The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 08/26/2025 Item #16A17 (Properties on the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee's May & Jund 2025 recommended list)8/26/2025 Item # 16.A.17 ID# 2025-1798 Executive Summary Recommendation to approve properties on the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee’s May and June 2025 recommended Active Acquisition Lists and direct staff to pursue the projects recommended within the A- Category, funded by the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund. OBJECTIVE: To obtain Collier County Board of County Commissioners (Board) approval to pursue A-category properties for acquisition. CONSIDERATIONS: On November 3, 2020, the Collier County electors approved the Conservation Collier Re- establishment Referendum with a 76.5% majority. Pursuant to Section 11 of Conservation Collier Ordinance No. 2002- 63, as amended, the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (CCLAAC) recommends qualified acquisition proposals for the Active Acquisition List (AAL) to the Board for approval. Pursuant to prior Board direction to streamline the acquisition process, properties are now reviewed on an ongoing basis rather than annual or bi-annual cycles. This new process started in April 2024 after Board approval of Ordinance No. 2002-63 revisions (BCC 3/26/2024, Agenda item 9.D.). Accordingly, the AAL provided includes all properties reviewed by the CCLAAC in May and June 2025. On May 7 and June 4, 2025, the CCLAAC selected acquisition proposals for inclusion in the AAL as follows: Property/Project Area Name Size (ac) Estimated Value Estimated Value per acre CCLAAC Recommended Category Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve TPMA 2.27 $52,210 $23,000 Reina 2.27 $52,210 $23,000 A I-75 and Everglades Blvd. TPMA 2.73 $62,790 $23,000 Pancham 2.73 $62,790 $23,000 A Nancy Payton Preserve TPMA 1.00 $78,000 $78,000 Bennett 1.00 $78,000 $78,000 A A-LIST TOTAL May and June 2025 6.00 $193,000 $32,167 A detailed summary of each property is attached to this item. The AAL above includes the CCLAAC recommendations. The AAL attached as Attachment 1 to this item provides detailed companion information about the properties on page 2, including whether the owner lives adjacent to the subject property and estimated maintenance costs. The proposed AAL has been separated into three (3) categories, A, B, and C, as required by Conservation Collier Ordinance (No. 2002-63, as amended) Section 10, which states the Active Acquisition List shall separate proposals into three (3) categories: A (pursue acquisition); B (hold for re-evaluation for one calendar year); and C (no interest in acquiring). No properties were selected for the B-category or C-category during this ranking. Staff prepared and presented property reports, called Initial Criteria Screening Reports (ICSR), to aid the CCLAAC in evaluating each property. Each ICSR includes a scoring matrix based on researched and observed data. The ICSRs are attached to this item. During the CCLAAC meeting, property ranking occurred after staff presented all property summaries and after public Page 1353 of 4682 8/26/2025 Item # 16.A.17 ID# 2025-1798 comments. A-CATEGORY PROPERTY Reina – 2.27 acres This parcel is within the Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve Target Protection Mailing Area (TPMA) and is adjacent to Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve. Staff and the CCLAAC recommend this property for the A-category as it expands an existing preserve and would provide important habitat for wildlife currently inhabiting the area, such as FL panther, FL black bear, and deer. The Reina property has an estimated value of $52,210 ($23,000 per acre). Pancham – 2.73 acres This parcel is between 40th Ave SE and 42nd Ave SE within North Golden Gate Estates on the east side of Everglades Blvd. S., north of I-75. It is within the I-75 and Everglades Blvd. TPMA. Staff and the CCLAAC recommend this property for the A-category as it would serve to connect protected lands within North Belle Meade, Picayune Strand State Forest, and Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve, and it would provide habitat for the federally listed FL panther, the FL black bear, and deer. The Pancham property has an estimated value of $62,790 ($23,000 per acre). Bennett – 1.00 acre This parcel is within the Nancy Payton Preserve TPMA and is about 300 feet west of the preserve. Staff and the CCLAAC recommend this property for the A-category as it expands an existing preserve and would provide important habitat for wildlife currently inhabiting the area, such as FL panther, FL black bear, deer, gopher tortoise, and red- cockaded woodpecker. The Bennett property has an estimated value of $78,000 ($78,000 per acre). ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: On May 7 and June 4, 2025, the CCLAAC held public meetings and ranked acquisition proposals for Board consideration. CCLAAC recommends three properties, for a total of 6.0 acres for the “A” list category. The total projected acquisition cost for these A-list category CCLAAC recommended properties is $193,000. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objectives to preserve and enhance the character of our community and to protect our natural resources. FISCAL IMPACT: The total estimated cost of the properties under consideration is $193,000. In the FY25 budget, $33,750,301 is available for land acquisitions within the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund (1061). Properties pending acquisition in Cycles 11B, 12B, 2024, and 2025 total approximately $25,564,790. Funding for managing any lands acquired by the program is budgeted in the separate Conservation Collier Land Management Fund (1062), funded via a transfer from the net Conservation Collier ad valorem tax levy. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Fee-simple acquisition of conservation lands is consistent with and supports Policy 1.3.1(e) in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved for form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board action. - SAA Page 1354 of 4682 8/26/2025 Item # 16.A.17 ID# 2025-1798 RECOMMENDATIONS: To approve properties on the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee’s May and June 2025 recommended Active Acquisition Lists and direct staff to pursue the projects recommended within the A-Category and bring the Purchase Agreements to the Board for review and approval. PREPARED BY: Melissa Hennig, Environmental Specialist I, Conservation Collier, Development Review Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2025 Cycle BCC Ranking List_for BCC ranking 8-12-2025 2. Property Summaries 3. Gore ICSR 4. Pancham ICSR 5. Bennett ICSR Page 1355 of 4682 Conservation Collier May and June 2025 CCLAAC Properties for BCC Ranking Size (ac)Estimated Value Estimated Value per acre CCLAAC Recommended Category 2.27 $52,210 $23,000 2.27 $52,210 $23,000 A 2.73 $62,790 $23,000 2.73 $62,790 $23,000 A 1.00 $78,000 $78,000 1.00 $78,000 $78,000 A 6.00 $193,000 $32,167A-LIST TOTAL May and June 2025 Property/Project Area Name I-75 and Everglades Blvd. TPMA Pancham Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve TPMA Reina Nancy Payton Preserve TPMA Bennett 1 Page 1356 of 4682 Conservation Collier May and June 2025 CCLAAC Property companion information Size (ac)Does owner live adjacent? Property owner location/adjacent property information Estimated Annual Maintenance Cost/Acre for 1st 5 years 2.27 No Owners live in Bonita Springs and other area of NGGE $3,800 2.73 No Owner lives in East Naples; owns a 2.73- acre vacant parcel approx. 1/4 mile to the north $3,600 1.00 No Owner lives on the east coast of Florida, does not own any other property in the area $10,250 6.00 $17,650 Property/Project Area Name Reina Pancham A-LIST TOTAL May and June 2025 Bennett 2 Page 1357 of 4682 BCC Conservation Collier Property Summary May 2025 Reina Parcel CCLAAC Recommendation: A-list Property Name: Reina Owner(s): Reina Properties Management Inc. Target Protection Area: Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve TPMA; NGGE Acreage: 2.27 acres Total Estimated Market Value: $52,210 Highlights: •Location: West of Desoto Blvd., north off of 36th Ave. SE •Met 6 out of 8 Initial Screening Criteria: Native habitat; human social values; water resource values; Biological and Ecological Value; conservation land enhancement; within Gore TPMA. •Habitat: Mixed Wetland Hardwoods •Listed Plants: common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) •Listed Wildlife: FWC telemetry shows use by panthers and observed on wildlife cameras on existing preserve. Habitat for Florida bonneted bats and Snail Kites. •Water Resource Values: hydric soils exist; wetland indicators noted and numerous wetland dependent plants species noted; very minimal mapped aquifer recharge •Connectivity: The parcel is within the Gore TPMA. The Preserve connects with the FL Panther NWR to the east, Picayune Strand State Forest to the south, and Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve to the SE •Access: 36th Ave. SE •Management Issues / Estimated Costs: Initial Exotic Removal estimated at $500/acre and ongoing annual estimated at $250/acre. This parcel would be managed along with the existing preserve parcels •Partnership Opportunities: Potential for funding assistance from Florida Fish and Wildlife Service for exotic plant control. •Zoning/Overlays: Single-family Estates zoning 1 unit/2.25 ac. No Overlays •Surrounding land uses: Mostly undeveloped Estates residential; some lots developed with single-family homes; roadway •All Criteria Score: 284 out of 400; high ecological value and human social value scores •Other Division Interest: Transportation may need ROW/pond sites in this area for a potential I-75 off ramp. •Acquisition Considerations: No additional considerations noted 120 54 46 64 160 80 80 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and Management 4 - Vulnerability Total Score: 284/400 Awarded Points Possible Points Page 1358 of 4682 BCC Conservation Collier Property Summary May 2025 Reina Parcel CCLAAC Recommendation: A-list 2 Page 1359 of 4682 BCC Conservation Collier Property Summary May 2025 Pancham 3 CCLACC Recommendation: A-list Property Name: Pancham Owner(s): Babalau Pancham Target Protection Area: North Golden Gate Estates; I-75 and Everglades Blvd. Acreage: 2.73 acres Total Estimated Market Value: $62,790 Highlights: •Location: North of I-75; east of Everglades Blvd. S; south off 40th Ave. SE •Met 4 out of 8 Initial Screening Criteria: Native plant communities; human social values; water resources; within a target area •Habitat: Oak hammock; Mixed shrubs; Mixed Wetland Hardwoods •Listed Plants: State-endangered Tillandsia fasciculata •Listed Wildlife: Panther telemetry on adjacent parcels •Water Resource Values: Wetlands on parcel; hydric mapped soils, very minimal aquifer recharge •Connectivity: Not immediately contiguous to conservation land, but land between parcel and Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve to the east are undeveloped •Management Issues / Estimated Costs: Initial Exotic Removal estimated at $1,100 and ongoing annual estimated at $400 •Partnership Opportunities: Potential for state funding assistance to treat exotic plants •Zoning/Overlays: Estates - allowable density of 1 unit per 2.25 acres •Surrounding land uses: undeveloped and developed Estates lot •All Criteria Score: 213 out of 400; high “restoration and management” and “vulnerability” scores •Other Division Interest: Conservation Collier is coordinating with the Transportation Department as this parcel is within the I-75 interchange study area •Acquisition Considerations: No other acquisition considerations 52 37 69 56 160 80 80 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and Management 4 - Vulnerability Total Score: 213/400 Awarded Points Possible Points Page 1360 of 4682 BCC Conservation Collier Property Summary May 2025 Pancham 4 Page 1361 of 4682 BCC Conservation Collier Property Summary June 2025 Bennett Parcel CCLAAC Recommendation: A-list Property Name: Bennett Owner(s): Bennett Family Trust Target Protection Area: Nancy Payton Preserve TPMA Acreage: 1.0 acres Total Estimated Market Value: $78,000 Highlights: •Location: Off Blue Sage Dr., approx. 800 ft. north of Nancy Payton Preserve parking area •Met 4 out of 8 Initial Screening Criteria: Native habitat; human social values; Biological and Ecological Value; within Nancy Payton Preserve TPMA. •Habitat: Mesic pine flatwoods •Listed Plants: common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata) •Listed Wildlife: None on-site; FWC telemetry shows use by panthers and observed on wildlife cameras on adjacent parcels preserve. Habitat for red-cockaded woodpecker and gopher tortoise – both of which have been observed on surrounding parcels. •Water Resource Values: hydric soils mapped on half the parcel; hydrology impacted by adjacent canal; no wetlands observed; very minimal mapped aquifer recharge •Connectivity: The parcel is within the Nancy Payton TPMA; parcel between it and the preserve is undeveloped. •Access: Blue Sage Dr. •Management Issues/Estimated Costs: Initial Exotic Removal estimated at $1,000/acre and ongoing annual estimated at $150/acre. Fire line creation and annual management is estimated at $7,300 and $200 respectively. This parcel would be managed along with the existing preserve parcels •Partnership Opportunities: Potential for prescribed fire assistance from Florida Forest Service. •Zoning/Overlays: Agricultural; RFMUD-Neutral-NBMO-Section 24 •Surrounding land uses: Undeveloped to the east and south; single family residence to the north; roadway and canal to the west •All Criteria Score: 190 out of 400; relatively high restoration and management score 60 37 55 38 160 80 80 80 0 50 100 150 200 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and Management 4 - Vulnerability Total Score: 190/400 Awarded Points Possible Points 5 Page 1362 of 4682 BCC Conservation Collier Property Summary June 2025 Bennett Parcel CCLAAC Recommendation: A-list •Other Division Interest: Transportation may need ROW/pond sites in this area for the Green Boulevard Extension. •Acquisition Considerations: No additional considerations noted 6 Page 1363 of 4682 Conservation Collier Initial Criteria Screening Report Gore TPMA Target Protection Mailing Area Parcels and Acreage: 78 parcels (179.6 ac) Application Parcel Owner: Reina Properties Management Inc. Staff Report: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 120 54 46 64 160 80 80 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and Management 4 - Vulnerability Total Score: 284/400 Awarded Points Possible Points Page 1364 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... 2 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Summary of Property ............................................................................................................................ 5 Figure 1 - Parcel Location Overview .........................................................................................................5 Figure 2 - Parcel Close-up .........................................................................................................................6 Figure 3 – Aerial of Multi-parcel Project and TPMA boundary ................................................................7 2.1 Summary of Property Information ....................................................................................................8 Table 1 – Summary of Property Information .....................................................................................8 Figure 4 - Secondary Criteria Score ....................................................................................................9 Table 2 - Secondary Criteria Score Summary .....................................................................................9 2.2 Summary of Assessed Value and Property Cost Estimates ........................................................... 10 Table 3. Assessed & Estimated Value ............................................................................................. 10 2.2.1 Zoning, Growth Management and Conservation Overlays ................................................. 10 2.3 Summary of Initial Screening Criteria Satisfaction (Ord. 2002-63, Sec. 10) ................................. 11 3. Initial Screening Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Ecological Values ............................................................................................................................. 13 3.1.1 Vegetative Communities ....................................................................................................... 13 Table 4. Listed Plant Species ........................................................................................................... 13 Figure 5 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities ............................................................................... 14 Figure 6 - Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System ................................................... 15 Figure 7 – Cypress/Tupelo .............................................................................................................. 16 Figure 8 – Mixed Wetland Hardwoods ........................................................................................... 16 Figure 9 – Mixed Shrub/Scrub Wetlands ........................................................................................ 17 Figure 10 – Transportation ............................................................................................................. 17 3.1.2 Wildlife Communities ............................................................................................................ 18 Table 5 – Listed Wildlife Species ..................................................................................................... 18 Figure 11 - Wildlife Spatial Data (i.e., telemetry, roosts, etc) ......................................................... 19 Figure 12 - CLIP4 Potential Habitat Richness .................................................................................. 20 3.1.3 Water Resources ................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 13 – CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones ................................ 22 Figure 14 - Collier County Soil Survey ............................................................................................. 23 Figure 15 - LIDAR Elevation Map ..................................................................................................... 24 Page 1365 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 3.1.4 Ecosystem Connectivity ........................................................................................................ 25 Figure 16 - Conservation Lands ....................................................................................................... 26 3.2 Human Values ................................................................................................................................. 27 3.2.1 Recreation ............................................................................................................................. 27 3.2.2 Accessibility ........................................................................................................................... 27 3.2.3 Aesthetic/Cultural Enhancement ......................................................................................... 28 Figure 17 – Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve Hiking Trail .................................................................. 28 3.3 Restoration and Management ....................................................................................................... 29 3.3.1 Vegetation Management ...................................................................................................... 29 3.3.1.1 Invasive Vegetation ............................................................................................................ 29 3.3.1.2 Prescribed Fire .................................................................................................................... 29 3.3.2 Remediation and Site Security .............................................................................................. 29 3.3.3 Assistance .............................................................................................................................. 29 3.4 Vulnerability .................................................................................................................................... 29 3.4.1 Zoning and Land Use ............................................................................................................. 29 Figure 18 – Zoning ........................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 19 –Future Land Use ............................................................................................................ 31 3.4.2 Development Plans ............................................................................................................... 32 4. Acquisition Considerations .................................................................................................................. 32 5. Management Needs and Costs .............................................................................................................. 32 Table 6 - Estimated Costs of Site Remediation, Improvements, and Management ....................... 32 6. Potential for Matching Funds .............................................................................................................. 33 7. Secondary Criteria Scoring Form ......................................................................................................... 34 8. Additional Site Photos ......................................................................................................................... 40 APPENDIX 1 – Critical Lands and Water Identification Maps (CLIP) Definitions ...................................... 43 Page 1366 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 1. Introduction The Conservation Collier Program (Program) is an environmentally sensitive land acquisition and management program approved by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (Board) in 2002 and by Collier County Voters in 2002 and 2006. The Program was active in acquisition between 2003 and 2011, under the terms of the referendum. Between 2011 and 2016, the Program was in management mode. In 2017, the Collier County Board re-authorized Conservation Collier to seek additional lands (2/14/17, Agenda Item 11B). On November 3, 2020, the Collier County electors approved the Conservation Collier Re-establishment referendum with a 76.5% majority. This Initial Criteria Screening Report (ICSR) has been prepared for the Conservation Collier Program to meet requirements specified in the Conservation Collier Implementation Ordinance, 2002-63, as amended, and for purposes of the Conservation Collier Program. The sole purpose of this report is to provide objective data to demonstrate how properties meet the criteria defined by the ordinance. The following sections characterize the property location and assessed value, elaborate on the initial and secondary screening criteria scoring, and describe potential funding sources, appropriate use, site improvements, and estimated management costs. This Initial Criteria Screening Report evaluates the entire Robert H. Gore III Preserve Target Protection Mailing Area (TPMA). The current TPMA includes a total of 78 parcels (179.6 acres). Parcels within the Robert H. Gore III Preserve TPMA, which is outside the multi-parcel project area, must be evaluated by the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (CCLAAC) and placed on the recommended Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List for Board consideration. Page 1367 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 2. Summary of Property Figure 1 - Parcel Location Overview Page 1368 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 2 - Parcel Close-up Page 1369 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 3 – Aerial of Multi-parcel Project and TPMA boundary Page 1370 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 2.1 Summary of Property Information Table 1 – Summary of Property Information Characteristic Value Comments Name Multiple Reina Properties Management has applied Folio Number 78 Parcels 179.6 parcels – current application folio is: 41617720004 Target Protection Area NGGE Within Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve Target Protection Mailing Area Size 177.9 total acres Current application is 2.27 acres Section, Township, and Range S32 and S33, T49S, R28E Sections 32 and 33, Township 49S, Range 28E Zoning Category/TDRs Estates 1 unit per 2.25 acres FEMA Flood Map Category AH, with some small areas AE and X500 AH and AE- Area close to water hazard that has a one percent chance of experiencing shallow flooding between one and three feet each year. X500 – low flood risk Existing structures none Adjoining properties and their Uses Conservation, Residential, Easement and roadway TPMA parcels are adjacent to existing Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve parcels, undeveloped land, limited residential inholdings, Desoto Blvd, and bordered on the east by conservation easement and the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and south by Picayune Strand State Forest. Development Plans Submitted None Known Property Irregularities None known Other County Dept Interest Transportation Desoto Blvd. may be widened, and an I-75 interchange may be developed in this area in the future Page 1371 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 4 - Secondary Criteria Score Table 2 - Secondary Criteria Score Summary Criteria Awarded Weighted Points Possible Weighted Points Awarded/Possible Points 1 - Ecological Value 120 160 75% 1.1 - Vegetative Communities 32 53 60% 1.2 - Wildlife Communities 24 27 90% 1.3 - Water Resources 11 27 40% 1.4 - Ecosystem Connectivity 53 53 100% 2 - Human Values 54 80 68% 2.1 - Recreation 23 34 67% 2.2 - Accessibility 27 34 79% 2.3 - Aesthetics/Cultural Enhancement 4 11 38% 3 - Restoration and Management 46 80 57% 3.1 - Vegetation Management 23 55 42% 3.2 - Remediation and Site Security 23 23 100% 3.3 - Assistance 0 2 0% 4 - Vulnerability 64 80 81% 4.1 - Zoning and Land Use 56 58 96% 4.2 - Development Plans 9 22 40% Total 284 400 71% 120 54 46 64 160 80 80 80 020406080100120140160180 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and Management 4 - Vulnerability Total Score: 284/400 Awarded Points Possible Points Page 1372 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 2.2 Summary of Assessed Value and Property Cost Estimates The interest being appraised is fee simple “as is” for the purchase of the site. A value of the parcel was estimated using only one of the three traditional approaches to value, the sales comparison approach. It is based on the principal of substitution that an informed purchaser would pay no more for the rights in acquiring a particular real property than the cost of acquiring, without undue delay, an equally desirable one. Three properties were selected for comparison, each with similar site characteristics, utility availability, zoning classification and road access. No inspection was made of the property or comparable used in this report and the Real Estate Services Department staff relied upon information solely provided by program staff. The valuation conclusion is limited only by the reported assumptions and conditions that no other known or unknown adverse conditions exist. If the Board of County Commissioners choose to acquire this property, an appraisal by an independent Real Estate Appraiser will be obtained at that time. Pursuant to the Conservation Collier Purchase Policy, one appraisal is required for this parcel, which has a valuation under $500,000; one independent Real Estate Appraiser will value the subject parcel, and that appraisal report will be used to determine an offer amount. Table 3. Assessed & Estimated Value Property owner Address Acreage Assessed Value* Estimated Value** Reina Properties Management Inc. No address 2.27 $27,949 $52,210 * Assessed Value is obtained from the Property Appraiser’s Website. The Assessed Value is based off the current use of the property. **The Estimated Market Value for this Gore TPMA parcel will be obtained from the Real Property Management Section prior to ranking by the Board. 2.2.1 Zoning, Growth Management and Conservation Overlays Zoning, growth management and conservation overlays will affect the value of a parcel. The parcels are zoned Estates which allows 1 unit per 2.25 acres. Page 1373 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 2.3 Summary of Initial Screening Criteria Satisfaction (Ord. 2002-63, Sec. 10) Criteria 1: CLIP Priority 1 Natural Community Does the property contain Upland Hardwood Forest, Scrub, Coastal Upland, Dry Prairie, or Upland Pine? NO Criteria 2: CLIP Priority 2 Natural Community Does the property contain Pine Flatwoods or Coastal Wetlands? YES TPMA contains Pine Flatwoods. Criteria 3: Other Native, Natural Communities Does the property contain other native, natural communities? N/A The parcels also Cypress, Cypress- Mixed Hardwoods, Mixed Wetland Hardwoods, and Mixed Scrub-Shrub Wetland, but already contain a CLIP Priority 2 Natural Community. Criteria 4: Human Social Values Does the property offer cultural values, appropriate access for natural resource-based recreation, and the enhancement of the aesthetic setting of Collier County? YES These parcels are in North Golden Gate Estates. They have access from four public roads: Desoto Blvd., 34th Ave. SE, and 36th Ave. SE. Desoto is paved road, both 34th Ave. SE and 36th Ave. SE are unpaved but passable by vehicle. Properties could accommodate seasonal outdoor recreation with some clearing for trails. Criteria 5: Water Resources Does the property offer opportunities for protection of water resource values, including aquifer recharge, water quality enhancement, protection of wetland dependent species habitat, wildfire risk reduction, storm surge protection, and flood control? YES Hydric soils exist on just over 81% of the parcels; wetland indicators noted, and numerous wetland dependent plants species noted. Criteria 6: Biological and Ecological Value Does the property offer significant biological values, including biodiversity and listed species habitat? YES FWC telemetry shows use by panther and black bear. Habitat for Florida bonneted bats and Everglades snail kites. Page 1374 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Criteria 7: Enhancement of Current Conservation Lands Does the property enhance and/or protect the environmental value of current conservation lands through function as a buffer, ecological link or habitat corridor? YES Parcels will enhance the Dr. Robert Gore III Preserve. Parcels are within a historic wetland that connects with the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge (FPNWR) to the east; however, they are separated by Desoto and the old Harley Davidson Test Track. Picayune Strand State Forest (PSSF) is located across I-75 to the south and Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve to the SE across I-75. Wildlife ledges under Miller and FakaUnion canals connect to PSSF. Criteria 8: Target Area Is the property within a Board-approved target protection mailing area? YES Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve TPMA The Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve TPMA parcels met 6 out of the 8 Initial Screening Criteria. Page 1375 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 3. Initial Screening Criteria 3.1 Ecological Values 3.1.1 Vegetative Communities Characterization of Plant Communities present: Native plant communities that make up the TPMA parcels as indicated through the Cooperative Land Cover Classification System and ground and aerial observations include: Cypress, Cypress- Mixed Hardwoods, Mixed Wetland Hardwoods, Mixed Scrub-Shrub Wetland, Pine Flatwood. Ground Cover: Ground cover species observed bidens (Bidens alba), winged sumac (Rhus copallinum L.), morning-glory (Ipomoea sagittata Poir), sweet acacia (Vachellia farnesiana) and various epiphytic ferns Midstory: Midstory species included beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), marlberry (Ardesia escallonioides), wild coffee (Psychotria nervosa and P. sulzneri), myrsine (Myrsine floridana), Carolina willow (Salix caroliniana), pond apple (Annona glabra), and buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis). Canopy: The canopy for most of the parcels consists of, in order of abundance, a mix of cypress (Taxodium distichum) cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), red maple (Acer rubrum), bay (Persea sp.), and slash pine (Pinus elliottii). Laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) were also observed in various areas. In depressional areas, pop ash (Fraxinus caroliniana) was observed. As a result of historic efforts to develop the Golden Gate Estates and habitat alterations that reduced the hydroperiod, some parcels within the TPMA have transitioned to pine flatwoods with upland vegetation in the understory. In general, the condition of the on-site native plant communities varied from moderate to poor as a result of the consistent infestation level throughout each community type by invasive, exotic plant species. The native plant communities found throughout the TPMA, while heavily impacted by exotics, feature mature native trees and a diverse midstory and understory where native plant species occur. Because of this persistence of a rich diversity of native plant species throughout the impacted communities found within the preserve, restoration forecasts are optimistic following intensive efforts to kill and remove the exotic plant species dominating the landscape. Table 4. Listed Plant Species Common Name Scientific Name State Status Federal Status Butterfly orchid Encyclia tempensis CE n/a Twisted airplant Tillandsia flexuosa T n/a common wild pine Tillandsia fasciculata T n/a reflexed wild pine Tillandsia balbisiana T n/a giant air plant Tillandsia utriculata E n/a Page 1376 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 5 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities Page 1377 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 6 - Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System Page 1378 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 7 – Cypress/Tupelo Figure 8 – Mixed Wetland Hardwoods Page 1379 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 9 – Mixed Shrub/Scrub Wetlands Figure 10 – Transportation Page 1380 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 3.1.2 Wildlife Communities As a result of regional connectivity, Florida panther, Florida black bear, wild turkey, white-tailed deer, spotted skunk, bobcat, grey fox, red-headed woodpeckers, and coyote are commonly sighted on the wildlife cameras located throughout the existing Gore Preserve lands. As the parcels within the Gore TPMA are adjacent to or near the acquired lands, it is reasonable that the TPMA parcels would provide similar habitat for species observed on preserve lands. Table 5 details imperiled species that are likely found or have been observed utilizing the parcels within the Gore TPMA. Figure 10 provides a reference to the utilization of the TPMA by the Federally Endangered Florida panther. Table 5 – Listed Wildlife Species Common Name Scientific Name Status Observation Documented American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis FT (S/A) Yes Audobon's crested caracara Polyborus plancus audubonii FT Within 2 miles Big Cypress fox squirrel Sciurus niger avicennia ST No Cassius blue butterfly Leptotes cassius theonus FT (S/A) No Ceraunus blue butterfly Hemiargus ceraunus antibubastus FT (S/A) No Eastern indigo snake Dymarchon corais couperi FT No Everglade snail kite Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus FE Within 3 miles Everglades mink Neovison vison evergladensis ST Within 10 miles Florida bonneted bat Eumops floridanus FE Within 5 miles Florida panther Puma Felis concolor coryi SE Yes Florida sandhill crane Antigone canadensis pratensis ST Yes Gopher tortoise Gopherus polyphemus ST Within 2 miles Little blue heron Egretta caerulea ST Yes Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis FE Within 5 miles Roseate spoonbill Platalea ajaja ST Yes Sherman's short-tailed shrew Blarina shermani ST No Tricolored heron Egretta tricolor ST Yes Wood stork Mycteria americana FT Yes FE= Federally Endangered, FT= Federally Threatened, FT (S/A) = Federally Threatened for Similar Appearance, SE= State Endangered, ST = State Threatened, Page 1381 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 11 - Wildlife Spatial Data (i.e., telemetry, roosts, etc) Page 1382 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 12 - CLIP4 Potential Habitat Richness Page 1383 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 3.1.3 Water Resources The project area provides moderate recharge of the surficial aquifer. Surface water pooling and storage throughout the wet season are observed in the depressional cypress sloughs, roadside swales, and seasonal ponds that make up the wetlands throughout the TPMA. Changes to the regional hydrology through the installation of roadways, swales, and the Faka-Union canal have facilitated a significant infestation of the native plant communities by exotic, invasive plant species. As a result of these hydrologic manipulations, areas noted on the map as freshwater forested wetlands have been observed to remain dry throughout the wet season. Wetland dependent wildlife species such as wood stork, little blue heron, and roseate spoonbill have been observed utilizing the seasonally flooded wetlands throughout the TPMA. Soils data is based on the Soil Survey of Collier County Area, Florida (USDA/NRCS, 1990). Mapped soils on this parcel show the TPMA is comprised of mainly non-hydric soils. Hallandale Fine Sand, nearly level, poorly drained soils associated with flatwoods, are mapped within 59% of the TPMA. Boca, Riviera, Limestone Substratum and Copeland Fine Sand, Depressional soils, hydric, very poorly drained soils found in depressions, swamps, and marshes, are mapped within 35% of the TPMA. Hallandale and Boca Fine Sand, hydric, very poorly drained soils found in depressions, swamps, and marshes, are mapped within 6% of the TPMA. Page 1384 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 13 – CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones Page 1385 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 14 - Collier County Soil Survey Page 1386 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 15 - LIDAR Elevation Map Page 1387 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 3.1.4 Ecosystem Connectivity The parcels within the Gore TPMA provide habitat and dispersal corridors for a significant number of imperiled and common wildlife species. The TPMA parcels are located within 1 mile of the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Picayune Strand State Forest and Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, as well as the low-density development of the Northern Golden Gate Estates residential area. A wildlife crossing exists beneath I-75 which provides connectivity between the Gore TPMA and Picayune Strand State Forest. Page 1388 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 16 - Conservation Lands Page 1389 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 3.2 Human Values 3.2.1 Recreation Acquisition of the parcels within the Gore TPMA would be an expansion of the existing Conservation Collier Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve. The Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve currently provides 1.5 miles of hiking trails with conceptual plans for expansion in the coming years dependent on acquisitions. Overall, it is important to note that adding onto the preserve will provide additional acreage that will not be developed and in turn will be available for wildlife utilization. The addition of trails and site improvements to these parcels will be evaluated and reviewed. Potential public use opportunities for the parcels within the TPMA include: Hiking: Some of the parcels could be incorporated into the preserve trail system. Nature Photography: These properties provide opportunities for nature photography. Birdwatching: Parcels will provide opportunities for birdwatching and are included in an annual Christmas Bird Count Route. Kayaking/Canoeing: The parcels do not provide opportunities for kayaking or canoeing. However, the preserve as a whole may have such opportunities in the future along the canal as budgeting and permitting consideration allow. Hunting: Hunting opportunities will be assessed with each management plan update to the preserve. The limited acreage and existing private inholdings indicate that hunting would not be a compatible land use at this time. Fishing: Acquisition of TPMA parcels may provide opportunities for fishing in the future along the canal as budgeting and permitting consideration allow. Environmental Education: Programs and special events could be held within the existing Gore Nature Center parcel, if acquired. 3.2.2 Accessibility Additional passive recreational hiking trails may be considered for incorporation on the parcels within the Gore TPMA. Parcels within the TPMA are accessible via Desoto Blvd, 36th Ave SE, and 34th Ave SE. The Cypress Cove Conservancy parcel has been developed for public natural resource based educational opportunities containing walking trails, a main building, an education center, a small gazebo, a chickee hut, and a gravel parking lot. Page 1390 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 3.2.3 Aesthetic/Cultural Enhancement The TPMA parcels are visible along Desoto Blvd, 36th Ave SE, and 34th Ave SE and would contribute to preserving the natural aesthetics of the Golden Gate Estates. Figure 17 – Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve Hiking Trail Page 1391 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 3.3 Restoration and Management 3.3.1 Vegetation Management 3.3.1.1 Invasive Vegetation Approximately 50-65% of the plant communities within the TPMA parcels are infested with invasive vegetation – primarily Brazilian pepper. Other species of concern include lantana, mission grass, cogon grass, and Boston fern. 3.3.1.2 Prescribed Fire The TPMA parcels contain fire dependent communities that have experienced decades of fire suppression and hydrologic changes that have resulted in a significant dry down of wetland habitats. The TPMA parcels and surrounding areas have significant wildfire risk and would be unlikely candidates for maintenance through controlled burning until significant fuel reduction took place within the parcels and surrounding private lands. 3.3.2 Remediation and Site Security Parcels within the Gore TPMA experience occasional ATV trespass issues and some illegal dumping in the road right of ways. Consideration must be made to preventing ATV trespass if incorporating public use opportunities onto acquisition parcels. 3.3.3 Assistance The FWC Invasive Plant Management Section (IPMS) has provided funding assistance for exotic vegetation removal within the Gore Preserve in the past. Opportunities exist for additional funding assistance to offset initial exotic removal costs. 3.4 Vulnerability 3.4.1 Zoning and Land Use The parcels are Zoned as Estates. Estates zoning provides lands for low density residential development in a semi-rural to rural environment, with limited agricultural activities. Allowable density is 1 unit per 2.25 acres, or 1 unit per lot if under 2.25 acres. In addition to low density residential density with limited agricultural activities, the E district is also designed to accommodate as Conditional Uses, Development that provides services for and is compatible with the low density residential, semi-rural and rural character of the E district. Page 1392 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 18 – Zoning Page 1393 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 19 –Future Land Use Page 1394 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 3.4.2 Development Plans The parcels within the Gore TPMA are within an area being rapidly targeted for development for clearing and new home construction. 4. Acquisition Considerations Staff would like to bring the following items to the attention of the Advisory Committee during the review of this property. The following does not affect the scoring. The following are items that will be addressed in the Executive Summary to the Board of County Commissioners if this property moves forward for ranking. Trash and dumping concerns will be reviewed and highlighted on a parcel-by-parcel basis as applications are received. A telephone pole and some large plastic piping was observed on the Rivera parcel. There is potential for an I-75 Interchange in the area of the Gore TPMA, and a roadway expansion and stormwater ponds may be needed in the near future. If these properties are approved for the A-List, staff will take this information into consideration when planning amenities and public access on the site. Additionally, when applicable, language will be memorialized in the Purchase Agreements and related closing documents to ensure Collier County Transportation will be able to purchase a portion of the properties from Conservation Collier for future right-of-way, if and when needed, at the original per-acre acquisition cost. 5. Management Needs and Costs Table 6 - Estimated Costs of Site Remediation, Improvements, and Management Management Element Initial Cost Annual Recurring Cost Comments Invasive Vegetation Removal $89,800 $44,900 Acquired lands within the Gore TPMA would be treated on an annual basis and acreage incorporated into the existing preserve maintenance to reduce acreage cost. Initial estimated $500/acre cost will be higher for newly acquired parcels and should reduce over time with continued maintenance to an estimated $250/acre Trail Construction and Signage $5,000 $100 If public access trails are incorporated into acquisition parcels TOTAL $93,950 $44,600 Page 1395 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 6. Potential for Matching Funds The primary partnering agencies for conservation acquisitions, and those identified in the ordinance are the Florida Communities Trust (FCT) and The Florida Forever Program. The following highlights potential for partnering funds, as communicated by agency staff. Florida Communities Trust - Parks and Open Space Florida Forever grant program: The FCT Parks and Open Space Florida Forever grant program provides grant funds to local governments and nonprofit organizations to acquire conservation lands, urban open spaces, parks and greenways. Application for this program is typically made for pre-acquired sites up to two years from the time of acquisition. The Parks and Open Space Florida Forever grant program assists the Department of Environmental Protection in helping communities meet the challenges of growth, supporting viable community development and protecting natural resources and open space. The program receives 21 percent Florida Forever appropriation. Florida Forever Program: Staff has been advised that the Florida Forever Program is concentrating on funding parcels already included on its ranked priority list. This parcel is not inside a Florida Forever priority project boundary. Additionally, the Conservation Collier Program has not been successful in partnering with the Florida Forever Program due to conflicting acquisition policies and issues regarding joint title between the programs. Page 1396 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 7. Secondary Criteria Scoring Form Property Name: Gore TPMA Target Protection Mailing Area: Gore Folio(s): 79 parcels – 179.6 ac. Secondary Criteria Scoring Possible Points Awarded Points Percentage 1 - Ecological Value 160 120 75 2 - Human Value 80 54 68 3 - Restoration and Management 80 46 57 4 - Vulnerability 80 64 81 TOTAL SCORE 400 284 71 1 - ECOLOGICAL VALUES (40% of total) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 1.1 VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES 200 120 1.1.1 - Priority natural communities (Select highest score) a. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 1 communities (1130 - Rockland Hammock, 1210 - Scrub, 1213 - Sand Pine Scrub, 1214 - Coastal Scrub, 1312 - Scrubby Flatwoods, 1610 - Beach Dune, 1620 - Coastal Berm, 1630 - Coastal Grasslands, 1640 - Coastal Strand, or 1650 - Maritime Hammock) 100 b. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 2 communities (22211 - Hydric Pine Flatwoods, 2221 - Wet Flatwoods, or 1311 - Mesic Flatwoods) 60 60 Mesic flatwoods in areas where wetland hardwoods have transitioned from hydologic changes c. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 3 communities (5250 - Mangrove Swamp, or 5240 - Salt Marsh) 50 d. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 4 communities (5250 - Mangrove Swamp) 25 1.1.2 - Plant community diversity (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has ≥ 3 CLC native plant communities (Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System native plant communities) 20 20 b. Parcel has ≤ 2 CLC native plant communities 10 c. Parcel has 0 CLC native plant communities 0 1.1.3 - Listed plant species (excluding commercially exploited species) (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has ≥5 CLC listed plant species 30 b. Parcel has 3-4 CLC listed plant species 20 20 c. Parcel has ≤ 2 CLC listed plant species 10 d. Parcel has 0 CLC listed plant species 0 Page 1397 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 1.1.4 - Invasive Plant Infestation (Select highest score) a. 0 - 10% infestation 50 b. 10 - 25% infestation 40 c. 25 - 50% infestation 30 d. 50 - 75% infestation 20 20 e. ≥75% infestation 10 1.2 - WILDLIFE COMMUNITIES 100 90 1.2.1 - Listed wildlife species (Select the highest score) a. Listed wildlife species documented on the parcel 80 80 FL panther b. Listed wildlife species documented on adjacent property 60 c CLIP Potential Habitat Richness ≥5 species 40 d. No listed wildlife documented near parcel 0 1.2.2 - Significant wildlife habitat (Rookeries, roosts, denning sites, nesting grounds, high population densities, etc) (Select highest score) a. Parcel protects significant wildlife habitat (Please describe) 20 b. Parcel enhances adjacent to significant wildlife habitat (Please describe) 10 10 adjacent to Gore c. Parcel does not enhance significant wildlife habitat 0 1.3 - WATER RESOURCES 100 40 1.3.1 - Aquifer recharge (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is located within a wellfield protection zone or within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 1 area 40 b. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 2 or 3 area 30 c. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 4 or 5 area 20 d. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 6 area 0 0 1.3.2 - Surface Water Protection (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for an Outstanding Florida Waterbody 30 b. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for a creek, river, lake, canal or other surface water body 20 20 Faka Union canal c. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for an identified flowway 15 d. Wetlands exist on site 10 e. Parcel does not provide opportunities for surface water quality enhancement 0 0 1.3.3 - Floodplain Management (Select all that apply) a. Parcel has depressional or slough soils 10 10 b. Parcel has known history of flooding and is likely to provide onsite water attenuation 10 10 c. Parcel provides storm surge buffering 10 Page 1398 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) d. Parcel does not provide floodplain management benefits 0 1.4 - ECOSYSTEM CONNECTIVITY 200 200 1.4.1 - Acreage (Select Highest Score) a. Parcel is ≥ 300 acres 150 150 177.9 ac. b. Parcel is ≥ 100 acres 100 b. Parcel is ≥ 50 acres 75 c. Parcel is ≥ 25 acres 25 d. Parcel is ≥ 10 acres 15 e. Parcel is < 10 acres 0 1.4.2 - Connectivity (Select highest score) a. Parcel is immediately contiguous with conservation lands 50 50 Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve b. Parcel is not immediately contiguous, but parcels between it and nearby conservation lands are undeveloped 25 c. Parcel is isolated from conservation land 0 0 ECOLOGICAL VALUES TOTAL POINTS 600 450 ECOLOGICAL VALUES WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*160) 160 120 2 - HUMAN VALUES (20%) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 2.1 - RECREATION 120 80 2.1.1 - Compatible recreation activities (Select all that apply) a. Hunting 20 b. Fishing 20 20 c. Water-based recreation (paddling, swimming, etc) 20 d. Biking 20 20 e. Equestrian 20 20 f. Passive natural-resource based recreation (Hiking, photography, wildlife watching, environmental education, etc) 20 20 g. Parcel is incompatible with nature-based recreation 0 2.2 - ACCESSIBILITY 120 95 2.2.1 - Seasonality (Select the highest score) a. Parcel accessible for land-based recreation year round 20 20 b. Parcel accessible for land-based recreation seasonally 10 c. Parcel is inaccessible for land-based recreation 0 2.2.2 - Vehicle access (Select the highest score) a. Public access via paved road 50 50 b. Public access via unpaved road 30 c. Public access via private road 20 d. No public access 0 2.2.3 - Parking Availability (Select the highest score) Page 1399 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) a. Minor improvements necessary to provide on-site parking 40 b. Major improvements necessary to provide on-site parking (Requires site development plan) 25 25 b. Public parking available nearby or on adjacent preserve 20 c. Street parking available 10 d. No public parking available 0 2.2.4 - Pedestrian access (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is easily accessible to pedestrians (within walking distance of housing development) 10 b. Parcel is not easily accessible to pedestrians 0 2.3 - AESTHETICS/CULTURAL ENHANCEMENT 40 15 2.3.1 - Aesthetic/cultural value (Choose all that apply) a. Mature/outstanding native vegetation 5 5 Mature Cypress and pine b. Scenic vistas 5 c. Frontage enhances aesthetics of public thoroughfare 10 10 adjacent to Desoto Blvd d. Archaeological/historical structures present 15 e. Other (Please describe) 5 f. None 0 HUMAN VALUES TOTAL SCORE 280 190 HUMAN VALUES WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*80) 80 54 3 - RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT (20%) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 3.1 - VEGETATION MANAGEMENT 120 50 3.1.1 - Invasive plant management needs (Select the highest score) a. Minimal invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (<30%) 100 b. Moderate invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (30-65%) 75 c. Major invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (>65%) 50 50 High invasive density but equally high native seed source and diversity intermixed. d. Major invasive/nuisance plant management and replanting necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (>65%) 25 e. Restoration of native plant community not feasible 0 Page 1400 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 3.1.2 - Prescribed fire necessity and compatibility (Select the highest score) a. Parcel contains fire dependent plant communities and is compatible with prescribed fire or parcel does not contain fire dependent plant communities 20 b. Parcel contains fire dependent plant communities and is incompatible with prescribed fire 0 0 Fire unlikely to be safely contained 3.2 - REMEDIATION AND SITE SECURITY 50 50 3.2.1 - Site remediation and human conflict potential (Dumping, contamination, trespassing, vandalism, other) (Select the highest score) a. Minimal site remediation or human conflict issues predicted 50 50 ATV trespass and minimal potential dumping b. Moderate site remediation or human conflict issues predicted (Please describe) 20 c. Major site remediation or human conflict issues predicted (Please describe) 5 d. Resolving site remediation or human conflict issues not feasible 0 3.3 - ASSISTANCE 5 0 3.3.1 - Management assistance by other entity a. Management assistance by other entity likely 5 b. Management assistance by other entity unlikely 0 0 RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT TOTAL SCORE 175 100 RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*80) 80 46 4 - VULNERABILITY (20%) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 4.1 - ZONING AND LAND USE 130 125 4.1.1 - Zoning and land use designation (Select the highest score) a. Zoning allows for Single Family, Multifamily, industrial or commercial 100 100 Estates b. Zoning allows for density of no greater than 1 unit per 5 acres 75 c. Zoning allows for agricultural use /density of no greater than 1 unit per 40 acres 50 d. Zoning favors stewardship or conservation 0 4.1.2 - Future Land Use Type (Select the highest score) a. Parcel designated Urban 30 b. Parcel designated Estates, Rural Fringe Receiving and Neutral, Agriculture 25 25 Page 1401 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) c. Parcel designated Rural Fringe Sending, Rural Lands Stewardship Area 5 d. Parcel is designated Conservation 0 4.2 - DEVELOPMENT PLANS 50 20 4.2.1 - Development plans (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has been approved for development 20 b. SFWMD and/or USACOE permit has been applied for or SDP application has been submitted 15 c. Parcel has no current development plans 0 0 4.2.2 - Site characteristics amenable to development (Select all that apply) a. Parcel is primarily upland 10 10 b. Parcel is along a major roadway 10 5 c. Parcel is >10 acres 5 5 d. Parcel is within 1 mile of a current or planned commercial or multi-unit residential development 5 VULNERABILITY TOTAL SCORE 180 145 VULNERABILITY WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*80) 80 64 Page 1402 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) 8. Additional Site Photos Mature Cypress within Gore TPMA Faka-Union canal with opportunities for enhance public access amenities Page 1403 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Typical site conditions of wetland hardwood communities that have transitioned to mesic flatwood. Reina parcel Page 1404 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Reina parcel view looking north from 36th Ave. SE Page 1405 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) APPENDIX 1 – Critical Lands and Water Identification Maps (CLIP) Definitions This report makes use of data layers from the Florida Natural Areas Inventory and University of Florida Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP4). CLIP4 is a collection of spatial data that identify statewide priorities for a broad range of natural resources in Florida. It was developed through a collaborative effort between the Florida Areas Natural Inventory (FNAI), the University of Florida GeoPlan Center and Center for Landscape Conservation Planning, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). It is used in the Florida Forever Program to evaluate properties for acquisition. CLIP4 is organized into a set of core natural resource data layers which are representative of 5 resource categories: biodiversity, landscapes, surface water, groundwater and marine. The first 3 categories have also been combined into the Aggregated layer, which identifies 5 priority levels for natural resource conservation. Below is a description of each of the three CLIP4 data layers used in this report. Figure 5 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities Consists of 12 priority natural community types: upland glades, pine rocklands, seepage slopes, scrub, sandhill, sandhill upland lakes, rockland hammock, coastal uplands, imperiled coastal lakes, dry prairie, upland pine, pine flatwoods, upland hardwood forest, or coastal wetlands. These natural communities are prioritized by a combination of their heritage global status rank (G-rank) and landscape context, based on the Land Use Intensity Index (subset of CLIP Landscape Integrity Index) and FNAI Potential Natural Areas. Priority 1 includes G1-G3 communities with Very High or High landscape context. Priority 2 includes G1-G3 Medium and G4 Very High/High. Priority 3 includes G4 Medium and G5 Very High/High. Priority 5 is G5 Medium. This data layer was created by FNAI originally to inform the Florida Forever environmental land acquisition program. The natural communities were mapped primarily based on the FNAI/FWC Cooperative Land Cover (CLC) data layer, which is a compilation of best-available land cover data for the entire state. The CLC is based on both remote-sensed (from aerial photography, primarily from water management district FLUCCS data) and ground-truthed (from field surveys on many conservation lands) data. Figure 12 - Potential Habitat Richness CLIP4 Map This CLIP version 4.0 data layer is unchanged from CLIP v3.0. FWC Potential Habitat Richness. Because SHCAs do not address species richness, FWC also developed the potential habitat richness layer to identify areas of overlapping vertebrate species habitat. FWC created a statewide potential habitat model for each species included in their analysis. In some cases, only a portion of the potential habitat was ultimately designated as SHCA for each species. The Potential Habitat Richness layer includes the entire potential habitat model for each species and provides a count of the number of species habitat models occurring at each location. The highest number of focal species co-occurring at any location in the model is 13. Page 1406 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report- Gore TPMA Folio Number: 41617720004 Owner Names: Reina Date: May 7, 2025 (Original Report Date: August 3, 2022) Figure 13 - CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones High priorities indicate high potential for recharge to an underlying aquifer system (typically the Floridan aquifer but could be intermediate or surficial aquifers in some portions of the state). The highest priorities indicate high potential for recharge to springs or public water supplies. This figure also includes Wellfield Protection Zones. Collier County Wellfield Protection Zones are referenced in the Land Development Code and updated in 2010 by Pollution Control and Prevention Department Staff. The public water supply wellfields, identified in section 3.06.06 and permitted by the SFWMD for potable water to withdraw a minimum of 100,000 average gallons per day (GPD), are identified as protected wellfields, around which specific land use and activity (regulated development) shall be regulated under this section. Page 1407 of 4682 Conservation Collier Initial Criteria Screening Report Pancham Owner Names: Babalau Pancham Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Size: 2 parcels totaling 2.73 acres Staff Report Date: May 7, 2025 52 37 69 56 160 80 80 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and Management 4 - Vulnerability Total Score: 213/400 Awarded Points Possible Points Page 1408 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 2 Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... 2 1.Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4 2.Summary of Property ............................................................................................................................ 5 Figure 1 - Parcel Location Overview .........................................................................................................5 Figure 2 - Parcel Close-up .........................................................................................................................6 2.1 Summary of Property Information ....................................................................................................7 Table 1 – Summary of Property Information .....................................................................................7 Figure 3 - Secondary Criteria Score ....................................................................................................8 Table 2 - Secondary Criteria Score Summary .....................................................................................8 2.2 Summary of Assessed Value and Property Cost Estimates ..............................................................9 Table 3. Assessed & Estimated Value ................................................................................................9 2.2.1 Zoning, Growth Management and Conservation Overlays ....................................................9 2.3 Initial Screening Criteria Satisfaction (Ord. 2002-63, as amended, Sec. 12) ................................ 10 3.Initial Screening Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Ecological Values ............................................................................................................................. 12 3.1.1 Vegetative Communities ....................................................................................................... 12 Figure 4 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities ........................................................................ 13 Figure 5 - Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System ............................................ 14 Figure 6 – Oak Hammock ........................................................................................................ 15 3.1.2 Wildlife Communities ............................................................................................................ 16 Figure 7 - Wildlife Spatial Data (i.e., telemetry, roosts, etc) .................................................... 16 Figure 8 - CLIP4 Potential Habitat Richness ............................................................................. 17 3.1.3 Water Resources ................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 9 - CLIP Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones .............................. 19 Figure 10 - Collier County Soil Survey ...................................................................................... 20 Figure 11 LIDAR Elevation Map ............................................................................................... 21 3.1.4 Ecosystem Connectivity ........................................................................................................ 22 Figure 12 - Conservation Lands ............................................................................................... 22 3.2 Human Values ................................................................................................................................. 23 3.2.1 Recreation ............................................................................................................................. 23 3.2.2 Accessibility ........................................................................................................................... 23 3.2.3 Aesthetic/Cultural Enhancement ......................................................................................... 24 Page 1409 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 3 3.3 Restoration and Management ....................................................................................................... 24 3.3.1 Vegetation Management ...................................................................................................... 24 3.3.1.1 Invasive Vegetation ..................................................................................................... 24 3.3.1.2 Prescribed Fire ............................................................................................................ 24 3.3.2 Remediation and Site Security .............................................................................................. 24 3.3.3 Assistance .............................................................................................................................. 24 3.4 Vulnerability .................................................................................................................................... 24 3.4.1 Zoning and Land Use ............................................................................................................. 24 Figure 13 – Zoning ................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 14 – Future Land Use ................................................................................................... 26 3.4.2 Development Plans ............................................................................................................... 27 4. Acquisition Considerations ................................................................................................................... 27 5. Management Needs and Costs .............................................................................................................. 28 Table 4 - Estimated Costs of Site Remediation, Improvements, and Management ............................. 28 6. Potential for Matching Funds .............................................................................................................. 28 7. Secondary Criteria Scoring Form ......................................................................................................... 29 8. Additional Site Photos ......................................................................................................................... 35 APPENDIX 1 – Critical Lands and Water Identification Maps (CLIP) Definitions ...................................... 37 Page 1410 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 4 1.Introduction The Conservation Collier Program (Program) is an environmentally sensitive land acquisition and management program approved by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (Board) in 2002 and by Collier County Voters in 2002 and 2006. The Program was active in acquisition between 2003 and 2011, under the terms of the referendum. Between 2011 and 2016, the Program was in management mode. In 2017, the Collier County Board reauthorized Conservation Collier to seek additional lands (2/14/17, Agenda Item 11B). On November 3, 2020, the Collier County electors approved the Conservation Collier Re-establishment referendum with a 76.5% majority. This Initial Criteria Screening Report (ICSR) has been prepared for the Conservation Collier Program to meet requirements specified in the Conservation Collier Implementation Ordinance, 2002-63, as amended, and for purposes of the Conservation Collier Program. The sole purpose of this report is to provide objective data to demonstrate how properties meet the criteria defined by the ordinance. The following sections characterize the property location and assessed value, elaborate on the initial and secondary screening criteria scoring, and describe potential funding sources, appropriate use, site improvements, and estimated management costs. Page 1411 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 5 2.Summary of Property Figure 1 - Parcel Location Overview s Page 1412 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 6 Figure 2 - Parcel Close-up Page 1413 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 7 2.1 Summary of Property Information Table 1 – Summary of Property Information Characteristic Value Comments Name Pancham Babalau Pancham Folio Numbers 41661240006 and 41661320007 Target Protection Area NGGE I-75 and Everglades Blvd. Target Protection Mailing Area Size 2.73 acres 41661240006 – 1.59 acres 41661320007 – 1.14 acres Section, Township, and Range S32, T49, R28 Zoning Category/TDRs Estates 1 unit per 2.25 acres FEMA Flood Map Category AH 1% annual chance of shallow flooding, usually in the form of a pond, with an average depth ranging from 1 to 3 feet. These areas have a 26% chance of flooding over the life of a 30-year mortgage. Existing structures None Adjoining properties and their Uses Undeveloped; Developed, rural single-family home Bordered by undeveloped lots to the E, W, and S; Bordered on north side by 38th Ave SE. then a single-family residence Development Plans Submitted None Known Property Irregularities None Other County Dept Interest Transportation Parcels are in the study area for the I-75 interchange between Everglades and Desoto Blvds. Page 1414 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 8 Figure 3 - Secondary Criteria Score Table 2 - Secondary Criteria Score Summary Criteria Awarded Weighted Points Possible Weighted Points Awarded/Possible Points 1 - Ecological Value 52 160 33% 1.1 - Vegetative Communities 21 53 40% 1.2 - Wildlife Communities 16 27 60% 1.3 - Water Resources 8 27 30% 1.4 - Ecosystem Connectivity 7 53 13% 2 - Human Values 37 80 46% 2.1 - Recreation 11 34 33% 2.2 - Accessibility 23 34 67% 2.3 - Aesthetics/Cultural Enhancement 3 11 25% 3 - Restoration and Management 69 80 86% 3.1 - Vegetation Management 46 55 83% 3.2 - Remediation and Site Security 23 23 100% 3.3 - Assistance 0 2 0% 4 - Vulnerability 56 80 69% 4.1 - Zoning and Land Use 56 58 96% 4.2 - Development Plans 0 22 0% Total 213 400 53% 52 37 69 56 160 80 80 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and Management 4 - Vulnerability Total Score: 213/400 Awarded Points Possible Points Page 1415 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 9 2.2 Summary of Assessed Value and Property Cost Estimates The interest being appraised is fee simple “as is” for the purchase of the site. A value of the parcels was estimated using only one of the three traditional approaches to value, the sales comparison approach. It is based on the principal of substitution that an informed purchaser would pay no more for the rights in acquiring a particular real property than the cost of acquiring, without undue delay, an equally desirable one. Three properties were selected for comparison, each with similar site characteristics, utility availability, zoning classification and road access. No inspection was made of the property or comparables used in this report and the Real Estate Services Department staff relies upon information solely provided by program staff. The valuation conclusion is limited only by the reported assumptions and conditions that no other known or unknown adverse conditions exist. Possible access concerns or limits to uses within the property unknown at the time of estimation will be taken into consideration at time of appraisal. If the Board of County Commissioners chooses to acquire this property, an appraisal by an independent Real Estate Appraiser will be obtained at that time. Pursuant to the Conservation Collier Purchase Policy, one appraisal is required for the parcels, which have an initial valuation less than $500,000; 1 independent Real Estate Appraiser will value the subject property, and that appraisal report will determine the actual value of the subject property. Table 3. Assessed & Estimated Value Property owners Folio # Acreage Assessed Value* Estimated Value** Babalau Pancham 41661240006 1.59 $34,920 $36,570 Babalau Pancham 41661320007 1.14 $24,817 $26,220 TOTAL 2.73 $59,737 $62,790 * Assessed Value is obtained from the Property Appraiser’s Website. The Assessed Value is based off the current use of the property. **The Estimated Market Value for the Pancham parcels was obtained from the Collier County Real Estate Services Department. 2.2.1 Zoning, Growth Management and Conservation Overlays Zoning, growth management and conservation overlays will affect the value of a parcel. The parcels are zoned Estates and have an allowable density of 1 unit per 2.25 acres. Page 1416 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 10 2.3 Initial Screening Criteria Satisfaction (Ord. 2002-63, as amended, Sec. 12) Criteria 1: CLIP Priority 1 Natural Community Does the property contain Upland Hardwood Forest, Scrub, Coastal Upland, Dry Prairie, or Upland Pine? NO Criteria 2: CLIP Priority 2 Natural Community Does the property contain Pine Flatwoods or Coastal Wetlands? NO Criteria 3: Other Native, Natural Communities Does the property contain other native, natural communities? YES The parcels contain oak hammock, mixed shrubs, and mixed wetland hardwoods. Criteria 4: Human Social Values Does the property offer cultural values, appropriate access for natural resource-based recreation, and the enhancement of the aesthetic setting of Collier County? YES The parcels are visible and readily accessible from a public roadway and can be accessed year-round. Criteria 5: Water Resources Does the property offer opportunities for protection of water resource values, including aquifer recharge, water quality enhancement, protection of wetland dependent species habitat, wildfire risk reduction, storm surge protection, and flood control? YES Disturbed wetlands exist on site and parcels are mapped as containing hydric soils. Criteria 6: Biological and Ecological Value Does the property offer significant biological values, including biodiversity and listed species habitat? NO Because of their small size, these parcels individually do not offer significant biological values. Criteria 7: Enhancement of Current Conservation Lands Does the property enhance and/or protect the environmental value of current conservation lands through function as a buffer, ecological link or habitat corridor? NO The parcels are not adjacent to any conservation lands, but lands between them and conservation lands are undeveloped. Page 1417 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 11 Criteria 8: Target Area Is the property within a Board-approved target protection mailing area? YES I-75 and Everglades Blvd. TPMA The Pancham parcels met 4 out of the 8 Initial Screening Criteria. Page 1418 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 12 3.Initial Screening Criteria 3.1 Ecological Values 3.1.1 Vegetative Communities The northern-most portion of the parcels is mapped as Cypress; however, staff observed Oak Hammock in this area. The other mapped areas (Mixed Shrubs and Mixed Wetland Hardwoods) were consistent with what was found on site. The Oak Hammock is dominated by laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) and cabbage palm (Sabal Palmetto). The midstory consists wild coffee (Psychotria nervosa), shortleaf wild coffee (Psychotria tenuifolia) and cabbage palm, with an occasional common buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), and firebush (Hamelia patens). The understory consists of muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia) and greenbriers (Smilax spp.). The Mixed Shrubs are dominated by buttonbush and elderberry (Sambucus nigra) in the midstory with muscadine, greenbriers, Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), and peppervine (Nekemias arborea) in the groundcover. The Mixed Wetland Hardwoods consist of cypress (Taxodium distichum), laurel oak, and cabbage palm in the canopy with myrsine (Myrsine cubana), wild coffee, and cabbage palm in the midstory and primarily swamp fern in the groundcover. Exotic plants are present at a total estimated density of approximately 10%. The primary invasive plant observed was Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia). The state endangered cardinal air plant (Tillandsia fasciculata) species was observed on the property during the site visit. Page 1419 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 13 Figure 4 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities Page 1420 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 14 Figure 5 - Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System Page 1421 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 15 Figure 6 – Oak Hammock Page 1422 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 16 3.1.2 Wildlife Communities Multiple Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) and Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) telemetry points have been noted around the parcels. Figure 7 - Wildlife Spatial Data (i.e., telemetry, roosts, etc) Page 1423 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 17 Figure 8 - CLIP4 Potential Habitat Richness Page 1424 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 18 3.1.3 Water Resources The parcels protect water resources. They are mapped as containing hydric soils and appear to contain wetlands, although the hydrology of the area has been affected by nearby canals. Additionally, aquifer recharge mapping indicates very little contribution to recharge. Soils data is based on the Soil Survey of Collier County Area, Florida (USDA/NRCS, 1990). Soils mapped on the parcels hydric. Mapped soils include “Boca, Riviera, Limestone Substratum and Copeland FS, Depressional” (level, very poorly drained soils in depressions, cypress swamps, and marshes) and “Hallandale and Boca Fine Sand” (nearly level, poorly drained soils associated with sloughs and poorly defined drainageways). Page 1425 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 19 Figure 9 - CLIP Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones Page 1426 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 20 Figure 10 - Collier County Soil Survey Page 1427 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 21 Figure 11 LIDAR Elevation Map Page 1428 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 22 3.1.4 Ecosystem Connectivity These parcels are not directly adjacent to conservation lands; however, undeveloped lands exist between the parcels and the Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve to the east. The low-density nature of development in this area allows wildlife to move relatively unimpeded across the landscape. Picayune Strand State Forest is to the south across I-75 with a wildlife underpass west of the parcels, along the eastern side of the Miller Canal. Figure 12 - Conservation Lands s Page 1429 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 23 3.2 Human Values 3.2.1 Recreation These parcels could provide year-round access for passive, recreational activities including equestrian, and hiking. 3.2.2 Accessibility The parcels are accessible via a paved road. Parking is available along 40th Ave. SE. Page 1430 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 24 3.2.3 Aesthetic/Cultural Enhancement The parcels are visible from a public road. 3.3 Restoration and Management 3.3.1 Vegetation Management 3.3.1.1 Invasive Vegetation Exotic plants are present at a total estimated density of approximately 10%. The primary invasive plant observed was Brazilian pepper along the northern boundary, adjacent with 40th Ave. SE. 3.3.1.2 Prescribed Fire The natural communities would benefit from fire; however, due to the parcels’ small size and location, prescribed fire is not likely. 3.3.2 Remediation and Site Security No site security issues appear to exist within the parcels. 3.3.3 Assistance No management assistance is anticipated. 3.4 Vulnerability 3.4.1 Zoning and Land Use The parcels are zoned Estates and have an allowable density of 1 unit per 2.25 acres. Page 1431 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 25 Figure 13 – Zoning Page 1432 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 26 Figure 14 – Future Land Use Page 1433 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 27 3.4.2 Development Plans The parcels are not currently planned for development. 4. Acquisition Considerations Staff would like to bring the following items to the attention of the Advisory Committee during the review of this property. The following items may not have significantly affected the scoring but are worth noting. These parcels are within the study area for the I-75 interchange. The properties in this location could be impacted by future right-of-way needs or for stormwater ponds to support the right-of-way. If this property is approved for the A-List, staff will take this information into consideration when planning amenities and public access on the site. Additionally, when applicable, language will be memorialized in the Purchase Agreement and related closing documents to ensure Collier County Transportation will be able to purchase a portion of the property from Conservation Collier for future right-of-way, if and when needed, at the original per-acre acquisition cost. Page 1434 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 28 5. Management Needs and Costs Table 4 - Estimated Costs of Site Remediation, Improvements, and Management Management Element Initial Cost Annual Recurring Cost Comments Invasive Vegetation Removal $1,100 $410 Initial assumes $400/acre; recurring assumes $150/acre TOTAL $1,100 $410 6. Potential for Matching Funds The primary partnering agencies for conservation acquisitions, and those identified in the ordinance are the Florida Communities Trust (FCT) and The Florida Forever Program. The following highlights potential for partnering funds, as communicated by agency staff. Florida Communities Trust - Parks and Open Space Florida Forever grant program: The FCT Parks and Open Space Florida Forever grant program provides grant funds to local governments and nonprofit organizations to acquire conservation lands, urban open spaces, parks and greenways. Application for this program is typically made for pre-acquired sites up to two years from the time of acquisition. The Parks and Open Space Florida Forever grant program assists the Department of Environmental Protection in helping communities meet the challenges of growth, supporting viable community development and protecting natural resources and open space. The program receives 21 percent Florida Forever appropriation. Florida Forever Program: This parcel is within the Belle Meade Florida Forever Project Area boundary, and state Real Estate Services staff has expressed interest in pursuing the property, depending on owner expectations of process and price. Additionally, the Conservation Collier Program has not been successful in partnering with the Florida Forever Program due to conflicting acquisition policies and issues regarding joint title between the programs. Additional Funding Sources: There are no additional funding sources known at this time. Page 1435 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 29 7. Secondary Criteria Scoring Form Property Name: Pancham Target Protection Mailing Area: I-75 and Everglades Blvd. Folio(s): 41612760001 Secondary Criteria Scoring Possible Points Awarded Points Percentage 1 - Ecological Value 160 52 33 2 - Human Value 80 37 46 3 - Restoration and Management 80 69 86 4 - Vulnerability 80 56 69 TOTAL SCORE 400 213 53 1 - ECOLOGICAL VALUES (40% of total) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 1.1 VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES 200 80 1.1.1 - Priority natural communities (Select highest score) a. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 1 communities (1130 - Rockland Hammock, 1210 - Scrub, 1213 - Sand Pine Scrub, 1214 - Coastal Scrub, 1312 - Scrubby Flatwoods, 1610 - Beach Dune, 1620 - Coastal Berm, 1630 - Coastal Grasslands, 1640 - Coastal Strand, or 1650 - Maritime Hammock) 100 b. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 2 communities (22211 - Hydric Pine Flatwoods, 2221 - Wet Flatwoods, or 1311 - Mesic Flatwoods) 60 c. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 3 communities (5250 - Mangrove Swamp, or 5240 - Salt Marsh) 50 d. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 4 communities (5250 - Mangrove Swamp) 25 1.1.2 - Plant community diversity (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has ≥ 3 CLC native plant communities (Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System native plant communities) 20 20 Oak hammock/Mixed shrubs/Mixed Wetland Hardwoods b. Parcel has ≤ 2 CLC native plant communities 10 c. Parcel has 0 CLC native plant communities 0 1.1.3 - Listed plant species (excluding commercially exploited species) (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has ≥5 CLC listed plant species 30 b. Parcel has 3-4 CLC listed plant species 20 c. Parcel has ≤ 2 CLC listed plant species 10 10 Tillandsia fasciculata Page 1436 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 30 d. Parcel has 0 CLC listed plant species 0 1.1.4 - Invasive Plant Infestation (Select highest score) a. 0 - 10% infestation 50 50 b. 10 - 25% infestation 40 c. 25 - 50% infestation 30 d. 50 - 75% infestation 20 e. ≥75% infestation 10 1.2 - WILDLIFE COMMUNITIES 100 60 1.2.1 - Listed wildlife species (Select the highest score) a. Listed wildlife species documented on the parcel 80 b. Listed wildlife species documented on adjacent property 60 60 FL panther c CLIP Potential Habitat Richness ≥5 species 40 d. No listed wildlife documented near parcel 0 1.2.2 - Significant wildlife habitat (Rookeries, roosts, denning sites, nesting grounds, high population densities, etc) (Select highest score) a. Parcel protects significant wildlife habitat (Please describe) 20 b. Parcel enhances adjacent to significant wildlife habitat (Please describe) 10 c. Parcel does not enhance significant wildlife habitat 0 0 1.3 - WATER RESOURCES 100 30 1.3.1 - Aquifer recharge (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is located within a wellfield protection zone or within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 1 area 40 b. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 2 or 3 area 30 c. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 4 or 5 area 20 d. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 6 area 0 0 1.3.2 - Surface Water Protection (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for an Outstanding Florida Waterbody 30 b. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for a creek, river, lake, canal or other surface water body 20 c. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for an identified flowway 15 d. Wetlands exist on site 10 10 e. Parcel does not provide opportunities for surface water quality enhancement 0 1.3.3 - Floodplain Management (Select all that apply) a. Parcel has depressional or slough soils 10 10 b. Parcel has known history of flooding and is likely to provide onsite water attenuation 10 10 c. Parcel provides storm surge buffering 10 Page 1437 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 31 d. Parcel does not provide floodplain management benefits 0 1.4 - ECOSYSTEM CONNECTIVITY 200 25 1.4.1 - Acreage (Select Highest Score) a. Parcel is ≥ 300 acres 150 b. Parcel is ≥ 100 acres 100 b. Parcel is ≥ 50 acres 75 c. Parcel is ≥ 25 acres 25 d. Parcel is ≥ 10 acres 15 e. Parcel is < 10 acres 0 0 1.4.2 - Connectivity (Select highest score) a. Parcel is immediately contiguous with conservation lands 50 b. Parcel is not immediately contiguous, but parcels between it and nearby conservation lands are undeveloped 25 25 c. Parcel is isolated from conservation land 0 ECOLOGICAL VALUES TOTAL POINTS 600 195 ECOLOGICAL VALUES WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*160) 160 52 2 - HUMAN VALUES (20%) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 2.1 - RECREATION 120 40 2.1.1 - Compatible recreation activities (Select all that apply) a. Hunting 20 b. Fishing 20 c. Water-based recreation (paddling, swimming, etc) 20 d. Biking 20 e. Equestrian 20 20 f. Passive natural-resource based recreation (Hiking, photography, wildlife watching, environmental education, etc) 20 20 g. Parcel is incompatible with nature-based recreation 0 2.2 - ACCESSIBILITY 120 80 2.2.1 - Seasonality (Select the highest score) a. Parcel accessible for land-based recreation year round 20 20 b. Parcel accessible for land-based recreation seasonally 10 c. Parcel is inaccessible for land-based recreation 0 2.2.2 - Vehicle access (Select the highest score) a. Public access via paved road 50 50 b. Public access via unpaved road 30 c. Public access via private road 20 d. No public access 0 2.2.3 - Parking Availability (Select the highest score) a. Minor improvements necessary to provide on-site parking 40 Page 1438 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 32 b. Major improvements necessary to provide on-site parking (Requires site development plan) 25 b. Public parking available nearby or on adjacent preserve 20 c. Street parking available 10 10 d. No public parking available 0 2.2.4 - Pedestrian access (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is easily accessible to pedestrians (within walking distance of housing development) 10 b. Parcel is not easily accessible to pedestrians 0 0 2.3 - AESTHETICS/CULTURAL ENHANCEMENT 40 10 2.3.1 - Aesthetic/cultural value (Choose all that apply) a. Mature/outstanding native vegetation 5 b. Scenic vistas 5 c. Frontage enhances aesthetics of public thoroughfare 10 10 d. Archaeological/historical structures present 15 e. Other (Please describe) 5 f. None 0 HUMAN VALUES TOTAL SCORE 280 130 HUMAN VALUES WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*80) 80 37 3 - RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT (20%) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 3.1 - VEGETATION MANAGEMENT 120 100 3.1.1 - Invasive plant management needs (Select the highest score) a. Minimal invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (<30%) 100 100 b. Moderate invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (30-65%) 75 c. Major invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (>65%) 50 d. Major invasive/nuisance plant management and replanting necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (>65%) 25 e. Restoration of native plant community not feasible 0 3.1.2 - Prescribed fire necessity and compatibility (Select the highest score) a. Parcel contains fire dependent plant communities and is compatible with prescribed fire or parcel does not contain fire dependent plant communities 20 Page 1439 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 33 b. Parcel contains fire dependent plant communities and is incompatible with prescribed fire 0 0 small size and adjacent to home 3.2 - REMEDIATION AND SITE SECURITY 50 50 3.2.1 - Site remediation and human conflict potential (Dumping, contamination, trespassing, vandalism, other) (Select the highest score) a. Minimal site remediation or human conflict issues predicted 50 50 b. Moderate site remediation or human conflict issues predicted (Please describe) 20 c. Major site remediation or human conflict issues predicted (Please describe) 5 d. Resolving site remediation or human conflict issues not feasible 0 3.3 - ASSISTANCE 5 0 3.4.1 - Management assistance by other entity a. Management assistance by other entity likely 5 b. Management assistance by other entity unlikely 0 0 RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT TOTAL SCORE 175 150 RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*80) 80 69 4 - VULNERABILITY (20%) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 4.1 - ZONING AND LAND USE 130 125 4.1.1 - Zoning and land use designation (Select the highest score) a. Zoning allows for Single Family, Multifamily, industrial or commercial 100 100 b. Zoning allows for density of no greater than 1 unit per 5 acres 75 c. Zoning allows for agricultural use /density of no greater than 1 unit per 40 acres 50 d. Zoning favors stewardship or conservation 0 4.1.2 - Future Land Use Type (Select the highest score) a. Parcel designated Urban 30 b. Parcel designated Estates, Rural Fringe Receiving and Neutral, Agriculture 25 25 c. Parcel designated Rural Fringe Sending, Rural Lands Stewardship Area 5 d. Parcel is designated Conservation 0 4.2 - DEVELOPMENT PLANS 50 0 4.2.1 - Development plans (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has been approved for development 20 b. SFWMD and/or USACOE permit has been applied for or SDP application has been submitted 15 Page 1440 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 34 c. Parcel has no current development plans 0 0 4.2.2 - Site characteristics amenable to development (Select all that apply) a. Parcel is primarily upland 10 b. Parcel is along a major roadway 10 c. Parcel is >10 acres 5 d. Parcel is within 1 mile of a current or planned commercial or multi-unit residential development 5 VULNERABILITY TOTAL SCORE 180 125 VULNERABILITY WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*80) 80 56 Page 1441 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 35 8. Additional Site Photos View from 40th Ave. SE Oak hammock Page 1442 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 36 Mixed Shrubs Mixed Shrubs in foreground with Mixed Wetland Hardwoods behind Page 1443 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 37 APPENDIX 1 – Critical Lands and Water Identification Maps (CLIP) Definitions This report makes use of data layers from the Florida Natural Areas Inventory and University of Florida Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP4). CLIP4 is a collection of spatial data that identify statewide priorities for a broad range of natural resources in Florida. It was developed through a collaborative effort between the Florida Areas Natural Inventory (FNAI), the University of Florida GeoPlan Center and Center for Landscape Conservation Planning, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). It is used in the Florida Forever Program to evaluate properties for acquisition. CLIP4 is organized into a set of core natural resource data layers which are representative of 5 resource categories: biodiversity, landscapes, surface water, groundwater and marine. The first 3 categories have also been combined into the Aggregated layer, which identifies 5 priority levels for natural resource conservation. Below is a description of each of the three CLIP4 data layers used in this report. Figure 4 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities Consists of 12 priority natural community types: upland glades, pine rocklands, seepage slopes, scrub, sandhill, sandhill upland lakes, rockland hammock, coastal uplands, imperiled coastal lakes, dry prairie, upland pine, pine flatwoods, upland hardwood forest, or coastal wetlands. These natural communities are prioritized by a combination of their heritage global status rank (G-rank) and landscape context, based on the Land Use Intensity Index (subset of CLIP Landscape Integrity Index) and FNAI Potential Natural Areas. Priority 1 includes G1-G3 communities with Very High or High landscape context. Priority 2 includes G1-G3 Medium and G4 Very High/High. Priority 3 includes G4 Medium and G5 Very High/High. Priority 5 is G5 Medium. This data layer was created by FNAI originally to inform the Florida Forever environmental land acquisition program. The natural communities were mapped primarily based on the FNAI/FWC Cooperative Land Cover (CLC) data layer, which is a compilation of best-available land cover data for the entire state. The CLC is based on both remote-sensed (from aerial photography, primarily from water management district FLUCCS data) and ground-truthed (from field surveys on many conservation lands) data. Figure 8 - Potential Habitat Richness CLIP4 Map This CLIP version 4.0 data layer is unchanged from CLIP v3.0. FWC Potential Habitat Richness. Because SHCAs do not address species richness, FWC also developed the potential habitat richness layer to identify areas of overlapping vertebrate species habitat. FWC created a statewide potential habitat model for each species included in their analysis. In some cases, only a portion of the potential habitat was ultimately designated as SHCA for each species. The Potential Habitat Richness layer includes the entire potential habitat model for each species and provides a count of the number of species habitat models occurring at each location. The highest number of focal species co-occurring at any location in the model is 13. Page 1444 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio Numbers: 41661240006 and 41661320007 Owner Names: Pancham Date: May 7, 2025 38 Figure 9 - CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones High priorities indicate high potential for recharge to an underlying aquifer system (typically the Floridan aquifer but could be intermediate or surficial aquifers in some portions of the state). The highest priorities indicate high potential for recharge to springs or public water supplies. This figure also includes Wellfield Protection Zones. Collier County Wellfield Protection Zones are referenced in the Land Development Code and updated in 2010 by Pollution Control and Prevention Department Staff. The public water supply wellfields, identified in section 3.06.06 and permitted by the SFWMD for potable water to withdraw a minimum of 100,000 average gallons per day (GPD), are identified as protected wellfields, around which specific land use and activity (regulated development) shall be regulated under this section. Page 1445 of 4682 Conservation Collier Initial Criteria Screening Report Bennett Parcel Owner Names: Bennett Family Trust Folio Number: 61731280002 Size: 1.0 acres Staff Report Date: June 4, 2025 60 37 55 38 160 80 80 80 0 50 100 150 200 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and Management 4 - Vulnerability Total Score: 190/400 Awarded Points Possible Points Page 1446 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 2 Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... 2 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Summary of Property ............................................................................................................................ 5 Figure 1 - Parcel Location Overview .........................................................................................................5 Figure 2 - Parcel Close-up .........................................................................................................................6 2.1 Summary of Property Information ....................................................................................................7 Table 1 – Summary of Property Information .....................................................................................7 Figure 3 - Secondary Criteria Score ....................................................................................................8 Table 2 – Secondary Criteria Score Summary ....................................................................................8 2.2 Summary of Assessed Value and Property Cost Estimates ..............................................................9 Table 3. Assessed & Estimated Value ................................................................................................9 2.2.1 Zoning, Growth Management and Conservation Overlays ....................................................9 2.3 Initial Screening Criteria Satisfaction (Ord. 2002-63, Sec. 12) ...................................................... 10 3. Initial Screening Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Ecological Values ............................................................................................................................. 12 3.1.1 Vegetative Communities ....................................................................................................... 12 Figure 4 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities ....................................................................... 13 Figure 5 - Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System ........................................... 14 Figure 6 – Earleaf acacia and slash pine canopy ..................................................................... 15 Figure 7 – Internal portion of parcel with little groundcover ................................................. 15 3.1.2 Wildlife Communities ............................................................................................................ 16 Figure 8 - Wildlife Spatial Data (i.e., telemetry, roosts, etc) ................................................... 17 Figure 9 - CLIP4 Potential Habitat Richness ............................................................................ 18 3.1.3 Water Resources ................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 10 - CLIP Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones ........................... 20 Figure 11 - Collier County Soil Survey ..................................................................................... 21 Figure 12 LIDAR Elevation Map ............................................................................................... 22 3.1.4 Ecosystem Connectivity ........................................................................................................ 23 Figure 13 - Conservation Lands ............................................................................................... 23 3.2 Human Values ................................................................................................................................. 24 3.2.1 Recreation ............................................................................................................................. 24 3.2.2 Accessibility ........................................................................................................................... 24 Page 1447 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 3 3.2.3 Aesthetic/Cultural Enhancement ......................................................................................... 24 Figure 14 – Mature, large slash pine on Bennett parcel ......................................................... 24 3.3 Restoration and Management ....................................................................................................... 25 3.3.1 Vegetation Management ...................................................................................................... 25 3.3.1.1 Invasive Vegetation.................................................................................................... 25 3.3.1.2 Prescribed Fire ............................................................................................................ 25 3.3.2 Remediation and Site Security .............................................................................................. 25 3.3.3 Assistance .............................................................................................................................. 25 3.4 Vulnerability .................................................................................................................................... 25 3.4.1 Zoning and Land Use ............................................................................................................. 25 Figure 15 – Collier County GMP FLU Element Section V.B.6.a. .............................................. 28 Figure 16 – Zoning ................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 17 – Zoning Overlay ..................................................................................................... 30 Figure 18 – Future Land Use ................................................................................................... 31 3.4.2 Development Plans ............................................................................................................... 32 4. Acquisition Considerations ................................................................................................................... 32 5. Management Needs and Costs .............................................................................................................. 33 Table 4 - Estimated Costs of Site Remediation, Improvements, and Management ............................. 33 6. Potential for Matching Funds .............................................................................................................. 33 7. Secondary Criteria Scoring Forms ....................................................................................................... 34 8. Additional Site Photos ......................................................................................................................... 40 APPENDIX 1 – Critical Lands and Water Identification Maps (CLIP) Definitions ...................................... 44 Page 1448 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 4 1. Introduction The Conservation Collier Program (Program) is an environmentally sensitive land acquisition and management program approved by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (Board) in 2002 and by Collier County Voters in 2002 and 2006. The Program was active in acquisition between 2003 and 2011, under the terms of the referendum. Between 2011 and 2016, the Program was in management mode. In 2017, the Collier County Board reauthorized Conservation Collier to seek additional lands (2/14/17, Agenda Item 11B). On November 3, 2020, the Collier County electors approved the Conservation Collier Re-establishment referendum with a 76.5% majority. This Initial Criteria Screening Report (ICSR) has been prepared for the Conservation Collier Program to meet requirements specified in the Conservation Collier Implementation Ordinance, 2002-63, as amended, and for purposes of the Conservation Collier Program. The sole purpose of this report is to provide objective data to demonstrate how properties meet the criteria defined by the ordinance. The following sections characterize the property location and assessed value, elaborate on the initial and secondary screening criteria scoring, and describe potential funding sources, appropriate use, site improvements, and estimated management costs. Page 1449 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 5 2. Summary of Property Figure 1 - Parcel Location Overview Page 1450 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 6 Figure 2 - Parcel Close-up Page 1451 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 7 2.1 Summary of Property Information Table 1 – Summary of Property Information Characteristic Value Comments Name Bennett Bennett Family Trust Folio Number 61731280002 No site address – off Blue Sage Dr. Target Protection Area RFMUD Nancy Payton Preserve Target Protection Mailing Area Size 1.0 acre Section, Township, and Range S24, Twn 49, R26 Zoning Category/TDRs A-RFMUD-NBMO - Neutral-Section 24 Agricultural - Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – North Belle Meade Overlay – Neutral Lands; Baseline zoning allows 1 unit per 40 acres or 1 unit per lot or parcel of less than 40 acres with 90% preservation of slash pine trees FEMA Flood Map Category AH and X500 AH - 1% annual chance of shallow flooding, usually in the form of a pond, with an average depth ranging from 1 to 3 feet; X500 – low risk of flooding Existing structures None Adjoining properties and their Uses Undeveloped, single family residential, agricultural, roadway and canal Undeveloped land to the east and south, single family residence to the north, and unpaved road and Golden Gate Canal to the west Development Plans Submitted None Known Property Irregularities None Other County Dept Interest Transportation The Needs Plan list of the MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) includes the Green Boulevard Extension (16th Ave SW), in phases, from 23rd St SW to Everglades Blvd. The subject parcel is located south of 16th Ave SW; however, the corridor alignment may shift, or there may be a need for support facilities such as drainage ponds. There could be potential impacts on this parcel depending on the final alignment Page 1452 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 8 Figure 3 - Secondary Criteria Score Table 2 – Secondary Criteria Score Summary Criteria Awarded Weighted Points Possible Weighted Points Awarded/Possible Points 1 - Ecological Value 60 160 38% 1.1 - Vegetative Communities 27 53 50% 1.2 - Wildlife Communities 19 27 70% 1.3 - Water Resources 8 27 30% 1.4 - Ecosystem Connectivity 7 53 13% 2 - Human Values 37 80 46% 2.1 - Recreation 17 34 50% 2.2 - Accessibility 17 34 50% 2.3 - Aesthetics/Cultural Enhancement 3 11 25% 3 - Restoration and Management 55 80 69% 3.1 - Vegetation Management 32 55 58% 3.2 - Remediation and Site Security 23 23 100% 3.3 - Assistance 0 2 0% 4 - Vulnerability 38 80 47% 4.1 - Zoning and Land Use 33 58 58% 4.2 - Development Plans 4 22 20% Total 190 400 47% 60 37 55 38 160 80 80 80 0 50 100 150 200 1 - Ecological Value 2 - Human Value 3 - Restoration and Management 4 - Vulnerability Total Score: 190/400 Awarded Points Possible Points Page 1453 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 9 2.2 Summary of Assessed Value and Property Cost Estimates The interest being appraised is fee simple “as is” for the purchase of the site. A value of the parcel was estimated using only one of the three traditional approaches to value, the sales comparison approach. It is based on the principal of substitution that an informed purchaser would pay no more for the rights in acquiring a particular real property than the cost of acquiring, without undue delay, an equally desirable one. Three properties were selected for comparison, each with similar site characteristics, utility availability, zoning classification and road access. No inspection was made of the property or comparables used in this report and the Real Estate Services Department staff relies upon information solely provided by program staff. The valuation conclusion is limited only by the reported assumptions and conditions that no other known or unknown adverse conditions exist. Possible access concerns or limits to uses within the property unknown at the time of estimation will be taken into consideration at time of appraisal. If the Board of County Commissioners chooses to acquire the property, an appraisal by an independent Real Estate Appraiser will be obtained at that time. Pursuant to the Conservation Collier Purchase Policy, one appraisal is required for the Bennett parcel, which has an initial valuation less than $500,000; 1 independent Real Estate Appraiser will value the subject property, and that appraisal report will determine the actual value of the subject property. Table 3. Assessed & Estimated Value Property owner Address Acreage Assessed Value* Estimated Value** Bennett Family Trust No address 1.0 $39,000 $78,000 * Assessed Value is obtained from the Property Appraiser’s Website. The Assessed Value is based off the current use of the property. **The Estimated Market Value for the Bennett parcel will be obtained from the Collier County Real Estate Services Department before Board of County Commission ranking. 2.2.1 Zoning, Growth Management and Conservation Overlays Zoning, growth management and conservation overlays will affect the value of a parcel. The parcel is zoned Agricultural but is designated as Neutral Lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD), has a North Belle Meade Overlay, and is within Section 24 of Township 49, Range 26, which means its development standards are governed by the Collier County Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element, as described within Section V.B.6. of the Future Land Use Designation Description Section. The maximum building density is 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres or 1 dwelling unit per lot or parcel of less than 40 acres. The 1.0-acres being offered to Conservation Collier. A residential dwelling could be developed within this parcel. Additionally, if developed, 90% of the slash pine trees shall be preserved, unless a Red-cockaded Woodpecker Habitat Management Plan is prepared, and it recommends a lesser amount. Page 1454 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 10 2.3 Initial Screening Criteria Satisfaction (Ord. 2002-63, Sec. 12) Criteria 1: CLIP Priority 1 Natural Community Does the property contain Upland Hardwood Forest, Scrub, Coastal Upland, Dry Prairie, or Upland Pine? NO Parcel does not contain CLIP Priority 1 Natural Community. Criteria 2: CLIP Priority 2 Natural Community Does the property contain Pine Flatwoods or Coastal Wetlands? YES Parcel contains Mesic Pine Flatwoods. Criteria 3: Other Native, Natural Communities Does the property contain other native, natural communities? N/A Criteria 4: Human Social Values Does the property offer cultural values, appropriate access for natural resource-based recreation, and the enhancement of the aesthetic setting of Collier County? YES This parcel can be viewed from Blue Sage Dr. and is near the Nancy Payton Preserve. It could eventually be incorporated into the preserve trail system for nature-based recreation if the parcel between it and the preserve is acquired. Criteria 5: Water Resources Does the property offer opportunities for protection of water resource values, including aquifer recharge, water quality enhancement, protection of wetland dependent species habitat, wildfire risk reduction, storm surge protection, and flood control? NO Hydric soils exist on approximately half of the parcel; however, it does not contain wetlands and does not significantly contribute to the aquifer. Criteria 6: Biological and Ecological Value Does the property offer significant biological values, including biodiversity and listed species habitat? YES The parcel is very near to Nancy Payton Preserve. Florida panther, gopher tortoises, and red- cockaded woodpeckers have been documented in this area. Criteria 7: Enhancement of Current Conservation Lands Does the property enhance and/or protect the environmental value of current conservation lands through function as a buffer, ecological link or habitat corridor? NO Page 1455 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 11 Although only one undeveloped parcel of land separates this property from the Nancy Payton Preserve, it is not adjacent to any conservation land. Criteria 8: Target Area Is the property within a Board-approved target protection mailing area? YES The Bennett parcel met 4 out of the 8 Initial Screening Criteria. Page 1456 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 12 3. Initial Screening Criteria 3.1 Ecological Values 3.1.1 Vegetative Communities Although the parcel is mapped as Hydric Pine Flatwoods and Tree Nurseries it can best be described as Mesic Pine Flatwoods. The canopy consists primarily of slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and mature earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis). Several large slash pine snags also exist within the canopy. Other plants observed in the midstory and groundcover include earleaf acacia, bald-cypress (Taxodium distichum), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), myrsine (Myrsine cubana), muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), and occasional sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense) and swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum). Earleaf acacia is known to have allelopathic properties, producing chemicals that can inhibit the growth of other plants. Muscadine and a thick, earleaf acacia leaf layer blanketed most of the site, while ery little ground cover was observed within much of the parcel Exotic plants were present at a density of approximately 75% and included primarily earleaf acacia and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia). Ceasarweed (Urena lobata), rosary pea (Abrus precatorius) tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum), and carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides) were also present. The state endangered cardinal airplant (Tillandsia fasciculata) was observed. Page 1457 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 13 Figure 4 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities Page 1458 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 14 Figure 5 - Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System Page 1459 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 15 Figure 6 – Earleaf acacia and slash pine canopy Figure 7 – Internal portion of parcel with little groundcover Page 1460 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 16 3.1.2 Wildlife Communities A red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus) was identified within the parcel, and several areas of armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) rooting were observed within the parcel. Although no listed wildlife species have been documented on the parcel itself, Florida panthers (Puma concolor coryi) utilize the adjacent properties, and the area is a known, successful denning site. Additionally, Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) telemetry points and red cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) observations have been documented within surrounding parcels. Page 1461 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 17 Figure 8 - Wildlife Spatial Data (i.e., telemetry, roosts, etc) Page 1462 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 18 Figure 9 - CLIP4 Potential Habitat Richness Page 1463 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 19 3.1.3 Water Resources The parcel does not significantly protect water resources and adds very minimally to the surficial aquifer. The parcel and adjacent properties are comprised of uplands. Soils data is based on the Soil Survey of Collier County Area, Florida (USDA/NRCS, 1990). Mapped soils on the Bennett parcel include approximately half “Malabar fine sand” – a nearly level, poorly drained soil normally found in sloughs and poorly defined drainageways – and approximately half “Immokalee Fine Sand” – a nearly level, poorly drained soil found in flatwoods. Page 1464 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 20 Figure 10 - CLIP Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones Page 1465 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 21 Figure 11 - Collier County Soil Survey Page 1466 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 22 Figure 12 LIDAR Elevation Map Page 1467 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 23 3.1.4 Ecosystem Connectivity This parcel is not directly adjacent to Nancy Payton Preserve, but undeveloped lands exist between it and the preserve. Although small in acreage, the parcel contains several large, mature pines and several snags - both of which enhance the habitat available within the preserve and surrounding undeveloped land. Figure 13 - Conservation Lands Page 1468 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 24 3.2 Human Values 3.2.1 Recreation This parcel could provide year-round access for a variety of recreational activities including equestrian, large tire cycling, and hiking. Should the parcel between it and Nancy Payton Preserve be acquired, trails could easily be incorporated into the trail system. 3.2.2 Accessibility The parcel is located directly off Blue Sage Dr. 3.2.3 Aesthetic/Cultural Enhancement This parcel contains several large slash pine trees. Figure 14 – Mature, large slash pine on Bennett parcel Page 1469 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 25 3.3 Restoration and Management 3.3.1 Vegetation Management 3.3.1.1 Invasive Vegetation Approximately 75% of the parcel is covered with exotic vegetation – primarily earleaf acacia and Brazilian pepper with some Caesarweed, tropical soda apple, and carrotwood. The canopy is primarily comprised of earleaf acacia and a thick layer of earleaf acacia leaves has reduced the growth of the understory. Treatment could be incorporated into Nancy Payton Preserve regular invasive, exotic plant maintenance. 3.3.1.2 Prescribed Fire The parcel would be incorporated into the existing Nancy Payton Preserve burn units and burn rotation. Assistance from other agencies would be anticipated. 3.3.2 Remediation and Site Security Although no current issues appear to exist, should a trail be created on the parcel, ATV trespass could become a concern. 3.3.3 Assistance Assistance from other agencies or organizations is anticipated with prescribed fire. 3.4 Vulnerability 3.4.1 Zoning and Land Use The parcel is zoned Agricultural but is designated as Neutral Lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD), has a North Belle Meade Overlay, and is within Section 24 of Township 49, Range 26, which means its development standards are governed by the Collier County Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element, as described within Section V.B.6.a. of the Future Land Use Designation Description Section (Figure 16). The maximum building density is 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres or 1 dwelling unit per lot or parcel of less than 40 acres. One residential dwelling could be developed within this 1-acre parcel. Additionally, if developed, 90% of the slash pine trees shall be preserved, unless a Red-cockaded Woodpecker Habitat Management Plan is prepared, and it recommends a lesser amount. Page 1470 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 26 Page 1471 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 27 Page 1472 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 28 Figure 15 – Collier County GMP FLU Element Section V.B.6.a. Page 1473 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 29 Figure 16 – Zoning Page 1474 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 30 Figure 17 – Zoning Overlay Page 1475 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 31 Figure 18 – Future Land Use Page 1476 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 32 3.4.2 Development Plans The parcels are not currently planned for development. 4. Acquisition Considerations Staff would like to bring the following items to the attention of the Advisory Committee during the review of this property. The following items may not have significantly affected the scoring but are worth noting. The Needs Plan list of the Metropolitan Planning Organization’s Long Range Transportation Plan includes the Green Boulevard Extension (16th Ave SW), in phases, from 23rd St SW to Everglades Blvd. The subject parcel is located south of 16th Ave SW; however, the corridor alignment may shift, or there may be a need for support facilities such as drainage ponds. There could be potential impacts on this parcel depending on the final alignment. If this property is approved for the A-List, staff will take this information into consideration when planning amenities and public access on the site. Additionally, if applicable, language will be memorialized in the Purchase Agreement and related closing documents to ensure Collier County Transportation will be able to purchase a portion of the property from Conservation Collier for future right-of-way or stormwater needs at the original per-acre acquisition cost. Page 1477 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 33 5. Management Needs and Costs Table 4 - Estimated Costs of Site Remediation, Improvements, and Management Management Element Initial/ Annual Recurring Cost Comments Invasive Vegetation Removal $1,000/$150 Initial assumes $1,000/acre; recurring assumes $150/acre Fireline creation $7,300/$200 Initial assumes $10/ft. TOTAL $8,300/$350 6. Potential for Matching Funds The primary partnering agencies for conservation acquisitions, and those identified in the ordinance are the Florida Communities Trust (FCT) and The Florida Forever Program. The following highlights potential for partnering funds, as communicated by agency staff. Florida Communities Trust - Parks and Open Space Florida Forever grant program: The FCT Parks and Open Space Florida Forever grant program provides grant funds to local governments and nonprofit organizations to acquire conservation lands, urban open spaces, parks and greenways. Application for this program is typically made for pre-acquired sites up to two years from the time of acquisition. The Parks and Open Space Florida Forever grant program assists the Department of Environmental Protection in helping communities meet the challenges of growth, supporting viable community development and protecting natural resources and open space. The program receives 21 percent Florida Forever appropriation. Florida Forever Program: Staff has been advised that the Florida Forever Program is concentrating on funding parcels already included on its ranked priority list. These parcels are not inside a Florida Forever priority project boundary. Additionally, the Conservation Collier Program has not been successful in partnering with the Florida Forever Program due to conflicting acquisition policies and issues regarding joint title between the programs. Additional Funding Sources: There are no additional funding sources known at this time. Page 1478 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 34 7. Secondary Criteria Scoring Forms Property Name: Bennett Target Protection Mailing Area: Nancy Payton Preserve Folio(s): 61731280002 Secondary Criteria Scoring Possible Points Awarded Points Percentage 1 - Ecological Value 160 60 38 2 - Human Value 80 37 46 3 - Restoration and Management 80 55 69 4 - Vulnerability 80 38 47 TOTAL SCORE 400 190 47 1 - ECOLOGICAL VALUES (40% of total) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 1.1 VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES 200 100 1.1.1 - Priority natural communities (Select highest score) a. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 1 communities (1130 - Rockland Hammock, 1210 - Scrub, 1213 - Sand Pine Scrub, 1214 - Coastal Scrub, 1312 - Scrubby Flatwoods, 1610 - Beach Dune, 1620 - Coastal Berm, 1630 - Coastal Grasslands, 1640 - Coastal Strand, or 1650 - Maritime Hammock) 100 b. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 2 communities (22211 - Hydric Pine Flatwoods, 2221 - Wet Flatwoods, or 1311 - Mesic Flatwoods) 60 60 Mesic flatwoods c. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 3 communities (5250 - Mangrove Swamp, or 5240 - Salt Marsh) 50 d. Parcel contains CLIP4 Priority 4 communities (5250 - Mangrove Swamp) 25 1.1.2 - Plant community diversity (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has ≥ 3 CLC native plant communities (Florida Cooperative Land Cover Classification System native plant communities) 20 b. Parcel has ≤ 2 CLC native plant communities 10 10 c. Parcel has 0 CLC native plant communities 0 1.1.3 - Listed plant species (excluding commercially exploited species) (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has ≥5 CLC listed plant species 30 b. Parcel has 3-4 CLC listed plant species 20 c. Parcel has ≤ 2 CLC listed plant species 10 10 Tillandsia fasciculata d. Parcel has 0 CLC listed plant species 0 1.1.4 - Invasive Plant Infestation (Select highest score) a. 0 - 10% infestation 50 b. 10 - 25% infestation 40 c. 25 - 50% infestation 30 Page 1479 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 35 d. 50 - 75% infestation 20 20 75% e. ≥75% infestation 10 1.2 - WILDLIFE COMMUNITIES 100 70 1.2.1 - Listed wildlife species (Select the highest score) a. Listed wildlife species documented on the parcel 80 b. Listed wildlife species documented on adjacent property 60 60 panther; gopher tortoise, RCW c CLIP Potential Habitat Richness ≥5 species 40 d. No listed wildlife documented near parcel 0 1.2.2 - Significant wildlife habitat (Rookeries, roosts, denning sites, nesting grounds, high population densities, etc) (Select highest score) a. Parcel protects significant wildlife habitat (Please describe) 20 b. Parcel enhances adjacent to significant wildlife habitat (Please describe) 10 10 parcel between it and Nancy Payton Preserve is undeveloped c. Parcel does not enhance significant wildlife habitat 0 0 1.3 - WATER RESOURCES 100 30 1.3.1 - Aquifer recharge (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is located within a wellfield protection zone or within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 1 area 40 b. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 2 or 3 area 30 c. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 4 or 5 area 20 d. Parcel is located within a CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority 6 area 0 0 1.3.2 - Surface Water Protection (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for an Outstanding Florida Waterbody 30 b. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for a creek, river, lake, canal or other surface water body 20 20 c. Parcel is contiguous with and provides buffering for an identified flowway 15 d. Wetlands exist on site 10 e. Parcel does not provide opportunities for surface water quality enhancement 0 1.3.3 - Floodplain Management (Select all that apply) a. Parcel has depressional or slough soils 10 10 Page 1480 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 36 b. Parcel has known history of flooding and is likely to provide onsite water attenuation 10 c. Parcel provides storm surge buffering 10 d. Parcel does not provide floodplain management benefits 0 1.4 - ECOSYSTEM CONNECTIVITY 200 25 1.4.1 - Acreage (Select Highest Score) a. Parcel is ≥ 300 acres 150 b. Parcel is ≥ 100 acres 100 b. Parcel is ≥ 50 acres 75 c. Parcel is ≥ 25 acres 25 d. Parcel is ≥ 10 acres 15 e. Parcel is < 10 acres 0 0 1.4.2 - Connectivity (Select highest score) a. Parcel is immediately contiguous with conservation lands 50 b. Parcel is not immediately contiguous, but parcels between it and nearby conservation lands are undeveloped 25 25 c. Parcel is isolated from conservation land 0 ECOLOGICAL VALUES TOTAL POINTS 600 225 ECOLOGICAL VALUES WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*160) 160 60 2 - HUMAN VALUES (20%) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 2.1 - RECREATION 120 60 2.1.1 - Compatible recreation activities (Select all that apply) a. Hunting 20 b. Fishing 20 c. Water-based recreation (paddling, swimming, etc) 20 d. Biking 20 20 e. Equestrian 20 20 f. Passive natural-resource based recreation (Hiking, photography, wildlife watching, environmental education, etc) 20 20 g. Parcel is incompatible with nature-based recreation 0 2.2 - ACCESSIBILITY 120 60 2.2.1 - Seasonality (Select the highest score) a. Parcel accessible for land-based recreation year round 20 20 b. Parcel accessible for land-based recreation seasonally 10 c. Parcel is inaccessible for land-based recreation 0 2.2.2 - Vehicle access (Select the highest score) a. Public access via paved road 50 b. Public access via unpaved road 30 c. Public access via private road 20 20 Page 1481 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 37 d. No public access 0 2.2.3 - Parking Availability (Select the highest score) a. Minor improvements necessary to provide on-site parking 40 b. Major improvements necessary to provide on-site parking (Requires site development plan) 25 b. Public parking available nearby or on adjacent preserve 20 20 c. Street parking available 10 d. No public parking available 0 2.2.4 - Pedestrian access (Select the highest score) a. Parcel is easily accessible to pedestrians (within walking distance of housing development) 10 b. Parcel is not easily accessible to pedestrians 0 0 2.3 - AESTHETICS/CULTURAL ENHANCEMENT 40 10 2.3.1 - Aesthetic/cultural value (Choose all that apply) a. Mature/outstanding native vegetation 5 b. Scenic vistas 5 c. Frontage enhances aesthetics of public thoroughfare 10 10 d. Archaeological/historical structures present 15 e. Other (Please describe) 5 f. None 0 HUMAN VALUES TOTAL SCORE 280 130 HUMAN VALUES WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*80) 80 37 3 - RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT (20%) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 3.1 - VEGETATION MANAGEMENT 120 70 3.1.1 - Invasive plant management needs (Select the highest score) a. Minimal invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (<30%) 100 b. Moderate invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (30-65%) 75 c. Major invasive/nuisance plant management necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (>65%) 50 50 d. Major invasive/nuisance plant management and replanting necessary to restore and maintain native plant communities (>65%) 25 e. Restoration of native plant community not feasible 0 3.1.2 - Prescribed fire necessity and compatibility (Select the highest score) a. Parcel contains fire dependent plant communities and is compatible with prescribed fire or parcel does not contain fire dependent plant communities 20 20 Page 1482 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 38 b. Parcel contains fire dependent plant communities and is incompatible with prescribed fire 0 3.2 - REMEDIATION AND SITE SECURITY 50 50 3.2.1 - Site remediation and human conflict potential (Dumping, contamination, trespassing, vandalism, other) (Select the highest score) a. Minimal site remediation or human conflict issues predicted 50 50 b. Moderate site remediation or human conflict issues predicted (Please describe) 20 c. Major site remediation or human conflict issues predicted (Please describe) 5 d. Resolving site remediation or human conflict issues not feasible 0 3.3 - ASSISTANCE 5 0 3.4.1 - Management assistance by other entity a. Management assistance by other entity likely 5 b. Management assistance by other entity unlikely 0 0 RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT TOTAL SCORE 175 120 RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*80) 80 55 4 - VULNERABILITY (20%) Possible Points Awarded Points Comments 4.1 - ZONING AND LAND USE 130 75 4.1.1 - Zoning and land use designation (Select the highest score) a. Zoning allows for Single Family, Multifamily, industrial or commercial 100 b. Zoning allows for density of no greater than 1 unit per 5 acres 75 c. Zoning allows for agricultural use /density of no greater than 1 unit per 40 acres 50 50 d. Zoning favors stewardship or conservation 0 4.1.2 - Future Land Use Type (Select the highest score) a. Parcel designated Urban 30 b. Parcel designated Estates, Rural Fringe Receiving and Neutral, Agriculture 25 25 c. Parcel designated Rural Fringe Sending, Rural Lands Stewardship Area 5 d. Parcel is designated Conservation 0 4.2 - DEVELOPMENT PLANS 50 10 4.2.1 - Development plans (Select the highest score) a. Parcel has been approved for development 20 b. SFWMD and/or USACOE permit has been applied for or SDP application has been submitted 15 c. Parcel has no current development plans 0 0 Page 1483 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 39 4.2.2 - Site characteristics amenable to development (Select all that apply) a. Parcel is primarily upland 10 10 b. Parcel is along a major roadway 10 c. Parcel is >10 acres 5 d. Parcel is within 1 mile of a current or planned commercial or multi-unit residential development 5 VULNERABILITY TOTAL SCORE 180 85 VULNERABILITY WEIGHTED SCORE (Awarded Points/Possible Points*80) 80 38 Page 1484 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 40 8. Additional Site Photos View looking east into parcel from Blue Sage Dr. Photo inside parcel Page 1485 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 41 Earleaf acacia Brazilian pepper Page 1486 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 42 Sawgrass on eastern side of parcel Typical sparce groundcover within parcel Page 1487 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 43 Tillandsia fasciculata Page 1488 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 44 APPENDIX 1 – Critical Lands and Water Identification Maps (CLIP) Definitions This report makes use of data layers from the Florida Natural Areas Inventory and University of Florida Critical Lands and Waters Identification Project (CLIP4). CLIP4 is a collection of spatial data that identify statewide priorities for a broad range of natural resources in Florida. It was developed through a collaborative effort between the Florida Areas Natural Inventory (FNAI), the University of Florida GeoPlan Center and Center for Landscape Conservation Planning, and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). It is used in the Florida Forever Program to evaluate properties for acquisition. CLIP4 is organized into a set of core natural resource data layers which are representative of 5 resource categories: biodiversity, landscapes, surface water, groundwater and marine. The first 3 categories have also been combined into the Aggregated layer, which identifies 5 priority levels for natural resource conservation. Below is a description of each of the three CLIP4 data layers used in this report. Figure 4 - CLIP4 Priority Natural Communities Consists of 12 priority natural community types: upland glades, pine rocklands, seepage slopes, scrub, sandhill, sandhill upland lakes, rockland hammock, coastal uplands, imperiled coastal lakes, dry prairie, upland pine, pine flatwoods, upland hardwood forest, or coastal wetlands. These natural communities are prioritized by a combination of their heritage global status rank (G-rank) and landscape context, based on the Land Use Intensity Index (subset of CLIP Landscape Integrity Index) and FNAI Potential Natural Areas. Priority 1 includes G1-G3 communities with Very High or High landscape context. Priority 2 includes G1-G3 Medium and G4 Very High/High. Priority 3 includes G4 Medium and G5 Very High/High. Priority 5 is G5 Medium. This data layer was created by FNAI originally to inform the Florida Forever environmental land acquisition program. The natural communities were mapped primarily based on the FNAI/FWC Cooperative Land Cover (CLC) data layer, which is a compilation of best-available land cover data for the entire state. The CLC is based on both remote-sensed (from aerial photography, primarily from water management district FLUCCS data) and ground-truthed (from field surveys on many conservation lands) data. Figure 9 - Potential Habitat Richness CLIP4 Map This CLIP version 4.0 data layer is unchanged from CLIP v3.0. FWC Potential Habitat Richness. Because SHCAs do not address species richness, FWC also developed the potential habitat richness layer to identify areas of overlapping vertebrate species habitat. FWC created a statewide potential habitat model for each species included in their analysis. In some cases, only a portion of the potential habitat was ultimately designated as SHCA for each species. The Potential Habitat Richness layer includes the entire potential habitat model for each species and provides a count of the number of species habitat models occurring at each location. The highest number of focal species co-occurring at any location in the model is 13. Page 1489 of 4682 Initial Criteria Screening Report Folio No: 61731280002 Owner Names: Bennett Date: June 4, 2025 45 Figure 10 - CLIP4 Aquifer Recharge Priority and Wellfield Protection Zones High priorities indicate high potential for recharge to an underlying aquifer system (typically the Floridan aquifer but could be intermediate or surficial aquifers in some portions of the state). The highest priorities indicate high potential for recharge to springs or public water supplies. This figure also includes Wellfield Protection Zones. Collier County Wellfield Protection Zones are referenced in the Land Development Code and updated in 2010 by Pollution Control and Prevention Department Staff. The public water supply wellfields, identified in section 3.06.06 and permitted by the SFWMD for potable water to withdraw a minimum of 100,000 average gallons per day (GPD), are identified as protected wellfields, around which specific land use and activity (regulated development) shall be regulated under this section. Page 1490 of 4682