The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 12/09/2025 Item #17K (Resolution - Amend and expand a conditional use for earth mining by adding 39.92± acres and revising the conditions of approval for property zoned Rural Agricultural (A) within the Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), the Rural Lands )12/9/2025Item # 17.KID# 2025-4641Executive SummaryThis item requires Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to amend and expand a conditional use for earth mining by adding 39.92± acres and revising the conditions of approval for property zoned Rural Agricultural (A) within the Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4) for a total of 490.62± acres located on the west side of SR 29 North, south of SR 82 in the Immokalee Planning Area in Sections 17, 18, and 19, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) review staff's findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced petition and render a decision regarding the petition; and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The Stewart Mining commercial excavation was originally approved by Resolution Number 03- 332 for 219 acres. Resolution Number 21-013 granted approval to expand the mine to 450.7 acres. This request will allow for another expansion, increasing the mine site to ±490.62 acres. The proposed area of expansion is ±39.92 acres at 3000 Edwards Grove Road, lying to the east of the existing Stewart Mining operation. The expansion area has historically been used for agricultural purposes, pasture, nurseries, and row crops, and currently includes a storage building of approximately 10,500 square feet, per Property Appraiser records. The proposed expansion site is zoned Agriculture within the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO-RLSAO-ST/W-4). Commercial excavation can be approved as a Conditional Use per LDC Section 2.03.01 A.1.c.1. The petitioner indicates that the mining operation is for the excavation of high-quality sand for beach renourishment. The proposed expansion will allow for relocation of the material processing facilities to the subject site. By relocating the material processing, the excavation limits of the existing mine expand to include the land area now occupied with processing equipment. Access to the site is via Edwards Grove Road, which connects to State Road 82. Thirteen conditions were established for the 450.7-acre mine approved by Resolution Number 21-013. For this request, those thirteen conditions are maintained with scrivener’s edits and updates, and these four conditions are added (see Exhibit C, Conditions of Approval in the Draft Resolution in Attachment A): New Condition 14 - to recognize the approved Dust Control Plan for Edwards Grove Road New Condition 15 - to note compliance with state, local, and federal laws New Condition 16 - requiring removal of vertical improvements within 12 months of completing the mining, except for improvements to be used for reclamation New Condition 17 - to note that blasting will require an Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. The petitioner indicates that the expansion will not generate additional trips to the site, as additional trucks or employees are not proposed. The trip cap of 49 pm peak hour two-way trips is maintained as Condition 6. The expansion includes a proposed preserve area of ±1.48 acres, which will be supplemented with additional vegetation to be consistent with Land Development Code requirements of Section 4.08.05 J.2. The petitioner has affirmed that the proposed Conditional Use will comply with all groundwater protection requirements for Zone W-4, which are identified in Chapter 3.06.00 of the LDC. A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan will be implemented in association with proposed mining activities to reduce or eliminate the potential for groundwater contamination via the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products or wastes. Page 9090 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.KID# 2025-4641COFFIER COMNTH LFANNINU COY Y ISSION PCCLCG: On October 16, 2025, the CCPC heard Petition CU- PL20240003054, and voted unanimously to approve. No public opposition was voiced on this item, so this petition is placed on the Summary Agenda.ENVIRONY ENTAF ADVISORH COMNCIF PEACG: This project did require the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project meets the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, Section 2-1193(m)(4) requires EAC approval for a conditional use of a commercial mine. On October 16, 2025, the CCPC, acting as the EAC, voted unanimously to approve. This item advances the Collier County Strategic Plan Objective within Community Development to encourage diverse economic opportunities by fostering a business-friendly environment. ( ISCAF IY LACT: The Conditional Use (CU) by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. There is no guarantee that the project, at build-out, will maximize its authorized level of development. However, if the CU is approved, a portion of the land could be developed, and the new development will result in an impact on Collier County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. URO) TW Y ANAUEY ENT IY LACT: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the FLUE of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). On the Stewardship Overlay Map, part of the FLUM series, the site is designated “Open.” See Attachment B to the CCPC Staff Report, Consistency Memo, for staff’s finding that the proposed Conditional Use may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. Based on the TIS provided by the applicant and the 2024 AUIR, the subject Conditional Use can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP, and Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Environmental review staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site is 39.92 acres and includes an existing mine operation and an orange grove. The subject property consists of 2.30 acres of native vegetation onsite. A minimum of 0.92 acres of preservation is required; however, a 1.48-acre created preserve will be provided and dedicated to Collier County. The GMP is the prevailing document to support land-use decisions, such as this proposed conditional use. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any conditional use petition. This petition is consistent with the GMP, subject to the criteria set forth in this Conditional Use petition. FEUAF CONSIDERATIONS: Before you is a recommendation by the Planning Commission to approve amending and expanding a conditional use for earth mining by adding 39.92+/- acres and revising the conditions of approval for property zoned Rural Agricultural (A) within the Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4). A conditional use is a use permitted in a particular zoning district, subject to certain restrictions. All testimony given must be under oath. The attached report and recommendations of the Planning Commission are advisory only and are not binding on you. The petitioner has the burden of demonstrating that the necessary requirements have been met, and you may question the petitioner or staff to satisfy yourself that the necessary criteria have been satisfied. In addition to meeting the Page 9091 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.KID# 2025-4641necessary criteria, you may place such conditions and safeguards as you deem appropriate to allow the use, provided that there is competent, substantial evidence that these additional conditions and safeguards are necessary to promote the public health, safety, welfare, morals, order, comfort, convenience, appearance, or the general welfare of the neighborhood. As a further condition of approval of the conditional use, you may require that suitable areas for streets, public rights-of-way, schools, parks, and other public facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use, subject to appropriate impact fee credits.Approval or denial of the petition is by Resolution. Should this item be denied, Florida Statutes section 125.022(3) requires the County to provide written notice to the applicant citing applicable portions of an ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority for the denial. This item has been approved as to form and legality and requires an affirmative vote of four for BZA approval. (HFAC) RECOY Y ENDATIONPSG: To approve Petition CU-PL20240003054, Stewart Materials Expansion, subject to the conditions incorporated in the Resolution. LRELARED BH: Ray Bellows, AICP, Zoning Manager ATTACWY ENTS: 1. CCPC Staff Report - Stewart Materials Exp CU 2. Att A - Resolution 3. Att B - Consistency Review 4. Att C - Applicant Backup Material 5. Att D - NIM Documentation 6. Affidavit of Sign Posting 7. legal ad - agenda ID 25-4641 - Stewart Mine expansion CU-PL20240003054 - 12-9-25 BCC Page 9092 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 1 of 11 October 3, 2025 STAFF REPORTTO:COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING & ZONING DIVISION GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE:OCTOBER 16, 2025 SUBJECT: PL20240003054; STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE ______________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner(s)/Applicant: Agent: Barfield Property Holdings, LLC Davidson Engineering P.O. BOX 2357 Brandon T. Copper, P.E. LaBelle, FL 33935 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Southwestern Properties, LLC Nick T. Stewart, Manager (Applicant) 2875 Jupiter Park Dr., Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Southern Reserves, LLC Nick T. Stewart, Manager (Applicant) 2875 Jupiter Park Dr., Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission consider expansion of the Conditional Use for earthmining approved by the Conditional Use Resolution No. 03-332, as amended, pursuant to Section 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code, by adding 39.92+ acres for a total of 490.62+ acres and revising the conditions of approval for property located in the Agricultural with Mobile Home Overlay and Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO- RLSAO-ST/W-4). Page 9093 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 2 of 11 October 3, 2025 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject site is located on the east side of the terminating point of Edwards Grove Road, identified as Parcel Number 00065402009, with an address of 3000 Edwards Grove Road, Immokalee, FL 34142. It is approximately one mile south of State Road 82 in Section 17, Township 46, Range 30, Collier County, Florida. (See location map below.) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner is requesting Conditional Use approval for expansion of the existing Stewart Mining commercial excavation onto ±39.92 acres at 3000 Edwards Grove Road. The subject site lies to the east of the existing Stewart Mining operation. The site has historically been used for agricultural uses, pasture, nurseries, and row crops, and the site includes a storage building of approximately 10,500 square feet per Property Appraiser records. The existing mine operates per Conditional Use approvals granted by Resolution Number 03-332 for 219 acres and Resolution Number 21-013, which approved expansion of the mine to 450.7 acres. This request will allow for another expansion, increasing the mine site to ±490.62 acres. The petitioner indicates that the mining operation is for the excavation of high-quality sand for beach renourishment. The proposed expansion will allow for relocation of the material processing facilities to the subject site. By relocating the material processing, the excavation limits of the existing mine expand to include the land area now occupied with processing equipment. Page 9094 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 3 of 11 October 3, 2025 The current approved Conditional Use Master Plan, per Resolution 2021-013, and the proposed Master Plan are displayed below. Current approved Conditional Use Master Plan per Resolution 21-013 Proposed Conditional Use Master Plan, included in Attachment A - Draft Resolution Page 9095 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 4 of 11 October 3, 2025 The proposed expansion site is zoned Agriculture within the Mobile Home Overlay District,Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO-RLSAO-ST/W-4). Commercial excavation can be approved as aConditional Use per LDC Section 2.03.01 A.1.c.1.The proposed Master Plan shows access points to the existing mine and to the new equipment area/processing plant will remain as they exist today, and a new connecting driveway and material transfer pipes will connect the two sites. An access road is proposed around the perimeter of the proposed expansion, which will meet or exceed the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and Collier County requirements for fire maneuverability. Inset 1 from Master Concept Plan (Exhibit B), included in Attachment A – Draft Resolution Page 9096 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 5 of 11 October 3, 2025 Thirteen conditions were established for the 450.7-acre mine approved by Resolution Number 21-013. For this request, those thirteen conditions are maintained with scrivener’s edits and updates, and these four conditions are added (see Exhibit C, Conditions of Approval in the Draft Resolution in Attachment A): New Condition 14 - to recognize the approved Dust Control Plan for Edwards Grove Road New Condition 15 - to note compliance with state, local, and federal laws New Condition 16 - requiring removal of vertical improvements within 12 months of completing the mining, except for improvements to be used for reclamation New Condition 17 - to note that blasting will require an Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. The petitioner indicates that the expansion will not generate additional trips to the site, as additional trucks or employees are not proposed. The trip cap of 49 pm peak hour two-way trips is maintained as Condition 6. LDC section 4.08.05 requires that 40 percent of native vegetation be set aside within a preserve area. The petitioner has indicated that there are ±2.30-acres of native vegetation on the subject site, requiring ±0.92 acres for preservation. The native vegetation on-site is low quality, so the petitioner has proposed that the native vegetation be relocated to a contiguous preserve area along the southern property line and enhanced. The proposed preserve area is ±1.48 acres and will be supplemented with additional vegetation to be consistent with Land Development Code requirements of Section 4.08.05 J.2. The petitioner has provided a replanting plan prepared by an environmental consultant as part of this submittal package. The petitioner has affirmed that the proposed Conditional Use will comply with all groundwater protection requirements for Zone W-4, which are identified in Chapter 3.06.00 of the LDC. A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan will be implemented in association with proposed mining activities to reduce or eliminate the potential for groundwater contamination via the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products or wastes. [Remainder of page is intentionally blank.] Page 9097 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 6 of 11 October 3, 2025 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding the boundaries of the subject property, which is zoned Agriculture with the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, with Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO-RLSAO-ST/W-4): North: Agricultural and vacant/undeveloped, with a zoning designation of Agriculture with the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, with Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO- RLSAO-ST/W-4) East: Agricultural and single-family residential, zoned Agriculture with the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, with Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO-RLSAO-ST/W-4) South: Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida (TIITF) State-owned land, with a zoning designation of Agriculture within the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, with Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO- RLSAO-ST/W-4) West: Agricultural with excavation/mining Conditional Use (CU-PL-19-808), with a zoning designation of Agriculture within the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) Page 9098 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 7 of 11 October 3, 2025 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the FLUE of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). On the Stewardship Overlay Map, part of the FLUM series, the site is designated “Open.” See Attachment B, Consistency Memo, for staff’s finding that the proposed Conditional Use may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant’s June 27, 2022, Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using the 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links, the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” Staff findings: According to the TIS provided with this petition, the proposed Stewart Mine Operation will generate a projected total of +/- 49 PM peak hour trips on the adjacent roadway, SR-29 and SR-82. The trips generated will occur on the following adjacent roadway network links: Page 9099 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 8 of 11 October 3, 2025 Roadway/Link Link Current Peak Hour Peak Direction Volume/Peak Direction Projected P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic (1) 2024 Level of Service (LOS) 2024 Remaining Capacity State Road 29/85.0 9th St. to CR-29A North 900/SB 17/SB D (2) 79 State Road 29/86.0 CR-29A to SR-82 900/SB 17/NB D (2) 126 State Road 82/88.0 SR-29 to Lee County Line 800/SB 25/SB F (2) (157) 1. Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is June 27, 2022; Traffic Impact Statement provided by the petitioner. 2. Road links are the jurisdiction of FDOT with planned improvements in the current work program and/or under construction. Based on the TIS provided by the applicant, the 2024 AUIR, the subject Conditional Use can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff have found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site is 39.92 acres and includes an existing mine operation and an orange grove. The subject property consists of 2.30 acres of native vegetation onsite. A minimum of 0.92 acres preservation is required; however, a 1.48 acre created preserve will be provided and dedicated to Collier County. GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions, such as this proposed conditional use. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any zoning action. This petition can be found consistent with the GMP. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff have completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based. This evaluation is completed as part of the Conditional Use Findings, which are provided below. In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the conditional use petition to address environmental concerns. The property is located within Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay (RLSO). The minimum required preserve is 0.92 acres (40% of 2.30 acres). The applicant is proposing a recreated preservation area, which will be 1.48 acres. The existing native Page 9100 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 9 of 11 October 3, 2025 vegetated area is impacted by invasive exotic vegetation, and the location conflicted with the proposed project design. The recreated preservation area (1.48 acres) will meet all the standards established by LDC Section 3.07.05 H.1. e. The environmental data indicates the proposed project is in an area that has the potential to contain a variety of protected animal species. One alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) was observed within an existing reservoir located onsite. Consultation with the Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) will be conducted to reduce and minimize any impact on the alligators. The property contains habitat commonly occupied by caracaras (Caracara cheriway); however, no documented nest was found onsite. Consultation with USFWS and FWCC regarding guidelines and permitting requirements may be required prior to construction. The Environmental Data indicates the subject property falls within FWS Secondary Florida Panther (Felis concolor coryi) habitat. There were no observations of panthers onsite, and the telemetry data indicate Florida panthers are not abundant within the boundary of the proposed project. The property does not contain habitats preferred by the Florida panther; therefore, consultation with FWS to obtain panther mitigation is unlikely. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) wildlife data indicates the presence of Black Bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) in the area. A black bear management plan will need to be included in PPL or SDP review. Additionally, the property contains potential habitat for the Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi). Consultation with the US Federal Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) regarding guidelines and permitting requirements will be required before construction. Additionally, the subject property is located within core foraging ranges for three Wood stork (Mycteria americana) colonies. However, consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for mitigation is unlikely since the reservoirs found onsite don’t appear to contain wood stork foraging habitat. An active caracara (Caracara cheriway) nest was documented north of the project site. Consultation with USFWS and FWCC regarding guidelines and permitting requirements will be required prior to construction. Lastly, the property is in Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay zones (ST/W-4) and must address groundwater protection in accordance with LDC Section 3.06.12. Z. Stormwater Management Review: The proposed mine expansion includes 39.92 acres and is located adjacent to the larger existing mining operation, which covers 450.70 acres and was approved under FDEP permit No. 0228414-002. Although adjacent to the existing mine, this new proposed site stormwater system will remain independent from the larger project and will meet required water quality and water quantity via an onsite dry retention system contained within the project’s perimeter. The proposed dry retention swale system is designed with sufficient capacity to ensure zero discharge up to the 100-year, 3-day storm event. To provide additional safeguards, the perimeter containment berm will also include an impervious liner membrane. No impacts to water quality or runoff to adjacent properties are anticipated from these improvements. In addition, site development approval will be required from Collier County, to ensure that local development standards are maintained and that proposed stormwater system is designed consistent with relevant LDC and County Ordinances for water quality and water quantity, during both the interim construction phase and final implementation. Page 9101 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 10 of 11 October 3, 2025 Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval. Landscape Review: The landscape buffers labeled on the Master Plan are consistent with the LDC. Historic Preservation Review: The petitioner provided a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey dated March 2022. At its December 16, 2022, meeting, the Collier County Historic and Archaeological Preservation Board (HAPB) voted unanimously to accept the findings that the proposed undertaking will result in no historic properties being affected. Conditional Use Findings: Before any conditional use recommendation can be offered to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA), the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) must make findings that: 1) approval of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public; and 2) all specific requirements for the individual conditional use will be met; and 3) satisfactory provisions have been made concerning the following matters, where applicable: 1. Section 2.03.01 A.1.c.1. of the LDC permits extraction or earthmining as a conditional use in the Agriculture zoning district. The requested use for an “extraction or earthmining” operation is allowed as a conditional use in the Agriculture zoning district, subject to Section 10.08.00 of the LDC's conditional uses procedures. 2. Consistency with the Land Development Code (LDC) and the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Staff has found that this request is consistent with the GMP, and the use as proposed is consistent with the LDC; development will be subject to all requirements and standards implemented through the excavation permit and site development plan review process. 3. Ingress and egress to the property and proposed structures thereon, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. Ingress and egress to the subject site are proposed using existing Edwards Grove Road access points. The petitioner has indicated that the expansion of the existing excavation operation will not generate additional trips to the site, as additional trucks or employees are not proposed. An access road is proposed around the perimeter of the proposed expansion, which will meet or exceed NFPA and Collier County requirements for fire maneuverability. 4. The effect the Conditional Use would have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic, or odor effects. The surrounding uses are agricultural operations, with an existing commercial excavation operation located on the parcel to the west, which will create a unified development with the Page 9102 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 11 of 11 October 3, 2025 subject site. Although not currently under consideration, should the petitioner seek to conduct blasting operations, a nuisance mitigation plan will need to be provided at the time of Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. 5. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. The proposed operations are compatible with existing adjacent agricultural uses. The conditional use for the existing operation approved by Resolution Number 21-013 did not prohibit blasting, and the petitioner seeks to maintain the right to blast should the need arise. Should the petitioner seek to conduct blasting operations, a nuisance mitigation plan will need to be provided at the time of Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This project does require the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project does meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, Section 2-1193(m)(4), a conditional use of a commercial mine requires EAC approval. Environmental Planning staff recommends approval of the proposed petition. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The NIM was held on April 30, 2025, at Immokalee Community Park, located at 321 N 1st St, Immokalee, FL 34142, with the option to attend remotely. No members of the public were present or participating remotely. The applicant’s agent was prepared to start the presentation at 5:30 p.m.; however, no presentation was given due to no participants in-person or virtually. The meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m. See Attachment D for the NIM documentation. CONCURRENT PETITIONS: Two other applications are in process for this site. Site Improvement Plan PL20250007418 and Excavation Permit PL20240007652 are both under review by Development Review staff. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office has reviewed this staff report on September 26, 2025. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) recommend approval of Petition CU-PL20240003054, Stewart Materials Expansion, to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA), subject to conditions outlined in the Draft Resolution. Attachments: A. Draft Resolution B. FLUE Consistency Memo C. Application/Backup documents D. NIM Documentation Page 9103 of 9661 [24-CPS-02512/1962490/1]32 Stewart Materials Expansion / PL20240003054 fka Edwards Grove Road Mine 9/9/25 1 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 03-332, AS AMENDED, WHICH ESTABLISHED A CONDITIONAL USE FOR EARTHMINING, TO EXPAND THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR EARTHMINING PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY ADDING 39.92± ACRES AND REVISING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE MOBILE HOME OVERLAY (MHO), THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY (RLSAO), AND WELLFIELD RISK MANAGEMENT SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY ZONE W-4 (ST/W-4) FOR A TOTAL OF 490.62± ACRES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF SR 29 NORTH, SOUTH OF SR 82 IN THE IMMOKALEE PLANNING AREA IN SECTIONS 17, 18 AND 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (PL20240003054) WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 67–1246, Laws of Florida, and Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on Collier County the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended) which includes a Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance establishing regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of Conditional Uses; and WHEREAS, on September 23, 2003, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved Resolution No. 03-332 which provided for the establishment of a conditional use “1” for earthmining in the “A-MHO” Rural Agricultural zoning district within the Mobile Home Overlay; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2021, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved Resolution 21- 13 amending Resolution 03-332 by adding 231.73± acres to the conditional use acreage; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals (Board), being the duly appointed and constituted planning board for the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of expanding the Page 9104 of 9661 [24-CPS-02512/1962490/1]32 Stewart Materials Expansion / PL20240003054 fka Edwards Grove Road Mine 9/9/25 2 of 3 conditional use for excavation and related processing and production pursuant to Section 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code by adding 39.92± acres to the conditional use for property in an Agricultural (A) zoning district within a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4) on the property hereinafter described, and the Collier County Planning Commission has made findings that the granting of the Conditional Use will not adversely affect the public interest and the specific requirements governing the Conditional Use have been met and that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Subsection 10.08.00.D. of the Land Development Code; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in a public meeting assembled and the Board having considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: Petition Number CU-PL20240003054 filed by Brandon T. Copper, P.E. of Davidson Engineering, be and the same is hereby approved for a Conditional Use to amend Resolution No. 03-332, as amended, to expand the conditional use for excavation and related processing and production pursuant to Section 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code by adding 39.92± acres to the conditional use for property in an Agricultural (A) zoning district within a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4) for the property hereinafter described in Exhibit A, totaling 490.62± acres, in accordance with the Conceptual Site Plan described in Exhibit B, and subject to the conditions in Exhibit C. Exhibits A, B, and C are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second, and super-majority vote, this ____ day of _______________, 2025. ATTEST: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: __________________________ By: __________________________________ , Deputy Clerk Burt L. Saunders, Chairman Page 9105 of 9661 [24-CPS-02512/1962490/1]32 Stewart Materials Expansion / PL20240003054 fka Edwards Grove Road Mine 9/9/25 3 of 3 Approved as to form and legality: _________________________ Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A - Legal Description Exhibit B - Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit C - Conditions of Approval Page 9106 of 9661 ______________9-9-25 Page 1 of 3 Page 9107 of 9661 EXHIBIT A Page 2 of 3 Page 9108 of 9661 Page 3 of 3Page 9109 of 9661 MASTER CONCEPT PLANEXHIBIT BREVISED JUNE 30, 2025SHEET NO:4365 Radio Road, Suite 201Naples, Florida 34104P: 239.434.6060Company Cert. of AuthorizationNo. 00009496REVISIONSDATE:REV.DESCRIPTIONAS NOTEDSCALE:STEWART MATERIALSLEGENDPREVIOUSLY PERMITTED LAND USE SUMMARYSEE INSET 1INSET 11" = 600'SCALE:1" = 1000'SCALE:PROPOSED LAND USE SUMMARYPRESERVE CALCULATIONSPage 9110 of 9661 EXHIBIT B Stewart Mining CU – PL20240003054 Exhibit C – Conditions of Approval June 30, 2025 www.davidsonengineering.com Strikethrough denotes a deletion, underline denotes an addition. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL EXHIBIT C 1. Edwards Road Grove Mine Conditional Use shall be limited to what is depicted on the “Master Concept Plan, revised 11/03/2020 June 30, 2025.” Prepared by Davidson Engineering, Inc. 2. The petitioner shall obtain a South Florida Water Management District Agricultural Surface Water Management Permit or permit modification for this site, if applicable. 3. The site shall be cleared of all exotic vegetation and maintained exotic- free in perpetuity. 4. Material hauling activities are permitted from 5:00 a.m. to 5:00 p. m., Monday through Saturday and 24 hours a day Monday through Sunday for excavation and processing activities. 5. The excavation shall be contained by a berm constructed to the height of the 100- year flood elevation. Unless the berm contains adequate clay content to slow the flow of water (as determined by the Collier County Engineering Division), the berm shall contain a membrane impervious to water. 6. The site shall be limited to a maximum of 49 pm peak hour, two- way trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at time of application for SDP/ SDPA or subdivision plat approval, or based on an alternate methodology accepted by staff at time of application for SDP/ SDPA in accordance with the County's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) guidelines in Resolution No. 2006-299, as it may be amended. 7. Evidence of U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) accepted mitigation for impacts to panthers, woodstorks, Florida black bear and other listed species will be required prior to excavation Site Improvement Plan (SIP) permit approval, if applicable. 8. A littoral shelf planting area to commence shall be constructed during the reclamation phase of the project shall be shown as depicted on the approved excavation permit (PL20200002472). for this petition and shall meet the current standards of the Land Development Code at time of submittal of the Commercial Excavation Permit. 9. Prior to any vehicular use of the additional 231.73± 39.92± acres, the owner shall post two (2) signs along the on- site entry drive, clearly visible to vehicles entering and leaving the site, providing information regarding potential panther presence and notifying drivers of the need to use caution. Sign wording, placement and size will be reviewed and approved by the Collier County Environmental Staff during review of the Commercial Excavation Application or other local development order, whichever is the first to allow vehicular use of the 231.73± 39.92± acres. 10. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. Page 9111 of 9661 Stewart Mining CU – PL20240003054 Exhibit C – Conditions of Approval June 30, 2025 www.davidsonengineering.com Strikethrough denotes a deletion, underline denotes an addition. 11. Pursuant to Section 125. 022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. 12. The westernmost 200 feet of the parcel 00065520004 shall be reserved for road right-of-way, for the purpose of the future Little League Road extension. Within 90 days of receipt of written notification by Collier County Transportation that the property is needed, the owner will convey the requested property to the County, for fair market value on the date of the conveyance. 13. The petitioner shall be responsible for maintenance of Edwards Grove Road, from State Road 82 to the subject 450.7± 490.62± acre property line, for the duration of the mining operation. Edwards Grove Road shall be paved a minimum of 22 feet in width and a depth of 1.5 inches of asphalt or asphalt millings. A Dust Control Plan, for Edwards Grove Road, shall be submitted with the Excavation Permit. 14. Petitioner’s dust control plan for Edwards Grove Road, required per Collier County Resolution 21- 13 and approved under Excavation Permit No. PL20200002472, shall remain in force and effect for the duration of the mining operation. 15. The mining operations shall be conducted in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida, Collier County Government, and the Federal government. 16. Upon completion of mining activities, all buildings, equipment, buffers and berms shall be removed within twelve (12) months unless said buildings and equipment will be used in the reclamation process. 17. The petitioner reserves the right to have the ability to blast in the future. Should blasting be required, the petitioner will file an Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. Page 9112 of 9661 Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 •239-252-2400 •www.colliercountyfl.gov/ Growth Management Community Development DepartmentZoning DivisionCONSISTENCY REVIEW MEMORANDUM To: Eric Ortman, Planner III, Zoning From: Stephenne Barter, Planner II, Comprehensive Planning Date: July 5, 2024 Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review PETITION NUMBER: PL20240003054 PETITION NAME: Stewart Materials Expansion (CU) REQUEST: To obtain a Conditional Use (CU) for a ±39.78-acre site request is to allow for the proposed expansion of an existing commercial excavation operation. LOCATION: The subject site abuts the east side of Edwards Grove Road, with the proposed expansion site approximately 1.1 miles south of SR 82 and approximately 1 mile west of SR 29, in Section 18, Township 46 South, Range 29 East (Immokalee). COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). On the Stewardship Overlay Map, part of the FLUM series, the site is designated “Open.” Relevant to this petition, The Agricultural/Rural Land Use Designation is for those areas that are remote from the existing development pattern, lack public facilities and services, are environmentally sensitive or are in agricultural production. Urbanization is not promoted, therefore most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. The proposed earthmining, and related processing is listed as an allowable use in this designation in the FLUE. The FLUE also states that the goal of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay is to address the long-term needs of residents and property owners within the Immokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment by retaining agricultural activities, directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, enabling the conversion of rural land to other uses in appropriate locations, discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that employs creative land use planning techniques through the use of established incentives. RLSA Policies 1.4 and 1.5 provide that properties in the RLSA may develop per the “Baseline Standards” (uses allowed by the underlying “A” zoning and Agricultural/Rural FLUM designation) which allow earth mining by conditional use. Page 9113 of 9661 Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov/ In reviewing Policies 5.6 and 7.1 - 7.4 (shown below) of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) staff provides the following analysis in [bracketed bold text.] FLUE Policy 5.6 requires development to be compatible with, and complementary to, surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code. Comprehensive Planning leaves these reviews for, and determinations for making further recommendations on, compatibility and complementary matters to the Zoning Services staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety. Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [The subject property does not front on a collector or arterial roadway.] Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [Given the site and the use proposed as an expansion of a single development project, no road has been proposed. Additionally, staff finds it unnecessary to provide a loop road due to the nature of the proposed use.] Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. [The applicant’s “Narrative & Evaluation Criteria” states, “Interconnections to the property to the West are proposed, to achieve the unified excavation.” Given the nature of the proposed use as well as its location, staff believes interconnections to adjacent lands other than the one to the east, of the existing CU site may not be appropriate or beneficial.] Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [This Policy addresses development characteristics mostly not applicable to the commercial excavation operation being proposed. The site will not be open to the public. Sidewalks/pathways will be provided only as necessary for employees within the site.] Based upon the above analysis, the proposed Conditional Use may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. PETITION ON CITYVIEW cc: James Sabo, AICP, Planning Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section Ray Bellows, Planning Manager, Zoning Services Section Page 9114 of 9661 Revised 5/18/2018 Provide to Agents G:\CDES Planning Services\Current\Zoning Staff Information\Job Aides or Help Guides HEARING PACKAGE CHECKLIST Return this form with printed materialsA. Backup provided by the County PlannerThe Planner is responsible for all required data included in the printed packets of information for the Hearing Examiner (Hex) or the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC). DO NOT ACCEPT DUPLICATES OF ANY DOCUMENTS. MAKE SURE ONLY THE LATEST, ACCEPTED/APPROVED COPY OF THE BELOW DOCUMENTATION. PLEASE CONFIRM THE DOCUMENTS ARE IN THE ORDER DESCRIBED IN “BACKUP PROVIDED BY APPLICANT.” Planner responsible for providing the County Attorney-drafted Ordinance for PUDs and placing in backup materials. AGENTS DO NOT INCLUDE THE PUD DOCUMENT – STAFF PROVIDES THIS TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WHEN THE ORDINANCE IS DRAFTED FOR A PUD. THE FINAL PUD ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION IS THE FIRST ITEM AFTER THE STAFF REPORT. [FOR HEX, THE REQUESTED LANGUAGE/ PROPOSED PLAN IS THE FIRST ITEM AFTER THE STAFF REPORT] B. Backup provided by Applicant: PLEASE PROVIDE THE DOCUMENTS IN THE ORDER DESCRIBED BELOW. DO NOT PROVIDE DUPLICATES OF ANY DOCUMENTS. PROVIDE ONLY THE LATEST, ACCEPTED/APPROVED COPY OF THE BELOW DOCUMENTATION. IF THE BACKUP PROVIDED BY APPLICANT IS IN DISARRAY-MEANING IT IS NOT IN THE PROPER ORDER AND/OR THE APPLICANT PROVIDES MULTIPLE DUPLICATES-THE APPLICANT COULD LOSE ITS HEARING DATE. ____ Application, to include but not limited to the following: ____ Narrative of request ____ Property Information ____ Property Ownership Disclosure Form ____ Any other documents required by the specific petition type; such as a variance, a boat dock extension; PUD amendment, rezone request, etc. ____ Disclosure of Property Ownership Interest (if there is additional documentation aside from disclosure form) tĂŝǀĞƌZĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚ Traffic Impact Study (TIS) N/A N/A____ Affidavit of Unified Control ____ Affidavit of Representation ____ Drawings (may include Cross-Section (for BDEs generally), proposed Boat Dock(s) with Water depth, location maps etc.) E ͲůƌĞĂĚǇWƌŽǀŝĚĞĚNIM Information (Sign in sheet, notes, minutes and transcript/or summary) /ŶĐůƵĚĞϯƚŚƵŵďŶĂŝůĚƌŝǀĞƐŽĨǀŝĚĞŽĂŶĚͬŽƌĂƵĚŝŽ Eͬ ____ Environmental Data Historical/Archeological Survey or Waiver N/A____ Utility Letter N/A____ Deviation Justifications Page 9115 of 9661 Revised 5/18/2018 Provide to Agents G:\CDES Planning Services\Current\Zoning Staff Information\Job Aides or Help Guides ____ Boundary Survey ____ Other documents, as needed, on a case-by-case basis such as relevant prior Ordinances, Conditional Uses, historical documents, any “private or legal” agreements affecting the PUD etc. ___ Submerged Resource Surveys may be included here if required. ____ CD with only one pdf file for all documents in the same order as the packets are put together. They must be in the same order. I understand that by submitting the above materials, it is the agent’s/applicant’s responsibility to ensure all materials are in the same order for all copies of backup materials to provide to the Hex/CCPC and the CD must contain the documents in one pdf file (not multiple files) in the same order as the printed materials. It is the agent’s responsibility to ensure no documentation is left out. ________________________________________ Signature of Agent Representative Date ________________________________________ Printed Name of Signing Agent Representative N/A ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌ͕W͘͘ ϵͬϮϰͬϮϬϮϱ Page 9116 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϭŽĨϭϮ WW>/Ed KEdd /E&KZDd/KE %( $:$5( 7+$7 &2//,(5 &2817< +$6 /2%%<,67 5(*8/$7,216 *8,'( <2856(/)$&&25',1*/<$1'(1685(7+$7<28$5(,1&203/,$1&( :,7+7+(6(5(*8/$7,216 A CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER EĂŵĞŽĨWƌŽƉĞƌƚǇKǁŶĞƌ;ƐͿ͗ EĂŵĞŽĨƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚŝĨĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚƚŚĂŶŽǁŶĞƌ͗ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚǇ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ͗ Ğůů͗ &Ăǆ͗ ͲDĂŝůĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ EĂŵĞŽĨŐĞŶƚ;ƐͿ͗ &ŝƌŵ͗ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚǇ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ͗ Ğůů͗ &Ăǆ͗ ͲDĂŝůĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ $SSOLFDWLRQ IRU 3XEOLF +HDULQJ IRU &RQGLWLRQDO 8VH/'& VXEVHFWLRQ &KDSWHURI WKH $GPLQLVWUDWLYH &RGH %DUILHOG3URSHUW\+ROGLQJV//&Southwestern Properties, LLC;6RXWKHUQ5HVHUYHV//& Nick T. Stewart 2875 Jupiter Park Dr., Suite 100 Jupiter FL 33458 561-972-4517 nick@stewartmaterials.com Brandon 7Copper, 3( Davidson Engineering 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 Naples FL 34104 239-434-6060 brandon@davidsonengineering.com Page 9117 of 9661 ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϮŽĨϭϮ ^^K/d/KE^ WZKWZdz /E&KZDd/KE ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͗>ŝƐƚĂůůƌĞŐŝƐƚĞƌĞĚ,ŽŵĞKǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ;ƐͿƚŚĂƚĐŽƵůĚďĞĂĨĨĞĐƚĞĚďǇƚŚŝƐƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͘WƌŽǀŝĚĞ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƐŚĞĞƚƐ ŝĨ ŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇ͘ /ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ ĐĂŶ ďĞ ĨŽƵŶĚ ŽŶ ƚŚĞ ŽĂƌĚ ŽĨ ŽƵŶƚǇ ŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶĞƌ͛ƐǁĞďƐŝƚĞĂƚŚƚƚƉ͗ͬͬǁǁǁ͘ĐŽůůŝĞƌŐŽǀ͘ŶĞƚͬ/ŶĚĞǆ͘ĂƐƉǆ͍ƉĂŐĞсϳϳϰ͘ EĂŵĞŽĨ,ŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͗ DĂŝůŝŶŐĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚǇ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ EĂŵĞŽĨ,ŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͗ DĂŝůŝŶŐĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚǇ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ EĂŵĞŽĨ,ŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͗ DĂŝůŝŶŐĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚǇ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ EĂŵĞŽĨ,ŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͗ DĂŝůŝŶŐĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚǇ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ EĂŵĞŽĨ,ŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͗ DĂŝůŝŶŐĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚǇ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ KŶ ƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞ ƉĂŐĞ͕ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ Ă ĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚ ůĞŐĂů ĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ ĐŽǀĞƌĞĚ ďǇ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͗ x /Ĩ ƚŚĞ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ ŝŶǀŽůǀĞƐ ĐŚĂŶŐĞƐ ƚŽ ŵŽƌĞ ƚŚĂŶ ŽŶĞ ǌŽŶŝŶŐ ĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ͕ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ ƐŚĂůů ŝŶĐůƵĚĞ ƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞůĞŐĂůĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶĨŽƌƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŝŶǀŽůǀĞĚŝŶĞĂĐŚĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ͖ x dŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ ƐŚĂůů ƐƵďŵŝƚϰĐŽƉŝĞƐ ŽĨĂƌĞĐĞŶƚ ƐƵƌǀĞǇ ;ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ ǁŝƚŚŝŶ ƚŚĞ ůĂƐƚ Ɛŝǆ ŵŽŶƚŚƐ͕ ŵĂǆŝŵƵŵϭΗƚŽϰϬϬΖƐĐĂůĞͿ͕ŝĨƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽĚŽƐŽĂƚƚŚĞƉƌĞͲĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͖ĂŶĚ x dŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ ŝƐ ƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞ ĨŽƌ ƐƵƉƉůǇŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ĐŽƌƌĞĐƚ ůĞŐĂů ĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͘/ĨƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĂƌŝƐĞ ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶŝŶŐƚŚĞůĞŐĂůĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͕ĂŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌΖƐĐĞƌƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŽƌƐĞĂůĞĚƐƵƌǀĞǇŵĂǇďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͘ WƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ/͘͘EƵŵďĞƌ͗ WůĂƚŽŽŬ͗ WĂŐĞη͗ ^ĞĐƚŝŽŶͬdŽǁŶƐŚŝƉͬZĂŶŐĞ͗ͬ ͬ ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ͗ >Žƚ͗ ůŽĐŬ͗ DĞƚĞƐΘŽƵŶĚƐĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͗ ^ŝǌĞŽĨWƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͗Ĩƚ͘y Ĩƚ͘с dŽƚĂů^Ƌ͘&ƚ͘ ĐƌĞƐ͗ ĚĚƌĞƐƐͬ 'ĞŶĞƌĂů >ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ^ƵďũĞĐƚ WƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͗ Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline Payment GuideE-Permitting Guides Multiple parcels, See attachedVXSSOHPHQW See legal exhibit 490.62 2315 Edwards Grove Rd, (GZDUGV*URYH5G(GZDUGV*URYH5GImmokalee, FL 43142 Page 9118 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϯŽĨϭϮ ŽŶŝŶŐ >ĂŶĚhƐĞE ^ t /Ĩ ƚŚĞ ŽǁŶĞƌ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƐƵďũĞĐƚƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ ŽǁŶƐ ĐŽŶƚŝŐƵŽƵƐ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ ƉůĞĂƐĞ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚ ůĞŐĂů ĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ĞŶƚŝƌĞ ĐŽŶƚŝŐƵŽƵƐ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͗ ;/Ĩ ƐƉĂĐĞ ŝƐ ŝŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞ͕ ĂƚƚĂĐŚ ŽŶ Ă ƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞƉĂŐĞͿ ^ĞĞůĞŐĂůĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶĂŶĚƐƵƌǀĞǇŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘ ^ĞĐƚŝŽŶͬdŽǁŶƐŚŝƉͬZĂŶŐĞ͗ͬ ͬ >Žƚ͗ ůŽĐŬ͗ ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ͗ WůĂƚŽŽŬ͗ WĂŐĞη͗ WƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ/͘͘EƵŵďĞƌ͗ DĞƚĞƐΘŽƵŶĚƐĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͗ dǇƉĞ ŽĨ ŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů hƐĞ͗ dŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŝƐƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐĂĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƵƐĞ ĂƐĂůůŽǁĞĚ͕ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽ>ƐĞĐƚŝŽŶϮ͘Ϭϯ͘ϬϬ͕ŽĨƚŚĞ ǌŽŶŝŶŐ ĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ ĨŽƌ WƌĞƐĞŶƚ hƐĞŽĨ ƚŚĞ WƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͗ ^ĞĞďĞůŽǁ͘ :Ed KE/E' E >E h^ KE/d/KE> h^ ZYh^d d/> Vacant/Agricultural A-MHO-RLSAO A-MHO-RLSAO A-MHO-RLSAO A-MHO-RLSAO Vacant/Agricultural Vacant/Agricultural Vacant/Agricultural Agricultural ([FDYDWLRQDQGUHODWHGSURFHVVLQJDQGSURGXFWLRQ 3523(57<,' 675 ( ( ( ([FDYDWLRQPLQLQJ ([FDYDWLRQPLQLQJ $JULFXOWXUDO WƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ/͗ dǇƉĞŽĨhƐĞ;ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚͿ͗ Page 9119 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϰŽĨϭϮ WƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽ>ƐĞĐƚŝŽŶϭϬ͘Ϭϴ͘ϬϬĂŶĚŚĂƉƚĞƌϯ͘ϭŽĨƚŚĞĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝǀĞŽĚĞ͕ƐƚĂĨĨ͛ƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƚŽƚŚĞƌĞǀŝĞǁŝŶŐďŽĚǇƐŚĂůůďĞďĂƐĞĚƵƉŽŶĂĨŝŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞŐƌĂŶƚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƵƐĞǁŝůůŶŽƚĂĚǀĞƌƐĞůǇĂĨĨĞĐƚƚŚĞƉƵďůŝĐŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚĂŶĚƚŚĂƚƚŚĞƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŐŽǀĞƌŶŝŶŐƚŚĞŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƵƐĞ͕ŝĨĂŶǇ͕ŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶŵĞƚ͘&ƵƌƚŚĞƌ͕ƐĂƚŝƐĨĂĐƚŽƌǇƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶĂŶĚĂƌƌĂŶŐĞŵĞŶƚŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶŵĂĚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶŝŶŐ ƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐŵĂƚƚĞƌƐ͕ǁŚĞƌĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͘ KŶ ĂƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞ ƉĂŐĞ͕ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ ĂŶĂƌƌĂƚŝǀĞ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ĚĞƐĐƌŝďŝŶŐ ĂƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ ĨŽƌ ĂĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƵƐĞ ĂŶĚĂĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞ ƚŽƚŚĞĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂůŝƐƚĞĚďĞůŽǁ͘^ƉĞĐŝĨǇŚŽǁĂŶĚǁŚǇƚŚĞƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝƐ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚĞĂĐŚŽĨƚŚĞĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂ͘ZĞĨĞƌƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚŶĂƌƌĂƚŝǀĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘ Ă͘ĞƐĐƌŝďĞ ŚŽǁƚŚĞ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ŝƐ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚ ƚŚĞ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ >ĂŶĚ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ŽĚĞ ĂŶĚ 'ƌŽǁƚŚ DĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ WůĂŶ͘ /ŶĐůƵĚĞ ŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ ŽŶ ŚŽǁ ƚŚĞ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ ŝƐ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚ ǁŝƚŚ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ ŽƌƉŽƌƚŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞ&ƵƚƵƌĞ>ĂŶĚhƐĞůĞŵĞŶƚ͘ ď͘ĞƐĐƌŝďĞƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐŽƌƉůĂŶŶĞĚŵĞĂŶƐŽĨŝŶŐƌĞƐƐĂŶĚĞŐƌĞƐƐƚŽƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ ĂŶĚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ ƚŚĞƌĞŽŶ ǁŝƚŚ ƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌ ƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ ƚŽ ĂƵƚŽŵŽƚŝǀĞ ĂŶĚ ƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶ ƐĂĨĞƚǇ ĂŶĚ ĐŽŶǀĞŶŝĞŶĐĞ͕ ƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ ĨůŽǁ ĂŶĚĐŽŶƚƌŽů͕ĂŶĚĂĐĐĞƐƐŝŶĐĂƐĞŽĨĨŝƌĞŽƌĐĂƚĂƐƚƌŽƉŚĞ͘ Đ͘ĞƐĐƌŝďĞƚŚĞ ĞĨĨĞĐƚƚŚĞĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƵƐĞ ǁŝůůŚĂǀĞŽŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐŝŶƌĞůĂƚŝŽŶƚŽ ŶŽŝƐĞ͕ ŐůĂƌĞ͕ ĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐŝŵƉĂĐƚ͕ĂŶĚŽĚŽƌ͘ Ě͘ĞƐĐƌŝďĞ ƚŚĞ ƐŝƚĞ͛Ɛ ĂŶĚ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ƵƐĞ͛Ɛ ĐŽŵƉĂƚŝďŝůŝƚǇ ǁŝƚŚ ĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐ ĂŶĚ ŽƚŚĞƌ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐŝŶƚŚĞĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ͘ Ğ͘WůĞĂƐĞ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂŶǇ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶǁŚŝĐŚǇŽƵŵĂǇ ĨĞĞůŝƐƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚƚŽ ƚŚŝƐ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ͘ ĞĞĚZĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐ͗dŚĞŽƵŶƚǇŝƐůĞŐĂůůǇƉƌĞĐůƵĚĞĚĨƌŽŵĞŶĨŽƌĐŝŶŐĚĞĞĚƌĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐ͖ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ŵĂŶǇ ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚŝĞƐŚĂǀĞĂĚŽƉƚĞĚƐƵĐŚƌĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐ͘zŽƵŵĂǇǁŝƐŚƚŽĐŽŶƚĂĐƚƚŚĞĐŝǀŝĐŽƌƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇŽǁŶĞƌƐ ĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞĂƌĞĂĨŽƌǁŚŝĐŚƚŚŝƐƵƐĞŝƐďĞŝŶŐƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚŝŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽĂƐĐĞƌƚĂŝŶǁŚĞƚŚĞƌŽƌŶŽƚƚŚĞ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝƐĂĨĨĞĐƚĞĚďǇĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐĚĞĞĚƌĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐ͘ WƌĞǀŝŽƵƐ ůĂŶĚ ƵƐĞƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶƐŽŶƚŚĞƐƵďũĞĐƚ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ͗dŽ ǇŽƵƌ ŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞ͕ŚĂƐĂƉƵďůŝĐŚĞĂƌŝŶŐďĞĞŶ ŚĞůĚŽŶƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ ǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞůĂƐƚǇĞĂƌ͍ /ĨƐŽ͕ ǁŚĂƚ ǁĂƐƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĂƚŚĞĂƌŝŶŐ͍ EŽ͘ KĨĨŝĐŝĂů /ŶƚĞƌƉƌĞƚĂƚŝŽŶƐ Žƌ ŽŶŝŶŐ sĞƌŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͗dŽ ǇŽƵƌ ŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞ͕ ŚĂƐ ƚŚĞƌĞ ďĞĞŶ ĂŶ ŽĨĨŝĐŝĂů ŝŶƚĞƌƉƌĞƚĂƚŝŽŶŽƌǌŽŶŝŶŐǀĞƌŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƌĞŶĚĞƌĞĚŽŶƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚǇǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞůĂƐƚǇĞĂƌ͍ EŽ zĞƐ ;/Ĩ ǇĞƐƉůĞĂƐĞ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ ĐŽƉŝĞƐ͘Ϳ s>hd/KE Z/dZ/ Page 9120 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϱŽĨϭϮ WW>/Ed /E&KZDd/KE dzW K& tdZ^Zs/ dK WZKs/ 67$7(0(17 2)87,/,7<3529,6,216 )25&21',7,21$/86(5(48(67 EĂŵĞŽĨƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ;ƐͿ͗ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚǇ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ͗ Ğůů͗ &Ăǆ͗ ͲDĂŝůĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ĚĚƌĞƐƐŽĨ^ƵďũĞĐƚWƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ;/ĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞͿ͗ ŝƚǇ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ ^ĞĐƚŝŽŶͬdŽǁŶƐŚŝƉͬZĂŶŐĞ͗ͬ ͬ >Žƚ͗ ůŽĐŬ͗ ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ͗ WůĂƚŽŽŬ͗ WĂŐĞη͗ DĞƚĞƐΘŽƵŶĚƐĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͗ ŚĞĐŬ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƐǇƐƚĞŵ͗ Ă͘ ŽƵŶƚǇ hƚŝůŝƚǇ^ǇƐƚĞŵ ď͘ ŝƚǇhƚŝůŝƚǇ^ǇƐƚĞŵ Đ͘ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞĚ hƚŝůŝƚǇ ^ǇƐƚĞŵ WƌŽǀŝĚĞEĂŵĞ͗ Ě͘ WĂĐŬĂŐĞ dƌĞĂƚŵĞŶƚWůĂŶƚ ;'WĂƉĂĐŝƚǇͿ͗ Ğ͘ ^ĞƉƚŝĐ^ǇƐƚĞŵ Ă͘ ŽƵŶƚǇ hƚŝůŝƚǇ^ǇƐƚĞŵ ď͘ ŝƚǇhƚŝůŝƚǇ^ǇƐƚĞŵ Đ͘ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞĚ hƚŝůŝƚǇ ^ǇƐƚĞŵ WZKs/ ED Ě͘ WƌŝǀĂƚĞ ^ǇƐƚĞŵ ;tĞůůͿ dŽƚĂůWŽƉƵůĂƚŝŽŶƚŽďĞƐĞƌǀĞĚ͗ WĞĂŬĂŶĚǀĞƌĂŐĞĂŝůǇĞŵĂŶĚƐ͗ ͘ tĂƚĞƌͲWĞĂŬ͗ ǀĞƌĂŐĞĂŝůǇ͗ ͘ ^ĞǁĞƌͲWĞĂŬ͗ ǀĞƌĂŐĞĂŝůǇ͗ >'> ^Z/Wd/KE dzW K& ^t' /^WK^> dK WZKs/ 2875 Jupiter Park Dr., Suite 100 Jupiter FL 33458 561-972-4517 nick@stewartmaterials.com 3000 Edwards Grove Rd, 2301 Edwards Grove Rd, &2315 Edwards Grove Rd Immokalee FL 34142 N/AWKHZHOOLVH[LVWLQJSURSRVHGH[SDQVLRQZLOOQRWUHVXOWLQLQFUHDVHGGHPDQG ĂƌĨŝĞůĚ WƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ ,ŽůĚŝŶŐƐ͕ >>͖ ^ŽƵƚŚǁĞƐƚĞƌŶ WƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐ͕ >>͖ ^ŽƵƚŚĞƌŶ ZĞƐĞƌǀĞƐ͕ >> 3523(57<,' 675 ( ( ( WƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ/η͗ ZĞĨĞƌƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚůĞŐĂůĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘ KŶͲƐŝƚĞƐĞǁĞƌƚŽďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚǀŝĂƉŽƌƚĂďůĞƚŽŝůĞƚƐŽŶ ƌĞŐƵůĂƌŵĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞ;ĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶͿ͘ Page 9121 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϲŽĨϭϮ /ĨƉƌŽƉŽƐŝŶŐƚŽďĞĐŽŶŶĞĐƚĞĚƚŽŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇZĞŐŝŽŶĂůtĂƚĞƌ^ǇƐƚĞŵ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĞĚĂƚĞƐĞƌǀŝĐĞŝƐĞǆƉĞĐƚĞĚƚŽďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͗EĂƌƌĂƚŝǀĞ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ͗WƌŽǀŝĚĞĂďƌŝĞĨ ĂŶĚ ĐŽŶĐŝƐĞ ŶĂƌƌĂƚŝǀĞ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ĂŶĚ ƐĐŚĞŵĂƚŝĐ ĚƌĂǁŝŶŐ ŽĨƐĞǁĂŐĞƚƌĞĂƚŵĞŶƚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐƚŽďĞƵƐĞĚĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĂƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽĨ ĂĨĨůƵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐůƵĚŐĞĚŝƐƉŽƐĂů͘/ĨƉĞƌĐŽůĂƚŝŽŶƉŽŶĚƐĂƌĞƚŽďĞƵƐĞĚ͕ƚŚĞŶƉĞƌĐŽůĂƚŝŽŶĚĂƚĂĂŶĚƐŽŝů ŝŶǀŽůǀĞĚƐŚĂůůďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚĨƌŽŵƚĞƐƚƐƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĚĂŶĚĐĞƌƚŝĨŝĞĚďǇĂƉƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌ͘ ŽƵŶƚǇhƚŝůŝƚǇĞĚŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ^ƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ͗/ĨƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞƐĞƌǀŝĐĞďŽƵŶĚĂƌŝĞƐŽĨ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ͛Ɛ ƵƚŝůŝƚǇ ƐĞƌǀŝĐĞ ƐǇƐƚĞŵ͕ Ă ŶŽƚĂƌŝǌĞĚ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚƐŚĂůů ďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ ĂŐƌĞĞŝŶŐ ƚŽ ĚĞĚŝĐĂƚĞƚŚĞǁĂƚĞƌĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶĂŶĚƐĞǁĂŐĞĐŽůůĞĐƚŝŽŶĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚĂƌĞĂƚŽƚŚĞ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ hƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ͘ dŚŝƐ ƐŚĂůů ŽĐĐƵƌ ƵƉŽŶ ĐŽŵƉůĞƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƚŚĞƐĞ ĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ŝŶ ĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞ ǁŝƚŚ Ăůů ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ŽƵŶƚǇŽƌĚŝŶĂŶĐĞƐŝŶ ĞĨĨĞĐƚ Ăƚ ƚŚĂƚ ƚŝŵĞ͘ dŚŝƐ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ƐŚĂůů ĂůƐŽ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞ ĂŶ ĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ ƚŚĂƚ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƐǇƐƚĞŵ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ĐŚĂƌŐĞƐ ĂŶĚ ĐŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŽŶ ĨĞĞƐ ǁŝůů ďĞ ƉĂŝĚ ƚŽ ƚŚĞ ŽƵŶƚǇ hƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ ƉƌŝŽƌ ƚŽ ƚŚĞ ŝƐƐƵĂŶĐĞ ŽĨ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ ƉĞƌŵŝƚƐ ďǇ ƚŚĞ ŽƵŶƚǇ͘ /Ĩ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͕ ƚŚĞ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ƐŚĂůů ĐŽŶƚĂŝŶ ĂŶ ĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ ƚŽ ĚĞĚŝĐĂƚĞ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ ƵƚŝůŝƚǇ ĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌƐĞƌǀŝŶŐƚŚĞǁĂƚĞƌĂŶĚƐĞǁĞƌƐǇƐƚĞŵƐ͘ Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: hŶůĞƐƐǁĂŝǀĞĚŽƌŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ ĨŽƌĂƚƚŚĞƉƌĞͲĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͕ŝĨƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝƐƚŽƌĞĐĞŝǀĞƐĞǁĞƌŽƌƉŽƚĂďůĞǁĂƚĞƌƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐĨƌŽŵ ĂŶǇ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƌ ŽƚŚĞƌ ƚŚĂŶ ƚŚĞ ŽƵŶƚǇ͕ĂƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ĨƌŽŵ ƚŚĂƚ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƌ ŝŶĚŝĐĂƚŝŶŐ ĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞ ĐĂƉĂĐŝƚǇ ƚŽƐĞƌǀĞƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐŚĂůůďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ͘Eͬ N/A N/A N/A Page 9122 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϳŽĨϭϮ &KDSWHURIWKH$GPLQLVWUDWLYH&RGHUHTXLUHVWKDWWKHDSSOLFDQWPXVWUHPRYH WKHLUSXEOLF KHDULQJDGYHUWLVLQJVLJQVDIWHUILQDODFWLRQLVWDNHQE\WKH%RDUGRI &RXQW\&RPPLVVLRQHUV %DVHGRQWKH%RDUG VILQDODFWLRQRQWKLVLWHPSOHDVH UHPRYHDOOSXEOLFKHDULQJDGYHUWLVLQJVLJQVLPPHGLDWHO\ Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer at their expense shall record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of the land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the Ordinance. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the recording requirements of F.S. §695. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the assigned Principal Planner, Zoning Services Department, within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS $FNQRZOHGJHG $FNQRZOHGJHG Page 9123 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϴŽĨϭϮ dŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ^ƵďŵŝƚƚĂůZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚŝƐƚŽďĞƵƚŝůŝǌĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞWƌĞͲƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶDĞĞƚŝŶŐ͕ĂŶĚĂƚƚŝŵĞŽĨ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂů͘ƚƚŝŵĞŽĨƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂů͕ƚŚĞĐŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚŝƐƚŽďĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĂŶĚƐƵďŵŝƚƚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƉĂĐŬĞƚ͘ WůĞĂƐĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŝƚĞŵƐŝŶƚŚĞĞǆĂĐƚŽƌĚĞƌůŝƐƚĞĚďĞůŽǁ͕ǁŝƚŚĐŽǀĞƌƐŚĞĞƚƐĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚƚŽĞĂĐŚƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ͘ /ŶĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůƐǁŝůůŶŽƚďĞĂĐĐĞƉƚĞĚ͘ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌZĞǀŝĞǁ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ EŽƚ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ ŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŽǀĞƌůĞƚƚĞƌďƌŝĞĨůǇĞǆƉůĂŝŶŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ WƌĞͲƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ EŽƚĞƐ ĨĨŝĚĂǀŝƚ ŽĨ ƵƚŚŽƌŝǌĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƐŝŐŶĞĚĂŶĚŶŽƚĂƌŝǌĞĚ ŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĚĚƌĞƐƐŝŶŐŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚ WƌŽƉĞƌƚǇKǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ ŝƐĐůŽƐƵƌĞ&Žƌŵ tĂƌƌĂŶƚǇ ĞĞĚ;ƐͿ ŽƵŶĚĂƌǇ ^ƵƌǀĞǇ ŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂů ^ŝƚĞ WůĂŶ Ϯϰ͟ y ϯϲ͟ ƉůƵƐ ;ŽŶĞ ϴ Ъ y ϭϭ ĐŽƉǇͿ WůĂŶƐ ƐŚŽǁŝŶŐ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĨŽƌ ƵƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ WůĂŶƐ ĨŽƌ ƐĐƌĞĞŶŝŶŐ ĂŶĚ ďƵĨĨĞƌŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ƵƐĞǁŝƚŚ ƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ ĂƐ ƚŽ ƚǇƉĞ͕ ĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶƐ͕ ĂŶĚ ĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ WůĂŶƐƐŚŽǁŝŶŐ ƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉŝŶŐ ĂŶĚ ƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐ ĨŽƌ ƚƌĞĞƐ ƉƌŽƚĞĐƚĞĚďǇ ŽƵŶƚǇ ƌĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ WůĂŶƐƐŚŽǁŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ƐŝŐŶƐ ĂŶĚ ůŝŐŚƚŝŶŐ͕ ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐ ƚǇƉĞ͕ ĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶƐ͕ ĂŶĚ ĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůZĞŶĚĞƌŝŶŐ ŽĨ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ;ƐͿ͕ ŝĨ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƵƌƌĞŶƚĂĞƌŝĂů ƉŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚƐ ;ĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ ĨƌŽŵWƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ ƉƉƌĂŝƐĞƌͿ ǁŝƚŚ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ďŽƵŶĚĂƌǇĂŶĚ͕ ŝĨ ǀĞŐĞƚĂƚĞĚ͕ &>h&^ ŽĚĞƐ ǁŝƚŚ ůĞŐĞŶĚ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚ ŽŶ ĂĞƌŝĂů͘ ^ƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚŽĨƵƚŝůŝƚǇ ƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐ ;ǁŝƚŚ Ăůů ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ ĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐ Θ ƐŬĞƚĐŚĞƐͿ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůĂƚĂ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕ ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚ ƚŽ > ƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ ϯ͘Ϭϴ͘ϬϬ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůĂƚĂZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĐŽůůĂƚĞĚŝŶƚŽĂƐŝŶŐůĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚ ^ƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ;/^Ϳ Ăƚ ƚŝŵĞ ŽĨƉƵďůŝĐ ŚĞĂƌŝŶŐƐ͘ ŽŽƌĚŝŶĂƚĞǁŝƚŚ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ƉůĂŶŶĞƌ Ăƚ ƚŝŵĞ ŽĨ ƉƵďůŝĐ ŚĞĂƌŝŶŐ͘ >ŝƐƚĞĚ ^ƉĞĐŝĞƐ ^ƵƌǀĞǇ͖ ůĞƐƐ ƚŚĂŶ ϭϮ ŵŽŶƚŚƐŽůĚ͘ /ŶĐůƵĚĞ ĐŽƉŝĞƐ ŽĨ ƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐ ƐƵƌǀĞǇƐ͘ dƌĂĨĨŝĐ /ŵƉĂĐƚ ^ƚƵĚǇ ;d/^Ϳ Žƌ ǁĂŝǀĞƌ ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂů ĂŶĚ ƌĐŚĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂů ^ƵƌǀĞǇ͕ Žƌ ǁĂŝǀĞƌ ůĞĐƚƌŽŶŝĐ ĐŽƉǇ ŽĨ Ăůů ĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ ĂŶĚ ƉůĂŶƐ 3UH$SSOLFDWLRQ 0HHWLQJ DQG )LQDO 6XEPLWWDO 5HTXLUHPHQW &KHFNOLVW IRUA Conditional Use to be heard by the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals A Minor Conditional Use to be heard by the Office of the Hearing ExaminerŚĂƉƚĞƌϯŽĨƚŚĞĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝǀĞŽĚĞ X X X X X X X X X Page 9124 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϵŽĨϭϮ /d/KE>ZYh/ZDEd^ &KZ d, Wh>/ ,Z/E' WZK^^͗x &ŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ĐŽŵƉůĞƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƌĞǀŝĞǁ ƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ ďǇ ŽƵŶƚǇ ƌĞǀŝĞǁ ƐƚĂĨĨ͕ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ ƐŚĂůů ƐƵďŵŝƚ Ăůů ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐĞůĞĐƚƌŽŶŝĐĂůůǇƚŽƚŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŵĂŶĂŐĞƌ͘x WůĞĂƐĞĐŽŶƚĂĐƚ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ŵĂŶĂŐĞƌ ƚŽ ĐŽŶĨŝƌŵ ƚŚĞ ŶƵŵďĞƌ ŽĨ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ĐŽƉŝĞƐ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͘ WůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͗/ŶĚŝĐĂƚĞŝĨƚŚĞƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ ŶĞĞĚƐ ƚŽďĞƌŽƵƚĞĚƚŽƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƌĞǀŝĞǁĞƌƐ͗ ĂǇƐŚŽƌĞͬ'ĂƚĞǁĂǇ dƌŝĂŶŐůĞ ZĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͗ ǆĞĐƵƚŝǀĞŝƌĞĐƚŽƌ ŵĞƌŐĞŶĐǇ DĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ Žƌ D^͗ ŽŶƐĞƌǀĂŶĐǇ ŽĨ^t&>͗ 'D 'ƌĂƉŚŝĐƐ ŝƚǇ ŽĨ EĂƉůĞƐ͗ hƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͗Ǉ WĂƌŬƐ ĂŶĚ ZĞĐƌĞĂƚŝŽŶ͗ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞ tĂƚĞƌͬ^ĞǁĞƌ ŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ͗ KƚŚĞƌ͗^ĐŚŽŽůŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ ;ZĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůŽŵƉŽŶĞŶƚƐͿ͗ ŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ dŽǁĞƌƐ͗ DŽƐƋƵŝƚŽŽŶƚƌŽů ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ ŝƌƉŽƌƚ ƵƚŚŽƌŝƚǇ EĂƉůĞƐ ŝƌƉŽƌƚ ƵƚŚŽƌŝƚǇ ŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů DŝŶŝŶŐ͗ /ŵƉĂĐƚ &ĞĞƐ Page 9125 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline Payment GuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϭϬ ŽĨϭϮ WƌĞͲƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ DĞĞƚŝŶŐ͗ΨϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ;ƚŽďĞĐƌĞĚŝƚĞĚƚŽǁĂƌĚƐƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶĨĞĞŝĨƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŝƐĨŝůĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶϵŵŽŶƚŚƐŽĨƉƌĞͲĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĞƚŝŶŐͿ )LUHWƌĞͲƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ DĞĞƚŝŶŐ͗ΨϭϱϬ͘ϬϬ;ƉƉůŝĞĚĂƐĐƌĞĚŝƚƚŽǁĂƌĚƐĨŝƌĞƌĞǀŝĞǁĨĞĞƵƉŽŶƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŽĨ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŝĨǁŝƚŚŝŶϵŵŽŶƚŚƐŽĨƚŚĞƉƌĞͲĂƉƉŵĞĞƚŝŶŐĚĂƚĞͿ ŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů hƐĞ ƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ &ĞĞ͗Ψϰ͕ϬϬϬ͘ϬϬ R tŚĞŶ ĨŝůĞĚ ǁŝƚŚ ZĞǌŽŶĞ WĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͗ Ψϭ͕ϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ R ĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ĨĞĞĨŽƌϱ ƚŚ ĂŶĚ ƐƵďƐĞƋƵĞŶƚ ƌĞǀŝĞǁƐ͗ ϮϬйŽĨ ŽƌŝŐŝŶĂů ĨĞĞ ŽŵƉƌĞŚĞŶƐŝǀĞWůĂŶŶŝŶŐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶĐǇZĞǀŝĞǁ͗ΨϯϬϬ͘ϬϬ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů ĂƚĂ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐͲ/^ WĂĐŬĞƚ ;ƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂů ĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚ ĂƚƉƌĞͲĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐͿ͗ ΨϮ͕ϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ >ŝƐƚĞĚ Žƌ WƌŽƚĞĐƚĞĚ ^ƉĞĐŝĞƐ ƐƵƌǀĞǇ ƌĞǀŝĞǁ ĨĞĞ ;ǁŚĞŶĂŶ/^ ŝƐ ŶŽƚ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚͿ͗Ψϭ͕ϬϬϬ͘ϬϬ dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ &ĞĞ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͗ R DĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐǇ ZĞǀŝĞǁ &ĞĞ͗ ΨϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ R DŝŶŽƌ ^ƚƵĚǇ ZĞǀŝĞǁ &ĞĞ͗ ΨϳϱϬ͘ϬϬ R DĂũŽƌ ^ƚƵĚǇ ZĞǀŝĞǁ &ĞĞ͗ Ψϭ͕ϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚ>ĞŐĂů ĚǀĞƌƚŝƐŝŶŐ&ĞĞ ĨŽƌ ƚŚĞ ,ĞĂƌŝŶŐǆĂŵŝŶĞƌ Žƌ W͗Ψϭ͕ϭϮϱ͘ϬϬ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚ >ĞŐĂů ĚǀĞƌƚŝƐŝŶŐ &ĞĞ ĨŽƌ ƚŚĞ ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͗ΨϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ &ŝƌĞWůĂŶŶŝŶŐZĞǀŝĞǁ&ĞĞ͗ΨϭϱϬ͘ϬϬ &ŝƌĞ ŽĚĞ WůĂŶƐ ZĞǀŝĞǁ &ĞĞƐĂƌĞ ĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚ Ăƚ ƚŚĞ ƚŝŵĞ ŽĨ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ƐƵďŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ ĂŶĚ ƚŚŽƐĞ ĨĞĞƐ ĂƌĞ ƐĞƚ ĨŽƌƚŚ ďǇ ƚŚĞ ƵƚŚŽƌŝƚǇŚĂǀŝŶŐũƵƌŝƐĚŝĐƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞ>ĂŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐEĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚEŽƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŵĂŝůĞƌƐĨŽƌ ƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐŚĞĂĚĞĚƚŽŚĞĂƌŝŶŐ͕ĂŶĚƚŚŝƐĨĞĞŝƐĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚƉƌŝŽƌƚŽŚĞĂƌŝŶŐ͘ ƐƚŚĞĂƵƚŚŽƌŝǌĞĚĂŐĞŶƚͬĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͕/ĂƚƚĞƐƚƚŚĂƚĂůůŽĨƚŚĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŝŶĚŝĐĂƚĞĚŽŶƚŚŝƐĐŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚŝƐ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůƉĂĐŬĂŐĞ͘/ƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƚŚĂƚĨĂŝůƵƌĞƚŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂůůŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŵĂǇ ƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶƚŚĞĚĞůĂǇŽĨƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͘ ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ĂƚĞ ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌEĂŵĞ;ƉůĞĂƐĞƉƌŝŶƚͿ )((5(48,5(0(176 ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌ ^ŝŐŶĂƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƵƵƵƌƵĞ Page 9126 of 9661 ϬϭͬϯϬͬϮϬϮϱ ƌĂŶĚŽŶd͘ŽƉƉĞƌ͕W͘͘ Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline Payment GuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϭϭ ŽĨϭϮ 3XEOLF 3DUWLFLSDWLRQ 5HTXLUHPHQWV/'&6HFWLRQ%RU&&KDSWHURI WKH$GPLQLVWUDWLYH &RGH 1RWLFH IRU 0LQRU &RQGLWLRQDO 8VH 3HWLWLRQV 1HLJKERUKRRG ,QIRUPDWLRQ 0HHWLQJ 1,0 5HTXLUHPHQWVApplicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the Hearing Examiner’s receipt of the staff report and application materials in accordance with the applicable sections of the Administrative Code. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. 0DLOHG 1RWLFHWritten notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing. 1HZVSDSHU $GYHUWLVHPHQWVThe legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum: x Date, time, and location of the hearing; x Description of the proposed land uses; and x 2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. 6LJQA sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing date. 3XEOLF +HDULQJ IRU 0LQRU &RQGLWLRQDO 8VH 3HWLWLRQV +HDULQJ ([DPLQHUThe Hearing Examiner shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. See Chapter 9 of the Administrative Code for the Office of the Hearing Examiner procedures. 1RWLFH IRU &RQGLWLRQDO 8VH 3HWLWLRQV 1HLJKERUKRRG,QIRUPDWLRQ0HHWLQJ1,05HTXLUHPHQWVApplicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the advertised public hearing. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. Page 9127 of 9661 ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϭϮŽĨϭϮ 0DLOHG1RWLFHWritten notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing. 1HZVSDSHU$GYHUWLVHPHQWVThe legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before theDGYHUWLVHGSXEOLFKHDULQJLQDQHZVSDSHURIJHQHUDOFLUFXODWLRQ7KH DGYHUWLVHPHQWVKDOOLQFOXGHDWDPLQLPXP x Date, time, and location of the hearing; x Description of the proposed land uses; and x 2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. 6LJQA sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing date. 3XEOLF+HDULQJIRU&RQGLWLRQDO8VH3HWLWLRQV (QYLURQPHQWDO$GYLVRU\&RPPLWWHH($&The EAC shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing, if required. &ROOLHU&RXQW\3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ&&3&The CCPC shall hold at least 1 public hearing. %RDUGRI=RQLQJ$SSHDOV%=$The BZA shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. Page 9128 of 9661 $ 0 $ 0 $ 2,110,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 2,897,700 $ 0 $ 4,092,650 $ 0 $ 4,092,650 $ 2,455,845 $ 1,636,805 $ 1,636,805 $ 1,636,805 $ 19,944.64 $ 0 $ 19,944.64 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty SummaryParcel ID 00065520004 Site Address*Disclaimer 2315 EDWARDSGROVE RD Site City IMMOKALEE Site Zone*Note 34142Name / Address BARFIELD PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLCPO BOX 2357 City LABELLE State FL Zip 33975-2357 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 1E18 000100 003 01E18 18 46 29 231.81 Legal 18 46 29 BEG AT SW CNR SEC 18, N 1331.15FT, N 89 DEG E 2481. 55FT, S 2658.62FT, N 89 DEG E84FT, S 1353.32FT TO PT ON 1\4 SEC LI OF SEC 19, TWP 46, RNG 29 N 89 DEG W 2590.55FT, N2653.33FT TO POB 231.81 AC Millage Area 209 Millage Rates £ *Calculations Sub./Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Use Code 66 - ORCHARD GROVES, CITRUS, ETC.4.3132 7.8719 12.1851 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 01/19/21 5927-1598 05/18/20 5764-3840 12/28/16 5350-1271 11/25/08 4409-3724 07/24/07 4261-1587 01/26/07 4174-1713 06/25/85 1141-2082 2024 Certified Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+)Improved Value (=)Market Value (-)Agriculture (=)Assessed Value (=)School Taxable Value (=)Taxable Value Ad Valorem Taxes (+)Non-Ad Valorem Taxes (=)Total Taxes Values are as of January 1st each year. If all values are 0, this parcel was createdafter the Final Tax Roll. Disclaimer: The actual total property taxes may vary due to changes in millagerates set by taxing authorities, the addition of non-ad valorem assessments, andspecial assessments. For the most accurate and up-to-date tax information,please visit the Collier County Tax Collector's office to see the final Tax bills. 2/5/25, 9:17 AM Details https://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=&Map=No&FolioNum=00065520004 1/1Page 9129 of 9661 $ 0 $ 708,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 3,146,100 $ 0 $ 3,146,100 $ 3,146,100 $ 3,146,100 $ 3,146,100 $ 38,335.54 $ 0 $ 38,335.54 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty SummaryParcel ID 00065680009 Site Address*Disclaimer 2301 EDWARDSGROVE RD Site City IMMOKALEE Site Zone*Note 34142Name / Address SOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIES LLC2875 JUPITER PARK DR #1100 City JUPITER State FL Zip 33458 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 1E19 000100 004 01E19 19 46 29 209.74 Legal 19 46 29 BEG AT NE CNR SEC 19, S 2692.02FT, N 89 DEG W 2340. 90FT, N 1353.32FT, S 89 DEG W84FT, N 2658.62 TO A POINT ON THE E/W QUARTER QUARTER LINE OF THE SE1/4 OF SEC 18, N 89DEG E 2438.79FT, S 00 DEG ALG E LINE SEC 18 1345.64FT TO POB, LESS AND EXCEPT FROM SAIDTRACT, THE E 30FT THEREOF. Millage Area 209 Millage Rates *Calculations Sub./Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Use Code 47 - MINERAL PROCESSING, PHOSPHATEPROCESSING 4.3132 7.8719 12.1851 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 07/02/03 3330-3215 07/02/03 3330-3209 06/01/91 1623-926 06/01/85 1141-2084 2024 Certified Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+)Improved Value (=)Market Value (=)Assessed Value (=)School Taxable Value (=)Taxable Value Ad Valorem Taxes (+)Non-Ad Valorem Taxes (=)Total Taxes Values are as of January 1st each year. If all values are 0, this parcel was createdafter the Final Tax Roll. Disclaimer: The actual total property taxes may vary due to changes in millagerates set by taxing authorities, the addition of non-ad valorem assessments, andspecial assessments. For the most accurate and up-to-date tax information,please visit the Collier County Tax Collector's office to see the final Tax bills. 2/5/25, 9:18 AM Details https://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=&Map=No&FolioNum=00065680009 1/1Page 9130 of 9661 $ 800,000 $ 15,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 374,925 $ 344,462 $ 719,387 $ 719,387 $ 719,387 $ 719,387 $ 8,765.81 $ 0 $ 8,765.81 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty SummaryParcel ID 00065402009 Site Address*Disclaimer 3000 EDWARDSGROVE RD Site City IMMOKALEE Site Zone*Note 34142Name / Address SOUTHERN RESERVES LLC2875 JUPITER PARK DRSTE 1100 City JUPITER State FL Zip 33458 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 1E17 000100 012 01E17 17 46 29 39.78 Legal 17 46 29 W1/4 OF S1/2 OF S1/2 LESS W 30FT Millage Area 209 Millage Rates £ *Calculations Sub./Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Use Code 7 - MISCELLANEOUS RESIDENTIAL 4.3132 7.8719 12.1851 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 02/09/21 5894-1033 10/23/19 5689-3336 12/10/09 4520-3347 02/10/05 3731-3940 2024 Certified Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+)Improved Value (=)Market Value (=)Assessed Value (=)School Taxable Value (=)Taxable Value Ad Valorem Taxes (+)Non-Ad Valorem Taxes (=)Total Taxes Values are as of January 1st each year. If all values are 0, this parcel was createdafter the Final Tax Roll. Disclaimer: The actual total property taxes may vary due to changes in millagerates set by taxing authorities, the addition of non-ad valorem assessments, andspecial assessments. For the most accurate and up-to-date tax information,please visit the Collier County Tax Collector's office to see the final Tax bills. 2/5/25, 9:19 AM Details https://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=&Map=No&FolioNum=00065402009 1/1Page 9131 of 9661 Page 9132 of 9661 Page 9133 of 9661 Page 9134 of 9661 Page 9135 of 9661 Page 9136 of 9661 Page 9137 of 9661 Page 9138 of 9661 Page 9139 of 9661 Page 9140 of 9661 Page 9141 of 9661 Page 9142 of 9661 Page 9143 of 9661 Page 9144 of 9661 Page 9145 of 9661 Page 9146 of 9661 Page 9147 of 9661 Page 9148 of 9661 Page 9149 of 9661 Page 9150 of 9661 Page 9151 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com D esigningE xcellenceCivil Engineering • Planning • PermittingNarrative and Evaluation Criteria for Conditional UseStewart Mining East ExpansionPL20240003054 The intent of this Conditional Use request is to allow for the proposed expansion of an existing commercial excavation operation, as provided for in the Conditional Use provisions within the A-MHO-RSLAO District. A Site Improvement Plan applicationwill be submitted concurrently with this Conditional Use application. The subject expansion consists of parcel 00065402009 which is ±39.92 acres. This expansion will be incorporated into the existing mine (approved under Resolution 2021-013), increasing the size of the conditional use boundary to ±490.62 acres. The excavation is for the purpose of mining high quality sand for uses including beach renourishment. The proposed expansion is to relocate the existing material processing facilities to the subject expansion parcel. The application does not seek to expand the previously approved excavation area. The following section is a narrative of the conditional use application and how it is consistent with the standards for approval, LDC section 10.08.00. a. Describe how the project is consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan. Include information on how the request is consistent with the applicable section or portions of the Future Land Use Element. The A-MHO-RSLAO District allows commercial excavations as a Conditional Use. The application and proposed Conceptual Site Plan identifies all the required elements for a conditional use, as required by the LDC and thereby, the Future Land Use Element. b. Describe the existing or planned means of ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. The expansion site will be unified with the existing commercial excavation site (western parcels identified on the Master Site Plan) by a 120’x60’ access easement, creating a unified development. The existing ingress/egress point on Edwards Grove Road will remain, allowing material transfer vehicles to access the existing commercial excavation operation, and will continue to be utilized for the operation that this Conditional Use proposes.An alternate access to the proposed expansion exists on Edwards Grove Road and is proposed to remain. This will allow employees to access the existing storage facility on site. The expansion of the existing excavation operation will not generate additional trips to the site, as additional trucks or employees are not proposed. An access road is proposed around the perimeter of the proposed expansion which will meet or exceed NFPA and Collier County requirements for fire maneuverability. Page 9152 of 9661 c. Describe the effect the conditional use will have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic impact, and odor. Considering the location and the existing commercial excavation operation that is currently operating to the west (as identified on the Master Site Plan) no additional noise, glare, economic impact, or odor is anticipated by expanding the mine. No additional workforce or equipment is proposed although the applicant is seeking to relocate existing processing equipment on the subject expansion property. There will be no residential uses within the site. a 10’ Type A landscape buffer shall be provided on all property lines except the western most of the existing mine where a 20’ Type D buffer is proposed .The proposed Conditional Use seeks to expand the existing mining operation to relocate the existing material processing plant on the easternmost parcel. The applicant seeks to reserve the right to blast, if needed. A nuisance mitigation plan shall be provided at the time of Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County, should blasting be required. d. Describe the site’s and the proposed use’s compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district. The proposed Conditional Use is to expand the existing commercial excavation operation, to allow for the relocation of the existing processing equipment on the subject expansion property. The subject development is surrounded by similar conditions and land uses, and screening will be provided to buffer the operation from adjacent properties. The previously approved conditional use application (CU-PL20190000808) did not limit the mining activities to no blasting and the applicant seeks to maintain those rights. Should blasting be required, a nuisance mitigation plan will be provided at the time of Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. Therefore, the subject property and the proposed Conditional Use are considered compatible with the surrounding uses. e. Please provide any additional information which you may feel is relevant to this request. Upon the successful completion of the Conditional Use application, the proposed expansion will be found consistent and permitted per the requirements of the LDC and its design and development standards. The applicant wishes to maintain their existing rights to blasting. Shall the need to blast arise, a nuisance mitigation plan shall be provided at the time of Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. The following section describes how this Conditional Use Application is consistent with the Future Land Use element provisions of the Growth Management Plan. Objective 1 Promote well planned land uses consistent with Future Land Use Designations, Districts and Subdistricts and the Future Land Use Map to ensure compatibility between the natural and human environments. The proposed conditional use for a commercial excavation operation is consistent with the future land use designation of Agricultural/Rural as per II.i. of the Future Land Use Element Designation Description Section, “Earth mining, oil extraction, and related processing” is “generally permitted” under this designation. Page 9153 of 9661 Objective 5 Policy 5.3 All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. For properties that are zoned inconsistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section but have nonetheless been determined to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element, as provided for in Policies 5.9 through 5.13, the following provisions apply: a. For such commercially-zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity commercial zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of commercial land use allowed by the existing zoning district, except as allowed by Policy 5.11, is not exceeded in the new zoning district. The foregoing notwithstanding, such commercial properties may be approved for the addition of residential uses, in accordance with the Commercial Mixed-Use Subdistrict, though an increase in overall intensity may result. A zoning change of such commercial-zoned properties to a residential zoning district is allowed as provided for in the Density Rating System of this Future Land Use Element and as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. b.For such industrially-zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity industrial, or commercial, zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of industrial land use allowed by the existing zoning district is not exceeded in the new zoning district. c.For such residentially zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the authorized number of dwelling units in the new zoning district does not exceed that authorized by the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of development allowed by the new zoning district does not exceed that allowed by the existing zoning district, except as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. d. For property deemed to be consistent with this Element pursuant to one or more of policies 5.9 through 5.13, said property may be combined and developed with other property, whether such other property is deemed consistent via those same policies or is deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section. For residential and mixed-use developments only, the accumulated density between these properties may be distributed throughout the project, as provided for in the Density Rating System or the Commercial Mixed- Use Subdistrict, as applicable. e. Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district and the proposed zoning district. Acknowledged. Page 9154 of 9661 Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004, and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). The A-MHO-RSLAO District allows commercial excavations. The application and Conceptual Site Plan identify the required elements for a Conditional Use, as required by the LDC and Future Land Use Element Provisions. The surrounding land is also zoned as A-MHO-RSLAO and currently hosts rural uses. This includes vacant land to the North, agricultural uses to the East and South, mining to the West. A 10’ Type A landscape buffer will be provided along the section of the property line to buffer the residentially used parcels. Objective 7 Policy 7.1 The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. The proposed expansion of the conditional use boundary will be developed as a unified operation with the existing commercial excavation site. The existing ingress/egress point, located along Edwards Grove Road, will remain, and be used for direct access to all properties. An alternate access to the proposed expansion exists on Edwards Grove Road and is proposed to remain. This will allow employees to access the existing storage facility on site. Policy 7.2 The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. The applicant has planned for the provision of internal circulation provided within the proposed Conceptual Site Plan. Construction drawings for the concurrent Site Improvement Plan will identify these circulation routes in detail. No additional trucks or employees are proposed, and per the included Traffic Impact Statement, this expansion “will not significantly or negatively impact the adjacent road network”. An access road is proposed around the perimeter of the proposed expansion which will meet or exceed NFPA and Collier County requirements for fire maneuverability. Policy 7.3 All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. An interconnection to the property to the West is proposed, to achieve the unified excavation as depicted in the Master Concept Plan. An alternate access to the proposed expansion exists on Edwards Grove Road and is proposed to remain. This will allow employees to access the existing storage facility on site. Page 9155 of 9661 Policy 7.4 The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. As this is a commercial excavation operation, the site will not be open to the public. Sidewalks/pathways will be provided only as necessary for employees within the site and as required by the LDC. CCME Policies Policy 6.1.3: For the County’s RLSA Overlay, as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved pursuant to the RLSA policies found in the Future Land Use Element. The proposed expansion site is ±39.92 acres. Of that, ±2.30 acres contain native vegetation communities. Collier County LDC 4.08.05 requires 40% of the native vegetation to remain. This equates to ±0.92 acres. Since most of the native vegetation on site is low-quality, the applicant proposes to relocate the preserve on site and provide a contiguous preserve area along the southern property line. The proposed preserve is ±1.48 acres and will be supplemented with plantings to ensure conformance with the land development code. A replanting plan, prepared by the project’s environmental consultant, is included as a supplement to this Conditional Use submittal. Policy 6.1.5: Agriculture shall be exempt from the above preservation requirements contained in Policies 6.1.1, and 6.1.2 of this Element provided that any new clearing of land for agriculture shall not be converted to non-agricultural development for 25 years. For any such conversions in less than 25 years, the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 of this Element shall be applied to the site at the time of the conversion. The percentage of native vegetation preserved shall be calculated on the amount of vegetation occurring at the time of the agricultural clearing, and if found to be deficient, a native plant community shall be restored to re-create a native plant community in all three strata (ground covers, shrubs and trees), utilizing larger plant materials so as to more quickly re-create the lost mature vegetation. Agricultural clearing within the RLSA Overlay shall be allowed and guided by the RLSA policies found in the FLUE. The proposed preserve on site shall exceed native vegetation preservation requirements outlined by the Collier County Land Development Code. Policy 7.1.3: Listed species within the RLSA shall be protected pursuant to the RLSA Overlay policies within the Future Land Use Element. No listed species have been documented within the project. Based on field observations of site characteristics, land use, known geographic distribution, and habitat requirements for listed species, no protected plants or significant nesting or foraging habitat associated with wildlife species listed by the county, state, and/or federal government are likely to be found onsite or be affected by the project. Page 9156 of 9661 Existing Conditions of Approval The following will list the existing conditions of approval per Resolution 2021-013 and that they have been or are on track to be completed. 1. Edwards Road Grove Road Mine Conditional Use shall be limited to what is depicted on the MasterConcept Plan, revised 11/ 03/ 2020," prepared by Davidson Engineering. The plan approved under CU-PL20190000808 is currently being implemented. Conformance with the previously approved plan is acknowledged. 2. The petitioner shall obtain a South Florida Water Management District Agricultural Surface Water Management Permit or permit modification for this site, if applicable. Please see included permit 11-00120-S-02 for existing operation. A new permit or permit modification shall be sought at time of site permitting. 3. The site shall be cleared of all exotic vegetation and maintained exotic- free in perpetuity. The portions of the developed existing site has been cleared and maintained exotic free. 4. Material hauling activities are permitted from 5: 00 a.m. to 5: 00 p. m., Monday through Saturday and 24 hours a day Monday through Sunday for excavation and processing activities. The hours of operation have been followed for the existing operation. 5. The excavation shall be contained by a berm constructed to the height of the 100- year flood elevation. Unless the berm contains adequate clay content to slow the flow of water (as determined by the Collier County Engineering Division), the berm shall contain a membrane impervious to water. The berm has been constructed as required. 6. The site shall be limited to a maximum of 49 pm peak hour, two- way trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval, or based on an alternate methodology accepted by staff at time of application for SDP/ SDPA in accordance with the County's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) guidelines in Resolution No. 2006-299, as it may be amended. The trip cap has not been exceeded. 7. Evidence of U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service( FWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) accepted mitigation for impacts to panthers, woodstorks, Florida black bear and other listed species will be required prior to excavation permit approval, if applicable. Excavation Permit PL20200002472 was approved with all required documentation. Page 9157 of 9661 8. A littoral shelf planting area to commence during the reclamation phase of the project shall be shown on the excavation permit for this petition and shall meet the current standards of the Land Development Code at time of submittal of the Commercial Excavation Permit. The project is not at the reclamation phase; however, upon reaching this phase, the littoral plantings and shelf shall be installed per the approved permit specifications. 9. Prior to any vehicular use of the additional 231. 73± acres, the owner shall post two (2) signs along the on- site entry drive, clearly visible to vehicles entering and leaving the site, providing information regarding potential panther presence and notifying drivers of the need to use caution. Sign wording, placement and size will be reviewed and approved by the Collier County Environmental Staff during review of the Commercial Excavation Application or other local development order, whichever is the first to allow vehicular use of the 231. 73± acres. The sign requirement has been respected. 10. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. All applicable state and/or federal permits were obtained prior to commencement of the development. 11. Pursuant to Section 125. 022( 5) F. S., issuance of a development permit by a County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. Acknowledged. 12. The westernmost 200 feet of the parcel shall be reserved for road right- of-way, for the purpose of the future Little League Road extension. Within 90 days of receipt of written notification by Collier County Transportation that the property is needed, the owner will convey the requested property to the County, for fair market value on the date of the conveyance. Acknowledged. As of June 30, 2025 written notification has not been received regarding this right of way reservation. Page 9158 of 9661 13. The petitioner shall be responsible for maintenance of Edwards Grove Road, from State Road 82 to the subject 450.7± acre property line, for the duration of the mining operation. Edwards Grove Road shall be paved a minimum of 22 feet in width and a depth of 1. 5 inches of asphalt or asphalt millings. A Dust Control Plan, for Edwards Grove Road, shall be submitted with the Excavation Permit. Edwards Grove Road has been maintained per the committed requirements. A supplement has been provided along with this petition to display the conditions of the roadway. Wellfield Management Pursuant to Figure 10, a portion of the property falls within the W - 4 (20 Year Travel Time Isocontour) Wellfield Protection Zone for Collier County. The Project will comply with all groundwater protection requirements for Zone W-4 which are identified in Chapter 3.06.00 of the LDC. A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan will be implemented in association with proposed mining activities to reduce or eliminate the potential for groundwater contamination via the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products or wastes. Page 9159 of 9661 Addressing Checklist (Rev ϭϬ/2022)Page 1 of 1 Operations & Regulatory Management Division Ɣ1RUWK+RUVHVKRH'ULYHƔ1DSOHV)/Ɣ-- www.colliercountyfl.gov ADDRESSING CHECKLISTPlease complete the following and upload via the CityView Portal with your submittal. Items ŵĂƌŬĞĚǁŝƚŚ;ΎͿare required for every application, other items are optional and may not apply to every project. Forms are valid for 6 months following their submittal; an updated form will be required for a new submittal after that timeframe and any time the properties within the project boundary are modified. Additional documents may be attached to this form and can include: -ΎLOCATION MAP and/or SURVEY showing the proposed project boundary. - List of additional folio numbers and associated legal descriptions. - E-mail from Addressing Official for any pre-approved project and/or street names. LOCATION INFORMATION ΎFOLIO (Property ID) Number(s)of subject property or properties. [Attach list if necessary] ΎLEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties. [Attach list if necessary] STREET ADDRESS(ES)where applicable, if already assigned. PROJECT INFORMATION Acceptance of this form does not constitute project and/or street name approval and is subject to further review by the Addressing Official. Pre-Approval may be requested by contacting us at GMD_Addressing@colliercountyfl.gov or 239-252-2482 prior to your submittal. CURRENT PROJECT NAME PROPOSED PROJECT NAME PROPOSED STREET NAME(s) LATEST APPROVED PROJECT NUMBER [e.g., SDP-94-##, PPL-2002-AR-####, PL2017000####] Page 9160 of 9661 00065402009, 00065680009, 00065520004 See Exhibit. 3000 Edwards Grove Rd, 2301 Edwards Grove Rd, 2315 Edwards Grove Road, Immokalee, FL 34142 Property ID Number: 00065402009, 00065680009, 00065520004 Section 17, Township 46, Range 29 Size of property: 490.62 Acres Address: 3000 Edwards Grove Rd, 2301 Edwards Grove Rd, 2315 Edwards Grove Road Immokalee, FL 34142 Legal Description: BARFIELD GROVE PARCEL A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST AND A PART OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF (N ½) OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 RUN N 00°25'14” W FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,331.53 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER-QUARTER LINE N 88°51'13" E 2,481.73 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE S 00°55'38" E 2,658.69 FEET; THENCE N 89°04'22" E 84.00 FEET; THENCE S 00°35'34" E 1,352.26 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST-WEST QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 19; THENCE ALONG SAID QUARTER LINE S 89°27'14" W 2,589.72 FEET TO THE WEST ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 19 N 00°29'38" W 2,652.80 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AND SOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIES A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18 AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19, RUN S 00°38'42" E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION FOR A DISTANCE OF 2692.02 FEET TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT BEING THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19; THENCE ALONG THE EAST-WEST QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 19 S 89°27'00" W 2341.08 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THOSE LANDS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 3330, PAGE 3215 AND Page 9161 of 9661 THE EASTERLY LINE OF THOSE LANDS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 5350, PAGE 1271, ALL OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE N 00°35'34" W 1352.26 FEET; THENCE S 89°04'22" WEST 84.00 FEET; THENCE N 00°55'38" W 2658.69 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST-WEST QUARTER LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE N 88°47'54" E ALONG SAID LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 2437.77 FEET TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT BEING THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/4; THENCE S 00°36'52" E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18 FOR A DISTANCE OF 1346.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. LESS AND EXCEPT THE EASTERLY THIRTY (30) FEET THEREOF. BEARINGS ARE RELATIVE TO NORTH AMERICAN DATUM (NAD) 1983, FLORIDA EAST ZONE. AND SOUTHERN RESERVES, LLC PARCEL THE WEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTH ONE-HALF OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS THE WEST 30 FEET OF SAID PARCEL. THE ABOVE DESCRIBES AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 490.62 ACRES OF LAND. Page 9162 of 9661 Page 9163 of 9661 Page 9164 of 9661 Page 9165 of 9661 Page 9166 of 9661 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATIONŽƌ>/D/d>//>/dzKDWEz͕ list the officers and stockholders and theƉĞƌĐĞŶƚĂŐĞŽĨƐƚŽĐŬŽǁŶĞĚďǇĞĂĐŚ͗ Name and Address % of Ownership Name and Address % of Ownership ƵƚŚŽƌŝǌĞĚDĞŵďĞƌͲ:ŽƐĞƉŚ͘ĞĂůĞ͕:ƌ͘ ϱϭϬϱ^tŝůůŝĂŵƐtĂǇ͕^ƚƵĂƌƚ&>ϯϰϵϵϳ ƵƚŚŽƌŝǌĞĚDĞŵďĞƌͲZĂŶĐŚƌŽǁŶ ϭϲϮϲϵϬƚŚǀĞŶƵĞ͕sĞƌŽĞĂĐŚ͕&>ϯϮϵϲϲ EĂŵĞĂŶĚĚĚƌĞƐƐ йŽĨKǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ6RXWKHUQ5HVHUYHV//& D'ZDͲEŝĐŬ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚ Ϯϴϳϱ:ƵƉŝƚĞƌWĂƌŬƌŝǀĞ͕^ƵŝƚĞϭϭϬϬ͕:ƵƉŝƚĞƌ͕&>ϯϯϰϱϴ %DUILHOG3URSHUW\+ROGLQJV//& DĂŶĂŐĞƌͲ:ĂŵĞƐWĂƵůDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ͕>> -DPHV3DXO0DQDJHPHQW//& DĂŶĂŐĞƌͲ:ĂŵĞƐ͘WĂƵů йŽĨKǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ йŽĨKǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ йŽĨKǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ 6RXWKZHVWHUQ3URSHUWLHV//& DĂŶĂŐĞƌͲEŝĐŬd͘^ƚĞǁĂƌƚ Page 9167 of 9661 33% 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100, Jupiter, FL 33458 33% 33% 100% 5701 Ft. Denaud Rd Labelle, FL 33935 0% PO Box 2357 Labelle, FL 33975 Growth Management Community Development Department2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104Phone: (239) 252-1036 | Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.govwww.colliercountyfl.gov 01/2023 Page1of3 100% d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of thegeneral and/or limited partners:Name and Address % of Ownership e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: ___________ f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust: Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired͗ Ͳ^ŽƵƚŚǁĞƐƚĞƌŶWƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐ͕>> ͲĂƌĨŝĞůĚWƌŽƉĞƌƚǇ,ŽůĚŝŶŐƐ͕>> Ͳ^ŽƵƚŚĞƌŶZĞƐĞƌǀĞƐ͕>> Leased: Term of lease ____________ years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Page 9168 of 9661 JUNE 24, 2003 Growth Management Community Development Department2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104Phone: (239) 252-1036 | Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.govwww.colliercountyfl.gov 01/2023 Page2of3 FEBRUARY 9, 2021 JANUARY 19,2021 Date of option: _________________________ Date option terminates: __________________, or Anticipated closing date: ________________ AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest-holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition’s final public hearing. ƐƚŚĞĂƵƚŚŽƌŝǌĞĚĂŐĞŶƚͬĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͕/ĂƚƚĞƐƚƚŚĂƚĂůůŽĨƚŚĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŝŶĚŝĐĂƚĞĚŽŶƚŚŝƐĐŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚŝƐ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůƉĂĐŬĂŐĞ͘/ƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƚŚĂƚĨĂŝůƵƌĞƚŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂůůŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌǇƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŵĂǇ ƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶƚŚĞĚĞůĂǇŽĨƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͘ ____________ ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ Date ____________________________________________ Agent/Owner Name (please print) ΎdŚĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͕ĂůůƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͕ĂŶĚĨĞĞƐƐŚĂůůďĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚĞĚƚŽ͗ 'ƌŽǁƚŚDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚͮ'DWŽƌƚĂů͗ ŚƚƚƉƐ͗ͬͬĐǀƉŽƌƚĂů͘ĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀͬĐŝƚǇǀŝĞǁǁĞď YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐ͍ŵĂŝů͗'DĐůŝĞŶƚƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀ ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌEĂŵĞ;ƉůĞĂƐĞƉƌŝŶƚͿ ĂƚĞ ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ Page 9169 of 9661 Nick Stewart 2/14/25 Growth Management Community Development Department2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104Phone: (239) 252-1036 | Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.govwww.colliercountyfl.gov 01/2023 Page3of3 James C. Paul 2/14/25 Page 9170 of 9661 Page 9171 of 9661 Page 9172 of 9661 Page 9173 of 9661 Page 9174 of 9661 Page 9175 of 9661 Page 9176 of 9661 Page 9177 of 9661 Page 9178 of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age 9179 of 9661 ! &&! && $&& !& & & && & %&"#& && EKOC95Y$CGCR;9Y $C57CECRVYKGM5IVY ,!$Y*,)*,04Y )$!'/Y $$Y DFDJ?Y"J>LNH6SDLJY +NDJ8D-6FY::N<PPY $ Y Y $Y 0!2Y Y0Y'1Y,Y $$$Y$YY %6DFDJ?Y::N<PPY *)Y)3Y $$$Y$YY .<?DPS<N<:Y?<JSY (6H<YY::N<PPY *5TEY#5G;QYY YKORY;I5T9Y,K59Y $57;EE;Y$YY '5G;YA5I@;9Y Y 99O=QQYA5I@;9Y Y USBLNDW<:Y+<NPLJXY<S6DFY 0CRE;Y&,Y #5G;QY*5TEY&5I5@;G;IRY$$Y Y0 Y '1Y,Y $$$Y$YY JJU6FY.<-LNSPY Y Y Y Y Y Y Page 9180 of 9661 C,&4$C"! "#C C$C"! "#C C$C"! "#C C,&4$C"! "#C C 279/)'C/5/<+*C/'(/3/=BC %0+AC15'.+C/6C!C-8:5'>C %/+AC /5'.+C/6C!C-895'?C%/+AC /5'.+C/6C !C-8;5'@C Page 9181 of 9661 -- - "- -$' &-!-'&-- *%! -!-!#!$&! %- -#- !$%- - #-+- (),-- - EKOC:6Z&CGCS<:Z&C68CECSWZKGM6IWZ %'1Z,3&Z')"')2Z &&Z !DFDJ?Z#J>LPH7TDLJZ -PDJ9DN7FZ;;P=QQZ Z 2Z)3Z.Z &&&Z &ZZ (7DFDJ?Z;;P=QQZ ,+Z+5Z Z &&&Z &ZZ & Z Z &Z 2$4Z /=?DQT=P=;Z?=JTZ*7H=ZZ;;P=QQZ ,6UEZ%6G<RZZ Z KOSZ<I6U:Z.K6:Z &68<EE<Z &ZZ )6G<ZA6I@<:Z Z ::O<RRZA6I@<:Z Z VTBLPDX=;Z-=PQLJYZ=T7DFZ 2CSE<Z'".Z ,3&Z%'1ZZ ,+Z+5Z Z &&&Z &ZZ JJV7FZ/=0LPTQZ Z Z Z Z Z Z Page 9182 of 9661 K''- %K*#)(*+K K!'?/- %K*#)(*,K K!''- %K*#)(*,K K!''-!%K*#)(*,K K $=BC820K&@9E43K%9019>8<K .94JK:@074K;AK )"$K5BD@0FK.94JK:@074K9AK)"$K5BD@0FK.94JK :@074K9AK)"$K6BC@0GK.94JK8@074K9AK)"$K5BC@0HK.94JK:@074KK )"$K6BC@0IK Page 9183 of 9661 333 c +`Ć & Ć'aĆĆ &ÅbĆ³Ć 'Ć"ĆÉĆêåĆĆ & cĆ\ª'?Ć2 Ć ĆºÜĆ Ć?ĆĆ+ĆĆ;Ć& Ć'ĆZ ©Ć ó ĆÙ ý ĆĆ #Mi,h |q +ĆĆ"<Ć 7#ĆĆ Ć ĆT&'ĆQ Ć ĆĆ ÑĆ ôĆ Ć ĆĆ0¸ Ć ÏãĆĆĆ0Ć"Ć Ć YĆ Ć Ć KĆ * ĆĆ Ć 2KĆèÈ ñĆ ĆĆ ĆÆÊĆ* @r Ć2ĆĆ;ĆQĆĆ Ć Ć Ć Ć O dĆ XĆ Ć ĆXæĆõ Ć Ć ĆË ĆĆâĆ"ĆĆ Ć0ĆĆ Ć s +ĆĆ [ ĆĆ ¹Ć"Ć * Ć *öĆĆ ĆĆ Ć )UĆ 7ĆĆ2OĆß » ĆĆÒĆ"ĆĆ Ć Ć;Ć ÔĆ ĆTĆĆ LĆ Ć t EĆ UĆ ZĆ Ć Ø" eĆ fĆ Ć Ć Ć ÄFĆ Ć Ć ¿Ć FYĆ Ć ĆĆ Ć®u v ¢ ² Ć [Ć Ć ĆĆÖz#Ć 0 Ć ĆĆ Ć7ĆLĆ Ć}Ć Ć@Ćw %/|j8,|%NNB@%Ll|:h|Ć'M]MTl>ML |l7,L|A|:h|uhu%J{|,z,'ul,*|&{|i7,|'M^|NXh|MQ|v|NXh %/|i7,|%NNC?%Ll|:h|Ć $K:k.*|$%&;D<r|KN%L{| !|MQ|$K:l,*|MKN%L{| |l7,L|l7,|*M'uK,Llh|h7MuE* sO:'%EE{|&,|h:6L,*|&{|l7,|MKN%L{h|"%L%6:L6|",K&,R %/|o,|%NNE:'%Li|:h|%|N%cL,_7:N|l7,L|tO:'%EE{|%|N%`L,Q|(L|h:6L|ML|&,7%I|M0|i7,|N%aL,_7:N %2|o,|%NNE:'%Ll|:h|Ć E:K=n*|N%bL,_7:N|l7,L|l7,|6,L,UE|N%e,S|Kuhl|h:6L|%L*|&,|:+Lq,*|1Ć i7,|6,L,TE N%aL,Q|M0|i7,|L%K,*|N%cL,_7:N %1|j9|%NNE:'%Ll|Fh|Ćjfhl |l7,L|l7,{|Kuhi|:L'Gu*,|l7,|WV1ì))^éĆL%K,|%L*|p,|yWh|û1ĆWV1í))]x %L|,%'7|:Lhl%L',|3_i|*,i,Z:L,|l7,|%NNE:'%Llh|hl%iuh|,6| :L*:w:*u%H|)^MVk-|jghm|N%dL,_7:N|%L*|l7,L uh,|i7,|%NN\PY%l-|4[%i|5S|i7%i|Mx,_7:N %)3(%$/".3'3(,1-3 3$)30/33 !23 *3/!3')'#& 3"2"/3'31/!'+'%3 %3/!/3 þÿĀĆ # &/1)3 3 3 3 3 3 3 E¾Ć´Ð6$6Ć$äÍĆøĆ-89P¼°Ć(µ:ĆÌĆ(#Ć.Ć¶Ć J#$5Ć:ë-Ć:Ć $Ć/$úMĆJÀĆ Ç§Ćî½Ć !#ĆHĆ gĆ_ĆðĆ {āhĆ(#Ć=RÂ!Ć.ĆHĆ9RĆSĆÕ<NI/>Ć Ć¤Ć×Ćp£Ćò·Ć DGĆÓà=>ĆçĆ(-Ć.<ïĆG-8Ć5(Ć¨ùĆA/Ć±á#Ć89ĆĆ.BĆSÎ!÷«!ĆĆ¯ÞĆ!Û/ĆPÁĆ¥,,,,Ć¦BĆÝ!¬3o444m33 Ć$!NI5My ÃĆD6nÚĆ ĂĆ !+c -0cc )M]1Wc.91Fc ă~Ą¡ąüijklĆ A CĆCĆ*N[2Xc,^5HE7/\3]:cO>c $GOT?84 PII@YYAQKc'c%&cc a c bc (`c RJJBYZCQLc#_SDU<Ycc " ; 7 < I 6 = V c c c Page 9184 of 9661 Document Number FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State Status Last Event Event Date Filed Event Effective Date Department of State / Division of Corporations / Search Records /Search by Entity Name /Detail by Entity Name Florida Limited Liability Company SOUTHERN RESERVES, L.L.C. Filing Information L02000026345 55-0808785 10/07/2002 FL ACTIVE LC STMNT OF AUTHORITY 21 02/02/2021 NONE Principal Address 2875 JUPITER PARK DRIVE SUITE 1100 JUPITER, FL 33458 Changed: 01/25/2021 Mailing Address 2875 JUPITER PARK DRIVE SUITE 1100 JUPITER, FL 33458 Changed: 01/25/2021 Registered Agent Name & Address STEWART, NICK 2875 JUPITER PARK DRIVE SUITE 1100 JUPITER, FL 33458 Name Changed: 03/01/2017 Address Changed: 01/25/2021 Authorized Person(s) Detail Name & Address Title MGRM D එඞඑඛඑ඗ඖ ඗ඎ C඗ක඘඗කඉගඑ඗ඖඛFlorida Department of State Page 9185 of 9661 STEWART, NICK T2875 JUPITER PARK DRIVE1100JUPITER, FL 33458Annual ReportsReport Year Filed Date2022 03/18/20222023 05/03/2023 2024 01/22/2024 Document Images 01/22/2024 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 05/03/2023 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/18/2022 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/02/2021 -- CORLCAUTH View image in PDF format 01/25/2021 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/17/2020 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/21/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/09/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/01/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/21/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/21/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/05/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/24/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/26/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/26/2011 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/20/2010 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/24/2009 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/04/2008 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/12/2007 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/13/2006 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/12/2005 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/30/2004 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/19/2003 -- LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION View image in PDF format 10/07/2002 -- Florida Limited Liabilites View image in PDF format Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations Page 9186 of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fiDLePx_Ddt~:r:?Ybe~[DMDC<DGejD_D<_D:cqeHqP?:[gkDqDc>Del ,ed\RdDdet:mQ:tRebuOQr 6C:eIy@<gnSbvECd:_DeJe~dDleohz:[WIUDjA 1{?OgDmredr*et:m.{<]T?_{rt?OD?Y:gg^U?:<[D<e gDmred:]]Zde~bte_D ":rgmeC{?DC:?{mmDbtCmU}Dmr[U?DdrD7777778 ":rg ` C{?DC :rUCDdtTKX?:tUeb *et:m1VNb:t|mD sw;9 2#+-+245 -()%22&-+#$ !/'02 FBa=p Page 9187 of 9661 Document Number FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State Status Department of State /Division of Corporations /Search Records /Search by Entity Name /Detail by Entity Name Florida Limited Liability Company SOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIES, LLC Filing Information L03000014304 57-1171149 04/22/2003 FL ACTIVE Principal Address 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Changed: 02/15/2021 Mailing Address 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Changed: 02/15/2021 Registered Agent Name & Address Stewart, Nick 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Name Changed: 04/14/2014 Address Changed: 02/15/2021 Authorized Person(s) Detail Name & Address Title Manager STEWART, NICK T 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 D එඞඑඛඑ඗ඖ ඗ඎ C ඗ක඘඗කඉගඑ඗ඖඛFlorida Department of State Page 9188 of 9661 Jupiter, FL 33458Title Authorized MemberBEALE, JOSEPH E, Jr.5105 SE WILLIAMS WAYSTUART, FL 34997Title Authorized MemberBROWN RANCH1626 90TH AVENUE VERO BEACH, FL 32966 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2022 03/18/2022 2023 05/03/2023 2024 01/25/2024 Document Images 01/25/2024 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 05/03/2023 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/18/2022 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/15/2021 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/17/2020 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/21/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/09/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/01/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/02/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/24/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/14/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/25/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/06/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/05/2011 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/15/2010 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/28/2009 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/11/2008 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/23/2007 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/21/2006 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/28/2005 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/13/2004 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/22/2003 -- Florida Limited Liabilites View image in PDF format Page 9189 of 9661 MASTER CONCEPT PLANEXHIBIT BREVISED JUNE 30, 2025SHEET NO:4365 Radio Road, Suite 201Naples, Florida 34104P: 239.434.6060Company Cert. of AuthorizationNo. 00009496REVISIONSDATE:REV.DESCRIPTIONAS NOTEDSCALE:STEWART MATERIALSLEGENDPREVIOUSLY PERMITTED LAND USE SUMMARYSEE INSET 1INSET 11" = 600'SCALE:1" = 1000'SCALE:PROPOSED LAND USE SUMMARYPRESERVE CALCULATIONSPage 9190 of 9661 AAA-A4365 Radio Road, Suite 201Naples, Florida 34104P: 239.434.6060Company Cert. of AuthorizationNo. 00009496SHEET:REVISIONSDATEREV.DESCRIPTIONMASTER CONCEPT PLANREVISED JUNE 30, 2025AS NOTEDSCALE:STEWART MININGLEGENDPREVIOUSLY PERMITTED LAND USE SUMMARY1" = 300'SCALE:1" = 150'SCALE:SEE INSET 1INSET 1PROPOSED LAND USE SUMMARYPRESERVE CALCULATIONSPage 9191 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com D esigningE xcellenceCivil Engineering • Planning • PermittingFebruary 6, 2025Michael SawyerProject Manager II Transportation Management Services Department 2685 S Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: CU-20240003054 - Stewart Materials Expansion (CU) TIS Waiver Request Dear Mr. Sawyer: This letter is a formal request for a no impact TIS Waiver per the email correspondence attached for CU20240003054. The proposed relocation of the processing plant at 3000 Edwards Grove Rd is not anticipated to generate additional trips as the proposed works will not expand on the previously permitted excavation boundary per Resolution 2021-013 and companion Lake Excavation permit PL20200002472. Should you have any questions or require additional information please contact me directly at 239.434.6060 or via email: Brandon@davidsonengineering.com Sincerely, Brandon T. Copper, P.E. Project Manager Page 9192 of 9661 1 Brandon CopperFrom:Michael Sawyer <Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov>Sent:Tuesday, January 28, 2025 4:02 PMTo:Brandon Copper; Lorraine LantzCc:Sean Sammon; Anthony KhawajaSubject:RE: CU-20240003054 - Stewart Materials Expansion (CU) Good afternoon, Brandon, Please submit the waiver request with the next submittal. Just make the request on a separate sheet of letterhead noting there are no increases in the number of trips proposed with the revised CU. I’m sure you’ll make sure everyone understands the revised petition request. You are correct the issue is that the 50’-utility easement shown on the master plan is that it is for FP&L use only which cannot be shared with the future Little League corridor/ROW reservation. You are also correct the issue is new to our office with the FP&L solar farms. The reservation needs to be 250’ (if it includes the FP&L easement) measured from your western development line or 200’ from the eastern edge of the FP&L easement. I hope that’s somewhat clear...it does get a little complicated. Again, please let me know of any questions or if you need anything. I’m glad to see this petition moving forward and apologize for any delays our office may have unintentionally caused. Respectfully, Michael Sawyer Project Manager II Transportation Management Services Department Transportation Planning 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 239-252-2926 michael.sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov Michael Sawyer Project Manager II Transportation Engineering Office:239-252-2926 Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov Page 9193 of 9661 2 &ƌŽŵ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх^ĞŶƚ͗dƵĞƐĚĂǇ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌǇϮϴ͕ϮϬϮϱϯ͗ϯϰWDdŽ͗DŝĐŚĂĞů^ĂǁǇĞƌфDŝĐŚĂĞů͘^ĂǁǇĞƌΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх͖>ŽƌƌĂŝŶĞ>ĂŶƚǌф>ŽƌƌĂŝŶĞ͘>ĂŶƚǌΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀхĐ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх͖ŶƚŚŽŶǇ<ŚĂǁĂũĂфŶƚŚŽŶǇ͘<ŚĂǁĂũĂΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǆƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿEXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, Michael. May I simply request the waiver in my response letter or is there a form that we must provide? Regarding the easements…FPL called me at the end of last week, so I had a feeling something was in the works. The approved resolution shows both the 50’ utility easement and 200’ ROW reservation, which overlaps the 50’ easement. Are you requesting that the 200’ is in addition to the 50’ for a total of 250’? I just want to make sure we’re on the same page, so I present it to the Stewart Materials team correctly. Brandon Copper, P.E. Project Manager Davidson Engineering, Inc. Main: 239.434.6060 Brandon@davidsonengineering.com www.davidsonengineering.com Page 9194 of 9661 3 &ƌŽŵ͗DŝĐŚĂĞů^ĂǁǇĞƌфDŝĐŚĂĞů͘^ĂǁǇĞƌΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх^ĞŶƚ͗DŽŶĚĂǇ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌǇϮϳ͕ϮϬϮϱϰ͗ϯϱWDdŽ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх͖>ŽƌƌĂŝŶĞ>ĂŶƚǌф>ŽƌƌĂŝŶĞ͘>ĂŶƚǌΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀхĐ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх͖ŶƚŚŽŶǇ<ŚĂǁĂũĂфŶƚŚŽŶǇ͘<ŚĂǁĂũĂΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǆƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿGood afternoon, Brandon, If the new direction does not result in additional mining areas/potential new trips, then it’s possible to request a TIS waiver instead of the TIS. You already have the TIS, but this is a viable alternative with the new direction. We do need you to revise the master plan for the Little League extension. We are working with the FP&L staff permitting the solar farms to the west and south of your project. Part of this discussion is the discovery that there is a 50’ wide FP&L easement that runs north and south including the western edge of Steward Materials. The Little League reservation intended to provide 200 feet of usable width which is not possible with the FP&L easement. I think perhaps the real issue is the number of easements in this location and the scale needed to show your entire site. Please revise your master plan to show the full 200-foot reservation as originally approved by the BCC. Please let me know if you have any follow-up questions or need anything from our team. Respectfully, Michael Sawyer Project Manager II Transportation Management Services Department Transportation Planning 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 239-252-2926 michael.sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov Michael Sawyer Project Manager II Transportation Engineering Office:239-252-2926 Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov &ƌŽŵ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх ^ĞŶƚ͗DŽŶĚĂǇ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌǇϮϳ͕ϮϬϮϱϵ͗ϰϱD dŽ͗DŝĐŚĂĞů^ĂǁǇĞƌфDŝĐŚĂĞů͘^ĂǁǇĞƌΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх Page 9195 of 9661 4 Đ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗&t͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǆƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿEXTERNAL EMAIL:This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Good morning, Michael Can you please opine on the below? Since the conditional use is not requesting to expand on the previously permitted mine, this is to entitle the neighboring parcel for mining activities (relocate the processing plant) is a TIS still required? Thank you, Brandon Copper, P.E. Project Manager Davidson Engineering, Inc. Main: 239.434.6060 Brandon@davidsonengineering.com www.davidsonengineering.com &ƌŽŵ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх ^ĞŶƚ͗&ƌŝĚĂǇ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌǇϮϰ͕ϮϬϮϱϰ͗ϱϴWD dŽ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǆƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿ Good afternoon Brandon, I went back to look at the pre-app notes and saw that the TIS was marked as required. Can you please reach out to Mike Sawyer (Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov or 239-252-2926) who would be more appropriate to make the decision you’re requesting? Thank you, have a nice weekend. Sean Sammon Planner III Zoning Office:239-252-8422 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Sean.Sammon@colliercountyfl.gov &ƌŽŵ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх ^ĞŶƚ͗dŚƵƌƐĚĂǇ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌǇϮϯ͕ϮϬϮϱϭϮ͗ϬϯWD dŽ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǆƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿ Page 9196 of 9661 5 EXTERNAL EMAIL:This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Good afternoon, Sean Given our change in direction with this project – now being we are trying to entitle the eastern parcel for the relocated processing plant and not an expansion of the mine itself – can you please confirm the need for a TIS? The relocation of the plant will not result in any additional trips and the existing mine will not be modified beyond what was approved under the current conditional use and excavation permit. Thank you, Brandon Copper, P.E. Project Manager Davidson Engineering, Inc. Main: 239.434.6060 Brandon@davidsonengineering.com www.davidsonengineering.com &ƌŽŵ͗ZĂǇĞůůŽǁƐфZĂǇ͘ĞůůŽǁƐΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх ^ĞŶƚ͗dŚƵƌƐĚĂǇ͕ĞĐĞŵďĞƌϱ͕ϮϬϮϰϯ͗ϰϭWD dŽ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх Đ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǆƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿ Good afternoon, The Conditional Use petition has been reassigned to Sean Sammon after Eric’s retirement. I have copied him on this e-mail to see if he can assist with your questions. Respectfully, Ray Zoning Division - Zoning Services Section Growth Management Department Telephone: 239.252.2463 Ray Bellows Manager - Planning Zoning Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov Page 9197 of 9661 6 &ƌŽŵ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх^ĞŶƚ͗dŚƵƌƐĚĂǇ͕ĞĐĞŵďĞƌϬϱ͕ϮϬϮϰϮ͗ϱϲWDdŽ͗ZĂǇĞůůŽǁƐфZĂǇ͘ĞůůŽǁƐΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚǇĨů͘ŐŽǀх^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐǆƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿEXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. 'ŽŽĚĂĨƚĞƌŶŽŽŶ͕ZĂǇ ƌŝĐKƌƚŵĂŶǁĂƐƚŚĞƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐƉůĂŶŶĞƌŽŶƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘KƵƌƉůĂŶŚĂƐĐŚĂŶŐĞĚ͕ĂŶĚ/ŚĂǀĞĂĨĞǁƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞ ĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞǁĂǇƚŽƉƌŽĐĞĞĚ͘tŚŽƐŚŽƵůĚ/ƌĞĂĐŚŽƵƚƚŽ͍ dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ͕ Brandon Copper, E.I. Project Manager Main: 239.434.6060 Brandon@davidsonengineering.com www.DavidsonEngineering.com Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Page 9198 of 9661 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE IMMOKALEE EXPANSION EAST PROPERTY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Performed for: Stewart Materials, //& 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 Jupiter, Florida 33458 Prepared by: Florida’s First Choice in Cultural Resource Management Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 (941) 379-6206 March 2022 Page 9199 of 9661 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE IMMOKALEE EXPANSION EAST PROPERTY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Performed for: Stewart Materials, LLC 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 Jupiter, Florida 33458 Conducted by: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 Marion Almy - Project Manager Elizabeth A. Horvath - Project Archaeologist Justin Winkler – Archaeologist March 2022 Page 9200 of 9661 i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) of the 160-acre Immokalee Expansion East property in Collier County for Stewart Materials, LLC. This project will involve most of the property being converted to a sand and gravel mine. The property is located on the west side of State Road (SR) 29, south of SR 82, in the north central portion of the county. Johnson Road is within the property. The project is being conducted as due diligence in anticipation of permitting requirements. The purpose of this CRAS was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As defined in 36 CFR Part § 800.16(d), the APE is the “geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.” Based on the scale and nature of the activities, the project has a limited potential for any indirect (visual or audible) or cumulative effects outside the immediate footprint of construction. The APE was defined as the property footprint. The survey was conducted in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations in 36 CRF Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties. It was carried out in conformity with the standards contained in the Florida Division of Cultural Resources’ (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual (FDHR 2003). In addition, this study meets the specifications set forth in Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code, and complies with Chapters 267.061 and 373.414, Florida Statutes (FS), as well as Florida’s Coastal Management Program and local regulations. The Principal Investigators meet the Secretary of the Interior's Historic Preservation Professional Qualification Standards (48 FR 44716) for archaeology, history, architecture, architectural history, or historic architecture. Background research and a review of the Florida Master Site File (FMSF) and the NRHP indicated that there are no sites recorded within the APE, and none have been recorded within two miles of the APE. The APE was considered to have a low to moderate indigenous archaeological potential based on the environmental setting and a low historic archaeological site potential. The field investigations, which included surface reconnaissance and the excavation of 96 shovel tests, discovered no archaeological sites within the APE. Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, revealed no previously recorded historic resources within or adjacent to the APE. A review of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Immokalee quadrangle map, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) historic aerial photos, and the Collier County Property Appraiser’s data revealed no potential for historic resources within the APE (Skinner 2022; USDA 1947, 1953, 1963, 1980; USGS 1958). This was confirmed by the field investigations. Given the results of background research and field survey, including the excavation of 96 shovel tests, no archaeological sites or historic resources were discovered. Thus, there are no cultural resources that are listed, eligible for listing, or that appear potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP within the APE. As such, it is the professional opinion of ACI that the proposed undertaking will result in no historic property affected. Page 9201 of 9661 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1-12.0ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ......................................................................................... 2-12.1Project Location ........................................................................................................ 2-12.2Physiography and Geology ....................................................................................... 2-12.3Soils and Vegetation .................................................................................................. 2-32.4Paleoenvironmental Considerations .......................................................................... 2-4 3.0CULTURE HISTORY ......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1Paleoindian ................................................................................................................ 3-2 3.2Archaic ...................................................................................................................... 3-2 3.3Glades ........................................................................................................................ 3-4 3.4Colonialism ............................................................................................................... 3-5 3.5Territorial and Statehood ........................................................................................... 3-7 3.6Civil War and Aftermath ......................................................................................... 3-10 3.7Twentieth Century ................................................................................................... 3-12 3.8APE Specifics .......................................................................................................... 3-16 4.0RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODS ..................................................... 4-1 4.1Background Research and Literature Review ........................................................... 4-1 4.2Archaeological Considerations .................................................................................. 4-1 4.3Historical Considerations .......................................................................................... 4-5 4.4Field Methodology .................................................................................................... 4-5 4.5Inadvertent/Unanticipated Discoveries ..................................................................... 4-6 4.6Laboratory Methods/Curation ................................................................................... 4-7 5.0RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 5-1 5.1Archaeological Results .............................................................................................. 5-1 5.2Historical Results ...................................................................................................... 5-1 5.3Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 5-3 6.0REFERENCES CITED ....................................................................................................... 6-1 APPENDIX Survey Log Page 9202 of 9661 iii LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND PHOTOGRAPHSFigureFigure 1.1. Location of the Immokalee Expansion East APE. ............................................................ 1-2Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the APE. .................................................................................... 2-2Figure 2.2. Soil type distribution within the APE. .............................................................................. 2-4Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. ....................................................................................... 3-1Figure 3.2. 1839 Mackay and Blake map showing the approximate location of the APE. ................. 3-8 Figure 3.3. 1856 Ives map showing the approximate location of the APE. ........................................ 3-9 Figure 3.4. 1873 plat showing the APE. ............................................................................................ 3-11 Figure 3.5. 1947 Collier County map showing the APE. .................................................................. 3-14 Figure 3.6. 1958 Immokalee USGS quadrangle map. ....................................................................... 3-15 Figure 3.7. 1947 and 1980 aerial photos showing the APE. ............................................................. 3-17 Figure 4.1. Previously recorded cultural resources within 1.6 km (1 mi) of the APE. ........................ 4-2 Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests within the APE. .................................................................... 5-2 Table Table 2.1. Soil types within the APE (Liudahl et al. 1998). ................................................................ 2-4 Table 4.1. Surveys conducted within 1.6 km (1 mile) of the APE. ..................................................... 4-3 Table 4.2. Distribution of sites by water type and distance. ................................................................ 4-3 Table 4.3. Distribution of sites by drainage and soil types. ................................................................. 4-4 Photo Photo 2.1. Pasture south of Johnson Road, facing west. ..................................................................... 2-1 Photo 2.2. Modified southern wetland, facing west. ........................................................................... 2-3 Photo 2.3. Western nursery, facing southwest. ................................................................................... 2-3 Photo 5.1. Stratigraphy in the pasture. ................................................................................................ 5-1 Photo 5.2. Stratigraphy in the nursery. ................................................................................................ 5-3 Page 9203 of 9661 ACI 1-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 1.0 INTRODUCTIONArchaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the 160-acre Immokalee Expansion East property in Collier County for Stewart Materials, LLC. This project will involve most of the property being converted to a sand and gravel mine. The property is located on the west side of State Road (SR) 29, south of SR 82, in the north central portion of the county; Johnson Road is within the property (Figure 1.1). The project is being conducted as due diligence in anticipation of permitting requirements. The purpose of this CRAS was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As defined in 36 CFR Part § 800.16(d), the APE is the “geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.” Based on the scale and nature of the activities, the project has a limited potential for any indirect (visual or audible) or cumulative effects outside the immediate footprint of construction. The APE was defined as the property footprint. The survey was conducted in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations in 36 CRF Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties. It was carried out in conformity with the standards contained in the Florida Division of Cultural Resources’ (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual (FDHR 2003). In addition, this study meets the specifications set forth in Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code, and complies with Chapters 267.061 and 373.414, Florida Statutes (FS), as well as Florida’s Coastal Management Program and local regulations. The Principal Investigators meet the Secretary of the Interior's Historic Preservation Professional Qualification Standards (48 FR 44716) for archaeology, history, architecture, architectural history, or historic architecture. Background research preceded the field investigations. Such research provides and informed set of expectation as to the types and locations of resources expected within the APE. In addition, the data can be used to assess the significance of any sites discovered. Page 9204 of 9661 ACI 1-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 1.1. Location of the Immokalee Expansion East APE. Page 9205 of 9661 ACI 2-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Environmental factors such as geology, topography, relative elevation, soils, vegetation, and water are important in determining where archaeological sites are likely to be located. These variables influenced what types of resources were available in an area, which in turn influenced decisions regarding settlement location and land-use patterns. Because of the influence of these environmental factors upon the inhabitants, a discussion of the environment is included. 2.1 Project Location The 160-acre APE is located in the southern quarter of Section 17 of Township 46 South, Range 29 East (United States Geological Survey [USGS] Immokalee 2013) in Collier County, Florida. It is on the west side of SR 29, south of SR 82; Johnson Road runs east/west through the center of the APE (Figure 2.1). The area consists of pasture with a residence and religious retreat area, a modified chain of wetlands, and the western portion of the APE is an abandoned plant nursery with associated buildings and infrastructure (Photos 2.1-2.4). Photo 2.1. Pasture south of Johnson Road, facing west. 2.2 Physiography and Geology According to White (1970), Collier County is included in the southern, or distal, physiographic zone, and more specifically, the APE is within the Immokalee Rise. It sits at an elevation of 11 to 12 meters (m) (35-40 feet [ft]) above mean sea level. The property is underlain by the Tamiami formation, which is surficially evidenced by medium fine sand and silt (Florida Department of Environmental Protection [FDEP] 2001a, 2001b). Page 9206 of 9661 ACI 2-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the APE. Page 9207 of 9661 ACI 2-3 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Photo 2.2. Modified southern wetland, facing west. Photo 2.3. Western nursery, facing southwest. 2.3 Soils and Vegetation According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the APE is situated within the Immokalee-Oldsmar-Basinger soil association (Liudahl et al. 1998). It is characterized by nearly level, poorly drained soils on flatwoods and in sloughs. The native vegetation of the flatwoods consists of saw palmetto and scattered areas of South Florida slash pine, wax myrtle, and gallberry. The natural vegetation in the sloughs consists of scattered areas of slash pine, scrub cypress, cabbage palm, saw palmetto, wax myrtle, sand cordgrass, pineland threeawn, panicums, and chalky bluestem. There are Page 9208 of 9661 ACI 2-4 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 four soil types within the APE, and they are listed in Table 2.1 and their locations are depicted on (Figure 2.2) (USDA 2018). Table 2.1. Soil types within the APE (Liudahl et al. 1998).Soil type, % slopes Drainage Setting Chobee, Winder & Gator soils, depressional Very poor Depressions and marshes Immokalee fine sand Poor Flatwoods Oldsmar fine sand Poor Flatwoods Pomello fine sand Moderately well Low ridges on the flatwoods Figure 2.2. Soil type distribution within the APE. 2.4 Paleoenvironmental Considerations The early environment of the region was different from that seen today. Sea levels were lower, the climate was arid, and fresh water was scarce. An understanding of human ecology during the earliest periods of human occupation in Florida cannot be based on observations of the modern environment because of changes in water availability, botanical communities, and faunal resources. Indigenous inhabitants would have developed cultural adaptations in response to the environmental changes taking place, which were then reflected in settlement patterns, site types, artifact forms, and subsistence economies. Due to arid conditions between 16,500 and 12,500 years ago, the perched water aquifer and potable water supplies were absent. Palynological studies conducted in Florida and Georgia suggest that between 13,000 and 5000 years ago, this area was covered with an upland vegetation community of scrub oak and prairie (Watts 1969, 1971, 1975). However, the environment was not static. Evidence recovered from the inundated Page-Ladson Site in north Florida has clearly demonstrated that there were two periods of low water tables and dry climatic conditions and two episodes of elevated water tables and wet conditions (Dunbar 2006b). Page 9209 of 9661 ACI 2-5 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 By 5000 years ago, a climatic event marking a brief return to Pleistocene climatic conditions induced a change toward more open vegetation. Southern pine forests replaced the oak savannas. Extensive marshes and swamps developed along the coasts and subtropical hardwood forests became established along the southern tip of Florida (Delcourt and Delcourt 1981). Northern Florida saw an increase in oak species, grasses, and sedges (Carbone 1983). In south central Florida, pollen cores were dominated by wax myrtle and pine. The assemblage suggests that by this time, a forest dominated by longleaf pine along with cypress swamps and bayheads were present (Watts 1971, 1975). About 5000 years ago, surface water was plentiful in karst terrains and the level of the Floridan aquifer rose to 1.5 m (5 ft) above present levels. With the establishment of warmer winters and cooler summers than in the preceding early Holocene, the fire-adapted pine communities prevailed. These depend on the high summer precipitation caused by the thunderstorms and the accompanying lightning strikes to spark the fires (Watts et al. 1996; Watts and Hansen 1994). The increased precipitation also resulted in the formation of the large swamp systems such as the Okefenokee and Everglades (Gleason and Stone 1994). After this time, modern floral, climatic, and environmental conditions began to be established. Page 9210 of 9661 ACI 3-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 3.0 CULTURE HISTORY A discussion of the culture history the region provides a framework within which the local archaeological and historic record can be examined. Archaeological and historic sites are not individual entities but are the remains of once dynamic cultural systems. As a result, they cannot be adequately examined or interpreted without reference to other sites and resources in the area. In general, the culture history of an area (i.e., an archaeological region) outlines the sequence of archaeological cultures through time. These cultures are defined largely in geographical terms but also reflect shared environmental and cultural factors. The APE is situated at the interface of the Caloosahatchee and Glades archaeological regions but is inland far enough to be considered part of the Glades culture area due to the lack of intensive coastal interaction (Carr and Beriault 1984; Griffin 1988) (Figure 3.1). It should be noted that this regional assignment is one of several competing interpretations for the area, and Griffin (1988) supplies an excellent discussion of alterative groupings. Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. The area is better understood after the introduction of pottery (ca. 500 BCE [Before Common Era]). Prior to this, regional characteristics of native populations are not easily identified, as malleable materials such as textiles and basketry, which lend themselves to cultural expression, are typically destroyed by environmental processes. With the arrival of pottery, the clay provided both a means of cultural expression and an archaeologically durable artifact. Thus, the use of pottery as a marker of cultural diversity probably post-dates the inception of distinct Florida cultures by many centuries. The local history of the region is divided into four broad periods named with reference to the prevailing governmental powers or historical trends. The first period, Colonialism, occurred during the exploration and control of Florida by the Spanish and British from around 1513 until 1821. At that time, Florida became a territory of the United States (U.S.) and 21 years later became a State (Territorial and Page 9211 of 9661 ACI 3-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Statehood). The Civil War and Aftermath (1861-1900) period covers the Civil War, the period of Reconstruction following the war, and the late 1800s, when the transportation systems were dramatically increased and development throughout the state expanded. The Twentieth Century period has subperiods based on important historic events such as the World Wars, the Boom of the 1920s, and the Depression. Each of these periods evidenced differential development and utilization of the region, thus effecting the historic archeological site distribution. 3.1 Paleoindian Current archaeological evidence indicates that the earliest human occupation of the Florida peninsula dates back some 13,500 years ago or ca. 11,500 BCE (Widmer 1988). The earliest occupation is referred to as the Paleoindian period, which lasted until approximately 7000 BCE. During this time, the climate of South Florida was much drier than today. Sea level was 80 to 130 m (260-425 ft) lower than present, and the coast extended approximately 160 kilometers (km) (100 miles) seaward on the Gulf coast. With lower sea levels, today’s well-watered inland environments were arid uplands (Milanich 1994). Lake Okeechobee, the Caloosahatchee, Myakka, and Peace Rivers, the Big Cypress Swamp, and the Everglades were probably dry. Because of drier global conditions and little or no surface water available for evaporation, Florida’s rainfall was much lower than at present (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980). Potable water was obtainable at sinkholes, where the lower water table could be reached. Plant and animal life were also more diverse around the oases that were frequented by both people and game animals (Milanich 1994; Widmer 1988). Thus, the prevailing environmental conditions were largely uninviting to human habitation during the Paleoindian period (Griffin 1988:191). Given the inhospitable climate, it is not surprising that the population was sparse and Paleoindian sites are uncommon in south Florida. Exceptions include two sites to the north in Sarasota County, Little Salt Springs (Clausen et al. 1979) and Warm Mineral Springs (Clausen et al. 1975a, 1975b; Cockrell and Murphy 1978) and one site to the southeast, Cutler Fossil Site, in Dade County (Carr 1986). Archaeologists hypothesize that this period was characterized by small groups utilizing a hunting and gathering mode of subsistence. Dunbar (2006a:540) suggests that Paleoindians identified and migrated to “unexploited resource-rich areas” of food. Permanent sources of water, scarce during this time, were very important in settlement selection as well (Daniel and Wisenbaker 1987). This settlement model, often referred to as the Oasis Hypothesis, has a high correlation with geologic features in southern Florida such as deep sink holes like those noted in Sarasota and Dade Counties (Milanich 1994:41). Sites of this period are most readily identified based on distinctive lanceolate shaped stone projectile points including those of the Simpson and Suwannee types (Bullen 1975). The tool assemblage also included items manufactured of bone, wood, and very likely leather, as well as plant fibers (Clausen et al. 1979). 3.2 Archaic The succeeding Archaic period is divided into three temporal periods: Early Archaic (ca. 7000 to 5000 BCE), Middle Archaic (ca. 5000 to 2000 BCE), and the Late Archaic (ca. 2000 to 500 BCE). According to Widmer (1988), the extreme aridity of the south Florida region during the Early Archaic period may have led to the abandonment of the area. Sites of the Early Archaic and Middle Archaic are not common in southern Florida. In a recent archaeological context, James Pepe confirms the locations of three Early Archaic and 13 Middle Archaic sites in the 13 county Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Project (CERP) area (Janus Research 2008). Initially, the settlement patterns and tools of Page 9212 of 9661 ACI 3-3 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 the Early Archaic were like those of the preceding Paleoindian period, but through time, more wetland habitats began to emerge. During the Archaic, marked environmental changes occurred that had profound influence upon human settlement and subsistence practices. Humans adapted to this changing environment and regional differences are reflected in the archaeological record (Russo 1994a, 1994b; Sassaman 2008). Among the landscape alterations were rises in sea and water table levels that resulted in the creation of more available surface water. It was during this period that Lake Okeechobee, the Everglades, the Big Cypress Swamp, and the Caloosahatchee and Peace Rivers formed. In addition, hydrological changes, this period is characterized by the spread of mesic forests and the beginnings of modern vegetation communities including pine forests and cypress swamps (Griffin 1988; Widmer 1988). Two Early Archaic horizons, the Bolen and the Kirk, have been identified (Janus Research 2008). The main diagnostic markers for the Bolen Early Archaic are side-notched projectile points such as the Bolen and Greenbriar types as well as Kirk Corner-Notched (Austin 1997; Bullen 1975; Farr 2006). Other stone artifacts include adzes, Edgefield scrapers, end scrapers, spokeshaves with graver spurs, side scrapers, and Waller knives (Purdy 1981). In southern Florida, the archaeological record for the Middle Archaic is better known than the Early Archaic. Among the material culture inventory are several varieties of stemmed, broad blade projectile points including those of the Newnan, Levy, Marion, and Putnam types (Bullen 1975). At sites where preservation is good, such as sinkholes and ponds, an elaborate bone tool assemblage is recognized along with shell tools and complicated weaving (Beriault et al. 1981; Wheeler 1994). In addition, artifacts have been found in the surrounding upland areas, such as the upland palmetto and pine flatwoods surrounding the Bay West Site (Beriault et al. 1981). Along the coast, excavations on both Horr’s Island in Collier County and Useppa Island in Lee County (Milanich et al. 1984; Russo 1991) have uncovered pre-ceramic shell middens that date to the Middle Archaic period. The Horr’s Island shell ring is accompanied by at least three ceremonial mounds. Large architectural features such as these were designed to divide, separate, and elevate above other physical positions within the settlement as a reflection and reinforcement of the social segmentation within society (Russo 2008:21). Mortuary sites, characterized by interments in shallow ponds and sloughs, as discovered at the Little Salt Springs Site in Sarasota County (Clausen et al. 1979) and the Bay West Site in Collier County (Beriault et al. 1981), are also distinctive of the Middle Archaic. The beginning of the Late (or Ceramic) Archaic period is similar to the Middle Archaic but includes the addition of pottery. The earliest pottery in the south Florida region is fiber-tempered (Orange Plain and Orange Incised), as represented at sites on Key Marco (Cockrell 1970; Widmer 1974). Projectile points of the Late Archaic are primarily stemmed and corner-notched, and include the Culbreath, Clay, and Lafayette types (Bullen 1975). Other Late Archaic lithic tools included hafted scrapers and ovate and triangular-shaped knives (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980). Essentially modern environmental conditions were reached by the beginning of the Late Archaic period, when freshwater resources were available throughout southern Florida. Sea levels continued to rise slightly during the post Archaic periods, inundating small knolls located along the edge of the Everglades in the process (Carr et al. 1991:125-126; Wheeler 2004:49). The emergence of stable coastal environments led to greater estuarine richness, which permitted larger human populations and regionalization of cultures as people adapted to specific habitats (Milanich 1994:83). The South Florida Native Americans increased their reliance on marine resources in coastal areas and expanded hunting, fishing, and plant collection throughout the interior (Carr 2002:195). Page 9213 of 9661 ACI 3-4 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Until recently, variations of Bullen’s chronology for the Late Archaic Orange culture in northeastern Florida were generally used for the Late Archaic in southern Florida. Fiber-tempered pottery, the earliest known for all North America, was considered a marker for the ceramic portion of the Late Archaic. The use of this standard fiber-tempered sequence for the Late Archaic in southern Florida has come into question. Based on his research in southwestern Florida, Widmer (1988:68) hypothesized that the earliest Late Archaic sites included “untempered chalky pottery and limestone- tempered pottery as well as the usual fiber-tempered Orange pottery.” Austin (1997:136) stated that the “identification of a true Orange Horizon in south Florida is debatable.” Instead, what is more common is the presence of “semi-fiber tempered” pottery in the basal levels of middens, “often in association with thick St. Johns Plain or sand tempered plain sherds, and overlying either culturally sterile sands, or sparse scatters of lithic artifacts” (Austin 1996, 1997). Both Widmer and Austin agreed that semi- fiber tempered components at sites throughout southern Florida are “ephemeral” and soon replaced in the archaeological record by components consisting exclusively of sand-tempered pottery (Austin 1997:136; Widmer 1988:72-73). Importantly, it is now becoming clear that many of the ubiquitous faunal bone middens located in the interior wetlands of southern Florida date to the Late Archaic, even though many of them lack pottery. Such sites are difficult to date because, not only do they often lack chronologically diagnostic artifacts, most of the faunal bone at the sites lacks collagen, the datable material in bone samples that are sent to radiocarbon labs. Nonetheless, ongoing research by the National Park Service in the Big Cypress National Preserve and Everglades National Park has yielded dense aceramic faunal bone middens yielding radiocarbon dates between 2800 and 1500 BCE (Schwadron 2006). 3.3 Glades The termination of the Late or Ceramic Archaic corresponds to a time of environmental change. The maturing of productive estuarine systems was accompanied by cultural changes leading to the establishment of what John Goggin originally defined as the “Glades Tradition” (Griffin 1988:133). The Glades Tradition was characterized by “the exploitation of the food resources of the tropical coastal waters, with secondary dependence on game and some use of wild plant foods. Agriculture was apparently not practiced, but pottery was extensively used” (Goggin 1949:28). Unlike much of peninsular Florida, the region does not contain deposits of chert, and as such, stone artifacts are rare. Instead of stone, shell and bone were used as raw materials for tools (Milanich 1994:302). Most information concerning the post-500 BCE indigenous populations is derived from coastal sites where the subsistence patterns are typified by the extensive exploitation of fish and shellfish, wild plants, and inland game, like deer. Inland sites show a greater reliance on interior wetland resources. Known inland sites often consist of sand burial mounds and shell and dirt middens along major water courses, and small dirt middens containing animal bone and pottery in oak/palm hammocks, or palm tree islands associated with freshwater marshes (Griffin 1988). These islands of dry ground provided space for settlements (Carr 2002). Glades I - Beginning around 500 BCE, fiber-tempered and semi fiber-tempered pottery of the Late Archaic period was replaced by sand-tempered pottery (Glades Plain). This change in tempering agent marks the beginning the Glades cultural tradition. For 700 years, sand-tempered plain pottery dominated the assemblage, but from 200 CE (Common Era) to 800 CE, Gordon’s Pass Incised, Sanibel Incised, and a decorated pottery type that has not been classified, were the predominant decorated wares (Carr and Beriault 1984; Griffin 1988). The tremendous increase in Glades I sites within the Big Cypress indicates a dramatic increase in the usage of the area during this time (Widmer 1988), and the Page 9214 of 9661 ACI 3-5 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 geographic extent of the Glades I diagnostics indicates a considerable degree of interchange and interaction (Griffin 1988). Glades II (800 to 1200 CE) is marked by a tremendous diversity in decorated ceramic types. Goggin (n.d.) described the decorations as being “neatly and cleanly cut and apparently made with swift cutting strokes while the clay is partially dry.” Glades IIa (750-900 CE) is identified by the presence of Key Largo Incised, Opa Locka Incised, and Miami Incised. During Glades IIb (900-1100 CE), Key Largo Incised remained the primary decorated ware. The number of sites increased, and the period would appear to be one of “relative stability in technology and subsistence” (Griffin 1988:140). From ca. 1100 to 1200 CE there is conspicuous absence of decorated pottery, and the number of sites drops dramatically (Griffin 1988:142). This cultural hiatus has been correlated to the NeoAtlantic warm period and associated with high sea levels (Fairbridge 1984; Gleason et al. 1984). Glades III begins with the reintroduction of decorated ceramics; however, the motifs and techniques are noticeably different from previous styles. Glades IIIa (1200-1400 CE) is identified by the appearance of Surfside Incised, St. Johns Check Stamped, and Safety Harbor wares. There is also an accompanying increase in bone ornaments. Then again, ca. 1400 CE, ceramic decoration ceases except for tooled rim types (Griffin 1988). Griffin hypothesizes that this ceramic style might have been associated with increasing Calusa influence in the area (Griffin 1988:142). Whereas the earlier cultural periods of the Glades area are defined exclusively by the archaeological record, historical documents provide greater information, including tribal names, for the peoples of the terminal Glades III period. Much of the early historical ethnographic information is derived from the account of Hernando d’Escalante Fontaneda, a Spanish captive of the Calusa (True 1944). During his 17-year captivity, Fontaneda learned of the political structure, economy, social hierarchy, and religion of the south Florida indigenous. 3.4 Colonialism The cultural traditions of the native Floridians changed because of European expansion into America. The initial events, authorized by the Spanish crown in the 1500s, ushered in devastating European contact. After Ponce de Leon’s landing near St. Augustine and circumnavigation of the peninsula in 1513, official Spanish explorations were confined to the west coast of Florida until 1565. Florida’s east coast, lacking deep-water harbors like Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor, was left to a few shipwrecked sailors from treasure ships, which, by 1551, sailed through the Straits of Florida on their way to Spain. When the first Europeans arrived in coastal southwest Florida in the 16th century, they encountered the Calusa, a powerful, complex society ruled by a paramount chief. The principal town of the Calusa is thought to have been on Mound Key in Estero Bay. Documents suggest that the Calusa chief ruled over 50 towns, from which he exacted tribute (Widmer 1988). Between 1513 and 1558, Spain launched several expeditions of exploration and ultimately failed, colonization of La Florida. Archaeological evidence of contact can be found in the form of European trade goods such as glass beads, bells, and trinkets recovered from village sites. Prior to the settlement of St. Augustine in 1565, European contact with the indigenous peoples was sporadic and brief; however, the repercussions were devastating. The southeastern indigenous population in 1500 has been estimated at 1.5 to 2 million (Dobyns 1983). Following exposure to European diseases such as bubonic plague, dysentery, influenza, and smallpox, epidemics to which they had no immunity, the native population was reduced by as much as 90% (Ramenofsky 1987). The social consequences of such a swift and merciless depopulation were staggering. Within 87 years of Ponce de Leon’s landing, the Mississippian cultures of the Southeast were collapsed (Smith 1987). In 1708, the Spanish Page 9215 of 9661 ACI 3-6 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 government reported that three hundred refugees were all that remained of the original Florida population (Mulroy 1993). Along the Gulf Coast between Charlotte Harbor and Tampa Bay, Spanish and Cuban anglers established communities, or “ranchos,” with the earliest being at Useppa Island and San Carlos Bay (Hammond 1973; Palov 1999). There is growing archaeological evidence that the surviving Native Americans of the region were assimilated into these mixed communities (Almy 2001; Hann 1991; Neill 1968; Palov 1999). These west coast ranchos supplied dried fish to Cuban and northern markets until the mid-1830s, when the Seminole Wars and customs control closed the fisheries. During the two centuries following the settlement of St. Augustine, the Spanish widened their Florida holdings to include the settlement at Pensacola and a garrison at Saint Marks. With the British to the north and the French to the west, the Spanish colony of La Florida was extremely fragile. In the early 1700s, Spain invited some of the Lower Creek, displaced by British settlements, into La Florida to provide a hostile buffer against the British (Mulroy 1993). What formed as a border population evolved as other bands of Lower Creek extraction moved into the peninsula. This first migration formed a confederation, which included Cowkeeper and his Alachua band, the Apalachicolas, and the Mikasukis (Mulroy 1993). The Treaty of Paris (1763) reallocated the British, French, and Spanish holdings in America. As a result, Florida was ceded to Great Britain. After this, bands of Upper Creek, Muskogee speakers, began moving into Florida, increasing the indigenous population to around two thousand by 1790 (Mulroy 1993). Although cultural distinctions existed between the various Native American groups entering Florida, Europeans collectively called them Seminoles: The word Seminole means runaway or broken off. Hence Seminole is a distinctive appellation, applicable to all the Indians in the Territory of Florida, as all of them run away, or broke off, from the Creek or Nuiscoge [Muskogee] nation (U.S. Congress 1837). The Seminoles formed, at various times, loose confederacies for mutual protection against the new American Nation to the north (Tebeau 1980:72) which considered them to be “the wildest and fiercest remnant of a tribe which has been distinguished for their ceaseless opposition to the arts of civilization” (U.S. Congress 1850). The Seminoles were joined by escaped slaves from South Carolina and Georgia (Porter 1996), “many of whom were seduced from the service of their masters” (Jackson et al. 1817-1818). The loss of slave labor, particularly considering the abolitionists’ movement in the northeast, coupled with the anxiety of having a free and hostile slave population immediately to the south, caused great concern among plantation owners. This historically underestimated nuance of the Seminole Wars prompted General Thomas S. Jesup to say, “This you may be assured is a negro and not an Indian War” (Knetsch 2003:104). Following the treaty of Paris (1763), the ensuing decades witnessed the American Revolution during which British loyalists immigrated to Florida. Following the Revolution, the second Treaty of Paris (1783) returned Florida to Spain; however, Spanish influence was nominal during this second period of ownership. For the next 36 years, Spain, from the vantage of Florida, watched with growing concern as the infant American Nation to the north gained momentum. When the U.S. acquired the Louisiana Purchase from France in 1803, Spain was hemmed in. When the Seminoles began cross-border raids from Spanish Florida into the U.S., General Andrew Jackson was commissioned to defend the nation. His orders permitted him to cross the international border to pursue Seminoles, but he was to respect Spanish authority. General Jackson’s Page 9216 of 9661 ACI 3-7 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 subsequent actions belie either tacit instructions or a personal agenda, as he killed hundreds of Seminoles and runaway slaves, took control of several Spanish garrisons and towns, confiscated the Spanish royal archives, named an American as governor of the area, and announced that the Spanish economic laws would be replaced by the revenue laws of the U.S. (Tebeau 1980). This aggression understandably strained relations between the U.S. and Spain. Spain, who had more pressing concerns with its Central and South American colonies, ceded Florida to the U.S. in the Adams-Onis Treaty of 1819 in exchange for the territory west of the Sabine River. 3.5 Territorial and Statehood Andrew Jackson, named provisional governor of Florida, divided the territory into St. Johns and Escambia Counties. At that time, St. Johns County encompassed all of Florida lying east of the Suwannee River, and Escambia County included the land lying to the west. In the first territorial census in 1825, some 317 persons reportedly lived in South Florida; by 1830 that number had risen to 517 (Tebeau 1980:134). Although what became known as the First Seminole War (the cross-border hostilities between the U.S. and the Seminoles) was fought in north Florida, the Treaty of Moultrie Creek in 1823, at the end of the war, was to affect the settlement of south Florida. In exchange for occupancy of a four- million-acre reservation south of Ocala and north of Charlotte Harbor, the Seminoles relinquished their claim to the remainder of the peninsula (Covington 1958; Mahon 1985). The treaty satisfied neither the Indigenous population nor the settlers. The inadequacy of the reservation, the desperate situation of the Seminoles, and the demand of would-be settlers for their removal, produced another conflict. By 1835, the Second Seminole War was underway, initiated with the Seminole attack on Major Dade’s company in route to Fort King. Although much of the Second Seminole War occurred in central Florida, as the Seminoles fled southward into the Big Cypress and Everglades, U.S. forces pursued them. In October 1840, U.S. Secretary of War Joel Poinsett advised commander Armistead that the construction of fixed post installations should be discontinued, and temporary depots should be adopted (Knetsch 2003). This new strategy was a direct response to the guerilla-like warfare utilized by the Seminoles and the abandonment of set piece warfare. Because of this directive, the landscape of south Florida was dotted with depots and only slightly more substantial “forts.” The forts of south Florida very rarely approximated the size and permanency of forts such as Brooke, King, and Mellon. The Mackay and Blake map from this time shows a number of roads/trails in the vicinity and Forts Adams, Deynaud, and Thompson to the north and Fort Keais to the south (Mackay and Blake 1839) (Figure 3.2). Geo-referencing maps from this time is a difficult proposition, thus this figure shows the approximate location of the APE. The federal government ended the Second Seminole War in 1842 by withdrawing troops from Florida. At the war’s end, some of the battle-weary Seminoles were persuaded to emigrate to the Oklahoma Reservation where the federal government had set aside land for them. After much political deliberation over the fate of black Seminoles (Knetsch 2003:126), approximately 500 black Seminoles were allowed to accompany the “red Seminoles” west (Porter 1996). Those Seminoles who wished to remain in Florida could do so, but the reservation boundary was redrawn, reducing Seminole lands to south and west of Lake Istokpoga in Highlands County. To limit contact between the Seminoles and Cuban anglers, the offshore islands were excluded from the territory (Covington 1982:3). The government considered these two and one half million acres “a temporary hunting and planting reserve” (Covington 1982:3) and continued to pressure the remaining Seminoles to leave by “sending a delegation of their tribe, which have emigrated West, to visit their brethren in Florida, and explain to them the advantages of rejoining their tribe” (U.S. Congress 1850). Page 9217 of 9661 ACI 3-8 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 3.2. 1839 Mackay and Blake map showing the approximate location of the APE. In 1845, the Union admitted the State of Florida with Tallahassee as the state capital and survey and exploration of the Big Cypress and Okeechobee areas was intensified. Tension mounted as the Seminoles watched with growing alarm the passage of military patrols and survey parties, and complaints were made to Indian Agent Captain Casey that such activities made hostilities inevitable (Covington 1982:30). Patrols typically found little remaining of previous military installations; however, navigation and location was always in doubt given the limited cartography and featureless swamps. One officer lamented that “The maps represent the shape of the Big Cypress so differently in this portion of it and also the course of the creek Okholoakooche [Okaloacoochee Slough] from what I found that I felt doubts if I had yet reached the right place.” On January 22, 1855, Lt. George Hartsuff, appointed topographical engineer and main surveyor, began exploration of the Big Cypress and Everglades. During this time, he helped establish Forts Simon Drum and Shackleford. When the rainy season of June 1855 set in, survey was suspended and Hartsuff began work on his field notes and maps. In a sketch furnished to the War Department, he showed the exact location of many Seminole villages and noted that he had been into the chief haunt of the Seminoles that contained most of their villages, gardens, and cattle pens (Covington 1982:35). Sampson Forrester, a Black Seminole, provided the following account of the Seminole existence in the swamps: Within the swamp are many pine-islands, upon which the villages are located. They are susceptible of cultivation; and between them is a cypress swamp, the water from two to three feet deep. The Indians rely principally upon their crops, which, though small, add much to their comfort. Corn, pumpkins, beans, wild potatoes, and cabbage palmetto, afford subsistence. The scarcity of powder deprives them partially of game; though bears and turkey are frequently killed with arrows. Discharging a rifle was forbidden, as in a country so flat and wet the reverberation is in abundance; but there they apprehend discovery. A few ponies, cattle, hogs, and chickens are owned by the chief (Tampa Tribune 1955). Page 9218 of 9661 ACI 3-9 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 On December 7, 1855, Lieutenant Hartsuff again set out for the Big Cypress with orders to make reconnaissance and take note of any Seminole fields and settlements (Covington 1982:1). Within a few days, the company found the charred ashes of Forts Simon Drum and Shackelford, which had been abandoned during the rainy season. Every Seminole village entered was found to be deserted, and when leaving Billy Bowlegs’ village on December 18, 1855, artillerymen took bunches of planted bananas. Later, in the day, the company received orders to return to Fort Myers and they began the trip westward. They camped for the evening in a small grove south of present-day Immokalee; 30 Seminole warriors led by Billy Bowlegs ambushed them at 5:00 AM (Covington 1982:1). In what was perhaps the result of misunderstood aggression, and tragically ill-timed orders (had they only left a day earlier), the Third, and final, Seminole War began. For the following two and a half years, hit and miss skirmishes extended from the Big Cypress and Everglades to Darby in Pasco County and New Smyrna Beach in Volusia County. Through this period, U.S. military strategy included the use of poorly disciplined militia, aggressive campaigns, and truce offerings. After several previous betrayals, the Seminoles did not respond to the latter tactic. By the summer of 1857, the focus was on Billy Bowlegs in the Big Cypress. This effort was greatly aided by the use of shallow draft boats (Covington 1982). When found, villages were burned, fields were destroyed, horses and cattle were slaughtered, and Seminoles captured. As Seminole warriors were occupied hunting or scouting, captured villagers were typically women and children, the wounded, and the elderly. On November 19, 1857, Captain William Cone’s company discovered an occupied village. Two Seminole guards were killed and five women, thirteen children, and a wounded warrior were taken prisoner (Covington 1982:72). During the Seminole War, the U.S. Army Engineers surveyed the region south of the Caloosahatchee River. The Ives map depicts numerous trails in the area as well as Fort Simon Drum to the southeast and Forts Keais and Doane to the south; the northward trending road leads to Fort Deynaud and Fort Thompson (Figure 3.3.) (Ives 1856). Figure 3.3. 1856 Ives map showing the approximate location of the APE. Page 9219 of 9661 ACI 3-10 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 After years of running, struggling to provide for his people, and mounting attacks, when possible, Billy Bowlegs finally surrendered to federal forces at Fort Myers. On May 4, 1858, the ship Grey Cloud departed Fort Myers for Egmont Key with 38 warriors and 85 women and children. An additional 45 captives were boarded at Egmont, and the ship set sail for New Orleans where they would depart for Oklahoma. Although some Seminoles remained in the Big Cypress and the Everglades, the U.S. government did not deem it worthy to pursue them. This half-starved and battle-weary population was left to eke out an existence in the south Florida swamps (Covington 1982). As settlers moved into the Big Cypress region, cattle ranching served as one of the major economic activities. Mavericks left by early Spanish explorers such as DeSoto and Narváez provided the stock for the herds raised by the mid-eighteenth century “Cowkeeper” Seminoles. As the Seminoles were pushed further south during the Seminole Wars and their cattle were either sold or left to roam, settlers captured or bought the cattle. By the late 1850s, the cattle industry of southwestern Florida was developing on a significant scale. By 1860, cattle owners from all over Florida drove their herds to Fort Brooke (Tampa) and Punta Rassa for shipment to Cuba, at a considerable profit. During this period, Jacob Summerlin became the first cattle baron of southwest Florida. Known as the “King of the Crackers,” his herds ranged from Ft. Meade to Ft. Myers (Covington 1957). 3.6 Civil War and Aftermath In 1861, Florida followed South Carolina’s lead and seceded from the Union as a prelude to the Civil War. Florida had much at stake in this war as evidenced in a report released from Tallahassee in June of 1861. It listed the value of land in Florida at $35,127,721 and the value of the slaves at $29,024,513 (Dunn 1989:59). Although the Union blockaded the coast of Florida during the war, the interior of the state saw very little military action. Florida became one of the major contributors of beef to the Confederate government (Shofner 1995:72). Summerlin originally had a contract with the Confederate government to market thousands of head a year at eight dollars per head. However, by driving his cattle to Punta Rassa and shipping them to Cuba, he received 25 dollars per head (Grismer 1946:83). To limit the supply of beef transported to the Confederate government, Union troops stationed at Ft. Myers conducted several raids into the Peace River Valley to seize cattle and destroy ranches. In response, Confederate supporters formed the Cattle Guard Battalion, consisting of nine companies under the command of Colonel Charles J. Munnerlyn (Akerman 1976). The cattle owners and the farmers in the state lived simply. The typical home was a log cabin without windows or chinking, and settlers’ diets consisted largely of fried pork, corn bread, sweet potatoes, and hominy. The lack of railway transport to other states, the federal embargo, and the enclaves of Union supporters and Union troops holding key areas such as Jacksonville and Ft. Myers prevented an influx of finished materials. As a result, settlement remained limited until after the Civil War. Immediately following the war, the South underwent a period of “Reconstruction” to prepare the Confederate States for readmission to the Union. The program was administered by the U.S. Congress, and on July 25, 1868, Florida officially returned to the Union. After the war ended, southerners who faced reconstruction and rebuilding saw Florida as a frontier full of opportunity and welcome. In southwest Florida, settlers first arrived by ones or twos, drifting through the area. Many of the early arrivals, however, were apparently “squatters” (Tebeau 1966:167). In most of the early settlements, development followed the earlier pattern with few settlers, one or two stores, and a lack of available overland transportation. In the 1870s, while the region was still part of Monroe County, settlement of Collier County evolved slowly and in isolated pockets. Immokalee, Everglades City, Chokoloskee, Marco, Caxambas, Goodland, and Naples served as the early centers for settlement (Tebeau 1966:96). These first Page 9220 of 9661 ACI 3-11 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 permanent pioneers were farmers; the hunters and fisherfolk who had preceded them established only temporary camps. As the land was largely impassable, their market was Key West, a growing city which produced almost none of its own food (Tebeau 1966). The Homestead Act, created by Congress in 1862, allowed settlers to obtain title to 160 acres by residing on and working the land. The property had to first be surveyed by the government. It was not until the 1870s that Matthew H. Clay and W.L. Apthorp surveyed the lands within Township 46 South, Ranges 29 East (Apthorp 1872; Clay 1873). Other than the Southeast Road, an old military road with a branch leading to Fort Simon Drum, no historic features were identified within or proximate to the APE (Figure 3.4) (Apthorp and Clay 1873). The lands closest to the APE were described as 3rd rate prairie (Clay 1873:771, 778, 780). Figure 3.4. 1873 plat showing the APE. By the early 1880s, the State of Florida faced a fiscal crisis involving title to public lands. By act of Congress in 1850, the federal government turned over to the states for drainage and reclamation all “swamp and overflow land.” Florida received approximately 10,000,000 acres. To manage that land and the 5,000,000 acres the state had received on entering the Union, the state legislature in 1851 created the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund. In 1855, the legislature established the actual fund (the Florida Internal Improvement Fund), in which state lands were to be held. The fund became mired in debt after the Civil War and under state law no land could be sold until the debt was cleared. In 1881, the Trustees started searching for a buyer capable of purchasing enough acreage to pay off the fund’s debt and permit the sale of the remaining millions of acres that it controlled. In 1881, Hamilton Disston, a member of a prominent Pennsylvania saw manufacturing family entered into an agreement with the State of Florida to purchase four million acres of swamp and overflowed land for one million dollars. In exchange, he promised to drain and improve the land. This transaction, which became known as the Disston Purchase, enabled the distribution of large land subsidies to railroad Page 9221 of 9661 ACI 3-12 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 companies, inducing them to begin extensive construction programs for new lines throughout the state. The purchase, although technically legal, was extremely generous with the designation “swamp and overflow land.” Grismer (1946) estimates that at least half of the acreage was “high and dry.” Disston and the railroad companies, in turn, sold smaller parcels of land to developers and private investors (Tebeau and Carson 1965:252). All of Section 17 was deeded to the Carrabelle, Tallahassee & Georgia Railroad Company in 1894 (State of Florida n.d.:265). By the late 1880s, squatters were sufficient in numbers to protest when “their land” became the property of Hamilton Disston. Squatters could have purchased the land on which they had taken up residence and constructed improvements, for such a provision was made in the Disston contracts. But the early settlers believed they should each be permitted to homestead 160 acres of high and dry land. They had not been able to do so because the land was designated “swamp and overflowed” and title to it had been transferred to the state (Tebeau 1966:167). Disston’s purchase included what is now Naples, and he formed the Florida Land and Improvement Company. In 1886, Charles Adams bought a parcel from Disston which formed the basis for the Naples Town Improvement Company of Tallahassee. When John Williams and Walter Haldeman, both from Kentucky, decided “Naples” was the perfect place to develop a city, they bought the controlling interest in the Naples Town Improvement Company. They reorganized it, gave it new direction, and renamed it the Naples Company. With Haldeman directing the work, the company was ready, by December 1887, to embark into a new period of full-scale town building and improvement including a hotel, churches, and shops. The name “Naples” is attributed to numerous Florida developers’ sales schemes to romanticize the Florida peninsula into a pleasant “Italian” seaside resort. Unfortunately, the only activity for the next few years was on paper - the buying and selling of land; little construction took place (Jamro and Lanterman 1985). In 1887, the land, which today is Collier County, became part of the newly created Lee County. It was named for Barron Gift Collier, a Memphis born businessperson who promoted the region’s development. When Billy Bowlegs departed for Oklahoma, Old Tiger Tail became the de facto leader of the remaining Seminoles. He lived at the headwaters of the Okaloacoochee Slough, and his holdings included cattle, agricultural fields, and Corn Dance Grounds (West 1990). In 1891, under the direction of Amelia S. Quinton, the Women’s National Indian Association resolved to establish a mission near Immokalee (then known as Allen’s Place) (West 1990). Dr. J.E. Brecht and his wife were hired as missionaries, and the mission consisted of a residence, a schoolhouse, barn, and fenced land. It was as this time that Allen’s Place became known as Immokalee (Mikasuki for “home”). A lumber mill was established in 1892 to provide the Native Americans with employment and industrial training, although it burned down the following year (FPS 1986:62). In 1893, the Episcopal Dioceses established a mission for the Seminoles and the federal government established an agency there. The Episcopal Indian Mission held its first service in 1896, though established for the Native Americans, white settlers made use of the church until 1924 (Tebeau 1966). In 1896, trader Bill Brown established a post on the western rim of the Everglades. Over time, the missionary activities shifted from Immokalee to Brown’s Landing where the Glade Cross Mission was established. As a result, when the Big Cypress Reservation boundaries were drawn, they included the Glade Cross Mission, but Immokalee was excluded. When the reservation was created, Bill Brown’s son, Frank, who grew up amongst the Seminoles, was appointed the Agent for the reservation (Brown 1989). 3.7 Twentieth Century From 1899 until 1914, the Naples Company struggled but the town slowly grew. In 1914, E.W. Crayton, an Ohio real estate developer with a successful record of accomplishment in St. Petersburg, Page 9222 of 9661 ACI 3-13 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 purchased the controlling interest in the company and renamed it the Naples Improvement Company. His direction is credited with leading Naples into the future. In 1925, Naples was incorporated and by 1927, reached by two railroad lines (Dean 1991). In 1911, successful New York City advertiser, Barron Gift Collier, visited Useppa Island. Collier was captivated, “Frankly, I was fascinated with Florida and swept off my feet by what I saw and felt. It was a wonderland with a magic climate, set in a frame of golden sunshine” (Collier County Museum 2010). Over the next decade, Collier amassed over one million acres in southwest Florida and his property stretched from the Ten Thousand Islands to Useppa Island, and from the coast to the Big Cypress and the Everglades (Clement n.d.). Collier was the largest landholder in the state and created a luxury resort, the Useppa Inn, which was visited by corporate giants, presidents, movie stars, authors, and sports celebrities. To facilitate development, Collier made a pledge to the Florida State Legislature to complete the Tamiami Trail from Tampa to Miami (Naples Daily News 1976). The roadway was finished in 1928 and as traffic increased, southwest Florida’s tourist industry was born (Scupholm 1997). The construction of the Tamiami Trail had a tremendous effect on Seminole settlement patterns. The roadway interrupted traditional canoe routes and as a result, Seminoles were forced to use the Tamiami Canal, which was created during road construction. Many Seminole families moved closer to the Tamiami Canal to facilitate canoe transportation (Carr 2002). On July 7, 1923, the state legislature created Collier County and named Everglades City as county seat. Collier became the second largest county in Florida with a land area of 2032 square miles. At the time of its creation, the county consisted of pine and cypress land and extensive swampland. The towns within the county, Immokalee, Naples, Marco, Caxambas, Chokoloskee, Deep Lake, and Everglades City, were all small settlements separated by almost inaccessible terrain. Barron Collier was instrumental in bringing modern communications, roadways, and railroads to his namesake county (Collier County Museum 2010). His promotions eventually opened up the area’s enormous agricultural and resort potential, but the Great Depression halted growth. The number of residents in 1925 of 1256 grew to only 2883 by 1930 (Tebeau 1966:212). By the mid-1930s, federal programs, implemented by the Roosevelt administration, started employing large numbers of construction workers, helping to revive the economy of the state. The programs were instrumental in the construction of parks, bridges, and public buildings. However, Collier County’s economy and population remained at a virtual standstill until the end of WWII when a new wave of national prosperity sent thousands of people to Florida (Dean 1991). Improvements in transportation included the 1921 Atlantic Coast Line (ACL) Railway Company’s extension south from LaBelle to Immokalee. The town took on new importance and became a center for inland activity in Collier County (Tebeau 1966). While Barron Collier was promoting the Tamiami Trail, he and his supporters were also trying to open a direct highway route from Immokalee to the county seat of Everglades City. By 1923, an unimproved road from LaBelle through Immokalee, terminating at Deep Lake, was depicted on a Florida State Map (Kendrick 1964). This road was completed between Immokalee and Everglades City in the early 1920s (FPS 1986). Collier County induced the ACL to continue its line south to Everglades City around 1927. The two projects linked the town with outer areas of the county and the Tamiami Trail. With the arrival of the railroad and road Immokalee became a center for ranching, farming, and lumbering (Tebeau 1966). In 1923, Collier County had one of the largest stands of virgin cypress and pine timber in the country (Tebeau 1966). Roads leading into the Everglades were completed in the 1920s, enabling logging companies to exploit the region’s cypress (Klinkenberg 1994). From the 1920s to the late 1950s, steam powered mills cut cypress board, which was valued for its durability and imperviousness to water. “Swamp Loggers” would cut down the trees and oxen and mules would pull the downed trees Page 9223 of 9661 ACI 3-14 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 to temporary tram railways where they were loaded for transport to the nearby mills. Logging activities in the Big Cypress Swamp and Fakahatchee Strand were prevalent in the 1940s in response to wartime needs (U.S. Fish and Wildlife n.d.). The cypress was used in the construction of P.T. boats, and, later, was shipped to Europe to supply the post-war rebuilding efforts (Klinkenberg 1994). Two of the companies with logging operations in the area were the Lee Tidewater Cypress Company and the C. J. Jones Logging Company. The logging industry required the construction of rail lines traversed by steam locomotives, which resulted in the establishment of several sawmills and lumber towns within the region. The largest of these towns was Jerome, located off of present-day State Road 29, north of US 41 (Tamiami Trail) (Klinkenberg 1994). Two mills, one at Naples and the other at Bonita Springs, reached into the timber lands from the west coast (Tebeau 1966:252). However, as a result of heavy lumbering activities from the 1940s to 1957, much of the trees were cleared (FDEP n.d.; Tebeau 1966; U.S. Fish and Wildlife n.d.). When the cypress supply was exhausted, logging establishments became ghost towns, and the rail lines were abandoned, leaving only remnant segments of trails and ditches. There are a number of trails that converge at the northern edge of the APE, one of which traverses the APE and connected with SR 29 (Copeland 1947) (Figure 3.5). Other than ditches and berms, no development of the APE was evident on the 1958 Immokalee quadrangle map (Figure 3.6) (USGS 1958) Figure 3.5. 1947 Collier County map showing the APE. In 1943, the first commercial oil well in Florida was drilled in Sunniland. The Humble Oil and Refining Company (now Exxon) struck crude, finally proving that there is oil in Florida. Sunniland remained the state’s only commercial oil field until 1964. In the 1950s, thousands of acres of cheap farmland opened due to the extensive drainage projects. At approximately this time, the agricultural thrust in Collier County began with approximately 640 cultivated acres near Ochopee-Copeland. By the early 1970s, citrus, watermelons, tomatoes, bell peppers, and cucumbers were the largest producing crops in the area. Other vegetable crops included squash, cantaloupes, potatoes, melons, cabbage, lettuce, eggplant, corn, beans, and okra (Naples Daily News 1973). Page 9224 of 9661 ACI 3-15 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 3.6. 1958 Immokalee USGS quadrangle map. Like many Florida communities, World War II changed the face of Naples and later added to its growth. Largely, the post-World War II development of Collier County is like that of the rest of America: increasing numbers of automobiles and asphalt, an interstate highway system, suburban sprawl, and strip development along major state highways. The county, like most of Florida, experienced a population boom in the 1950s. Florida’s population increased from 1,897,414 in 1940 to 1950 in 2,771,305. Collier County’s population grew from 5082 in 1940 to 6488 in 1950 (Forstall 1995). After the war, car ownership increased, making the American public more mobile, making vacations more inexpensive and easier. Many who had served at Florida’s military bases during World War II also returned with their families to live. As veterans returned, the trend in new housing focused on the development of small tract homes in new subdivisions. The agricultural growth of the county led to an influx of migrant workers into the area. In 1966, Collier County began its first effort to house these workers. The Farm Workers Village, located along SR 29, was a 491-unit apartment complex operated by the county Housing Authority, it provided affordable housing to the workers as well as daycare, postal services, a convenience store, laundromat, and educational facilities (Naples Daily News 1991). The number of permanent Collier County residents grew rapidly from 6,488 in 1950 to 85,000 by 1980. In 1967, SR 84 (Alligator Alley) or the Everglades Parkway was built. In 1970, FDOT appointed an advisory panel to evaluate possible routes across south Florida for the proposed I-75. The plans were prepared by 1972 and the Interstate was built thereafter, utilizing existing lanes from Alligator Alley for eastbound traffic. Two westbound lanes were built on the vacant strip of land between Alligator Alley and the canal (Duever et al. 1985). From 1980 to 1990, Collier County experienced a 77% percent increase in population and between 1990 and 2000, the population increased 65%. The population continued to increase in the Page 9225 of 9661 ACI 3-16 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 county, albeit at a slower rate of 28% from 2000 to 2010 with an estimate of 357,470 individuals for 2017. Leisure and hospitality (19.4%) and trade, transportation, and utilities (18.8%) are the two largest sectors of employment in the county today (Enterprise Florida 2017). 3.8 APE Specifics A review of the aerial photographs available from the Publication of Archival and Museum Materials (PALMM) revealed that the APE was undeveloped prairie and wetlands in 1947. Trails are visible on the 1953 aerial, but no development was noted. By 1963, the property had been cleared and drained with ditches and berms. The 1980 aerial photo depicts the eastern two-thirds of the property as a pasture with a number of structures; the western third was wooded pasture (Figure 3.7) (USDA 1947, 1953, 1963, 1980). Based on the property appraiser’s data, the structures in the eastern portion of the APE were constructed in the early to mid-1970 and the plant nursery in the western portion of the APE was built around 1994 (Skinner 2022). Page 9226 of 9661 ACI 3-17 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 3.7. 1947 and 1980 aerial photos showing the APE. Page 9227 of 9661 ACI 4-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 4.0 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODS 4.1 Background Research and Literature Review A review of archaeological and historical literature, records and other documents and data pertaining to the APE was conducted. The focus of this research was to ascertain the types of cultural resources known in the APE and vicinity, their temporal/cultural affiliations, site location information, and other relevant data. This included a review of sites listed in the NRHP, the FMSF, CRAS reports, published books and articles, aerial photographs, unpublished manuscripts, and maps. In addition to the NRHP and FMSF, other information relevant to the historical research was obtained from the files of ACI. The FMSF data in this report were obtained in January 2022, which is the most recent edition. However, according to FMSF staff, input may be a month or more behind receipt of reports and site files. No individuals with knowledge of historic or prehistoric activities specific to the APE were discovered during this project; thus, no informant interviews were conducted. 4.2 Archaeological Considerations Background research indicated that no archaeological sites have been recorded within 1.6 km (1 mile) of APE (Figure 4.1). The closest, which is 3.8 km (2.4 mile) away, is 8CR00708, a ceramic scatter recorded during the survey of Collier County (Dickel 1991). Table 4.1 provides a list of the CRAS projects conducted within 1.6 km (1 mile) of the APE. These have primarily been conducted for transportation projects, but also include electric lines, a cell tower, and archaeological/historical surveys. Based on these data, and other regional site location predictive models (ACI 1992, 1999, 2014b, 2014c; Austin 1987; Bellomo and Fuhrmeister 1991; Carr 1988; Dickel 1991; Smith 2008) and informed expectations concerning the types of sites likely to occur within the APE, as well as their probable environmental settings, was generated. As archaeologists have long realized, indigenous populations did not select their habitation sites and activity areas in a random fashion. Rather, many environmental factors had a direct influence upon site location selection, including soil drainage, distance to water, topography, and proximity to resources. It should be noted that the settlement pattern noted below cannot be applied to sites of the Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods, which precede the onset of modern environmental conditions. Analysis of the April 2020 data for the 32 indigenous archaeological sites, with known locations in the Immokalee Rise physiographic region of Collier County that is outside of National Park Service (NPS) lands, was conducted. The NPS lands were not included as there is not a modern soil survey for that area. Historic archaeological sites and indigenous archaeological sites that were plotted “per vague verbal description” were deleted from this analysis. Although this is a small sample size, it can give us clues as to which areas were preferred. Proximity to water is an important site location feature. Over 96% of the sites are located within 100 m (328 ft) of a water source, and only one of the sites further than 200 m (656 ft) from a water source (Table 4.2). Ninety percent of the sites are proximate to a wetland or swamp, while three sites are associated with a lake. Page 9228 of 9661 ACI 4-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 4.1. Previously recorded cultural resources within 1.6 km (1 mi) of the APE. Page 9229 of 9661 ACI 4-3 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Table 4.1. Surveys conducted within 1.6 km (1 mile) of the APE. FMSF Manuscript # / Reference Project # of Newly Recorded Resources # of Previously Recorded Resources 1108 / FPS 1986 Historical/architectural Survey of Collier County, Florida 120 0 2858 / Dickel 1991 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County 22 0 8141 / Batategas 2001 An Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Proposed DT Immokalee Tower Location in Collier County, Florida 0 0 14907 / Janus Research 2007 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of State Road 82 from Lee Boulevard to State Road 29 Lee, Hendry, and Collier Counties 6 0 16907 / ACI 2009 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study S.R. 29 from North of S.R. 82 to South of C.R. 80A Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida 13 2 20872 / ACI 2014a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Lee County Electric Cooperative (LCEC) SR 82 and SR 29 Distribution Line Replacement, Collier County, Florida 0 0 21792 / ACI 2015b Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Preferred Stormwater Treatment Areas, State Road (SR) 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida 0 1 21923 / ACI 2015a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Addendum Preferred Stormwater Treatment Areas, State Road (SR) 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida 0 0 23126 / ACI 2016 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum, Regional Stormwater Pond 4B and Proposed Roundabout State Road 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida 0 0 24480 / ACI 2017 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Preferred Ponds, Drainage Easements, and Right-of-Way, State Road (SR) 82 from the Hendry County Line to Gator Slough Lane, Collier County, Florida 2 0 25332 / Janus Research 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey for the State Road 29 Project Development & Environmental Study from Oil Well Road (County Road 858) to State Road 82, Collier County, FL 44 2 26188 / Janus Research 2019 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Orange River to Terrytown 500 kV Transmission Line Rebuild 0 0 Table 4.2. Distribution of sites by water type and distance. Type 100 m (356 ft) 200 m (656 ft) 300 m (984 ft) Total Cnt %Cnt %Cnt %Cnt % Lake 3 9.38% 0.00% 0.00% 3 9.38% Swamp/wetland 28 87.50% 0.00% 1 3.13% 29 90.63% Total 31 96.88% 0 0.00% 1 3.13% 32 100.00% Page 9230 of 9661 ACI 4-4 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Soil types and their drainage characteristics can also be used to assess the likelihood for indigenous site occurrence (Almy 1978). There are 45 soil types within this study area; of which 36 have recorded archaeological sites (Table 4.3). Those within the APE are shaded in orange on the table. Many of the sites occurred on more than one soil type. This analysis only includes the four types covering the greatest acreage for each site, which totaled 41 soil type occurrences. The column “1”, indicates that this soil type had the greatest area of the site, and so on down the line, so that the “4” column had the smallest site acreage. However, this analysis may not prove an accurate representation of the site distribution. While we know the percentage of sites on the various soil types, we do not have an accurate assessment as to how much of each soil type has been surveyed for archaeological sites. Table 4.3. Distribution of sites by drainage and soil types. DRAINAGE/Soil Type, % slopes % of Area 1 2 3 4 Total % of Sites difference MODERATELY WELL DRAINED Pomello fine sand, 0-2% 0.95% 1 0 1 2.44% 1.49% Total 0.95% 1 0 1 2.44% 1.49% POORLY DRAINED Basinger fine sand, 0-2% 5.79% 0 0.00% -5.79% Boca fine sand, 0-2% 1.52% 2 2 4.88% 3.35% Ft. Drum and Malabar, high, fine sands 1.34% 0 0.00% -1.34% Hallandale and boca fine sands 0.06% 0 0.00% -0.06% Hallandale fine sand, 0-2% 0.04% 0 0.00% -0.04% Hilolo, Jupiter, and Margate fine sands 0.80% 6 6 14.63% 13.83% Holopaw fine sand, 0-2% 4.44% 2 2 4.88% 0.44% Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum (ls) 0.25% 0 0.00% -0.25% Immokalee fine sand, 0-2% 19.19% 1 1 2.44% -16.75% Malabar fine sand, 0-2% 4.50% 4 4 9.76% 5.26% Myakka fine sand, 0-2% 1.44% 0 0.00% -1.44% Oldsmar fine sand, 0-2% 12.71% 0 0.00% -12.71% Oldsmar fine sand, ls 0.99% 1 1 2.44% 1.45% Pennsuco silt loam 0.06% 0 0.00% -0.06% Pineda and Riviera fine sands 3.67% 2 1 1 4 9.76% 6.08% Pineda fine sand, ls 0.23% 0 0.00% -0.23% Riviera fine sand, ls 0.65% 0 0.00% -0.65% Riviera, ls-Copeland fine sands 1.02% 1 1 2.44% 1.42% Tuscawilla fine sand 4.30% 2 2 4 9.76% 5.45% Wabasso fine sand, 0-2% 5.40% 2 2 4.88% -0.52% Total 68.41% 22 4 1 0 27 65.85% -2.55% VERY POORLY DRAINED Boca, Riviera, ls, and Copeland fine sands, depressional (depr) 7.11% 3 1 4 9.76% 2.64% Chobee, ls, and Dania mucks, depr 0.21% 0 0.00% -0.21% Chobee, Winder, and Gator soils, depr 6.94% 1 1 2 4.88% -2.06% Holopaw and Okeelanta soils, depr 1.19% 0 0.00% -1.19% Winder, Riviera, ls, and Chobee soils, depr 13.13% 2 2 4 9.76% -3.38% Total 28.59% 6 4 0 0 10 24.39% -4.20% OTHER Urban land 0.01% 0 0.00% -0.01% Urban land-Holopaw-Basinger complex 0.01% 0 0.00% -0.01% Urban land-Immokalee-Oldsmar, ls, complex 0.95% 0 0.00% -0.95% Page 9231 of 9661 ACI 4-5 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 DRAINAGE/Soil Type, % slopes % of Area 1 2 3 4 Total % of Sites difference Urban land-Matlacha-Boca complex 0.02% 0 0.00% -0.02% Water 1.07% 3 3 7.32% 6.25% Total 2.05% 3 0 0 3 7.32%5.27% Grand Total 100.00% 32 8 1 0 41 100.00% 0.00% This portion of Collier County is damp and soggy as evidenced by the fact that 68% of the soils are poorly drained and another 29% of the soils are very poorly drained. The moderately well drained soils do not even make up 1% of the area. Water and urban land underlie the remaining portion (2%) of the study area. Those soils that have a higher percentage of sites as compared to area (2% or greater) are marked in red on the table, while those that seem less likely to be used (-2% or less) are marked in blue. There are six preferred soil types; in order of preference are: Hilolo, Jupiter, and Margate fine sands; Pineda and Riviera fine sands; Tuscawilla fine sand; Malabar fine sand 0-2% slopes; Boca fine sand, 0-2% slopes; and Boca, Riviera, limestone substratum, and Copeland sands, depressional. The last soil type may have been chosen as a water hole as opposed as a camping area. There are three soils that appear to have been avoided. In order of avoidance, they area Immokalee fine sand, 0-2% slopes; Oldsmar fine sand, 0-2% slopes; and Basinger fine sand, 0-2% slopes. Based on the environmental setting, the APE was considered to have a low to moderate probability for indigenous archaeological site occurrence. Much of the property is underlain by Immokalee and Oldsmar sands that have a high negative correlation with sites, but there were water sources within the APE prior to development. A review of the 1947 suggested the potential for tree islands, which often contain sites in spite of the low soil potential; these areas would have the highest archaeological potential. Areas of more moderate potential would be along the 40-foot contour and on the Pomello sand adjacent to a water source. There is a low probability for the occurrence of historic archaeological sites as development of the property was not identified until the 1970s. 4.3 Historical Considerations Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, indicated that one historic resource is located adjacent to, but outside of the APE. 8CR01309 (SR 29) was recorded in 2017 during the survey of SR 29 from Oil Well Road to SR 82 (Janus Research 2018). At that time, the resource was determined ineligible for listing in the NRHP by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). 4.4 Field Methodology The FDHR’s Module Three, Guidelines for Use by Historic Professionals, indicates that the first stage of archaeological field survey is a reconnaissance of the APE to “ground truth,” or ascertain the validity of the predictive model (FDHR 2003). During this part of the survey, the researcher assesses whether the initial predictive model needs adjustment based on disturbance or conditions such as constructed features (i.e., parking lots, buildings, etc.), underground utilities, landscape alterations (i.e., ditches and swales, mined land, dredged and filled land, agricultural fields), or other constraints that may affect the archaeological potential. Additionally, these Guidelines indicate that non-systematic “judgmental” testing may be appropriate in urbanized environments where pavement, utilities, and constructed features make systematic testing unfeasible; in geographically restricted areas such as proposed pond sites; or within APEs that have limited high and moderate probability zones, but where a larger subsurface testing sample may be desired. While predictive models are useful in determining preliminary testing strategies in a broad context, it is understood that testing intervals may be altered Page 9232 of 9661 ACI 4-6 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 due to conditions encountered by the field crew at the time of survey. A reasonable and good faith effort was made to identify the historic properties within the project APE (cf., Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d.). Archaeological field survey methods consisted of surface reconnaissance combined with systematic and judgmental subsurface testing. Testing was conducted at 25 m (82 ft) intervals in the potential tree island areas. The 40-foot contour line was tested at 50 m (164 ft) intervals as was the Pomello sand proximate to a water source. The trail that ran diagonal through the APE was tests at 100 m (328 ft) intervals and the remainder of the APE was tested at 200 m (656 ft) off-set intervals along transects spaced 100 m (328 ft) apart or judgmentally. Shovel tests were circular and measured approximately 50 centimeters (cm) (20 inches [in]) in diameter by at least 1 m (3.3 ft) in depth unless precluded by water intrusion. All soil removed from the shovel tests was screened through a 0.64 cm (0.25 in) mesh hardware cloth to maximize the recovery of artifacts. The locations of all shovel tests were recorded using a Trimble Juno 5D device. Following the recording of relevant data such as stratigraphic profile, all shovel tests were refilled. Historic/architectural field methodology consisted of a field survey of the APE to determine and verify the location of all buildings and other historic resources (i.e., bridges, roads, cemeteries) that are 50 years of age or older (constructed in or prior to 1970), and to establish if any such resources could be determined eligible for listing in the NRHP. For each property, photographs would have been taken, and information needed for the completion of FMSF forms gathered. In addition to architectural descriptions, each historic resource would have been reviewed to assess style, historic context, condition, and potential NRHP eligibility. Also, informant interviews would have been conducted, if possible, with knowledgeable persons to obtain site-specific building construction dates and/or possible associations with individuals or events significant to local or regional history. 4.5 Inadvertent/Unanticipated Discoveries Occasionally, archaeological deposits, subsurface features or unmarked human remains are encountered during the course of development, even though the APE may have previously received a thorough and professionally adequate cultural resources assessment. Such events are rare, but they do occur. In the event that human remains are encountered during the course of development, the procedures outlined in Chapter 872, FS must be followed. No human remains were anticipated within the APE; however, the field crew was prepared to follow Chapter 872, FS should such materials be located. In the event such discoveries are made during the development process, all activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery will be suspended, and a professional archaeologist will be contacted to evaluate the importance of the discovery. The area will be examined by the archaeologist, who, in consultation with staff of the Florida SHPO, will determine if the discovery is significant or potentially significant. In the event the discovery is found to be not significant, the work may immediately resume. If, on the other hand, the discovery is found to be significant or potentially significant, then development activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery will continue to be suspended until such time as a mitigation plan, acceptable to SHPO, is developed and implemented. Development activities may then resume within the discovery area, but only when conducted in accordance with the guidelines and conditions of the approved mitigation plan. Page 9233 of 9661 ACI 4-7 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 4.6 Laboratory Methods/Curation No cultural materials were recovered; thus, no laboratory methods were utilized. All project related material (including field notes, maps, digital data, and photographs) will be stored at ACI in Sarasota (P22026), unless the client requests otherwise. Page 9234 of 9661 ACI 5-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 5.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Archaeological Results Archaeological field survey included surface reconnaissance and the excavation 96 shovel tests (Figure 5.1). Testing was conducted at 25 m (82 ft) intervals in the potential tree island areas. The 40- foot contour line was tested at 50 m (164 ft) intervals as was the Pomello sand proximate to a water source. The trail that ran diagonal through the APE was tests at 100 m (328 ft) intervals and the remainder of the APE was tested at 200 m (656 ft) off-set intervals along transects spaced 100 m (328 ft) apart or judgmentally. All shovel tests were negative, and no archaeological sites were discovered. A reasonable and good faith effort was made to identify the historic properties within the project APE (cf., Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d.). The Survey Log is in the Appendix. In the pasture area, the stratigraphy consisted of 0-20 cm (0-8 in) gray sand and 20-100 cm (8- 40 in) light gray sand (Photo 5.1). Extensive ground disturbance was noted in the nursery area. The upper 40 cm (16 in) consisted of gray-brown sand with irrigation drip lined, 40-80 cm (16-32 in) consisted of light brown sand with irrigation pipes, and 80-100 cm (32-40 in) was a dark brown sandy clay (Photo 5.2). Photo 5.1. Stratigraphy in the pasture. 5.2 Historical Results Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, revealed no previously recorded historic resources within or adjacent to the APE. A review of (USGS Florida Immokalee quadrangle map, the USDA historic aerial photos, and the Collier County Property Appraiser’s data revealed no potential for historic resources within the APE (Skinner 2022; USDA 1947, 1953, 1963, 1980; USGS 1958). This was confirmed by the field investigations. Page 9235 of 9661 ACI 5-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests within the APE. Page 9236 of 9661 ACI 5-3 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Photo 5.2. Stratigraphy in the nursery. 5.3 Conclusions Given the results of background research and field survey, including the excavation of 96 shovel tests, no archaeological sites or historic resources were discovered. Thus, there are no cultural resources that are listed, eligible for listing, or that appear potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP within the APE. As such, it is the professional opinion of ACI that the proposed undertaking will result in no historic property affected. Page 9237 of 9661 ACI 6-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 6.0 REFERENCES CITED Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d. Meeting the "Reasonable and Good Faith" Identification Standard in Section 106 Review. http://www.achp.gov/docs/reasonable_good_faith_identification.pdf. Akerman, Joe A. 1976 Florida Cowman: A History of Florida Cattle Raising. Florida Cattlemen's Association, Kissimmee. 4th edition. Almy, Maranda M. 2001 The Cuban Fishing Ranchos of Southwest Florida 1600-1850s. Honor's thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Almy, Marion M. 1978 The Archaeological Potential of Soil Survey Reports. The Florida Anthropologist 31(3):75-91. Apthorp, W.L. 1872 Field Notes. Volume 220. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Apthorp, W.L. and M.H. Clay 1873 Plat. Township 46 South, Range 29 East. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) 1992 Mapping of Areas of Historical/Archaeological Probability in Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 3160. 1999 1999 Update Historic/Archaeological Probability Maps and Data Sheets for Collier County Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2009 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study S.R. 29 from North of S.R. 82 to South of C.R. 80A Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 16907. 2014a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Lee County Electric Cooperative (LCEC) SR 82 and SR 29 Distribution Line Replacement, Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 20872. 2014b Cultural Resources Avoidance Model Nobles Grade 3D Seismic Survey Big Cypress National Preserve Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2014c Cultural Resources Predictive Model Tellus 3D Seismic Survey Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2015a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Addendum Preferred Stormwater Treatment Areas, State Road (SR 82) from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida. Financial Project ID No.: 430849-1-52-01. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 21923. 2015b Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Preferred Stormwater Treatment Areas, State Road (SR) 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida. Financial Project ID No.: 430849-1-52-01. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 21792. 2016 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum, Regional Stormwater Pond 4B and Proposed Roundabout State Road 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida. Financial Project ID No.: 430849-1-32-01. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 23126. Page 9238 of 9661 ACI 6-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 2017 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Addendum Preferred Preferred Ponds, Drainage Easements, and Right-of-Way, State Road (SR 82) from the Hendry County Line to Gator Slough Lane, Collier County, Florida. Financial Project ID No.: 430848-1-52-01. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 24480. Austin, Robert J. 1987 An Archaeological Site Inventory and Zone Management Plan for Lee County, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 1561. 1996 Prehistoric Chert Procurement and Mobility Strategies on the Lake Wales Ridge. The Florida Anthropologist 49(4):211-223. 1997 The Economics of Lithic-Resource Use in South-Central Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Batategas, Juliet T. 2001 An Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Proposed DT Immokalee Tower Location in Collier County, Florida. Panamerican Consultants, Inc., Tampa. MS# 8141. Bellomo, Randy V. and Charles Fuhrmeister 1991 1992 Update of an Archaeological and Zone Management Plan for Lee County, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 3145. Beriault, John G., Robert Carr, Jerry Stipp, Richard Johnson, and Jack Meeder 1981 The Archaeological Salvage of the Bay West Site, Collier County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 34(2):39-58. Brown, Percy 1989 A Family of Early Settlers of Immokalee. The Timepiece 16(1):3-9. Bullen, Ripley P. 1975 A Guide to the Identification of Florida Projectile Points. Kendall Books, Gainesville. Carbone, Victor 1983 Late Quaternary Environment in Florida and the Southeast. The Florida Anthropologist 36(1-2):3-17. Carr, Robert 1988 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County, Florida. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Miami. MS# 2544. Carr, Robert S. 1986 Preliminary Report on Excavations at the Cutler Ridge Fossil Site (8DA2001) in Southern Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 39(3, Part 2):231-232. 2002 The Archaeology of Everglades Tree Islands. In Tree Islands of the Everglades. Edited by Fred H. Sklar and Arnold Van der Valk. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands. Carr, Robert S. and John G. Beriault 1984 Prehistoric Man in Southern Florida. In Environments of South Florida, Past and Present. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 1-14. Miami Geological Society Memoir 2, Miami. Page 9239 of 9661 ACI 6-3 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Carr, Robert S., Patricia Fay, and Jane S. Day 1991 Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Crane Point Hammock, Marathon, Monroe County.AHC Technical Report 24. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Davie. Clausen, Carl J., H. K. Brooks, and A. B. Wesolowsky 1975a The Early Man Site at Warm Mineral Springs, Florida. Journal of Field Archaeology 2(3):191-213. 1975b Florida Spring Confirmed as 10,000 Year Old Early Man Site. Florida Anthropological Society Publications 7 Clausen, Carl J., A. D. Cohen, Cesare Emiliani, J. A. Holman, and J. J. Stipp 1979 Little Salt Spring, Florida: A Unique Underwater Site. Science 203(4381):609-614. Clay, M. H. 1873 Field Notes. Volume 222. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee. Clement, Gail n.d. Barron Gift Collier. Everglades Digital Library, Florida International University, http://everglades.fiu.edu/reclaim/bios/collier.htm Cockrell, W. A. 1970 Glades I and Pre-Glades Settlement and Subsistence Patterns on Marco Island. MS Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Cockrell, W. A. and Larry E. Murphy 1978 Pleistocene Man in Florida. Archaeology of Eastern North America 6:1-13. Collier County Museum 2010 One Man's Vision: Barron Gift Collier. Collier County Museum, Naples. http://colliermuseums.com/history/barron_collier.php Copeland, Graham D. 1947 Map of Collier County Florida. Collier County Board of County Commissioners, Naples. Covington, James W. 1957 The Story of Southwestern Florida. Lewis Historical Publishing Company, Inc., New York. 1958 Exploring the Ten Thousand Islands: 1838. Tequesta 18:7-13. 1982 The Billy Bowlegs War 1855-1858: The Final Stand of the Seminoles Against the Whites. The Mickler House Publishers, Chuluota. Daniel, I. Randolph and Michael Wisenbaker 1987 Harney Flats: A Florida Paleo-Indian Site. Baywood Publishing Co., Inc., Farmingdale. Dean, Virginia 1991 Naples on the Gulf: An Illustrated History. Windsor Publications, Inc., Chatsworth. Delcourt, Paul A. and Hazel R. Delcourt 1981 Vegetation Maps for Eastern North America: 40,000 yr B.P. to the Present. In Geobotony II. Edited by R. C. Romans, pp. 123-165. Plenum Publishing Corp., New York. Page 9240 of 9661 ACI 6-4 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Dickel, David N. 1991 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County, Florida. AHC Technical Report 38. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Davie. MS# 2934. Dobyns, Henry F. 1983 Their Numbers Become Thinned. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. Duever, Michael J., John E. Carlson, John F. Meeder, Linda C. Duever, Lance H. Gunderson, Lawrence A. Riopelle, Taylor R. Alexander, Ronald L. Myers, and Daniel P. Spangler 1985 The Big Cypress National Preserve. Research Report 8. National Audubon Society, New York. Dunbar, James S. 2006a Paleoindian Archaeology. In First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Edited by S. David Webb. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 2006b Pleistocene-Early Holocene Climate Change: Chronostratigraphy and Geoclimate of the Southeast US. In First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Edited by S. David Webb, pp. 103-155. Springer, The Netherlands. Dunn, Hampton 1989 Back Home: A History of Citrus County, Florida. Citrus County Historical Society, Inverness. 2nd edition. Enterprise Florida, Inc. 2017 Florida Counties. https://www.enterpriseflorida.com/data-center/florida- communities/floridas-counties/ Fairbridge, Rhodes W. 1984 The Holocene Sea Level Record in South Florida. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past II. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 427-436. Miami Geological Society, Coral Gables. Farr, Grayal Earle 2006 A Reevaluation of Bullen's Typology for Preceramic Projectile Points. MA thesis, Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Florida Department of Environmental protection (FDEP) 2001a Geology (Environmental). Florida Geographic Data Library, Gainesville. 2001b Surficial Geology. Florida Geographic Data Library, Gainesville. n.d. Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee. Florida Division of Historical Resources (FDHR) 2003 Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual. Florida Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee. Florida Preservation Services (FPS) 1986 Historic/Architectural Survey of Collier County, Florida. Florida Preservation Services, St. Augustine. MS# 1108. Page 9241 of 9661 ACI 6-5 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Forstall, Richard L. 1995 Population of Counties by Decennial Census. www.census.gov/population/cencounts/fl190090.txt. Gleason, Patrick J., Arthur D. Cohen, William Smith, H. Kelly Brooks, Peter A. Stone, Robert Goodrick, and William Spackman, Jr. 1984 The Environmental Significance of Holocene Sediments from the Everglades and Saline Tidal Plain. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past II. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 297-351. Miami Geological Society, Coral Gables. Gleason, Patrick J. and P. Stone 1994 Age, Origin and Landscape Evolution of the Everglades Peatland. In Everglades: The Ecosystem and Its Restoration. Edited by S. M. Davis and J. C. Ogden, pp. 149-197. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach. Goggin, John M. 1949 Cultural Traditions in Florida Prehistory. In The Florida Indian and His Neighbors. Edited by John W. Griffin, pp. 13-44. Inter-American Center, Winter Park. Griffin, John W. 1988 The Archeology of Everglades National Park: A Synthesis. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee. Grismer, Karl H. 1946 The Story of Sarasota. Florida Grower Press, Tampa. Hammond, E. A. 1973 The Spanish Fisheries of Charlotte Harbor. Florida Historical Quarterly 51(4):355-380. Hann, John H. 1991 Missions to Calusa. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Ives, Lieut. J. C. 1856 Map of the Peninsula of Florida South of Tampa Bay. Top Engineers, Sarasota. http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~crackerbarrel/Ives.html, http://files.mapoftheweek.net/2009/09/18/1856%20Ives%20MilitaryMap.pdf. Jackson, General Andrew, John C. Calhoun, and others 1817-1818 Seminole Indians: Message from the President of the United States, Transmitting Copies of Documents in Relation to the Seminole War. E. DeKraft, Washington, D.C. Jamro, Ron and Gerald L. Lanterman 1985 The Founding of Naples. Friends of Collier County Museum, Naples. Janus Research 2007 Cultural Resource Assessment of State Road 82 from Lee Boulevard to State Road 29 Lee, Hendry, and Collier counties. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 14907. 2008 South Florida Archaeological Context. South Florida Water Management District. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. Page 9242 of 9661 ACI 6-6 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Janus Research 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey for the State Road 29 Project Development & Environment Study from Oil Well Road (County Road 858) to State Road 82, Collier County, FL. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 25332. 2019 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Orange River to Terrytown 500 kV Transmission Line Rebuild. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 26188. Kendrick, Baynard 1964 Florida Trails to Turnpikes 1914-1964. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Klinkenberg, Jeff 1994 "Swamp Loggers." The St. Petersburg Times, September 18. Knetsch, Joe 2003 Florida's Seminole Wars 1817-1858. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, SC. Liudahl, Kenneth, David J. Belz, Lawrence Carey, Robert W. Drew, Steve Fisher, and Robert Pate 1998 Soil Survey of Collier County Area, Florida. USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Mackay, John and J. E. Blake 1839 Map of the Seat of War in Florida.https://digital.lib.usf.edu/?u15.246. Mahon, John K. 1985 History of the Second Seminole War 1835-1842. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Revised edition. Milanich, Jerald T. 1994 Archaeology of Precolumbian Florida. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Milanich, Jerald T., Jeffery Chapman, Ann S. Cordell, Stephen H. Hale, and Rochelle A. Marrinan 1984 Prehistoric Development of Calusa Society in Southwest Florida: Excavations on Useppa Island. In Perspectives on Gulf Coast Prehistory. Edited by Dave D. Davis, pp. 258-314. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Milanich, Jerald T. and Charles H. Fairbanks 1980 Florida Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. Mulroy, Kevin 1993 Freedom on the Border: The Seminole Maroons in Florida, the Indian Territory, Coahuila, and Texas. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock. Naples Daily News 1973 "Big Farming Major Cog in County Economy." Naples Daily News, March 6. 1976 "The Collier Story." Naples Daily News, July 4. 1991 "Farm Workers Village Celebrates 25 Years." Naples Daily News, September 24. Neill, Wilfred T. 1968 An Indian and Spanish Site on Tampa Bay, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 21(4):106-116. Page 9243 of 9661 ACI 6-7 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Palov, Maria Z. 1999 Useppa's Cuban Fishing Community. In The Archaeology of Useppa Island. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 149-169. Monograph 3. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. Porter, Kenneth W. 1996 The Black Seminoles. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Purdy, Barbara A. 1981 Florida's Prehistoric Stone Tool Technology. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Ramenofsky, Ann F. 1987 Vectors of Death: The Archaeology of European Contact. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Russo, Michael 1991 Archaic Sedentism on the Florida Coast: A Case Study from Horr's Island. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. 1994a A Brief Introduction to the Study of Archaic Mounds in the Southeast. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):89-92. 1994b Why We Don't Believe in Archaic Ceremonial Mounds and Why We Should: The Case from Florida. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):93-108. 2008 Late Archaic Shell Rings and Society in the Southeast U.S. The SAA Archaeological Record 8(5):18-22. Sassaman, Kenneth E. 2008 The New Archaic, It Ain't What It Used to Be. The SAA Archaeological Record 8 (5): 6- 8. Schwadron, Margo 2006 Everglades Tree Islands Prehistory: Archaeological Evidence for Regional Holocene Variability and Early Human Settlement. Antiquity 80(310). Scupholm, Carrie 1997 The Tamiami Trail: Connecting the East and West Coasts of the Sunshine State. The Society for Commercial Archeology Journal 15(2):20-24. Shofner, Jerrell H. 1995 History of Brevard County. Brevard County Historical Commission, Stuart. Skinner, Abe 2022 Records Search. Collier County Property Appraiser, Naples. http://www.collierappraiser.com/ Smith, Greg C. 2008 Cultural Resources Overview and Survey Strategy: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. New South Associates, Stone Mountain, GA. Smith, Marvin T. 1987 Archaeology of Aboriginal Culture Change in the Interior Southeast: Depopulation during the Early Historic Period. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Page 9244 of 9661 ACI 6-8 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 State of Florida n.d. Tract Book. Volume 25. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Tampa Tribune 1955 "Pioneer Florida." Tampa Tribune, January 2. Tebeau, Charlton W. 1966 Florida's Last Frontier: The History of Collier County. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables. 1980 A History of Florida. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables. Revised Edition. Tebeau, Charlton W. and Ruby Leach Carson, Eds. 1965 Florida -- From Indian Trail to Space Age. Southern Publishing Co., Delray Beach. True, David O., Ed. 1944 Memoir of D. Escalante Fontaneda Respecting Florida. University of Miami and South Florida Historical Society, Miami. United States Congress 1837 Report from the Secretary of War in Compliance with Resolution of the Senate of the 14th and 18th Instant, Transmitting Copies of Correspondence Relative to the Campaign in Florida. 24th Congress, 2nd Session, May 21, Washington, D.C. 1850 Hostilities Committed by the Seminole Indians in Florida during the Past Year. 31st Congress, 1st Session, Washington, D.C. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1947 Aerial Photograph: MAR 28 1947, BUN-1D-94. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 1953 Aerial Photograph: 1-1-53, DSM-2L-207. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 1963 Aerial Photograph: 11-15-63, DSM-3DD-7. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 1980 Aerial Photograph: 1-2-80, 12021-178-160. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 2018 Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Florida - September 2018. USDA, NRCS, Fort Worth, TX. United States Fish and Wildlife Service n.d. History. Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Naples. http://www.fws.gov/refuges/profiles/index.cfm?id=41545 United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1958 Immokalee, Fla. 1987 PR 1973. 2013 Immokalee, Fla. USA_Topo_Maps. Watts, William A. 1969 A Pollen Diagram from Mud Lake, Marion County, North-Central Florida. Geological Society of America Bulletin 80(4):631-642. 1971 Post Glacial and Interglacial Vegetational History of Southern Georgia and Central Florida.Ecology 51:676-690. 1975 A Late Quaternary Record of Vegetation from Lake Annie, South-Central Florida. Geology 3(6):344-346. Page 9245 of 9661 ACI 6-9 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Watts, William A., Eric C. Grimm, and T. C. Hussey 1996 Mid-Holocene Forest History of Florida and the Coastal Plain of Georgia and South Carolina. In Archaeology of the Mid-Holocene Southeast. Edited by Kenneth E. Sassaman and David G. Anderson, pp. 28-38. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Watts, William A. and Barbara C. S. Hansen 1994 Pre-Holocene and Holocene Pollen Records of Vegetation History for the Florida Peninsula and their Climatic Implications. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 109:163-176. West, Patsy 1990 History of Post-War Seminole Settlement in the Big Cypress. The Florida Anthropologist 43(4):240-248. Wheeler, Ryan J. 1994 Early Florida Decorated Bone Artifacts: Style and Aesthetics from Paleo-Indian Through Archaic.The Florida Anthropologist 47(1):47-60. 2004 Southern Florida Sites Associated with the Tequesta and Their Ancestors: National Historic Landmark/National Register of Historic Places Theme Study. FDHR, Tallahassee. White, William A. 1970 Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula. Geological Bulletin 51. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Geology, Tallahassee. Widmer, Randolph J. 1974 A Survey and Assessment of the Archaeological Resources on Marco Island, Collier County, Florida. Miscellaneous Project Report Series 19. FDHR, Tallahassee. MS# 265. 1988 The Evolution of the Calusa. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Page 9246 of 9661 APPENDIX Survey Log Page 9247 of 9661 Florida Master Site File / Div. of Historical Resources / R.A. Gray Bldg / 500 S Bronough St., Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 HR6E066R0, effective 05/2016 Rule 1A-46.001, F.A.C. Phone 850.245.6440, Fax 850.245.6439, Email: SiteFile@dos.myflorida.com Page 1 Ent D (FMSF only) __________ Survey Log Sheet Survey # (FMSF only) ___________ Florida Master Site File Version 5.0 /1 Consult Guide to the Survey Log Sheet for detailed instructions. Manuscript Information Survey Project (name and project phase) Report Title (exactly as on title page) Report Authors (as on title page) 1._______________________________ 3. _____________________________ 2._______________________________ 4. _____________________________ Publication Year __________ Number of Pages in Report (GRQot include site forms) ___________ Publication Information (Give series, number in series, publisher and city. For article or chapter, cite page numbers. Use the style of American Antiquity.) Supervisors of Fieldwork (even if same as author) Names _____________________________________________________ Affiliation of Fieldworkers: Organization _____________________________________ City ______________________ Key Words/Phrases (Don’t use county name, or common words like archaeology, structure, survey, architecture, etc.) 1. ___________________ 3.___________________ 5. ___________________ 7.____________________ 2. ___________________ 4.___________________ 6. ___________________ 8.____________________ Survey Sponsors (corporation, government unit, organization, or person funding fieldwork) Name. ____________________________________ Organization. ______________________________________ Address/Phone/E-mail. __________________________________________________________________________ Recorder of Log Sheet _________________________________________ Date Log Sheet Completed ___________ Is this survey or project a continuation of a previous project? q No q Yes: Previous survey #s (FMSF only) _______________ Project Area Mapping Counties (select every county in which field survey was done; attach additional sheet if necessary) 1. ___________________________ 3. ____________________________ 5. ___________________________ 2. ___________________________ 4. ____________________________ 6. ___________________________ USGS 1:24,000 Map Names/Year of Latest Revision (attach additional sheet if necessary) 1.Name ____________________________ Year_____4.Name _____________________________ Year_____ 2.Name ____________________________ Year_____5.Name _____________________________ Year_____ 3.Name ____________________________ Year_____6.Name _____________________________ Year_____ Field Dates and Project Area Description Fieldwork Dates: Start _________B End _B________ Total Area Surveyed (fill in one) _____BB_hectares BB______acres Number of Distinct Tracts or Areas Surveyed _________ If Corridor (fill in one for each) Width: ___B___meters ___B___feet Length: __B____kilometers ____B__miles CRAS Immokalee Expansion East, CR Co. - Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Immokalee Expansion East Property, Collier County, Florida ACI 2022 48 ACI (2022) Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Immokalee Expansion East Property, Collier County, Florida. Conducted for Stewart Materials, LLC, Jupiter by ACI, Sarasota. P22026 Horvath, Elizabeth A. Archaeological Consultants Inc Sarasota Stewart Materials, LLC 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100, Jupiter FL 33458 Horvath, Elizabeth A. 3-8-2022 Collier IMMOKALEE 2013 2-28-2022 3-4-2022 160.00 1 Page 9248 of 9661 Florida Master Site File / Div. of Historical Resources / R.A. Gray Bldg / 500 S Bronough St., Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 HR6E066R0, effective 05/2016 Rule 1A-46.001, F.A.C. Phone 850.245.6440, Fax 850.245.6439, Email: SiteFile@dos.myflorida.com Page 2 Survey Log Sheet Survey #__________ Research and Field Methods Types of Survey (select all that apply): archaeological architectural historical/archival underwater damage assessment monitoring report other(describe):. _________________________ Scope/Intensity/Procedures Preliminary Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Florida Archives (Gray Building)q library research- local public q local property or tax records q other historic maps q Florida Photo Archives (Gray Building)q library-special collection q newspaper files q soils maps or data q Site File property search q Public Lands Survey (maps at DEP) q literature search q windshield survey q Site File survey search q local informant(s)q Sanborn Insurance maps q aerial photography q other (describe):. ______________________________________________________________________________ Archaeological Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Check here if NO archaeological methods were used. q surface collection, controlled q shovel test-other screen size q surface collection, uncontrolled q water screen q shovel test-1/4”screen q posthole tests q shovel test-1/8” screen q auger tests q shovel test 1/16”screen q coring q shovel test-unscreened q test excavation (at least 1x2 m) q block excavation (at least 2x2 m) q soil resistivity q magnetometer q side scan sonar q JURXQGSHQHWUDWLQJUDGDU*35 q /,'$5 q other (describe):. _______________________________________________________________________________ Historical/Architectural Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Check here if NO historical/architectural methods were used. q building permits q demolition permits q neighbor interview q subdivision maps q commercial permits q occupant interview q tax records q interior documentation q ZLQGVKLHOGVXUYH\ q local property records q occupation permits q unknown q other (describe):. _______________________________________________________________________________ Survey Results Resource Significance Evaluated? q Yes q No Count of Previously Recorded Resources____________ Count of Newly Recorded Resources____________ List Previously Recorded Site ID#s with Site File Forms Completed (attach additional pages if necessary) List Newly Recorded Site ID#s (attach additional pages if necessary) Site Forms Used: q Site File Paper Forms q Site File PDF Forms REQUIRED: Attach Map of Survey or Project Area Boundary SHPO USE ONLY SHPO USE ONLY SHPO USE ONLY Origin of Report: 872 Public Lands UW 1A32 # Academic Contract Avocational Grant Project # Compliance Review: CRAT # Type of Document: Archaeological Survey Historical/Architectural Survey Marine Survey Cell Tower CRAS Monitoring Report Overview Excavation Report Multi-Site Excavation Report Structure Detailed Report Library, Hist. or Archival Doc MPS MRA TG Other: Document Destination: ________________________BB____ Plotability: ___________________________________________ /,'$5 RWKHUUHPRWHVHQVLQJ SHGHVWULDQVXUYH\ XQNQRZQ PHWDOGHWHFWRU RWKHUUHPRWHVHQVLQJ 'HVNWRS$QDO\VLV background research, surface reconnaissance; systematic and judgmental subsurface testing (25, 50, 200 m) N=96, all negative; 50 cm diameter, 1 m deep, 1/4" screen; historic resources reconnaissance 00 NA NA Plottable Projects Page 9249 of 9661 Sand Mine Property Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Section 17 USGS Immokalee Collier County, Florida Page 9250 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page i of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT IMMOKALEE SAND MINE, EAST EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA KLEINFELDER PROJECT #20223424.001 Updated February 2025 Prepared for: 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Prepared by: 3663 Lake Center Drive Mount Dora, FL 32757 Copyright 2025 Kleinfelder All Rights Reserved ONLY THE CLIENT OR ITS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES MAY USE THIS DOCUMENT AND ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT FOR WHICH THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED. Page 9251 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page ii of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com A Report Prepared for: Stewart Materials 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT IMMOKALEE SAND MINE, EAST EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared by: Bill Newlon Senior Ecologist Reviewed by: Lisa Daugherty Program Manager KLEINFELDER 3663 Lake Center Drive Mount Dora, Florida 32757 February 11, 2025 Kleinfelder Project No 20223424.001A Page 9252 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page iii of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com TABLE OF CONTENTS ____________________________________________________________________________ Section Page 1INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 2OVERALL PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................. 2 3PROJECT AREA CONDITIONS .......................................................................... 4 3.1LAND USE AND COVER TYPES .............................................................. 4 3.2NATIVE VEGETATION .............................................................................. 7 3.3WETLANDS AND OTHER SURFACE WATERS ...................................... 7 3.3.1Wetland and Other Surface Water Impacts ..................................... 8 3.4LISTED SPECIES ...................................................................................... 9 3.4.1Listed Plants ................................................................................. 10 3.4.2Listed Wildlife ................................................................................ 10 3.5WELLFIELD PROTECTION ZONES ....................................................... 19 4RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ........................................................... 21 5LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................................... 24 FIGURES 1 Project Location Map 2 Existing Land Use Map 3 Wood Stork Colony Location Map 4 USFWS Florida Panther Focus Area Map 5 Florida Panther Telemetry Map 6 Black Bear Range Map 7A 1973 Historic Imagery 7B 1994 Historic Imagery 7C 1999 Historic Imagery 8 Wetland and Surface Water ID Map 9 Wetland and Surface Water Impact Map 10 Collier County Well Field Protection Zones 2010 ATTACHMENTS 1 Bill Newlon’s Resume 2 FNAI Biodiversity Matrix 3 Eastern Indigo Snake Standard Protection Measures 4 USFWS Caracara Coordination and Mapping Page 9253 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 1 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 1 INTRODUCTION ____________________________________________________________________________ The following environmental data report was prepared for the Collier County Growth Management Department to meet the requirements of Section 3.08.00 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) in association with a proposed plant site that includes processing, staging, and materials storage areas east of the existing Edwards Grove Road Sand Mine, a.k.a. Immokalee Sand Mine. Previous environmental data was provided for the Conditional Use (CU) approvals established for the original 219.0-acre mine site and a 231.7-acre expansion of mining to the west which increased the total mine area to 450.7 acres via Resolution Numbers 03-332 and 21-13, respectively. Field assessments for the proposed 39.92-acre CU boundary associated with the eastern plant site were conducted on February 23 and 24, 2022. The environmental data herein was prepared by Bill Newlon, a Senior Environmental Scientist with Kleinfelder, Inc. (Kleinfelder). Pursuant to Section 3.08.00.A.2., the minimum academic credentials and experience required in association with the preparation of the environmental data submittal requirements include a Bachelor’s degree or higher in one of the biological sciences and at least two years of ecological or biological professional experience in the state of Florida. Mr. Newlon meets these requirements with Bachelor and Master of Science degrees in wildlife biology and has 23 years of experience with field surveys and environmental permitting related to wetlands, protected species, and native communities in Florida. A resume for Mr. Newlon documenting these academic credentials and experience has been included with this report as Attachment 1. Page 9254 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 2 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 2 OVERALL PROJECT DESCRIPTION ___________________________________________________________________________________ The project proposes a 39.92-acre CU boundary for a plant site east of the existing 450.7 acre permitted CU boundary (Figure 1). The proposed eastern plant site (project) for which CU is being requested is located approximately 1.1 miles southwest of the intersection of State Road (SR) 29 and SR 82 and north of the City of Immokalee, in Section 17, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida (Figure 1). Environmental impacts associated with the project are expected to be minimal because the project consists of land historically converted to agricultural uses, specifically pasture lands, nurseries, and row crops. Impacts to wetlands were avoided where practicable, and where unavoidable, were minimized to 0.21 acres of wetland with a wetland exotic designation of E3, that contains between 51-75% exotic vegetation. Additionally, no listed species of plants or wildlife were identified on the project and a wildlife management plan will be implemented with protection measures and monitoring for listed species with the potential to occur on the project to minimize potential impacts. Best Management Practices, Erosion Control Measures, and Pollution Prevention Plans will be used during the project to provide safeguards to public health, safety and welfare, and protect undisturbed natural resources. Existing water use on the project involves the presence of drainage ditches and reservoirs constructed within the pasture operation to provide site drainage and cattle ponds. Historic water use continues to be associated with the abandoned agricultural areas, including ditching, and a vegetated non-forested wetland and a willow and elderberry wetland. The vegetated non-forested wetland appears to have been created as a cow pond pursuant to the 1973 imagery (Figure 7A), which had been converted to a reservoir by 1994 (Figure 7B) and has since filled in with wetland vegetation. Based on the 1973, 1994, and 1999 (Figure 7C) imagery, the willow and elderberry wetland also appears to have been created, likely in association with the historic agricultural operation. Water use for the proposed project will be the same as within existing mining areas where use is associated with the transport and processing of sand materials. Water associated with transport is used as a medium to pump dredged sand material through above ground pipes to the existing plant facility for processing. Water associated with processing is used to wash and remove Page 9255 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 3 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com undesirable material from the sand. Water used for transport and processing is recirculated back to the mine pit. No dewatering will occur in association with the project and all stormwater run-offs will be retained within the mine pit to the west. Portions of the project are mapped as being within the 100-year flood zone; however, because of the additional flood storage created by mining to the west, onsite or offsite flooding resulting from project related impacts to mapped flood zone areas (Zone AH) is not anticipated. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) approval of a stormwater management plan demonstrating the permitted mine pit to the west will have sufficient storage to retain the 25-year / 72-hour design storm during and after the project will be required for the Environmental Resource Permit (ERP). Page 9256 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 4 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 3 PROJECT AREA CONDITIONS ____________________________________________________________________________ An environmental site assessment to determine the land use and cover types, and the presence or potential for native vegetation, wetlands, and listed species within the project (Figure 1) was conducted by Kleinfelder on February 23 and 24, 2022. The findings of this assessment are provided as follows. 3.1 LAND USE AND COVER TYPES Existing land use and cover types within the project were mapped over aerial imagery (2021) utilizing the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS, FDOT 1999) (Figure 2). The project is found in a rural setting and consists primarily of existing and abandoned agricultural land uses. Pursuant to a review of historic aerial imagery, the entire project had been converted to pasture by 1973 (Figure 7A), approximately 50 years ago. Further conversion from pasture to nursery and row crop operations in the western two-thirds of the project are also evident in historic images from 1994 (Figure 7B) and 1999 (Figure 7C), respectively. Adjoining land uses currently include agriculture, mining, and low density residential. Eight FLUCFCS land use and cover types in total were identified for the project, as detailed below: 211 Improved Pastures (5.11 acres, 12.80%) A central and southern portion of the eastern one-third of the project and a narrow strip along the northeastern project boundary consist of improved pasture. These areas have been cleared of native vegetation, ditched, and planted with pasture grasses in support of livestock such as cattle, horses, sheep, and donkeys. Bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum) was the dominant pasture grass, but Bermudagrass (Cynadon dactylon), big carpetgrass (Axonopus furcatus), and torpedograss (Panicum repens) were also observed. Other representative pasture vegetation observed includes shrubby false buttonweed (Spermacoce verticillata), rustweed (Polypremum procumbens), largeflower Mexican clover (Richardia grandiflora), tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum), smutgrass (Sporobolus indicus), spiny amaranth (Amaranthus spinosus), dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), and John Charles (Condea verticillata) with scattered Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia), slash pine (Pinus elliottii), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), and sabal palm (Sabal palmetto). Page 9257 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 5 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 214 Row Crops (9.99 acres, 25.02%) The southern portion of the western two-thirds of the project consists of an area that appears to have been used historically for a row crop operation. Based on historical imagery (Figures 7B and 7C), this area had been converted from pasture to row crops between 1994 and 1999. Presently, use of this land for row crops has been abandoned. The rows are still evident; however, they are now covered by a variety of colonial vegetation such as elephantgrass (Cenchrus purpureus), white seed beggarticks (Bidens alba), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), torpdedograss, guineagrass (Urochloa maxima), shrubby false buttonweed, shrubverbena (Lantana strigocamara), knotroot foxtail (Setaria parviflora), broomsedge bluestem (Andropogon virginicus), dogfennel, hairy indigo (Indigophera hirsuta), creeping cucumber (Melothria pendula), and Caesarweed (Urena lobata) with scattered Brazilian pepper and groundsel tree (Bachharis halimifolia). 240 Nurseries and Vineyards (18.21 acres, 45.62%) The central and northern portion of the western two-thirds of the project consists of an area that appears to have been used historically for a nursery operation. Based on historical imagery (Figure 7B), this area had been converted from pasture to a nursery by 1994. Presently, however, use of this land as a nursery has been abandoned. Rows of dilapidated structures where the nursery vegetation appears to have been cultivated are still present with intervening shallow ditches that have been included as part of this land use area. Additionally, abandoned buildings and equipment, shipping containers, and piles of discarded sheeting and other materials were observed. Abandoned nursery areas are now covered by a variety of colonial vegetation such as common ragweed, Caesarweed, dogfennel, broomsedge bluestem, bahiagrass, elephantgrass, manyflower marshpennywort (Hydrocotyle umbellata), cogongrass (Imperata cylindrica), Bermudagrass, muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia), and foxtail flatsedge (Cyperus alopecuroides) with scattered laurel oak, Brazilian pepper, castorbean (Ricinus communis), cabbage palm, and mimosa (Albizia julibrissin). 422 Brazilian Pepper (2.09 acres, 5.24%) In the northern half of the eastern one-third of the project, a shrub forest dominated by Brazilian pepper was observed around the perimeter of a willow and elderberry marsh in between the pasture and nursery land use areas to the southeast and northwest, respectively. Discarded Page 9258 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 6 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com materials that appeared to be from the nursery operation were observed within this area. Outside of Brazilian pepper, little other vegetation was observed under the canopy except Caesarweed, scattered clumps of sword fern (Nephrolepis spp), and vining species such as muscadine grape, greenbriar (Smilax spp.), and air potato (Dioscorea bulbifera). 514 Upland-Cut Ditches (0.52 acres, 1.30%) Several man-made ditches which appear to have been excavated for use in draining the various agricultural land use types on the project were observed. Representative species included torpedograss, red-leaf ludwigia (Ludwigia repens), dotted smartweed (Persecaria punctata), manyflower marshpennywort, Asian coinwort (Centella asiatica), Peruvian primrosewillow (Ludwigia peruviana), Bermudagrass, bahiagrass, sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum), and big carpetgrass. Based on a review of NRCS soils, all the soils where ditches were excavated are mapped as predominantly nonhydric and nonhydric soil units; thus, all of the ditches are considered upland-cut. 530 Reservoirs (1.70 acres, 4.26%) Portions of two open water reservoirs were observed within / adjacent to improved pasture. Both had uniform moderately steep slopes along the edges and appeared to have been excavated. The smaller of the two (Surface Water 2, 0.05 ac. – Figure 8) was located at the eastern edge of the willow elderberry marsh and continues offsite to the east. The larger one (Surface Water 1, 1.65 ac. – Figure 8) was located south of the willow elderberry marsh and appears to have been excavated to depths which have precluded wetland vegetation. Both are accessible to cattle and other livestock; however, they did not appear to use the larger reservoir, presumably because of the lack of shallower, accessible water depths. 618 Willow and Elderberry (2.06 acres, 5.16%) A willow and elderberry marsh was observed between the pastureland and the abandoned nursery operation. It was dominated by Primrose willow and southern willow (Salix caroliniana). Other species observed along the wetland edges included common banana (Musa x paradisiaca), common dayflower (Commelina diffusa), Brazilian pepper, elephantgrass, Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia virginica), swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum), and manyflower marshpennywort. Discarded materials that appeared to be from the nursery operation were Page 9259 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 7 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com observed within this area. Based on the historical imagery (Figures 7A-C), this area appeared to have formerly been used as a reservoir. 640 Vegetated Non-Forested Wetlands (0.24 acres, 0.60%) There are two southern areas along the eastern boundary of the project, within pasture south of the larger reservoir (Surface Water 1 – Figure 8), and one in the western part of the project, between the abandoned nursery and row crop land uses that consist of excavated depressions, shallow enough to support wetland vegetation. The two areas on the pasture side of the property were accessible to and grazed by cattle at the time of the site assessment. The western area is drained by interconnected east-west ditching. Wetland vegetation within these areas included torpedograss, Cuban bulrush (Cyperus blepharoleptos), dotted smartweed, Peruvian primrosewillow, manyflower marshpennywort, broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes), and scattered southern willow and common banana. 3.2 NATIVE VEGETATION Due to the long-standing history and extent of agricultural land uses on the project, there is a limited amount of native vegetation within the land use and cover types observed onsite as described in Section 3.1; however, Section 3.05.07.A.1. of the LDC indicates native vegetation is defined as a vegetative community with 25% or more canopy coverage or highest existing vegetative strata of native plant species. Wetland E (0.01 acres) is an E2 wetland with 26% - 50% exotics and Wetlands D (0.02 acres), F (2.06 acres), and G (0.21 acres) are E3 wetlands with 51 – 75% exotics. Despite the predominance of exotic vegetation within these wetland communities, pursuant to the LDC they meet the minimum vegetation requirement for native vegetation of 25%. As such, the total wetland area with existing native vegetation is 2.30 acres. 3.3 WETLANDS AND OTHER SURFACE WATERS State jurisdictional wetlands and surface water boundaries, except ditches, within the project were delineated in the field with a sub-meter GPS unit pursuant to criteria found in Ch. 62-340, F.A.C. Linear ditch surface water boundaries were aerial interpreted based on ground-truthing. The boundaries of these aquatic features are depicted in Figures 2 and 8. The surface waters on the project are man-made and consist of reservoirs and ditches. The ditches are all mapped within upland soil units as determined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service; thus, they are Page 9260 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 8 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com all considered upland-cut. All wetlands have been used as reservoirs, vegetated cow ponds, and/or been subject to impacts by cattle in association with the agricultural operations as shown in historic aerial imagery from 1973-1999 (Figures 7A-C) and observed during the site investigation. Vegetation within project wetlands and surface waters is predominated by exotics, nuisance species, and pasture grasses such as torpedograss, Peruvian primrosewillow, Brazilian pepper, smutgrass, big carpetgrass, Bermudagrass, bahiagrass, southern willow, Cuban bulrush, watter lettuce, and broadleaf cattail. Exotic codes (E1 - E4) for all project wetlands have been included on Figure 8. Federal jurisdiction of wetlands and surface waters that are considered assumed waters has been determined by the FDEP since it assumed administration over a portion of the CWA Section 404 program from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) on December 22, 2020; however, a recent lawsuit has vacated the FDEPs regulatory authority over assumed waters, and jurisdiction over all 404 waters has since reverted to the Corps. As a result of the ongoing litigation, the Corps is currently the only entity in the State of Florida with authority to issue permits under Section 404 of the CWA. As such, if Section 404 authorization were to be required for the Project, it would need to be obtained from the Corps. Pursuant to the latest Corps guidance, determination of federal jurisdiction is currently based on the pre-2015 regulatory regime, consistent with the May 25, 2023, Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) Sackett opinion, under which the Corps will not assert jurisdiction based on the significant nexus standard, will not assert jurisdiction over interstate wetlands solely because they are interstate, will interpret “adjacent” to mean “having a continuous surface connection,” and will limit the scope of the (a)(3) provision to only relatively permanent lakes and ponds that do not meet one of the other jurisdictional categories. Based on this rationale, project wetlands and surface waters need to share a continuous surface connection with WOTUS to be considered jurisdictional. Because the wetland being proposed for impact is hydrologically isolated and the surface waters proposed for impact are upland-cut ditches as detailed in the following section, there does not appear to be federal jurisdiction or regulatory authority under Section 404 of the CWA, and permitting is not anticipated based on the current site plan. 3.3.1 Wetland and Other Surface Water Impacts All wetland and other surface water (OSW) impacts being proposed onsite have been identified in Figure 9. These impacts will be permitted separately with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. A total of 0.21 acres of wetlands and 0.31 acres Page 9261 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 9 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com of OSWs are proposed for direct impact. All 0.21 acres of wetland impacts will be to Wetland G and all 0.31 acres of OSW impacts will be to OSW ditches. Wetland G is hydrologically isolated, less than 0.5 acres, and not utilized by threatened or endangered species. Pursuant to Section 10.2.2.1 of the Statewide Environmental Resource Permit (SWERP) Applicant’s Handbook, Vol. 1, no compensatory mitigation is required for impacts to this wetland. All 0.33 acres of the ditches proposed for impact are associated with nonhydric and predominantly nonhydric soil units according to the Florida Association of Environmental Soil Scientists (FAESS) in the Hydric Soils of Florida Handbook, Fourth Edition (2007), and thus, are upland-cut. Pursuant to Section 10.2.2.2 of the SWERP Applicant’s Handbook, Vol. 1, upland-cut ditches are exempt from mitigation. No secondary impacts will occur as an undisturbed 15-foot minimum, 25-foot-wide average upland buffer will be maintained between areas of disturbance and preserved wetlands pursuant to Section 10.2.7(a) of the SWERP Applicant’s Handbook, Vol. 1, and Sections 3.05.07 and 4.08.05 of the Collier County LDC. All 2.06 acres of Wetland F are being preserved as identified in the Site Plans provided under separate cover. The minimum setback associated with Wetland F will be 32.21-feet which is shown in the Site Plans and has also been identified in Figure 9. 3.4 LISTED SPECIES Preliminary listed species surveys were conducted on February 23 and 24, 2022, within the project for the occurrence and potential for occurrence of floral or faunal species listed or otherwise protected by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Collier County. Random transects were surveyed within all land use and cover types shown on Figure 2. In addition to the preliminary site survey, available database reviews and mapping were used to ascertain any previous documentation or likelihood of occurrence of FDACS, FWC, USFWS, and County listed or otherwise protected species. Specifically, reviews of the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) Biodiversity Matrix (Attachment 2), FWC Eagle Nest Locator, and FWC/USFWS listed species records were conducted. The results of the preliminary listed species surveys are as follows: Page 9262 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 10 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 3.4.1 Listed Plants Pursuant to a query of FNAI’s Biodiversity Matrix (Attachment 2), no state and/or federally listed native plant species or plants identified as rare or less rare in Chapter 3.04.03 of the Collier County LDC have been documented or are likely within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512, which are the one-square mile assessment areas in which the project is located. Pursuant to a review of historic imagery from 1973 (Figure 7A), the entirety of the project site has been disturbed for at least approximately 50 years. Due to the site wide and long- term persistence of agricultural related disturbances, the project consists primarily of planted pasture grasses, and invasive exotic and ruderal plants such as Brazilian pepper, Peruvian primrosewillow, shrubby false buttonweed, elephantgrass, torpedograss, smutgrass, shrubverbena, bahiagrass, Bermudagrass, and big carpetgrass. As such, the presence of state and/or federally listed plant species or native species considered rare or less rare by Collier County are not anticipated, and none were observed; thus, impacts to protected native plant species are not anticipated. 3.4.2 Listed Wildlife Pursuant to the FNAI Biodiversity Matrix (Attachment 2), one listed native wildlife species, the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), has been identified as documented within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512, the one-square mile assessment areas in which the project is located. Five additional listed or otherwise protected native wildlife species, the Audubon’s crested caracara (Polyborus plancus audubonii), wood stork (Mycteria americana), gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), mangrove fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), and Florida black bear (Ursu americanus floridanus) are considered by FNAI as “likely” to occur within one or both matrix units. No listed species and one otherwise protected species, the American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis), was observed on the project during the preliminary site surveys. Based on site characteristics, land use, known geographic distribution, and habitat requirements, listed or otherwise protected species that could be found on the project or adjacent lands in addition to the American alligator include the Florida panther, crested caracara, Florida black bear, wood stork, gopher tortoise, and eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi). The presence of the mangrove fox squirrel and Florida scrub jay (identified by FNAI as likely and potential elements, respectively) were determined to be Page 9263 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 11 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com unlikely onsite due to habitat limitations and the presence of the bald eagle was determined to be unlikely due to records of known nesting locations. The mangrove fox squirrel, also known as the Big Cypress fox squirrel, which is found in five counties in south Florida, requires forested areas with an open understory including habitats such as cypress stands, slash pine savanna, mangrove swamps, tropical hardwood forests, live oak woods, coastal broadleaf evergreen hammocks, as well as suburban areas also containing forested components and open understories like golf courses, city parks, and residences. The open understory is important for accessing food which primarily consists of nuts, seeds, fungi, fruit, and buds, and avoiding predation. The project contains cleared, open agricultural lands and what forested component is present consists of dense invasive species lacking an open understory; thus, the project does not contain habitat suitable to support this species and impacts to this species are not anticipated. The Florida scrub jay inhabits fire-dominated, low growing oak scrub found on well-drained sandy soils but may also be found on modified lads such as abandoned citrus groves with scrub oaks; however, the types of abandoned and active agricultural uses found on the project lack a sufficient supply of acorn forage from scrub oaks and bare, dry, sandy soils for caching acorns. As such, the project does not contain habitat suitable to support this species and impacts to this species are not anticipated. Searches of the FWC Eagle Nesting and Audubon Florida EagleWatch Nest Locator mapping databases did not have records of any bald eagle nests on the project or within 660 feet. Protective buffers are typically required for development within 660 feet of a bald eagle nest. With no nests documented within 660 feet of the project or observed within 660 feet of the project during the preliminary listed species survey, no impacts to this species are anticipated. The following provides additional information on the one otherwise protected faunal species identified onsite. American Alligator The American alligator was observed within the project reservoirs which is listed as “Threatened” due to similarity of appearance to the American crocodile Page 9264 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 12 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com (Crocodylus acutus) by the USFWS and Federally-designated Threatened due to similarity of appearance by the FWC. The American crocodile is a coastal species and thus, misidentification of an American crocodile as an American alligator on this inland site is highly unlikely. While there are regulations related to the intentional feeding, harm, take, possession, or sale of individual alligators, nests, or eggs without appropriate licensing and permits, no developmental permitting restrictions are typically associated with the American alligator. Based on site characteristics, land use, known geographic distribution, and habitat requirements, the following species, which have not been identified on the project, have the potential to occur. Gopher Tortoise No gopher tortoise burrows were observed along ditch berms where present or elsewhere on the project during the preliminary survey. Pursuant to a query of FNAI Biodiversity Matrix, the gopher tortoise is a potential element within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512 (Attachment 2), in which the project is located. The gopher tortoise is listed as “Threatened” by the FWC and permits are required to impact areas containing tortoises or their burrows. Suitable habitat includes dry, sandy upland land uses and cover types, such as sandhills, scrub, xeric oak hammock, dry pine flatwoods, pastures, and abandoned groves. Based on the widespread land use disturbances, low elevations and corresponding high- water table, the likelihood of tortoises utilizing the project site is considered low and would most likely be limited to berms noted along the perimeter ditches within the pasture at times of the year when the water table is depressed. In advance of land disturbing activities associated with the project, surveys will be conducted pursuant to the FWC Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines and as identified in the wildlife management plan. Any potentially occupied gopher tortoise burrows occurring within the limits of disturbance will be addressed via permitting and relocation, per the FWC Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines. Additional protected commensal species associated with gopher tortoise burrows have a low to moderate potential to utilize the property. These species are known Page 9265 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 13 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com as gopher tortoise burrow commensals and include species such as the Florida pine snake (Pituophis melanoleucus mugitus) and eastern indigo snake. No commensal species were observed during the field review. Permitting and relocation of these protected species is generally addressed concurrently in association with the gopher tortoise permitting. Eastern Indigo Snake No eastern indigo snakes have been observed on the project. Pursuant to a query of FNAI Biodiversity Matrix, the eastern indigo snake is a potential element within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512, (Attachment 2), in which the project is located. The eastern indigo snake is listed as a “Threatened” species by the FWC and USFWS. It ranges over large areas often in the hundreds of acres over which it utilizes a mosaic of upland and wetland habitats, from scrub and sandhill to wet prairies and mangrove swamps. It will use most of the available habitats within its home range, but prefers open, undeveloped areas. The burrows of gopher tortoises are often used for denning as thermal refugia from winter cold and desiccating sandhill environments. While no gopher tortoise burrows were observed on the project, the likelihood of occurrence of the eastern indigo snake onsite is considered low to moderate based on the rural nature of the area, the potential for gopher tortoise burrows outside the project, and the large territorial ranges used by this species. As such, the USFWS’s Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake will be used during site preparation and project construction as identified in the wildlife management plan. This will include an outline of the measures being incorporated, educational pamphlets, and signage (Attachment 3). In the event potentially occupied gopher tortoise burrows were to be identified on the project in advance of project areas proposed for land disturbance, they will be permitted and excavated prior to the initiation of site disturbance in the vicinity of the burrow. Any eastern indigo snakes which are encountered will be allowed to vacate the area prior to additional work in the burrow vicinity. These measures along with the use of the USFWS’s standard protection measures should help to minimize impacts to this species, and as such, adverse effects are not anticipated. Page 9266 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 14 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com Wood Stork No wood storks or rookeries have been observed on the project. Pursuant to a query of the FNAI Biodiversity Matrix, the wood stork is a likely element within matrix units 46511 and 46512 (Attachment 2), in which the project is located. The wood stork is listed as “Threatened” by both the FWC and USFWS. Wood storks typically nest in rookeries found in stands of medium to tall trees, particularly cypress, which occur along the edges of, or which form islands in large water bodies. Ideal habitat consists of a variety of inundated forested wetlands, including cypress strands and domes, mixed hardwood swamps, and sloughs. Foraging occurs in shallow marshes or artificial impoundments with fluctuating pools of open water that trap and concentrate prey items, particularly when water levels recede. Prey is comprised primarily of fish 1-6 inches in length, which require wetlands or surface waters that are inundated for most of the year, and which seldom dry up entirely. The bulk of wood stork foraging occurs within areas designated by the USFWS as core foraging area (CFAs). A CFA is measured as a radial distance from the rookery. Pursuant to USFWS guidelines, the size of the CFA varies regionally across Florida, with CFAs of 18.6 miles for rookeries in south Florida in which the project is located. A review of the USFWS Wood Stork Nesting Colonies database revealed that the expansion area is located within the CFAs of three known rookeries, Corkscrew, Barron Collier and Collier-Hendry (Figure 3). Pursuant to Figure 8, wetlands and surface waters on the project include 0.24 acres of vegetated non-forested wetlands (Wetlands D, E, and G), 1.70 acres of reservoirs (Surface Waters 1 and 2), 0.52 acres of upland-cut surface water ditches, and 2.06 acres of willow and elderberry marsh (Wetland F). Most of these areas are unsuitable as the willow and elderberry marsh appears to be too densely vegetated with shrubs and the upland-cut ditches, vegetated non-forested Wetlands D and E, and reservoirs appear to either have limited water sources or greater water depths that provide only limited wood stork foraging opportunities. Vegetated non-forested Wetland G and reservoirs Surface Water 2 have mostly permanent water sources and shallow enough depths to adequately support wood stork foraging. Surface water 2 will not be impacted. Page 9267 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 15 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com While Wetland G is being proposed for impact and does contain suitable habitat within the CFA, because it is only 0.21 acres in extent, and the CFA includes an area of 1,086 square miles, these impacts are considered de minimis. Because of the limited wood stork foraging habitat onsite and de minimis impacts, the project is not anticipated to adversely affect this species. Additionally, as shown on the project plans, the posting of educational signage for wading birds along access roads will be implemented as a protection measure to caution haul truck drivers. Florida Panther No Florida panthers or evidence of their occurrence have been observed on the project. The Florida panther is listed as “Endangered” by the USFWS and FWC. Panthers require an extensive mosaic of native plant communities, which are contiguous and largely forested to meet their social, reproductive, and energetic needs. Large wetlands generally inaccessible to humans are important for diurnal refuge. Improved land use areas located within a mosaic of natural communities are tolerated. Panther habitat selection is related to prey availability, which means they select habitats that make prey vulnerable to stalking and capturing. Dense understory vegetation provides some of the most important feeding, resting, and denning cover for panthers. A search of the FNAI biodiversity index indicated the Florida panther has been documented within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512 (Attachment 2), within which the project is located. According to the FWC’s wildlife maps, the project exists within the secondary Florida panther habitat zone (Secondary Zone) (Figure 4). The Secondary Zone is defined as lands that are contiguous with the Primary Zone and although these lands are used to a lesser extent by panthers, they are important to the long-term viability and persistence of the panther in the wild. Panthers use these lands in a much lower density than those found in the Primary Zone. Pursuant to telemetry data received from the FWC (Figure 5), almost all panther activity in the area has occurred in association with Corkscrew Swamp to the west Page 9268 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 16 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com and Graham Marsh to the east of the project. There are a minimal number of telemetry records in the vicinity of the project that are located outside of these wetland corridors. There is one record from the 2010’s east of Edwards Grove Road which is on the property immediately north of the project. One other record from the 1980’s is located approximately 0.75 miles to the south; however, considering these are the only records in the proximity of the project, regular use of this habitat as part of a territorial range or travel corridor appears unlikely, especially considering the lack of vegetative cover/forested corridors. Due to the absence of recorded telemetry data and wildlife corridors on the project, and the rarity of recorded data on surrounding properties, the project does not appear to be regularly used as part of a travel corridor or territorial range. Additionally, there are no natural habitats associated with the project or nearby. All land on and surrounding the project consists primarily of altered land use areas, with little functional value, such as extraction areas, citrus groves, active and abandoned agricultural areas, disturbed lands, and man-made surface water ditches and reservoirs. The project would appear to be compatible with Chapter 3.04.02 of the Collier County LDC which discourages the destruction of native habitats preferred by the Florida panther such as pine flatwoods and hardwood hammocks by directing intensive land uses to currently disturbed areas. As such, the project is not anticipated to adversely affect this species; however, protection measures such as the preservation of 2.06 acres of wetland and the surrounding 25-foot wide average upland buffer, educational signage, and reduced speed limits will be implemented on the project to ensure impacts to this species are minimized to the extent practicable as identified in the wildlife management plan. Audubon’s Crested Caracara No Audubon’s crested caracaras or nests have been observed on the project. The Audubon’s crested caracara (caracara) is listed as “Threatened” by the USFWS and FWC. The project is located within the USFWS consultation area for the caracara. Caracaras prefer large pasture expanses, grasslands, or prairies with numerous shallow ponds and sloughs for foraging and single to small clumps (2 to 10) of cabbage palm, live oak (Quercus virginiana), and/or cypress (Taxodium spp.) for nesting, with a strong preference for cabbage palm as the primary nest Page 9269 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 17 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com tree. Nests are typically constructed 4 to 18 meters off the ground and nesting typically occurs from January through April. Caracaras are opportunistic feeders that eat carrion and capture live prey, including a wide variety of vertebrates and invertebrates. A search of the FNAI biodiversity index indicated the caracara is likely to occur within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512 (Attachment 2), in which the project is located. Evidence of caracara activity was previously documented in the area but not on the site by Kleinfelder and the USFWS. Previous records from the USFWS showed four nests between 1.3 and 4.6 miles away from the western mining expansion and an individual sighting approximately 3.5 miles away. Additionally, a caracara pair and individual had been observed by Kleinfelder northwest and northeast of the western mining expansion, respectively, during a March 2020 site assessment; however, none were observed on this project site or the previously permitted mining areas. The project consists of a mix of active and abandoned agricultural land uses. The abandoned nursery and row crops area are overgrown and of limited suitability for this species. The active pasture areas do have some ponds and wetlands and provide moderate suitability for foraging; however, there are very few cabbage palm trees present that are solitary or found in small clumps which are of suitable size for nesting. Any cabbage palm trees that did appear suitable or nesting were inspected for nests, and no nests were observed. The land area between the project and SR-29 which was once part of the project area was also investigated for nests, and none were identified. A protective buffer of 1,500 meters is recommended around active caracara nests to avoid impacts to potentially occupied habitat. All land surrounding the project consists of agricultural use, citrus groves, and mining. Scattered, solitary palm trees were observed in some of the groves and other agricultural lands surrounding the project which could potentially support nesting. As such, coordination was conducted with the USFWS to obtain the most current mapping/nesting data. Pursuant to records provided by the USFWS in 2022, there have been individual observations approximately 3.4 and 4.0 miles north of the project (Attachment 4), but no documented nests within less than approximately 3.0 miles; thus, no Page 9270 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 18 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com impacts to nests or habitat occupied by this species are anticipated. The project is mapped by the USFWS as being located within a communal roost/gathering area of juveniles/subadults where 50+ individuals have been observed which is represented as a circular plot greater than 5 miles in diameter; however, the conversion of the project from the active and abandoned agricultural land use types to a plant site would not appear to have significant adverse effects on this species. While adverse effects are not anticipated, a monitoring program will be implemented under the wildlife management plan to evaluate any future use of the property and minimize impacts to this species to the extent practicable. Black Bear No black bears or evidence of their occurrence have been observed on the project. The Florida black bear was de-listed by the FWC in August 2012, but is still protected by the Florida Black Bear Conservation Rule, 68A-1.004, F.A.C., and the Florida Black Bear Management Plan. According to the rule, no person is allowed to possess, injure, shoot, wound, trap, collect, or sell Florida black bears and the FWC is to provide comments to permitting agencies to minimize the impacts of land modifications on the conservation and management of black bears as outlined in the Florida Black Bear Management Plan. The goal of the Black Bear Management Plan is to maintain healthy populations in suitable habitats throughout Florida for the benefit of the species and people and prevent the re- listing of the species due to population and habitat decline. A search of the FNAI’s Biodiversity Matrix indicated the Florida black bear is a likely element within the matrix units 46511 and 46512 (Attachment 2), in which the project is located. Additionally, pursuant to the latest FWC coverage of Florida Black Bear populations, the Project is mapped within a portion of the geographic range of the Big Cypress black bear population where it has been determined to be a frequent occurrence (Figure 6). This designation is indicative of areas within their range where records have shown that densities are highest, and bears spend the most amount of time. Such areas make up the core of bear populations, where reproduction is occurring as evidenced by the consistent presence of females and cubs. Page 9271 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 19 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com The Florida black bear is known to utilize a variety of habitats including pine flatwoods, swamps and forested scrub and relies on contiguous forested expanses for cover and travel corridors. Bears main forage in Florida includes acorns, saw palmetto, and cabbage palm. Denning typically occurs in the ground surrounded by dense protective vegetation such as saw palmetto. The project consists of active and abandoned agricultural land use types, with no saw palmetto, native vegetation, or natural forested communities. As such, there is limited cover, and no foraging or denning habitat onsite and the proposed project is not anticipated to adversely affect this species. Because the project is within a range where occurrence is designated as frequent, however, protection measures will be implemented as identified in the wildlife management plan that include the preservation of 2.06 acres of wetland and the surrounding 25-foot wide average upland buffer, placement of signage along the entrance road from Edwards Grove Road to inform haul truck operators of its potential as a black bear crossing area, limitation of haul trucks to a maximum speed of 15 MPH, and utilization of bear-proof trash containers to discourage scavenging by black bears and minimize interactions between black bears and humans. When considering the use of these protection measures and the lack of habitat value onsite, it is anticipated the goals of the Florida Black Bear Management Plan will be met and no adverse effects will occur to this species. Based upon known geographic distribution and habitat requirements, no other floral or faunal species listed or otherwise protected by the county, state or federal governments are likely to be found onsite or affected by the proposed project. While no significant habitat for county, state and/or federally listed species is known to be present or anticipated onsite due to the site wide and long-term persistence of agricultural related disturbances, if any use by listed species is identified, Stewart Materials will comply with all requirements to avoid and/or minimize impacts and mitigate if necessary. 3.5 WELLFIELD PROTECTION ZONES Pursuant to Figure 10, much of the project falls within the W - 4 (20 Year Travel Time Isocontour) Wellfield Protection Zone for Collier County. The Project will comply with all groundwater protection requirements for Zone W-4 which are identified in Chapter 3.06.00 of the LDC. A Spill Page 9272 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 20 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan will be implemented in association with the project to reduce or eliminate the potential for groundwater contamination via the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products or wastes. Page 9273 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 21 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 4 RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ___________________________________________________________________________________ The following additional project information is being provided to demonstrate consistency with the policies related to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay which are found in the CCME of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Applicable policies are listed and addressed as follows: Policy 1.3.2: The overall purpose and description of the Rural Stewardship program is defined in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay found in the Future Land Use Element. A Stewardship Credit system has been established that shall serve as the primary basis for the protection of Flowway Stewardship Areas (FSAs), Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSAs) and Water Retention Areas (WRAs). The RLSA Overlay also contains policies that shall direct incompatible land uses away from FSAs, HSAs and WRAs in order to protect wetlands, upland habitats and listed species within the RLSA. There are no native upland habitat communities on the project, and it appears none have been present since the land was converted to agriculture historically which occurred by at least approximately 50 years ago (Figure 7A). Wetland habitat communities are dominated by exotic vegetation; however, pursuant to the LDC they meet the minimum vegetation requirement for native vegetation of 25%, and thus, existing native vegetation is considered to be 2.30 acres. All surface waters on the project are man-made, consisting of reservoirs and ditches (Figure 8). All wetlands have been used as reservoirs, vegetated cow ponds, and/or been subject to impacts by cattle in association with the agricultural operations as shown in historic aerial imagery from 1973- 1999 (Figures 7A-C) and observed during the project investigation. Vegetation within project wetlands and surface waters is predominated by exotics, nuisance species, and pasture grasses such as torpedograss, Peruvian primrosewillow, Brazilian pepper, smutgrass, big carpetgrass, Bermudagrass, bahiagrass, southern willow, Cuban bulrush, watter lettuce, and broadleaf cattail. As indicated in Section 3.4, based on field observations of project characteristics, land use, known geographic distribution and habitat requirements for listed species, no protected floral species or significant nesting or foraging habitat associated with faunal species listed by either the State or Federal government are likely to be found within the project. As such, the proposed land use associated with the project would not appear to be incompatible with the purpose of the Rural Stewardship program. Page 9274 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 22 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com Policy 6.1.3: For the County’s RLSA Overlay, as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved pursuant to the RLSA policies found in the Future Land Use Element. The total wetland area with existing native vegetation is 2.30 acres. Pursuant to LDC section 4.08.05.J.2, the minimum amount of native vegetation required to be preserved is 40%, or 0.92 acres. All 2.06 acres of Wetland F have been identified for preservation; thus, meeting the native vegetation preservation requirement. Policy 6.1.5: Agriculture shall be exempt from the above preservation requirements contained in Policies 6.1.1, and 6.1.2 of this Element provided that any new clearing of land for agriculture shall not be converted to non- agricultural development for 25 years. For any such conversions in less than 25 years, the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 of this Element shall be applied to the site at the time of the conversion. The percentage of native vegetation preserved shall be calculated on the amount of vegetation occurring at the time of the agricultural clearing, and if found to be deficient, a native plant community shall be restored to re-create a native plant community in all three strata (ground covers, shrubs and trees), utilizing larger plant materials so as to more quickly re-create the lost mature vegetation. Agricultural clearing within the RLSA Overlay shall be allowed and guided by the RLSA policies found in the FLUE. All uplands onsite had been converted to agricultural pastureland by 1973 as evidenced by the historical imagery provided as Figure 7A. Additional agricultural conversions included nursery and row crop operations in the western two-thirds of the project which are evident in the 1994 and 1999 historical imagery (Figures 7B&C), but which have since been abandoned. The eastern one-third of the project continues to actively be used as pastureland for livestock. There are no natural upland areas remaining onsite which could be converted to agriculture. As such, the native vegetation preservation requirements of Policies 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 are limited to the 2.30 acres of wetlands, of which 2.06 acres, or 90% will be preserved. Policy 7.1.3: Listed species within the RLSA shall be protected pursuant to the RLSA Overlay policies within the Future Land Use Element. Page 9275 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 23 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com As indicated in Section 3.4, no listed species have been documented within the project; however, a wildlife management plan has been prepared pursuant to Sections 3.04.02 and 4.08.05.J.3. of the Collier County LDC to account for listed wildlife species the site is capable of supporting. Page 9276 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 24 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 5 LIMITATIONS ____________________________________________________________________________ This work was performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of Kleinfelder’s profession practicing in the same locality, under similar conditions and at the date the services provided. Our conclusions, opinions, and recommendations are based on a limited number of observations and data. It is possible that conditions could vary between or beyond the data evaluated. Kleinfelder makes no other representation, guarantee, or warranty, express or implied, regarding the services, communication (oral or written), report, opinion, or instrument of service provided. Page 9277 of 9661 FIGURES Page 9278 of 9661 Page 9279 of 9661 Page 9280 of 9661 Page 9281 of 9661 Page 9282 of 9661 Page 9283 of 9661 Page 9284 of 9661 Page 9285 of 9661 Page 9286 of 9661 Page 9287 of 9661 Page 9288 of 9661 Page 9289 of 9661 Page 9290 of 9661 ATTACHMENTS Page 9291 of 9661 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 9292 of 9661 RESUME Kleinfelder | 1 Bill Newlon Senior Environmental Scientist Project Professional Mr. Newlon has worked in the environmental planning and permitting field for over 23 years and has an extensive background in wetlands, listed species, and natural resource management. Wetland related experience includes wetland delineations of local, state and federal jurisdictional wetlands, significant nexus evaluations, formal state and federal jurisdictional wetland determinations, agency wetland line verifications, ordinary high water determinations, quantitative functional wetland assessments, permitting of wetland impacts and related mitigation design, and wetland mitigation monitoring, related reporting, and quality/technical review. Wetland work has been conducted in several states, including Florida, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, and Utah. Listed species related experience includes preliminary faunal and floral species surveys, species specific floral and faunal surveys and/or agency consultation related to the giant orchid, sweetscented pigeon wing, Florida scrub jay, gopher tortoise, Audobon's crested caracara, Florida black bear, eastern indigo snake, Florida sandhill crane, whooping crane, Florida burrowing owl, sand skink, Panama City crayfish, and wood stork, submerged aquatic vegetation surveys/monitoring, giant orchid relocations, wading bird rookery and bald eagle nest monitoring, gopher tortoise and bald eagle permitting, gopher tortoise and burrow commensal relocations via mechanical excavation, bucket trapping, and hand digging, Florida mouse relocation via Sherman trapping, and herp array trapping/sampling. Natural resource management related experience includes habitat and land use mapping, state and federal environmental resource permitting, environmental impact and mitigation assessments, water quality sampling, mitigation design and monitoring, sovereign submerged lands investigations, enforcement and compliance resolution, and nuisance species maintenance. He has worked for a wide variety of clients in public and private sectors, including local governmental departments such as the Lake County School Board, Public Works, Board of County Commissioners, and Parks and Trails; companies within the mining industry such as Vulcan/Florida Rock, Mosaic, DuPont, Iluca, Stewart Mining, Panadero, Votorantim Cimentos, and Sun-Gro, which are associated with limerock, sand, phosphate, peat and heavy minerals mining; residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, and waterfront developers and rail/shipping terminal operators such as NASCAR, Disney, Dollar General, Vulcan/Florida Rock, and Panadero; and oil and natural gas providers such as Chesapeake, Newfield, SECO, Exxon-Mobil, and QEP. To serve those clients, he has worked with various government agencies across local, state and federal levels to secure entitlements and permits, including Environmental Management, Building and Zoning, and Planning and Development departments of various municipalities, Canaveral Port Authority, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Division of State Lands, Bureau of Mining and Minerals Regulation, Environmental Resource Program, Wetland Evaluation and Delineation Section, and Compliance and Enforcement), Florida Water Management Districts (St. Johns River, South Florida, Southwest Florida, Northwest Florida, and Suwannee River), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Years of Experience 20+ years Education Bachelors, Management, Gettysburg College, Pennsylvania, 1991 Bachelors, Biology, Old Dominion University, Virginia, 1997 Masters, Biology, University of New Orleans, Louisiana, 2001 Registrations Authorized Gopher Tortoise Agent, No. GTA-09-00239G, FFWCC Certifications CPR & First Aid, Red Cross Mine Safety Training, MSHA, Basic Fire Management training, NWCG Open Water Diver Certification, PADI Professional Affiliations Society of Wetland Scientists Florida Association of Environmental Professionals Florida Wildlife Society Gopher Tortoise Council Publications Primary Researcher and Author, Phenotypic Plasticity of Reproductive Effort in a Colonial Ascidian, Botryllus schlosseri, Journal of Experimental Zoology. 297A: 180-188, 2003, Estuarine Biology, Article Page 9293 of 9661 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 9294 of 9661 Page 9295 of 9661 Page 9296 of 9661 Page 9297 of 9661 Page 9298 of 9661 Page 9299 of 9661 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 9300 of 9661 STANDARD PROTECTION MEASURES FOR THE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service August 12, 2013 The eastern indigo snake protection/education plan (Plan) below has been developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in Florida for use by applicants and their construction personnel. At least 30 days prior to any clearing/land alteration activities, the applicant shall notify the appropriate USFWS Field Office via e-mail that the Plan will be implemented as described below (North Florida Field Office:jaxregs@fws.gov; South Florida Field Office: verobeach@fws.gov; Panama City Field Office: panamacity@fws.gov). As long as the signatory of the e-mail certifies compliance with the below Plan (including use of the attached poster and brochure), no further written confirmation or “approval” from the USFWS is needed and the applicant may move forward with the project. If the applicant decides to use an eastern indigo snake protection/education plan other than the approved Plan below, written confirmation or “approval” from the USFWS that the plan is adequate must be obtained. At least 30 days prior to any clearing/land alteration activities, the applicant shall submit their unique plan for review and approval. The USFWS will respond via e- mail, typically within 30 days of receiving the plan, either concurring that the plan is adequate or requesting additional information. A concurrence e-mail from the appropriate USFWS Field Office will fulfill approval requirements. The Plan materials should consist of: 1) a combination of posters and pamphlets (see Poster Information section below); and 2) verbal educational instructions to construction personnel by supervisory or management personnel before any clearing/land alteration activities are initiated (see Pre-Construction Activities and During Construction Activities sections below). POSTER INFORMATION Posters with the following information shall be placed at strategic locations on the construction site and along any proposed access roads (a final poster for Plan compliance, to be printed on 11” x 17” or larger paper and laminated, is attached): DESCRIPTION: The eastern indigo snake is one of the largest non-venomous snakes in North America, with individuals often reaching up to 8 feet in length. They derive their name from the glossy, blue-black color of their scales above and uniformly slate blue below. Frequently, they have orange to coral reddish coloration in the throat area, yet some specimens have been reported to only have cream coloration on the throat. These snakes are not typically aggressive and will attempt to crawl away when disturbed. Though indigo snakes rarely bite, they should NOT be handled. SIMILAR SNAKES: The black racer is the only other solid black snake resembling the eastern indigo snake. However, black racers have a white or cream chin, thinner bodies, and WILL BITE if handled. LIFE HISTORY: The eastern indigo snake occurs in a wide variety of terrestrial habitat types throughout Florida. Although they have a preference for uplands, they also utilize some wetlands 1 Page 9301 of 9661 and agricultural areas. Eastern indigo snakes will often seek shelter inside gopher tortoise burrows and other below- and above-ground refugia, such as other animal burrows, stumps, roots, and debris piles. Females may lay from 4 - 12 white eggs as early as April through June, with young hatching in late July through October. PROTECTION UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAW: The eastern indigo snake is classified as a Threatened species by both the USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. “Taking” of eastern indigo snakes is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act without a permit. “Take” is defined by the USFWS as an attempt to kill, harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect, or engage in any such conduct. Penalties include a maximum fine of $25,000 for civil violations and up to $50,000 and/or imprisonment for criminal offenses, if convicted. Only individuals currently authorized through an issued Incidental Take Statement in association with a USFWS Biological Opinion, or by a Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the USFWS, to handle an eastern indigo snake are allowed to do so. IF YOU SEE A LIVE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: x Cease clearing activities and allow the live eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site without interference; x Personnel must NOT attempt to touch or handle snake due to protected status. x Take photographs of the snake, if possible,for identification and documentation purposes. x Immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,and the appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. x If the snake is located in a vicinity where continuation of the clearing or construction activities will cause harm to the snake, the activities must halt until such time that a representative of the USFWS returns the call (within one day) with further guidance as to when activities may resume. IF YOU SEE A DEAD EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: x Cease clearing activities and immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,and the appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. x Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. x Thoroughly soak the dead snake in water and then freeze the specimen. The appropriate wildlife agency will retrieve the dead snake. Telephone numbers of USFWS Florida Field Offices to be contacted if a live or dead eastern indigo snake is encountered: North Florida Field Office – (904) 731-3336 Panama City Field Office – (850) 769-0552 South Florida Field Office – (772) 562-3909 2 Page 9302 of 9661 PRE-CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 1. The applicant or designated agent will post educational posters in the construction office and throughout the construction site, including any access roads. The posters must be clearly visible to all construction staff. A sample poster is attached. 2. Prior to the onset of construction activities, the applicant/designated agent will conduct a meeting with all construction staff (annually for multi-year projects) to discuss identification of the snake, its protected status, what to do if a snake is observed within the project area, and applicable penalties that may be imposed if state and/or federal regulations are violated. An educational brochure including color photographs of the snake will be given to each staff member in attendance and additional copies will be provided to the construction superintendent to make available in the onsite construction office (a final brochure for Plan compliance, to be printed double-sided on 8.5” x 11” paper and then properly folded, is attached). Photos of eastern indigo snakes may be accessed on USFWS and/or FWC websites. 3. Construction staff will be informed that in the event that an eastern indigo snake (live or dead) is observed on the project site during construction activities, all such activities are to cease until the established procedures are implemented according to the Plan, which includes notification of the appropriate USFWS Field Office. The contact information for the USFWS is provided on the referenced posters and brochures. DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 1. During initial site clearing activities, an onsite observer may be utilized to determine whether habitat conditions suggest a reasonable probability of an eastern indigo snake sighting (example: discovery of snake sheds, tracks, lots of refugia and cavities present in the area of clearing activities, and presence of gopher tortoises and burrows). 2. If an eastern indigo snake is discovered during gopher tortoise relocation activities (i.e. burrow excavation), the USFWS shall be contacted within one business day to obtain further guidance which may result in further project consultation. 3. Periodically during construction activities, the applicant’s designated agent should visit the project area to observe the condition of the posters and Plan materials, and replace them as needed. Construction personnel should be reminded of the instructions (above) as to what is expected if any eastern indigo snakes are seen. POST CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES Whether or not eastern indigo snakes are observed during construction activities, a monitoring report should be submitted to the appropriate USFWS Field Office within 60 days of project completion. The report can be sent electronically to the appropriate USFWS e-mail address listed on page one of this Plan. 3 Page 9303 of 9661 IF YOU SEE A LIVE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE:•Cease clearing activities and allow the eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site without interference.•Personnel must NOT attempt to touch or handle snake due to protected status. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,andthe appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •If the snake is located in a vicinity where continuation of the clearing or construction activities will cause harm to the snake, the activities must halt until such time that a representative of the USFWS returns the call (within one day) with further guidance as to when activities may resume.IF YOU SEE A DEAD EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE:•Cease clearing activities and immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,andthe appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Thoroughly soak the dead snake in water and then freeze the specimen.The appropriate wildlife agency will retrieve the dead snake. USFWS Florida Field Offices to be contacted if a live or dead eastern indigo snake is encountered:North Florida ES Office – (904) 731-3336Panama City ES Office – (850) 769-0552South Florida ES Office – (772) 562-3909DESCRIPTION: The eastern indigo snake is one of the largest non-venomous snakes in North America, with individuals often reaching up to 8 feet in length. They derive their name from the glossy, blue-black color of their scales above and uniformly slate blue below. Frequently, they have orange to coral reddish coloration in the throat area, yet some specimens have been reported to only have cream coloration on the throat. These snakes are not typically aggressive and will attempt to crawl away when disturbed. Though indigo snakes rarely bite, they should NOT be handled. SIMILAR SNAKES: The black racer is the only other solid black snake resembling the eastern indigo snake. However, black racers have a white or cream chin, thinner bodies, and WILL BITE if handled.LIFE HISTORY: The eastern indigo snake occurs in a wide variety of terrestrial habitat types throughout Florida. Although they have a preference for uplands, they also utilize some wetlands and agricultural areas. Eastern indigo snakes will often seek shelter inside gopher tortoise burrows and other below- and above-ground refugia, such as other animal burrows, stumps, roots, and debris piles. Females may lay from 4 - 12 white eggs as early as April through June, with young hatching in late July through October.Page 9304 of 9661 Killing, harming, or harassing indigo snakes is strictly prohibited and punishable under State and Federal Law.Only individuals currently authorized through an issued Incidental Take Statement in association with a USFWS Biological Opinion, or by a Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the USFWS, to handle an eastern indigo snake are allowed to do so.LEGAL STATUS: The eastern indigo snake is classified as a Threatened species by both the USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. “Taking” of eastern indigo snakes is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act without a permit. “Take” is defined by the USFWS as an attempt to kill, harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect, or engage in any such conduct.Penalties include a maximum fine of $25,000 for civil violations and up to $50,000 and/or imprisonment for criminal offenses, if convicted.ATTENTION:THREATENED EASTERN INDIGO SNAKES MAY BE PRESENT ON THIS SITE!!! Please read the following information provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to become familiar with standard protection measures for the eastern indigo snake. Photo: Dirk StevensonAugust 12, 2013Page 9305 of 9661 ATTENTION: THREATENED EASTERN INDIGO SNAKES MAY BE PRESENT ON THIS SITE!!! IF YOU SEE A LIVE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: •Cease clearing activities and allow the eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site without interference. •Personnel must NOT attempt to touch or handle snake due to protected status. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent, and the appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •If the snake is located in a vicinity where continuation of the clearing or construction activities will cause harm to the snake, the activities must halt until such time that a representative of the USFWS returns the call (within one day) with further guidance as to when activities may resume. IF YOU SEE A DEAD EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: •Cease clearing activities and immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent, and the appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Thoroughly soak the dead snake in water and then freeze the specimen. The appropriate wildlife agency will retrieve the dead snake. USFWS Florida Field Offices to be contacted if a live or dead eastern indigo snake is encountered: North Florida Field Office – (904) 731-3336 Panama City Field Office – (850) 769-0552 South Florida Field Office – (772) 562-3909 Killing, harming, or harassing indigo snakes is strictly prohibited and punishable under State and Federal Law. DESCRIPTION: The eastern indigo snake is one of the largest non-venomous snakes in North America, with individuals often reaching up to 8 feet in length. They derive their name from the glossy, blue-black color of their scales above and uniformly slate blue below. Frequently, they have orange to coral reddish coloration in the throat area, yet some specimens have been reported to only have cream coloration on the throat. These snakes are not typically aggressive and will attempt to crawl away when disturbed. Though indigo snakes rarely bite, they should NOT be handled. SIMILAR SNAKES: The black racer is the only other solid black snake resembling the eastern indigo snake. However, black racers have a white or cream chin, thinner bodies, and WILL BITE if handled. LIFE HISTORY: The eastern indigo snake occurs in a wide variety of terrestrial habitat types throughout Florida. Although they have a preference for uplands, they also utilize some wetlands and agricultural areas. Eastern indigo snakes will often seek shelter inside gopher tortoise burrows and other below- and above- ground refugia, such as other animal burrows, stumps, roots, and debris piles. Females may lay from 4 - 12 white eggs as early as April through June, with young hatching in late July through October. PROTECTION: The eastern indigo snake is classified as a Threatened species by both the USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. “Taking” of eastern indigo snakes is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act without a permit. “Take” is defined by the USFWS as an attempt to kill, harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect, or engage in any such conduct. Penalties include a maximum fine of $25,000 for civil violations and up to $50,000 and/or imprisonment for criminal offenses, if convicted. Only individuals currently authorized through an issued Incidental Take Statement in association with a USFWS Biological Opinion, or by a Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the USFWS, to handle an eastern indigo snake are allowed to do so. Photo: Dirk Stevenson August 12, 2013 Page 9306 of 9661 ATTACHMENT 4 Page 9307 of 9661 Page 9308 of 9661 %LOO1HZORQ )URP/LVD'DXJKHUW\ 6HQW)ULGD\0DUFK30 7R%LOO1HZORQ 6XEMHFW):>(;7(51$/@86):6&DUDFDUD/RFDWLRQ'DWD $WWDFKPHQWV)HOGDDQG,PPRNDOHH65&DUDFDUDJHSULQWMSJ ^ĞĞďĞůŽǁĂŶĚĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚʹƚŚĞǇĐŚĂŶŐĞĚƚŚĞƐĞƚƵƉƐŽŶŽŵŽƌĞ<DĨŝůĞƐĨŽƌƵƐ͘ >ŝƐĂ&͘ĂƵŐŚĞƌƚǇ͕WDW WƌŽŐƌĂŵDĂŶĂŐĞƌ ϯϲϲϯ>ĂŬĞĞŶƚĞƌƌŝǀĞ DŽƵŶƚŽƌĂ͕&ůŽƌŝĚĂϯϮϳϱϳ ĚͮϯϱϮ͘ϱϱϰ͘ϴϬϴϵ ŵͮϰϬϳ͘Ϯϳϲ͘ϰϲϱϯ dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŵĂǇĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĐŽŶĨŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͘/ĨǇŽƵŚĂǀĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚƚŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůͶŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂŶǇĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐͶŝŶĞƌƌŽƌ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞŶŽƚŝĨǇ ƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌƉƌŽŵƉƚůǇĂŶĚĚĞůĞƚĞƚŚĞĞŵĂŝůĂŶĚĂŶǇĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐĨƌŽŵĂůůŽĨǇŽƵƌƐǇƐƚĞŵƐ͘ &ƌŽŵ͗<ŶƵƚƐŽŶ͕ĚĂŵdфĂĚĂŵͺŬŶƵƚƐŽŶΛĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀх ^ĞŶƚ͗&ƌŝĚĂǇ͕DĂƌĐŚϭϭ͕ϮϬϮϮϯ͗ϯϳWD dŽ͗ůĞǆŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶф^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶΛŬůĞŝŶĨĞůĚĞƌ͘ĐŽŵх Đ͗DĐĚŽŶĂůĚ͕<ĞŶŶĞƚŚфŬĞŶŶĞƚŚͺŵĐĚŽŶĂůĚΛĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗ZĞ͗΀ydZE>΁h^&t^ĂƌĂĐĂƌĂ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶĂƚĂ ǆƚĞƌŶĂůŵĂŝů ,ŝůĞǆŝƐ͕ dŚĞƉŽƌƚĂůǁĂƐŽŶŽƵƌǁĞďƐŝƚĞ͕ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐĂƉƉĂƌĞŶƚůǇŐŽŶĞ͘tĞŚĂǀĞĂŶĞǁǁĞďƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚŝƐŵƵĐŚŵŽƌĞůĞĂŶ͘ ƚƚĂĐŚĞĚŝƐĂ'ŽŽŐůĞĂƌƚŚƐĐƌĞĞŶŐƌĂďŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĞĂŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͘dŚĞƚǁŽĚŽƚƐĂƌĞŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůŽďƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ƚŚĞ ďŝŐĐŝƌĐůĞŝƐĂĐŽŵŵƵŶĂůƌŽŽƐƚͬŐĂƚŚĞƌŝŶŐĂƌĞĂŽĨũƵǀĞŶŝůĞͬƐƵďĂĚƵůƚďŝƌĚƐǁŚĞƌĞϱϬнŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůƐŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶ ŽďƐĞƌǀĞĚ͘>ĞƚŵĞŬŶŽǁŝĨǇŽƵŚĂǀĞĂŶǇƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐŽƌŶĞĞĚĂŶǇƚŚŝŶŐĨƵƌƚŚĞƌ͘ dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ͕ ĚĂŵ Adam Knutson Fish and Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Page 9309 of 9661 1339 20th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Tel: 772-469-4252 Fax: 772-562-4288 &ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶdǁŝƚƚĞƌΛh^&t^sZK &ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶ&ĂĐĞďŽŽŬΛh^&t^^ŽƵƚŚ&ůŽƌŝĚĂ &ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶ/ŶƐƚĂ'ƌĂŵΛƵƐĨǁƐͺƐŽƵƚŚͺĨůŽƌŝĚĂ sŝƐŝƚŽƵƌǁĞďƐŝƚĞĂƚǁǁǁ͘ĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀͬǀĞƌŽďĞĂĐŚͬ EKd͗dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůĐŽƌƌĞƐƉŽŶĚĞŶĐĞĂŶĚĂŶǇĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐƚŽĂŶĚĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐƐĞŶĚĞƌŝƐƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞ&ƌĞĞĚŽŵŽĨ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶĐƚ;&K/ͿĂŶĚ ŵĂǇďĞĚŝƐĐůŽƐĞĚƚŽƚŚŝƌĚƉĂƌƚŝĞƐ͘ &ƌŽŵ͗ůĞǆŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶф^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶΛŬůĞŝŶĨĞůĚĞƌ͘ĐŽŵх ^ĞŶƚ͗dŚƵƌƐĚĂǇ͕DĂƌĐŚϯ͕ϮϬϮϮϳ͗ϱϭD dŽ͗<ŶƵƚƐŽŶ͕ĚĂŵdфĂĚĂŵͺŬŶƵƚƐŽŶΛĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗΀ydZE>΁h^&t^ĂƌĂĐĂƌĂ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶĂƚĂ ,ŝĚĂŵ͕ /ƚŚŽƵŐŚƚ/ƌĞŵĞŵďĞƌĞĚĂƉŽƌƚĂů͕ďƵƚ/ĐŽƵůĚŶ͛ƚĨŝŶĚĂŶǇůŝŶŬ͘tĞ͛ƌĞůŽŽŬŝŶŐĂƚĂŶĂƌĞĂďĞƚǁĞĞŶ&ĞůĚĂĂŶĚ/ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞŝŶ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ͘EŽƌƚŚŽĨϴϰϲ͕ƐŽƵƚŚŽĨϴϯϬ͕ϰŵŝůĞƐĞĂƐƚĂŶĚϰŵŝůĞƐǁĞƐƚŽĨϮϵ͘/ĐĂŶŵĂƌŬƵƉĂŬŵǌŝĨƚŚĂƚ͛ƐŚĞůƉĨƵů͘ dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ͕ ůĞǆŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚDĂŶĂŐĞƌΘĐŽůŽŐŝƐƚ ϯϲϲϯ>ĂŬĞĞŶƚĞƌƌŝǀĞ DŽƵŶƚŽƌĂ͕&>ϯϮϳϱϳ ŽͮϯϱϮ͘ϱϱϰ͘ϴϬϳϲ ŵͮϯϱϮ͘ϵϳϴ͘ϯϮϰϯ dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŵĂǇĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĐŽŶĨŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͘/ĨǇŽƵŚĂǀĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚƚŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůͶŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂŶǇĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐͶŝŶĞƌƌŽƌ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞŶŽƚŝĨǇ ƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌƉƌŽŵƉƚůǇĂŶĚĚĞůĞƚĞƚŚĞĞŵĂŝůĂŶĚĂŶǇĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐĨƌŽŵĂůůŽĨǇŽƵƌƐǇƐƚĞŵƐ͘ &ƌŽŵ͗<ŶƵƚƐŽŶ͕ĚĂŵdфĂĚĂŵͺŬŶƵƚƐŽŶΛĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀх ^ĞŶƚ͗tĞĚŶĞƐĚĂǇ͕DĂƌĐŚϮ͕ϮϬϮϮϰ͗ϮϱWD dŽ͗ůĞǆŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶф^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶΛŬůĞŝŶĨĞůĚĞƌ͘ĐŽŵх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗ZĞ͗΀ydZE>΁h^&t^ĂƌĂĐĂƌĂ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶĂƚĂ ǆƚĞƌŶĂůŵĂŝů Page 9310 of 9661 ,ŝůĞǆŝƐ͕ tĞƵƐĞĚƚŽŚĂǀĞĂƉŽƌƚĂůƚŽƌĞƋƵĞƐƚƐƉĞĐŝĞƐŽĐĐƵƌƌĞŶĐĞƐŚĂƉĞĨŝůĞƐ͖ŝƚĂƉƉĞĂƌƐƚŚĂƚŚĂƐďĞĞŶƌĞŵŽǀĞĚ͘ƐǁĞ ŚĂǀĞĂůŽƚŽĨĚĂƚĂĨŽƌƚŚĞĐĂƌĂĐĂƌĂ͕ŝƚŵĂǇďĞĞĂƐŝĞƌƚŽƌĞĨŝŶĞƚŚĞĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂƚŽƚŚĞĂƌĞĂǇŽƵĂƌĞůŽŽŬŝŶŐ͘ĂŶǇŽƵ ƐŚĂƌĞƚŚĞŐĞŶĞƌĂůůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚŝƐŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͍ dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ͕ ĚĂŵ Adam Knutson Fish and Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1339 20th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Tel: 772-469-4252 Fax: 772-562-4288 &ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶdǁŝƚƚĞƌΛh^&t^sZK &ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶ&ĂĐĞďŽŽŬΛh^&t^^ŽƵƚŚ&ůŽƌŝĚĂ &ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶ/ŶƐƚĂ'ƌĂŵΛƵƐĨǁƐͺƐŽƵƚŚͺĨůŽƌŝĚĂ sŝƐŝƚŽƵƌǁĞďƐŝƚĞĂƚǁǁǁ͘ĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀͬǀĞƌŽďĞĂĐŚͬ EKd͗dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůĐŽƌƌĞƐƉŽŶĚĞŶĐĞĂŶĚĂŶǇĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐƚŽĂŶĚĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐƐĞŶĚĞƌŝƐƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞ&ƌĞĞĚŽŵŽĨ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶĐƚ;&K/ͿĂŶĚ ŵĂǇďĞĚŝƐĐůŽƐĞĚƚŽƚŚŝƌĚƉĂƌƚŝĞƐ͘ &ƌŽŵ͗ůĞǆŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶф^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶΛŬůĞŝŶĨĞůĚĞƌ͘ĐŽŵх ^ĞŶƚ͗dƵĞƐĚĂǇ͕DĂƌĐŚϭ͕ϮϬϮϮϯ͗ϭϵWD dŽ͗<ŶƵƚƐŽŶ͕ĚĂŵdфĂĚĂŵͺŬŶƵƚƐŽŶΛĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗΀ydZE>΁h^&t^ĂƌĂĐĂƌĂ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶĂƚĂ dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŚĂƐďĞĞŶƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĨƌŽŵŽƵƚƐŝĚĞŽĨK/ͲhƐĞĐĂƵƚŝŽŶďĞĨŽƌĞĐůŝĐŬŝŶŐŽŶůŝŶŬƐ͕ŽƉĞŶŝŶŐĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐ͕Žƌ ƌĞƐƉŽŶĚŝŶŐ͘ ,ŝĚĂŵ͕ /ŚŽƉĞǇŽƵ͛ƌĞĚŽŝŶŐǁĞůů͘/ǁĂƐǁŽŶĚĞƌŝŶŐŝĨƚŚĞƌĞǁĂƐĂŶǇĚĂƚĂĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐĐĂƌĂĐĂƌĂůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶƐŽƵƚŚ&ůŽƌŝĚĂ͕ ƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌůǇŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ͍WůĞĂƐĞůĞƚŵĞŬŶŽǁŝĨƚŚĞƌĞŝƐƐŽŵĞŽŶĞĞůƐĞ/ƐŚŽƵůĚƌĞĂĐŚŽƵƚƚŽ͘ dŚĂŶŬǇŽƵ͕ ůĞǆŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚDĂŶĂŐĞƌΘĐŽůŽŐŝƐƚ ϯϲϲϯ>ĂŬĞĞŶƚĞƌƌŝǀĞ Page 9311 of 9661 DŽƵŶƚŽƌĂ͕&>ϯϮϳϱϳ ŽͮϯϱϮ͘ϱϱϰ͘ϴϬϳϲ ŵͮϯϱϮ͘ϵϳϴ͘ϯϮϰϯ dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŵĂǇĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĐŽŶĨŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͘/ĨǇŽƵŚĂǀĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚƚŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůͶŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂŶǇĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐͶŝŶĞƌƌŽƌ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞŶŽƚŝĨǇ ƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌƉƌŽŵƉƚůǇĂŶĚĚĞůĞƚĞƚŚĞĞŵĂŝůĂŶĚĂŶǇĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐĨƌŽŵĂůůŽĨǇŽƵƌƐǇƐƚĞŵƐ͘ Page 9312 of 9661 /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞĂƐƚhƉůĂŶĚWƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶWůĂŶƟŶŐWůĂŶ An undeveloped 1.48-acre ƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶĂƌĞĂǁŝůůďĞƉůĂŶƚĞĚǁŝƚŚŵĞƐŝĐŇĂƚǁŽŽĚƐƉĞĐŝĞƐƚŽŵĞĞt ƚŚĞŶĂƟǀĞǀĞŐĞƚĂƟŽŶƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐin ƐĞĐƟŽŶϰ͘Ϭϴ͘Ϭϱ͘:͘Ϯ of the Land Development Code. The ůŽĐĂƟŽŶŽĨƚŚĞƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶĂƌĞĂŝƐĚĞƉŝĐƚĞĚŝŶĐŽŶũƵŶĐƟŽŶǁŝƚŚϮ-foot LiDAR contours ŽŶƚŚĞĂƩĂĐŚed Preserve Area map (&ŝŐƵƌĞϭ). EZ^ŵĂƉƉĞĚƐŽŝůƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶĂƌĞĂ consist of /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞƐĂŶĚ͕ϬƚŽϮйƐůŽƉĞƐ. Pursuant to the NRCS Soils Survey for Collier County, DĞƐŝĐŇĂƚǁŽŽĚƐĂƌĞƚǇƉŝĐĂůůǇĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐĞƐŽŝůƚǇƉĞƐ͘EĂƟǀĞƉůĂŶƟŶŐƐƚǇƉŝĐĂůŽĨŵĞƐŝĐ ŇĂƚǁŽŽĚƐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐǁĞƌĞĐŚŽƐĞŶďĂƐĞĚŽŶƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƟǀĞƐƉĞĐŝĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĮĞĚŝŶƚŚĞEZ^^ŽŝůƐ Survey and the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) 'ƵŝĚĞƚŽƚŚĞEĂƚƵƌĂůŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐŽĨ Florida. ĂŶŽƉǇ͕ƐŚƌƵď͕ĂŶĚŐƌŽƵŶĚĐŽǀĞƌƐƚƌĂƚĂǁŝůůall be planted. The canopy stratum will consist of slash pine (WŝŶƵƐĞůůŝŽƫŝ); the shrub stratum will consist of saw ƉĂůŵĞƩŽ (Serenoa repens)͕ŐĂůůďĞƌƌǇ (Ilex glabra), and wax myrtle (Morella cerifera); and the ŐƌŽƵŶĚĐŽǀĞƌƐƚƌĂƚƵŵǁŝůůĐŽŶƐŝƐƚŽĨƉŝŶĞůĂŶĚƚŚƌĞĞĂǁŶ (ƌŝƐƟĚĂƐƚƌŝĐƚĂ var. beyrichiana), chalky ďƌŽŽŵƐĞĚŐĞ (ŶĚƌŽƉŽŐŽŶǀŝƌŐŝŶŝĐƵƐ), and shiny blueberry (sĂĐĐŝŶŝƵŵŵǇƌƐŝŶŝƚĞƐ)͘ůůƉůĂŶƟŶŐƐ will be installed on 4-ĨŽŽƚĐĞŶƚĞƌƐ͖ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ƚŽĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƚĞĂůůƚŚƌĞĞƐƚƌĂƚĂ͕ƐƉĂĐŝŶŐďĞƚǁĞĞŶ plants within the same strata will vary. Canopy stratum ƉůĂŶƟŶŐƐǁŝůůďĞinstalled on 16-foot ĐĞŶƚĞƌƐ͖ƐŚƌƵďƐƚƌĂƚƵŵƉůĂŶƟŶŐƐǁŝůůďĞŝŶƐƚĂůůĞĚon 8-foot and 16-foot centers; and ŐƌŽƵŶĚĐŽǀĞƌ ƐƚƌĂƚƵŵƉůĂŶƟŶŐƐǁŝůůďĞŝŶƐƚĂůůĞĚŽŶϰ-foot and 8-foot centers. WůĞĂƐĞƌĞĨĞƌƚŽƚŚĞĂƩĂĐŚĞĚ ƚǇƉŝĐĂůƉůĂŶƟŶŐĚĞƚĂŝůwhich illustrates the proposed ƉůĂŶƟŶŐƚǇƉĞƐĂŶĚŽǀĞƌĂůl ĐŽŵƉŽƐŝƟŽŶŽĨ the ƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶĂƌĞĂ͘ Page 9313 of 9661 4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'48'Continues for 1,290'Legend: Tree Shrub Ground CoverPlanting Area (1,290' x 48')Not to ScalePlanting CompositionTrees, Shrubs, and Ground CoverGround CoverShrubs and Ground CoverGround CoverTrees, Shrubs, and Ground CoverGround CoverShrubs and Ground CoverGround CoverTrees, Shrubs, and Ground CoverGround CoverShrubs and Ground CoverGround CoverTrees, Shrubs, and Ground Cover\\mountdora\MOUNTDORA-DATA\GISCAD\0_Map Data\0_LOGO\Kleinfelder\KLF MD Logo with Address & COA.jpgCAD FILE: \\azrgisstorp03\GIS_Projects\Mt_Dora\GISCAD\Stewart Mining\_2025\26000118.001A_SMI-Immokalee-East Expansion 40Ac\DWG_APRX\ LAYOUT: PlantingDetailPLOTTED: 21 May 2025, 9:24am, NLawrenceATTACHED XREFS:ATTACHED IMAGES: Images: KLF MD Logo with Address & COA.jpgFILE NAME:25-0519_ImmokaleeEastExp.dwgDRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DRAWN:PROJECT NO.www.kleinfelder.comThe information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety ofsources and is subject to change without notice. Kleinfelder makes no representations orwarranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use ofsuch information. This document is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is itdesigned or intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the informationcontained on this graphic representation is at the sole risk of the party using or misusing theinformation.MT. DORA, FLStewart MaterialsImmokalee Mine East ExpansionCollier County, FloridaFIGURE-NLAWN5/19/202526000118.001ATypical Planting DetailPage 9314 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page i of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com IMMOKALEE SAND MINE, EAST EXPANSION WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA KLEINFELDER PROJECT #20223424.001 Updated February 2025 Prepared for: 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Prepared by: 3663 Lake Center Drive Mount Dora, FL 32757 Copyright 2025 Kleinfelder All Rights Reserved ONLY THE CLIENT OR ITS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES MAY USE THIS DOCUMENT AND ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT FOR WHICH THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED. Page 9315 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page ii of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com A Report Prepared for: Stewart Materials 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN IMMOKALEE SAND MINE, EAST EXPANSION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared by: Bill Newlon Senior Ecologist Reviewed by: Lisa Daugherty Program Manager KLEINFELDER 3663 Lake Center Drive Mount Dora, Florida 32757 February 11, 2025 Kleinfelder Project No 20223424.001A Page 9316 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page iii of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________________________________________________ SECTION Page 1INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 2WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN ....................................................................... 2 3WILDLIFE MONITORING PROGRAM ................................................................. 7 FIGURES 1 PROJECT LOCATION 2 NRCS SOILS 3 BLACK BEAR RANGE MAP 4 USFWS FLORIDA PANTHER FOCUS AREA MAP ATTACHMENTS 1 EAGLE WATCH NESTING LOCATIONS MAP 2 EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE STANDARD PROTECTION MEASURES Page 9317 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 1 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 1 INTRODUCTION ____________________________________________________________________________ The following wildlife management plan was prepared for the Collier County Growth Management Department to meet the requirements of Sections 3.04.02 and 4.08.05.J.3. of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The wildlife management plan was requested in association with Conditional Use approval for a proposed 39.92-acre eastern expansion of the Edwards Grove Road Sand Mine (a.k.a. Immokalee Sand Mine) for the construction of a plant site (the project), which is located in Section 17, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida (Figure 1). The 39.92-acre eastern expansion property is herein referred to as the “site.” Page 9318 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 2 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 2 WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN ___________________________________________________________________________________ Pursuant to Sections 3.04.02 and 4.08.05.J.3. of the Collier County LDC, a wildlife habitat management plan for listed species shall be submitted for County approval for all projects where the wildlife survey indicated listed species are utilizing the site, or the site is capable of supporting and is likely to support listed species. While wildlife surveys and records have not identified listed species utilizing the site, the site is capable of supporting listed species, and thus, this plan has been prepared as required. The purpose of this plan is to describe how the project will direct incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. Specifically, the management and protection of wildlife should include requirements detailed in Sections 3.04.02 and 4.08.05.J.3. for the following species: Gopher tortoise, sea turtles, Florida scrub jay, bald eagle, red-cockaded woodpecker, Florida black bear, Florida panther, and west Indian manatee. Additionally, two other listed species of wildlife not specifically identified in these sections of the LDC have been included in this wildlife management plan, the eastern indigo snake and Audubon’s crested caracara. The following addresses each of these species as applicable: Gopher Tortoise No gopher tortoise individuals or their burrows have been documented on the site. Pursuant to the Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines, suitable soils are typically those that are moderately well-drained to excessively drained, with a midpoint of the upper limit of the water table value of 18 inches or greater. A map of the NRCS soil units has been provided as Figure 2. Pursuant to the NRCS, all mapped soils on the site are somewhat poorly to poorly drained and the only soil with a midpoint water table value of 18 inches or greater is Pomello fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes (15). This soil type is mapped over a small portion of the site (3.42%) along the northern boundary. Based on the widespread land use disturbances, associated with the sites former use for agriculture and as a nursery, general soil unsuitability, low elevations, and corresponding high- water table, the likelihood of tortoises utilizing the site is considered low. Potentially suitable habitat would most likely be limited to berms noted along the perimeter ditches within the eastern pasture areas at times of the year when the water table is depressed. Mining will avoid pasture areas and is being limited to the portions of the site consisting of abandoned nursery and fallow row crop operations. While tortoises are not anticipated in these areas, a survey for tortoises that includes berms and the area mapped with Pomello fine sand, 0 to 2 Page 9319 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 3 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com percent slopes (15) will be conducted as specified in the FWC Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines in advance of the project. In the event potentially occupied gopher tortoise burrows are identified within the limits of project related disturbance, they will be permitted for relocation, and no project related activities will occur until all burrows are excavated and the tortoises in any occupied burrows are relocated. Sea Turtles The management of sea turtles does not apply since this project is located inland and does not contain coastal habitats utilized by these species. Florida scrub jay No Florida scrub jay (scrub jay) individuals have been documented on the site. The scrub jay inhabits fire-dominated, low growing oak scrub found on well-drained sandy soils but may also be found on modified lands such as abandoned citrus groves or other developed lands where scrub oaks provide a supply of acorn forage and bare, dry, sandy soils are present for caching acorns. Management of the scrub jay does not apply to this project since no suitable habitats with scrub oaks or bare, dry sandy soils are present to support the use of this site by this species. Bald Eagle No known bald eagle nests have been documented on the project or within 660 feet of the site. Protective buffers where certain activities are restricted are typically required for development within 660 feet of a bald eagle nest. Up to date mapping of documented eagle nests from Audubon’s Eagle Watch which includes the 660-foot buffers has been provided as Attachment 1. With no nests documented within 660 feet of the project, no restrictions are currently being implemented on the project for this species. In the event future bald eagle nesting occurs on or within 660 feet of the project, this wildlife management plan will be updated to address the implementation of applicable protection measures. Red-Cockaded Woodpecker No red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) individuals have been documented on the site. The RCW has very specific habitat requirements which limit them to open pine woodlands and savannahs with large, old pines for nesting and roosting, and open mid-stories with abundant bunchgrasses and forb groundcovers for foraging. The management of the RCW does not apply to this project since no suitable pine woodland habitat is present to support the use of this site by this species. Page 9320 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 4 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com Florida black bear Pursuant to the latest FWC coverage of Florida Black Bear (black bear) populations, the project is mapped within a portion of the geographic range of the Big Cypress black bear population where it has been determined to be a frequent occurrence (Figure 3). The black bear is known to utilize a variety of habitats including pine flatwoods, swamps and forested scrub and relies on contiguous forested expanses for cover and travel corridors. Black bears main forage in Florida includes acorns, saw palmetto, and cabbage palm. Denning typically occurs in the ground surrounded by dense protective vegetation such as saw palmetto. The project consists of active and abandoned agricultural land use types, with no saw palmetto and habitats with limited shrubby native vegetation that provide cover but no real foraging or denning opportunities. What native vegetation is present is associated with the 2.06-acre willow and elderberry wetland which will be preserved to maintain existing cover for black bears (See Sheet C-20.00 of the plans). A 25-foot-wide average upland buffer is also being proposed surrounding this preserved wetland to buffer the undisturbed low intensity land use areas to the east consisting of the preservation wetland and pastureland from the western most intense land use areas associated with the project. Additional protection measures for this species will also include the placement of signage along the entrance road from Edwards Grove Road (See Sheet C-20.00 of the plans) to inform haul truck operators of its potential as a black bear crossing area, limiting haul trucks to a maximum speed of 15 MPH, and utilizing bear-proof trash containers to discourage scavenging by black bears and minimize interactions between black bears and humans. Florida Panther According to the FWC, the project exists within the Secondary Zone (Figure 4), or Priority II area, defined as lands important to the long-term persistence of the Florida panther (panther) where expansion of the population is likely to occur, but not essential like Primary Zone, or Priority I areas which are typically occupied by panthers and crucial to maintaining a viable population. The Florida panther requires an extensive mosaic of native plant communities, which are contiguous and largely forested to meet their social, reproductive, and energetic needs. All land on and surrounding the project consists primarily of altered land use areas, with relatively low functional value, such as extraction areas, citrus groves, active and abandoned agricultural areas, disturbed lands, and man-made surface water ditches and reservoirs. The site being proposed for the project would appear to be compatible with Chapter 3.04.02 of the Collier County Land Development Codes which discourages the destruction of native habitats preferred by the Florida panther such as pine flatwoods and hardwood hammocks by directing intensive land uses to currently disturbed areas. Page 9321 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 5 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com Native vegetation on the site is associated with the 2.06-acre willow and elderberry wetland which will be preserved to maintain existing cover for panthers (See Sheet C-20.00 of the plans). A 25- foot-wide average upland buffer is also being proposed surrounding this preserved wetland to buffer the undisturbed low intensity land use areas to the east consisting of the preservation wetland and pastureland from the western most intense land use areas associated with the project. Additional protection measures for this species will also include the placement of signage along the entrance road from Edwards Grove Road (See Sheet C-20.00 of the plans) to inform haul truck operators of its potential as a panther crossing area and limiting haul trucks to a maximum speed of 15 MPH. West Indian Manatee The management of the west Indian Manatee does not apply since this project is located inland and does not contain coastal habitats utilized by this species. Eastern Indigo Snake The eastern indigo snake (EIS) ranges over large areas often in the hundreds of acres over which it utilizes a mosaic of upland and wetland habitats, from scrub and sandhill to wet prairies and mangrove swamps. It will use most of the available habitats within its home range, but prefers open, undeveloped areas. The burrows of gopher tortoises are often used for denning as thermal refugia from winter cold and desiccating sandhill environments. While no gopher tortoise burrows were observed on the project, the likelihood of occurrence of the EIS on the site is considered low to moderate based on the rural nature of the area, the potential for gopher tortoise burrows outside the project, and the large territorial ranges used by this species. As such, the USFWS’s Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake will be used during site preparation and project construction. This will include an outline of the measures being incorporated, educational pamphlets, and signage (Attachment 2). Audubon’s crested caracara The Audubon’s crested caracara (caracara) prefers large pasture expanses, grasslands, or prairies with numerous shallow ponds and sloughs for foraging and single to small clumps (2 to 10) of cabbage palm. The project consists of a mix of active (pasture) and abandoned (row crops and nursery) agricultural land uses. The abandoned nursery and fallow row crops areas are overgrown and of limited suitability for this species. The active pasture which extends offsite to the east has some ponds and wetlands which provide moderate suitability for foraging; however, there are very few individual or small clumps of cabbage palm trees which are of suitable size for Page 9322 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 6 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com nesting. Any cabbage palm trees that did appear suitable for nesting were located within the improved pasture. These trees were inspected during the site assessment, and no nests were observed. The improved pasture areas will be avoided by the project and a forested buffer will be retained between the project and pasture areas, leaving potential nesting and foraging areas intact for use by this species. Page 9323 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 7 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 3 WILDLIFE MONITORING PROGRAM Pursuant to 4.08.05.J.3.a.iii. of the LDC, a wildlife monitoring program is required for developments over 10 acres. Annual wildlife monitoring will occur in February or March of each year. These months were chosen as they fall within the most active portions of the nesting season for the bald eagle and Audubon’s crested caracara and any evidence of nesting on the site or nearby would likely be evident at that time. Monitoring will include reconnaissance of the 39.92- acre project site for signs of nesting or other evidence of utilization by the bald eagle, caracara, gopher tortoise, black bear, panther, or EIS. The results of each annual monitoring event will be documented in a summary report and will be available to Collier County upon request. Page 9324 of 9661 FIGURES Page 9325 of 9661 Page 9326 of 9661 Page 9327 of 9661 Page 9328 of 9661 Page 9329 of 9661 ATTACHMENTS Page 9330 of 9661 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 9331 of 9661 VV H O RX J K * D W R U 6 O R X J K ) X V V H O 6 O R X J K 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˙ 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˙ 3 H S S H U 5 D Q F K 3 U H V H U Y H / D N H 7 U D I I R U G & R U N V F U H Z 6 Z D P S , P P R N D O H H 5 G & R Z 6 O R X J K ) H O G D ˝ 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˝ 1 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˝ 1 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˙ , P P R N D O H H 5 H J L R Q D O $ L U S R U W ˙ ˇ ˙ ˇ 6 V W 6 W ( 0 D L Q 6 W , P P R N D O H H 5 G 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˝ 6 , P P R N D O H H 5 H V H U Y D W L R Q , P P R N D O H H 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˝ 6 ( D J O H : D W F K 0 D S 8 Q L Y H U V L W \ R I 6 R X W K ) O R U L G D ) ' ( 3 ( V 6 D I H * U D S K * H R 7 H F K Q R O R J L H V , Q F 0 ( ( 3 $ 1 3 6 8 6 ' $ 8 6 ) : 6 6 W D W H R I ) O R U L * H R J U D S K L F V % D O G ( D J O H 1 H V W / R F D W L R Q V X Q P R Q L W R U H G ˇ ˇ I W % X I I H U $ U R X Q G 1 H V W / R F D W L R Q V ˙ ˇ ˛ ˛ ˆ 3 0 ˘ ˆ ˘ P L N P ˛ ˆ $ U F * , 6 : H E $ S S % X L O 6 W D W H R I ) O R U L G D ( D U W K V W D U * H R J U D S K L F V _ 8 Q L Y H U V L W \ R I 6 R X W K ) O R U L G D ) ' ( 3 ( V U L 7 R P 7 R P * D U P L Q 6 D I H * U D S K * H RPage 9332 of 9661 PROJECT SITE ATTACHMENT 2 Page 9333 of 9661 IF YOU SEE A LIVE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE:•Cease clearing activities and allow the eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site without interference.•Personnel must NOT attempt to touch or handle snake due to protected status. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,andthe appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •If the snake is located in a vicinity where continuation of the clearing or construction activities will cause harm to the snake, the activities must halt until such time that a representative of the USFWS returns the call (within one day) with further guidance as to when activities may resume.IF YOU SEE A DEAD EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE:•Cease clearing activities and immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,andthe appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Thoroughly soak the dead snake in water and then freeze the specimen.The appropriate wildlife agency will retrieve the dead snake. USFWS Florida Field Offices to be contacted if a live or dead eastern indigo snake is encountered:North Florida ES Office – (904) 731-3336Panama City ES Office – (850) 769-0552South Florida ES Office – (772) 562-3909DESCRIPTION: The eastern indigo snake is one of the largest non-venomous snakes in North America, with individuals often reaching up to 8 feet in length. They derive their name from the glossy, blue-black color of their scales above and uniformly slate blue below. Frequently, they have orange to coral reddish coloration in the throat area, yet some specimens have been reported to only have cream coloration on the throat. These snakes are not typically aggressive and will attempt to crawl away when disturbed. Though indigo snakes rarely bite, they should NOT be handled. SIMILAR SNAKES: The black racer is the only other solid black snake resembling the eastern indigo snake. However, black racers have a white or cream chin, thinner bodies, and WILL BITE if handled.LIFE HISTORY: The eastern indigo snake occurs in a wide variety of terrestrial habitat types throughout Florida. Although they have a preference for uplands, they also utilize some wetlands and agricultural areas. Eastern indigo snakes will often seek shelter inside gopher tortoise burrows and other below- and above-ground refugia, such as other animal burrows, stumps, roots, and debris piles. Females may lay from 4 - 12 white eggs as early as April through June, with young hatching in late July through October.Page 9334 of 9661 Killing, harming, or harassing indigo snakes is strictly prohibited and punishable under State and Federal Law.Only individuals currently authorized through an issued Incidental Take Statement in association with a USFWS Biological Opinion, or by a Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the USFWS, to handle an eastern indigo snake are allowed to do so.LEGAL STATUS: The eastern indigo snake is classified as a Threatened species by both the USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. “Taking” of eastern indigo snakes is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act without a permit. “Take” is defined by the USFWS as an attempt to kill, harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect, or engage in any such conduct.Penalties include a maximum fine of $25,000 for civil violations and up to $50,000 and/or imprisonment for criminal offenses, if convicted.ATTENTION:THREATENED EASTERN INDIGO SNAKES MAY BE PRESENT ON THIS SITE!!! Please read the following information provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to become familiar with standard protection measures for the eastern indigo snake. Photo: Dirk StevensonAugust 12, 2013Page 9335 of 9661 ATTENTION: THREATENED EASTERN INDIGO SNAKES MAY BE PRESENT ON THIS SITE!!! IF YOU SEE A LIVE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: •Cease clearing activities and allow the eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site without interference. •Personnel must NOT attempt to touch or handle snake due to protected status. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent, and the appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •If the snake is located in a vicinity where continuation of the clearing or construction activities will cause harm to the snake, the activities must halt until such time that a representative of the USFWS returns the call (within one day) with further guidance as to when activities may resume. IF YOU SEE A DEAD EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: •Cease clearing activities and immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent, and the appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Thoroughly soak the dead snake in water and then freeze the specimen. The appropriate wildlife agency will retrieve the dead snake. USFWS Florida Field Offices to be contacted if a live or dead eastern indigo snake is encountered: North Florida Field Office – (904) 731-3336 Panama City Field Office – (850) 769-0552 South Florida Field Office – (772) 562-3909 Killing, harming, or harassing indigo snakes is strictly prohibited and punishable under State and Federal Law. DESCRIPTION: The eastern indigo snake is one of the largest non-venomous snakes in North America, with individuals often reaching up to 8 feet in length. They derive their name from the glossy, blue-black color of their scales above and uniformly slate blue below. Frequently, they have orange to coral reddish coloration in the throat area, yet some specimens have been reported to only have cream coloration on the throat. These snakes are not typically aggressive and will attempt to crawl away when disturbed. Though indigo snakes rarely bite, they should NOT be handled. SIMILAR SNAKES: The black racer is the only other solid black snake resembling the eastern indigo snake. However, black racers have a white or cream chin, thinner bodies, and WILL BITE if handled. LIFE HISTORY: The eastern indigo snake occurs in a wide variety of terrestrial habitat types throughout Florida. Although they have a preference for uplands, they also utilize some wetlands and agricultural areas. Eastern indigo snakes will often seek shelter inside gopher tortoise burrows and other below- and above- ground refugia, such as other animal burrows, stumps, roots, and debris piles. Females may lay from 4 - 12 white eggs as early as April through June, with young hatching in late July through October. PROTECTION: The eastern indigo snake is classified as a Threatened species by both the USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. “Taking” of eastern indigo snakes is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act without a permit. “Take” is defined by the USFWS as an attempt to kill, harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect, or engage in any such conduct. Penalties include a maximum fine of $25,000 for civil violations and up to $50,000 and/or imprisonment for criminal offenses, if convicted. Only individuals currently authorized through an issued Incidental Take Statement in association with a USFWS Biological Opinion, or by a Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the USFWS, to handle an eastern indigo snake are allowed to do so. Photo: Dirk Stevenson August 12, 2013 Page 9336 of 9661 From:FinnTimothy To:GundlachNancy; BellowsRay Cc:Jessica Kluttz Subject:PL20210003005 Stewart Mining Conditional Use - HAPB Date:Monday, December 19, 2022 8:56:18 AM Attachments:image001.png Hi Nancy, Last Friday the HAPB voted 4-0 to accept the findings and recommendation in the Cultural Resource Assessment for the above referenced petition. Timothy Finn, Principal Planner Zoning Division - Zoning Services Section Growth Management Department Telephone: 239.252.4312 Exceeding expectations, every day! Tell us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at https://goo.gl/eXjvqT. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Page 9337 of 9661 N00°25'13"W 1331.15'(D)N00°25'14"W 1331.53'(S)N00°19'08"W 2653.33'(D)N00°29'38"W 2652.80'(S)N89°39'50"E 2481.85'(D)N88°51'13"E 2481.73'(S)S00°07'03"E 2658.62'(D)S00°55'38"E 2658.69'(S)S00°12'54"E 1353.32'(D)S00°35'34"E 1352.26'(S)N89°52'57"E(D)84.00'(D)N89°04'22"E(S)84.00'(S)N89°43'00"W 2590.55'(D)S89°27'14"W 2589.72'(S)N89°43'00"W 2340.90'(D)S89°27'00"W 2341.08'(S)N89°39'50"E 2448.79'(D)N88°47'54"E 2437.77'(S)33.933.832.533.032.833.733.633.833.532.933.333.433.733.133.633.834.534.835.435.734.433.532.732.932.833.132.932.332.632.833.133.032.831.532.232.832.432.031.732.434.034.232.332.632.932.932.232.331.832.832.232.532.532.131.432.832.032.733.632.433.533.133.635.033.533.332.433.433.433.532.632.832.933.033.033.332.732.535.035.234.834.033.334.434.734.633.533.634.434.435.734.135.835.634.435.834.833.033.132.834.434.634.435.334.534.134.133.934.634.733.635.133.133.932.934.233.934.834.834.734.834.134.034.034.733.334.033.234.934.935.036.435.535.235.235.0334.535.334.635.234.435.034.235.033.434.233.634.033.533.533.434.433.734.834.935.936.436.036.635.934.834.535.834.634.633.832.833.333.032.733.333.834.335.435.335.835.234.935.736.036.135.635.435.337.239.036.838.136.135.137.437.936.735.438.035.637.635.336.636.333.833.833.635.233.033.435.433.2BARFIELD GROVE(O.R.BOOK 5350, PAGE 1271) 231.73 ACRES OF LANDPOINT OF BEGINNINGSOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 18,TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EASTFOUND 5/8" IRON PIN AND CAPSTAMPED MINOR LB 5151POINT OF BEGINNINGNORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 19,TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EASTFOUND 1" PIPE WITH1/2" CAP STAMPEDLB 642FOUND 1" PIPE WITH1/2" CAP STAMPEDLB 642FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 642FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB F043FOUND 4"X4" CONCRETEMONUMENT (BROKEN)WEST 1/4 CORNER OF SECTION 19,TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EASTCCR# 106978N00°12'54"W 1353.32'(D)N00°35'34"W 1352.26'(S)S89°52'57"W 84.00'(D)S89°04'22"W 84.00'(S)N00°07'03"W 2658.62'(D)N00°55'38"W 2658.69'(S)SOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIES(O.R.BOOK 3330, PAGE 3215) 218.97 ACRES OF LANDTIITF / ED UNIV FLPARCEL NO. 00066000002SOUTHERN RESERVES LLCPARCEL NO. 00065402009 39.92 ACRES OF LANDRINKER MATERIALS WEST LLCPARCEL NO. 00065480005TURNER GROVES CITRUS LTD PRTNRPARCEL NO. 00050600007TURNER GROVES CITRUS LTD PRTNRPARCEL NO. 00052520004TURNER GROVES CITRUS LTD PRTNRPARCEL NO. 00065600005BARRON COLLIER P'SHIP LLLPPARCEL NO. 00065640007TIITF / ED UNIV FLPARCEL NO. 00066040004FOUND 4"X4" CONCRETECOLLIER MONUMENT WITHBRASS DISC STAMPED1/4 CORNER (BROKEN)FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED MINORLB 5151FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 642S00°11'07"W 2692.02(D)S00°38'42"E 2692.02'(S)S00°12'15"W 1345.64'(D)S00°36'52"E 1346.05'(S)S00°36'52"E 1345.75'(S)S00°38'42"E 2691.98'(S)2407.77'2311.08'LESS AND EXCEPT THEEAST 30 FEET QUIT CLAIM DEED(O.R. BOOK 156, PAGE 375)LESS AND EXCEPT THEEAST 30 FEET QUIT CLAIM DEED(O.R. BOOK 156, PAGE 375)FOUND 4"X4" CONCRETECOLLIER MONUMENT WITHBRASS DISC STAMPED1/4 CORNERFOUND 5/8" IRONPIN NO I.D., 25.10'WEST OF COMPUTEDPROPERTY CORNEREASEMENT FOR CANALS AND DRAINAGE(O.R. BOOK 1141, PAGE 2089)EASEMENT FOR CANALS AND DRAINAGE(O.R. BOOK 1141, PAGE 2089)EASEMENT FOR CANALS AND DRAINAGE(O.R. BOOK 1141, PAGE 2089)EASEMENT FOR CANALS AND DRAINAGE(O.R. BOOK 1141, PAGE 2089)50' UTILITY EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 3909, PAGE 2831)50' UTILITY EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 3909, PAGE 2831)50' UTILITY EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 3974, PAGE 1369)50' UTILITY EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 3974, PAGE 1369)EASEMENT FOR ROAD(O.R. BOOK 1141, PAGE 2093)FLOOD ZONE AH36.5 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH36.5 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH36 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH35.5 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH35 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH34.5 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH34 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH33.5 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH36 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH35 CONTOUR LINE19 2018 1719 2019 2024 1924 1924 1913 18N88°59'44"E 4923.89'(S)SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EASTSECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EASTAPPROXIMATE DIRTROADEDWARDS GROVE ROAD5,780 FEET± TO S.R. 82LAMM ROAD7,327 FEET± TO S.R. 82APPROXIMATEASPHALT/DIRTROADAPPROXIMATE DIRTROADAPPROXIMATE ASPHALTROADGATE IS 7'±WEST OFPROPERTY CORNEROHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHUAPPROXIMATE OVERHEADPOWER LINESN88°47'54"E 30.00'S89°27'00"W 30.00'N88°51'16"E 30.00'N88°51'16"E 1289.04'S00°36'30"E 1351.88'N89°06'28"E 1288.86'N00°36'52"W 1346.18'N89°06'28"E 30.00'WEST 30 FEET LESSEDOUT AND QUIT CLAIMEDTO COLLIER COUNTY(O.R. BOOK 156, PAGE 375) CLIENT:TITLE:FILE NO.:SHEET OFNO.REVISION DESCRIPTIONDATE BY28421 BONITA CROSSINGS BLVD.CECI GROUP SERVICESCOASTAL AND MARINE ENGINEERINGENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOLOGICAL SERVICESLAND AND MARINE SURVEY AND MAPPINGNAPLES, FLORIDA 34135PHONE: (239)643-2324 FAX: (239)643-1143www.coastalengineering.comE-Mail: info@cecifl.comServing Florida Since 1977THIS DOCUMENT, AND THE CONCEPTS AND DESIGNS PRESENTED HEREIN, AS AN INSTRUMENT OFSERVICE, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND CLIENT FOR WHICH IT WAS PREPARED.REUSE OF AND IMPROPER RELIANCE ON THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION ANDADAPTATION BY COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC. (CECI) OR ITS SUBSIDIARIES SHALL BEWITHOUT LIABILITY TO CECI OR ITS SUBSIDIARIES.FLORIDA BUSINESS AUTHORIZATION NO. LB 2464COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.DATE OF SIGNATURE:FLORIDA CERTIFICATE NO. 5295PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPERTHE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDANOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE ANDLICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPERRICHARD J. EWING, VPCHECKED:F.B.ACAD NO.PG.DRAWN:DATE:REF. NO.SCALE:SEC. TWP. RNG.21.41011SKETCH OF DESCRIPTIONSTEWART MATERIALS1" = 250'H6471329E46S17.25117.251-SKETCH WITH 40 AC.05/30/2024MMWRJE18 & 19LEGEND(S) - SURVEY / REVISED DESCRIPTION DATA(D) = PROVIDED DESCRIPTION DATACCR# = CERTIFIED CORNER RECORD0 125 250 500250 OF TRACTS OF LANDLOCATED IN SECTIONS 17, 18 AND 19,TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,LEGAL DESCRIPTIONBARFIELD GROVE PARCELA TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF SECTION 18,TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST AND A PART OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF(N ½) OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 RUN N 00°25'14” W FOR ADISTANCE OF 1,331.53 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWESTONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF SAID SECTION 18;THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER-QUARTER LINE N 88°51'13" E 2,481.73FEET;THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE S 00°55'38" E 2,658.69 FEET;THENCE N 89°04'22" E 84.00 FEET;THENCE S 00°35'34" E 1,352.26 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST-WESTQUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 19;THENCE ALONG SAID QUARTER LINE S 89°27'14" W 2,589.72 FEET TO THE WESTONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19;THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 19 N 00°29'38" W 2,652.80 FEET TO THEPOINT OF BEGINNING.ANDSOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIESA TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18 AND THENORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIERCOUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19, RUN S 00°38'42" E ALONGTHE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION FOR A DISTANCE OF 2692.02 FEET TO A CONCRETEMONUMENT BEING THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19;THENCE ALONG THE EAST-WEST QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 19 S 89°27'00" W2341.08 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THOSE LANDS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 3330,PAGE 3215 AND THE EASTERLY LINE OF THOSE LANDS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 5350,PAGE 1271, ALL OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID LINE N 00°35'34" W 1352.26 FEET;THENCE S 89°04'22" WEST 84.00 FEET;THENCE N 00°55'38" W 2658.69 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST-WEST QUARTER LINE OFTHE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18;THENCE N 88°47'54" E ALONG SAID LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 2437.77 FEET TO ACONCRETE MONUMENT BEING THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/4;THENCE S 00°36'52" E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18 FOR A DISTANCE OF1346.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.LESS AND EXCEPT THE EASTERLY THIRTY (30) FEET THEREOF.BEARINGS ARE RELATIVE TO NORTH AMERICAN DATUM (NAD) 1983, FLORIDA EAST ZONE.ANDSOUTHERN RESERVES, LLC PARCELTHE WEST 14 OF THE SOUTH ONE-HALF OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS THE WEST 30 FEET OF SAID PARCEL.THE ABOVE DESCRIBES AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 490.62 ACRES OF LAND.Page 9338 of 9661 %RQLWD&URVVLQJV%OYG%RQLWD6SULQJV)/ 1RUWK5DQJH$YH6XLWH('HQKDP6SULQJV/$ 3KRQHx)D[3KRQH (PDLOLQIR#FHFLIOFRP SERVING COASTAL COMMUNITIES SINCE 1977 &RDVWDODQG0DULQH(QJLQHHULQJ (QYLURQPHQWDODQG*HRORJLFDO6HUYLFHV /DQGDQG0DULQH6XUYH\DQG0DSSLQJ :HEVLWHZZZFRDVWDOHQJLQHHULQJFRP y,//d͟͞;W'ϭK&ϮͿ ^dtZdDdZ/>^ >'>^Z/Wd/KE Z&/>'ZKsWZ> dZdK&>E>Kd/Ed,^Khd,t^dKEͲYhZdZ;^tЬͿK&^d/KEϭϴ͕ dKtE^,/Wϰϲ^Khd,͕ZE'Ϯϵ^dEWZdK&d,EKZd,KEͲ,>& ;EЪͿK&^d/KEϭϵ͕dKtE^,/Wϰϲ^Khd,͕ZE'Ϯϵ^d͕K>>/ZKhEdz͕&>KZ/͕/E' DKZWZd/h>Z>z^Z/^&K>>Kt^͗ '/EE/E'dd,^Khd,t^dKZEZK&^/^d/KEϭϴZhEEϬϬΣϮϱΖϭϰ͟t&KZ /^dEK&ϭ͕ϯϯϭ͘ϱϯ&ddKd,EKZd,t^dKZEZK&d,^Khd,t^dKEͲYhZdZ ;^tЬͿK&d,^Khd,t^dKEͲYhZdZ;^tЬͿK&^/^d/KEϭϴ͖ d,E>KE'd,EKZd,>/EK&^/YhZdZͲYhZdZ>/EEϴϴΣϱϭΖϭϯΗϮ͕ϰϴϭ͘ϳϯ&d͖ d,E>s/E'^/>/E^ϬϬΣϱϱΖϯϴΗϮ͕ϲϱϴ͘ϲϵ&d͖ d,EEϴϵΣϬϰΖϮϮΗϴϰ͘ϬϬ&d͖ d,E^ϬϬΣϯϱΖϯϰΗϭ͕ϯϱϮ͘Ϯϲ&ddKE/EdZ^d/KEt/d,d,^dͲt^dYhZdZ>/E K&^/^d/KEϭϵ͖ d,E>KE'^/YhZdZ>/E^ϴϵΣϮϳΖϭϰΗtϮ͕ϱϴϵ͘ϳϮ&ddKd,t^dKEͲYhZdZ KZEZK&^/^d/KEϭϵ͖ d,E>KE'd,t^d>/EK&^/^d/KEϭϵEϬϬΣϮϵΖϯϴΗtϮ͕ϲϱϮ͘ϴϬ&ddKd,WK/Ed K&'/EE/E'͘ E ^Khd,t^dZEWZKWZd/^ dZdK&>E>Kd/Ed,^Khd,^dYhZdZK&^d/KEϭϴEd,EKZd,^d YhZdZK&^d/KEϭϵ͕dKtE^,/Wϰϲ^Khd,͕ZE'Ϯϵ^d͕K>>/ZKhEdz͕&>KZ/͕ /E'^Z/^&K>>Kt^͗ '/EE/E'dd,EKZd,^dKZEZK&^/^d/KEϭϵ͕ZhE^ϬϬΣϯϴΖϰϮΗ>KE'd, ^d>/EK&^/^d/KE&KZ/^dEK&ϮϲϵϮ͘ϬϮ&ddKKEZdDKEhDEd /E'd,^dYhZdZKZEZK&^/^d/KEϭϵ͖ d,E>KE'd,^dͲt^dYhZdZ>/EK&^/^d/KEϭϵ^ϴϵΣϮϳΖϬϬΗtϮϯϰϭ͘Ϭϴ&d dKd,t^dZ>z>/EK&d,K^>E^ZKZ/EK͘Z͘KK<ϯϯϯϬ͕W'ϯϮϭϱEd, Page 9339 of 9661 6WHZDUW0DWHULDOV&2$67$/(1*,1((5,1*&2168/7$176,1& /HJDO'HVFULSWLRQ %DUILHOG*URYH3DUFHO ([KLELW³$´3DJHRI %RQLWD&URVVLQJV%OYG%RQLWD6SULQJV)/ 1RUWK5DQJH$YH6XLWH('HQKDP6SULQJV/$ 3KRQHx)D[ 3KRQH (PDLOLQIR#FHFLIOFRP SERVING COASTAL COMMUNITIES SINCE 1977 y,//d͟͞;W'ϮK&ϮͿ ^dZ>z>/EK&d,K^>E^ZKZ/EK͘Z͘KK<ϱϯϱϬ͕W'ϭϮϳϭ͕>>K&d,Wh>/ ZKZ^K&K>>/ZKhEdz͕&>KZ/͖ d,E>KE'^/>/EEϬϬΣϯϱΖϯϰΗtϭϯϱϮ͘Ϯϲ&d͖ d,E^ϴϵΣϬϰΖϮϮΗt^dϴϰ͘ϬϬ&d͖ d,EEϬϬΣϱϱΖϯϴΗtϮϲϱϴ͘ϲϵ&ddKWK/EdKEd,^dͲt^dYhZdZ>/EK&d, ^Khd,^dYhZdZK&^/^d/KEϭϴ͖ d,EEϴϴΣϰϳΖϱϰΗ>KE'^/>/E&KZ/^dEK&Ϯϰϯϳ͘ϳϳ&ddKKEZd DKEhDEd/E'd,^dYhZdZKZEZK&^/^Khd,^dϭͬϰ͖ d,E^ϬϬΣϯϲΖϱϮΗ>KE'd,^d>/EK&^/^d/KEϭϴ&KZ/^dEK&ϭϯϰϲ͘Ϭϱ &ddKd,WK/EdK&'/EE/E'͘ >^^EyWdd,^dZ>zd,/Zdz;ϯϬͿ&dd,ZK&͘ Z/E'^ZZ>d/sdKEKZd,DZ/EdhD;EͿϭϵϴϯ͕&>KZ/^dKE͘ E ^Khd,ZEZ^Zs^͕>>WZ> d,t^dϭͬϰK&d,^Khd,KEͲ,>&K&^d/KEϭϳ͕dKtE^,/Wϰϲ^Khd,͕ZE'Ϯϵ^d͕ K>>/ZKhEdz͕&>KZ/͕>^^d,t^dϯϬ&dK&^/WZ>͘ d,Ks^Z/^EZK&WWZKy/Dd>zϰϵϬ͘ϲϮZ^K&>E͘ K^d>E'/EZ/E'KE^h>dEd^͕/E͘ &>KZ/h^/E^^hd,KZ/d/KEEK͘>Ϯϰϲϰ ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ Z/,Z:͘t/E'͕s͘W͘ WZK&^^/KE>^hZszKZEDWWZ &>KZ/Zd/&/dEK͘ϱϮϵϱ EKds>/t/d,Khdd,^/'EdhZE d,KZ/'/E>Z/^^>K&&>KZ/ >/E^^hZszKZEDWWZ &/>EK͘Ϯϭ͘ϰϭϬ dK&^/'EdhZ͗ Page 9340 of 9661 10+0011+0012+0013+0014+0015+0016+0017+0018+0019+0020+0021+0022+0023+00BMEL. = 41.19(295) SET NAIL ANDDISK STAMPED"NORTHSTARTRAV/TBM" IN POWERPOLEBP: 10+00.0010+50 11+5012+50 13+5014+50 15+5016+50 17+5018+50 19+5020+50 21+5022+50 23+5024+0025+0026+0027+0028+0029+0030+0031+0032+0033+0034+0035+0036+0037+00BMEL. = 40.97(1) SET IRON ROD ANDCAP STAMPED"NORTHSTARTRAV/TBM"BMEL. = 42.53(4) SET NAIL AND DISKSTAMPED "NORTHSTARTRAV/TBM" IN POWERPOLE24+5025+5026+50 27+5028+50 29+5030+50 31+5032+50 33+5034+50 35+5036+50 37+50 SURVEYOR'S NOTES1. THE EXPECTED USE OF THIS SURVEY IS FOR ROAD MAINTENANCEPURPOSES.2. ALL MEASUREMENTS SHOWN HEREON ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEUNITED STATES STANDARD AND ARE IN FEET.3. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE SURVEY MAP AND/OR REPORT BY OTHERTHAN THE SIGNING PARTY IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OFTHE SIGNING PARTY OR PARTIES AND RENDERS THE SURVEY INVALID.4. THIS SURVEY CANNOT BE TRANSFERRED OR ASSIGNED WITHOUT THESPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE SURVEYOR HEREON.5. THE SURVEY MAP AND REPORT OR THE COPIES THEREOF ARE NOT VALIDWITHOUT THE ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSEDSURVEYOR AND MAPPER.6. THIS SURVEY MEETS OR EXCEEDS APPLICABLE ACCURACY REQUIREMENTSAND IS PREPARED ACCORDING TO THE STANDARDS OF PRACTICE SETFORTH BY THE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CHAPTER 5J-17 AS CODE,ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPERS.7. THERE WAS NO ATTEMPT TO LOCATE ANY UNDERGROUND UTILITIES,EXCEPT AS SHOWN.8. SYMBOLS SHOWN HEREON ARE NOT TO SCALE.9. LAST DATE OF DATA ACQUISITION: 12/6/202310. THIS SURVEY IS INTENDED TO BE DISPLAYED AT THE SCALE SHOWN ON THESCALE BAR.11. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN DATUMOF 1983 (NAD83), ADJUSTMENT OF 2011, FLORIDA STATE PLANE EAST ZONE.FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PERMANENT REFERENCENETWORK WAS USED AS HORIZONTAL CONTROL AND GPS RTK WITHREDUNDANT MEASUREMENTS. HORIZONTAL ACCURACY IS 0.10 FOOT, PLUSOR MINUS.12.ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE REFERENCED TO THE NATIONALAMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88), AS ESTABLISHED BYNATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY (NGS). BENCHMARK 1, 295, AND 296 AREESTABLISHED USING THE NGS BENCHMARK "G 533" HAVING AN ELEVATIONOF 39.19'. ELEVATIONS DEPICTED ON THIS SURVEY WERE OBTAINED USINGREAL TIME KINEMATIC (RTK) GPS METHODS WITH AN EXPECTED ACCURACYOF +/- 0.1'.13.IMAGERY SHOWN WAS OBTAINED FROM FDOT AND DATED 2021 WITH A 2'PIXEL RESOLUTION.14.RIGHT OF WAY LINES ARE APPROXIMATE AND BASED ON CERTIFIEDCORNER RECORD CALCULATIONS.15.ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON PRE-ROAD CONSTRUCTION ON 9/8/2023. POSTROAD ELEVATIONS WERE COLLECTED ON 12/6/2024.= SURVEYOR'S POINT NUMBER(xxxxx)LEGEND= BENCHMARK (AS LABELED)AbbreviationsSymbols= BENCHMARKBM= EXISTING ELEVATIONX 14.2SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION(THIS SURVEY IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND RAISED EMBOSSEDSEAL ON PAPER OR DIGITAL SEAL IF DIGITAL OF FRANK C. VELDHUIS, FLORIDAPROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER.)I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY SHOWN ANDDESCRIBED HEREON WAS COMPLETED UNDER MY DIRECTION AND SAID SURVEY IS TRUEAND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT THIS BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY MEETS THESTANDARDS OF PRACTICE FOR SURVEYS SET FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF LANDSURVEYORS IN CHAPTER 5J-17, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, PURSUANT TO SECTION472.027 FLORIDA STATE STATUTES. NO SEARCH OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS HAS BEEN MADEBY THIS OFFICE. THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON INFORMATION FURNISHED BY CLIENT ORCLIENT'S REPRESENTATIVENORTHSTAR GEOMATICS, INC.DATE FRANK C. VELDHUIS PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER FLORIDA CERTIFICATION NO. 6582ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE REFERENCED TO THENORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88)= CORRUGATED METAL PIPECMP= EDGE OF PAVEMENT/MILLINGSEOP= HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENEHDPE= TOP OF BANKTOB= TOE OF SLOPETOSPage 9341 of 9661 52+0053+0054+0055+0056+0057+0058+0059+0060+0061+0062+0063+0064+0065+00PI: 65+35.9552+5053+5054+5055+5056+5057+5058+5059+5060+5061+5062+5063+5064+5065+5038+0039+0040+0041+0042+0043+0044+0045+0046+0047+0048+0049+0050+0051+00PI: 39+05.0138+5039+5040+5041+5042+5043+5044+5045+5046+5047+5048+5049+5050+5051+50 Page 9342 of 9661 BMEL. = 37.85(296) SET NAIL ANDDISK STAMPED"NORTHSTARTRAV/TBM" IN POWERPOLE Page 9343 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com EDWARDS GROVE ROAD - ROADWAY PHOTOS CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION CU20240003054 Photos Obtained March 9, 2025 Image 1: ±150 LF south of SR 82/ Edwards Grove Rd Intersection (facing north) Page 9344 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 2: ±150 LF south of SR 82/ Edwards Grove Rd Intersection (facing south) Page 9345 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 3: Roadway condition (±3,000 LF from SR 82 entrance, facing north) Page 9346 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 4: Roadway condition (±3,000 LF from SR 82 entrance, facing south) Page 9347 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 5: Roadway condition (±4,500 LF from SR 82 entrance, facing south) Page 9348 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 6: Entrance to mine (±5,500 LF from SR 82 entrance, facing south) Page 9349 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 7: Entrance to mine (±5,780 LF from SR 82 entrance, facing north) Page 9350 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com D esigningE xcellence Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting ENGINEERINGG REPORTT Stewart Materials - Immokalee East Expansion Collier County, FL PREPARED FOR: Stewart Materials, LLC 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100 Jupiter, Florida 33458 PREPARED BY: Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 June 20, 2025 _________________________________________________ Brandon Copper, P.E. License No. 100296 Company ID No. 9496 Page 9351 of 9661 Table of Contents General .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Proposed Improvements .............................................................................................................................. 2 Stormwater Management ............................................................................................................................ 3 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................. 3 HydroCAD® Results ................................................................................................................................... 4 Floodplain Compensation ......................................................................................................................... 5 Appendix A: Stormwater Design Calculations Appendix B: HydroCAD® Results Appendix C: Floodplain Compensation Calculations Page 9352 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 1 General The ±490.62-acre project site is currently partially developed with previous uses defined predominantly as agricultural and surface mining operation. The subject property is surrounded by other agricultural zoned properties on the North, South, and East. Refer to Figure 1 below for the site location map. The project will consist of the expansion of operational land which will function in conjunction with the existing lake and will also contain its own independent stormwater management system, construction of a culvert in a county drainage ditch, a gravel access roadway, and relocation of the mining operations processing equipment. Figure 1: Site Location Map Existing Conditions The existing mining operation encompasses ±450.7 acres and was previously expanded under Collier County Boardof Zoning Appeals Resolution 2021-013 in 2021. The subject property is situated to the east of the existing mining facility, west of State Road 29, south of State Road 82 which are a Florida Department of Transportation Right-Of-Way (ROW) and borders Edwards Grove Rd, a Collier County public Right-of-Way to the north. Potable water and sanitary sewer service are not available at this site. The previously permitted surface mine expansion has a previously approved excavation permit (PL20200002472) with Collier County. Page 9353 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 2 Proposed Improvements Davidson Engineering, Inc. (DE) proposes to clear a portion of the existing vegetation located within the ±39.92-acre expansion parcel, leaving an existing storage structure undisturbed within the project area. The parcel is partially inundated with a ±1.48-acre wetland, which is low-quality non-native and proposed to be removed. A replacement preserve is proposed along the southern property line. DE proposes an equipment area which will be used to relocate the existing processing plant along with a dedicated area for material storage, both areas would be surrounded by gravel roadways. Additionally, DE proposes a drainage swale surrounding the gravel roadway to mitigate any stormwater runoff from disturbing the preserve located along the southern property line. Access to the site will come in two forms, (1) a gravel roadway to be made possible with two proposed culverts, within the Collier County ROW swale consisting of two 30-inch concrete pipes as to not restrict any conveyance in said swale, and (2) an existing access to Edwards Road at the northwest corner of the site. Table 1 outlines the previously permitted conditions land use table for the existing mine site. Table 2 outlines the proposed conditions land use for the expansion property only. *The above was approved by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners under resolution No. 21-13. Table 1: Previously Permitted Land Use Table Area (Ac.) % of Site Impervious ROW RESERVATION & EASEMENTS 24.19 5.37 PERIMETER BUFFERS 4.93 1.09 DEVELOPMENT / EXCAVATION AREA 421.58 93.54 TOTAL SITE AREA 450.70 100.0 Table 2: Land Use Table – East Expansion Area (Ac.) % of Site Impervious BUILDING 0.25 0.63 STABILIZED GRAVEL/ DIRT ROAD 6.48 16.23 Total Impervious 6.73 16.86 Pervious PRESERVE 1.48 3.71 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 3.85 9.64 OPEN SPACE 27.86 69.79 Total Pervious 33.19 83.14 Total (Site) 39.92 100 Page 9354 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 3 Stormwater Management Methodology The eastern expansion will contain its own stormwater management system independent from the existing system involving with western lake. The project area proposes a 100-yr storm berm to completely surround the project area which will not connect into the Collier County ROW swale instead it will function as a containment of stormwater within the project area, ensuring there will be zero discharge during the 100-year, 3-day storm event. The proposed stormwater management system will provide adequate storage via dry retention areas and will function with no outlets to any drainage ditch or lake. Thus, all stormwater runoff will be contained on-site. Stormwater Model Based on the depicted rainfall events, the project was modeled using HydroCAD® technology to ensure the minimum water quality and quantity requirements are met. Table 3 provides a summary of the criteria used to model the projects’ water quantity/ quality volumes: Table 3: Stormwater Design Criteria WSWT Elevation (Ft- NAVD) [2] 32.70 10-Year, 1-Day Rainfall Event (inches) 5.00 25-year, 3-day Rainfall Event (inches)8.00 100-year, 3-day Rainfall Event (inches) 10.00 Total Required Water Quality Volume (ac-ft) 4.99 [2]WSWT based on previously approved SFWMD ERP No. 0228414-002, Application No. 090618-9. The full design calculations for the proposed development can be found in Appendix A: Stormwater Design Calculations. Page 9355 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 4 HydroCAD® Results The proposed stormwater management system consists of a large swale surrounding the project area that serves as storage for stormwater runoff and acts as a barrier for the southern preserve. Once in the swale, the stormwater runoff will be retained and permitted to exfiltrate through the ground. No outfall structure is proposed. Table 4 outlines the HydroCAD® modeling results and outfall structure details. The full HydroCAD® results are provided in Appendix B. Table 4: Post-Development Stormwater Management Summary Provided Water Quality Volume (ac-ft) 17.284 Water Quality Elevation (ft-NAVD) [3] 36.15 Peak Modeled Discharge (cfs) N/A 10-Year, 1-Day Storm Stage (ft-NAVD) 35.42 Minimum Parking Elevation (ft-NAVD) 35.50 25-Year, 3-Day Storm Stage (ft-NAVD) 35.97 Minimum Road Elevation (ft-NAVD) 36.00 100-Year, 3-Day Storm Stage (ft-NAVD) 36.15 Minimum Finished Floor Elevation (ft-NAVD) 37.50 Minimum Perimeter Berm Top of Bank Elevation (ft-NAVD) 36.15 [3] Water quality elevation is based on the min. top of bank elevation of the proposed perimeter swale. Page 9356 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 5 Floodplain Compensation Floodplain compensation calculations were performed to determine if the existing site was an importer or exporter. The existing sites’ pervious area, total site area, available soil storage, depth to water table, and 100-year rain fall amount were used to calculate the site’s runoff. The site’s area, FEMA base flood elevation, and average existing elevation were utilized to calculate the pre-development site storage capacity. The results of the existing site’s runoff and site storage capacity were 11.23 ac-ft and 6.18 ac-ft respectively. Since the runoff is greater than the available storage capacity (5.05 ac-ft difference) the site is considered an exporter, therefore floodplain compensation is not required on the proposed site. The floodplain compensation calculations can be found in Appendix C. Page 9357 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 6 Appendix A Stormwater Design Calculations Page 9358 of 9661 Project Proj. #:21-0099 Task # Calculated By:NCT Date: Checked By:BTC Date:18-Jun-25 A ) LAND USE SUMMARY - CONTRIBUTORY BASIN ONLY Land Use Total Basin Area Water Surface Future Imp. Pavement Impervious Area Pervious Area Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Lake 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Preserve 1.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.48 Stabilized Roadway, Pavement, Concrete 6.48 0.00 0.00 6.48 6.48 0.00 Building 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.00 Open Space 27.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.86 Retention Areas (Stormwater Ditch) 3.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.85 Total Basin: 39.92 0.00 0.25 6.48 6.73 33.19 B ) DESIGN PARAMETERS Control Elevation = 32.70 NAVD 3-day rainfall(100yr) = 10.0 Inches 3-day rainfall(25yr) = 8.0 Inches 1-day rainfall(10yr) = 5.0 Inches Q(Allow) = 0.15 CFS/ac "All other Basins" Soil compaction factor (i.e. 25%) 25% Pervious Area= Project Area - Impervious Area Pervious Area= 39.92 - 6.73 Pervious Area=33.19 Acres B ) PEAK ALLOWABLE DISCHARGE Excludes Wetland and Upland Preserve Q(Allowable)= 0.15 x 39.921 ac Q(Allowable)=5.99 CFS STEWART MATERIALS - IMMOKALEE EAST EXPANSION Water Management Design Calculations STEWART MATERIALS - IMMOKALEE EAST EXPANSION Page 9359 of 9661 C ) WATER QUALITY STORAGE VOLUME 1. First Inch of Runoff Criteria: Water Quality Vol.= Project Area * 1 in.*(1ft/12in.) Water Quality Vol.= 39.92 * 1 in.*(1ft/12in.) Water Quality Vol.=3.33 Ac-ft. Allowable 24-HR Discharge Volume 1.66 Ac-ft. 1/2" 2. 2.5 % Impervious Criteria: a) Site Area= Project Area - (Lake + Conservation) - Roof Site Area= 39.92 - 1.48 -0.25 Site Area= 38.19 Acres b) Imp. Area= Site Area - Pervious Area Imp. Area= 38.19 - 33.19 Imp. Area= 5.00 Acres c) Vol. Stor. Req'd= 2.5 in.*(1ft/12in.) * (Imp. Area/Site Area) * (Project Area - Lake - Conserv.) Vol. Stor. Req'd= 2.5 in.*(1ft/12in.) * 0.13 * 38.44 Vol. Stor. Req'd=1.09 Ac-ft. Therefore, calculation # 1 controls and a water quality volume of 3.33 Ac-ft must be detained on-site prior to discharge. 3. Maximum Daily Discharge: Criteria: 1/2" per day Q(Bleed-Down)= {(0.5in./24hrs.) * (1ft/12in.) * (43560sf/acre) * (1hr/3600s)} * (Project Area - Lake-Wetland-Preserve) Q(Bleed-Down)= 0.021 * 39.92 - 1.75 Q(Bleed-Down)=0.80 CFS 4. Type of Water Quaility Area (1st stage or pre-treatment)Dry Retention Type of Water Quaility Area (2nd stage if needed)Not Required 5. Water Quaility calculations Water quaility pre-treatment for Commerical and Industrial sites (1/2" min. no reduction) = 1/2" =1.66 Ac-Ft. Water Quality Required By SFWMD per B.O.R. (Greater of 1" or 2.5" x % Imp.)1'' =3.33 Ac-Ft. 150% of B.O.R. =2.50 Ac-Ft. of Dry Retention 1 1/2" =4.99 Ac-Ft. Total Water Quaility Required =4.99 Ac-Ft. Water quaility provided (1st stage or pre-treatment) =17.28 Ac-Ft. of Dry Retention Water quality volume will start at Control Elevation:32.70 NAVD (ft.) D ) SOIL STORAGE Depth to Water Table = 3.0 ft. Interpolated Soil Storage for pervious areas = Sd = 4.95 Inches From SFWMD; Basis for Review, Volume IV S= Site-Wide Soil Storage S= Sd * (Pervious Area/Project Area) S= 4.95 * 33.19 / 39.92 S=4.12 Inches Water Quality Required by Collier County [per CC LDC 3.07.02 150% of BOR 5.2.1(a) 25% reduction for Dry Detention or 50% reduction for Dry Retention or 1 1/2" min.] Page 9360 of 9661 E ) MINIMUM FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION 1. Peak Stage from HydroCAD routings (100-year, 3-day, zero discharge): Peak Stage=36.15 NAVD (ft.) 2. FEMA Flood Zone:AH The flood hazard elevation is:36.50 (worst case if more than one elevation zone) 3. 100-year, 3-day, zero discharge calculations (SCS method) 3-day rainfall= 10.00 Inches Inches of Runoff= (P-0.2S)^2/(P+0.8S) Inches of Runoff= 6.34 Inches Volume of Runoff= (1ft/12in.) * (Inches of Runoff) * (Project Area) Volume of Runoff= 1ft/12in. * 6.34 * 39.92 Volume of Runoff=21.08 Ac-ft. Therefore, using the stage storage curve a minimum finished floor elevation will be equal to or greater than 37.50 NAVD F ) MINIMUM ROADS ELEVATION 1. Peak Stage from HydroCAD routings (25-year, 3-day): Peak Stage=35.97 NAVD (ft.) 2. 25-year, 3-day, zero discharge calculations (SCS method) 3-day rainfall= 8.00 Inches Inches of Runoff= (P-0.2S)^2/(P+0.8S) Inches of Runoff= 4.56 Inches Volume of Runoff=(1ft/12in.) * (Inches of Runoff) * (Project Area) - (Bleed-down 3-Day Volume Allowed in Ac-Ft) Volume of Runoff= 4.56 * 1'/12" * 39.92 - 4.77 Volume of Runoff=10.40 Ac-ft. Therefore, using the stage storage curve a minimum road elevation will be approximately:36.00 NAVD (ft.) G ) MINIMUM PARKING ELEVATION 1. Peak Stage from HydroCAD routings (10-year, 1-day): Peak Stage=35.42 NAVD (ft.) 2. 10-year, 1-day, zero discharge calculations (SCS method) 1-day rainfall= 5.00 Inches Inches of Runoff= (P-0.2S)^2/(P+0.8S) Inches of Runoff= 2.10 Inches Volume of Runoff=(1ft/12in.) * (Inches of Runoff) * (Project Area) - (Bleed-down 3-Day Volume Allowed in Ac-Ft) Volume of Runoff= 2.10 * 1'/12" * 0.00 - 0.00 Volume of Runoff=0.00 Ac-ft. Therefore, using the stage storage curve a minimum parking elevation will be approximately:35.50 NAVD (ft.)(Minimum 2' above C.E. Controls) H ) PERCENT DIRECTLY CONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA (DCIA) %DCIA= Impervious Area / Project Area %DCIA= 6.73 / 39.92 %DCIA=16.9% I ) CURVE NUMBER FOR PERVIOUS AREA CN= 1000 / (10 + Sd) CN=55 Page 9361 of 9661 J ) DISCHARGE STRUCTURE See Storm Water or HydroCAD® Draw Down Routings for calculations and results. K ) STORMWATER FLOOD ROUTING 1. Flood routing for the system is accomplished through the use of Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph method to generate the runoff hydrographs and through the HydroCAD for multiple pond routing. The following pages are the input and output for this drainage area. NATURAL DEV. DEPTH TO AVAILABLE AVAIL. WTR TABLE STORAGE STORAGE 0 0.00 0.00 1 0.60 0.45 1.5 1.50 1.10 2 2.50 1.88 2.5 4.50 3.40 3 6.60 4.95 3.5 8.90 6.80 4 10.90 8.18 10 10.9. 8.18 Page 9362 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 7 Appendix B HydroCAD® Results: 10 Year- 1 Day, 25 Year- 3 Day & 100 Year- 3 Day Storm Events (Zero Discharge) Page 9363 of 9661 10S SMIEE 11P Contributory Basin Routing Diagram for 2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Prepared by Davidson Engineering, Printed 6/13/2025 HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link Page 9364 of 9661 2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 2HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Rainfall Events Listing Event# Event Name Storm Type Curve Mode Duration (hours) B/B Depth (inches) AMC 1 10 YR-1 DAY SFWMD 24-hr Default 24.00 1 5.00 2 2 25 YR-3 DAY SFWMD 72-hr Default 72.00 1 8.00 2 3 100 YR-3 DAY SFWMD 72-hr Default 72.00 1 10.00 2 Page 9365 of 9661 2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 3HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Area Listing (selected nodes) Area (acres) CN Description (subcatchment-numbers) 0.250 98 Building (10S) 27.860 55 Open Space (10S) 1.480 55 PRESERVE (10S) 3.850 55 Retention (10S) 6.480 98 Roadways, pavement, Concrete (10S) 39.920 62 TOTAL AREA Page 9366 of 9661 2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 4HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Soil Listing (selected nodes) Area (acres) Soil Group Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 HSG A 0.000 HSG B 0.000 HSG C 0.000 HSG D 39.920 Other 10S 39.920 TOTAL AREA Page 9367 of 9661 2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 5HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Ground Covers (selected nodes) HSG-A (acres) HSG-B (acres) HSG-C (acres) HSG-D (acres) Other (acres) Total (acres) Ground Cover Subcatchment Numbers 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.250 Building 10 S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 27.860 27.860 Open Space 10 S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.480 1.480 PRESERVE 10 S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.850 3.850 Retention 10 S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.480 6.480 Roadways, pavement, Concrete 10 S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 39.920 39.920 TOTAL AREA Page 9368 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 6HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-360.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=39.920 ac 16.86% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.62"Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 Runoff=39.37 cfs 5.382 af Peak Elev=35.42' Storage=5.382 af Inflow=39.37 cfs 5.382 afPond 11P: Contributory Basin Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Total Runoff Area = 39.920 ac Runoff Volume = 5.382 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.62" 83.14% Pervious = 33.190 ac 16.86% Impervious = 6.730 ac Page 9369 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 7HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Runoff = 39.37 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 5.382 af, Depth= 1.62" Routed to Pond 11P : Contributory Basin Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00" Area (ac) CN Description * 6.480 98 Roadways, pavement, Concrete * 0.250 98 Building * 27.860 55 Open Space * 3.850 55 Retention * 1.480 55 PRESERVE 39.920 62 Weighted Average 33.190 55 83.14% Pervious Area 6.730 98 16.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00" Runoff Area=39.920 ac Runoff Volume=5.382 af Runoff Depth=1.62" Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 39.37 cfs Page 9370 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 8HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Hydrograph for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Time (hours) Precip. (inches) Perv.Excess (inches) Imp.Excess (inches) Runoff (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 1.07 0.00 0.85 1.38 20.00 4.76 0.86 4.52 1.93 30.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 40.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 50.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 60.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 70.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 80.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 90.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 100.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 110.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 120.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 130.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 140.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 150.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 160.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 170.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 180.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 190.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 200.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 210.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 220.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 230.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 240.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 250.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 260.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 270.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 280.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 290.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 300.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 310.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 320.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 330.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 340.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 350.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 360.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 Page 9371 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 9HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Inflow Area = 39.920 ac, 16.86% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.62" for 10 YR-1 DAY event Inflow = 39.37 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 5.382 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 35.42' @ 30.95 hrs Surf.Area= 3.654 ac Storage= 5.382 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 33.70' 23.580 af DITCH (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) #2 35.00' 5.320 af PAVEMENT Listed below #3 35.50' 13.930 af OPEN SPACE Listed below #4 33.70' 18.574 af SWM AREA (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) 61.404 af Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.131 7,603.0 0.000 0.000 1.131 34.70 1.655 7,547.0 1.385 1.385 2.691 35.70 2.181 7,641.0 1.912 3.297 5.305 45.00 2.181 7,641.0 20.283 23.580 6.936 Elevation Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 35.00 0.000 0.000 35.50 0.110 0.110 36.00 1.320 1.430 36.50 3.890 5.320 Elevation Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) 35.50 0.000 36.00 3.480 36.50 13.930 Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.375 1,587.0 0.000 0.000 1.375 34.70 1.522 1,612.0 1.448 1.448 1.526 35.70 1.670 1,637.0 1.595 3.043 1.679 45.00 1.670 1,637.0 15.531 18.574 2.028 Page 9372 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 10HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Inflow Area=39.920 ac Peak Elev=35.42' Storage=5.382 af 39.37 cfs Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Storage Stage-Area-Storage Storage (acre-feet) 605550454035302520151050Elevation (feet)45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 DITCH + SWM AREA PAVEMENT OPEN SPACE Page 9373 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 11HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Hydrograph for Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Time (hours) Inflow (cfs) Storage (acre-feet) Elevation (feet) 0.00 0.00 0.000 33.70 5.00 0.49 0.076 33.73 10.00 1.38 0.447 33.87 15.00 3.44 3.943 35.04 20.00 1.93 4.880 35.29 25.00 0.03 5.381 35.42 30.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 35.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 40.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 45.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 50.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 55.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 60.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 65.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 70.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 75.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 80.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 85.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 90.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 95.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 100.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 105.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 110.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 115.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 120.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 125.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 130.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 135.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 140.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 145.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 150.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 155.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 160.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 165.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 170.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 175.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 180.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 185.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 190.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 195.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 200.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 205.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 210.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 215.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 220.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 225.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 230.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 235.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 240.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 245.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 250.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 255.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 260.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 Time (hours) Inflow (cfs) Storage (acre-feet) Elevation (feet) 265.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 270.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 275.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 280.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 285.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 290.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 295.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 300.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 305.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 310.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 315.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 320.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 325.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 330.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 335.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 340.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 345.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 350.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 355.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 360.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 Page 9374 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 12HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 33.70 0.000 33.80 0.254 33.90 0.514 34.00 0.780 34.10 1.053 34.20 1.332 34.30 1.619 34.40 1.912 34.50 2.212 34.60 2.518 34.70 2.833 34.80 3.153 34.90 3.481 35.00 3.815 35.10 4.177 35.20 4.546 35.30 4.922 35.40 5.304 35.50 5.694 35.60 7.028 35.70 8.370 35.80 9.715 35.90 11.060 36.00 12.405 36.10 15.658 36.20 18.911 36.30 22.165 36.40 25.418 36.50 28.671 36.60 29.056 36.70 29.441 36.80 29.826 36.90 30.211 37.00 30.596 37.10 30.981 37.20 31.366 37.30 31.752 37.40 32.137 37.50 32.522 37.60 32.907 37.70 33.292 37.80 33.677 37.90 34.062 38.00 34.447 38.10 34.832 38.20 35.217 38.30 35.603 38.40 35.988 38.50 36.373 38.60 36.758 38.70 37.143 38.80 37.528 38.90 37.913 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 39.00 38.298 39.10 38.683 39.20 39.068 39.30 39.454 39.40 39.839 39.50 40.224 39.60 40.609 39.70 40.994 39.80 41.379 39.90 41.764 40.00 42.149 40.10 42.534 40.20 42.919 40.30 43.305 40.40 43.690 40.50 44.075 40.60 44.460 40.70 44.845 40.80 45.230 40.90 45.615 41.00 46.000 41.10 46.385 41.20 46.770 41.30 47.156 41.40 47.541 41.50 47.926 41.60 48.311 41.70 48.696 41.80 49.081 41.90 49.466 42.00 49.851 42.10 50.236 42.20 50.621 42.30 51.007 42.40 51.392 42.50 51.777 42.60 52.162 42.70 52.547 42.80 52.932 42.90 53.317 43.00 53.702 43.10 54.087 43.20 54.472 43.30 54.858 43.40 55.243 43.50 55.628 43.60 56.013 43.70 56.398 43.80 56.783 43.90 57.168 44.00 57.553 44.10 57.938 44.20 58.323 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 44.30 58.709 44.40 59.094 44.50 59.479 44.60 59.864 44.70 60.249 44.80 60.634 44.90 61.019 45.00 61.404 Page 9375 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 13HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-360.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=39.920 ac 16.86% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.62"Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 Runoff=84.37 cfs 12.053 af Peak Elev=35.97' Storage=12.053 af Inflow=84.37 cfs 12.053 afPond 11P: Contributory Basin Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Total Runoff Area = 39.920 ac Runoff Volume = 12.053 af Average Runoff Depth = 3.62" 83.14% Pervious = 33.190 ac 16.86% Impervious = 6.730 ac Page 9376 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 14HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Runoff = 84.37 cfs @ 59.95 hrs, Volume= 12.053 af, Depth= 3.62" Routed to Pond 11P : Contributory Basin Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00" Area (ac) CN Description * 6.480 98 Roadways, pavement, Concrete * 0.250 98 Building * 27.860 55 Open Space * 3.850 55 Retention * 1.480 55 PRESERVE 39.920 62 Weighted Average 33.190 55 83.14% Pervious Area 6.730 98 16.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00" Runoff Area=39.920 ac Runoff Volume=12.053 af Runoff Depth=3.62" Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 84.37 cfs Page 9377 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 15HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Hydrograph for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Time (hours) Precip. (inches) Perv.Excess (inches) Imp.Excess (inches) Runoff (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 0.36 0.00 0.19 0.21 20.00 0.72 0.00 0.52 0.23 30.00 1.17 0.00 0.95 0.37 40.00 1.69 0.00 1.47 0.37 50.00 2.23 0.04 2.00 0.66 60.00 5.98 1.50 5.74 83.13 70.00 7.86 2.69 7.62 2.07 80.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 90.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 100.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 110.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 120.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 130.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 140.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 150.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 160.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 170.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 180.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 190.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 200.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 210.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 220.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 230.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 240.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 250.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 260.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 270.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 280.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 290.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 300.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 310.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 320.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 330.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 340.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 350.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 360.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 Page 9378 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 16HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Inflow Area = 39.920 ac, 16.86% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.62" for 25 YR-3 DAY event Inflow = 84.37 cfs @ 59.95 hrs, Volume= 12.053 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 35.97' @ 79.00 hrs Surf.Area= 3.851 ac Storage= 12.053 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 33.70' 23.580 af DITCH (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) #2 35.00' 5.320 af PAVEMENT Listed below #3 35.50' 13.930 af OPEN SPACE Listed below #4 33.70' 18.574 af SWM AREA (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) 61.404 af Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.131 7,603.0 0.000 0.000 1.131 34.70 1.655 7,547.0 1.385 1.385 2.691 35.70 2.181 7,641.0 1.912 3.297 5.305 45.00 2.181 7,641.0 20.283 23.580 6.936 Elevation Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 35.00 0.000 0.000 35.50 0.110 0.110 36.00 1.320 1.430 36.50 3.890 5.320 Elevation Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) 35.50 0.000 36.00 3.480 36.50 13.930 Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.375 1,587.0 0.000 0.000 1.375 34.70 1.522 1,612.0 1.448 1.448 1.526 35.70 1.670 1,637.0 1.595 3.043 1.679 45.00 1.670 1,637.0 15.531 18.574 2.028 Page 9379 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 17HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Inflow Area=39.920 ac Peak Elev=35.97' Storage=12.053 af 84.37 cfs Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Storage Stage-Area-Storage Storage (acre-feet) 605550454035302520151050Elevation (feet)45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 DITCH + SWM AREA PAVEMENT OPEN SPACE Page 9380 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 18HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Hydrograph for Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Time (hours) Inflow (cfs) Storage (acre-feet) Elevation (feet) 0.00 0.00 0.000 33.70 5.00 0.15 0.028 33.71 10.00 0.21 0.105 33.74 15.00 0.22 0.194 33.78 20.00 0.23 0.288 33.81 25.00 0.31 0.385 33.85 30.00 0.37 0.526 33.90 35.00 0.35 0.672 33.96 40.00 0.37 0.816 34.01 45.00 0.47 0.990 34.08 50.00 0.66 1.219 34.16 55.00 2.15 1.733 34.34 60.00 83.13 5.514 35.45 65.00 3.05 10.533 35.86 70.00 2.07 11.660 35.94 75.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 80.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 85.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 90.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 95.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 100.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 105.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 110.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 115.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 120.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 125.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 130.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 135.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 140.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 145.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 150.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 155.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 160.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 165.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 170.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 175.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 180.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 185.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 190.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 195.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 200.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 205.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 210.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 215.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 220.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 225.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 230.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 235.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 240.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 245.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 250.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 255.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 260.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 Time (hours) Inflow (cfs) Storage (acre-feet) Elevation (feet) 265.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 270.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 275.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 280.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 285.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 290.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 295.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 300.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 305.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 310.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 315.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 320.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 325.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 330.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 335.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 340.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 345.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 350.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 355.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 360.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 Page 9381 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 19HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 33.70 0.000 33.80 0.254 33.90 0.514 34.00 0.780 34.10 1.053 34.20 1.332 34.30 1.619 34.40 1.912 34.50 2.212 34.60 2.518 34.70 2.833 34.80 3.153 34.90 3.481 35.00 3.815 35.10 4.177 35.20 4.546 35.30 4.922 35.40 5.304 35.50 5.694 35.60 7.028 35.70 8.370 35.80 9.715 35.90 11.060 36.00 12.405 36.10 15.658 36.20 18.911 36.30 22.165 36.40 25.418 36.50 28.671 36.60 29.056 36.70 29.441 36.80 29.826 36.90 30.211 37.00 30.596 37.10 30.981 37.20 31.366 37.30 31.752 37.40 32.137 37.50 32.522 37.60 32.907 37.70 33.292 37.80 33.677 37.90 34.062 38.00 34.447 38.10 34.832 38.20 35.217 38.30 35.603 38.40 35.988 38.50 36.373 38.60 36.758 38.70 37.143 38.80 37.528 38.90 37.913 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 39.00 38.298 39.10 38.683 39.20 39.068 39.30 39.454 39.40 39.839 39.50 40.224 39.60 40.609 39.70 40.994 39.80 41.379 39.90 41.764 40.00 42.149 40.10 42.534 40.20 42.919 40.30 43.305 40.40 43.690 40.50 44.075 40.60 44.460 40.70 44.845 40.80 45.230 40.90 45.615 41.00 46.000 41.10 46.385 41.20 46.770 41.30 47.156 41.40 47.541 41.50 47.926 41.60 48.311 41.70 48.696 41.80 49.081 41.90 49.466 42.00 49.851 42.10 50.236 42.20 50.621 42.30 51.007 42.40 51.392 42.50 51.777 42.60 52.162 42.70 52.547 42.80 52.932 42.90 53.317 43.00 53.702 43.10 54.087 43.20 54.472 43.30 54.858 43.40 55.243 43.50 55.628 43.60 56.013 43.70 56.398 43.80 56.783 43.90 57.168 44.00 57.553 44.10 57.938 44.20 58.323 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 44.30 58.709 44.40 59.094 44.50 59.479 44.60 59.864 44.70 60.249 44.80 60.634 44.90 61.019 45.00 61.404 Page 9382 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 20HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Time span=0.00-360.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 7201 points Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv. Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method Runoff Area=39.920 ac 16.86% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.16"Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 Runoff=119.42 cfs 17.167 af Peak Elev=36.15' Storage=17.167 af Inflow=119.42 cfs 17.167 afPond 11P: Contributory Basin Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Total Runoff Area = 39.920 ac Runoff Volume = 17.167 af Average Runoff Depth = 5.16" 83.14% Pervious = 33.190 ac 16.86% Impervious = 6.730 ac Page 9383 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 21HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Runoff = 119.42 cfs @ 59.95 hrs, Volume= 17.167 af, Depth= 5.16" Routed to Pond 11P : Contributory Basin Runoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00" Area (ac) CN Description * 6.480 98 Roadways, pavement, Concrete * 0.250 98 Building * 27.860 55 Open Space * 3.850 55 Retention * 1.480 55 PRESERVE 39.920 62 Weighted Average 33.190 55 83.14% Pervious Area 6.730 98 16.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00" Runoff Area=39.920 ac Runoff Volume=17.167 af Runoff Depth=5.16" Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 119.42 cfs Page 9384 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 22HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Hydrograph for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Time (hours) Precip. (inches) Perv.Excess (inches) Imp.Excess (inches) Runoff (cfs) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 0.45 0.00 0.27 0.27 20.00 0.90 0.00 0.69 0.29 30.00 1.46 0.00 1.24 0.47 40.00 2.11 0.03 1.89 0.66 50.00 2.79 0.14 2.56 1.07 60.00 7.47 2.43 7.23 117.35 70.00 9.82 4.09 9.58 2.80 80.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 90.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 100.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 110.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 120.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 130.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 140.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 150.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 160.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 170.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 180.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 190.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 200.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 210.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 220.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 230.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 240.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 250.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 260.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 270.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 280.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 290.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 300.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 310.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 320.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 330.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 340.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 350.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 360.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 Page 9385 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 23HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Summary for Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Inflow Area = 39.920 ac, 16.86% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.16" for 100 YR-3 DAY event Inflow = 119.42 cfs @ 59.95 hrs, Volume= 17.167 af Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 36.15' @ 78.60 hrs Surf.Area= 3.851 ac Storage= 17.167 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 33.70' 23.580 af DITCH (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) #2 35.00' 5.320 af PAVEMENT Listed below #3 35.50' 13.930 af OPEN SPACE Listed below #4 33.70' 18.574 af SWM AREA (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) 61.404 af Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.131 7,603.0 0.000 0.000 1.131 34.70 1.655 7,547.0 1.385 1.385 2.691 35.70 2.181 7,641.0 1.912 3.297 5.305 45.00 2.181 7,641.0 20.283 23.580 6.936 Elevation Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 35.00 0.000 0.000 35.50 0.110 0.110 36.00 1.320 1.430 36.50 3.890 5.320 Elevation Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) 35.50 0.000 36.00 3.480 36.50 13.930 Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.375 1,587.0 0.000 0.000 1.375 34.70 1.522 1,612.0 1.448 1.448 1.526 35.70 1.670 1,637.0 1.595 3.043 1.679 45.00 1.670 1,637.0 15.531 18.574 2.028 Page 9386 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 24HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Inflow Hydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Inflow Area=39.920 ac Peak Elev=36.15' Storage=17.167 af 119.42 cfs Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Storage Stage-Area-Storage Storage (acre-feet) 605550454035302520151050Elevation (feet)45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 DITCH + SWM AREA PAVEMENT OPEN SPACE Page 9387 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 25HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Hydrograph for Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Time (hours) Inflow (cfs) Storage (acre-feet) Elevation (feet) 0.00 0.00 0.000 33.70 5.00 0.22 0.044 33.72 10.00 0.27 0.147 33.76 15.00 0.29 0.263 33.80 20.00 0.29 0.383 33.85 25.00 0.39 0.506 33.90 30.00 0.47 0.685 33.96 35.00 0.51 0.874 34.03 40.00 0.66 1.116 34.12 45.00 0.80 1.420 34.23 50.00 1.07 1.802 34.36 55.00 3.34 2.619 34.63 60.00 117.35 8.142 35.68 65.00 4.16 15.106 36.08 70.00 2.80 16.635 36.13 75.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 80.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 85.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 90.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 95.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 100.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 105.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 110.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 115.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 120.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 125.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 130.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 135.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 140.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 145.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 150.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 155.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 160.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 165.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 170.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 175.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 180.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 185.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 190.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 195.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 200.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 205.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 210.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 215.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 220.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 225.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 230.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 235.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 240.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 245.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 250.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 255.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 260.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 Time (hours) Inflow (cfs) Storage (acre-feet) Elevation (feet) 265.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 270.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 275.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 280.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 285.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 290.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 295.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 300.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 305.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 310.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 315.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 320.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 325.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 330.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 335.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 340.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 345.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 350.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 355.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 360.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 Page 9388 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 26HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 33.70 0.000 33.80 0.254 33.90 0.514 34.00 0.780 34.10 1.053 34.20 1.332 34.30 1.619 34.40 1.912 34.50 2.212 34.60 2.518 34.70 2.833 34.80 3.153 34.90 3.481 35.00 3.815 35.10 4.177 35.20 4.546 35.30 4.922 35.40 5.304 35.50 5.694 35.60 7.028 35.70 8.370 35.80 9.715 35.90 11.060 36.00 12.405 36.10 15.658 36.20 18.911 36.30 22.165 36.40 25.418 36.50 28.671 36.60 29.056 36.70 29.441 36.80 29.826 36.90 30.211 37.00 30.596 37.10 30.981 37.20 31.366 37.30 31.752 37.40 32.137 37.50 32.522 37.60 32.907 37.70 33.292 37.80 33.677 37.90 34.062 38.00 34.447 38.10 34.832 38.20 35.217 38.30 35.603 38.40 35.988 38.50 36.373 38.60 36.758 38.70 37.143 38.80 37.528 38.90 37.913 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 39.00 38.298 39.10 38.683 39.20 39.068 39.30 39.454 39.40 39.839 39.50 40.224 39.60 40.609 39.70 40.994 39.80 41.379 39.90 41.764 40.00 42.149 40.10 42.534 40.20 42.919 40.30 43.305 40.40 43.690 40.50 44.075 40.60 44.460 40.70 44.845 40.80 45.230 40.90 45.615 41.00 46.000 41.10 46.385 41.20 46.770 41.30 47.156 41.40 47.541 41.50 47.926 41.60 48.311 41.70 48.696 41.80 49.081 41.90 49.466 42.00 49.851 42.10 50.236 42.20 50.621 42.30 51.007 42.40 51.392 42.50 51.777 42.60 52.162 42.70 52.547 42.80 52.932 42.90 53.317 43.00 53.702 43.10 54.087 43.20 54.472 43.30 54.858 43.40 55.243 43.50 55.628 43.60 56.013 43.70 56.398 43.80 56.783 43.90 57.168 44.00 57.553 44.10 57.938 44.20 58.323 Elevation (feet) Storage (acre-feet) 44.30 58.709 44.40 59.094 44.50 59.479 44.60 59.864 44.70 60.249 44.80 60.634 44.90 61.019 45.00 61.404 Page 9389 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 8 Appendix C Floodplain Compensation Calculations Page 9390 of 9661 Existing Site Runoff Total Area of Impacts w/in Floodplain 0.65 acres 21.41 acres Area w/in Floodplain (below BFE) 0 acres 13.74 acres Area w/in Floodplain (above BFE) 0.65 acres 7.67 acres 100-yr, 3-Day Rainfall 10.00 inches 10.00 inches WSWT 32.70 ft-NAVD 32.70 ft-NAVD Average Existing Grade 36.99 ft-NAVD 36.05 ft-NAVD Base Flood Elevation 36.00 ft-NAVD 36.50 ft-NAVD 100-yr, 3-Day Storm Stage 36.15 ft-NAVD 36.15 ft-NAVD Soil Storage Average Existing Grade 36.99 ft-NAVD 36.05 ft-NAVD Depth to Water Table (avg. ex. grade- WSWT) 4.29 ft 3.35 ft Ex. Soil Storage (Refer to table on following sheet)8.18 in 6.25 in Runoff Volume Site Runoff (100-yr, 3-day rainfall - Ex. Soil Storage) 1.82 in 3.755 in Runoff Volume = Site Runoff *Site Area Below BFE* (1 ft/12 in) 0.00 ac-ft 4.30 ac-ft Runoff Volume = 100-yr, 3-day Rainfall *Site Area Above BFE * (1 ft/12 in) 0.54 ac-ft 6.40 ac-ft Total Runoff ( ac-ft) Total Runoff (Area 1 and 2, ac-ft) Existing Site Storage Surface Storage = Site Area Below BFE * (BFE-Avg. Ex.Grade)0 ac-ft 6.181 ac-ft Total Surface Storage (Area 1 & 2), ac-ft Existing Site Discharge at Peak Total Discharge (Total Runoff - Total Surface Storage), ac-ft The existing site discharge is a positive number, representing the site is an exporter. No additional analysis is necessary. 6/11/2025Date Calculated By: Checked By: BTC BTC 5.05 Stewart Materials - ±40 ac. Expansion Compensating Storage Calculations Area 1 Area 2 11.23 6.18 0.54 10.69 Page 9391 of 9661 NATURAL DEV. DEPTH TO AVAILABLE AVAIL. WTR TABLE STORAGE STORAGE 0 0.00 0.00 1 0.60 0.45 1.5 1.50 1.10 2 2.50 1.88 2.5 4.50 3.40 3 6.60 4.95 3.5 8.90 6.80 4 10.90 8.18 10 10.90 8.18 Wet Season Wtr Tbl Elev 32.70 (FT-NAVD) Existing Conditions Area 1 Area 2 Avg. Ex Grade 36.99 36.05 (FT-NAVD) Depth To Wtr Tbl 4.29 3.35 FT Soil Storage (interpolated)8.18 6.25 IN Stewart Materials - ±40 ac. Expansion Soil Calculations Date 6/11/2025 Calculated By: BTC Checked By: BTC Page 9392 of 9661 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201Naples, Florida 34104P: 239.434.6060Company Cert. of AuthorizationNo. 00009496SHEET:REVISIONSDATEREV.DESCRIPTIONFLOODPLAINELEVATION EXHIBITPage 9393 of 9661 Page 9394 of 9661 Page 9395 of 9661 Page 9396 of 9661 Page 9397 of 9661 Page 9398 of 9661 Page 9399 of 9661 Page 9400 of 9661 Page 9401 of 9661 Page 9402 of 9661 Page 9403 of 9661 Page 9404 of 9661 Page 9405 of 9661 Page 9406 of 9661 Page 9407 of 9661 Page 9408 of 9661 Page 9409 of 9661 Page 9410 of 9661 Page 9411 of 9661 Page 9412 of 9661 Page 9413 of 9661 Page 9414 of 9661 Page 9415 of 9661 Page 9416 of 9661 Page 9417 of 9661 Page 9418 of 9661 Page 9419 of 9661 Page 9420 of 9661 Page 9421 of 9661 Page 9422 of 9661 Page 9423 of 9661 Page 9424 of 9661 Page 9425 of 9661 Page 9426 of 9661 Stewart Mining CU – PL20240003054 Exhibit C – Conditions of Approval June 30, 2025 www.davidsonengineering.com Strikethrough denotes a deletion, underline denotes an addition. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL EXHIBIT C 1. Edwards Road Grove Mine Conditional Use shall be limited to what is depicted on the “Master Concept Plan, revised 11/03/2020 June 30, 2025.” Prepared by Davidson Engineering, Inc. 2. The petitioner shall obtain a South Florida Water Management District Agricultural Surface Water Management Permit or permit modification for this site, if applicable. 3. The site shall be cleared of all exotic vegetation and maintained exotic- free in perpetuity. 4. Material hauling activities are permitted from 5:00 a.m. to 5:00 p. m., Monday through Saturday and 24 hours a day Monday through Sunday for excavation and processing activities. 5. The excavation shall be contained by a berm constructed to the height of the 100- year flood elevation. Unless the berm contains adequate clay content to slow the flow of water (as determined by the Collier County Engineering Division), the berm shall contain a membrane impervious to water. 6. The site shall be limited to a maximum of 49 pm peak hour, two- way trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at time of application for SDP/ SDPA or subdivision plat approval, or based on an alternate methodology accepted by staff at time of application for SDP/ SDPA in accordance with the County's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) guidelines in Resolution No. 2006-299, as it may be amended. 7. Evidence of U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) accepted mitigation for impacts to panthers, woodstorks, Florida black bear and other listed species will be required prior to excavation Site Improvement Plan (SIP) permit approval, if applicable. 8. A littoral shelf planting area to commence shall be constructed during the reclamation phase of the project shall be shown as depicted on the approved excavation permit (PL20200002472). for this petition and shall meet the current standards of the Land Development Code at time of submittal of the Commercial Excavation Permit. 9. Prior to any vehicular use of the additional 231.73± 39.92± acres, the owner shall post two (2) signs along the on- site entry drive, clearly visible to vehicles entering and leaving the site, providing information regarding potential panther presence and notifying drivers of the need to use caution. Sign wording, placement and size will be reviewed and approved by the Collier County Environmental Staff during review of the Commercial Excavation Application or other local development order, whichever is the first to allow vehicular use of the 231.73± 39.92± acres. 10. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. Page 9427 of 9661 Stewart Mining CU – PL20240003054 Exhibit C – Conditions of Approval June 30, 2025 www.davidsonengineering.com Strikethrough denotes a deletion, underline denotes an addition. 11. Pursuant to Section 125. 022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. 12. The westernmost 200 feet of the parcel 00065520004 shall be reserved for road right-of-way, for the purpose of the future Little League Road extension. Within 90 days of receipt of written notification by Collier County Transportation that the property is needed, the owner will convey the requested property to the County, for fair market value on the date of the conveyance. 13. The petitioner shall be responsible for maintenance of Edwards Grove Road, from State Road 82 to the subject 450.7± 490.62± acre property line, for the duration of the mining operation. Edwards Grove Road shall be paved a minimum of 22 feet in width and a depth of 1.5 inches of asphalt or asphalt millings. A Dust Control Plan, for Edwards Grove Road, shall be submitted with the Excavation Permit. 14. Petitioner’s dust control plan for Edwards Grove Road, required per Collier County Resolution 21- 13 and approved under Excavation Permit No. PL20200002472, shall remain in force and effect for the duration of the mining operation. 15. The mining operations shall be conducted in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida, Collier County Government, and the Federal government. 16. Upon completion of mining activities, all buildings, equipment, buffers and berms shall be removed within twelve (12) months unless said buildings and equipment will be used in the reclamation process. 17. The petitioner reserves the right to have the ability to blast in the future. Should blasting be required, the petitioner will file an Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. Page 9428 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting D esigningE xcellence M E M O R A N D U M April 30, 2025 To: Sean Sammon, Planner III, Collier County Zoning Division From: Brandon T. Copper, P.E., Project Manager, Davidson Engineering, Inc. RE: Stewart Mining – CU PL20240003054 Neighborhood Information Meeting Summary Davidson Engineering conducted a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) for the subject Conditional Use on Tuesday, April 30, 2025 at 5:30pm. The meeting was held at the Immokalee Community Park, located at 321 N 1st St, Immokalee, FL 34142. Brandon Copper, P.E., with Davidson Engineering, Inc. was in attendance to represent the applicant and make a presentation. There were zero individuals from the public that attended the meeting (in-person) and zero individuals participated in the meeting via Microsoft Teams. In Person/ Virtual (Microsoft Teams) Participants: No attendees. The following individuals, associated with the project, were in attendance: Brandon T. Copper, P.E., Davidson Engineering, Inc. (in-person) Amanda Stewart, Stewart Materials (in-person) Summary: Brandon Copper, agent for the applicant, was prepared to begin the presentation at approximately 5:30 p.m. This includes verifying the Microsoft Teams (virtual meeting) link was active and accessible. No attendees, in-person or virtually, entered the meeting. At 5:45 p.m. Brandon Copper again verified that no one was in the virtual meeting. After confirming, the meeting was adjourned. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation is attached. Page 9429 of 9661 2 Should you have any questions or require additional information please contact me directly at 239.434.6060 or via email: Brandon@davidsonengineering.com Sincerely, Brandon Copper, P.E. Project Manager Page 9430 of 9661 Stewart Mining East Expansion CU PL20240003054 AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE I hereby certify that pursuant to Ordinance 2004-41, of the Collier County Land Development Code, I did cause the attached newspaper advertisement to appear and I did give notice by mail to the following property owners and/or condominium and civic associations whose members may be affected by the proposed land use changes of an application request for a Planned Unit Development Rezone and Growth Management Plan Amendment, at least 15 days prior to the scheduled Neighborhood Information Meeting. For the purposes of this requirement, the names and addresses of property owners shall be deemed those appearing on the latest tax rolls of Collier County and any other persons or entities who have made a formal request of the county to be notified. The said notice contained the laymen’s description of the site property of proposed change and the date, time, and place of a Neighborhood Information Meeting. Per the attached letters, property owner’s list, and copy of newspaper advertisement which are hereby made a part of this Affidavit of Compliance _________________________________________________ Brandon T. Copper, P.E. State of Florida County of Collier The foregoing Affidavit of compliance was acknowledged before me this _30th_ day of _April , 2025 by Brandon T. Copper, P.E., who is personally known to me. (Notary Seal) _____________________________________________ (Signature of Notary Public) Tocia HamlinͲZŽƐĂ Printed Name of Notary Page 9431 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com D esigningE xcellence Civil Engineering • Planning • Permitting April 11, 2025 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that a formal application has been submitted to Collier County seeking approval of a Conditional Use (CU-PL20240003054) to include parcel 00065402009 which is approximately 39.92 acres. This parcel will be incorporated into the existing mine, increasing the size of the petition to encompass ±490.62 acres. 2301, 2315 & 3000 Edwards Grove Rd The petitioner is asking the County to approve this Conditional Use application to relocate the existing processing plant to said parcel and provide an area for excavated material storage. The proposed works shall not increase the size of excavatable area under the previous approval Resolution 2021-013. In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, a Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to provide you with an opportunity to become fully aware of our development intentions and to give you an opportunity to influence the form of development. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on April 29th, 2025, at 5:30 PM at the Immokalee Community Park in the Conference Room. The address for the Immokalee Community Park is 321 N 1st St, Immokalee FL 34142. At this meeting the petitioner will make every effort to illustrate how the property will be developed and to answer any questions. The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational purposes, it is not a public hearing. If you are unable to attend and require a virtual link, please use the link and meeting information below. If you have any questions, please contact us by phone or e-mail at (239) 434-6060 or Brandon@DavidsonEngineering.com. Join virtually via Microsoft Teams:https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-teams/join-a-meeting Meeting ID:282 026 456 236 4 Passcode:CU9JG6qk Sincerely, Brandon Copper, P.E. Project Manager, Davidson Engineering Page 9432 of 9661 1NAME1NAME2NAME3NAME4NAME5NAME6LEGAL1LEGAL2LEGAL3LEGAL4FOLIOADDRESSTYPEBARFIELD PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLCPO BOX 2357LABELLE, FL 33975---235718 46 29 BEG AT SW CNR SEC 18,N 1331.15FT, N 89 DEG E 2481.55FT, S 2658.62FT, N 89 DEG E84FT, S 1353.32FT TO PT ON00065520004UBARRON COLLIER P'SHIP LLLP2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY # 200NAPLES, FL 34105---322719 46 29 ELY 91.54 AC. OFS1/200065640007UBETHEL MINISTRIES INTNTNL INC1225 W MAIN STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---364117 46 29 COMM SE CNR SEC 17,N 716FT ALG E LI, W 2851.30FTTO POB; W208.71FT, N208.71FT,E208.71FT, S208.71FT TO POB00065360002UE & B MILLER FAMILY FLORIDALIMITED PARTNERSHIPPO BOX 728LABELLE, FL 33975---72817 46 29 N1/2 OF S1/2, LESS W30FT + LESS HWY R/W00065160008UFLORIDA POWER & LIGHTPROPERTY TAX DEPARTMENT700 UNIVERSE BLVD, PSX/JBJUNO BEACH, FL 33408---013 46 28 ALL LESS AS DESC INOR 6127 PG 372100050600007UFLORIDA POWER & LIGHTPROPERTY TAX DEPARTMENT700 UNIVERSE BLVD, PSX/JBJUNO BEACH, FL 33408---024 46 28 ALL00052520004UFLORIDA POWER & LIGHTPROPERTY TAX DEPARTMENT700 UNIVERSE BLVD, PSX/JBJUNO BEACH, FL 33408---019 46 29 WLY 201.61 AC OFS1/200065600005UINA LOUISE JOHNSON REV TRUST1255 N 15TH ST STE 7IMMOKALEE, FL 34142---285917 46 29 E3/4 OF SW1/4 OF SE1/4 OF SW1/4 AND W1/4 OF SE1/4 OF SE1/4 OF SW1/400065401000UJOHNSON FAMILY DEVELOPMENT LLC1255 N 15TH ST STE 7IMMOKALEE, FL 34142---285917 46 29 S1/2 OF S1/2, LESS W30FT + LESS OR 287 PG 985,LESSOR 3720 PG 379 LESS W1/400065040005URINKER MATERIALS WEST LLC1501 BELVEDERE RDWEST PALM BEACH, FL 33406---150118 46 29 N3/4 OF SECT, LESS E30FT R/W00065480005USOUTHERN RESERVES LLC2875 JUPITER PARK DRSTE 1100JUPITER, FL 33458---017 46 29 W1/4 OF S1/2 OF S1/2LESS W 30FT00065402009USOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIES LLC2875 JUPITER PARK DR #1100JUPITER, FL 33458---019 46 29 BEG AT NE CNR SEC 19,S 2692.02FT, N 89 DEG W 2340.90FT, N 1353.32FT, S 89 DEG W84FT, N 2658.62 TO A POINT ON00065680009UTIITF /ED UNIV FLUNIV OF FL EXP STATION% DEP DOUGLAS BLDG3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVDTALLAHASSEE, FL 32399---300020 46 29 NW1/4 160 AC. OR 524PG 48000066000002UTIITF /ED UNIV FLUNIV OF FLA EXP STATION% DEP DOUGLAS BLDG3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVDTALLAHASSEE, FL 32399---300020 46 29 N1/2 OF S1/2LESS RR R/W DB 524 PG 48000066040004UNotice: This data belongs to the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office (CCPA). Therefore, the recipient agrees not to represent this data to anyone as other than CCPA provided data. The recipient may not transfer this data to others without consent from the CCPA.Petition: PL20240003054 (Stewart Materials Expansion (CU) | Buffer: 1000' | Date: 4/8/2025 | Site Location: 00065520004, 00065680009, 00065402009POList_1000.xlsPage 9433 of 9661 Page 9434 of 9661 Page 9435 of 9661 Page 9436 of 9661 In Attendance•Brandon T. Copper, P.E. – Project Manager, Davidson Engineering, Inc. •Amanda Stewart – Vice President of Sales, Stewart Materials•Roger Burns – Stewart Materials Page 9437 of 9661 Join via Microsoft Teams:https://www.microsoft.com/enen-n-us/microsoftf-ft-teams/joinin-n-a-a-aa--meetingngggMeeting ID: 282 026 456 236 4Passcode: CU9JG6qkPage 9438 of 9661 TOTAL NEW SITE AREA: 490.62-ACRESNPage 9439 of 9661 LOCATIONSUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATIONSTATE RD 29 IMMOKALEELAKE TRAFFORDNPage 9440 of 9661 ZONINGAGRICULTURAL AL––AGRICULTURAAL MOBILE HOME OVERLAYAY-Y-MOBILE HOME OVERLAAYYRURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAYPage 9441 of 9661 MASTERMASTERCONCEPTCONCEPTPLAN 1Development Area= Devel±opmentevel±±490.62 ment22-ent2 2AreaAt ent--acresPage 9442 of 9661 MASTERMASTERCONCEPTCONCEPTPLAN 2Development Area= Devel±opmentevel±±490.62 ment22-ent2 2AreaAt ent--acresPage 9443 of 9661 EXISTING INGRESS/ EGRESS(TO REMAIN)ON-SITE VEHICULARCIRCULATIONACCESSACCES&&CIRCULATIONIRCULATIOPLAN 1Page 9444 of 9661 EXISTING INGRESS/ EGRESS(TO REMAIN)ON-SITE VEHICULARCIRCULATIONACCESSACCES&&CIRCULATIONIRCULATIOOPLAN 2Page 9445 of 9661 Perimeter Perimeteer Landscape Landscape Buffer Buffer Plan 110’ Type A20’ Type D10’ Type A10’ Type A10’ Type A10’ Type APage 9446 of 9661 Perimeter Perimeterr Landscape Landscapee Buffer Buffer Plan 210’ Type A20’ Type D10’ Type A10’ Type A10’ Type APage 9447 of 9661 ROWROWRESERVATIONESERVATIOPLAN 1200’ ROW RESERVATIONPage 9448 of 9661 ROWROWRESERVATIONESERVATIOPLAN 2200’ ROW RESERVATIONPage 9449 of 9661 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL1. Edwards Road Grove Mine Conditional Use shall be limited to whatis depicted on the Master Concept Plan at time of approval by theBoard of County Commissioners. 2. The petitioner shall obtain a South Florida Water Management District Agricultural Surface Water Management Permit or permitmodification for this site, if applicable.3. The site shall be cleared of all exotic vegetation and maintained exotic- free in perpetuity.4. Material hauling activities are permitted from 5:00 a.m. to 5:00 p. m., Monday through Saturday and 24 hours a day Monday throughSunday for excavation and processing activities.5. The excavation shall be contained by a berm constructed to the height of the 100- year flood elevation. Unless the berm containsadequate clay content to slow the flow of water (as determined by the Collier County Engineering Division), the berm shall contain amembrane impervious to water.6.Thesiteshallbelimitedtoamaximumof49pmpeakhour,two-waytripsbasedontheusecodesintheITEManualontripgenerationrates in effect at time of application for SDP/ SDPA or subdivision plat approval, or based on an alternate methodology accepted by staffat time of application for SDP/ SDPA in accordance with the County' s Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) guidelines in Resolution No. 2006-299, as it may be amended.7. Evidence of U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) accepted mitigation forimpacts to panthers, woodstorks, Florida black bear and other listed species will be required prior to Site Improvement Plan (SIP) permitapproval, if applicable.8. A littoral shelf planting area to commence during the reclamation phase of the project as depicted on the approved excavation permit(PL20200002472).9. Prior to any vehicular use of the additional 39.92± acres, the owner shall post two (2) signs along the on- site entry drive, clearly visibleto vehicles entering and leaving the site, providing information regarding potential panther presence and notifying drivers of the need touse caution. Sign wording, placement and size will be reviewed and approved by the Collier County Environmental Staff during review ofthe Commercial Excavation Application or other local developmentorder, whichever is the first to allow vehicular use of the 39.92±acres.Page 9450 of 9661 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (CONTINUED)10. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development.11. Pursuant to Section 125. 022(5) F.S., issuance of a developmentpermit by a County does not in any way create any rights on the part ofthe applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of thepermit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actionsthat result in a violation of state or federal law.12. The westernmost 200 feet of parcel 00065520004 shall be reserved for road right-of-way, for the purpose of the future Little LeagueRoad extension. Within 90 days of receipt of written notification by Collier County Transportation that the property is needed, the ownerwill convey the requested property to the County, for fair market value on the date of the conveyance.13. The petitioner shall be responsible for maintenance of EdwardsGrove Road, from State Road 82 to the subject 490.62± acre propertyline, for the duration of the mining operation. Edwards Grove Road shall be paved a minimum of 22 feet in width and a depth of 1.5 inchesof asphalt or asphalt millings.14. Petitioner’s dust control plan for Edwards Grove Road, required per Collier County Resolution 21-13 and approved under ExcavationPermit No. PL20200002472, shall remain in force and effect for the duration of the mining operation.15. The mining operations shall be conducted in compliance with thelaws of the State of Florida, Collier County Government, and theFederal government.16. Upon completion of mining activities, all buildings, equipment, buffers and bermsshall be removed within twelve (12) months unlesssaid buildings and equipment will be used in the reclamation process.Page 9451 of 9661 AGENT:Brandon T. Copper, P.E.Email: Brandon@DavidsonEngineering.comCOUNTY PLANNER:Sean Sammon, Planner IIIEmail: Sean.Sammon@colliercountyfl.govPage 9452 of 9661 QUESTIONS?Page 9453 of 9661 SIGN POSTING INSTRUCTIONS (CHAPTER 8, COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT) A zoning sign(s) must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioner’s agent on the parcel for a minimum of fifteen (15) calendar days in advance of the first public hearing and said sign(s) must be maintained by the petitioner or the petitioner’s agent through the Board of County Commissioners Hearing. Below are general guidelines for signs, however these guidelines should not be construed to supersede any requirement of the LDC. For specific sign requirements, please refer to the Administrative Code, Chapter 8 E. 1. The sign(s) must be erected in full view of the public, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street right-of-way or easement. 2. The sign(s) must be securely affixed by nails, staples, or other means to a wood frame or to a wood panel and then fastened securely to a post, or other structure. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage. 3. The petitioner or the petitioner’s agent must maintain the sign(s) in place, and readable condition until the requested action has been heard and a final decision rendered. If the sign(s) is destroyed, lost, or rendered unreadable, the petitioner or the petitioner’s agent must replace the sign(s -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ----- -- -- AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED AUTHORITY, PERSONALLY APPEARED WHO ON OATH SAYS THAT HE/SHE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 10.03.00 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON THE PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER : SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT OR AGENT STREET OR P.O. BOX NAME (TYPED OR PRINTED) CITY, STATE ZIP # STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this day of , 20 , by , personally known to me or who produced as identification and who did/did not take an oath. Signature of Notary Public Printed Name of Notary Public My Commission Expires: (Stamp with serial number) Rev. 3/4/2015 NOTE: AFTER THE SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED, THIS AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE RETURNED NO LATER THAN TEN (10) WORKING DAYS BEFORE THE FIRST HEARING DATE TO THE ASSIGNED PLANNER. Brandon Copper PL20240003054 Brandon Copper 4365 Radio Rd #201 Naples, FL 34104 29th September 25 Brandon Copper Tocia Hamlin-Rosa Page 9454 of 9661 Page 9455 of 9661 Page 9456 of 9661 Page 9457 of 9661 Page 9458 of 9661