife habitat management plans for listed species or SSLC and for those protected species identified below shall be submitted for County approval. A plan shall be required for all projects where the wildlife survey indicates listed species or SSLC or the protected species identified below are utilizing the site, or the site contains potential habitat for listed species. These plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species or SSLC and their habitats. Management plans for new preserves shall also outline a public awareness program to educate residents about the on -site preserve and the need to maintain habitat within the preserve for listed species and those protected species identified below. a. Management plans for new preserves shall incorporate proper techniques to protect listed species, or SSLC and those protected species identified below, and their habitats from the negative impacts of proposed development. The most current and completed data and local, state, and federal guidelines and regulations shall be utilized to prepare the required management plans. vegetati.en p 'e,e..ati.en ree„i.rem...e.n..t.A.. S..h...A..l.l. e used to e6tabl.i.shh-#BF aFeas Provisions such as fencing, walls, or other obstructions shall be provided to minimize development impacts to the wildlife and to facilitate and encourage wildlife to use wildlife corridors. Appropriate roadway crossings, underpasses and signage shall be used where roads must cross wildlife corridors. Mitigation for impacting listed species or SSLC habitat shall be considered in the management plans, as appropriate. i. Management guidelines contained in publications used by the FFWCC and USFWS for technical assistance shall be used for developing required management plans. Text underlined is added; text stFike Neagh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks ("" "' "") denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 26 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft (XIII) ii. The County shall consider any other techniques recommended by the USFWS and FFWCC, subject to the provision of paragraph 3 of this Policy. (XIII) iii. When listed species or SSLC are utilizing a diFeGtly 0199AP99d GA site or indicated by evidence, such as denning, foraging, or other indications, a minimum of 40% of native vegetation on site shall be retained, with the exception of clearing for agricultural purposes. The County shall also consider the recommendation of other agencies, subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 of this Policy. b. Manaaement plans shall include provisions for minimizina human and wildlife interactions. Low intensity land uses (e.g. parks, passive recreation areas, golf courses) and vegetation preservation requirements, including agriculture, shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and areas dominated by human activities. Consideration shall be given to the most current Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission guidelines and regulations on techniques to reduce human wildlife conflict. The management plans shall also require the dissemination of information to local residents, businesses and governmental services about the presence of wildlife and practices (such as appropriate waste disposal methods) that enable responsible coexistence with wildlife, while minimizing opportunities for negative interaction, such as appropriate waste disposal practices. c. The Management Plans shall contain a monitoring program for developments greater than ten acres. buffiRd fe u iidinn Ring tg off site adjanept nepher to Fteice t pFe6eFve6' aye t OF mitigate fGF that Femaffi�-. f lR aaFeasc .Aohere Clerieta hlaGk hoar /I Irct tc amerinant to fleridant O may he present management plans are re reed and e.hall rent tiro that garbage he planed Text underlined is added; text stfike thresh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 27 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft . WRIPM MIT AN I all h. 3_The County shall, consistent with applicable policies of this Overlay, consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and recommendations from the US Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing development orders on property Wig -utilized by listed species or SSLC. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case by case basis, may Ghange-strengthen the requirements contained within these wildlife protection policies and any such change shall be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan. However, no reduction of the wildlife protection policies of Policy 5.5 will be considered as these shall constitute minimum standards for wildlife protection. Policy 5.6: For those lands that are not voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship program, Collier County shall direct non-agricultural land uses away from high functioning wetlands by limiting direct impacts within wetlands. A direct impact is hereby defined as the dredging or filling of a wetland or adversely changing the hydroperiod of a wetland.' This Policy shall be implemented as follows: 1. There are two (2) major wetlands systems within the RLSA, Camp Keais Strand and the Okaloacoochee Slough. These two systems have been mapped and are designated as FSNs. Policy 5.1 prohibits certain uses within the FSA's, thus preserving and protecting the wetlands functions within those wetland systems. 2. The other significant wetlands within the RLSA are WRA's as described in Policy 3.3. These areas are protected by existing SFWMD wetlan& peFFF146—Environmental Resource Permit for each area. 3. FSAs, HSAs and WRAs, as provided in Policy 5.3, and the ACSC have stringent site clearing and alteration limitations, nonpermeable surface limitations, and requirements addressing surface water flows which protect wetland functions within the wetlands in those areas. Other wetlands within the RLSA are isolated or seasonal wetlands. These wetlands will be protected based upon the wetland functionality assessment described below, and the final permitting requirements of the South Florida Water Management District. Text underlined is added; text Wig# is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 28 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft a. The County shall apply the vegetation retention, open space and site preservation requirements specified within this Overlay to preserve an appropriate amount of native vegetation on site. Wetlands shall be preserved as part of this vegetation requirement according to the following criteria: i. The acreage requirements specified within this Overlay shall be met by preserving wetlands with the highest wetland functionality scores. Wetland functionality assessment scores shall be those described in paragraph b of this Policy. The vegetative preservation requirements imposed by Policies 5.3 and 5.5 shall first be met through preservation of wetlands having a WRAP functionality assessment score of 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method score of 0.7, or greater. The County shall apply specific criteria in the LDC to be used to determine those instances in which wetlands with a WRAP functionality assessment score of 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method score of 0.7, or greater must be preserved in excess of the preservation required by Policy 5.3. ii. Wetlands and contiguous upland buffers that are used by listed species or SSLC, or serving as corridors for the movement of listed species or SSLC, shall be preserved on site. Wetland flowway functions through the project shall be maintained. iii. Proposed development shall demonstrate that ground water table drawdowns or diversions will not adversely change the hydoperiod of preserved wetlands on or offsite. Detention and control elevations shall be set to protect surrounding wetlands and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. In order to meet these requirements, projects shall be designed in accordance with Sections 10.2.2.4 of the Environmental Resource Permit Applicant's Handbook Volume I, and Sections 3.11 and 3.12 of the Environmental Resource Permit Applicant's Handbook Volume 11 for use within the Geographic Limits of the South Florida Water Management District (2014). Upland vegetative communities may be utilized to meet the vegetative, open space and site preservation requirements of this Overlay when the wetland functional assessment score is less than 0.65. b. In order to assess the values and functions of wetlands at the time of project review, applicants shall rate functionality of wetlands using the South Florida Water Management District's Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP), as described in Technical Publication Reg-001, dated August 1999 as amended, or the Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method, identified as F.A.C. Chapter 62-345. The applicant shall submit to County staff agency -accepted WRAP scores, or Uniform Wetlands Mitigation Assessment scores. County staff shall review this functionality assessment as part of the County's €Environmental Data provisions and shall use the results to direct incompatible land uses away from the highest functioning wetlands according to the requirements found in paragraph 3 above. c. All direct impacts shall be mitigated for pursuant to the requirements of paragraph (f) of this Policy. d. Single family residences shall follow the requirements contained within Policy 6.2.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Text underlined is added; text Neagh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 29 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A J PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft e. The County shall separate preserved wetlands from other land uses with appropriate buffering requirements. The County shall require a minimum 50-foot vegetated upland buffer abutting a natural water body, and for other wetlands a minimum 25-foot vegetated upland buffer abutting to the wetland. A structural buffer may be used in conjunction with a vegetative buffer that would reduce the vegetative buffer width by 50%. A structural buffer shall be required abutting wetlands where direct impacts are alloweds. Wetland buffers shall conform to the following standards: The buffer shall be measured landward from the approved jurisdictional line. ii. The buffer zone shall consist of preserved native vegetation. Where native vegetation does not exist, native vegetation compatible with the existing soils and expected hydrologic conditions shall be planted. iii. The buffer shall be maintained free of Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. iv. The following land uses are considered to be compatible with wetland functions and are allowed within the buffer: (1) Passive recreational areas, boardwalks and recreational shelters; (2) Pervious nature trails; (3) Water management structures; (4) Mitigation areas; (5) Any other conservation and related open space activity or use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses. v. A structural buffer may consist of a stem -wall, berm, or vegetative hedge with suitable fencing. f. Mitigation shall be required for direct impacts to wetland in order to result in no net loss of wetland functions. Mitigation Requirements: i. "No net loss of wetland functions" shall mean that the wetland functional score of the proposed mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland functional score of the impacted wetlands. Priority shall be given to mitigation within FSA's and HSXs. ii. Loss of storage or conveyance volume resulting from direct impacts to wetlands shall be compensated for by providing an equal amount of storage or conveyance capacity on site and within or abutting the impacted wetland. iii. Protection shall be provided for preserved or created wetland or upland vegetative communities offered as mitigation by placing a conservation easement over the land in perpetuity, providing for initial exotic plant removal (Class I invasive exotic plants defined by the Florida Exotic Plan Council) and continuing exotic plant maintenance, or by appropriate ownership transfer to a state or federal agency along with sufficient funding for perpetual management activities. iv. Exotics removal or maintenance may be considered acceptable mitigation. Text underlined is added; text is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 30 of 38 Staff Proposed Amendments Exhibit A PL20190002292 Future Lands Use Element Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Amendments — BCC Adoption Draft v_Jv.Prior to issuance of any final development order that authorizes site alteration, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with paragraphs (f} f. i, ii, and iii of this Policy and SFWMD standards. If agency permits have not provided mitigation consistent with this Policy, Collier County will require mitigation exceeding that of the jurisdictional agencies. g. Wetland preservation, buffer areas, and mitigation areas shall be identified or platted as separate tracts. In the case of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), these areas shall also be depicted on the PUD Master Plan. These areas shall be maintained free from trash and debris and from Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. Land uses allowed in these areas shall be limited to those listed above (3.e.iv.) and shall not include any other activities that are detrimental to drainage, flood, control, water conservation, erosion control or fish and wildlife habitat conservation and preservation. 4. All landowners shall be encouraaed to consider Darticioatina in anv proarams that provide incentives, funding or other assistance in facilitating wetland and habitat restoration on private lands including, but not limited to, federal farm bill agricultural conservation Droarams, private or public grants, tax incentives, easements, and fee or less than fee sale to conservation programs. Policy 5.7 Anv development not DarticiDatina in the RLS Proaram shall be compatible with surroundinq land uses. Within one year of the effective date of this Policy, LDC regulations shall be implemented for outdoor liahtina to protect the niahttime environment, conserve energy, and enhance safety and security. Text underlined is added; text stFike thr4gugh is deleted. Rows of Asterisks (** *** **) denotes break in text. 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 31 of 38 a Q Ml 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 32 of 38 r m a 9 0 a L v f0 x Y ~ N � a u O N N C a L C V u 70 N w w a y t, O m y v 9 6 v= i0 a E o c g 5 E D? m `m 3 o n a o u N cu o E o m 2 - N C O Y 0 0 D Y C c 7 c v m c a ` o a w 0 0 a ° 2 �_ 0> o -0 a ?J E m_ z o u 0 N a p d D u o m o o ° c Y c E v a,u c a s A n t.�t v a � 3 i o c° D m m c .0o s a` m w e o- n `aa a° m c N m c n c E Q m c o° Q L C G D .`-• C d !6 D c " oOc i u m o a n o°# m 22 n Q` CL Ev CL h O r� w N � C t L0 3 3 7 N m p Q C 70 �a O O Q V ti = r a tz m' Y _ E - i E a c ° n .t a ti �c m a a cc 7 n n n s A o a v, 4 C> L C a Y le-5 c oo > Ea Y O E 7 a Q u a o7 c w A G c 00 a C E °_° ° O c o c o. m 5 o a 5 E N c Q n- n A G E r ° > c° ° '0a° u�c cn¢�,�Y °oS omna a' inn m3a c°im o > c O m. a a d a g 6! ° c O _m o o t a `oLD 10to L v z c m a c_ L d O E Q o u a -- E W 1 > '�' a T w O G Q t A C a U a N A 'Q,' N O U d U i f0 ° Q U a W ' G u w y ,>o c N t o c - O x CN TVGOG oo = m m v Q " yoG 7 E°u 10 6l Mc> s ° a a>> L 0 0 t 3 E u m ? c E t 0o vO V ' > U io V N t O U G U a' JOj 8 G ww U of U N � .._ d OD c q `O ,0 C Ocl N rp m Gi C E w c �`z C _ � L N C c 4 m = E m v w n, m¢ C a. u io O a t O T L` c r0 N c j V a a� Al y 0 w C O> 0J _ y' 7 LC tO O O 7 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 33 of 38 3 m � y s J o m¢ E z ` y o 3 a. ¢ m m Z U O o Y 8 Q1 i Q CL E A �b a J x u'va��F«g5 w`3a ' O C� a g •r. � o Y a m E a d F a h >?W � $ � le s _� Qg°oS — u E m c uj �E c 9 E J V � � N LL E� N m o mU a�i EiSV $ E oa ✓' 'b U u a_ u �dii 8 ti m u b u_ N a u w c9 aid � �• Y m (E0Eb� � 9 N OCCl Y> Y Cyr C� �0 � m '? OOo pN] JR 4 .n �' E j R co m 0 V M R a 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 34 of 38 fA iO 6 E c a i - c 3E E c£ ° o B �° 5 a c � Z E E n _ n E c ae E i 4,e v •' = E ; E z7 � NE��Yca Y E c- — 'I Wu E O, v _ u y N • � L � 'V � O J Q E � E c o q Y o E �e 3 E c a o w U .t y� o u V e v N p U V q J Q E v^ X;C YE A M E w m E O' 2 4 s w M 4 W $ o c , 3 i y E El 00, ° S E 4 c p a- - 2 p ' 4 q n 8 0 Y r 4 3 8 i W c U• C. V pS ✓ > A V Z � 3 E a c E31 G r Y Y-6. E TO r V 3 j E W ! x Y r Z a Y � E � 5 a o c V ,E r 3 3 ` E' ' - pV • E " V �. 2 FA J D 0 m IL 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 35 of 38 LE 4 c d E o. 0 m d G d d E g g .2W 2 m c 'Z m TE n d `o E in V in c' �' Z° '1 c uTi L I- o a!E 2 m ti a c c vy o o d D�h c e o O m a�iv a m C e m Q a °8 °' 2 ' ( 6 m y m= a W E m O- LL E c° in s H- y c m 3 rn yyg o d L a �o o omv m d - cn v o t a9 .O �i. n a o Z� Q N m f0 O N m T y y OI N c� c d i N z c o O ,qC C g C J ° d E.-. C� y LL `o <n 'O {gyp O Y d o u m E L co U m m rn ai O c Z A «'H rnO 9m m �2m o UU x E �o o-�Qd a3im m aLLi ,S ra N L C inl N .0 G j D y E C C p Do K o y Uo mEo m � E a 4 1 j 6 � oF�; LLl m m U M L $ d pE U > c LL 5 ¢ p 2 a$m d 'o c U c cn � `o ° T m m # Ey 4 m m TZcai� .� we¢� O `o E_ _ oc u LL`o m oo c- m u) �? by C D > N >inEmma E v E C N m c .° n d E �' !� w 7E_ 0' IL m U o O v ^- cn 'ca $ 'E m c EC10c �vdi m 'c m d Y c o N 8 ,n y y o T d O ... O m d O 0 C CJ > a c ,° n d C d p O(IDE o N �c a d C E ru rn my m o «$U�p;� ac�� o� s �g a° z �Q�aH ''n mC 2, Be v E o 'e m «CE O rn>> Q c 0- o m•- LLz OF C LL p N > U) M° LL 5- C N U D> O ~z�U o. ¢ O U o a S Mc Q 'o LL U U N U C m L m d m N O a � _ � C d c of d C O J _ - m u Q 2 m a c CO f N = 00 d n 3 c m E p c oy c v E E E_ C m Dp O O > � C n N N C y X O m d N ° .Ic .> N in v i (7 3 U O d m o c t O v 05/10/21 BCC Adoption Hearing Page 36 of 38 Proposed Draft RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY MAP Note The official designated titles of SSAs can be found within SSA Credit Agreements. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT Of STATE RON DESANTIS Governor July 19, 2021 Ms. Martha Vergara, BMR & VAB Senior Deputy Clerk Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller of Collier County 3329 Tamiami Trail E, Suite #401 Naples, Florida 34112 Dear Ms. Vergara: LAUREL M.LEE Secretary of State Pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.66, Florida Statutes, this will acknowledge receipt of your electronic copy of Collier County Ordinance No. 2021-28, which was filed in this office on July 19, 2021. Sincerely, Anya Grosenbaugh Program Administrator AG/lb R. A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Telephone: (850) 245-6270 JohnsonEric From: BosiMichael Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2022 2:06 PM To: JohnsonEric Subject: FW: Conservancy Comments and Recommendations to Improve the RLSAs Land Development Code Section 4.08.00 Attachments: Attachment A - USFWS Fish and Wildlife Concerns re Longwater and Bellmar 3-1-21.pdf, Attachment B - Memo - 4-24-08 Hatcher-Roys to Greenwood.pdf, FW: Data & Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year; 3-4-2022 RLSA LDC Amendment recommendations Conservancy.pdf For the file From: FrenchJames <James.French @colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 6:32 PM To: ScottTrinity <Trinity.Scott@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: PattersonAmy <Amy. Patterson @colliercountyfl.gov>; GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch @colliercountyfl.gov>; BosiMichael <Michael.Bosi@colliercountyfl.gov>; CookJaime <Jaime.Cook@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Conservancy Comments and Recommendations to Improve the RLSAs Land Development Code Section 4.08.00 FYI Respectfully, Jamie James C. French Growth Management Department, Community Development 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 Office (239) 252-5717 Co Ter C014nty cAnn sent Delmrtrnent From: April Olson <AprilO@conservancy.org> Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 10:47 AM To: BosiMichael <Michael.Bosi@colliercountvfl.gov>; CookJaime <Jaime.Cook@colliercountvfl.gov>; FrenchJames <James.French @colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: nicole johnson <nicolei@conservancy.org> Subject: Conservancy Comments and Recommendations to Improve the RLSAs Land Development Code Section 4.08.00 EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Dear Mr. Bosi, Ms. Cook, and Mr. French, We are pleased to provide you with the "Conservancy's Recommendations to improve RLSA's Land Development Code Section 4.08.00", dated 3-4-2022. Also, included with this email are three Attachments referenced in our comment letter. CONSERVANCY of Southwest Moridat _ DUR WATER, LAND, WILOLIFE, KUTl1PE_ Protecting Southwest Florida's unique natural environment and quality of life ... now and forever. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. CONSERVANCY of Southwest Moi Ada OUR WATER, LAND, WILDLIFE, FUTURE. Protecting Southwest Florida's unique natural environment and quality of life ... now and forever. March 4, 2022 Michael Bosi, Planning Director Jamie Cook, Director Development Review Jamie French, Deputy Department Head Collier County Growth Management Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Conservancy's Recommendations to improve the RLSA's Land Development Code Section 4.08.00 Dear Mr. Bosi, Ms. Cook, and Mr. French: Although the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay is twenty years old, only recently has the program's effectiveness as a stewardship program truly been put to the test. Prior to the 5-Year Review (2007-2009), the RLSA had only one approved Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA), the Town of Ave Maria. However, as you know, during the second restudy (2018-2021), several more SRA applications were submitted to Collier County and were approved.' In addition, the County recently approved several Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) applications. These recent applications provide a wealth of information and reveal what is working and what improvements are necessary for the program to achieve its goals of wetland and habitat protection, retention of agricultural lands, and smart growth. Through our in-depth reviews of these recent SSA and SRA applications, we discovered flaws within the RLSA program that will result in ineffective restoration plans and impacts to listed species habitat, even within the preserves (SSAs). Although there are these serious issues, the applications still generated substantial stewardship credits toward development. Many of the issues boil down to loopholes and weak language within the Land Development Code (LDC). While, the Conservancy has solutions to improve the LDC, we understand that our recommendations may be outside of staffs scope of work, as the LDC amendments are only to implement the 2021 GMP RLSA Amendments. Unfortunately, because the adopted 2021 RLSA GMP Amendments are modeled after the outdated 2009 1 Rivergrass and Hyde Park Villages approved in 2020, followed Longwater and Bellmar Villages in 2021. Page 1140 "5-Year Review Amendments," the 2021 RLSA GMP amendments failed to address many of the current issues we raise in this document. This document explains some of the ways in which recent SRA and SSA applications fail to align with the RLSA's goals and objectives for habitat protection and restoration. Following each issue we present, we provide our recommendations to improve policies within Collier County's LDC Section 4.08.00. If staff believes our recommendations to be outside of the scope this LDC Amendment process, we ask that staff consider our recommendations for the upcoming amendment cycle or the EAR. In this document, we present the following issues: • ISSUE #1: Restoration Plans that do not achieve stated outcomes. • ISSUE #2: SSA Applications may still generate large numbers of restoration credits while providing minimal restoration work. • ISSUE #3: The LDC should require measurable success criteria based on specific environmental outcomes instead of completed tasks. • ISSUE #4: SSA Agreements and Easements must include perpetual maintenance agreements to manage and control exotic species. • ISSUE #5: Although the Planning Commission acts as the County's Environmental Advisory Committee, they do not review or hold hearings for SSA applications. • ISSUE #6: SRAs may reduce habitat functionality in adjacent SSAs. • ISSUE #7: LDC 4.08.01Q fails to conform to the RLSA's goal. • ISSUE # 8: Scores for Listed Species Habitat Indices must be increased to protect the endangered Florida panther. • ISSUE #9: Issues with the proposed location of panther corridors. Conservancy provides recommendations for location of wildlife crossings. While these issues are not all encompassing, we believe these to be the most significant issues pertaining to restoration and protection of natural resources. Following the explanation of each issue, we provide our recommendation for LDC Section 4.08.00 in BLUE. ISSUE #1- Restoration Plans that do not achieve stated outcomes: SSA15's Amended restoration plan, approved by the BCC in 2021, provides an example of a restoration plan that does not measure up to its stated goals. SSA15 lands are within an important regional wetland flowway that connects National Audubon Society's Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary to Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve. These lands are part of a large regional mammal corridor, called Camp Page 2140 Keais Strand Corridor, for the endangered Florida panther and other mammals. Florida Forever targets Camp Keais Strand for protection and states in their five year plan "the large, interconnected swamps of Southwest Florida must be preserved if such wildlife as the Florida panther and black bear are to survive." z The applicant's goal for SSA15's Amended restoration plan is "to return the natural/historic functions to degraded and altered habitats, which will in turn provide regional benefits for surface water flow and wildlife."3 While the goal sounds promising, experts concluded that SSA15's restoration plan would not fully restore Camp Keais Strand to natural and historic conditions. This is because the applicant withdrew their commitment of significant work to restore two large farm fields that impede flows within Camp Keais Strand to wetlands, even though the work was included in a 2016 version of the SSA15 Amendment application for the Town of Rural West.4 Furthermore, the restoration plan failed to demonstrate significant hydrological benefits to SSA15 lands because the applicant did not provide an updated flowway restoration analysis after the applicant removed the significant farm field restoration work from the plan.' Kevin Godsea, Refuge Manager of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services' Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge (FPNWR), explained in a letter to Collier County his concerns that SSA15's restoration plans would not achieve its stated goals of flowway restoration and landscape connectivity. Mr. Godsea stated: Secondly, the application does not address the need for hydrologic restoration of the adjacent Camp Keais Strand Flowway Stewardship Area. Hydrological restoration of the Camp Keais Strand was identified as a unique functional group within Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, which the County and Service both participated in. During this effort, members of local and state agencies, NG0s, and the Federal government made every effort to take a holistic approach to hydrological restoration. We implore the County and other regulatory authorities to require the applicants to include wetland restoration activities identified within the Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, especially those within the Camp Keais Strand functional group. 2 Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Division of State Lands (May 2020) 2020 Florida Forever Five -Year Plan. Summary of Recommendations and Status as of December 2019. Corkscrew Regional Ecological Watershed. P. 173 of 889. https:/Ifloridadep.gov/sites/default/files/FLDEP DSL OES FF CorkscrewRegionalEcosystemWatershed.pdf 3 Stewardship Sending Area 15 Collier County Restoration Plan, Revised Oct. 2019, Exhibit F to Easement Agreement p. 1 4 Stewardship Sending Area 15 Amendment Application dated January 2016. Exhibit 4-1: Aerial with Restoration Designation Areas p. 40/241 of pdf includes restoration work of two large farm fields. 5 The 2016 SSA15 Amendment application included the "Rural Lands West Camp Keais Strand Flow Way Restoration Analysis", which was never updated after restoration work for two large farm fields was removed. Page 52/241 of pdf Page 3140 Hydrologic restoration of the Camp Keais Strand is clearly a component of the RLSA Stewardship Sending Areas, and is critically important for downstream conservation lands such as the FPNWR. Currently two farm fields restrict the flowway to a few culverts in a span of 100 yards, whereas restoring these farm fields back to wetlands would result in a nearly 1 mile wide flowway immediately adjacent to the proposed Longwater development. The applicant's original plans for the Town of Rural Lands West included restoring these approximately 935 acres of farmland in the middle of the Camp Keais Strand Stewardship flowway in SSA15, to benefit the hydrology of downstream conservation lands. This wetland restoration was not included in the plans for Rivergrass Village, Longwater Village or Belmar Village, and we believe that it should, as this type of wetland restoration was clearly the intent when the RLSA was established. If properly implemented, Camp Keais Strand hydrological restoration activities could ultimately benefit one of the most biodiverse forested wetlands in the state of Florida (i.e., Fakahatchee Strand), as well as the Picayune Strand. (Letter - Attachment A) In addition, the Conservancy hired Michael Frankenberger, Certified Professional Ecologist and President of Natural Resources Services, Inc., to review SSA15's 2016 and 2019 restoration plans. Mr. Frankenberger found similar concerns with SSA15's amended plan, as was stated by Mr. Godsea. At the January 28, 2020 Board of County Commission adoption hearing for SSA15 Mr. Frankenberger stated: They [applicant] don't provide any data, no hydrological data to support their assumption that this is going to provide great environmental benefit and hydrological improvements.... They [applicant] provide no data except in '16 they did do a hydrological monitoring plan, but that is irrelevant because they took out most of the restoration, and it doesn't identify all the additional development around the sloughs. The restoration work removed from the plan that Mr. Frankenberger referenced was the work to restore the two large farm fields. Mr. Frankenberger also stated the following in a report to the Conservancy6 upon his review of Amended SSA15 Amendment application: The application flow -way restoration plan includes an unsupported assumption that the two identified areas of flow -way work, totaling 4.5 acres will significantly improve Strand flow -way functions far beyond the proposed work site, including the >8 mile length of the strand within SSA15. However, there is no supporting documentation to support this extended reach of existing road impact or potential benefit. 6 Natural Resources Services, Inc. Outside Review and Comment on the SSA 15 Natural Resource Index Assessment and SSA 15 Proposed Restoration Plan. Page 4140 Figure 1 provides a side -by -side comparison of SSA1S's restoration areas from 2016 (left) and 2019 (right). Figure 1: 2016 and 2019 Restoration Areas within SSA15 The 2016 plan, on the left, includes restoration work for two large farm fields (Areas 8 and 9 depicted in light purple and pink). The 2019 plan, on the right, shows that restoration for the two farm fields has been removed. The 2016 Plan states: The restoration of Areas 8 and 9 will contribute significantly to the hydrologic improvement of Camp Keais Strand. The removal of the perimeter berms and ditches and re -grading of Areas 8 and 9 will aid in restoring historic sheet flow conditions within Camp Keais Strand.? Because restoration of the two farm fields was so important to the hydrologic restoration of Camp Keais Strand, the restoration work should not have been removed from the plan, unless the hydrologic modeling was updated after removal of the significant farm field 7 SSA 15 Amendment Application January 2016. Stewardship Sending Area 15 Restoration Analysis and Report p. 37/241 Page 5 140 restoration and the modeling supported the assumption that regional surface water flows and wildlife habitats would be restored to natural/historic function, as was promised by SSA15's goal. RECOMMENDATION 1: Language within LDC 4.08.06.C.5.j.(4) and (5) must be strengthened for flowway restoration plans. As part of the "Restoration Analysis and Report", require applicants to provide site -specific data and a hydrological study to identify how the restoration work will result in significant and measurable hydrological improvements. Applicants shall provide pre and post hydrological data as part of the success criteria to demonstrate improvements associated with each restoration activity. Furthermore, if prior to approval of an SSA application, or as part of an amendment to an approved SSA, the applicant modifies the amount and type of restoration work, the applicant shall provide the county with an updated Restoration Analysis and Report. The report must include an updated hydrological study demonstrating that the modified restoration plan still achieves the restoration goals provided in the plan, or the SSA agreement shall not be approved. RECOMMENDATION 2: If prior to approval of an SSA application, or as part of an amendment to an approved SSA, the applicant modifies the amount and type of restoration work to be provided for any type of restoration stated in Policy 3.11, (i.e. wading bird habitat restoration, panther corridor restoration, caracara habitat restoration, etc.) the applicant must provide an updated Restoration Analysis and Report that demonstrates how the modified plan would still achieve a functional enhancement of the restoration area. RECOMMENDATION 3: Camp Keais Strand and Okaloacoochee Slough are part of the Big Cypress Basin and a large interconnected natural system of wetlands and habitat corridors that connect with surrounding public lands. However, the letter from FPNWR manager suggests that some landowner -proposed restoration projects for SSAs are designed piecemeal, without considering whether the restoration project would benefit surrounding public lands. The LDC should be updated to require that applicants who apply for Restoration Credits (R-1 and R-2) must first consult with wildlife agencies and land managers of adjacent, downstream and/or connecting public lands to ensure that the proposed restoration activities are based on a holistic approach to benefit the entire watershed and habitat types. In addition, restoration plans within Camp Keais Strand or Okaloacoochee Slough must be consistent with Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan (SWFCWP). The SWFCWP was created through a large coordinated effort to "restore surface water hydrology (getting the right quantity of water to the right place, at the right time), Page 6 140 improve water quality, restore landscape connectivity for wildlife, and restore the health of the estuaries." ISSUE #2 - SSA Applications may still generate a large number of restoration credits while providing minimal restoration work: Collier County Planning Staff clearly understood that restoration credits may not always be commensurate with restoration work provided, which is why they provided the following RLSA White Paper Recommendations. Structure restoration credits so that needed restoration is assured in return for the maximum credit and acreage footprint of SRA development (draft LDCAmendment) Restructure the timing of R-1 credits: only half of R-1 credits awarded at time of permit approval through the ERP process (or County permit if no ERP required): the remaining "R-1"credit(s) would be awarded only after the owner successfully complete all phases of R-2 restoration. (draft LDCAmendment) Restoration credits represent the lion's share of stewardship credits earned to date and are the primary type of credits that are expected to be earned in the future.$ We believe that the relationship between restoration credits and restoration work provided should always be proportional. In other words, the applicant should provide extensive environmental restoration work toward restoring habitats, flowways, and corridors, if the number of restoration credits is substantial. The SSA15 Amendment Application provides an example of how restoration work was not commensurate with the number of credits the applicant received. SSA15's Amended and Adopted restoration plan provided restoration work over only 116 acres, a mere 2% of the SSA's total 5,253 acres.9 Nonetheless, their application generated 21,428 restoration credits. At ten credits per acre, the restoration credits alone entitle them to 2,142 acres of SRA development, which may be applied toward any combination of SRAs.10 As example, 21,428 restoration credits may be applied toward two 1,000-acre villages or even a 2,142-acre town. A 2,142-acre SRA could easily add far more than 12,800 new residents to Collier County.11 These new residents will increase demands on traffic, water, sewer, 8 Collier County Stewardship Credit Analysis August 2020; Collier County May 2019 White Paper 9 Stewardship Sending Area 15 Collier County Restoration plan provide that there will be 104.23 acres of farm field restoration, 8.15 acres of exotics removal, 3.47 acres to remove trail south of Oil Well (5,400ft x 28ft), and .22 acre section road removal to alleviate pinch point (500ft x 20 ft.). The total lands where restoration work will occur is 116.07 acres. Resolution 2020-25, p. 2. 10 Policy 4.19 requires ten credits per acre, so 21,428 stewardship credits = 2,142 acres of SRAs. 11 SRAs can build up to 4 homes per acre. Even if we assume the 2,142 acres will be developed at a lower density of 3 homes per acre and at 2.5 persons per household, we get a population of 16,065. Assuming a vacancy rate of 20% _ 12,852 Page 7140 fire, police, and impacts to water quality and wildlife in the area. Thus, the increase in development rights just from SSA15's restoration credits is very substantial. Ultimately, SSA15's applicant offered a faulty restoration plan, as we saw in the previous section, consisting of only 116 acres of restoration work, in exchange for substantial developer entitlements. We do not believe this ever was the intended purpose of restoration credits. Unfortunately, this seems to be a pattern with more recent SSA agreements, as we found a similar case with SSA14's restoration plan where there was little restoration work provided in exchange for considerable restoration credits. While the Board in 2021 did take a step in the right direction by reducing R-1 dedication credits, for some of the categories, to one credit per acre, we believe that applicants will continue to provide little restoration in exchange for an abundance of restoration credits. This is because there is little incentive to provide costly restoration work for two reasons: a. Lands restored through costly restoration activities generate the same credits as lands that may benefit indirectly from restoration. b. Less costly types of restoration, that provide fewer benefits to wildlife or wetlands, generate the same number of credits as costly restoration that provide much greater benefits. a. Lands restored through costly restoration activities generate the same credits as lands that may benefit indirectly from restoration: Environmental restoration work can be very costly, especially when the site includes large farm fields restored to wetlands or forested areas. However, the applicant of SSA15 discovered that, even if they removed major restoration work, they could still generate copious restoration credits. Before the SSA15 Amendment was adopted, the applicant removed 88%12 of the restoration work that was provided in the 2016 application, yet the total restoration credits were only reduced by 25% in the final adopted application.13 How could the applicant generate so many restoration credits while removing most of the restoration work? A review of SSA15's restoration plan shows that the bulk of restoration credits were generated for potential indirect benefits of the restoration work. Although the actual restoration work was planned for only 116 acres, the applicant claimed that 2,678 acres would benefit from the restoration work.14 12 The 2016 SSA15 Amended application provided 942 acres of restoration. While the adopted SSA15 Amendment provided only 116 acres. Thus, 826 acres of restoration was removed or 88% of the total restoration work. 13 The 2016 SSA15 Amended application proposed to generate 28,357 restoration credits (p. 18/241), while the adopted SSA15 Amended Application generated 21,428 restoration credits. Thus, a reduction of credits of about 25%. 14 Stewardship Sending Area 15 Collier County Restoration Plan, Revised Oct. 2019, Exhibit G, p. 1 Stewardship Sending Area 15 Restoration Analysis and Report. Revised October 2019. Exhibit G. Page 8140 Figure 2 shows maps provided by the applicant's consultant. The map on the left shows, in blue and pink, the 2,678 acres where the applicant earned restoration credits. The map on the right shows, in orange and purple, the exact location where 116 acres of restoration work or restoration activities are planned. Figure 2: Map on left shows areas where R-1 and R-2 credits are generated. Map on right show locations of actual restoration activities. 2,678 acres of restoration areas EXHIBIT u.RESTORATION eeenH N. kVIs �•^�^. —^ PASSARELLA %' A 15 N.l' P_ • 75, R1 7/I/19 & ss ociATFs Ill 116 acres of restoration work While we agree that flowway restoration work, when done right, can benefit downstream lands, we also believe the framers intended to award Restoration credits only for restoration work or for "restoration activities" as stated in the LDC.15 Furthermore, the paltry restoration work of 116 acres, provided by the applicant, is likely why principal ecologist Michael Frankenberger and FPNWR Refuge Manager Kevin Godsea voiced is LDC policies 4.08.06.B.3f (1) (2), and (5) all state that Restoration Stewardship Credits shall be generated for "restoration activities." Page 9 140 concerns that SSA15's restoration plan would provide little hydrological benefit to Camp Keais Strand flowway and downstream conservation lands. b. Less costly types of restoration, that provide fewer benefits to wildlife or wetlands, generate the same number of credits as costly restoration that provide much greater benefits: Besides removing extensive restoration work altogether, the applicant discovered that they could provide less expensive types of restoration with cheaper, less effective types of restoration, and not be penalized. As example, the 2016 SSA15 application provided planting of native wetland and upland species for each restoration area. However, the final adopted application removed all plantings in lieu of natural recruitment, even for the largest project, restoration of a 104-acre farm field. Michael Frankenberger stated concerns that natural recruitment may not work for large areas. He stated: It should be noted that the condition to let a large agricultural area restore vegetation naturally is very risky as long-term agricultural management has likely significantly reduced native seed bank and we would recommend that the applicant modify the plan to including seeding planting prior to first rainy season aftergrade restoration. Frankenberger also stated concerns that more costly restoration activities that provide greater benefits to wildlife and hydrology generate the same credits as activities that yield less environmental benefits: It appears that an error was made on the assignment of credits for flow -way work and farm field work. The amount of restoration work/expense for the restoration of farm fields and the potential wetland/flow-way/wildlife benefits for the farm field restoration is in order of magnitude greater than the cost/benefits associated with the road removal (flow -way restoration). The credits allotted should be more justifiably be assigned with the 70% to the farm fields and the +25% for the road removal. If changes are not made to the newly adopted GMP Policy 3.11, the issue of awarding an extensive amount of restoration credits in exchange for minimal restoration could become even worse, as the new policy increases the ways in which restoration credits may be earned. RECOMMENDATION 4: The only way to incentivize significant restoration work is to award R-2 restoration credits only for the areas where the actual restoration work is to occur, not for the lands that have the potential to be indirectly restored. As example, R-2 credits may be generated on lands where there is a road removal, grading, removal of berms, planting of native species, seeding, exotics removal, etc. However, R-2 credits shall be awarded only after all specified environmental outcomes are achieved. R-1 Page 10 140 credits may be awarded for lands that may benefit indirectly from restoration; however, Land Use Layers 1-6 shall first be removed. It should be noted that under the existing Stewardship Credit Matrix, base credits may be generated for lands having "Restoration Potential". This is yet another way landowners may generate credit for lands that may indirectly benefit from restoration, and another reason why R-2 credits should only be granted for the actual restoration work. Furthermore, the program should encourage planting of native vegetation and/or seeding, rather than natural recruitment to earn R-2 credits. If an application provides for natural recruitment, then restoration credits should be held until natural recruitment is successful, as determined by permitting agency. ISSUE #3 -The LDC should require measurable success criteria based on specific environmental outcomes instead of completed tasks: Principal Ecologist Michael Frankenberger, who reviewed SSA15's restoration plans, suggested that the plan lacked measurable success criteria for environmental outcomes. The success criteria provided within SSA15 Amendment was not based on whether the restoration work resulted in measurable environmental goals such as desired habitat types with dominant native species or achieved targeted hydroperiods, instead, the success criteria was whether the applicant completed restoration activities or tasks. As example, SSA15's Amended Restoration Plan provided the following success criteria for flow -way restoration: The following are the success criteria for flow -way restoration: (1) removal of the old road grade designated for removal as part of the SSA 14 restoration plan will be completed; (2) removal of road grade south of Oil Well Road will be completed; (3) removal of the pinch pointfarm road will be completed, (4) if two years after removal of the road grades natural recruitment of native vegetation within the footprint of the old road grades has not occurred, then planting/seeding will be completed, and (6) the restored areas will be free from exotic vegetation immediately following a maintenance activity and will consist of no more than five percent cover for exotic species. A total of 10,264.5 Stewardship Credits shall be available upon the achievement of these success criteria. The statement demonstrates that the plan's success is entirely measured upon whether the work is completed, not if or how the restoration work would benefit water quality or quantity within the strand or whether certain habitat types are enhanced for listed species or wildlife. The LDC should be updated to require that success criteria demonstrates Page 11 1 40 significant and measurable enhancements of specific habitat types with specific tree or vegetative cover and/or targeted hydroperiods or water quality improvements. The 2021 adopted RLSA GMP amendments added several new ways in which applicants may earn restoration credits, so now is the time for the language to include specific success criteria based on environmental outcomes.16 As example, for crested caracara habitat restoration, the success criteria could be whether the restoration work results in the creation or enhancement of suitable caracara habitat, such as open dry or wet prairies consisting of scattered cabbage palms or lightly wooded areas with saw palmettos, cypress, and/or scrub oak.17 Mr. Frankenberger provided examples of measurable success criteria for SSA15, which we incorporated in the following recommendation to improve restoration plans. RECOMMENDATION 5: Add specificity to require that the Restoration Plan provide clearly defined and measurable expectations on what defines successful fulfillment of the restoration goals. Success criteria goals for habitat restoration should include desired dominant native species and minimum appropriate vegetative cover by habitats (i.e. deep marsh, marsh, wet prairie, hydric pine flatwoods, hardwood wetlands, cypress, pine uplands, palmetto uplands, etc.). For each of these systems, targeted habitats and hydroperiods (i.e. time period of saturation/inundation, average season high water depth, maximum seasonal high water) needs to be defined to allow post assessment and management adjustments. For forested and upland systems, in addition to identifying appropriate native tree composition (species and dominance), minimum trees per acre and minimum tree height/canopy closure should be provided to define level of success. The Conservancy is happy to provide language for success criteria, specific to each restoration type listed in Amended Policy 3.11, per the request of planning staff. 16 The 2021 amendments to Policy 3.11 provide landowners with additional opportunities to earn restoration credits for caracara habitat restoration, exotic control/burning, panther corridor enhancements, and restoration of shallow wetland wading bird foraging habitat. This is in addition to credits for flowway and native habitat restoration, which existed prior to the 2021 amendments. 17 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service South Florida Multi -Species Recovery Plan. Audubon's Crested Caracara. Polyborus plancus audubonii. https://www.fws.govlverobeach/MSRPPDFs/AudubonsCrestedCaracara.pdf Page 12 140 ISSUE #4 - SSA Agreements and Easements must include a perpetual maintenance agreement to manage and control exotic species: One of the benefits of the RLSA program often touted by RLSA landowners is that SSAs will be preserved and maintained in perpetuity at no cost to the taxpayers. ECPO's presentation at the March 28, 2019 RLSA Workshop stated: Total conservation land has grown to 50,000 acres (from 16,000 in 2002) that are permanently preserved, protected and managed at no cost to Collier County taxpayers -land that is valued at more than $500,000,000. (Emphasis added) However, a review of SSA15's Application documents, reveal ambiguous maintenance obligations that appear to end after only a few years. While there are annual inspections, the SSA Easement Agreement or Restoration plan does not state how long the inspections are to last and does not provide any maintenance requirements for the restoration areas. What happens if after ten years, much of the area becomes infested with exotics or nuisance species? There is nothing in the Stewardship Agreement to require the applicant to maintain the restoration areas. The LDC currently provides loose standards for maintenance and control of exotic species and for monitoring success of all restoration work. The LDC only requires the following: When the restoration is to be undertaken by the applicant, a Restoration Plan that addresses, at a minimum, the following elements: (f) annual management, maintenance and monitoring.18 Stewardship easement Agreement shall identify the specific land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures.19 Identification of the proposed land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measures.20 Language within Stewardship Easement Agreements should require minimum standards for controlling exotic species and for prescribed burning and should state that annual management is perpetual. RECOMMENDATION 6: Write policy based on staffs White Paper recommendation: "Add specific exotic vegetation control measures to the SSA agreement and easement and require 18 4.080.06.C.5.j.(5) (SSA Designation Application) 19 4.080.06.C.8.b (SSA Designation Application Package) 20 4.080.06.D.1.d. (SSA Application Review Process) Page 13 140 maintenance that assures no greater infestation than that existing at time of SSA designation." The plan should identify perpetual exotic control and other management measures as a requirement for Stewardship Easement Agreements. In addition to providing control measures for Category I and Category II exotic species, nuisance species such as cattail, dog fennel, and pasture grasses, shall not be allowed to flourish and count toward successful vegetation establishment. RECOMMENDATION 7: We agree with staffs recommendation that "additional specific maintenance standards [] should he included in all future SSA agreements and easements (draft LDCAmendment)." In addition, the agreements and easements must identify the long-term management entity who will maintain SSAs. Insuring funding for long-term management is essential. A suggested approach would be for each credit received, the owner would set aside monies into a long-term management endowment fund to be used solely for management of the property. This applies after all phases meet substantial success and ensures costs shall not be borne by taxpayers. ISSUE # 5 - Although the Planning Commission acts as the County's Environmental Advisory Committee, they do not review or hold hearings for SSA applications. Although the Collier County Planning Commission (CPCC) acts as the County's only Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC), the LDC does not provide for the CCPC-EAC to review Stewardship Sending Area (SSA) applications, they only review the Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA) applications. This lack of review by CCPC-EAC is completely illogical, as SSA applications are incredibly complex and include a plethora of important reports and analyses related to preservation and restoration including: Restoration Plans, Natural Resource Index Assessments, SSA Credit Agreements, Restoration Analysis and Report, and SSA Easement Agreement. The Restoration Plan report alone includes numerous important sections warranting an in-depth review by the CCPC-EAC, including restoration goals, the description of work to be performed, entity responsible for the work, work schedule, success criteria, and management and maintenance.21 Below are just some of the reasons why an additional layer of review by the CCPC-EAC is necessary: 1. A review of SSA applications by CCPC-EAC would provide better assurances that SSA applications adhere to complex GMP and LDC rules for SSAs. 2. To ensure restoration plans are designed to achieve stated outcomes. 3. To ensure restoration credits are commensurate with restoration work provided. zl LDC 4.08.08.C.5J(5) Page 14 140 4. To ensure that habitat within SSAs will not be impacted by adjacent SRAs. S. So that the CCPC-EAC fully understands the entirety of a developer's project. Not surprisingly, Eastern Collier Property Owner's (ECPO) opposes a review of SSA applications by the CCPC-EAC for reasons that do not add up.22 The reality is that ECPO simply wants little oversight of SSA applications because SSA Applications are the instrument by which RLSA landowners earn stewardship credits. Stewardship credits are the currency of the program and they substantially increase density and the value of their lands. Furthermore, ECPO understands that without a review and public hearing by the CCPC-EAC, there is less scrutiny of restoration plans and restoration work proposed. However, having only half the information of a development plan makes the CCPC-EAC susceptible to false claims and misinformation regarding what the applicant proposes for the preserve (SSA) and the number of credits generated. As example, the developer for the Town of Big Cypress, which includes Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar, claimed the following: Collier Enterprises will preserve more than 12,000 environmentally sensitive acres as part of the plan for the Town of Big Cypress and the Villages of Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar.23 When the statement is taken at face value, it seems like a great deal for Collier County. The applicant is setting aside 12,000 acres in exchange for 3,500 acres of development.24 However, the whole truth is that the SSA lands that make up the 12,000-acre preserve will generate 52,295 stewardship credits, which are enough credits to allow for approximately 6,425 acres of SRAs, not 3,500 acres as they claim.25 An accurate statement would have been: 22 Section 4 Public Participation and Comments, Committee Deliberations, Committee Actions Regarding Recommended Amendments to the Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay, p.100 https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/23857/635883137282070000 23 TownofBigCypress.com 24 Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar total approximately 3,000 acres. Per the Town Agreement, the Town of Big Cypress core area equals 515 acres. Thus, the total development area = 3,515 acres. 25 The 12,372 acres of preserve that Collier Enterprises agreed to set aside for Town of Big Cypress is for SSA14, SSA 15, SSA 17, and SSA18. (SSA14 = 1,713 acres; SSA 15 = 5,253 acres; SSA 17 = 3,148 acres; SSA 18 = 2,258 acres; total preserve = 12,372 acres). These SSAs generated 52,295 stewardship credits for setting aside SSA14, SSA15, SSA17, and SSA18. (SSA14 = 12,893 credits; SSA 15 = 31,367 credits; SSA 17 = 4,528 credits; SSA 18 = 3,507 credits). The total SRA acreage from 52,295 credits = 6,425 SRA acres. (3,000 acres of SRAs for Longwater, Rivergrass, Bellmar; 515 acres of SRA for Town Core; plus credits left over to develop 2,909 acres of SRAs) MATH: The developer is using credits right now from those SSAs toward three villages totaling 3,000 acres: Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar. Rivergrass Resolution 2020-024 shows that 6,198 credits were used; Longwater's Submittal 5 - SRA Credit agreement shows that 6,697 credits will be used; Bellmar's Submittal 6 - SRA Credit agreement shows that 6,742 credits will be used. Total Credits applied toward 3,000 acres for those three villages=19,637. The proposed Town Core would consume an estimated 3,559 credits (515.1 acres -159.2 acres for public benefit acres which do not consume credits Per Amendment 4.20 = 355.9 acres); 355.9 acres x 10 credits per acre = 3,559 credits). Credits used for the three villages=19,637 + estimated 3,559 credits used per Town Core = 23,196 total estimated credits to be consumed if Town Core is approved. Therefore, there are 29,099 remaining credits (52,295 - 23,196 = 29,099 remaining credits.) Based on Page 15 140 "Collier Enterprises will preserve more than 12,000 environmentally sensitive acres as part of the plan for the Town of Big Cypress and the Villages of Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar. In addition, we may develop three more villages at nearly 1,000- acres each or we may use the credits from the preserve toward an additional 2,909 acre town." We believe the CCPC-EAC may not have understood this, as they were not tasked with review of the SSA agreements. Furthermore, they may not have been aware that approximately 86% or 10,625 acres of the 12,000-acre preserve was already protected from development, because of the RLSA's Group 5 policies.26 Grandiose claims of high preservation to development ratio may have been a primary reason for the CCPC to recommend approval of Longwater and Bellmar and for the Board to vote to approve the villages, even when the Conservancy demonstrated that the projects did not achieve the RLSA's requirements for design, fiscal neutrality, or traffic impacts. Since SSA applications are the vehicle to generate stewardship credits, which entitle development and, ultimately, the need for infrastructure and services provided by Collier County, it is irresponsible to prohibit a review and public hearing by the CCPC-EAC. It is our hope, that by adding another layer of review and a public hearing for SSA applications, restoration plans will yield better environmental outcomes, applicants will be granted restoration credits proportionate to extent of restoration work provided, and the public and the Board will have an accurate understanding of the true development -to - preservation ratios. RECOMMENDATION #8: We recommend that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), which is also Collier County's Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC), becomes an integral part the adopted RLSA Amendments, 10 credits per SRA acre would be required. So 29,099 credits / 10 credits per acre = 2,909 remaining SRA acres. This means that from the 12,300 acres of preserves there are enough credits for an additional 2,909-acre Town or three additional 970-acre villages, this is in addition to Longwater, Bellmar, and Rivergrass and the 515-Town Core. (Data found in SSA application materials and Town SRA agreement). 26 MATH: SSA14, 15, 17, and 18 = 5,057.2 acres of WRAs; 4,260.4 acres of FSAs; and 2,996.4 acres of HSAs = 12,314 acres. Policy 5.1 prohibits development and mining within all FSAs, unless the acre has an NRI score of 1.2 or less. There are 77 acres within the acres of FSAs that score 1.2 or less. Thus, 4,183 acres of the total 4,260.4 acres of FSAs is protected. Policy 5.3.1 prohibits site clearing and alteration in FSAs, WRAs, and HSAs within 80% of the property, unless lands are to be used for agriculture. Since FSAs are already protected, then we will apply Policy 5.3.1 to the remaining 8,053 acres of WRAs and HSAs. 8,053 x 80% = 6,442 acres. Thus, there are approximately 6,442 acres of WRAs and HSAs which are protected, plus 4,183 acres of FSAs = 10,625. Thus, 86% of the 12,372 site is already protected simply by being located within the RLSA. (10,625 / 12,372 = 86%). 12,372 acre preserve - 10,625 protected from development = 1,747 acres vulnerable to development. These protection measures were the trade-off, when the program was created, for the County granting landowners the opportunity to increase density 20-fold on RLSA lands and build compact cost efficient SRAs. (SSA data provided in SSA application materials). Page 16 140 of the approval process for Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA). We recommend that LDC 4.08.06.C.6, 4.08.06.E, and 10.03.06 are amended to require the CCPC-EAC to review all SSA applications, including Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreements and Restoration Plans. In addition, the CCPC-EAC should hold a public hearing for each SSA agreement and provide a recommendation for approval, denial, or approval with conditions to the BCC. ISSUE #6 - SRAs may reduce habitat functionality in adjacent SSAs: Staffs 2019 RLSA White Paper includes a very important recommendation aimed at better protections for preserves (SSAs). The recommendation, under the "Environmental Protection" section, states: Require applicants to address the effect of potential SRA development on adjacent SSA values when SSAs are proposed (draft LDC Amendment). The Conservancy was pleased to see the recommendation in the White Paper, because we raised the issue in our 2018-2019 RLSA Comment letter.27 We do not believe that the framers of the RLSA program ever considered that an SRA's design could cause a reduction of listed species habitat value within an SSA preserve, however, we discovered that this could happen if the project is poorly designed. The Town of Rural Lands West's (RLW) application, which is another iteration of Collier Enterprises' villages, provides a good example of what could happen to listed species habitat values when a SRA is designed to surround an adjacent SSA (SSA17). Although the applicant withdrew RLW's application from Collier County in 2019, in lieu of the villages and the amended Town of Big Cypress, the applicant continues to seek state and federal approvals for the same lands within RLW's development footprint (Figure 3).28 The applicant's habitat conservation plan, for their federal incidental take permit application, states that preserves, which includes SSA17, "will be managed to preserve their existing ecological functions."29 Contrary to this claim by the applicant, an analysis conducted by Dr. Robert Frakes, discussed below, demonstrates that RLW's design will actually reduce the ecological function of SSA17. SSA17, like other WRAs, provides high quality wetlands and habitat for listed species, which is why the GMP identifies WRAs, along with FSAs and HSAs, as lands with "the 27 Conservancy of Southwest Florida (January 2019) Critique and Recommendation of Collier County's Rural Lands Stewardship Area Program: 2018-2019 RLSA Restudy. "Flaw VI: Developments May Result in Reduced Habitat Functionality in Adjacent Sending Areas." 28 The landowner -developer has an Environmental Resource Permit conceptual approval for lands within the RLW footprint from the South Florida Water Management District. In addition, they continue to seek approvals for the RLW footprint through a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and under a federal incidental take permit application with the US Fish and Wildlife Service 29 Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Eastern Collier Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, Revised 2018. For submittal to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Page 17 140 highest priority for natural resource protection."30 SSA17 WRA consists of 3,148 acres of an ecologically important wetland system, providing habitat for 11 listed species, including, among others, the Florida sandhill crane, Big Cypress fox squirrel, wood stork, limpkin, and the endangered Florida panther.31 Shaggy Cypress Swamp is a large wetland area, within SSA17, that received high rankings for Natural Resource Index Values (NRI) because of its importance for providing listed species habitat and wetlands.32 The applicant designed RLW to surround Shaggy Cypress with neighborhoods, a golf course, and the town center.33 Dr. Robert Frakes analyzed RLW's proposed site plan, using the landscape -scale adult panther habitat model.34 Applying Dr. Frakes' model to RLW's plans, Figure 3 illustrates how RLW would adversely affected Adult Breeding panther habitat (panthers three years or older). The left side of Figure 3 shows the current adult breeding panther habitat value, and the right side shows the Frakes et al. (2015) model re -run with the Rural Lands West project in place. The diagonal lines depict the proposed location of Rural Lands West, which are mostly farm fields today, but include many of the same lands within the approved Longwater Village and Rivergrass Village. The warmer the color, as depicted with reds, oranges, and yellows, the higher the value to adult breeding panthers. Gray and white colors depict lower value habitat for adult breeding panthers. 30 Collier County Future Land Use Element, RLSA Overlay Policy 1.18 31 Passarella and Associates. Stewardship Sending Area 17 NRI Assessment Listed Species Occurrence Map (July 2018). p. 1 and 10; and Passarella and Associates. Stewardship Sending Area 17 NRI Assessment Revised August 2020, p. 2 provides acreage of SSA17. 32 Passarella and Associates. Natural Resource Index Assessment Stewardship Sending Area 17. Revised August 2020. SSA17 2020 NRI Score Map, p. 17 of 17. 33 The same applicants are pursuing a permit through the Clean Water Action Section 404 permit for the same lands as RLW, in which Shaggy Cypress is proposed to be encircled by development. 34 Frakes RA, Beldon RC, Wood BE, James FE. (2015). Landscape Analysis of Adult Florida Panther Habitat. PLoS ONE, 10(7). Page 18 140 Figure3: rakes (2018). Panther Habitat Value Before Development ...........� i i a' The Frakes et al. (2015) model demonstrates that there would be a significant decrease in adult panther breeding habitat value, not only within the Shaggy Cypress, but within all of SSA17 lands, should those lands be developed. Disturbances from the surrounding neighborhoods —light, noise, pets, and traffic —would deter the Florida panther and other species from occupying SSA17 lands. Furthermore, SSA17 lands south of Oil Well Road, adjacent to the approved Rivergrass and Longwater, would also be subject to a significant reduction in habitat value for adult breeding panthers. Making matters worse, Dr. Frakes' analysis shows that RLW would decrease habitat value within Camp Keais Strand Flowway Stewardship Area (FSA). This is unfortunate, because Camp Keais Strand is a primary wetland flowway system and designated by the RLSA program as lands critical for protection. It is also one of only two major south -to -north corridor for the panther and provides primary habitat. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had similar concerns regarding another iteration of RLW, the 2008 version of the Town of Big Cypress DRI, which also would have surrounded preserves within SSA17's lands. Upon review of the development proposal, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service stated in a letter to the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers: Although there are internal waters and habitat preserves being proposed within the current development design, the overall development has been designed in such a way to discourage use by panthers and other large animals (see discussion below). Therefore, the entire development will be considered as being Page 19 140 converted into habitat that is of no value to the panther. Please consider this when conducting your panther habitat analysis.35 (Emphasis added) Ironically, under the applicant's current federal incidental take permit application, they claim SSA17 as mitigation lands for panther impacts from their proposed "covered activities" (development)36 The developers approved villages of Rivergrass and Longwater are also designed to surround SSA17's lands. Despite the fact that habitat values with SSA17 will be diminished due to the development's design, the developer still generated 4,527 Stewardship Credits from Collier County for "preserving" Stewardship Sending Area 17 (SSA17).37 While the land development code allows SRAs to surround WRAs for water management activitieS,38 the code further explains that when additions and modifications to the WRA result in in a net loss of habitat function within the WRA, then mitigation and restoration that "provide[s] comparable habitat function" to other areas of the RLSA district is required. However, the required mitigation and restoration are only for impacts related to water management activities. There are no LDC policies to address loss of habitat function or value within a WRA as a result an SRA's design, which is why staffs White Paper recommendation is important and why the LDC must be improved. RECOMMENDATION #10: We believe the LDC should be strengthened to better protect panther habitat within WRAs and SSAs from the impacts of nearby development. In order to preserve habitat values and connectivity for the endangered Florida panther, we recommend language is added to state that SRAs are prohibited from surrounding or partially surrounding a WRA or SSA, when the WRA or SSA consists of adult breeding habitat or primary panther zone habitat. 35 Letter from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, dated November 18, 2008. Corps Application No. SAJ-2008-210 (IP-MAE). Project: Town of Big Cypress. 36 The developer's lands are part of a habitat conservation plan (HCP) to obtain a federal incidental take permit under the Endangered Species Act. Figure 2-1 of the HCP depicts SSA17 lands as a "Preservation." The "Preservation" areas are set aside as mitigation for impacts to the permitted areas. The HCP states: 'As residential/commercial and earth -mining activities are approved and implemented in the area designated for Covered Activities, commensurate acreages within the lands designated for Preservation/Plan-Wide Activities and Very Low Density Use will be placed under perpetual conservation easements to compensate for permitted impacts.."... "The lands designated for Preservation/Plan-Wide Activities and Very Low Density Use will he managed to preserve their existing ecological functions." 37 Resolution 2021-083 for Stewardship Sending Area 17, p. 2 38 Collier County LDC 4.08.06.A.1 and LDC 4.08.06.A.4.b. Page 20 140 ISSUE #7 - LDC 4.08.010 fails to conform to the RLSA's Lyoal: Despite a concerted effort by many to create a planning program for eastern Collier County that protects listed species and their habitats, and regardless of the RLSA's goal of "directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitats" Collier County recently approved three developments directly within prime habitat of a critically endangered listed species. (Figure 4) Figure 4: Panther habitat zones with locations of approved villages. Layer Sources. ° ❑° Panther Te lemetry -Florida Fish &Wildlife Commission RLSA 6o undary. Rivergrass, Longwater. Bellmar- Collier County 3anther2ones-FWC, LJSFWS G ° ° 0 ° - Hyde Park& 6ellmar Town Connector- digitized by COSWFL ❑ G ndO ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ — ° ❑❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 0 9Po 0 ❑❑ 0 ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ W $o $❑ CO 0 $P m 0 00 ° ❑ ❑ 0 G ° cPd 6° o cP 0 ❑ ° ' pb $ p 0 ❑ ❑ r� 4 m ❑ 0 ° 0(b � 0 0 0O 0 ° m ❑ ❑ c pB ❑ ° df 9 0 ° ❑ ° ❑ ❑ m° O0 0 0 ❑❑ 0 ° 0 0 0 0 ❑o ° 1b❑ °❑ a o �° n q°�❑�° °o ❑ ❑ o ° ❑ 0$ d�� n ❑ o m ° ❑ ° 9 ° 0 �' ❑ m ° m � ❑ ❑ 0 ° $$ p,�pg n �❑❑❑0 ❑❑❑ 0 c 0 ❑g Legend 0 IP Ode` 0 ❑ ° ° d0 0 0 00 ❑ Florida Panther Telemetry (thruJuly 2O21) ° ❑�❑° ❑ ❑ � RLSA Boundary (2O2tJ ❑ ❑❑ ° ,.pp ❑ [�66� ❑ Town Connector y tf lb Rivergrass ego � Sdf ❑ Longwater CO ❑ ❑ Bellmar ❑ tp pg�yj ° ❑ ❑ Hyde Park ❑� ❑❑°7 m ZONE 4.,°.�nhp❑oY � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Primary � ip'CSG ❑$7 �❑ 0 Secondary ❑ 0 q09� 10�o ❑a ° ° ❑ $ ttst ❑ ❑ $ ° 0 5, 0 0 ❑� cf6 ❑ ❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑ 00 ❑� 0 0 0 ❑ 0 0❑ ❑❑ ❑ g❑ 0,❑4 CONSERVANCY $ 00 °Cbd;b $ ° 0C$90 0— ALX"Pa MIIeS Date: 111012O22 0 0.37M.75 1.5 2.25 3 Page 21 1 40 Figure 4 shows that both 1,000-acre sites for Longwater and Bellmar Villages are located entirely within primary zone habitat of the endangered Florida panther. The proposed 515-acre town connector is also 100% within primary zone panther habitat. In addition, over 700 acres, or about 70% of Rivergrass Village's site, is within Primary Zone panther habitat. Hyde Park Village is within secondary zone panther habitat. The Collier County Board of County Commissioners approved all projects, except for the town connector, in 2020 to 2021. Clearly, the County is not adhering to the RLSA's goal of directing incompatible uses from upland habitat. This is incredibly concerning as the situation for the panther is getting dire. There are only 120 to 230 Florida adult panthers left in the wild and the panther is restricted now to only 5% of its historic range.39 Furthermore, new evidence shows that the panther population may be declining.40 At the hearings for the villages, Collier County planning staff was questioned as to why they would recommend approval of projects that are mostly or entirely within primary habitat of an endangered species. Staff s response was that they were following LDC 4.08.01.Q requirements, which limit "preferred and tolerated" panther habitat to specific land cover FLUCFCS codes. LDC 4.08.01.Q states: Listed Species Habitat Indices: One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value, with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for listed species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species with land cover identified as preferred or tolerated habitatfor that species. Land mapped, using FLUCFCS, as 310, 321, 411, 425, 428, 434, 617, 6172, 621, 6218, 6219, 624, and 630 is deemed to be preferred or tolerated habitat for panthers for the purpose of assigning a value for these indices. An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of preferred or tolerated habitat for that species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat. Yet, the land cover types considered "preferred and tolerated" for the panther, as provided in LDC 4.08.01.Q, are outdated. Data from late 1990's to 2000 informed the FLUCFCS for 39 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. http://myfwc.com/panther; Frakes RA, Beldon RC, Wood BE, James FE. (2015). Landscape Analysis ofAdult Florida Panther Habitat. PLoS ONE, 10(7). 40 Presentation by FWC at August 4, 2021 Commissioners meeting: "Staff are tracking all indicators of changes in the panther population, and for the first time since the genetic restoration efforts, and decline was detected in the motor vehicle mortality model. Similar dips were seen in the number of depredations. it is unclear if this is a sign of a stabilizing population or indicates a more widespread impact of FLM or other threats." Page 22 140 4.08.01.Q.41 In addition, the same out-of-date data sets determined the locations of the RLSA's habitat stewardship areas. While data used for the report was current during the creation of the Immokalee Area Study, WilsonMiller, the report's author, acknowledged that science would continue to evolve, especially regarding the understanding of habitat use and needs of the endangered Florida panther. The report stated: The analysis involving panther habitat for the Study will be complemented by ongoing computer modeling of potential habitat and development of an updated panther recovery plan by interagency committees led by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service... . Exhibit 12A shows the same telemetry point data set at the scale of the study area. The data can be used within the study area for a variety of analyses involving panther occurrence and habitat utilization. Again, these analyses may be complemented by ongoing efforts by governmental interagency committees.42 (Emphasis added) Although the US. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) completed their panther recovery plan in 2008,43 the RLSA program was not updated with the USFWS' modeling of panther habitat. Since 2002, the RLSA's adoption date, there have been three major discoveries regarding panther habitat relevant to the program: the location and importance of the Primary Zone (Figure 5), the realization that agricultural fields are important to panthers and thusly included in the Primary Zone designations, and the delineation of Adult Breeding Habitat (Figure 6). What is Primary Zone Panther Habitat? Using all records of panther telemetry available from 1981 to 2001, land use cover data, satellite imagery, and GIS information, a group of eleven panther scientists, Kautz et al. (2006), identified regions that are most important for conservation of Florida panther habitat (Figure 5). Kautz et al. (2006) describes Primary Zone panther habitat as the minimum space needed to "support a population that is barely viable demographically as long the habitat base remains stable" and lands that are "essential to the long-term viability and survival of the Florida panther."44 The Secondary Zone is important to transient sub - adult males and may support expanding panther populations if habitat restoration were to occur. 41 Report and Recommendations of the Collier County Rural Lands Assessment Area Oversight Committee for the Immokalee Area Study, Wilson Miller May 2002, Table 1: Data Sets and Publications Obtained for Use in the Immokalee Area Study. 42 Wilson Miller, December 2000, The Immokalee Area Study Stage 1 Report. p. 14 43 US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008. Florida Panther Recovery Plan, 3rd Revision. 44 Kautz, et al. (2006) How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation 130, p. 122 Page 23 140 Most importantly, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers Kautz et al. (2006) to be current best available science for prioritizing for panther protections, as it has been wrapped into the agency's recovery plan and Panther Habitat Assessment Methodology. The USFWS Florida Panther Recovery Plan states that habitat as identified by Kautz et al. (2006) should be maintained in order to maintain the existing population. Below is a quote from the USFWS 2008 Florida Panther Recovery Plan, 3rd Revision: "The Primary Zone supports the only breeding panther population. To prevent further loss of population viability, habitat conservation efforts should focus on maintaining the total available area, quality, and spatial extent of habitat within the Primary Zone. The continued loss of habitat functionality through fragmentation and loss of spatial extent pose serious threats to the conservation and recovery of the panther. Therefore, conserving lands within the Primary Zone and securing biological corridors are necessary to help alleviate these threats." p. 89 The Primary Zone included other land cover types that are not included in LDC 4.08.01.Q, such as row crops, pasture, orchards, and marsh as primary habitat for the endangered panther. Why are Agricultural Lands within Primary Zone Important? In addition to forested areas, agricultural lands are necessary to meet daily needs and support the prey on which the panther depends.45 Many agricultural areas contain important natural landscape connections that support panther home ranges, panther reproduction, dispersal movements, and availability of large prey.46 The Primary Zone consists partly of agricultural lands. USFWS Florida Panther Recovery Plan and other best available science acknowledge the importance of agricultural lands as habitat not only for the Florida panther, but also for the eastern indigo snake, crested caracara, and the Florida bonneted bat.47 What is Adult Breeding Panther Habitat? Frakes et al. (2015) found that conservation of Adult Breeding Habitat south of the Caloosahatchee River is also essential to the recovery and survival of the Florida panther.48 45 Kautz, et al. (2006) How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation 130, p. 118-133; Pienaar E. F. and Rubino E. C (2014) Habitat Requirements of the Florida Panther. Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation U1711FAS Extension. 46 Cominskey et al (2002). Panthers and Forests in South Florida an Ecological Perspective. Conservation Ecology Vol 6, No. 1 47 Kautz, et al, 2006. How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation: Vol. 130, p. 118-133; Jackson, S., 2013. Home Range Size and Habitat Use of the Eastern Indigo Snake at a Disturbed Agricultural Site in South Florida: A Thesis Presented to Florida Gulf Coast University; Morrison and Humphrey, 2001. Conservation Value of Private Lands for Crested Caracaras in Florida. Conservation Biology, Vol. 15, No. 3, Pages 675-684. Bailey et al., 2017. Impact of Land Use and Climate on the Distribution of the Endangered Florida Bonneted Bat. 48 Frakes RA, Belden RC, Wood BE, James FE (2015) Landscape Analysis of Adult Florida Panther Habitat. PLoS ONE 10(7): e0133044. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0133044 Page 24 140 Ninety-three percent of panther's adult breeding habitat lies within the Primary Zone (Figure 6). Frakes et al. (2015) developed a distribution map for resident breeding panthers, ages 3 and up, by using telemetry of 87 adult panthers from 2004 to 2013. They concluded that, "protection of the remaining breeding habitat in south Florida is essential to the survival and recovery of the subspecies and should receive the highest priority by regulatory agencies."49 The RLSA and LDC 4.08.01.Q does not account for Primary Zone or Adult Breeding habitat nor does it consider the importance of agricultural lands to the Florida panther. Without a modification to the LDC to protect these important habitat areas, panther habitat will continue to be vulnerable to development and road impacts in the RLSA, contrary to the Overlay's very goal. 5 F Panther Zones y - Primary Zone - Secontlary 2cne - Dispersal Zone f rO Figure 5 Kautz et al. Primary Zone e _ I E i �—i A Adult Panther Habitat + r Pnmary Zone y 0 Secondary Zone F• Study Area ; a Figure 6 Frakes et al. Adult Breeding Habitat Even though Collier County did not update the program with current panther data, the County's Legal Counsel, during the 5-Year Review, stated that amendments to the RLSA must be based on current data.50 49 Ibid, p. 15-16 so Carlton Fields Memorandum, March 1, 2010. Analysis of Data Analysis requirements to support RLSA Review Committee recommended comprehensive plan amendments. Page 25 140 Data relied upon must be the best available data. If a more recent analysis or study is available, then that analysis must be considered, p. 3 For all data used to support this proposed amendment the studies must be the most up-to-date version available at the time the amendment is adopted by the Commission. Any relevant analysis that has been conducted since the Report was finalized should also be used as supporting documentation. p. 5 Even Collier County Planning Staff stated that the RLSA Overlay should be updated with new panther studies and data. In 2008, during the first review of the RLSA program, staff from the Environmental Services Department wrote a memo to Tom Greenwood, Principal Planner who was responsible for coordinating the County's RLSA's 5 Year Review Committee, explaining that the land cover codes assigned in 2002 that determine preferred and tolerated panther habitat were outdated and should be updated. Below is that statement from a 2008 Memorandum:51 (Attachment B) What is considered to be habitat utilized by the Florida Panther has changed since 2002. The FLUEAND LDC use FLUCCS codes to define 'preferred and tolerated" panther habitat as 310 (dry prairie), 321 (palmetto prairie), 411 (pine flatwoods), 425 (temperate hardwoods), 428 (cabbage palm), 434 (hardwood - conifer mixed) 617 (mixed wetlands), 6172 (mixed wetland shrubs), 621 (cypress), 6218 (cypress melaleuca), 6219 (cypress wet prairie), 624 (cypress pine, cabbage palm), and 630 (wetland forest mix). The USFWS habitat types include marsh, pasture, row crops, orchards, and exotic plants that are not included in the current RLSA description. Utilization of the descriptive habitat types for listed species solves the issues of incomplete FLUCCS lists and minor interpretation differences. (Emphasis added) In addition, Collier County planning staff, in a 2011 email, requested that Stantec (formerly WilsonMiller) provide an analysis of newer panther studies and a re-evaluation of land cover types deemed as panther habitat.52 Stantec's consultant, Al Reynolds, who represented ECPO landowners, pushed back on this request. Mr. Reynolds likely knew that if the program was updated to reconsider habitat areas of the endangered panther based on newer panther studies, then his clients (ECPO) would have to modify their development plans. Instead, he claimed that when a property owner applies for a SSA or SRA application panther data is updated. Here is what was stated in that email: (Attachment C) si Memorandum from Collier County Environmental Staff to Tom Greenwood, April 24, 2008. (RLSA Restudy Phase 2 - Policy Comments, Environmental Services Department Draft) 52 Email between Al Reynolds, Stantec and Michelle Mosca, Collier County, November 30, 2011, Subject: Data and Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year Page 26 140 Michelle Mosca . Collier County Planning Staff: A comparative analysis of current data/reports is needed to determine any changed conditions since the RLSA committee's review and recommendations. County staff is requesting that Stantec staff prepare an analysis/evaluation of the new SFWMD Land Use and Cover as well as new (since BCC consideration) panther habitat use studies and provide comments regarding changed conditions.553 Al Reynolds, Stantec: One of the basic principles of the RLSA is that there will always be more recent and more site specific data available as the program is implemented, and this is best addressed at the time a property owner and the county evaluate a specific application for an SSA or SRA, or when a property owner uses their baseline uses. This is all spelled out in detail in the GMP and LDC. As such, there is no need to continuously amend the GMP Overlay Map. Similarly, Panther information is always in a state of flux, as new telemetry is generated and new studies are performed." Mr. Reynold's suggestion to rely only on a review of the site -specific panther data under the rules of the existing LDC policies, does nothing to protect panther habitat. Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar's approvals are proof of this. The environmental consultant for the applicant of those three villages, Passarella and Associates, did update the site -specific data for all three SRA applications, per LDC rules. However, because Passarella utilized the same outdated FLUCFCS codes to determine "preferred and tolerated" panther habitat, as provided in the LDC, all three projects scored nothing or next to nothing for panther habitat within the "Listed Species Habitat Indices." Which is absurd, because all three sites are located mostly or entirely within Primary Zone panther habitat, according to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service GIS layers.54 The LDC has an egregious loophole that must be corrected. While the program has not been updated yet with recent panther habitat studies, it is still possible to protect primary panther habitat, and better protect habitat of other listed species by amending the LDC. However, there are three necessary changes to the LDC, provided in Recommendations 11, 12 and 13. 53 Email between Al Reynolds, Stantec and Michelle Mosca, Collier County, November 30, 2011, Subject: Data and Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year S4 Passarella and Associates. Bellmar Village SRA Natural Resource Index Assessment. Revised August 2020. Prepared for Collier Enterprises Management. p. 5 and Exhibit 9A; Passarella and Associates. Longwater Village SRA Natural Resource Index Assessment. Revised May 2020. Prepared for Collier Enterprises Management. p. 5 and Exhibit 9A; Passarella and Associates. Rivergrass Village SRA Natural Resource Index Assessment. Revised September 2019. Prepared for Collier Enterprises Management. (The NRI assessment for Rivergrass did not include an exhibit for Listed Species Habitat Indices, as it should have; however, the overall low NRI scores from Exhibit 7 illustrate that panther habitat was not scored). Page 27 140 RECOMMENDATION #11: We recommend the following amendment to protect primary panther habitat and align the RLSA program with its stated Goal of "directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitats": Update LDC 4.08.01.Q to remove incorrect FLUCFCS codes and any reference to "preferred or tolerated" panther habitat. Replace language to instead state: "Lands mapped as Primary Zone55 panther habitat, per U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's GIS shape files, shall be utilized for the purpose of assigning a value under the `Listed Species Habitat Indices'." ISSUE #8 - Scores for Listed Species Habitat Indices must be increased to protect the endangered Florida panther: In addition to updating LDC 4.08.01Q to incorporate the Primary Zone, the Stewardship Matrix for scores within "Listed Species Habitat Indices" must also be increased (Figure 7). Figure 7: Six Indices that make up the Natural Index Score of RLSA land Slewardship Natural Resource Index Factors Erwarx I FbW&WSbL&ffd&hiP Area WF:SA Habitat S4e*ardship Area HBA) a.6 W aler Re{ivttl7n Area RR a.5 IaB df CJnlCrl stffia COM1GaM ACSC) DA None or ilk aha* �a.a Pre]tf115 ■IdfEeL a.4 Enclwed FSA, NSA, or WRA W rhin 30D Imi of FSA or HSA a.3 a Wrhi n 380 Teei or hae ar a aWW 6.2 N U Vk 8G0'.k` P.P e tnamrnal oorrldcrmbxahw aess a.5 Comeolnr wetlendi and Nywway realoratlen anew a.5 WSA dm f[9MrM" areal DA Olher fo-itti reetorarlon areas a.3 Nme A the atm D.D Lahi ilia • Land Cover hugea4 FLUOCS Code Cwou 1 04 FLl1CCS Cetla GIBu 2 0.3 FLi1CCS Cetla Cmnp a 02 FLUCCS Ccde Cwdt 4 0.0 55 Primary Zone panther habitat areas are described in US Fish and Wildlife Service, 2008 Florida Panther Recovery Plan, 3rd Revision. Page 28 140 Figure 7 shows the Stewardship Natural Index Factors for the RLSA program set forth on the Stewardship Matrix Worksheet. Wilson Miller, working on behalf of ECPO, designed the NRI scoring and stewardship credit matrix system. There appears to be no rhyme or reason for selecting the scores for each of the six indices. Although the Conservancy requested a copy of the methodology for the NRI scoring from Collier County, during the 2018-2021 RLSA Amendment process, we were never provided with it. It appears that Collier County also does not have access to the methodology. Either a methodology that determined the NRI scores on the matrix was never created based on sound science, or Stantec (WilsonMiller) is just not willing to provide it. Without the methodology, we can only assume that WilsonMiller specifically chose 1.3 as the minimum score necessary for an acre to be protected from development. In addition, we can only assume that WilsonMiller designed the NRI system to ensure that their clients, Eastern Collier Property Owners, were assured an enormous footprint of lands that, no matter how the NRI values were applied, those lands would always score under 1.3, and therefore would always be eligible for intensification as SRAs, regardless of any updated best available science.56 The Conservancy conducted a GIS analysis on Open lands within the Primary Zone areas of the RLSA. Unless the scores under "Listed Species Habitat Indices" are increased, there is virtually no way to protect Primary Zone panther habitat under the RLSA's rules. This is so even if the outdated "preferred and tolerated" FLUCFCS were replaced with Primary Zone GIS files and there are panther telemetry points present.57 This is why values for "Primary Zone" must be increased to 1.3 and values for "Primary Zone plus other species" must be increased to 1.6. In that 2008 letter from the Environmental Services Department to Tom Greenwood, during the 5-Year Review, staff urged changes to the NRI scoring because panther habitat within Open Areas was not protected. They stated the following: (Attachment B) Protection of listed species and wildlife habitat from intense land uses is one of the requirements in the Growth Management statutes. The HSAs were delineated to protect listed species and their habitat. During the first 5 years of the RLSA program there have been several instances of listed species in Open areas. The HSAs alone do not provide adequate protection to listed species. Additionally the 2002 definition of panther habitat is very limited compared to habitat valuation matrix utilized by USFWS now. 56 RLSA Overlay Policy 4.9 states that "a SRA shall not be cited on lands that receive a Natural Resource Index value of greater than 1.2." 57 Policy 4.08.01Q states: "An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of preferred or tolerated habitat for that listed species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat" Page 29 140 In addition to the FSA and HSA areas the NRI score was intended to protect important natural resources. The NRI was not intended to specifically provide protection for listed species, it is intended to direct development away from important natural resources. The NRI score necessary to prevent conversion to high intensity uses is 1.3. In the "Open Areas," only areas with panthers and other listed species or panthers in wetlands with muck soils will score an NRI of 1.3 or greater. The weighting is inadequate for the NRI alone to contribute significantly to natural resource protection. The listed species that depend on large amounts of dry prairie like sand hill cranes, burrowing owls, and caracara now utilize pasture lands and fallow areas also. Although some Sources _ Pather Focus Areas - U S. Fish and Wildlife Service & Florida Fish and'Niidllfe �a[e2f2412o-22 /� of these areas Conservation Commission -Fish and Wldhi Research In siitute Panther Te lemetry-Florida Fish antl'.Nlltlllfe Conservation Comm -non GPS PantheFTelemeti, - Land et at Florida Panther Habitat Selection.The JouTal of'.Nlldllfe ld anagement, 2000 were included Figure 8: Bellmar Village site with panther telemetry and habitat data as HSAs the e ' ' C CC Cc CC ® p °o ° ° °° ° °. ° NRI scoring is y ©Co S C :C°°0 C ° ° �° °°C gc°O °° °�g ° ® C PC oo �C not weighted ,6 C CCon C . CC G : CC C + r C C C^ to nG j• C C CC C° -� C C C C • 4 C QC �C C c provide C C c Cc C G o ° c c° occc c protection ., o g- •CC C° C '• ° ° C a �C C �� o outside of '© �C. .C°C C "C Stewardship C .� C ° e 8C ° ®° °� C .0 CC .® orACSCareas. C� CC- C (Emphasis added) _ c • C- o = C C ° ® 8CC CC C c The NRI valuing system °° a °°�� o°� °oo�o ®C 0 ° has failed. Without the C cc N CC ACC F`Cr'i ® cc CJ� C C 8 `�C C .� C. C F cc, c° C changes we propose, it is C a•�o �o�-� •C highly likely that many C �Co Cr E°° o° Cow ° Ctc ° o io "-�� yC0 •off more developments will ° ° ' C 6 C C ° ® ° � 5° °c c C° CC C1 be approved within C C C ; primary panther habitat. C'T °° t5 ° I* , C �AI - ° LTi � �rcyv -.. It is also likely that _ C0. C UGC ., C°C °• CSC` °� ` - • Cr ° habitat of other listed C C ° J ° °° C - �C C species, which all score Legend CONSERNANC'Y under 1.3 on the matrix, • Pantnertelemetry-GPS aryllla a uI Soulhwt s oMorida MR.'InR TFa Ign],'J II L FF„ i:TUFF will also be converted to c Pa Minorer telemetry thru July 2021 �Pnmary Pan herZone Prim aJ.9 ib35 0.7 9.05 9.4 ® Florida Panther National Wildlife Beluga Miles development. Bellmar Village provides a perfect example of the failing of the NRI scoring. Page 30 140 Bellmar's site is only about 1.5 miles from the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and it is located entirely within Primary Zone panther habitat (Figure 8). Even though few panthers have been collared and the green and purple telemetry points represent only a small sample size of panthers, there are still numerous telemetry points near the site, which indicates that the Bellmar site is heavily traveled by panthers. Although the site is considered primary panther habitat and the area is heavily travelled, Bellmar scored a zero value for Listed Species Habitat Indices for most of the site. Only a small portion of the site scored a value of 0.4 NRI for listed species. Furthermore, because Bellmar scored low for all other indices and not one single acre achieved the 1.3 threshold, nothing could protect Bellmar from qualifying as a SRA, under Collier County's faulty rules. The issue all boils down to a faulty NRI scoring system and a refusal to update the program with current best available science, even though the landowner's own representative stated that the program would be updated with habitat modeling from the USFWS's Panther Recovery Plan. Now is the time to update the LDC to protect this critically endangered species. Under ECPO's "Habitat Conservation Plan," they propose to destroy 17,500 to 19,600 acres of primary panther habitat within the RLSA for uses such as development and mining!58 However, ever, single acre of Primary Zone panther habitat could be avoided and ECPO could still build the 91,480 dwelling units they propose, and more159 There are approximately 36,881 acres of "Open" areas within the RLSA that are outside of primary panther habitat (Figure 9: Conservancy Vision Map -pink areas on map). The RLSA program allows up to four units per acre for towns and villages. Thus, even if they build at an average density of 2.5 units, per acre, they could build 92,202 homes without touching 58 Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Eastern Collier Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Revised 2018. For submittal to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Table 4-1 and 4-3 59 Ibid, p. iii Page 31 1 40 one acre of Primary Zone panther habitat. If they increase the average density beyond 2.5, they could build even more homes. In addition, because the development areas would be more compact and closer to an existing road network and infrastructure, the costs to Collier County for providing infrastructure and services would be far less. Collier County cannot assume that wildlife agencies will protect the panther. From 1984 to 2012, the US Fish and Wildlife Service permitted 97,000 acres of panther habitat for development, mining, transportation projects, and other projects.60 Collier County can modify the program to achieve the goal of listed species habitat protection. During the 2003 hearings for creation of the LDC policies, Collier County's outside legal counsel, Nancy Linnan, stated the following at a planning commission meeting:61 "First of all, you can amend the comprehensive plan at any time assuming you do it during the twice a year state so you have that ability to see it getting out of whack. You have five year period where there is a mandatory check with certain requirements that you have to look at. You also have your EARS where you are going to be doing it and it doesn't preclude you from 60 Information from multiple US Fish and Wildlife Service consultation logs from FOIA. Some of the losses were prior to the delineation of panther habitat zones as defined by Kautz et al 2006, as the "line" of panther habitat was well westward of where it currently stands today. 61 Collier County Audio Tapes from May 1, 2003, Tape 1A. Conversation starts approximately 40 min 52 seconds. Page 32 140 asking at any point please bring us up to speed on where we are, give us an accounting on where we are on the credits. And so you will be seeing all of the SSAs coming in, you will be seeing all of the SRAs coming in, so you will have a pretty good idea of what is going on out there. " Dwight Richardson (Planning Commissioner) replied: "So we can change the rules at that time if it's not working?" Nancy Linnan: "Yes." RECOMMENDATION #12: We recommend the following amendment to align the RLSA program with its stated Goal of "directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitats." Modify Listed Species Habitat Indices within the Stewardship Credit Matrix by: • Replacing language that states, "Panther occupied habitat (preferred and tolerated)" with "Primary Zone panther habitat." Increase value from 0.5 to 1.3. • Replacing language that states, "Panther occupied habitat (preferred and tolerated) plus other listed species" with "Primary Zone panther habitat plus other listed species." Increase value from 0.8 to 1.6. RECOMMENDATION #13: Additional habitat protections for other listed species are necessary. If an acre of land scores zero for five of the six indices (Figure 7), but scores 0.4 for "Other documented listed species habitat" then that species' habitat is vulnerable to development. We recommend, for other listed species, that the LDC is updated to require habitat buffers found in Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services' (FWS) Species Conservation Measures and Guidelines.62 As example, FWS recommends a 985 feet buffer around a caracara nest.63 FWC recommends a 400 feet buffer around a sandhill crane's nest and 575 feet around a big cypress fox squirrel nest.64 62 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Guidance Documents: https://www.fws.goviguidance/ and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Species Conservation Measures and Permitting Guidelines. https: Ilmyfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/species-guidelines/ 63 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service South Florida Ecological Services Office DRAFT April 20, 2004. Species Conservation Guidelines South Florida Audubon's Crested Caracara, p. 3 64 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) Florida Sandhill Crane Species Conservation Measures and Permitting Guidelines, p. 6 https:IImyfwc.com/media/11565Iflorida-sandhill-crane-guidelines.pdf; FWC Big Cypress Fox Squirrel Species Conservation Measures and Permitting Guidelines, p. 6,7 https://myfwc.com/media111559/big-cvnress- fox-squirrel-guidelines.pdf Page 33 140 ISSUE #9 -Issues with the proposed location for panther corridors. Conservancy provides recommendations for location of wildlife crossings. PROPOSED PANTHER CORRIDORS: The recently amended Policy 3.11.3 provides up to ten Stewardship Credits per acre for designation and restoration of lands within a northern or southern panther corridor. The policy states that the credits shall be granted for lands within a "federally approved corridor." The Conservancy is unaware of any federally approved corridor near or within the proposed "North Corridor General Location" and "South Corridor General Location" as identified by the red arrows on the RLSA Overlay map. Furthermore, there are serious issues with the County's proposed general locations of the corridors and policy language, including the following: 1. Two approved projects are located squarely within the area of the proposed "North Corridor General Location." Figure 10 shows the location of Immokalee Sand Mine,65 an 897 acre -mining project, and the 578-acre approved Immokalee Solar project for Florida Power and Light (FPL).66 Clearly a panther corridor is not appropriate for areas where there are permitted uses. Furthermore, while we are aware that FPL has the capacity to use panther permeable fencing, FPL has provided no evidence that panthers will access or utilize solar sites once panels and fencing have been installed. It is our understanding that FPL has been collecting data on other sites utilizing this panther friendly fencing in Hendry County for many years, but has not provided data to confirm that panthers continue to use these sites after the solar panels have been installed. 2. Collier County purchased 1,046 acres near the "South Corridor General Location" (Figure 10). Although, the proposed use has yet to be decided, ideas for the parcel provided by staff include a new location for the county fairground, EMS/fire, parks and recreation, hurricane debris management and horticulture processing, and/or workforce housing.67 Any proposed panther corridor should avoid proximity to the Collier County site, as any of those uses would add considerable traffic near the proposed corridor. 65 Collier County City View. Conceptual Conditional Use Re -Review Plans for Immokalee Sand Mine. July, 2020 66 Collier County City View. Immokalee Solar CU, Site Plan. 67 Collier County BCC Agenda Item 1113, March 9, 2021. Page 34 140 3. Although Policy 3.11.3 provides landowners with the opportunity to generate substantial credits for panther corridors, there are no assurances that all landowners within the corridors will participate. If just one landowner within the proposed corridors chooses not to participate, and instead chooses to develop their lands, then the corridor will be fragmented and will not be viable. We believe that no credits shall be issued until all landowners within the corridor have committed to set aside their lands as a panther corridor. RECOMMENDATION #14. We provide the following recommendations for panther corridors: 1. The proposed corridor locations are relocated to areas where there are no permitted uses that are more intensive than existing agriculture. 2. Credits for "designating" property within a panther corridor shall not be issued until the corridor is complete, where all landowners within the 0 1 2 4 6 8 Miles proposed corridors have designated their lands to a panther corridor. 3. The SSA Agreements must stipulate that land use layers within the panther corridors are removed to an Agriculture or Conservation layer. Page 35 140 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services' Florida Panther Recovery Plan, 3rd Edition (p. 30-31), provides specifications for panther corridor widths depending on the length. The document states that corridors extending between 0.6 miles to 4 miles in length should be more than 1,312 feet wide (Beier,1995), perhaps up to 1 mile (Noss, 1992), 5 (Beier,1995), or even 10 miles (Harrison, 1992) wide. As this is a landscape corridor covering a great distance, the Conservancy has previously targeted a 1 mile width for these corridors. " Once the County provides more information for the proposed corridor locations, the Conservancy may provide additional comments and/or recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR WILDLIFE CROSSINGS: Roads are one of the greatest threats to wildlife. Currently, the RLSA has a limited road network. However, Eastern Collier Property Owners' (ECPO) plans show that they would like Collier County to add approximately 200 miles of new and expanded road projects to the RLSA, to connect the many developments they would like built.68 This road network would add approximately 800,000 daily vehicle trips to Collier County's road network,69 dramatically increasing the risks to of vehicle strikes and roadkills to all of the RLSA's wildlife. The recently amended Policy 4.14 provides for ' provisions for the construction and/or permitting of wildlife crossing" as one of the ways in which landowner -developers may mitigate or offset a SRA's traffic impacts. However, wildlife crossings must be strategically located and appropriately designed to better protect the RLSA's many threatened and endangered species. RECOMMENDATION #15: Three important studies have already been conducted to determine where wildlife crossings are most needed, due to the highest incidents of wildlife mortalities. To reduce road mortalities of wildlife and listed species, the Conservancy recommends that Collier County select the locations of wildlife crossings and fencing based on results of these studies, including crossing locations and designs for large mammal crossings: Florida Department of Transportation District One. Florida Panther Recovery Implementation Team. Transportation Subteam. June 2020. Southwest Florida Road Hot Spots 2.0. (Figure 11) This report is updated typically annually, so please refer to the most up-to-date information. https://www.fws.gov/verobeach/FloridaPantherTransl2ortation/20210127 S outhwestFloridaPantherHotSpotsReportRevised202O.pdf 68 Conservancy analysis of WilsonMiller 2008 Conceptual Build -out Roadway Network Map. 69 Panther Review Team (2009, October 15). Technical Review of the Panther Protection Program Proposed for the Rural Lands Stewardship Area of Collier County, Florida. Prepared for Rural Landowners and Conservation Organizations a Parties to a Memorandum of Understanding dated June 2, 2008.. Table 6.3-1 and 6.3-1 continued. Page 36 140 • Smith et al. 2006. Eastern Collier County Wildlife Movement Study: SR29, CR846, and CR858 Wildlife Crossing Project Final Report (Figure 12) https:Iiconservationcorridor.org/cpb/Smith Noss Main 2016.pdf • Florida Department of Transportation District One. December 2021. Wildlife Crossing Feasibility Study. SR 29 North of Florida Panther Wildlife Refuge http://www.swflroads.com/us29Inorthofpantherrefuge/images/449143- 1 SR 29 Wildlife Crossing Feasibility Study Final 12-13-21.pdf Once the County provides more information about this section of the LDC, the Conservancy may provide additional comments and/or recommendations. Page 37 140 Figure 11: Southwest Florida Road Hot Spots Report. Florida Panther Recovery Implementation Team Transportation Subteam. Adopted by USFWS. Map of panther vehicle collisions. Panthef C oil ision Hotspots as of 12131110 1 IF f it a H4tspe� Srvrrll� i � �Of Cs�l[luans - I �+ qa � ■ L 1 inth * 8.2 miles W ffqw rwfierW�n amwiv416n Iotdo ■df Nift bIrt Now, see Cormpmong To bW Pw Loewy Fees tiwricss Page 38 140 Miles Date: M112a21 0 0.5 1 2 3 4 In conclusion, the Conservancy is hopeful that you will consider these recommendations as the basis for amendments to section 4.08.00 of the Land Development Code, or if you believe the recommendations to be outside your current scope of work, please consider our recommendations for the next amendment cycle and EAR. If you would like to discuss these matters further, you may reach us at (239) 262-0304. Page 39 140 Sincerely, April Olson Senior Environmental Planning Specialist (239) 262-0304, ext. 250 Apri1O@Conservancy.org Attachments: Nicole Johnson Director of Environmental Policy (239) 403-4220 Nicole)@Conservancy.org A. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Letter to Collier County Planning Commission re: Longwater and Bellmar SRAs, dated March 1, 2021. B. Memorandum from Collier County Environmental Staff to Tom Greenwood, April 24, 2008. (RLSA Restudy Phase 2 - Policy Comments, Environmental Services Department Draft) C. Email between Al Reynolds, Stantec and Michelle Mosca, Collier County, November 30, 2011, Subject: Data and Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year Page 40 140 C*er County Memorandum To: Tom Greenwood, Principal Planner From: Laura Roys, Senior Environmental Specialist Mac Hatcher, Senior Environmental Specialist Date: April 24, 2008 Subject: RLSA Study Phase 2 — Policy Comments, Environmental Services Department DRAFT Preliminary suggested changes from the Environmental Services Department: Listed Species Protection Protection of listed species and wildlife habitat from intense land uses is one of the requirements in the Growth Management statutes. The HSAs were delineated to protect listed species and their habitat. buring the first 5 years of the RLSA program there have been several instances of listed species in Open areas. The HSAs alone do not provide adequate protection to listed species. kilditiionally the 2002 definition of panther habitat is very limited compared to the habitat valuation matrix utilized by USFWS now. VII) Policy 3.2 Listed animal and plant species and their habitats shall be protected through the establishment of Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSAs), as SSAs within the RLSA Overlay. HSAs are delineated on the Overlay Map and contain approximately 40,000 acres. HSAs are privately owned agricultural areas, which include both areas with natural characteristics that make them suitable habitat for listed species and areas without these characteristics. These latter areas are included because they are located contiguous to habitat to help form a continuum of landscape that can augment habitat values. The Overlay provides an incentive to permanently protect HSAs by the creation and transfer of Credits, resulting in the elimination of incompatible uses and the establishment of protection measures described in Group 1 Policies. Not all lands within the delineated HSAs are comparable in terms of their habitat value; therefore the index shall be used to differentiate higher value from lower value lands for the purpose of Overlay implementation. Analysis of the Index Map Series shows that HAS lands score within a, range of 0.6 to 2.2. There are approximately 13,800 acres of cleared agricultural fields located in HSAs. The average Index score of HAS designated lands is 1.3, however, the average index score of the naturally vegetated areas within HSAs In addition to the FSA and BSA areas the NRI score was intended to protect important natural resources. The NRI score was not intended to specifically Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division provide protection for listed species, it is intended to direct development away from important natural resources. The NRI score necessary to prevent conversion to high intensity uses is 1.3. In the "Open Areas" only areas with panthers and other listed species or panthers in wetlands with muck soils will score an NRI of 1.3 or greater. The weighting is inadequate for the NRI alone to contribute significantly to natural resource protection. The listed species that depend on large amounts of dry prairie like sand hill cranes, burrowing owls, and caracara now utilize pasture lands and fallow areas also. Although some of these areas were included as HSAs the NRI scoring is not weighted to provide protection outside of Stewardship or ACSC areas. (VU) Policy 1.8 The natural resource value of land within the RLSA is measured by the Stewardship Natural Resource Index (Index) set forth on the Worksheet. The Index established the relative natural resource value by objectively measuring six different characteristics of land and assigning an index factor based on each characteristic. The sum of these six factors is the index value for the land. Both the characteristics used and the factors assigned thereto were established after review and analysis of detailed information about the natural resource attributes of land within the RLSA so that development could be directed away from important natural resources. The six characteristics measured are: Stewardship Overlay Designation, Sending Area Proximity, Listed Species Habitat, Soils/Surface Water, Restoration Potential, and Land Use/Land Cover. Approximately 6 % of the panther telemetry points (through 12/2007) in the RLSA are in "Open" areas (Figure 1). There are 8 documented panther deaths in or on the edge of open areas. There are 5 Florida scrub jay families and 1 rookery and an eagle nest in Open areas. I don't have GIS data for caracaras, sand hill cranes, gopher tortoises, or burrowing owls but they have all been observed in these areas also. LDC 4.08.01 Specific Definitions Applicable to RLSA District Q. Listed Species Habitat Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value, with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for listed species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species with land cover identified as preferred or tolerated habitat for that species. Land mapped, using FLUCFCS, as 310, 321, 411, 425, 428, 434, 617, 6172, 621, 6218, 6219, 624, and 630 is deemed to be preferred or tolerated habitat for panthers for the purpose of assigning a value for these indices. An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of preferred or tolerated habitat for that species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat. The scoring range is 0.8 for panther and other listed species, 0.5 for panther, and 0.4 for other listed species. No FLUCCS codes are listed for any other species. Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division What is considered to be habitat utilized by the Florida Panther has changed since) 2002. The FLUE AND LDC use FLUCCS codes to define "preferred or tolerated" panther habitat as 310 ( dry prairie), 321 (pahnetto prairie), 411 (pine flatwoods), 425 ( temperate hardwoods), 428 ( cabbage palm), 434 ( hardwood — conifer mixed), 617 ( mixed wetlands), 6172 (mixed wetland shrubs), 621 (cypress), 6218 (cypress melaleuca), 6219 (cypress wet prairie), 624 (cypress, pine, cabbage palm), and 630 (wetland forest mix). The USFWS uses the following habitat types that occur in the RLSA to value panther habitat for compensation assessments: Habitat Type Xeric oak scrub Hardwood forest Freshwater marsh Bottomland hardwood Bay swamp Hardwood swamp Cypress swamp Sand pine scrub Sandhill Hardwood -pine forest Pine forest Grassland/pasture Dry prairie Shrub swamp Shrub and brush STA Crop land Orchards/groves Exotic plants Reservoir Assigned value 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 6 5 5 4.5 4 4 3 The USFWS habitat types include marsh, pasture, row crops, orchards, and exotic plants that are not included in the current RLSA description. Utilization of descriptive habitat types for listed species solves the issues of incomplete FLUCCS lists and minor interpretation differences. I suggest we utilize the same list for black bears; native wetland and natural water bodies for alligators and wading birds; pastures, parries, and fallow agriculture for sand hill cranes, caracara, and burrowing owls; native uplands for gopher tortoise; and a 660 ft buffer for an eagle nest. For any other listed species the land cover shall be identified in a sate or federal management plan as utilized by that species. Protection of natural resources To provide protection to the areas providing significant habitat value to listed species in Open areas I suggest changing the scoring to Endangered species with other listed species 0.9; Endangered species or Threatened and other listed species 0:8; Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division Threatened species, Eagle nest, or rookery 0.7; and Species of Special Concern 0.6. To provide some flexibility to property owners and benefit to listed species mitigation of areas with NRI values greater than 1.3 can occur off -site in similar habitat or restoration areas within or contiguous to Camp Keais or Okaloacochee sloughs at a ratio of at least 1:1 with a management plan and conservation easement. Proposed change to LDC: LDC 4.08.01 Specific Definitions Applicable to RLSA District Q. Listed Species Habitat Indices. One of the indices comprising the Natural Resource Index Value, with values assigned based upon the habitat value of the land for listed species. Index values are based on documentation of occupied habitat as established by the intersect of documented and verifiable observations of listed species with land cover identified as pr-efeffed e t ed-habitat for that species. , f 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 and 630 is "+++ed to be- pre&rred of telefat .a Oak scrub. hardwood forest, freshwater marsh, bav swamp. hardwood swamp, c ress swamp,sand pine scrub hardwood -pine forest. pine forest, grassland/pasture, dry prairie, shrub swamp. or shrub and brush shall be used s habitat for bears and panthers for the puTose f assigning a value for these indices. The following habitat types shall be used in the indices, Native wetland and natural water bodies for alligators and wading birds: pastures, prairies, and fallow agriculture for sand hill cranes, care and burrowin owls native u lands for o her tortoise: and a 660 ft buffer for an eggle nest. An intersection of at least one data point establishing the presence of a listed species within a geographic information system (GIS) polygon of habitat for that species shall result in the entire polygon being scored as occupied habitat. The scoring for the Listed Species Habitat Indices shall be: Endangered species with other listed species 0.9: Endangered species or Threatened and other listed species 0.8; Threatened species, -Eagle nest. or rookery; and Species of Special Concern 0.6. Other Comments/Concerns: NRl score, Group 3 Policies, LDC 4.08.06.13.3 • There should be an update of the initial mapping. Not all land use/land cover codes are included and there could be more areas like Lake Trafford Ranch and Half Circle Ranch that were improperly designated. Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSA) Policy 3.2 • The current acreage for all HSAs provided in the FLUE is incorrect. Acreage was added between Transmission and Adoption of the RLSA and needs to be updated. Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA): • Continuing agricultural use in the SSAs should be with Best Management Practice (BMP) standards, at a minimum. Policy 3.9 • No exotic removal and maintenance is required for SSA designation. Staff has observed substantial amounts of exotic pest plants, and are concerned that their growth will continue to decrease the habitat value in the years to come. The presence of high concentrations of exotic plants in the sub - canopy has long been recognized as deleterious to native species, both plants and animals. This would not be a concern where management of the exotics were part of a restoration plan. Goal 3 and LDC 4.08.06 SSA Designation Restoration - Policies 3.11 and 3.12, LDC 4.08.06.C.5.j • Any level of restoration or maintenance receives the same amount of credits. The credit value should be tied to the functional lift and there should be levels of credit that could be earned. • The Management Plan should be required with the Stewardship Easement to ensure enforceability. • The management plan should include more than the 12 exotic plants listed by County Code (FLEPPC Category 1). Various other exotics have been observed. • The LDC should define more specific requirements on what management plans entail. • Restoration should be to a native habitat. Development in the RLSA: • SRA: LDC 4.08.07 SRA Designation Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division • Soil sampling and other relevant information that is normally required for submittal of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be required. Unless it is a DRI, staff can not request an EIS or even parts of the EIS. • Full, detailed wildlife surveys should be submitted at the time of SRA review. This information can be used to confirm the SSAs being used for development of the SRA are offsetting the impacts development of the i SRA will have on listed species. • EAC hearing should be required for all SRAs. (LDC 4.08.07.F.1.a.) • Need detailed habitat management plans or information regarding species to be relocated, etc. Jmh/Lrg C: ESD File: G:IRLSA\RLSA 5 year review Enviro 032808-draft.doc Environmental Services Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division May 6, 2008 ' MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA REVIEW CONMUTTEE Ave Maria, Florida, May -6 °2009 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted Business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Ave Maria University Academic Building 07 Conference Room 5, 5050 Ave Maria Boulevard, Ave Maria, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Ron Hamel j VICE CHAIRMAN: Neno Spagna Brad Cornell Zach Floyd Crews Gary Eidson David Farmer Tom Jones David Woodley Bill McDaniel Timothy Nance Fred Thomas ALSO PRESENT: Thomas Greenwood, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Department Michael J. DeRuntz, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Department Laura Roys, Senior Environmental Specialist, Engineering and Environment Services Department May 6, 2008 Approximately 20 members of the public I. Call Meeting to Order The meeting was called to order at 9:07 AM by Chairman Hamel. II. Roll Call Roll call was taken, and a quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda Mr. Hamel requested that Item IX be move up in front of Item VI. Mr. McDaniel moved to approve the agenda as amended, Second by Mr. Farmer, Voice Vote - Unanimously Approved 11-0. IV. Approval of Minutes: February 5, 2008 Mr. Thomas moved to approve the minutes of the February 5, 2008 committee meeting, as amended, Second by Mr. McDaniel Voice Vote -Unanimously Approved 11-0. V. Presentation — Mr. Draper was on his way B. Clarence Tears, Jr., South Florida Water Management District Mr. Tears stated that the most important thing that needs to be accomplished from the South Florida Water Management District's perspective for the RLSA Program would be to help keep and improve the flowway of the Ramp Keais Strand and Okaloacoochee Slough open and flowing. He stated that local utilities are using reverse osmosis for their supply of potable water and it is becoming increasing important to provide all means to recharge aquifers. He added that the RLSA program. in Collier County has been a huge .success in establishing SSAs within the Kamp Keais Strand, and to a lesser degree the Okaloacoochee Slough. One of the District's goals is to work with property owners to develop "Regional Land Stewardship Flow Restoration." The District, at the request and support of the property owners in the Kamp Keais Strand, completed modeling for the Kamp Keais Strand drainage area. Through this model, restrictions to the flowway were identified and plans for the reduction and elimination of restrictions and environmental restoration were developed. Those plans included structural improvements, the enhancement of the CR 846 bridge, new CR 858 bridge, replacement of existing culverts, and the removal of old railroad grade. Non-structural measures were also included such as the eradication of non-native vegetation through a grant sponsored by the Soil & Water Conservation District. Mr. Tears added that the District is working with property owners in the Okaloacoochee Slough to try to re -introduce natural seed sources in existing grazing areas. Mr. McDaniel asked if Mr. Tears could share his definition of disturbed, and what could this Committee do to work together to find answers to the many water resource issues that exist within the RLSA. Mr. Tears stated that soil data and remnant 9 37 May 6, 2008 vegetation provide clues of historic flowways. From that information they look at the human impact to the area to distinguish the extent of flowway alterations. The continuation of this program and the cooperation of the land owners will be a tremendous aid to improving water quantity, water quality and environmental conservation. Gary Eidson questioned whether the potential build out of this area will impede natural flowways. Mr. Tears stated that, with each development that occurs in the RLSA, the developer will be required to identify the watershed, flowways, the proposed impervious area, and provide storm water detention, structural and non-structural improvements to an extent that no net impact occurs and, where possible, provide for the enhancement of the existing storm water system. Mr. Thomas suggested that the committee consider the general location of roadway corridors during this review to lessen the impact to the flowways, the environment, and agricultural activities. Mr. Jones asked if Mr. Tears could cite further examples of successes of how the RLSA program has furthered the District's goals. Mr. Tears stated that, with the establishment of each of the. SSA's, conservation easements are established which contain preservation and management plans. Through this process, the unique flowway area is captured, and as these are linked together, the slough flowway area is preserved. Mr. Hamel asked if Mr. Tears would be kind enough to remain for further questions, and asked Mr. Draper of the Audubon Society to begin his presentation. A. Eric Draper, Florida Chapter of the Audubon Society Mr. Draper stated that his presentation will focus on the State's perspective on the Collier County's RLSA program. The State Chapter is very supportive of any furtherance of wildlife species protection. Funding for land acquisition is becoming tighter with constraints on the State Budget, but the Florida Forever Bill did pass, which included a continuation of $300,000 for land acquisition and land use easements over agricultural land for conservation and preservation. While the list of identified lands targeted for acquisition far exceed the funding that is available, programs such as Collier County's RLSA further the objectives of the Audubon Society and support compact development, watershed restoration, wildlife conservation, recreation, transportation, and food and agricultural production. Mr. Jones, ,*ed if Mr. Draper could provide any suggestion to the Committee. Mrry Draper stated that the loss of agricultural lands should be taken very seriously, and that the area of development should be compressed to the greatest degree possible. Mr. Hamel asked Mr. Draper to provide some perspective on the land use easement initiative for agricultural properties. Mr. Draper stated that this type of program is much more cost effective than buying the property outright, and that several states have 530 May 6, 2008 similar programs. He had heard some discussion that this may not be well received by the land owners in Florida, but time will tell. Mr. Hamel stated that the Committee would be recessed for 5 minutes. IX. Next Meeting/future extra meeting to meet Committee schedule Mr. Greenwood informed the Committee that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) appointed this Committee for a one year term, which will end on September 11, 2008 [actually October 24, 2008]. He stated that with the present schedule and issues to be addressed, he suggested that the Committee may wish to recommend to the BCC that the sunset date be extended. He also suggested that the Committee may wish to consider having meetings twice a month to address the many policies in the Phase II Report. Mr. McDaniel made a motion to double up the Committee meetings, with the first meeting taking place at Ave Maria and the second meeting to take place at the CDES Building in Naples. The meeting time would remain at 9 AM. to 12 Noon. The Committee also recommends that the BCC approve a 6 month extension to the Committee. Mr. Thomas second the motion. Voice Vote: 10 — Yes, 1 — No. APPROVED. Mr. Neno opposed the extension because he believed that the tasks could be completed within the allotted time frame. Mr. Jones stated that hoped the staff would be able to provide a listing of the received comments and suggestions with the related policies for the Committee to review at the next meeting. VI. Old Business A. Phase I — Technical Review Mr. Hamel thanked the six Committee members that attended the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) for the presentation of the Phase I — Technical Review on May 1, 2008. He stated that the presentation made by the staff was well done. Mr. Greenwood stated that the CCPC recommended approval of the Phase I -- Technical Review with a stipulation that the nine page list of comments and suggestions be addressed by the Committee during the Phase II review. This list was distributed during the meeting. Mn Neno also thought that the staffs presentation was very good. Mr. McDaniel questioned if the Committee was required to address the list of comments. Mr. Greenwood stated that the Committee should try their best to address this list of comments and suggestions, but the supporting data and analysis needs to be provided to justify any substantial changes. 2. Mr. Greenwood reviewed the "Working Paper," which summarized the build -out potential for the RLSA with the existing regulations. sag 4 May 6, 2008 Mr. Cornell thanked staff for the overview of the "Working Paper." He requested the staff to prepare an analysis of the program incorporating agricultural preservation credits. B. RLSA Review Committee Phase II IGroup 2 Agricultural] 1. Ms. Payton stated that she was not expecting to speak, but she would like to have an opportunity to meet with staff to help in the coordination of the "Comments and Suggestion" with the RLSA policies. Mr. Greenwood stated that he would coordinate a meeting with the authors of the "Comments and Suggestions." 2. Mr. Nance stated that his comments were provided to ask the question: "How would the Committee address comments from DCA's "RLSA Report to the State Legislation." If particular comments are not identified by any existing policies, how should the Committee address them? Mr. Greenwood suggested that the Committee focus on addressing policy related comments first, and then unrelated policy comments at the end of the report if the Committee desires. Mr. Jones stated that the format for addressing all the comments and suggestions should consist of the Committee's recommendation being stated first, and then the staff s recommendation would follow. Mn McDaniel commented that the County's RLSA program may not be perfect but it is working. VII. New Rasiness ;A._ RLSA Review Committee, Phase H... Review of Group 3 and 5 Policies of the Rural Land -Stewardship area Overlay [Environmental] Laura Roys stated that the copy of the concerns from the Environmental Services Department that was provided in the agenda was an early draft and a comprehensive report of the Department's concerns will be provided. VM. Public Continents Mr. Reynold stated that 5—Year Review requirement by the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and the Growth Management Plan (GMP) applied only to the Phase I Review. The review was to provide a measured assessment of the program. He reviewed a memo that he prepared (See Attachment) in which he shared some observations and suggestions. Ms. Ryan stated that the Conservancy had provided comments to the County when the RLSA program was enacted and were told that there would be time to address their concerns when the review process occurred. During the Phase I Review the Conservancy was told that their concerns would be addressed during the Phase H review. She added that the Conservancy would be glad to meet with County staff to coordinate the positioning the concerns with the specific policy for the Committee's review. IX. Staff Comments 5 I i May 6, 2008 Mr. Greenwood stated that he would contact those interested parties to coordinate a meeting date and time to facilitate the positioning of concerns with the related RLSA policies. X. Adjournment Mr. McDaniel moved to adjourn the meeting, second by Mr. Jones. Voice Vote - Unanimously Approved 11-0, Adjournment 12: 02PM. Rural Lands Stewardshi Area Review Committee f on Ha 1, Chairman These minutes proved by the Committee on O , as presented or as amended . _ Attachment: WilsonMiller memorandum May 6, 2008 R- Wilsonmiller TO: Rural Land Stewardship Area Review Committee Members FROM: Alan Reynolds, AICP 41—DATE: May 6, 2008 SUBJECT: RLSAO Five -Year Review Process - Phase 2 First, my compliments to the Rural Land Stewardship Review Committee and County Staff for preparing a comprehensive Phase 1 Technical Report that is has been well received and accepted by both the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council and the Collier County Planning Commission. As the Committee begins substantive work on the second phase of the 5-year review process, I would offer a few observations and suggestions on the process going forward. My point of reference is my role as the Principal Planner involved in the Immokalee Area Study that led to the creation of the RLSAO, and as one of the primary authors of the actual RLSAO implementing language. I have also been closely involved in the majority of the actual implementation of the program on behalf of participating property owners since it was adopted, so I have both detailed knowledge and experience to support my perspective. Policy 1.22 was very specific regarding the purpose of the Five Year Review: "to assess the PartiCiDation in and the effectiveness of the Overlay im lementation in meeting the Goal Obiective and Policies set forth herein. The specific measures of review shall be as follows..." The Phase 1 Technical Report has documented each of the 8 speck items required and demonstrates both a level of both participation and effectiveness that is far beyond expectations for such a new and innovative program. In my thirty years of experience as a professional planner in Florida, I cannot point to any other such program in the State that has come so far, so quickly, in accomplishing its stated goal and objective. As an example, the implementation of the'RLSAO was expected to take approximately 25 years to protect the estimated 89,300 acres of agricultural and natural resource lands depicted on the Overlay Map as FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs. At this five year anniversary, approximately 27% of such land is now within approved SSAs, and an additional 36% of such land is included in pending SSA applications. Clearly the level of participation in the RLSAO is exceeding its goal. With respect to effectiveness, one need only to look at the maps contained in the Report to recognize the significant progress that has been made toward permanently protecting the two major environmental systems in the region, the Camp Keais Strand and the Okaloacoochie Slough. In addition, the approval of the Town of Ave Maria SRA has enabled the realization of another major goal, accommodating growth and economic diversification within the RLSA in a more innovative, sustainable, mixed -use pattern. " �LCE)"' SMODe-2024et.V r..,-AR py H awl-oDaDaD- ACOR -2yeee While some have criticized the provision of the RLSAO that protects a property owner's baseline zoning rights as an alternative to use of the RLSAO, it must be noted that since its inception, not a single new platted lot or rural subdivision has been proposed or approved in the entire 300 square mile area. Phase 2 is not a required part of the GMP mandated process; it was proposed prior the beginning of the Five Year Review in anticipation that there would be certain changes that may be necessary and appropriate to correct issues "in the artici atio d effectiveness of the Overlay' that may become evident based on the factual data from Phase 1. As the Committee considers and deliberates on the ever increasing amount of public input in the form of comments, questions, and suggestions for changes, I would suggest the following approach be used: 1. All comments, questions and suggested changes should be referenced to a specific policy in the adopted RLSAO, to facilitate effective discussions and decision -making by the Committee. County staff can facilitate this process. 2. The old axiom "if it isn't broken, don't fix if should be used as a qualifier for making substantive changes to the RLSAO. Recommendations for changes should cite specific data and analysis in Phase 1 Technical Report, or documented examples from approved SSAs and SRAs that support the need for such change. 3. Whenever possible, specific language should be proposed and alternatives explored that best target the specific issue in question and cause the least amount of collateral changes to the overall program. This will hopefully prevent unintended consequences from disrupting the program. 4. As has been pointed out by several property owners and committee members, the RLSAO program relies on a voluntary, incentive -based approach and a balance between competing uses of land. It also requires'a soured basis in market based economics and deference to private property rights. There is a point at which regulatory changes could compromise the acceptance of the program, and the Committee should be mindful not to disrupt the careful balance that has been realized by the proven utilization of the current program. 5. Finally, bear in mind that a collaborative process extending over three years and involving thousands of hours of meetings, hearings and deliberations was needed to create the adopted RLSAO. At the end of this process, there was unanimous approval by the County Commission and universal support for the adopted program by the stakeholders. We must also keep in mind that the RLSAO does not operate in a vacuum; it does not supplant any of the myriad regulatory procedures and requirements that apply to land development activities. Proposed development in the RLSAO must obtain the same permits that all other development must, including Development of Regional Impact review, jurisdictional wetland permitting, surface water management and groundwater resource permits, site development plan approvals and plats, and other local, state and federal requirements. 7 5MFAM-202481- Ver 1-AReynold OOU11-000 W=-ACOR-21868 While some have made reference to the Department of Communist Affairs — 2007 Annual Report to the Legislature, and the need to respond to specific paints of criticism about the Collier County RLSAO therein, I would point out the following: 1. The Collier County RLSAO is not subject to the State RLS Statute (although it is a model for it). 2. The DCA Report was prepared prior to the Collier County Phase 1 Technical Report, 3. The DCA Report was prepared without any substantive input from the stakeholders and organizations that participated in the creation of the RLSAO, or the participating land owners in the RLSAO. DCA never sought out input or factual information from those most familiar with the program. 4. The DCA found the Collier County RLSAO in full compliance with all applicable Growth Management Laws upon Its final adoption in 2002. 5. Until the recent change in administration, DCA strongly promoted RLS and hailed Collier County for its innovative approach to good planning. 6. The Collier County RLSAO has won numerous recognitions and awards from Statewide organizations including_ a. 1000 Friends of Florida b. Council for Sustainable Florida c. Florida Chapter American Planning Association d. Florida Planning and Zoning Association In closing, I would urge the Committee to continue with its thoughtful and measured evaluation of the RLSAO, and to continue to encourage broad -base participation by interested citizens. Part of the value of this review is to further the level of understanding and awareness of the program, and to that end, the process of receiving input and responding to questions and comments is healthy. I am convinced that the more people understand about this innovative program, the more supportive they will be. The challenge for the Committee will be to identify those specific changes that are essential to maintaining and improving the effectiveness of the RLSAO without compromising its effectiveness, and separating out well -intended suggestions for changes that are not essential. W42M - 202481 . Vor: 1-AR&JMc9d OOO11.000-000 - ACO R - 21850 s° a �, JohnsonEric From: Al Reynolds Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 3:37 PM To: MoscaMichele Subject: FW: Data & Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year Thanks Michelle - I've noted a couple of clarifications below, please advise if you concur. Thanks for your help. From: MoscaMichele jmailto:MicheleMosca2kcollier owl Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 11:00 AM To: Reynolds, Al Cc: Perry, Margaret; BosiMichael; WeeksDavid; HatcherMac; LenbergerSteve Subject: Data & Analysis Requirements for the RLSA 5-Year Al: You requested that staff provide a listing of any additional data and analysis needed to support the RLSA 5-year review amendments to the Growth Management Plan (GMP), so that you can prepare a Scope of Services for ECPO members prior to the formal GMP amendment submittal and the BCC's discussion of RLSA amendments scheduled for December 13, 2011. As we previously discussed, staff has conducted a limited review of the data and analysis contained within the RLSA 5-Year Review Phase I and Phase II Reports and the Carlton Fields Memorandum, dated March 1, 2010, to generally determine if additional data and analysis may be needed to move forward with these amendments. The following is a summary of the data and analysis commitments that were discussed by telephone on November 17, 2011 and the additional data and analysis needed to support the GMP amendments to the RLSA based on staff s limited review. It should be noted that after receipt of the "repackaged"/formal submittal, staff will evaluate the GMP amendment package to determine if additional supporting data and analysis is needed. If staff determines that additional data and analysis is needed, preparation of that additional data and analysis may or may not require the assistance of Stantec staff. Once we have a draft package of our items prepared, we would anticipate one round of review with you and the county staff team to address any gaps or clarifications. We would then give you our completed documents in electronic format, so they can be incorporated into the full package. We are not proposing to make a "formal submittal" as the documents will be part of the larger GMP package that staff will be preparing. As we are proposing to act in a technical capacity only, based on the recommendations of the BCC accepted Committee Report, we need to keep all of our work product strictly objective and quantifiable. Carlton Fields Memorandum: Issue #1— Identify the purpose and need for each amendment as determined by the RLSA committee. Stantec to provide "repackaging" of amendments to include concise explanation of each change, including narrative of issue(s) raised by the RLSA committee and cross reference(s) to support documentation, including original data source and date. Issue#2 (ref. 163.3177(1)(f), F.S.) — Use best available data to support proposed amendments. A comparative analysis of current data/reports is needed to determine any changed conditions since the RLSA committee's review and recommendations. County staff is requesting that Stantec staff prepare an analysis/evaluation of the new SFWMD Land Use and Cover as well as new (since BCC consideration) panther habitat use studies and provide comments regarding changed conditions. With respect to SFWMD land cover mapping, we will compare the most recent mapping (2011) to that used in 2001- 1001 to Pva1111At1- xvhathar thPYP have IIPPYI anv marrn 1PVP1-hancr,-o that xxTnnld affP,,t t6P RT C 0 (lvarlav County staff will review relevant population and transportation studies to evaluate changed conditions. Issue #3 (ref. 163.3177(6)(a), F.S.) — Include a comprehensive land use analysis to support any changes to the amount of credits and SRA acreage in the program. Stantec staff to provide comprehensive land use analysis. Analysis should include existing and proposed development scenarios that were considered during the five year review process. Issue #4 (ref. 163.3177(6)(a) 9.a.(v), F.S.) — Provide data and analysis to demonstrate program will not result in a premature conversion of agricultural lands. Stantec staff to provide data and analysis. Data and analysis to include detailed explanation of the proposed agricultural credit and comparative tables (existing vs. proposed maximum development scenarios). Additional Data and Analysis Needed to Support RLSA Changes: • Table of existing and proposed RLSA maximum credit generation by category (e.g. restoration, agricultural, early entry, etc.). If this information is already contained within the five-year review documents, please provide the locational reference. Please contact me should you have questions. Michele Michele R. Mosca, AICP Principal Planner Growth Management Division/Planning and Regulation Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 tel. 239.252.2466 fax 239.252.2946 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. United States Department of the Interior - W ' AEM"CE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Southwest Florida Gulf Coast Refuge Complex Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge 12085 State Road 29S. Immokalee, Florida 34142 PH:239-657-8001 FAX:239-657-8002 March 1, 2021 Collier County Planning Commission 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: PL20190001836 and PL20190001837, Longwater and Bellmar Village SRA Resolutions respectively Dear Collier County Planning Commissioners, The Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge (FPNWR) is 26,609 acres adjacent to the Rural Land Stewardship Area (RLSA) and approximately 1.25 miles southwest of the proposed Bellmar Village. Administered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the FPNWR was established in 1989 to assist in the recovery of endangered species such as the Florida Panther. FPNWR staff have worked cooperatively with the applicants and other landowners within the RLSA for many years to assist in habitat management activities across the FPNWR's boundary lines, and more generally, in discussions on how to keep landscape connectivity for far ranging species like the Florida panther and black bear. Both of the villages of Longwater and Bellmar are currently under federal review for a more comprehensive planning approach in the Eastern Collier Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan (ECMSHCP), which would lead to the protection of 106,000 acres within the RLSA. It is preferable to delay permitting individual developments in the ECMSHCP development area until the Environmental Impact Statement and Endangered Species Act Section 10 review for the ECMSHCP is completed. In addition, the County should complete the adoption of the RLSA 5 year review amendments prior to approving developments within the RLSA so that the County's development permit and RLSA requirements are not contradictory to the mitigation requirements proposed by the ECMSHCP. Separate and apart from the Service's work considering the ECMSHCP, the Service has concerns about the proximity of these developments to the FPNWR that the planning commission should address with the applicant prior to approval of Longwater and Bellmar villages. First, the future development within the RLSA, including both Longwater and Bellmar, will encroach upon several current conservation areas such as the FPNWR. These conservation lands are intensely managed using prescribed burning to manage the fire -adapted ecosystems for the benefit of wildlife and to reduce high fuel loads, the latter of which contributes to more catastrophic harmful wildfires. The Stewardship Sending Areas within the RLSA and adjacent to the proposed developments include fire -adapted habitats that will need to be managed with silvicultural activities such as prescribed fire and exotic invasive plant control. This encroachment toward conservation lands can complicate the appropriate management of the FPNWR. For instance, the refuge's southern boundary is 1-75, and eastern boundary is State Road 29. As such, we often have to burn habitats on the refuge with a prevailing southerly or easterly wind direction. These prescriptions are in place to mitigate risk of serious traffic accidents on those major roads, and cannot be changed, leaving the locations for high -density residential and commercial developments in the RLSA directly in the path of our current smoke management protocols. On some prescribed burns, we will not have the ability to redirect smoke away from the location of these future developments. We recommend that all existing and future landowners and leaseholders (e.g., residents, businesses, health care providers, and homeowner associations) within the RLSA sign an acknowledgement notice within their deed or lease agreement that recognizes and accepts the use of prescribed fire to manage the adjacent habitats on both public and private conservation lands. We believe this indemnification is necessary for fire managers to be held harmless for any adverse impacts from the inconveniences of smoke produced by prescribed fires, and to ensure that this critically important management tool is not further limited by new developments. The Florida Forest Service's Prescribed Fire in Florida Strategic Plan 2013-2020 identified two objectives to facilitate this action: 4-2 states: "Introduce Smoke Disclosure Language in deed transfers and homeowner association agreements with county planning," 4-3 states: "Develop a smoke easement template. " There are a few examples of these Indemnifications being used in other states. I look forward to working with the Planning Commission, Collier County Commissioners and the Florida Forest Service to construct the appropriate language for such an instrument prior to any further development of the RLSA. Secondly, the application does not address the need for hydrologic restoration of the adjacent Camp Keais Strand Flowway Stewardship Area. Hydrological restoration of the Camp Keais Strand was identified as a unique functional group within Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, which the County and Service both participated in. During this effort, members of local and state agencies, NGOs, and the Federal government made every effort to take a holistic approach to hydrological restoration. We implore the County and other regulatory authorities to require the applicants to include wetland restoration activities identified within the Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan, especially those within the Camp Keais Strand functional group. Hydrologic restoration of the Camp Keais Strand is clearly a component of the RLSA Stewardship Sending Areas, and is critically important for downstream conservation lands such as the FPNWR. Currently two farm fields restrict the flowway to a few culverts in a span of 100 yards, whereas restoring these farm fields back to wetlands would result in a nearly 1 mile wide flowway immediately adjacent to the proposed Longwater development. The applicant's original plans for the Town of Rural Lands West included restoring these approximately 935 acres of farmland in the middle of the Camp Keais Strand Stewardship flowway in SSA15, to benefit the hydrology of downstream conservation lands. This wetland restoration was not included in the plans for Rivergrass Village, Longwater Village or Belmar Village, and we believe that it should, as this type of wetland restoration was clearly the intent when the RLSA was established. If properly implemented, Camp Keais Strand hydrological restoration activities could ultimately benefit one of the most biodiverse forested wetlands in the state of Florida (i.e., Fakahatchee Strand), as well as the Picayune Strand. In conclusion, we believe the planning commission should take a pause in considering developments within the RLSA on an individual project approach, and implement a more comprehensive planning approach. By incorporating our recommendations, we believe that they will: 1) Minimize impacts to one of the most important land management tools in the state of Florida (i.e., fire); 2) Protect important habitats; 3) Provide for critically important wetland restoration within hydrologic flowways such as Camp Keais Strand; 4) Improve the quality and quantity of water entering the FPNWR; and 5) Address the landscape connectivity needs of wildlife such as the Florida panther and black bear. Sincerely, Kevin Godsea Refuge Manager Southwest Florida Gulf Coast Refuges Cc: Ray Bellows, Planning Commission Liaison Nancy Gundlach, Principle Planner Corby Schimidt, Principle Planner Matthew McLean, Director, Development Review Kirsten Wilkie, Environmental Services Manager Jamie Cook, Principal Environmental Specialist James Sabo, AICP, Principal Planner Michael Sawyer, Principal Planner PUtter@colIierenterprises.com> !ptember 20, 2022 2:14 PM Bob Mulhere (BobMulhere@hmeng.com) ing Wednesday rom an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. !ting on Wednesday, September 21, 2022 regarding the RLSA Amendments to the LDC, Collier Enterprises provides the following e screen shot below) — First and foremost, the term "destination" is not a defined term, therefore the language is open to gar. Secondly, CE objects to the arbitrary use of the quarter -mile radius to define walkability. In addition to studies showing quarter mile, there are existing county standards that exceed one -quarter mile (i.e. CAT uses a three-quarter mile rule, and the pick-up students within two miles of the school). The sudability for pedestrians to walk safely and comfortably wdhin a or distinct neighborhood to a destination, generally w9hin a quarter -mile radius_ Dunmunides are typically characterized by skiewalks and curbs arndlor less eg d to r7 tect oedeyriarps from moving "ffic. including the use of street 'atirno the street from the sidewalk. e screen shot below) —There are state and federal agencies already responsible for establishing and regulating mitigation criteria It is CE's position the County should not be involved in these activities. ii+_ Roadways crossings, underpasses, and signage shall be used where roads must cross wildlife comdors as determined by the authorities governing crossing locations_ �e screen shot below) — Mitigation for impacted listed species is already provided for by other agencies. CE objects to the County :ion that is already governed by other state and federal agencies. V. Mitigation for impacting listed species or 55C habitat shall be considered in the management plan, as appropriate. :reen shot below) — Same comment as items 2 and 3 above applies to this section. The most current and completed data and local, state, and federal guidelines and regulations shall be utilized to prepare the required management plans_ Management guidelines contained in publications used by the FFWCC and US FWS for technical assistance shall be used for developing required management plans, but the County shall consider any other techniques recommended by the FFWCC and the USFWS, consistent with LDC section 4.08.O5 JA. The f..'!GW ^^ shall -he ee screen shot below) — CE proposes Wastewater Treatment or surface water lakes could be used for golf course irrigiation, 3ilable or not cost effective. As available, golf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water consistent with Wastewater Treatment Sanitary Sewef Sub -Element Objective 4-4 and its policies. ,ee screen shot below) — Collier Enterprises is concerned the County is opening the door to govern mitigation already governed as the same concerns as expressed in items 2, 3, and 4 above. In addition, the term, "may be" is subjective. CE proposes The removal of exotics may be considered as acceptable mitigation as determined by the County Manager or desiqnee or by the applicable permitting agencies_ we, Collier Enterprises has concerns regarding two other items in the RLSA Amendment review package. Regarding the la's letter dated, March 4, 2022, Collier Enterprises concurs with Mike Bosi and County staff, the content of the Conservancy's of this particular RLSA Review process. cents in the letter dated March 1, 2021, on U.S. Department of Interior/Fish and Wildlife Service letterhead, Collier Enterprises ding the use of prescribed burns for the management of wildlife habitat in Longwater and Bellmar Villages. Collier Enterprises disclosure at closing, for both Longwater and Bellmar Village. The commitment is in section 13.d of the Town Agreement. (See dcd and required to acknowledge by signature a notice will occur not only within the adjacent Stewardship at the Panther Refuge. )rmation, feel free to reach out. it Estate ment, Inc. , Suite 507 only for the individual(s) to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and protected law. If you are not an intended recipient you may not copy, forward, disclose or use any part of it. If you have received this notify us immediately by replying to the e-mail and deleting it from your computer. Thank you. Co ie-r CO14ftty Growth Management Community Development Department 2022 Land Development Code Amendments - Public Meeting - Development Services Advisory Committee - Land Development Review Subcommittee Wednesday, September 21, 2022 2:00 p.m. 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL Growth Management Community Development Department Building Conference Room 609/610 Agenda: 1. Call to Order 2. Approve Agenda 3. Old Business 4. New Business a. PL20220003445 RLSA Updates b. Discussion of Landscape/Buffer and Miscellaneous Sections in the LDC 5. Public Comments 6. 2022 DSAC-LDR Subcommittee schedule reminder a. December 14, 2022 7. Potential Special Meeting in October 8. Adjourn For more information please contact Eric Johnson at (239) 252-2931 or Eric.Johnson@colliercountyfl.gov