EAC Minutes 09/05/2007 R
September 5, 2007
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
Naples, Florida, September 5,2007
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Environmental
Advisory Council in and for the County of Collier, having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in
Building "F" of the Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
CHAIRMAN: William Hughes
Lee Horn
Dr. Judith Hushon
Roger Jacobsen
David Bishof
Michael V. Sorrell (Excused)
Dr. Llew Williams (Excused)
Richard Miller
William W. Hill
Nick Penniman (absent)
ALSO PRESENT: Jeff Klatzkow, Managing Assistant County Attorney
Mac Hatcher, Environmental Specialist
Stan Chrzanowski, PE, Planning Review
Susan Mason, Principal Environmental Specialist
Summer Araque, Senior Environmentalist
Sue Filson, Executive Manager to the BCC
I. Call to Order
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
AGENDA
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
9:00 A.M.
Commission Boardroom
W. Harmon Turner Building (Building "F") - Third Floor
I. Call to Order
II. RollCall
III. Approval of Agenda
IV. Approval of August 1, 2007 meeting minutes
V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences
VI. Land Use Petitions
A. Site Development Plan, SDP-AR-8271
"Orchid Run"
Section 25, Township 49 South, Range 25 East
B. Planned Unit Development, PUDZ -2003-AR-3601
"New Hope Ministries - Phase 2"
Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East
VII. New Business
A. Introduction of the Watershed Management Plan Prioritization schedule - Mac Hatcher
B. Belle Meade Stormwater Management Master Plan - Clarence Tears
C. Review of the Updated Floodplain Management Plan - Michael Deruntz & Robert Wiley
D. Petition CPSP-2007-6, Petition requesting an amendment to the Potable Water Sub-
Element of the Public Facilities Element, to add reference in Policy 1.7 to the proposed
"Ten-year Water Supply Facilities Work Plan." - Carolina Valera
E. December 5, 2007 meeting will be at CDES Room 609/610
VIII. Old Business
A. Planned Unit Development PUDZ-2005-AR-8416 "Pezzetino Di Cielo RPUD"
B. Update members on projects
C. Mission Statement
IX Subcommittee Reports
A. LDC Subcommittee meeting schedule is available
X. Council Member Comments
XI. Public Comments
XII. Adjournment
*******************************************************************
Council Members: Please notifv Summer Araoue. Environmental Services Senior Environmental
Soecialist no later than 5:00 o.m. on Auoust 30. 2007 if vou cannot attend this meetino or if vou
have a conflict and will abstain from votino on a oetition 1530-62901.
General Public: Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the
proceedings pertaining thereto; and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of proceedings is
made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
September 5, 2007
The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chairman Dr. Judith Hushon at 9;00
AM.
II. Roll Call
A quorum was established.
III. Approval of Agenda
Mr. Hughes moved to approve the Agenda. Seconded by Mr. Jacobsen.
Carried unanimously 7-0.
IV. Approval of August 1, 2007 meeting minutes.
Page 5, Line 30, "Committee" should read "Council." "On the title page, "Lew"
should read "Llew." On Page 9, Line 10, "Huston" should read "Hushon." On the
title page, "Arague" should read "Araque."
Mr. Jacobsen moved to approve the Minutes of August 1, 2007 as amended.
Seconded by Mr. Miller. Carried unanimously 7-0.
V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences
Dr. Judith Hushon will be unable to attend the November 2007 meeting therefore
excused.
Mr. Miller will be unable to attend the October 2007 meeting therefore excused.
VI. Land Use Petitions
A. Site Development Plan, SDP-AR-8271
"Orchid Run"
Section 25, Township 49 South, Range 25 East
Presenters were affirmed by Managing Assistant County Attorney Jeff
Klatzkow.
Disclosures:
Mr. Jacobsen disclosed he had visited the site but had no personal contact.
Mr. Miller disclosed he had visited the site but had no personal contact.
Dr. Hushon disclosed she had been by the site but had no personal contact.
Richard Clark, Opus South Corporation, introduced Shane Johnson of
Passarella and Associates, Inc., and Mark Sunyak of R W A, Inc.
All presenters were sworn in by BCC Executive Manager, Sue Filson.
Shane Johnson, Passarella and Associates, Inc., presented Petition No. SDP-
2005-AR 8271. (See attached)
2
September 5, 2007
Dr. Hushon stated post-Hurricane Katrina photos would be helpful as the site had
changed and was cleared.
Mr. Jacobsen questioned how the exotics would be removed and was informed it
would be done by hand.
Mr. Miller asked what the area at the south end between guest parking and the
preserve area was going to be used for and was told it was to be a lawn area.
Dr. Hushon asked that irrigation water be obtained from the Golden Gate Canal
and was told it would be investigated.
Mr. Miller asked what the slopes were going to be on the retention pond and
whether any fencing was planned between the development and the three-to-one
slopes; he was told the slopes would be a four-to-one maximum or ten-to-one,
depending on the orientation, with hedge fencing.
Dr. Hushon asked who was going to maintain the water retention area and was
advised it would be the development's responsibility to maintain the water
retention area.
Mr. Hughes asked if there was anything in the 20-year plan that might need this
space on the south corridor.
Gene Calvert, Storm Water Management, Department of Transportation
Division, responded the Capital Improvement Program for Storm Water
Management had no planned improvements in the particular corridor and area.
Mr. Hughes stated he had concerns regarding the amount ofRF radiation present
from the power plant in the proximity of the dwellings and was told there were no
known issues.
Mr. Hughes stated this issue should be carefully considered in the future.
Mr. Jacobsen questioned how much storm water run off would go into the canal
once the project was completed as opposed to what goes in currently.
Mr. Calvert stated Community Development would be in charge of those
calculations and the current regulations required that there be no net increase in
peak run off.
Mr. Chrzanowski stated there are maximum alIowable run offs averaged across a
particular basin and this particular site would not pose a problem, no downstream
properties would be adversely affected.
Mr. Jacobsen stated fresh water would be a polIutant to Naples Bay and there
should be no increase.
Dr. Hushon stated the site is a part of the Grey Oaks PUD but is not a part of
Grey Oaks subdivision yet the calculations for the required set-aside are being
3
September 5, 2007
met almost entirely by Grey Oaks, the .89 acres is almost a token, and there
should have been a 25% set-aside.
Chris D'Arco, Environmental Services Department, stated Orchid Run is part
of the Grey Oaks PUD.
Dr. Hushon stated the property is not adjoining; the property is across the road
and separated by the Florida Power and Light substation so it would not be
possible to put preserves together.
Laura Roys-Gibson, Environmental Services Department, stated Naples
Grand immediately west of the FP&L line is also part of Grey Oaks, the entire
PUD area was examined to ensure 25%, this was an older PUD and the preserve
areas were scattered throughout the PUD, the .89% was what remained of the
original 25%.
Dr. Hushon stated the .89% was not going to benefit the community and would
create a very urban feel.
Mr. Hughes asked where the turtle burrows were located and was informed there
was only one tortoise burrow remaining on the property and it would be relocated
to Sorono in Bonita Springs.
Mr. Hughes stated he wanted to know how the wildlife is affected by RF
radiation fields and that the tortoise program is not working since the tortoise die
when relocated.
Mr. Hughes also questioned how permission was obtained to move the tortoise
and was told an amendment was made to the existing gopher tortoise state permit
to allow it.
Mr. Jacobsen stated it was undesirable to have condos and housing developments
built property line to property line with parking lots and buildings.
Dr. Hushon stated the development is highly visible from the street and all that
would be visible are buildings and parking lots.
Mr. Hughes stated he did not like the direction the project was taking and did not
want to see development that resembled Fort Lauderdale.
Dr. Hushon stated she would like the EAC's concerns to be forwarded to the
Planning Commission and the current rules are not working.
Ms. Araque, Senior Environmentalist, stated this project would not be going
before the Planning Commission but would go straight to the Collier County
Board of County Commissioners.
Susan Mason, Principal Environmental Specialist, stated if the EAC had
conditions of approval and the applicant agreed to them, the conditions could be
put into the final STD prior to approval; however, if the conditions were not a part
of the LDC and went above and beyond that and the applicants were unable or
unwilling to agree to them, Collier County would not be able to make the
conditions a requirement for the STD approval.
Mr. Hughes questioned whether this type of development represented the kind of
development the community wanted to see in Collier County.
4
September 5, 2007
Dr. Hushon suggested sending a statement of concern regarding green space
balance to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners and the Planning
Commission.
Dr. Hushon moved to accept the project with the EACs concerns with the
condition that the canal is used for irrigation water if it can be arranged legally
with the South Florida Water Management District. Seconded by Mr. Hughes.
Emilio J. Robau, PE, RW A, Inc. Cautioned that canals are sometimes treated
with herbicides that could cause damage to property.
Carried 6-1 with Mr. Jacobsen opposed.
B. Planned Unit Development, PUDZ-2003-AR-3601
"New Hope Ministries - Phase 2"
Section 4, Township 50 South, Range 26 East
All presenters were sworn in by BCC Executive Manager, Sue Filson.
Tim Hancock, Davidson Engineering, presented the petition via a PowerPoint
presentation. (See attached)
· Average rainfall over the last ten years was 51 inches
· In the wettest month of an average year water would not infiltrate the
upland preserve
· Variables were not used in calculations for the model
· This site qualifies as a native preserve with ten years of on-site activity
· Upland preserves would not be adversely impacted in an average year
· Any water sheet flowing on the property would be sheet flowing from
the north to the south; water going south to north is the initial
conveyance and the initial pretreatment
· If the preserves were not used for attenuation of water, the result
would be isolated preserves below the level around them
Discussion:
Mr. Bishof asked if the existing system in the southeastern corner of the property
would remain unchanged and was told it would. He also asked whether the pond
would be a dry detention pond and all water in it would discharge to the north into
the native preserve and was told it would. He stated the water was overflowing
at a rate of 11.3 and asked if there were a control structure, and was told there
was.
Mr. Gillette stated there would be a 12 to 20 foot lake, water would be treated in
dry detention and routed to a conveyance swale to next detention area and then
piped to the lake after it goes through a control structure; the lake would fill up
providing another half inch of pretreatment, preserves would then be used for
attenuation of the 25-year storm and there was another control structure in the
lake which would be piped down to the Davis Boulevard canal for ultimate
discharge.
5
September 5, 2007
Mr. Bishof asked if the control structure in the southeastern corner of the lake
was a bleeder and was informed there was a bleeder there set at 9.5 and asked
how water would get from the lake into the preserve.
Mr. Gillette responded there were several types of storms that would have to be
modeled to get appropriate volume and frequency of the storm in order to fill up
the dry detention and then the lake would have to be filled and then the lake
would have to overflow into the preserve.
Mr. Bishof asked whether the discharge structure that goes into the ditch that
goes into Davis Boulevard had an overflow elevation above the control area.
Mr. Gillette responded yes, set at the 25-year storm or I I. I 7.
Dr. Hushon stated it appeared from the data provided there would be an average
of five storms per year that would breach.
Mr. Bishof asked with a five-year storm how much water would go into the
preserve.
Mr. Gillette responded there were so many variables in the models that he could
not give an answer regarding a five-year storm. He also stated that even with a
25-year storm event system recovery would be within ten days.
Mr. Bishof was advised that the Petitioner had an ERP permit that covers the
entire site at present and asked whether using the design as currently presented the
project would meet district-permitting criteria if the preserve were not used as part
of attenuation.
Mr. Gillette responded it would not.
Mr. Hughes asked if detention ponds would become retention ponds after 2
inches.
Mr. Gillette responded the site was designed with no retention; it was all
detention due to the fact every storm water management area is connected to a
control structure with a bleeder.
Mr. Bishof asked whether in designing the layout of the preserve any effort was
made to compact the area.
Mr. Hancock responded the wetlands were of such low quality that they did not
rise on the list of preserve areas, the uplands were better quality.
Dr. Hushon stated it was undesirable to put water where there was non-hydric
soil and having non-hydric soil areas getting wet four to five times per year for a
few days each time would pose a problem.
Mr. Hancock responded that the design was developed with the help of Collier
County environmental staff and there were no standards in the LDC or GMP to
follow.
Discussion was held regarding the issue of pervious versus impervious surfaces
for parking; it was a complex issue with no acceptable solution being available.
Staff Comments:
6
September 5, 2007
Susan Mason, Environmental Services Department, stated Southwest Florida
Water Management District's responsibility was to protect the wetlands, they were
not concerned with protecting upland areas; ERP does not evaluate the
functioning of the upland vegetation, they are only concerned with storm-water
management.
Claudia Piotrowicz, Environmental Services Department, stated staff
recommended denial of the petition because the applicant had not demonstrated
that the addition of treated storm water into the upland preserves on site would not
result in an adverse impact on the naturally occurring native vegetation and this
was not consistent with CC&E Policy 6.1.l5d.
Mr. Jacobsen asked if staff was recommending denial based on Petitioner's
current proposal and was told "yes."
Susan Mason stated no new information had been received as ofthis morning.
She also stated that Preserve I consisted of one-half hydric soils and there was a
definite sloping, the area farther west is lower and did not have Palmetto but had a
very weedy under-story.
Public Speakers:
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, stated adherence to the GMP
is critical, must be done correctly from the beginning. Impact of storm-water run
off on native vegetation is a point of contention and it was important that native
vegetation be preserved. She stated they do not want to see the/iktitioner
penalized by being the first applicant after the new policies wer~nstituted and
suggested after the ,eetitioner an~ff have further discussed the matter and
examined further intormation, th e itioner could come back before the EAC for
a decision.
Mr. Jacobsen agreed with Ms. Ryan, pointed out that Ms. Piotrowicz reported
that all the numbers were not yet in, and asked whether the Petitioner would like
to come back next month for a decision on the petition.
Mr. Hancock expressed the frustration of his client regarding the delay that has
already occurred because there are no standards currently set and the Petitioner
had no way of knowing what the standards were or what they will be by the time
of a next hearing.
Bill Lorenz, Environmental Services Director, stated a new policy had been
adopted into the Growth Management Plan and was in the process of being
fleshed out and it was unfortunate that some petitioners may get caught in the
middle while this was occurring.
Mr. Bishof asked whether the small littoral shelf located away from the control
structure could be erected in the vicinity of the control structure.
7
September 5, 2007
Mr. Hancock responded that it was required not to be next to the control
structure in the lake facilities, the LDC requires a 20-foot offset minimum from
the control structure. He requested EAC give its recommendation today.
Mr. Hughes suggested some compromise may help and more review time was
needed.
Ms. Piotrowicz stated there were concerns regarding existing pines in the
preserve, she produced photos depicting how the pines were stressed out and
stated it was unknown what had caused their stress, whether it was from the
additional water in the preserve or the amount of depth of the water or frequency
of the water.
Mr. Jacobsen stated the project would create more run off, as most of the
property would be paved.
Mr. Hancock stated that no one had given him a standard to design to and was
concerned waiting 30 days would not change that.
Public Comment:
Nicole Ryan stated the Conservancy had always been concerned about storm
water going into preserves whether they be wetlands, uplands, hydric or non-
hydric but if there was a possibility that the data presented today would show that
there would be no adverse impact and the vegetation would not change, whatever
Staff would need, then there could be the possibility of waiting another month.
(Lunch break - 11:40 AM.)
(Reconvened - 12:30 PM)
(Mr. Horn did not rejoin the meeting)
Mr. Jacobsen disclosed that he had a conversation with the applicant.
Mr. Hancock stated it was not possible to overcome the issues of non-hydric soil
but there is no evidence to indicate the project would be detrimental and asked for
the approval of the Environmental Advisory Council.
Mr. Lorenz stated after discussion with the Petitioner it was clear that Staff
would still have to recommend denial.
Mr. Hancock stated they would not be able to overcome the objection over
putting storm water over non-hydric soil, there were no assurances that set
standards would be available by the time of the next meeting, and requested a
decision by the EAC today.
Mr. Jacobsen stated he had concern regarding the lack of set standards for the
Petitioner to follow and the wetlands were an issue.
Mr. Hughes moved to approve the Petition with the caveat that the EAC
understands the definitions are not yet clearly defined and the EA C would like
to see less impervious parking surfaces in future development planning.
Seconded by Mr. Jacobsen. Carried 6-0.
8
September 5, 2007
VII. New Business
A. Introduction of the Watershed Management Plan Prioritization schedule
- Mac Hatcher
Mr. Hatcher gave a PowerPoint presentation outlining the background ofthe
watershed management plan. (See attached)
B. Belle Meade Storm Water Management Master Plan - Clarence Tears
Will be carried over to the next meeting October 3, 2007.
C. Review ofthe Updated Floodplain Management Plan - Michael Deruntz
& Robert Wiley
Mr. Wiley stated the Floodplain Management Plan is a requirement of the CRS
Program of the National Flood Insurance Program and the CRS program is a
community rating system. Collier County is a Class 7 community and if a Class 7
community has more than ten repetitive loss properties it must have a floodplain
management plan. He stated Mr. Deruntz will present the draft Floodplain
Management Plan and asked that the EAC go over it and provide their comments.
Mr. Deruntz, Comprehensive Planning, gave a PowerPoint presentation
regarding the draft Floodplain Management Plan. (See attached)
· Citizen involvement was the first priority
· Criteria considered included assessing hazards, assessing problems,
setting goals, reviewing possible activities, drafting an action plan,
adopting the plan
· Ten informational meetings were held to discern flood events
experienced by ci tizens
· Issues of prevention, property protection and natural resource
protection were being addressed
Mr. Hughes asked what questions were asked at the public meetings.
Mr. Deruntz responded subjects raised were flooding incidents and possible
prevention and better oversight may help.
Mr. Hughes stated he agreed with the intent, issues are coastal flood plain and
rather than poor planning there seemed to be issues of County maintenance
involved.
Mr. Deruntz stated preventative steps were being taken and maintenance is a big
Issue.
Mr. Hughes stated the largest issue was coastal and inquired about the concept
that nothing be built west of Route 41.
Mr. Deruntz responded there was some similar sentiment regarding construction
in the interior but coastal communities were more concerned about requirements
for rebuilding.
D. Petition CPSP-2007-6, Petition Requesting an Amendment to the Potable
Water Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element, to add reference in
9
September 5, 2007
Policy 1.7 to the proposed "Ten-year Water Supply Facilities Work Plan."-
Carolina Valera
Ms. Valera, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Department, gave a
PowerPoint presentation. (See attached)
· Five districts in the State of Florida are required by the legislature to
develop regional plans to ensure water supply in the future
· Lower West Coast was the regional plan for Collier County which
Collier County must abide by
· In 2005 an amendment was adopted requiring a deadline for local
govermnents to incorporate into their GMPs a water management plan
· Water Management Plan must be adopted by January 2008
. This is the last phase of the plan
· This year's population methodology had not been approved
· The plan in front of the EAC today uses last year's population
methodology
· Florida DCA instructed Collier County send the plan with the latest
approved population methodology but revise the plan in time for the
adoption hearings
· EAC had before it last year's population methodology and a revised
plan will be presented in December 2007 with this year's population
Dr. Hushon stated she had concerns relating to Golden Gate Estates as it is
expected to be the fastest growing area in the County, there will be many more
drinking water wells and septic systems, these wells will draw from the same
aquifers as the County. She stated wells may be going dry in the future in
Golden Gate Estates and she would like to see planning to provide potable water
in a phased manner into the Estates via surface lines rather than wells.
Phil Gramatges, PE, Principal Project Manager, Public Utilities Engineering
Department, responded wells in Golden Gate do not draw from the same aquifer
as Collier County; Collier County wells go much deeper than the wells in Golden
Gate.
Dr. Hushon stated density in Golden Gate justifies using public water and sewer
and providing water and sewer should be planned for.
Mr. Gramatges stated the document is designed to address Section 163.3177 of
the Florida Statutes and does what the law required; those issues are a matter of
policy that only the Collier County Board of County Commissioners has authority
to address and only areas within our water-sewer district were being addressed.
Dr. Hushon asked if the people moving into Golden Gate Estates were included
in the figures and was told no, that they did not impact on the water-sewer district
and so were not included in this count.
Mr. Hughes stated this issue must be addressed whether civilly or legally, the
aquifers could run dry, and people must be protected.
Mr. Gramatges stated the East of 951 Committee was looking at this issue, a poll
was done of homeowners, and city water was not desired.
10
September 5, 2007
Mr. Miller stated the future capacity of the aquifers must be considered, the plan
may meet the letter of the law but does not do what is necessary.
Mr. Hughes stated the EAC's purpose was to raise issues of concern.
Ms. Valera stated one reason the plan was incorporated as a reference into the
GMP was so changes can be made as policies become available; the document
will change and the East of951 Committee will address issues in the Golden Gate
area.
It was discussed that water restrictions and talk of building desalinization plants
indicate the aquifers were not expected to be able to support the growing
population indefinitely.
Mr. Hughes moved to forward Petition CPSP-2007-6 with the caveats of intent
demonstrated here today. Seconded by Mr. Miller. Carried unanimously 6-0.
E. December 5, 2007 meeting will be at CDES Room 609/610
VIII. Old Business
A. Planned Unit Development PUDZ-2005-AR-8416 "Pezzetino Di Cielo
RPUD"
Ms. Araque stated comments were received back from the EAC members and
some of the members would like to have the matter re-heard in order to ask
questions regarding the supplemental information.
Mr. Hughes moved to re-hear the matter. Seconded by Mr. Jacobsen.
Mr. Bishof expressed concern that the wetland area would be adequately
hydrated and requested that getting some water into the wetland area be
investigated.
Ms. Araque suggested responding with that request which would then be
forwarded on to the Petitioner and stated all comments were forwarded on to the
applicant so they could prepare a response for the next meeting.
Mr. Bishof stated the response to his request for information regarding hydrology
was incorrect.
Mr. Jacobsen stated he spoke directly with the gentleman who did the E1S and
was disappointed it was two years old when we got it; he spoke to Lance Scogin
who stated he did not do the whole property because there was a bull on the
property and his basis for determining nothing was done with cow dip, etc., was
because the owner's son told him.
Carried unanimously 6-0.
B. Update members on projects
Dr. Hushon stated she attended a meeting of the Southwest Florida Water
Management District September 4,2007 and they went over projects for Orchid
II
September 5, 2007
Run and New Hope Ministries. She also stated Southwest Florida Water
Management District is primarily concerned with wetlands and not as much with
upland preserves, and it is up to Collier County to defend the upland preserves.
SWFWMD will be enforcing the 150% capacity rule, sites of 5.5 acres or less
may not always comply, a special basin rule will come out shortly, an area in
Golden Gate Estates will be used as a mitigation bank in the future.
C. Mission Statement
Carried over to the next meeting
IX. Subcommittee Reports
A. LDC Subcommittee meeting schedule is available
Meetings are the second and fourth Thursdays @ 9; 30 a.m.
Next meeting is scheduled for September 13, 2007 at 9:30 a.m.
X. Council Member Comments
Mr. Hughes stated HCP AC needs to be motivated to get more done and the State
has said Collier County is responsible to protect its own wildlife and there are
issues that must be addressed.
Mr. Miller stated his understanding of the Sunshine Law is that two members are
prohibited from getting together to discuss matters before the Council but that has
been interpreted to mean two members cannot attend a meeting or seminar to
gather information. He asked if the two members attended the same meeting or
seminar but did not discuss Council matters, did that violate the Sunshine Law.
Mr. K1atzkow responded that it did not but it was desirable to avoid the
appearance of impropriety.
Mr. Miller stated that Collier County had been derelict in addressing the human
environment and the LDC should require dedicated areas for recreation for
children, open space requirements and green space; also, he would like to see a
requirement that any new developments over a certain size be required to
maintain on site sufficient water storage facilities to supply irrigation for the
facility on a year-round basis.
XI. Public Comments
None
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was
adjourned by the order of the Chair at 2:35 PM.
12
September 5, 2007
COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL
ADVISORY COUNCIL
Vice Chairman Dr. Judith Hushon
These Minutes were approved by the Board/Chairman on
as presented , or as amended
13