The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 02/24/2026 Item #17B(Resolution, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), located at 3625 SR 82, Immokalee in Sections 6 and 7, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20240012172]2/24/2026 Item # 17.B ID# 2026-147 Executive Summary This 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 approve a Resolution approving a variance for an earthmining operation from the Collier County Land Development Code relating to landscape buffers and eliminating the fence and landscaping requirement around outdoor storage and equipment on approximately 896.7+/- acres zoned Rural Agricultural (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), located at 3625 SR 82, Immokalee in Sections 6 and 7, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20240012172] (This item is a companion to Items 16A1 and 17A) OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of Zoning Appeals review staff’s findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced petition, render a decision regarding this variance 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 subject property is identified as Property Appraiser ID #00063480007 & 00063360004 located at 3625 State Road (SR) 82, Immokalee, +1 mile west of the intersection of SR 82 and SR 29. The property’s northern boundary is the Collier County/Hendry County line. The subject property is ±896.7 acres operated by Cemex as a commercial sand mine. The purpose of this Variance (VA-PL20240012172) is for relief from the requirement to provide a 20’ Type “C” buffer adjacent to residential development, a 10’ Type “A” buffer adjacent to agricultural uses, and a 20’ Type “D” buffer adjacent to rights-of-way, to instead allow no buffers other than those identified on the Landscape Buffer Exhibit E of the Conceptual Site Plan; and also for relief from the required 2,110 linear feet of perimeter fence and berm (7 feet in height) surrounding stockpile/processing plant equipment as provided for in Land Development Code Section 4.02.12 to allow no perimeter fence and berm. This variance request has two companion petitions. The Conditional Use (CU) request is to expand the excavation area previously approved by Resolution 2010-224 (see Attachment B). The companion Excavation permit (EX- PL20200002201) is to permit the expanded excavation area on the site. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) & ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard Petition VA- PL20240012172, Immokalee Sand Mine Expansion Variance, on January 15, 2026. Acting in its capacity as the Planning Commission and as the EAC, the vote was unanimous to forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval. There were no members of the public who spoke on the petition, and the CCPC voted unanimously to recommend approval. As such, this petition will be placed on the Board’s Summary Agenda. This item advances the Collier County Strategic Plan Objective within Community Development to encourage diverse economic opportunities by fostering a business-friendly environment. FISCAL IMPACT: 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 (GMP) as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the 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. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural (Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District) and is within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay, as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the GMP. RLSA Policy 1.5 provides for Baseline Standards, and RLSA Policy 1.4 provides that property for which the owner chooses not to participate in the Stewardship Program will remain eligible for those Baseline Standards uses, which allow for earthmining activities. See attached Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review memo, which concludes that the proposed companion Conditional Use may be deemed consistent with the Page 2728 of 3023 2/24/2026 Item # 17.B ID# 2026-147 FLUE. This Variance request as conditioned does not have an impact on the FLUE consistency. Environmental review staff have found this request to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The subject use is consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. The requested Variance does not have any impact on this property's consistency with the County's GMP. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner is requesting variances from the Land Development Code. The granting of such a Variance is permitted under LDC §9.04.02. The attached staff report and recommendations of the Planning Commission are advisory only and are not binding on you. All testimony given must be under oath. The Petitioner has the burden to prove that the proposed Variance is consistent with all the criteria set forth below, and you may question Petitioner, or staff, to satisfy yourself that the necessary criteria have been satisfied. LDC Section 10.09.00 F. requires that “Upon consideration of the Planning Commission’s report, findings and recommendations, and upon consideration of the standards and guidelines set forth [below], the Board of Zoning Appeals shall approve, by resolution, or deny a petition for a variance.” Should you consider denying the Variance, to assure that that your decision is not later found to be arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable, the denial must be based upon competent, substantial evidence that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria below. In granting any Variance, the Board of Zoning Appeals may prescribe the following: 1. Appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with the zoning code or other applicable county ordinances. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the Variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of the zoning code. 2. A reasonable time limit within which the action for which the Variance required shall be begun or completed or both. Criteria for Variances 1. There are special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size, and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved. 2. There are special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant, such as pre- existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the Variance request. 3. A literal interpretation of the provisions of the LDC work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. 4. The Variance, if granted, will be the minimum Variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure and which promote standards of health, safety, or welfare. 5. Granting the Variance requested will not confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. 6. Granting the Variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the LDC, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 7. There are natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation, such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. 8. Granting the Variance will be consistent with the GMP. This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for Board approval. Should this item be denied, Florida Statutes section 125.022(5) 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. -HFAC RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve Petition VA- PL20240012172, Immokalee Sand Mine Expansion. PREPARED BY: Ray Bellows, AICP, Zoning Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report VA (1-15-26 CCPC) 2. Att A - Resolution - 012326 3. Att B - Hendry Co Letter (1-15-26 CCPC) Page 2729 of 3023 2/24/2026 Item # 17.B ID# 2026-147 4. Att C - Applicant Backup (1-15-26 CCPC) 5. Affidavit Sign Posting 6. Affidavit of Confirmation-Legal Ad Page 2730 of 3023 VA-PL20240012172; IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXPANSION Page 1 of 9 December 23, 2025 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION- ZONING SERVICES SECTION HEARING DATE: JANUARY 15, 2026 SUBJECT: VA-PL20240012172; IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXPANSION COMPANION ITEMS: CU-PL20240012171 & EX-PL20200002201 PROPERTY OWNER/AGENTS: Owner: Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34105 Agents: Jessica Harrelson, AICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Peninsula Engineering Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 2600 Golden Gate Parkway 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34105 Naples, FL 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a request for variances relating to an earthmining operation to allow relief from Land Development Code (LDC) Section 4.06.02.C. Table 2.4 which requires commercial excavations on property zoned Rural Agricultural District (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District (RLSAO), to provide a 20’ Type “C” buffer adjacent to residential development, a 10’ Type “A” buffer adjacent to agricultural uses, and a 20’ Type “D” buffer adjacent to rights-of-way, to instead allow no buffers other than those identified on the Landscape Buffer Exhibit of the Conceptual Site Plan; and to allow relief from LDC Section 4.02.12 which requires 2,110 linear feet of perimeter fence and berm (7 feet in height) surrounding the stockpile/processing plant equipment to allow no perimeter fence and berm. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject properties are identified as Property Appraiser ID #00063480007 & 00063360004 located at 3625 State Road (SR) 82, Immokalee, 1+/- mile west of the intersection of SR 82 and SR 29, in Sections 6 and 7, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on the following page.) Page 2731 of 3023 VA-PL20240012172; IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXPANSION Page 2 of 9 December 23, 2025 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject property is 896.7± acres currently operated by Cemex as a commercial sand mine. A companion Conditional Use (CU-PL20240012171) request is being sought to expand the excavation area previously approved by Resolution 2010-224. The prior approval allowed for 589.3 acres to be excavated, and the Conditional Use request is to expand excavation to the northeast direction by an additional 91 acres in areas previously approved as preserve land and wildlife corridor, for a total excavation area of 680.3 acres. The petitioner is seeking Variance approval for relief from the requirement to provide a 20’ Type “C” buffer adjacent to residential development, a 10’ Type “A” buffer adjacent to agricultural uses, and a 20’ Type “D” buffer adjacent to rights-of-way, to instead allow no buffers other than those identified on the Landscape Buffer Exhibit of the Conceptual Site Plan; and also for relief from the required 2,110 linear feet of perimeter fence and berm (7 feet in height) surrounding stockpile/processing plant equipment as provided for in LDC Section 4.02.12 to allow no perimeter fence and berm. The proposed Landscape Buffer Exhibit of the Conceptual Site Plan is included in the Draft Resolution and also included on the following page. The plan provides that: - The Owner will install an LDC required buffer within 180 days along any property boundary where an SRA, PUD, rezone, or other residential development has been approved or is approved in the future on an adjacent property, unless development on the Page 2732 of 3023 VA-PL20240012172; IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXPANSION Page 3 of 9 December 23, 2025 adjacent property includes the construction of a perimeter berm that is a minimum of 7’ in height, as measured from Finished Floor Elevation of the adjacent site. - The Owner will install a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer along the northeast corner of the property, where the site is adjacent to residential, as shown on the Conceptual Site Plan. - The Owner will retain the existing Type ‘A’ buffer along the western property line, as shown on the Conceptual Site Plan. - The Owner will complete the installation of the required Type ‘D’ buffer along SR 82, as shown on the Conceptual Site Plan. 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 operated as a commercial sand mine and zoned Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A- MHO-RLSAO) with Conditional Use approval for earthmining by Resolution 2010-224. Page 2733 of 3023 VA-PL20240012172; IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXPANSION Page 4 of 9 December 23, 2025 North: The northern property line is the Collier-Hendry County line, beyond which is agricultural land zoned Agriculture in Hendry County. Also to the northeast is a single family home on 32.5 acres zoned A-MHO-RLSAO. East: Agricultural, grazing, and natural lands zoned A-MHO-RLSAO. South: State Road 82, beyond which are agricultural row crops and an FDOT water management pond, all zoned A-MHO-RLSAO. West: Agricultural groves and natural lands zoned A-MHO-RLSAO Subject Site Page 2734 of 3023 VA-PL20240012172; IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXPANSION Page 5 of 9 December 23, 2025 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural (Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District) and is within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay, as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the GMP. RLSA Policy 1.5 provides for Baseline Standards, and RLSA Policy 1.4 provides that property for which the owner chooses not to participate in the Stewardship Program will remain eligible for those Baseline Standards uses, which allow for earthmining activities. See attached Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review memo, which concludes that the proposed companion Conditional Use may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. This Variance request as conditioned does not have an impact on the FLUE consistency. Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff have found this request to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). STAFF ANALYSIS: The subject property is 896.7± acres currently operated by Cemex as a commercial sand mine. A companion Conditional Use (CU-PL20240012171) request is being sought to expand the excavation area previously approved by Resolution 2010-224. The prior approval allowed for 589.3 acres to be excavated, and the Conditional Use request is to expand excavation to the northeast direction by an additional 91 acres in areas previously approved as preserve land and wildlife corridor, for a total excavation area of 680.3 acres. The petitioner is seeking Variance approval for relief from the requirement to provide a 20’ Type “C” buffer adjacent to residential development, a 10’ Type “A” buffer adjacent to agricultural uses, and a 20’ Type “D” buffer adjacent to rights-of-way, to instead allow no buffers other than those identified on the Landscape Buffer Exhibit of the Conceptual Site Plan; and also for relief from the required 2,110 linear feet of perimeter fence and berm (7 feet in height) surrounding stockpile/processing plant equipment as provided for in Land Development Code Section 4.02.12 to allow no perimeter fence and berm. The Variance petition seeks the following variance requests: Proposed Variance #1: (Buffer Requirements) Variance # 1 seeks relief from Section 4.06.02.C (Table 2.4) of the Collier County Land Development Code - “Buffer Requirements”, that requires commercial excavations to provide a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer adjacent to residential development, a 10’ Type ‘A’ buffer adjacent to agricultural uses, and a 20’ Type ‘D’ buffer adjacent to rights-of-way, whereas the petitioner is requesting to allow no buffers other than those identified on the Landscape Buffer Exhibit of the Conceptual Site Plan included in the attached Draft Resolution (also enumerated as Condition #13 in the Draft Resolution for the companion Conditional Use petition CU-PL20240012171). Petitioner Developer Commitments (depicted on the Landscape Buffer Exhibit of the Conceptual Site Plan included in the attached Draft Resolution, and also included as Condition #13 in the Draft Resolution for the companion Conditional Use petition): a. The Owner will install an LDC required buffer within 180 days along any property boundary where an SRA, PUD, rezone, or other residential development has been Page 2735 of 3023 VA-PL20240012172; IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXPANSION Page 6 of 9 December 23, 2025 approved or is approved in the future on an adjacent property, unless development on the adjacent property includes the construction of a perimeter berm that is a minimum of 7’ in height, as measured from Finished Floor Elevation of the adjacent site. b. The Owner will install a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer along the northeast corner of the property, where the site is adjacent to residential. c. The Owner will retain the existing Type ‘A’ buffer along the western property line. d. The Owner will complete the installation of the required Type ‘D’ buffer along SR 82. Petitioner Justifications: • The property is mostly adjacent to agriculturally zoned properties. Earth mining activities have no negative impacts on lands used for agricultural purposes. The County’s Land Development Code does not consider the large tracts of land needed for earth mining and agricultural activities, and the compatibility between these uses. • Abutting property along a portion of the eastern property line is under common ownership. • Hendry County has issued a letter approving the request to eliminate any required landscape buffer along the property’s northern boundary, which is zoned Agricultural. The property, within Hendry County abutting the subject site along the north, has an existing berm that is 6± feet in height. The petitioner has also agreed to retain existing vegetation along the northern property boundary. Staff recommendation: See Attachment C for the letter from Hendry County, which specifies the County has no objection to the request to eliminate any required landscape buffer along the property’s northern boundary, provided that existing native vegetation is retained and a 50-foot excavation area setback is provided. The Landscape Buffer Exhibit of the Conceptual Site Plan included in the attached Draft Resolution enumerates that existing vegetation along the northern property line is to remain, and the Draft Resolution for the companion Conditional Use petition CU-PL20240012171 specifies the minimum excavation setback is 50 feet. Zoning and Landscape Review finds that granting the variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the LDC, and staff recommends APPROVAL of this variance. Proposed Variance #2: (Screening for Outdoor Storage/Equipment/Mining/Operations) Variance # 2 seeks relief from Section 4.02.12 of the Land Development Code that requires outdoor storage areas, including but not limited to manufactured products, raw or finished materials, or vehicles other than vehicles intended for sale, be screened with a fence or equivalent landscaping or combination thereof, not less than 7 feet in height, whereas the petitioner is requesting to eliminate this requirement surrounding the Processing Plant Equipment area identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. Petitioner Justifications: • The Immokalee Sand Mine’s stockpile/processing plant/equipment area is located 2,800± feet from State Road 82 and roughly a mile from the existing single-family home along the northeast corner. Adding a 7-foot-high berm, landscaping, wall, or combination thereof around this area would interfere with day-to-day activities and routine work, as it would isolate this area from the excavation activities. Unrestricted access to this area is needed to perform daily operations. The project team has been unable to identify that this LDC requirement has been applied to other mining projects. Page 2736 of 3023 VA-PL20240012172; IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXPANSION Page 7 of 9 December 23, 2025 Staff recommendation: Staff finds that a literal interpretation of the provisions of the LDC work unnecessary and undue hardship on the petitioner or create practical difficulties on the petitioner, and there are special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size, and characteristics of the land involved. Zoning and Landscape Review staff recommend APPROVAL of this variance. The decision to grant a variance is based on the criteria in LDC Section 9.04.03.A–H (in bold font below). Staff has analyzed this petition relative to these provisions and offers the following responses: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? The subject site is 897+ acres and is already operating as a mine. The northern property line is the Collier-Hendry County line, beyond which is agricultural property. Hendry County staff have issued a letter of no objection to the request to eliminate any required landscape buffer along the property’s northern boundary, provided that existing native vegetation is retained and a 50-foot excavation area setback is provided. The Conceptual Site Plan with the companion Conditional Use petition (CU-PL20240012171) demonstrates conformance with these provisions. Surrounding the property in Collier County is mostly undeveloped, agricultural lands with exception of a single family home on 32.5 acres at the northeast corner of the site. The petitioner’s rationale for the variance from buffer requirements is that mining and agricultural uses are located in the same geography, require large tracts of land, and buffering between mines and agricultural properties is not necessary for compatible operations; the petitioner has committed to providing the required buffer along the property line shared with the neighboring residence. The petitioner’s rationale for the relief from screening requirements is that the stockpile/processing plant/equipment area is ±2,800 feet from State Road 82 and roughly a mile from the existing single-family home along the northeast corner, rendering the screening unnecessary given the large size of the property. b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which are the subject of the Variance request? There are no special conditions or circumstances, such as pre-existing conditions relative to the subject property that do not result from the action of the applicant. c. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant? Yes, the code required buffers would result in the installation of several miles of unnecessary landscape buffers where the mine operator must already provide berms and barriers for mine operation. The intent of the buffer provisions of the code are achieved by the petitioner’s commitments to retain the existing vegetation along the northern property boundary, retain the existing Type ‘A’ buffer along the western property line, install the Page 2737 of 3023 VA-PL20240012172; IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXPANSION Page 8 of 9 December 23, 2025 required buffer adjacent to the existing residence at the northeast corner of the property, install a buffer along the eastern property line should circumstances of residential development transpire, and complete the Type ‘D’ buffer along SR 82. The code required screening is unnecessary and impractical given the great distance from impact to the public along State Road 82 or to the residence along the northeast corner of the site; the stockpile/processing plant/equipment area is 2,800± feet from State Road 82 and roughly a mile from the residence. d. Will the Variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? Granting this variance will be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of land. To promote standards of public health, safety and welfare the petitioner has committed to retaining the existing vegetation along the northern property boundary, retaining the existing Type ‘A’ buffer along the western property line, installing the required buffer adjacent to the existing residence at the northeast corner of the property, installing a buffer along the eastern property line should circumstances of residential development transpire, and completing the Type ‘D’ buffer along SR 82. e. Will granting the Variance confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? No, granting this variance request will not confer any special privilege to the applicant that is denied to other lands, buildings, or structures that may be subject to a variance request within the same zoning district. f. Will granting the Variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the zoning codes and will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood because the petitioner has committed to retaining the existing vegetation along the northern property boundary, retaining the existing Type ‘A’ buffer along the western property line, installing the required buffer adjacent to the existing residence at the northeast corner of the property, installing a buffer along the eastern property line should circumstances of residential development transpire, and completing the Type ‘D’ buffer along SR 82. g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? The existing vegetation along the northern property line to be retained helps ameliorate the buffer requirement to the north. Along the eastern property line, the petitioner has committed to providing a buffer should residential development transpire, unless a berm of Page 2738 of 3023 VA-PL20240012172; IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXPANSION Page 9 of 9 December 23, 2025 at least 7 feet in height is constructed at time of the residential development to ameliorate need for a buffer. Along the west and south property lines, the petitioner has committed to providing the required buffers. The sheer distance between the stockpile/processing plant/equipment area helps to ameliorate the goal of screening this area from surrounding view; the area is 2,800 ± feet from State Road 82 and roughly a mile from the existing residence. h. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the GMP? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the finding of consistency for this project relative to the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) REVIEW: This project does require an 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), a conditional use of a commercial mine requires EAC approval. The Environmental Planning staff recommends approval. COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW: The staff report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s office on December 23, 2025. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) recommend approval to the BZA for Variance Petition VA-PL20240012172, subject to approval of the companion Conditional Use Petition CU-PL20240012171 and as provided in the attached Draft Resolution. Attachments: A) Draft Resolution B) FLUE Consistency Memo C) Letter of No Objection from Hendry County D) Application-Backup Materials Page 2739 of 3023 Page 2740 of 3023 Page 2741 of 3023 Page 2742 of 3023 Page 2743 of 3023 Page 2744 of 3023 Page 2745 of 3023 Page 2746 of 3023 HENDRY COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 2340 • 640 SOUTH MAIN STREET • LABELLE, FLORIDA 33975 • (863) 675-5240 • FAX: (863) 674-4194 February 7, 2025 Jessica Harrelson, AICP 2600 Golden Gate Pkwy Naples, FL 34105 RE: Letter of No Objection Ms. Harrelson, Based on the information below, Hendry County Planning and Zoning has no objection to eliminating any requirement for a landscape buffer along the property’s northern property line, which abuts Hendry County. - The property in Hendry County that borders the Immokalee Sand Mine is Agriculturally zoned. - Existing native vegetation along the northern property line will be retained. - A min. 50’ setback will be provided to the excavation area. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 863-675-5241 or email ryan.alexander@hendryfla.net Sincerely, Ryan Alexander Director of Planning and Community Development Page 2747 of 3023 Variance Application (VA) 3/27/24 Page 1 of 6 Planning and Zoning Division • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 www.colliercountyfl.gov Need Help? GMCD Public Portal Online Payment Guide E-Permitting Guides APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. PROJECT NAME:_______________________________________________________________________________ Name of Property Owner(s): Name of Applicant if different than owner: Address: City: State: ZIP: Telephone: Cell: Fax: E-Mail Address: Name of Agent: Firm: Address: City: State: ZIP: Telephone: Cell: Fax: E-Mail Address: VARIANCE PETITION APPLICATION Variance from Setbacks Required for a Particular Zoning District LDC section 9.04.00 & Code of Laws section 2-83 – 2-90 Chapter 3 J. of the Administrative Code ĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŐĞŶƚ͗ZŝĐŚĂƌĚzŽǀĂŶŽǀŝĐŚ͕ƐƋ͘ &ŝƌŵ͗ŽůĞŵĂŶ͕zŽǀĂŶŽǀŝĐŚΘ<ŽĞƐƚĞƌ͕W͘͘ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ϰϬϬϭdĂŵŝĂŵŝdƌĂŝůEŽƌƚŚ͕^ƵŝƚĞϯϬϬ͕EĂƉůĞƐ͕&>ϯϰϭϬϯ WŚŽŶĞ͗Ϯϯϵ͘ϰϯϱ͘ϯϱϯϱŵĂŝů͗ƌǇŽǀĂŶŽǀŝĐŚΛĐǇŬůĂǁĨŝƌŵ͘ĐŽŵ Immokalee Sand Mine Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP 2600 Golden Gate Pkwy Naples FL 34105 239.262.2600 N/A Jessica Harrelson, AICP Peninsula Engineering 2600 Golden Gate Pkwy 239.403.6751 jharrelson@pen-eng.com Page 2748 of 3023 Variance Application (VA) 3/27/24 Page 2 of 6 ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately. PROPERTY INFORMATION Provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page) Property I.D. Number: Section/Township/Range: / / Unit: Lot: Block: Total Acreage: Subdivision: Metes & Bounds Description: Address/ General Location of Subject Property: Zoning Land Use N S E W Minimum Yard Requirements for Subject Property: Front:_________ f.t. Corner Lot: Yes No Side:__________ f.t. Waterfront Lot: Yes No Rear:__________ f.t. The above notes applicable excavation setbacks 00063360004 & 00063480007 6&7 46S 29E N/A See Survey and Legal Description 896.7 3625 SR 82, Immmokalee A-2 (Hendry County Agricultural Zoning)Agriculture ROW/ A-MHO-RSLAO SR 82/ Agriculture A-MHO-RLSAO Developed Residential (NE Corner)/ Agriculture and Undeveloped A-MHO-RLSAO Agriculture and Undeveloped 50 50 50 Page 2749 of 3023 Variance Application (VA) 3/27/24 Page 3 of 6 NATURE OF PETITION Complete the following for all registered Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner’s website at http://www.colliergov.net/Index.aspx?page=774. Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: On a separate sheet, attached to the application, please provide the following: 1.A detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front setback from 25 ft. to 18 ft.; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (include building permit number(s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc. 2.For projects authorized under LDC Section 9.04.02, provide a detailed description of site alterations, including any dredging and filling. 3.Pursuant to LDC section 9.04.00, staff shall be guided in their recommendation to the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner shall be guided in the determination to approve or deny a variance petition by the criteria (a-h) listed below. Please address the following criteria: a)Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved. ASSOCIATIONS N/A Page 2750 of 3023 Variance Application (VA) 3/27/24 Page 4 of 6 b)Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. c)Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. d)Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety or welfare. e)Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. f)Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. g)Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. h)Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? 4.Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? Yes No If yes, please provide copies. ǆ Page 2751 of 3023 Variance Application (VA) 3/27/24 Page 5 of 6 The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Completed Application (download current form from County website) Pre-Application Meeting Notes Project Narrative Completed Addressing Checklist Property OwnershipDisclosure Form Conceptual Site Plan 24” x 36” and one 8 ½ ” x 11” copy Survey of property showing the encroachment (measured in feet) Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized Deeds/Legal(s) Location map Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial Historical Survey or waiver request, if applicable Environmental Data Requirements or exemption justification Once the first set of review comments are posted, provide the assigned planner with draft Agent Letter and address of property owners Electronic copy ofall documents and plans *Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. ADDITIONALREQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: x Following the completion of the review process by County review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager. x Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required. Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: Variance Chapter 3 J. of the Administrative Code X X X X X X X Page 2752 of 3023 Variance Application (VA) 3/27/24 Page 6 of 6 FEE REQUIREMENTS Planners: Indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following reviewers: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Historical Review: City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Immokalee Water/Sewer District: Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson Parks and Recreation Director: Olema Edwards Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or EMS: Artie Bay School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Other: Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 Variance Petition: o Residential- $2,000.00 o Non-Residential- $5,000.00 o 5th and Subsequent Review- 20% of original fee Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the Office of the Hearing Examiner: $1,125.00 After The Fact Zoning/Land Use Petitions: 2x the normal petition fee Listed Species Survey (if EIS is not required): $1,000.00 Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and the permit fee shall be submitted to: Growth Management Community Development Department Zoning Division ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Applicant Signature Date Printed Name x x x x x 01/31/2025 Jessica Harrelson, AICP Page 2753 of 3023 Page 2754 of 3023 Page 2755 of 3023 Page 2756 of 3023 Page 2757 of 3023 Page 2758 of 3023 Page 2759 of 3023 Page 2760 of 3023 Page 2761 of 3023 Page 2762 of 3023 Page 2763 of 3023 Page 2764 of 3023 Page 2765 of 3023 Page 2766 of 3023 Page 2767 of 3023 Page 2768 of 3023 Page 2769 of 3023 Page 2770 of 3023 Page 2771 of 3023 Page 2772 of 3023 Page 2773 of 3023 Page 2774 of 3023 Page 2775 of 3023 Page 2776 of 3023 Page 2777 of 3023 Page 2778 of 3023 Page 2779 of 3023 Page 2780 of 3023 Page 2781 of 3023 Page 2782 of 3023 Page 2783 of 3023 Page 2784 of 3023 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 Partnership BARRON COLLIER PARTNERSHIP, LLLP Filing Information A04000001471 65-0247894 09/10/2004 FL ACTIVE LP AMENDMENT 12/22/2014 01/01/2015 Principal Address 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Mailing Address 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Registered Agent Name & Address Sonalia, Jeffrey S 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Name Changed: 03/02/2023 General Partner Detail Name & Address BARRON COLLIER MANAGEMENT, LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 D IVISION OF CORPORATIONSFlorida Department of State Detail by Entity Name https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entity... 1 of 3 8/18/2025, 4:27 PM Page 2785 of 3023 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2023 03/02/2023 2024 04/29/2024 2025 04/28/2025 Document Images 04/28/2025 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/29/2024 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/02/2023 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/28/2022 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/26/2021 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 06/24/2020 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/26/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/26/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/19/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/26/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/24/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 12/22/2014 -- LP Amendment View image in PDF format 04/25/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 12/30/2013 -- Merger View image in PDF format 12/30/2013 -- LP Amendment View image in PDF format 03/28/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/26/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/05/2012 -- LP Amendment View image in PDF format 04/18/2011 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/30/2010 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/21/2009 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/07/2009 -- LP Amendment View image in PDF format 12/30/2008 -- GEN-COR Merger View image in PDF format 05/01/2008 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/29/2007 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/24/2006 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/06/2005 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/08/2005 -- Name Change View image in PDF format 02/24/2005 -- CORAPSTQUL View image in PDF format 09/10/2004 -- Domestic LP View image in PDF format Detail by Entity Name https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entity... 2 of 3 8/18/2025, 4:27 PM Page 2786 of 3023 Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations Detail by Entity Name https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entity... 3 of 3 8/18/2025, 4:27 PM Page 2787 of 3023 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 BARRON COLLIER MANAGEMENT, LLC Filing Information L14000185495 47-2505176 12/03/2014 FL ACTIVE LC AMENDED AND RESTATED ARTICLES 02/22/2024 NONE Principal Address 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Mailing Address 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Registered Agent Name & Address SONALIA, JEFFREY S 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Name Changed: 04/25/2023 Authorized Person(s) Detail Name & Address Title Director Robert, Sullivan, III D IVISION OF CORPORATIONSFlorida Department of State Detail by Entity Name https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entity... 1 of 4 8/18/2025, 4:26 PM Page 2788 of 3023 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Title Director Villere, Lamar 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Title Director Kunde, Chelsea 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Title Director Reckford, Jonathan 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Title Chairman / Director Cecil, Jack 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Title Director Senkbeil, Thomas 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Title Director Collier, Barron G, IV 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Title President, CEO Gable, R. Blakeslee 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Detail by Entity Name https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entity... 2 of 4 8/18/2025, 4:26 PM Page 2789 of 3023 Title CIO Goguen, Brian 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Title CFO Sonalia, Jeff 2600 Golden Gate Parkwasy Naples, FL 34105 Title PRESIDENT OF DEVELOPMENT GENSON, DAVID 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Title COO Wong Aguilera, Juan Jose 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2023 04/25/2023 2024 04/29/2024 2025 04/29/2025 Document Images 04/29/2025 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/29/2024 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/22/2024 -- LC Amended and Restated Art View image in PDF format 04/25/2023 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/28/2022 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/22/2021 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/24/2021 -- CORLCAAUTH View image in PDF format 06/29/2020 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/26/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 10/22/2018 -- CORLCAAUTH View image in PDF format 04/26/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format Detail by Entity Name https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entity... 3 of 4 8/18/2025, 4:26 PM Page 2790 of 3023 06/27/2017 -- AMENDED ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/19/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/27/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/24/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 12/18/2014 -- CORLCAUTH View image in PDF format 12/03/2014 -- Florida Limited Liability View image in PDF format Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations Detail by Entity Name https://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entity... 4 of 4 8/18/2025, 4:26 PM Page 2791 of 3023 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. a.If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest: Name and Address % of Ownership b.If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each: Name and Address % of Ownership c.If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest: Name and Address % of Ownership Page 2792 of 3023 d.If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general 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 acquired _______________ Leased: Term of lease ____________ years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Page 2793 of 3023 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. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Agent/Owner Name (please print) *The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Community Development Department | GMD Portal: https://cvportal.colliercountyfl.gov/cityviewweb Questions? Email: GMDclientservices@colliercountyfl.gov 2/3/2025 Page 2794 of 3023 Entity ID Owner % Interest BCP % Ownership Trustee Trustee Trustee Trustee BCP Barron Collier Management, LLC (GP)1.00000% BCP Juliet C. Sproul Family Inheritance Trust (LP)24.75000% 24.75000% Patrick George BCP Barron Collier III Lifetime Irrevocable Trust (LP)24.75000% 24.75000% Bradley A. Boaz Andrew R. Meulenberg Katherine G. Sproul BCP Lamar Gable Lifetime Irrevocable Trust (LP)12.37500% 12.37500% Bradley A. Boaz Andrew R. Meulenberg Jeffrey S. Sonalia BCP Frances G. Villere Lifetime Irrevocable Trust for Christopher D. Villere Family 4.12500% 4.12500% Brian L. Goguen Mathilde V. Currence Christopher D. Villere BCP Frances G. Villere Lifetime Irrevocable Trust for Lamar G. Villere Family 4.12500% 4.12500% Brian L. Goguen Mathilde V. Currence Lamar G. Villere BCP Frances G. Villere Lifetime Irrevocable Trust for Mathilde V. Currence Family 4.12500% 4.12500% Brian L. Goguen Mathilde V. Currence Christopher D. Villere Richard Currence BCP Phyllis G. Alden Lifetime Irrevocable Trust 12.37500% 12.37500% Brian L. Goguen Barron Collier IIII Mathilde V. Currence BCP Donna G. Keller Lifetime Irrevocable Trust 12.37500% 12.37500% Brian L. Goguen Brian D. Stockman Jeffrey S. Sonalia BCM Juliet C. Sproul Family Inheritance Trust (LP)25.00000% 0.25000% Patrick George BCM Barron Collier III Lifetime Irrevocable Trust (LP)25.00000% 0.25000% Bradley A. Boaz Andrew R. Meulenberg Katherine G. Sproul BCM Lamar Gable Lifetime Irrevocable Trust (LP)12.50000% 0.12500% Bradley A. Boaz Andrew R. Meulenberg Jeffrey S. Sonalia BCM Frances G. Villere Lifetime Irrevocable Trust for Christopher D. Villere Family 4.16667% 0.04167% Brian L. Goguen Mathilde V. Currence Christopher D. Villere BCM Frances G. Villere Lifetime Irrevocable Trust for Lamar G. Villere Family 4.16666% 0.04167% Brian L. Goguen Mathilde V. Currence Lamar G. Villere BCM Frances G. Villere Lifetime Irrevocable Trust for Mathilde V. Currence Family 4.16667% 0.04167% Brian L. Goguen Mathilde V. Currence Christopher D. Villere Richard Currence BCM Phyllis G. Alden Lifetime Irrevocable Trust 12.50000% 0.12500% Brian L. Goguen Barron Collier IIII Mathilde V. Currence BCM Donna G. Keller Lifetime Irrevocable Trust 12.50000% 0.12500% Brian L. Goguen Brian D. Stockman Jeffrey S. Sonalia Total Barron Collier Partnership, LLL Ownership 100.00000% Page 2795 of 3023 Page 2796 of 3023 Page 2797 of 3023 Page 2798 of 3023 Page 2799 of 3023 Page 2800 of 3023 Page 2801 of 3023 Page 2802 of 3023 Page 2803 of 3023 Page 2804 of 3023 Page 2805 of 3023 Page 2806 of 3023 Page 2807 of 3023 Page 2808 of 3023 Page 2809 of 3023 Page 2810 of 3023 Page 2811 of 3023 Page 2812 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine VA-PL20240012172 August 27, 2025 1 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE VARIANCE NARRATIVE & JUSTIFICATIONS This petition seeks a variance from landscape buffer requirements for the existing commercial excavation mine, the Immokalee Sand Mine. The project involves two (2) parcels, collectively consisting of 896.7 acres, located in Immokalee within portions of Sections 6 and 7, Township 46 South and Range 29 East (the “property”) and more specifically, at 3625 SR 82. Refer to the Location Map prepared by Peninsula Engineering. Zoning & Future Land Use: The property is within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO). Refer to the Zoning and Future Land Use Maps, prepared by Peninsula Engineering. The site is adjacent to SR 82 along the south and is surrounded by agricultural zoning/agricultural activities. SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE TABLE LOCATION FROM PROPERTY ZONING LAND USE North Hendry County - General Agriculture (A-2) Agriculture South ROW / A-MHO-RLSAO SR 82 / Agriculture East A-MHO-RLSAO Developed Residential (NE Corner)/ Agriculture and Undeveloped West A-MHO-RLSAO Agriculture Request The Land Development Code, Section 4.06.02.C (Table 2.4) - “Buffer Requirements”, requires commercial excavations to provide a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer adjacent to residential development, a 10’ Type ‘A’ buffer adjacent to agricultural zoning/uses and a 20’ Type ‘D’ buffer adjacent to rights-of-way, whereas the Applicant is requesting to allow no buffers other than those identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. Additionally, this variance petition requests to eliminate the required 2,110 LF of the perimeter fence and berm (7’ in height) surrounding the stockpile/processing plant equipment, as required by LDC Section 4.02.12 “Design Standards for Outdoor Storage,” identified on the approved landscape plans (SDPA-PL2020000548). Page 2813 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine VA-PL20240012172 August 27, 2025 2 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Justifications for Request • The property is mostly adjacent to agriculturally zoned properties. Earth mining activities have no negative impacts on lands used for agricultural purposes. The County’s Land Development Code does not consider the large tracts of land needed for earth mining and agricultural activities, and the compatibility between these uses. • Abutting property along a portion of the eastern property line is under common ownership; refer to the Common Ownership Parcel. • Hendry County has issued a letter approving the request to eliminate any required landscape buffer along the property’s northern boundary, which is zoned Agricultural. The property, within Hendry County abutting the subject site along the north, has an existing berm that is ±6’ in height. The Applicant has also agreed to retain existing vegetation along the northern property boundary. • LDC Section 4.02.12 requires that outdoor storage areas, including but not limited to manufactured products, raw or finished materials, or vehicles other than vehicles intended for sale, be screened with a fence or equivalent landscaping or combination thereof, not less than 7 feet in height. The Immokalee Sand Mine’s stockpile/processing plant/equipment area is located ±2,800 feet from State Road 82 and roughly a mile from the existing single-family home along the northeast corner. Adding a 7-foot-high berm, landscaping, wall, or combination thereof around this area would interfere with day-to-day activities and routine work, as it would isolate this area from the excavation activities. Unrestricted access to this area is needed to perform daily operations. The project team has been unable to identify that this LDC requirement has been applied to other mining projects. Developer Commitments • The Applicant will install an LDC required buffer within 180 days along any property boundary where an SRA, PUD, rezone, or other residential development has been approved or is approved in the future on an adjacent property, unless development on the adjacent property includes the construction of a perimeter berm that is a minimum of 7’ in height, as measured from Finished Floor Elevation of the adjacent site. • The Applicant will install a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer along the northeast corner of the property, where the site is adjacent to residential, as shown on the Conceptual Site Plan. • The Applicant will retain the existing Type ‘A’ buffer along the western property line, as shown on the Conceptual Site Plan. • The Applicant will complete the installation of the required Type ‘D’ buffer along SR 82, as shown on the Conceptual Site Plan. Page 2814 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine VA-PL20240012172 August 27, 2025 3 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 NATURE OF PETITION 1. A detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e., reduce front setback from 25 ft. to 18 ft.; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (include building permit number(s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc. Response: This variance seeks to eliminate the requirement of the eastern perimeter landscape buffer and landscaping around the stockpile/processing plant/equipment area. The County’s Land Development Code does not recognize the compatibility between earth mining and agricultural uses; thus, it requires unnecessary buffers for the project. Both uses require large tracts of land and occur in the same geographic area of the County. Earth mining is deemed an industrial use by the County, and industrial uses adjacent to agricultural zoning/uses require the installation of a 10’ Type ‘A’ landscape buffer. Earth mining activities have no negative impacts on lands used for agricultural purposes, and when considering Ag zoning to Ag zoning, no buffers are required by the Land Development Code. The Applicant will install an LDC required buffer within 180 days along any property boundary where an SRA, PUD, rezone, or other residential development has been approved on an adjacent property, unless development on the adjacent property includes the construction of a perimeter berm that is a minimum of 7’ in height, as measured from Finished Floor Elevation of the adjacent site. 2. For projects authorized under LDC Section 9.04.02, provide a detailed description of site alterations, including any dredging and filling. Response: An existing conditional use (Resolution 2010-244) permits the earth mining operation on the subject property. A request to amend the existing conditional use has been submitted as a companion item to this variance, requesting a ±91-acre expansion to the mining footprint. The mining operation includes dredging. If blasting is necessary, the state-required process will be followed for such activities. 3. Pursuant to LDC section 9.04.00, staff shall be guided in their recommendation to the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner shall be guided in the determination to approve or deny a variance petition by the criteria (a-h) listed below. Please address the following criteria: a) Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved. Response: The subject site is located within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, consisting of ±896-acres. The property is surrounded by undeveloped and agricultural lands, except along the northeast corner, which abuts Page 2815 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine VA-PL20240012172 August 27, 2025 4 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 single-family residential development. A 20’ Type C buffer will be installed along the northeast corner to mitigate any potential impacts on residential development. b) Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. Response: There are no special conditions or circumstances, such as pre-existing conditions relative to the subject property. c) Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. Response: The literal interpretation of the provisions of the zoning code creates an unnecessary and undue hardship by requiring the installation of landscape buffers between compatible uses. Both uses require large tracts of land and occur in the same geographic area of the County. Earth mining is considered an industrial use, and industrial uses adjacent to agricultural zoning/uses require the installation of a 10’ Type ‘A’ landscape buffer. Earth mining activities have no negative impacts on lands used for agricultural purposes, and when considering Ag zoning to Ag zoning, no buffers are required by the Land Development Code. The applicant has agreed to install code-required buffers along any property line where development is approved. d) Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety, or welfare. Response: The variance, if granted, will be the minimum variance needed to make the project successful. Granting this variance will have no negative impact on surrounding uses and will not be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare. e) Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. Response: Granting this variance will not confer any special privilege to other lands, buildings or structures within the same zoning district. f) Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Response: The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the zoning codes and will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood. Page 2816 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine VA-PL20240012172 August 27, 2025 5 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 g) Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. Response: The County’s Land Development Code does not consider the large tracts of land needed for earth mining activities and compatibility between earth mining and agricultural uses. Earth mining activities have no negative impacts on agricultural uses. h) Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Response: The variance request is to eliminate perimeter landscape buffers; therefore, granting the variance is neither consistent nor inconsistent with the Growth Management Plan. Page 2817 of 3023 Page 2818 of 3023 Page 2819 of 3023 Lamm RDWombles RD SR 29 NEdwards Grove RDSR 82Gator Slough LNSunshine RD¯ P:\Active_Projects\P-CMEX-0 01\001-Immokalee_S and_Mine \Plann in g\GIS\202 4-1 0-3 0-L OCAT ION_MAP.mxd Date Sa ved: 11/18/2024 PROJECT: NOTES: EXHIBIT DESC: 2600 Gold en Gate ParkwayNaples, FL 34105 CLIENT: LOCATION:SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2024) LOCATION MAPIMMOKALEE SAND MI NE SR 82 CEMEX County Line County Line Legend Immokalee Sand Mine County Boundary Line Page 2820 of 3023 PROFESSIONAL SURVEYORS AND MAPPERS, CERTIFICATE NO. LB. 8030www.bowman.com © Bowman Consulting Group, Ltd. Bowman 6200 WHISKEY CREEK DR. FORT MYERS, FL 33919 Phone: (239) 985-1200PROJECT NOPROJECT NOOFCEMEX - IMMOKALEE SAND BOUNDARY SURVEY530037-01-00211·Page 2821 of 3023 Lamm RDWombles RD SR 29 NEdwards Grove RDSR 82Gator Slough LNSunshine RD¯ P:\Active_Projects\P-CMEX-0 01\001-Immokalee_S and_Mine \Plann in g\GIS\202 4-1 0-3 0-L OCAT ION_MAP.mxd Date Sa ved: 1/3 1/2025 PROJECT: NOTES: EXHIBIT DESC: 2600 Gold en Gate ParkwayNaples, FL 34105 CLIENT: LOCATION:SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2024) Common O wnership ExhibitIMMOKALEE SAND MI NE SR 82 CEMEX County Line County Line Legend Immokalee Sand Mine County Boundary Line Common Ownership Parcel Property Owner: Barron Collier Partnership LLLP Page 2822 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT PREPARED FOR: IMMOKALEE SAND LLC 11430 CAMP MINE ROAD BROOKSVILLE, FL 34601 JANUARY 2025 PREPARED BY: TURRELL, HALL & ASSOCIATES, INC 3584 EXCHANGE AVENUE, STE B NAPLES, FL 34104 (239) 643-0166 Page 2823 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 1 of 36 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION 3 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS (PRE-DEVELOPMENT) 4 2.1 VEGETATION ASSOCIATIONS 4 2.2 NATIVE HABITAT 4 2.3 EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY & DRAINAGE PATTERNS 5 2.4 WETLANDS AND OTHER SURFACE WATERS 5 2.4.1 WETLAND SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE AND HYDROPERIOD 7 2.4.2 OTHER SURFACE WATERS 7 2.4.3 JURISDICTIONAL STATUS OF WETLANDS AND OTHER SURFACE WATERS 8 2.5 LISTED PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES 8 2.6 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 8 2.7 SOILS 9 3. PROPOSED CONDITIONS (POST-DEVELOPMENT) 12 3.1 PROPOSED PROJECT 12 3.2 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE 14 3.3 PROJECT IMPACTS TO WETLANDS 15 3.3.1 DIRECT, PERMANENT IMPACTS 15 3.3.2 TEMPORARY IMPACTS 16 3.3.3 SECONDARY IMPACTS TO OFF-SITE WETLANDS AND WATER RESOURCES 16 3.4 PRESERVATION, ENHANCEMENT, RESTORATION, AND CREATION OF WETLANDS 17 3.5 PROJECT IMPACTS TO LISTED SPECIES 17 3.6 PROJECT IMPACTS TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL RESOURCES 23 4. AVOIDANCE & MINIMIZATION OF WETLAND AND LISTED SPECIES IMPACTS 24 5. WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM 27 5.1 ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES (TYPES) 27 5.2 ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS OF ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM 27 6. WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM SUCCESS CRITERIA 29 7. WETLAND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM 30 8. MITIGATION / PRESERVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM 31 9. FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM 32 10. BASIS OF WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM AS ADEQUATE COMPENSATION FOR PROPOSED WETLAND IMPACTS 33 11. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS 36 Page 2824 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 2 of 36 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: TABLES APPENDIX B: UPDATED LISTED SPECIES SURVEY APPENDIX C: LISTED SPECIES PROTECTION PLAN APPENDIX D: PRESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN APPENDIX E: CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY FIGURES: FIGURE 1 LOCATION MAP FIGURE 2 EXISTING FLUCFCS & AND WETLANDS ON AERIAL FIGURE 2A FLUCFCS & AND WETLANDS IN EXPANSION AREA FIGURE 3 TOPOGRAPHICAL DATA WITH OUTFALLS FIGURE 4 SOILS FIGURE 5 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN FIGURE 6 WETLAND IMPACTS MAP FIGURE 7 WETLAND PRESERVE MAP FIGURE 8 POST CONSTRUCTION FLUCFCS MAP Page 2825 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 3 of 36 1. INTRODUCTION Immokalee Sand LLC seeks to amend the mining footprint of an existing sand mine with associated sorting and processing facilities just north and west of the town of Immokalee. The mine project is referred to as the Immokalee Sand Mine (Mine) and encompasses approximately 896.70 acres situated in portions of Sections 6 and 7, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. The Sand Mine is located immediately north of State Road 82 and about 1 mile west of the intersection of State Road 29 and State Road 82. A general location map is provided as Figure 1. The original permitting showed the project area as 897.9 acres, but subsequent survey revisions have amended the overall acreage to 896.7 acres. The project is located on existing agricultural lands. Citrus groves originally composed approximately half of the property while row crop and pasture comprised the other half. The citrus trees on the property were removed in 2013 and the land not currently being mined is maintained as cattle pasture through periodic mowing. Citrus, row crop, and cattle grazing operations surround the property for several miles in all directions. Another sand mine is located approximately 1.5 miles to the south of this project. The proposed expansion to the Mine project will add approximately 109.6 acres to the currently permitted footprint. This expansion area had been left out of the original permitting to allow for a potential wildlife corridor that was under consideration. The wildlife corridor was eventually located further north and west of the project site, so the proposed expansion area is no longer needed for any wildlife corridor. Approximately 6.6 acres of the expansion area are isolated man made wetland. Mitigation for these wetland impacts will be via purchase of mitigation credits from an approved mitigation bank. This report frequently refers to lands within the Immokalee Sand Mine property boundary as the "Mine property" or "Mine site" while lands within the boundaries of the on-site preserve area are referred to as the "conservation area" or "preservation area". Taken together, the lands contained within the Immokalee Sand Mine property boundary are typically referred to herein as the "project lands". The preserve area associated with the project was established during the original permitting for the project. Appendix D outlines the enhancement and protection activities proposed within the on-site preserve area that were established during this earlier permitting. No additional preserve lands are proposed or required in association with this expansion. The preserve management plan also outlines the monitoring efforts that will be done to track and document the success of the enhancement efforts. It should be noted though that this area is not being used as mitigation for the proposed impacts. Impacts will be mitigated for by purchase of credits from an approved mitigation bank. This document provides information concerning the proposed Immokalee Sand Mine expansion project as it relates to natural resources and environmental issues. It was written to support applications submitted Collier County for a Conditional Use zoning determination and to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) seeking a modification to the current Environmental Resource Permit (Permit No. MMR-0297420-009) that has been issued for the project. Page 2826 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 4 of 36 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS (PRE-DEVELOPMENT) 2.1 VEGETATION ASSOCIATIONS The existing habitat types (based on FDOT FLUCFCS codes) are shown in Figure 2 and are further described in Appendix B. The description below lists each of the existing major land use categories and their extent as mapped on the Mine property while Appendix B contains a table listing all the unique FLUCFCS map units present on the Mine property and their extent. Of the total 896.70 acres contained within the mine property boundary, 95.8% classify as uplands (858.8 ac.), 2.6% classify as other surface waters (23.6 ac.; ponds and drainage ditches), and 1.6% classify as wetlands (14.3 ac.). The majority of the property (46%) consists of cattle pasture that is currently maintained by mowing while another 40% is currently dedicated to the mining operations. 2.2 NATIVE HABITAT Of the total 896.70 acres contained within the mine property boundary, The breakdown of habitats at the time of the original approval was; 94.7% classified as uplands (849.6 ac.), 3.6% classified as other surface waters (32.7 ac.; ponds and drainage ditches), and 1.7% classified as wetlands (15.6 ac.). The majority of the property (55%) consisted of citrus grove while another 31% was actively farmed row crop fields. These acreages have been amended with the current application due to the mining activities that are currently underway. For the purpose of establishing the required native preserve, the original acreages are utilized. There were a total of 13.3 acres of habitats (i.e. vegetation associations or FLUCFCS categories) on the Mine property that were classified as native vegetation when the project was originally approved. The proposed project expansion will impact some (approximately 44%) of the existing native vegetation areas on the Mine property. The wetland areas that will be impacted are shown in Figure 6 while Appendix A Table 5 provides a listing of the total extent of the proposed impacts to the wetlands. The original project included establishment of a single on-site preserve (the "Preserve" or "native vegetation preserve") in the southwest corner of the site. This preserve contains a total of approximately 9.9 acres and was identified as the location where existing on-site native vegetation will be preserved. The Preserve is shown in Figures 5 and 6. Figure 7 illustrates the existing native vegetation habitats (FLUCFCS mapping units) that will be preserved on the Mine property within the native vegetation preserve. Table 6 lists the existing habitat types, for both native and non-native vegetation, contained within the boundaries of the proposed Preserve along with the total extent of each preserved habitat (FLUCFCS) type. Native vegetation preservation requirements applicable to the Mine property are addressed in Policy 6.1.3 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the County's Growth Management Plan (GMP) and in Policy 5.5.2.a.iii of Section D, the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay or RLSA, of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. These requirements are echoed in Section 4.08.05.J.2 of the County's Land Development Code (LDC), which indicates that if listed species are observed on the project site then a minimum of 40% of the native vegetation on site must be retained. The proposed on-site Preserve will preserve and protect a total of 7.4 acres of the existing vegetation present on the Mine property. This equates to preservation of 56% of the total existing native vegetation on-site. The on-site Preserve has been protected by placing it into a conservation easement pursuant to Page 2827 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 5 of 36 LDC 3.05.07.H.1.d (i.e. in a conservation easement dedicated to the County). Both Category 1 and 2 invasive exotics identified in the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council's (EPPC) "List of Invasive Species" will be eradicated and controlled throughout the Preserve, in accordance with LDC 3.05.07.H.1.g.ii. Following completion of the initial exotic eradication efforts, shrubs, and ground cover species as appropriate to the wetland and upland prairie habitat will be planted as necessary within the Preserve areas that do not presently constitute native vegetation habitats to restore these areas to native. Supplemental plantings will be conducted in general accordance with LDC 3.05.07.H.1.f. Through the restoration of current non- native vegetation areas, the entire 9.9-acre Preserve will be comprised of native vegetation associations. The post-restoration/enhancement communities are anticipated to be a mixture of FLUCFCS 310 (dry prairie) and FLUCFCS 643 (wetland prairie). A review of historic aerial photographs for the region indicated that by 1973, agricultural clearing and development had encompassed the entire area currently under consideration. Sometime after 1973, the row crop field area previously occupying the western half of the site was converted to citrus trees. The original approvals for the site identified a 25.9 acre area in the northeast corner of the property for preservation in conjunction with a potential wildlife corridor along the northern property boundary. Since the actual wildlife corridor accepted by FWC is located further north and west of the project site, the mine is proposed to be expanded into the area no longer required for the corridor. As a result, the proposed County preserve and native habitat retention has been located in the south west corner of the site contiguous to wetlands and a small native habitat area on the adjacent property to the west. 2.3 EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY & DRAINAGE PATTERNS Figure 3 illustrates the pre-mining topography and general surface water drainage patterns. The majority of the mine property consists of actively managed agricultural operations. The pasture areas are graded to drain into internal field ditches and/or into perimeter rim ditches surrounding groups of fields. The larger fields are bordered by large perimeter containment berms. Because of these perimeter berms, no runoff naturally drains from the property. All water from the site is diverted through the perimeter ditches to the eastern side of the property where it outfalls into another pump controlled ditch. When these pumps are operating, water is thrown off site to the east where it enters another ditch and eventually spreads out into more natural sheet flow conditions. The water table (water levels) within the crop fields is strictly managed and controlled. Wells with in-pumps in conjunction with throwout pumps at various locations (see Figure 3) are the primary means of regulating water levels within the fields. There are no significant off-site flows entering the site since the entire proposed excavation site is largely isolated from off site flows by the existing farming berms and associated agricultural operations. The site is surrounded by agricultural lands in active production which are also managed by similar agricultural water management systems. 2.4 WETLANDS AND OTHER SURFACE WATERS Qualified Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. environmental staff inspected the project lands for the purpose of delineating wetlands and other surface waters. The wetland delineation Page 2828 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 6 of 36 methodologies and criteria set forth by the state (in Chapter 62-340, FAC, Delineation of the Landward Extent of Wetlands and Surface Waters) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual) were followed in determining whether an area classified as a wetland or other surface water and in delineating the limits (boundaries) of potential jurisdictional wetlands and other surface waters. Turrell, Hall & Associates ecologists flagged the boundaries of those areas which classified as wetlands according to state and federal guidelines. There were very few cases where it appeared wetland lines established based on the state methodology would differ from those established based on the federal (USACE) methodology. Where this did occur, the feature boundary was flagged based on the landward-most extent of the two methods – in other words, the methodology that produced the greatest extent of wetlands was used to flag the wetland line (the "safe uplands line" approach). The wetland boundaries flagged (marked) by staff ecologists were subsequently survey-located. Figure 2 depicts wetlands present on the project lands and immediately adjacent areas. Within the Mine property there are 3 isolated wetlands that encompass a total of 14.3 acres or about 1.6% of the Mine property. These “on-site” wetlands are identified as hatched areas on Figure 2.. Table 3 of Appendix A provides a listing of the various existing FLUCFCS types mapped in the on-site wetlands as depicted in Figure 2. Refer to Appendix B for a description of the various FLUCFCS categories. The following paragraphs provide a general description of each of the three on-site wetlands. Wetland 643 (7.7 acres; in southwest corner of mine property) This wetland is located in the southwest corner of the property. The wetland is adjacent to wetland areas to the west and small areas within the road right-of-way. Overall, this wetland and the adjacent wetland areas are isolated by the existing road and agricultural operations. Based on a review of historic aerial photos and field observations, it appears this has always been a depressional wetland area. Wetland 643 is primarily a wet prairie not dominated by any single vegetation but instead composed of a wide mixture of ruderal and grassy vegetation including dog fennel, beak rush, maidencane, soft rush, flat sedges, primrose willow, red root, crinum lily, and several other mixed species. Exotic species such as para grass and torpedo grass are also present. Active mowing has kept woody types of vegetation out of this area. It appears to have been used for staging and storage activities in the past. Approximately 6 to 8 inches of standing water can be present for short periods when the area water table is allowed to remain high. This area has been identified and set aside as preserve area to meet local (Collier County) preservation requirements. It is not being used as mitigation for any wetland impacts. Wetland 618 (5.6 acres; in east central portion of the property) This wetland is completely surrounded and isolated by agricultural berms, disturbed lands, and drainage ditches. Indications are that the central portion of the wetland, an area dominated by willows, was historically a wetland but that the surrounding portions to the north and east were once uplands. Today, these outer portions of the wetland consist of areas of dense Brazilian pepper, and a scrub/shrub community composed of various shrubby species such as primrose willows and Brazilian pepper. The entire wetland can be inundated for significant periods when the water table in the surrounding fields is allowed to remain high. This wetland is being proposed to be impacted under the current expansion modification request. Page 2829 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 7 of 36 Wetland 640 (1.0 acre; in the northeastern portion of the property) This small wetland is entirely man-made. It was created from historic upland areas when the area was used as cattle pasture. The depressional areas appear to have originally been dug as watering holes that were later incorporated into the water retention area for the fields. The wetland hydroperiods are completely dictated by the active manipulation of water levels in the adjacent drainage ditches and pasture fields. This area will be impacted under the current expansion request. 2.4.1 WETLAND SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE AND HYDROPERIOD Ecologists attempted to estimate the existing seasonal high water table (SHWT) elevation in each of the wetlands on the Mine property. Because of the historical and ongoing water level manipulation estimation of SHWT was difficult. The types of wetlands present and the heavy hydrological manipulation associated with the agricultural operations resulted in few reliable indicators that could be used. The physical and biological indicators used in the determination included water stains, drift lines, tussocks, adventitious rooting, buttressed tree trunks, lichen lines, etc. The estimated SHWT elevations appear to be split between the northeastern portion of the property and the majority (remainder) of the site. Wetland 643 SHWT appeared to be about 36.0 to 36.5 feet NGVD (34.8 to 35.3 NAVD) while wetlands 618, and 640 appear to have a SHWT ranging from 34 feet to 35 feet NGVD (32.8 to 33.8 NAVD). Former historic SHWT elevations were essentially impossible to gage in the wetlands present on project lands. The hydroperiods in these wetlands have been altered by farming activities for so long that signs of the historic high water levels have vanished or are so faint and/or variable that they could not be estimated with sufficient certainty. One must remember that the existing SHWT elevations determined for wetlands on the Mine property do not necessarily reflect a "natural" hydroperiod. The water levels in these wetlands are governed by how the area water table is regulated in the surrounding agricultural fields. Using off-site wetlands to judge historical water levels will not work for this property because all of the surrounding lands have been exposed to the same types of hydrological manipulations as have occurred on this property. 2.4.2 OTHER SURFACE WATERS All the other surface waters (OSWs) on the Mine property are man-made agricultural drainage ditches and ponds that are an active part of the current agricultural surface water management system. Characteristics of these ditches are highly variable. Some are largely devoid of vegetation while others have patchy cover by native and exotic herbaceous species along side slopes and ditch bottoms. Nuisance, exotic, and native woody species can also be present. Maintenance excavation is performed in these ditches and ponds as is occasional applications of herbicides, thereby altering vegetative cover following such events. Although "separate" ditches are mapped on the Mine property, most are hydraulically connected to one or more other ditch segments via pipes. There are also two on-site OSW ponds that have been mapped. One of these (SW-3) has a direct hydrologic connection to the on-site ditches. This pond has limited shoreline vegetation, mostly consisting of Brazilian pepper and other exotic species. The small pond in the north east portion of the site (SW-2) appears to be the by-product of past agricultural pumping activities and was also used as a cattle watering hole. This pond is very shallow and will dry down to the point that wetland marsh vegetation frequently fills in the pond when water levels are low. Page 2830 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 8 of 36 2.4.3 JURISDICTIONAL STATUS OF WETLANDS AND OTHER SURFACE WATERS All of the wetlands and OSWs (drainage ditches and ponds) now present on the project lands were assumed to be FDEP jurisdictional. Wetland areas 640 is an isolated wetland surrounded by upland crop fields and berms, and there are no ditches bordering or in close proximity to this wetland that has any hydrologic connection with off-site wetlands or navigable Waters of the United States. This on-site wetland was assumed to not be USACE jurisdictional because of these factors. Wetland 643 has a direct connection to off-site wetlands but the total wetland area (on- site and off-site) is isolated by agricultural activities and the road right-of-way. Due to the lack of connectivity, this wetland was also assumed to not be USACE jurisdictional. Wetland 618 is a natural wetland connected to a small pond and also immediately adjacent to a ditch that has a direct connection to off-site ditches. This wetland (618) was judged to be USACE jurisdictional. 2.5 LISTED PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES A thorough survey for listed animal and plant species was originally conducted on the project lands by Turrell, Hall & Associates biologists in 2008. Subsequent survey efforts have been conducted in 2012, 2019, 2020, and 2024. This listed species survey and its results are discussed in Appendix B. The listed animal species observed on project lands by Turrell, Hall & Associates included American alligator, wood stork, snowy egret, tricolored heron, white ibis, sandhill crane, and crested caracara. A caracara nest was assumed to be located on the property in 2016 as a result of surveys done in conjunction with the SR 82 road widening. No caracara nesting has been observed in subsequent monitoring during nesting seasons. A sandhill crane nest was observed in SW-2 during the 2020 survey efforts. No other nesting or denning of listed species has been observed on the project site. No listed plant species were found on the project lands. Subsequent to the original field surveys in 2008, nesting surveys of the Mine property for crested caracaras and their nests have been conducted during the 2017-2018, 2019-2020, and is ongoing in the current 2024/25 nesting seasons. No caracara nests were located though caracaras were observed foraging on the Mine property. The methodology and results of this survey are also discussed in Appendix B. A few listed animal species, in addition to those documented on the project lands, have the potential to occurring in certain habitats present on project lands. These species are further discussed in Appendix B and include; indigo snake, gopher tortoise, gopher frog, roseate spoonbill, limpkin, burrowing owl, listed wading birds, peregrine falcon, Southeastern American kestrel, bald eagle, and Florida panther. The probability of these animals utilizing suitable habitats in project lands ranges from high to low depending upon the particular species (see discussion in Appendix B). It is improbable that any of these species currently reside or nest on the project lands. It is highly unlikely that any listed plant species could be present on the project lands. 2.6 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES During the initial permitting for this site, a letter was submitted to the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources (DHR) requesting DHR to examine the Florida Master Site File for any previously recorded archaeological/historical resources documented on the project lands. DHR responded in a letter dated 9/25/08 that the Florida Master Site File listed no previously recorded cultural resources on the subject property. A Cultural Resources Survey of the site was conducted in 2016 which did not find any evidence of cultural or archaeological resources on the property. A copy of the Survey is provided as Appendix E. Page 2831 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 9 of 36 The Collier County Long Range Planning Department's "Index Map of Historical/Archaeological Probability of Collier County, Florida", published on 5/5/01 was also reviewed. These maps did not show any historic structures, archaeological sites, or historic districts on the project lands. Based on a review of historic aerial photos, this area has existed as actively maintained agricultural lands for at least the past 40 years or more. Given the above, it does not appear that development of the Immokalee Sand Mine property will impact any historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places or otherwise of historical, architectural, or archaeological value. If a suspected archaeological or historical artifact is discovered during the course of site development activities (construction, mining, clearing, etc.), the development activities at the specific site will be immediately halted and the appropriate agency notified. Development will be suspended for a sufficient length of time to enable the County or a designated consultant to assess the find and determine the proper course of action. 2.7 SOILS Based on the National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) "Soil Survey of Collier County Area, Florida" (NRCS, 1998) there are 7 different soil types (soil map units) present on the project lands. Figure 4 provides a soils map for the project area as derived from the NRCS mapping. The following sub-sections provide a brief description of each soil map unit identified on the project lands. Information is provided about the soil's landscape position (i.e. its typical location in the landscape on a county-wide basis), the soil's profile (i.e. textural composition and thickness or depth range of the layers or horizons commonly present in the soil), and the soil's drainage and hydrologic characteristics. In addition, the hydrologic soil group is also identified for each soil. There are 4 groups that are used to estimate runoff from precipitation. Soils are grouped according to the rate of infiltration of water when the soils are thoroughly wet and are subject to precipitation from long-duration storms. The four groups range from A (soils with a high infiltration rate, low runoff potential, and a high rate of water transmission) to D (soils having a slow infiltration rate and very slow rate of water transmission). The soils occurring on project lands are as follows: Immokalee fine sand (Map Unit #7) Landscape position – Flatwoods. Soil profile – Surface layer is black fine sand about 6 inches thick. The subsurface is light gray fine sand to a depth of 35 inches. The subsoil is fine sand varying from reddish brown to dark brown and down to about 58 inches. Substratum is a pale brown fine sand to a depth of about 80 inches. Drainage/Hydrologic characteristics – Poorly drained. Permeability is moderate. The seasonal high water table (apparent) is at a depth of 6 to 18 inches for 1 to 6 months. Water table can recede to more than 40 inches during dry periods. Hydrologic group is B/D. Myakka fine sand (Map Unit #8) Landscape position – Flatwoods. Soil profile – Surface layer is dark gray fine sand and typically 7 inches thick. The subsurface is fine sand to a depth of 27 inches. Substratum is a yellowish brown fine sand to a depth of about Page 2832 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 10 of 36 80 inches. Drainage/Hydrologic characteristics – Poorly drained. Permeability is moderate. Seasonal high water table (apparent) is at a depth of 6 to 18 inches for 1 to 6 months during most years. During the other months, the water table is below a depth of 18 inches, and it recedes to a depth of more than 40 inches during extended dry periods. Hydrologic group is B/D. Oldsmar fine sand (Map Unit #16) Landscape position – Flatwoods. Soil profile – Surface layer to a depth of 3 to 8 inches consists of fine sand. Subsurface layer to depth of about 4 to 50 inches consist of sand or fine sand. Subsurface layers below this to a depth of 30 to 65 inches consist of sand or fine sand. Below these layers the subsoil is fine sandy loam, sandy clay loam, or sandy loam. Limestone bedrock begins at a depth of 60 to 72 inches but may not begin within 80 inches of the surface in some pedons. Drainage/Hydrologic characteristics – Poorly drained. Permeability is slow or very slow. The seasonal high water table (apparent) is at a depth of 6 to 18 inches for 1 to 6 months. Hydrologic group is B/D. Basinger fine sand (Map Unit #17) Landscape position – Sloughs and poorly defined drainageways. Soil profile – All soil horizons present to a depth of 80 inches or more are comprised of fine sand. A weak spodic horizon occurs beginning at depths ranging from 12 to 38 inches. Drainage/Hydrologic characteristics – Poorly drained. Permeability is rapid. The seasonal high water table (apparent) is within 12 inches of the surface for 3 to 6 months. Shallow standing water is present for about 7 days following peak rainfall events during the wet season. Hydrologic group is B/D. This soil is classified as a hydric soil by the NRCS. Ft. Drum and Malabar, high, fine sands (Map Unit #20) Landscape position – On ridges along sloughs. Soil profile for Ft. Drum soil – The surface layer is typically a dark grayish brown fine sand about 5 inches thick. The subsoil is fine sand to a depth of about 20 inches. Soil profile for Malabar, high soil – The surface layer is typically dark gray fine sand about 2 inches thick. The subsurface layer is light brownish gray fine sand to a depth of about 15 inches. Drainage/Hydrologic characteristics – Poorly drained. Permeability is slow or very slow for Malabar soil and rapid for Ft. Drum soil. Under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table (apparent) is set at a depth of 6 to 18 inches for 1 to 6 months during most years. During the other months, the water table is below a depth of 18 inches, and it recedes to a depth of more than 40 inches during extended dry periods. Hydrologic group is C for Fort Drum soils and B/D for Malabar soils. Page 2833 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 11 of 36 Chobee, Winder, and Gator soils, depressional (Map Unit #22) Landscape position – Depressions and marshes. Soil profile for Chobee soil – Surface layer to a depth of 4 to 18 inches consists of black fine sandy loam. Subsurface layers to a depth of about 47 inches consist of sandy clay loam or fine sandy loam. The subsoil below these layers to a depth of 80 inches is dark greenish-gray and gray fine sandy loam. Soil profile for Winder soil – The surface layer to a depth of 3 to 6 inches is dark gray fine sand. The subsoil layers to a depth of 15 inches consist of light brownish gray fine sand. In the depth range of about 15 to 50 inches, subsoil layers consist of gray fine sandy loam transitioning to dark gray sandy clay loam. Below this to a depth of 80 inches is white fine sandy loam. Soil profile for Gator soil – The surface and subsurface layers to a depth of 16 to 51 inches consist of black muck. The subsoil horizons to a depth of 80 inches or more consist of dark gray, greenish gray and light gray fine sandy loam. Drainage/Hydrologic characteristics – Very poorly drained. Permeability is slow or very slow. Seasonal high water table (apparent) is up to 2 feet above the surface for 6 months or more typically. Hydrologic group is D. This map unit is classified as a hydric soil by the NRCS. Holopaw fine sand (Map Unit #27) Landscape position – Sloughs and poorly defined drainageways. Soil profile – Typically, the surface layer is dark gray fine sand about 5 inches thick. The subsurface layer is dark grayish brown fine sand to a depth of about 52 inches. The subsoil extends of a depth of about 62 inches and consists of fine sandy loam. Drainage/Hydrologic characteristics – Holopaw soils are very poorly drained. Permeability for Holopaw soils is moderate to moderately slow. The available water capacity is low. The seasonal high water table (apparent) is within a depth of 12 inches for 3 to 6 months during most years. During the other months, the water table is below a depth of 12 inches, and it recedes to a depth of more than 40 inches during extended dry periods. During periods of high rainfall, the soil is covered by shallow, slow moving water for about 7 days. Hydrologic group is B/D. Page 2834 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 12 of 36 3. PROPOSED CONDITIONS (POST-DEVELOPMENT) 3.1 PROPOSED PROJECT The Owners propose to expand the excavation footprint of the existing sand mine utilizing the related production and sorting facilities on the 896.7-acre Immokalee Sand Mine property, as illustrated in the conceptual site plan (see Figure 7). The area to be mined shown on Figure 6 is the "maximum excavation area". Mining will involve removal of any overburden using typical equipment such as bulldozers, front-end loaders, and dump trucks. Once the water table has been reached, other conventional excavation equipment such as draglines and excavators will be brought in to start the sand extraction. As the depth of the pit increases, a hydraulic dredge will be used. This hydraulic dredge will be used for the vast majority of the sand extraction activities. The total depth of excavation previously permitted by the FDEP is no more than 90 feet below the control elevation (-54.5 feet NAVD) or to the top of the confining layer, whichever is shallower. Any haul roads built within the mining area will utilize crushed limestone. The project will include the processing facilities proposed along the western side of the property where the excavated materials will be stockpiled and processed on- site. The majority of the sand mine will be excavated "in the wet" rather than dewatering an entire individual pit. However, some dewatering activities may initially be necessary in order to efficiently excavate down to the mine target sand deposit. This excavation will be done hydraulically in a single expanding cell and the water discharge will be recirculated into a perimeter ditch as it is dug. The vast majority of the mining will be accomplished by the utilization of the hydraulic dredge. The dredge allows for the material to be pumped to the central processing area where it can be sorted and graded. This also eliminates the need for all of the haul roads and on-site trucks and machinery that are common at rock quarries. The hydraulic dredge can be adjusted to reach differential depths and is the most efficient method of excavating deeper sand deposits. Limited blasting may be necessary as part of the mining operation. The soil borings indicate that the site does not contain a significant layer of rock. However, if small rock patches are encountered blasting may be necessary. Such blasting will occur only as needed and will be limited to no more than twice per week. The blasting will be conducted only in daylight hours. Depending on demand for the sand, the actual excavation (dredging) process may be conducted 24 hours per day. Modifications to this work schedule could result from discussions with FFWCC and FWS. The production schedule anticipates that between 10 and 15 acres will be mined per year, though this number will be greater initially then decrease as the sand is extracted at greater depths. Furthermore, market conditions and demand for sand will greatly affect the production schedule. The production schedule listed above is a maximum production schedule. The central portion of the mine property will contain various sorting and processing facilities and an initial tailings/drainage pond. This area will include the settling/tailings ponds, the plant for processing the excavated materials, and stockpiles of the processed product (graded sand). The processing plant will operate roughly 12 to 16 hours per day. The processing plant will use water pumped up as part of the dredging operations along with the sand to transport and wash the mined materials, assist in the sorting, and to remove undesirable fines (silts and clays). At the start of operations, a well may be needed to supply some water to the plant but this consumptive Page 2835 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 13 of 36 use will cease once the Mine pits are capable yielding a sufficient volume of water. Water in this pond can be recirculated to the processing plant as necessary. One well tapping the surficial aquifer will be constructed to supply the limited amount of water necessary to meet potable water needs. An on site septic system will be built to handle sanitary sewage generated. If necessary, a stormwater containment berm will be constructed around the outer perimeter of mining portions of the project (see Figure 6) so that the crest of this earthen berm will be high enough to contain all storm events up to and including the 25-year event. An additional two feet of freeboard will be designed into the containment berm system where needed. Thus, all runoff from the mining area will be contained on-site and will either percolate through the soil or flow into the pit. Once the mining has been completed, reclamation plans will include stormwater discharge to off-site wetlands via an outfall control structure on the eastern side of the lake only after the stormwater has received appropriate treatment and attenuation (i.e. treatment and attenuation that satisfies water quality and water quantity design standards specified in the SFWMD’s Applicant’s Handbook). It is important to understand that the existing cattle farming activities will continue during much of the total lifespan of the Mine project. Pasture fields will be retained in areas not being mined and will be gradually eliminated as the mining progresses across the property. The fields and agricultural drainage and irrigation ditches associated with these fields will be modified as necessary in advance of the mining to allow farming to continue in non-mined areas. The overall mining area will be reclaimed in accordance with reclamation requirements set forth in Chapter 62C-36, Florida Administrative Code (limestone reclamation requirements). Mine closure and reclamation will include removal of the processing plant. Reclamation of the overall Mine property will be completed following completion of all the mining operations. This will be done in accordance with criteria set forth in the state’s applicable mine reclamation standards (i.e. Chap. 62C-36.008, FAC). Three isolated and degraded wetlands, totaling 14.3 acres, currently remain on the mine property. The mining operation will eliminate two of these wetlands for a combined total of 6.6 acres of impact. However, any functional values lost as a result will be fully compensated through the purchase of wetland credits from an approved wetland mitigation bank. In addition, approximately 9.9 acres have been retained in the southwest corner of the property. This area includes an isolated 7.7 acre wetland that has been preserved to meet local Collier County preservation requirements. Approximately 7.4 acres of this wetland are included within the conservation easement for the preserve area. the remaining 0.3 acre of wetland is along the perimeter of the property within utility or ROW easements so while it is being retained on the site, it is not included in the preserve calculations. Alligators currently reside within and/or utilize some of the larger agricultural ditches and the small man-made ponds on the mine property. Various listed wading birds forage within the ditches and wetlands on the mine property as well as along the banks of the ponds. Florida sandhill cranes and crested caracaras also occasionally forage in the property's pastures and crop fields. These listed species will be protected during project construction (see Appendix C). The lake created through the mining process will establish far more aquatic habitat for use by listed wading birds and alligators than presently exists on the property. The large mining pit lake, when completed, will provide much greater water storage on the property than exists currently and thus will be a source of groundwater recharge for the general region. The water table in the lakes will reflect the existing regional water table and so will not adversely affect natural hydroperiods or peak water table elevations in off-site wetlands. To the Page 2836 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 14 of 36 contrary, more water will be available to the wetlands through the surficial aquifer recharge effects of the lake. The on-site stormwater management system proposed is designed so that some stormwater from the pit lake will discharge following appropriate water quality treatment and attenuation. The overall water balance for the project site should be improved since groundwater withdrawals for crop field irrigation will be phased out as the mining operation progresses. Currently, agricultural practices on the property include the use of throwout pumps to discharge water from the crop fields into on-site uplands and wetland storage areas. This discharge seriously disrupts and adversely impacts the natural hydroperiod of affected wetlands and also lowers the water quality in the lands receiving water from the pumping. As mining progresses, the on-site farming activities including the use of throwout pumps will be eliminated. Surface water nutrient loadings generated by the existing farming operations can be substantial. When managed appropriately the impacts can be eliminated. However, the ultimate elimination of the throw out pumps as proposed will certainly eliminate any potential for adverse impacts. The proposed project stormwater management system will capture and treat on-site stormwater runoff in accordance with SFWMD/FDEP stormwater treatment and attenuation design criteria. The stormwater treatment capacity of the lake will be sufficient enough to gain a state water quality certification. Various acreage estimates for the proposed project are provided below. • Total area within Immokalee Sand Mine property boundary = 896.70 acres • Total area to be developed as part of the project = 886.3 acres • Portion of developed area to be mined = 680.3 acres • Portion of developed area to be disturbed but not mined = 206.0 acres • Total area within the property boundary to be preserved (on-site Preserve) = 9.9 acres Proposed Composition of Areas Developed on the Mine Property • Mine Lake (dug as excavation cells; area at control elevation) = 680.3 acres • Tailings pond (area at control elevation) = 17.9 acres • Aggregate stockpile and processing area plus Offices/operational facilities area = 47.9 acres • Perimeter stormwater containment berms = 59.3 acres • Primary haul road = 83.9 acres • Total impervious areas = 14.1 acres 3.2 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Figure 6 illustrates the conceptual site plan for the expanded Immokalee Sand Mine project. No construction of public facilities is proposed as part of the project. The property will be accessed directly from State Road 82 using the access determined in coordination with County and State DOT and traffic officials. The proposed project includes constructing new turn lanes (west-bound right turn lane and east-bound left turn lane) on State Road 82. The project construction activities commenced in 2019. The wetland mitigation purchase has already occurred for the previously impacted wetland areas. Mitigation for the proposed new wetland impacts will occur shortly after issuance of the necessary permits. Generally speaking, the Mine operations office and related facilities (parking lot, on-site entry road, etc.), processing plant and facilities, and the tailings pond will be constructed first along with the perimeter stormwater berms encompassing this area. Excavation of the mining pit will then commence and will be expanded over time. Mining of the overburden in the construction office and tailings Page 2837 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 15 of 36 pond area has already commenced. It is estimated that a maximum of roughly 40 to 50 acres may be mined per year, although initial mining will encompass more acreage, areal expansion will reduce as deeper depths are mined. Prior to starting excavation of a given excavation area; the perimeter stormwater containment berm will be constructed/expanded to encompass the new mining area. Final completion of mining activities is estimated to occur roughly 10 to 15 years after project construction is initiated but this could vary. The overall mining area ("developed area") will be reclaimed in accordance with reclamation requirements set forth in Chapter 62C-36.008, Florida Administrative Code (limestone reclamation requirements/standards). Mine closure and reclamation will include removal of the processing plant plus elimination (filling and subsequent revegetation) of the tailings pond. It is important to understand that the existing farming activities will continue during much of the total lifespan of the Mine project. Pasture fields will be retained in areas not being mined and will be gradually eliminated as the mining progresses across the property. The fields and agricultural drainage and irrigation ditches associated with these fields will be modified as necessary in advance of the mining to allow farming to continue in non-mined areas. 3.3 PROJECT IMPACTS TO WETLANDS The proposed expansion of the project will impact a total of 6.7 acres of isolated, degraded wetlands on the Mine property. Development of the proposed Mine project will impact two of the remaining three wetlands on the Mine property; hence one wetland area will be preserved on-site. one small wetland area was authorized to be impacted under the original permitting and no longer exists. The additional impacted wetlands proposed with this expansion total about 6.6 acres. Figure 6 illustrates the wetlands that will be impacted. Appendix A Table 4 provides the existing habitat types (FLUCFCS map units) occurring in the wetlands to be impacted. During the construction and mining process, appropriate construction best management practices will be employed to help protect water quality and minimize the discharge of sediments and/or turbid water from the project site. The specific erosion/sediment/turbidity control methods and devices used will generally conform to applicable standards and criteria set forth in the "FDER Florida Development Manual," Sections 6-301 through 6-500 (FDER. 1988. "The Florida Development Manual: A Guide to Sound Land and Water Management," Chapter 6: "Storm Water and Erosion Control Best Management Practices for Developing Areas; Guidelines for Using Erosion and Sediment Control Practices," ES BMP1.01-1.67. Tallahassee, FL.). These methods will also typically conform to applicable standards and guidelines set forth in the "Florida Stormwater, Erosion, and Sedimentation Control Inspector's Manual" (FDEP, 2002). All runoff from the developed Mine area will be contained on-site while the Mine is active through construction of the perimeter stormwater containment berms. 3.3.1 DIRECT, PERMANENT IMPACTS Development of the proposed Mine expansion project will result in direct, permanent impacts to a total of 6.6 acres of FDEP jurisdictional wetlands and potentially USACE jurisdictional wetlands. As used herein, the term "direct, permanent impacts" refers to actions that will result in the complete elimination of jurisdictional areas (i.e. excavation and fill). The remainder of the existing on-site wetlands will be preserved. Table 4 lists the proposed permanent wetland impacts while Figure 6 illustrates these impacts. The wetlands proposed to be permanently impacted are all isolated and substantially degraded. UMAM scores for the existing functional values of these wetlands range from 0.27 to 0.33 (see Table 8). Page 2838 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 16 of 36 Wetland 643 is a small area in the southwest corner of the property that also extends off-site. None of this wetland will be impacted by the proposed mine and the off-site portions of this wetland will also remain intact. There are several jurisdictional other surface waters (OSWs) within the Mine property boundary which are all segments of man-made agricultural drainage ditches and small man- made ponds. Development of the Mine project will result in direct, permanent impacts to all these OSWs. The only OSW not to be directly impacted will be portions of the perimeter rim ditch that is located both on and off-site. Portions or "slivers" of this ditch located within the Mine property are not anticipated to be impacted by Mine development. 3.3.2 TEMPORARY IMPACTS Permitted wetland enhancement activities in wetland 643 required mechanized clearing and grading of portions of the wetland. These activities took place in disturbed areas that were dominated by exotics. This wetland is not USACE jurisdictional. The proposed enhancement program may require additional temporary impacts to a total of 7.4 acres of FDEP jurisdictional wetlands to maintain the area free from exotics. The effects of any needed future clearing and grading activities proposed should not be considered wetland "impacts" since they are necessary to carry out the wetland enhancement and will result in overall positive benefits to the affected wetland areas. 3.3.3 SECONDARY IMPACTS TO OFF-SITE WETLANDS AND WATER RESOURCES The proposed layout of the Mine project's development features will minimize potential secondary impacts to the only adjacent off-site wetlands by providing an appropriate buffer between the development features and these wetlands. The Mine pit, when completed, will provide much greater water storage on the Mine property than exists currently and thus will be a source of groundwater recharge for the general region. The water table in the lake will reflect the existing regional water table and thereby maintain ambient natural water table levels. In this manner, the proposed lake will not adversely affect natural hydroperiods or peak water table elevations around the project site. Indications are that the overall water budget (water balance) for the Mine property will be improved by development of the project, largely through the elimination of agricultural ground water usage. The pre-mining conditions likely produce a net deficit water balance due to losses from evapotranspiration/evaporation, surface runoff, and ground water pumping. The post-mining conditions should create a surplus water balance, primarily due to the elimination of agricultural ground water pumping and, to a lesser extent, a decrease in surface runoff. The proposed project will, over time, eliminate the agricultural ground water pumping, will reduce the net consumptive use of the surficial aquifer, and will somewhat decrease site runoff. Due to the proposed method of excavation (wet mining), groundwater resources will not be adversely affected by this project. The project site is not located in an area where Mine excavation activities might pose the threat of potential saltwater intrusion. Most of the Mine property prior to the original permitting was used to produce citrus and small vegetable crops and as such required irrigation. The supplemental irrigation is supplied by groundwater resources via wells tapping the surficial aquifer (water table aquifer). The proposed project will not require a net consumption of as great a volume of water as that Page 2839 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 17 of 36 demanded by the crop fields, therefore utilization of groundwater resources will be reduced. The project's proposed stormwater management system will be designed to comply with all applicable design standards and requirements set forth in SFWMD's Applicant’s Handbook, including but not limited to those addressing water quality criteria, water quantity criteria, and water management design and construction criteria. Adherence to these criteria will help ensure that, following mine reclamation, discharges from the stormwater management system to off-site lands meets applicable state and federal surface water quality standards. While Mine operations are on-going (pre-reclamation) all runoff from developed areas will be contained on-site through use a perimeter stormwater containment berm. This runoff will flow into the project's lakes for proper attenuation and treatment. During the construction and mining process, appropriate best management practices will be employed to control and reduce soil erosion, sediment transport, and turbidity. Given these factors, the proposed project should not adversely impact water quality in off-site wetlands or surface waters. Currently agricultural practices on the Mine property also include the use of throwout pumps to discharge water from the crop fields into off-site uplands and wetlands. This discharge lowers the water quality in the wetlands receiving water from the pumping since the water receives minimal, if any, treatment prior to the pumping. As mining progresses, the on-site farming activities including the use of throwout pumps will be eliminated. Discontinuation of pumping will further benefit water quality in off-site wetlands and other surface waters. 3.4 PRESERVATION, ENHANCEMENT, RESTORATION, AND CREATION OF WETLANDS The proposed wetland impacts will be compensated by purchase of mitigation credits from an approved mitigation bank. An assessment of the wetland impacts and mitigation was conducted using the Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method (UMAM) set forth in Chapter 62-345, Florida Administrative Code. A summary of this assessment is provided in Table 8 of Appendix A, while the complete UMAM sheets are provided in Appendix E. The UMAM assessment indicates that the UMAM scores for the four remaining on-site wetlands range from 0.27 to 0.43 and that the total functional value of the 6.6 acres of wetlands to be impacted is 2.71. The applicant will purchase 2.71 mitigation bank credits from the Panther Island Mitigation Bank Expansion to offset the proposed project wetland impacts. This will fully compensate for the proposed project wetland impacts without the inclusion of the on-site enhancement activities proposed in the on-site preserve. The UMAM assessment indicates the Mine project will not result in any net loss of wetland functions. 3.5 PROJECT IMPACTS TO LISTED SPECIES An ongoing survey for listed animal and plant species has been conducted on the project lands by Turrell, Hall & Associates ecologists. This listed species survey, and its results are discussed in Appendix B. The listed animal species observed on project lands by Turrell, Hall & Associates included American alligator, wood stork, snowy egret, white ibis, tricolored heron, sandhill crane, and crested caracara. Other than alligators and sandhill crane, none of the observed listed animal species reside or nest on the project lands. No listed plant species were found on the project lands. Appendix C provides a protection plan (management plan) for the listed species that were documented utilizing the project lands as well as for some additional listed wading birds that were not observed but which could forage on the property. Page 2840 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 18 of 36 The following subsections provide an assessment of the proposed project's potential impacts to various listed animal species. The species addressed include those observed on or in close proximity to the Mine property as well as certain species that could potentially occur on the Mine property and/or on off-site lands close to the Mine site. Wood Storks (Mycteria americana) No wood stork nests, rookeries, or roosting sites have been found on the project lands. The closest documented wood stork colony is located approximately 9.3 miles east of the Mine property in the Okaloacoochee Slough. The proximity of this rookery (colony) places the proposed project within the colony's 18.6- mile Core Foraging Area as defined by FWS. The property is also within the CFA of two other rookery sites. It is 13.5 miles from the Corkscrew rookery and 17.7 miles from the North Katherine Island rookery. Wood storks have been documented foraging in a few of the larger agricultural ditches on the Mine property. On-site wetlands do not provide suitable foraging habitat for wood storks for various reasons (water depths, density of shrub cover, inappropriate hydroperiod, minimal prey species, etc.). Though it is possible that wood storks could occasionally forage in limited portions of on-site wetland 643; however the quality of these habitats for foraging purposes is minimal. None of the on-site wetlands offer habitats suitable for establishment of wood stork rookeries. The proposed project will impact two of the remaining three small wetlands present on the Mine property. These impacts will not constitute a significant loss of suitable foraging habitat. The project will also eliminate (impact) essentially all of the existing other surface waters (OSWs) present on the Mine property (i.e. the existing man-made agricultural drainage ditches and ponds). Very few of the ditches to be impacted provide significant wood stork foraging opportunities. Most of the ditches are generally very shallow and contain limited prey species when water is present. The remaining larger ditches do provide suitable foraging habitat when conditions are favorable. The foraging opportunities provided can vary significantly during a given year due a wide array of factors that include, but are not limited to: water levels present (ditches can be too dry for several months; water depths can be too deep in larger ditches, particularly when fields are being irrigated); variable abundance of prey species; access of prey species to ditch segment (manipulation control structures such as flashboard risers can block or allow access); maintenance condition of ditch segment (ex. whether vegetation cover is dense or sparse, whether the ditch has been recently re-graded or not, etc.). The herbaceous wet prairie to be retained and enhanced will provide 7.4 acres of short hydroperiod wetlands to the project site. Upon completion of the mining operation and mine reclamation, the resultant lake will encompass a total of approximately 680 acres. The lake will provide a deep water refuge for fish as well as habitat for a diversity of other aquatic and semi-aquatic organisms. Vegetated littoral zones will form along the perimeters of the lake. These littoral zones will provide some foraging opportunities for wood storks, however the foraging value on a per acre basis will be limited compared to more favorable habitats such as the prairie areas in the preserve (due to factors such as water depth, dispersal of prey species, extended inundation vs. seasonal drying, etc.). During the initial construction phase of the Mine and as the areas to be mined expand over time; various measures will be taken to help ensure protection of wood storks. These measures are addressed in the enclosed "listed species protection plan" (see Appendix C). The proposed wetland mitigation activities will occur at a mitigation bank within the same wood stork Core Foraging Area in which the proposed wetland impacts will occur. This mitigation is in keeping with the Section 404(b)(l) guidelines and, in conjunction with the creation of the Mine, should Page 2841 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 19 of 36 adequately compensate for the loss of the existing low-quality wood stork foraging habitats that will be impacted by the Mine project. Given these considerations, it is concluded that the proposed Mine project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect wood storks. Various Listed Wading Birds Little blue herons (Egretta caerulea), snowy egrets (Egretta thula), tricolored herons (Egretta tricolor), and white ibis (Eudocimus alba) have been observed foraging in various agricultural drainage ditches and swales located on the Mine property. Little blue herons and snowy egrets have also been observed foraging in on-site wetlands. No nests of these species have been observed on the project lands. Besides these species, other listed wading birds that could theoretically frequent appropriate habitats within the project lands include roseate spoonbills (Ajaja ajaja), and limpkins (Aramus guarauna). Development of the Mine project will result in the loss of on-site drainage ditches and wetlands thereby reducing potential foraging habitats for the listed wading birds mentioned while the Mine lake shoreline will provide new potential foraging habitats. The listed species protection plan includes measures to help protect these species during project construction and operation. Overall, the proposed project will impact existing low-quality foraging habitats but should adequately compensate for these impacts and not threaten the continued existence of the cited listed wading birds. American Alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) Numerous alligators have been observed in the drainage ditches on the Mine property. No alligator nests have been documented on or in close proximity to the Mine property though nests could occur in the denser wetland areas and not be observed. The proposed project will affect alligators; however the anticipated impacts (primarily a combination of temporary and permanent displacement) should not substantially affect alligator populations in the general region. Measures are included in the listed species protection plan to help avoid and minimize direct impacts to individual alligators and alligator nests. Once the Mine is reclaimed, the lake will provide roughly 680 acres of viable alligator habitat, far more than exists presently. Florida Sandhill Cranes (Grus canadensis pratensis) A few Florida sandhill cranes have been observed on the Mine property foraging in row crop field areas. Cranes have also been observed in pastures and herbaceous wetlands near the property. A single crane nest was observed at the north end of SW-2 during the 2020 listed species survey effort. Development of the Mine property will eliminate certain on-site upland and wetland habitats that provide foraging opportunities for sandhill cranes. The wet prairie area in the southwest corner of the site will be protected and retained. Crane foraging can also continue to occur in the pasture areas as the mining operation expands. The gradual loss of the pasture lands as the mining footprint expands should not threaten the continued existence of sandhill cranes nor should it adversely impact sandhill crane populations. The listed species protection plan incorporates actions that will help ensure protection of sandhill crane nests in the unlikely event that such nests are established on-site. The FWC has expressed some concerns on other projects that blasting activities might adversely impact off-site sandhill Page 2842 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 20 of 36 crane nests. The listed species protection plan calls for conducting off-site surveys for sandhill crane nests should the first blasting events be scheduled to commence shortly before or during the crane nesting season. It also includes measures for protecting any nests encountered from the potential secondary impacts of blasting (ex. abandonment of nest). If the first blasting events will not coincide with the nesting season, it was assumed that sandhill cranes would not elect to establish nests in off-site lands that are in close enough proximity to the Mine that the cranes would feel threatened or disturbed by the on-going blasting activities. Eastern Indigo Snakes (Drymarchon corais couperi) No indigo snakes have been observed on the project lands and the majority of these lands do not provide particularly suitable habitats for indigo snakes. Considering their elusive nature, their large home range, and the wide array of habitats they may utilize, there remains a limited potential that indigo snakes could occasionally frequent portions of the project lands. The listed species protection plan adopted as part of the Mine project includes appropriate measures for helping ensure the protection of indigo snakes throughout the operational life of the Mine. The particulars of the protection plan for indigo snakes set forth in the Mine's listed species protection plan basically follow the FWS's prescribed "Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake". There are no gopher tortoise burrows, and only a very few armadillo burrows, on the project lands where an indigo snake could be buried or trapped and injured during project activities. In consideration of these points and given the limited probability of any indigo snakes occurring on the project lands, it is anticipated that the Mine project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect this species. Florida Bonneted Bat (Eumops floridanus) No bats or bat roosts have been documented on or in the immediate vicinity of the Mine property. Due to the agricultural activities there are no trees with cavities suitable for roosting. It is possible that bats might establish in some of the farm storage sheds or mine office buildings in the future either prior to initial mine construction activities or afterward as the Mine development/excavation progresses though the likelihood of this occurring is minimal at best. The proposed project should have no direct, significant impact to bonneted bats. Florida Panthers (Puma concolor coryi) Secondary Zone panther habitat conservation overlays encompass the Mine property as discussed in Appendix C, although no Florida panthers have ever been documented on project lands. Development of the Mine will permanently impact 896.7 acres all of which is located in the Secondary Zone. The FWS has established panther Habitat Suitability Values (HSVs) for various types of habitats with scores (values) ranging from 0 (no value) to 9.5 (optimal value). When the acreage of a given habitat type (polygon) is multiplied by this habitat's HSV, the result is termed the Panther Habitat Unit value or PHU value. Based on the existing habitat types present, the total PHU value of the land encompassed by the proposed mine expansion property boundary is 422 Secondary zone or 291 Primary zone equivalent habitat units. Utilizing the 1.98 base ratio multiplier, the PHU requirement to off-set the proposed impacts associated with the expansion is 577 PHUs. Wetland mitigation credits purchased from the mitigation bank have associated PHU credits. Each wetland credit from the Panther Island Mitigation Bank expansion has 34.8 PHUs associated with it. The project will be purchasing 2.71 wetland credits which will also account for 94.31 Page 2843 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 21 of 36 PHUs. The applicant currently anticipates that the mitigation needed to compensate for the proposed panther habitat impacts will be achieved through preservation and management of off-site lands located within the Primary Zone panther habitat conservation overlay. The original review and authorization of this project preserved 764.1 acres of off-site lands which provided 6,628 PHUs. All of these off-site lands used for the project's panther mitigation program are lands that are currently owned by the owner of the Mine property. The FWS has previously approved this approach to mitigating development impacts to potential panther habitats for the original permitting on this project. There is still a value of 4,156 PHUs associated with the off-site preserve lands which could be used to offset the remaining PHU requirement for the proposed expansion of the mine footprint. The applicant will enter into consultation with the FWS to address the Mine project's expansion impacts to Florida panthers and their potential habitats. The specifics of the location of the off-site lands to be preserved and protected as part of the project's panther mitigation program have been provided by the applicant as part of the previous permitting process. The applicant will ensure that the compensation value of these off-site lands combined with the compensation value of the on-site Preserve will be at least equal to if not greater than the current PHU value of Mine lands proposed for development (e.g. PHU value of off-site lands plus wetland mitigation purchase will be equal to or greater than the PHU value of the area to be developed multiplied by the requisite base ratio and applicable landscape compensation multipliers). Any other measures deemed necessary by the FWS to ensure adequate protection of panthers will also be addressed by the applicant during the Section 7 consultation process during which time the applicant will also coordinate panther issues with the FWC. Given this approach, it is anticipated that the proposed project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, the Florida panther. Crested Caracaras (Caracara cheriway) Intensive surveys of the project lands found no caracara nests on the project lands. Caracara foraging was observed on the project site in the fallow agricultural fields. Caracaras were also regularly seen consuming road-kill along SR 82 in close proximity to the project site. Several cabbage palm trees were removed in 2019 following the issuance of the Biological Opinion for the original mine footprint. It appears that caracaras do not nest on these lands but that they do occasionally use these lands for hunting/foraging purposes. The listed species survey conducted by ecologists working on the SR 82 roadway expansion in 2016 opined that a caracara nest may be present on project lands No nest was observed but repeated flights by a pair of caracaras were observed that would lead to the possibility that nesting was occurring in that area. Subsequent caracara nesting surveys determined that a caracara nest may be present on lands to the east of the project site. No nest was observed but repeated flights by a pair of caracaras were observed that would lead to the possibility that nesting was occurring in that direction. Publications by the FWS and FWC (ref: FWS. 2002. Habitat management guidelines for Audubon's crested caracara in central and southern Florida; FWC. 2001. Recommended management practices and survey protocol's for Audubon's crested caracara in Florida; FWS. 2002. Draft standard local operating procedures for endangered species (SLOPES) for Audubon's crested caracara) recommend buffer zones to be established around active nests. If a nest is located on or adjacent to the project site appropriate buffers will be established to ensure that the proposed work will not adversely affect the nest. Considering this along with the results of the listed species surveys conducted on-site (no nests, relatively few observations of foraging/hunting, limited suitable habitat), proposed development Page 2844 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 22 of 36 activities on the actual Mine property should not directly impact caracaras (not likely to adversely affect). It may also be concluded that while the existing mine will not adversely affect caracaras (per the FWS BO for the project), the proposed expansion may increase effects to caracaras. The determination of whether these additional impacts will adversely affect caracaras or whether they will have only minimal effects on this species (i.e. may affect, not likely to adversely affect) will be coordinated with FWS and FWC during the permitting process to determine appropriate measures that can be taken to help ensure the proposed project will not adversely affect caracaras (ex. protection plans, monitoring plans, and measures to minimize or mitigate potential impacts). The listed species protection plan proposed (Appendix C) prescribes surveying on-site for caracara nests prior to initiation of Mine construction activities to help ensure no caracara nests have been established on the project lands subsequent to the listed species surveys already conducted. Surveys for caracara nests located on or immediately off-site in the immediate vicinity of the Mine property will also be conducted throughout the life of the mine. The protection plan further includes various activities to be conducted during the operational life of the Mine to help minimize potential secondary impacts to caracaras. These proposed activities are subject to change and will be finalized based on input and guidance received from FWS during their evaluation of the project. Burrowing Owls (Athene cunicularia) No burrowing owls or owl burrows have been documented on or in the immediate vicinity of the Mine property. It is possible that owls might establish on-site burrows in the future either prior to initial mine construction activities or afterward in areas of the property where Mine development/excavation had not yet expanded into though the likelihood of this occurring is minimal at best. The listed species management plan includes measures to locate and protect any on-site owl burrows during the operational life of the Mine. Thus, the proposed project should have no direct, significant impact to burrowing owls. The listed species protection program also incorporates measures to protect off-site owl burrows from Mine blasting activities should new burrows be established in close proximity to Mine blasting areas. After blasting activities begin, it is assumed burrowing owls will avoid establishing burrows in off-site areas where they consider the effects of blasting (noise, ground vibration) to be potentially harmful or disruptive. Potential secondary impacts of Mine blasting activities to off-site owl burrows should not be significant given the proposed protection plan and the anticipated tendency of owls to avoid areas where blasting creates a disturbance. Gopher Tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus) No gopher tortoises or tortoise burrows have been documented on or in the immediate vicinity of the Mine property. There are known tortoise burrows approximately ¾ of a mile to the southwest and 1 mile to the northeast of the project site. There is a possibility that tortoises could move onto the site or establish burrows closer to the Mine between now and the completion of the excavation activities. The listed species management plan includes measures to periodically survey the site to locate and protect any on-site tortoises during the operational life of the Mine. The listed species protection program also incorporates measures to protect off-site tortoises from Mine activities should new burrows be established in close proximity to Mine. Thus, the proposed project should have no direct, significant impact to gopher tortoises. Page 2845 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 23 of 36 3.6 PROJECT IMPACTS TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL RESOURCES As part of the earlier permitting efforts, a letter was submitted to the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources (DHR) requesting DHR to examine the Florida Master Site File for any previously recorded archaeological/historical resources documented on the project lands. DHR responded in a letter dated 9/25/08 that the Florida Master Site File listed no previously recorded cultural resources on the subject property. A Cultural Resources Survey of the site was conducted in 2016 which did not find any evidence of cultural or archaeological resources on the property. A copy of the Survey is provided as Appendix F. The Collier County Long Range Planning Department's "Index Map of Historical/Archaeological Probability of Collier County, Florida", published on 5/5/01 was also reviewed. These maps did not show any historic structures, archaeological sites, or historic districts on the project lands. Based on a review of historic aerial photos, this area has existed essentially in the same condition as it is today for at least the past 30 years or more. Given the above, it does not appear that proposed expansion of the Immokalee Sand Mine mining footprint will impact any historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places or otherwise of historical, architectural, or archaeological value. If a suspected archaeological or historical artifact is discovered during the course of site development activities (construction, mining, clearing, etc.), the development activities at the specific site will be immediately halted and the appropriate agency notified. Development will be suspended for a sufficient length of time to enable the County or a designated consultant to assess the find and determine the proper course of action. Page 2846 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 24 of 36 4. AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION OF WETLAND AND LISTED SPECIES IMPACTS The geology in southwest Florida is highly inconsistent from one site to another. Tamiami Limestone is shown in regional geology data to be the predominant geological formation in the area, but that formation is not a viable source of natural sand and gravel. The applicant been searching for a viable deposit of sand and gravel (fine aggregate) when they discovered this deposit. The applicant was involved in a search for rock aggregate in which they investigated several properties. During the investigations, the sand source associated with this project was located and a mining permit application process was started to take advantage of this uncommon deposit. The Stewart Mine to the south across SR 82 also produces similar sand products and has been in operation for several years. The next closest source of sand to the SW Florida market is in Ortona, which is about 35 miles away by truck. Permits were issued for this property by all appropriate agencies and the mining operation was initiated in late 2019. In order for a deposit to be deemed viable, the following requirements had to be met: location in southwest Florida near the Naples/Bonita Springs/Ft. Myers area (e.g. near existing manufacturing facilities in Naples, Bonita Springs, and lmmokalee plus located in a region of the state where there is a high demand for this type of aggregate); deposits present must be capable of yielding FDOT-quality construction aggregates; deposits must be sufficient in volume/extent and must be sufficiently shallow to make mining operation economically viable. One of the more difficult requirements to satisfy is typically locating deposits that can meet FDOT quality standards. The general requirements for fine aggregate to meet these standards are (from FDOT Standards for Road and Bridge Construction Section 902): - Fine aggregate shall consist of natural silica sand, screenings, local materials, or other inert materials with similar characteristics, having hard, strong, durable particles, conforming to the specific requirements of this Section 902. - All fine aggregate shall be reasonably free of lumps of clay, soft or flaky particles, salt, alkali, organic matter, loam or other extraneous substances. The weight of deleterious substances shall not exceed the following percentages: o Shale...................................................................................1.0 o Coal and lignite................................................................1.0 o Cinders and clinkers........................................................0.5 o Clay Lumps.......................................................................1.0 - Silica sand shall be composed only of naturally occurring hard, strong, durable, uncoated grains of quartz, reasonably graded from coarse to fine, meeting the following requirements, in percent total weight. Sieve Opening Size Percent Retained Percent Passing No. 4 0 to 5 95 to 100 No. 8 0 to 15 85 to 100 No. 16 3 to 35 65 to 97 No. 30 30 to 75 25 to 70 No. 50 65 to 95 5 to 35 No. 100 93 to 100 0 to 7 No. 200 minimum 96 maximum 4 - Silica sand from any one source, having a variation in Fineness Modulus greater than 0.20 either way from the Fineness Modulus of target gradations established by the producer, may be rejected. Page 2847 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 25 of 36 - Silica sand shall be subject to the colorimetric test for organic impurities. If the color produced is darker than the standard solution, the aggregate shall be rejected unless it can be shown by appropriate tests that the impurities causing the color are not of a type that would be detrimental to Portland Cement Concrete. Such tests shall be in accordance with AASHTO T21 and AASHTO T71. When tested for the effect of organic impurities on strength of mortar, the strength ratio at seven and 28 days, calculated in accordance with Section 11 of AASHTO T71, shall not be less than 95%. Extensive testing was done at multiple sites throughout the area but were not considered viable due to the lack of sand deposits meeting the above criteria. Only the proposed Immokalee Sand Mine area contained sufficient quantities of sand where the deposits were capable of yielding FDOT-quality fine aggregate. Initially, the boundary of the area to be mined covered the entire project area but was reduced due to a potential wildlife corridor that was considered along the north boundary of the site. This potential corridor was eliminated from consideration when wildlife agencies located the corridor further north and west of the project site. Since the corridor is no longer proposed by the wildlife agencies, the mine footprint is being expanded in order to be able to excavate this valuable resource. During the construction and mining process, appropriate construction best management practices will be employed to help protect water quality and minimize the discharge of sediments and/or turbid water from the project site. The specific erosion/sediment/turbidity control methods and devices used will generally conform to applicable standards and criteria set forth in the “FDER Florida Development Manual,” Sections 6-301 through 6-500 (FDER. 1988. “The Florida Development Manual: A Guide to Sound Land and Water Management,” Chapter 6: “Storm Water and Erosion Control Best Management Practices for Developing Areas; Guidelines for Using Erosion and Sediment Control Practices,” ES BMP 1.01-1.67. FDER, Tallahassee, FL.). Impacts to various listed wading birds and alligators that may periodically visit the project site (for foraging or other activities) along with impacts to resident alligators will be minimized by taking appropriate protection measures during project construction and operations activities. Following completion of the proposed mining activities, it is presently estimated that the lake formed on-site by the excavation will occupy approximately 680 acres. Mine reclamation activities will include planting lake shorelines with a variety of native littoral zone species in accordance with mine reclamation requirements specified in Chapter 62C-36, Florida Administrative Code. These post-reclamation mine lakes will provide desirable habitats for listed wading bird foraging and for alligators, thereby helping offset the project's proposed impacts to habitats currently utilized by these species. Secondary Zone panther habitat conservation overlays encompass the Mine property as discussed in Appendix B, although Florida panthers have not been documented on project lands. Development of the Mine will impact these panther habitat conservation zones. Even though the affected areas currently have limited panther habitat value, it is anticipated that the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) will require mitigation for the proposed impacts to the same extent as they required compensation for the currently permitted footprint. The necessary mitigation for the project's impacts to panther habitats and the specifics of the mitigation will be determined as part of the consultation with FWS. It is proposed that mitigation will take the form of protecting and managing privately owned lands located within the Primary habitat zone of the Panther. This form of panther habitat mitigation has been previously Page 2848 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 26 of 36 approved by FWS for the current mine footprint. Mitigation for project impacts to panther habitat conservation zones could include other measures recommended by the FWS. However, it is premature to accurately predict the ultimate panther habitat mitigation program at this conceptual planning stage of the project. Page 2849 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 27 of 36 5. WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM The mitigation for wetland impacts will be provided through the purchase of wetland mitigation credits from the Panther Island Mitigation Bank Expansion. In addition to the credit purchase, the project will include a Collier County preserve area which will be enhanced and maintained, though no mitigation credit is associated with it. The wetland enhancement program involves enhancement of preserved wetlands and uplands, and the maintenance, management, and protection of these areas. This section describes key components of the wetland enhancement program. 5.1 ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES (TYPES) Wet Prairie – (Map FLUCFCS Code 643) This existing wetland occurs in a disturbed area in the southwest corner of the property. Plant cover is variable and mainly consists of native herbaceous wetland species and a few woody exotic and nuisance species. Eradication of the exotic and nuisance species using non- mechanized methods will be undertaken but no other enhancement activities are proposed. Presently the area is occasionally mown during the dry season. It is desirable to retain this area in its existing state due to its value for wading birds. Mowing activities will be suspended unless necessary for the road right-of-way maintenance or to control colonization by large woody species. This area will be separated from the mining operations and maintained in its existing condition. It is not included in the preserve areas due to its isolation from other natural areas and its unknown future pending potential improvements or widening of State Road 82. Some supplemental planting may be done if exotic eradication efforts create barren areas too large to quickly re-colonize. Potential supplemental plantings could include the following; Sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense) Maidencane (Panicum virgatum) Cordgrasses (Spartina spp.) Spike Rushes (Eleocharis spp.) St. Johns Wort (Hypericum spp.) Spiderlily (Hymenocallis palmeri) Swamplily (Crinum americanum) Yellow-eyed Grass (Xeric ambigua) Whitetop Sedge (Dichromena colorata) 5.2 ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS OF ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM In addition to the above, the wetland enhancement program will have several other facets. These are discussed in the following paragraphs. Hydrologic Enhancement: Historically the water table in row crop fields adjacent to the preserve area was managed (i.e. fields are de-watered) by pumping water in to or out of field rim ditches and lateral ditches. This water is discharged via throw out pumps around these wetlands. This practice severely disrupts the normal wetland hydroperiod. Once the mining operations are under way, agricultural pumping of water into wetlands will be permanently ceased. This will help restore stable hydroperiods that are more typical of natural wetland conditions, prevent artificial over- inundation or drawdown of wetlands, and improve water quality. Page 2850 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 28 of 36 Protection of Wetlands and Uplands via Conservation Easements: The preserve area will be placed under appropriate conservation easements which will protect the future integrity of the enhanced wetlands and uplands encompassed by the conservation area. The easements will ensure that the preserve area are preserved and protected in perpetuity. Wetland and Upland Enhancement via Maintenance Eradication of Exotic and Nuisance Plants: The preserve area will be maintained in perpetuity to ensure that the areas are free from exotic/invasive plant species immediately following maintenance events and such that exotic and nuisance plane species will be kept out of the preserve area. Exotic invasive plant species will include Category I and Category II species identified in the current “Invasive Plant List” published by the Florida Exotic Pest Plan Council (FLEPPC) as well as Class I and Class II Prohibited Aquatic Plants listed in Chapter 62C-52.011, Florida Administrative Code. Nuisance plant species will include native plant species deemed detrimental due to their potential adverse competition with desirable native species. Visual inspection for exotic, non-native and nuisance plant invasion will be conducted annually and all exotic, non-native and nuisance vegetation including those defined by County codes and the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council, found within the preserve areas will be flagged, mapped and reported for treatment. Felled material will be removed from the preserve areas where possible or killed in place where removal would cause extreme damage to the surrounding native areas. Any stumps remaining after the exotic, non-native and nuisance removal will be treated with a U.S. EPA approved herbicide and visible tracer dye to prevent regeneration from the roots. These maintenance activities will be performed in perpetuity as needed. Wetland and Upland Enhancement via Removal of Cattle and Fencing: All of the Preserve area is currently protected from grazing by cattle. Much of the on-site Preserve was occasionally managed for rangeland grazing via measures such as brush-hogging. Cattle are no longer allowed to graze within the conservation area and rangeland management practices have been discontinued. This has increased the growth, development, and diversity of native plant assemblages by removing the grazing and management pressures. Wetland and Upland Preserve Delineation: The preserves is clearly delineated with appropriate signage and will not be impacted by the currently proposed expansion. Page 2851 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 29 of 36 6. WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM SUCCESS CRITERIA Since mitigation will be provided via mitigation bank credit purchase, meeting on-site success criteria is not applicable or relevant to this proposal. Page 2852 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 30 of 36 7. WETLAND MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Since mitigation will be provided via mitigation bank credit purchase, Onsite monitoring of wetland preserves will not be required. Page 2853 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 31 of 36 8. PRESERVE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Since mitigation will be provided via mitigation bank credit purchase, the management of the preserve area will be more to keep it consistent and compliant with Collier County regulations. The wetland will not be impacted as a minimization measure for the FDEP and USACE permitting. The Immokalee Sand Mine preserve area will be maintained to suppress infestation by exotic/invasive and nuisance plant species. Maintenance/management actions will be conducted as required to keep the area free from exotic or nuisance species. This area will be maintained in perpetuity such that exotic and nuisance plant infestations do not exceed the maximum allowed by the Collier County Land Development Code. After initial eradication efforts are complete, follow-up exotic and nuisance plant control will include directed herbicide applications and/or physical removal methods throughout all portions of the preserve area. Exotic/nuisance plant control is likely to occur on an annual basis for at least the first three years following completion of initial eradication efforts. Such maintenance events may be conducted more frequently if field observations indicate the need. At the end of this period, the frequency of activities necessary to adequately control nuisance and exotic plants will be re-assessed and a program developed for future maintenance. Follow-up plantings of previously planted areas will be conducted as necessary when and where survivorship, density, and/or percent cover goals are not achieved. The need for such re- plantings will typically be assessed on an annual basis. Management/maintenance activities may include removal of dead, dying, or diseased plants (both planted and existing plants) as deemed necessary. A qualified biologist or similar environmental professional will inspect the preserve area at least once a year. During the first few years, inspections will likely occur more frequently in an effort to rectify any potential problem situations (e.g., exotic/nuisance plant infestations, mortality of planted species, etc.) before they worsen. The necessary maintenance activities will be determined by the biologist during these inspections. The maintenance will be conducted during the course of the year following issuance of the biologist's recommendations. Page 2854 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 32 of 36 9. FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM Since mitigation will be provided via mitigation bank credit purchase, the financial component of the mitigation requirement will be met prior to any impacts occurring to the wetlands within the project footprint. Page 2855 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 33 of 36 10. BASIS OF WETLAND MITIGATION PROGRAM AS ADEQUATE COMPENSATION FOR PROPOSED WETLAND IMPACTS Section 230.10(a) of the 404(b)(1) Guidelines states that no discharge of dredge and/or fill material (into waters of the United Sates, including wetlands) shall be permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic environment, provided the alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental consequences. This regulation further states that for non-water dependent projects, practicable alternatives that do not involve special aquatic sites are presumed to be available. Practicable alternatives are those that are “available and capable of being done after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of the overall project purposes.” The applicant has investigated the availability and feasibility of practicable alternative locations other than the proposed expansion of this existing sand mine under the pending application. While the applicant has examined other locations, it is necessary to consider the investments in the Immokalee Sand Mine and the costs and logistics of obtaining sand from other locations. As noted in the Corps Regulatory Guidance on analysis under the 404(b)(1) Guidelines, the "characteristics of the project and what constitutes a reasonable expense for these projects [are what] are most relevant to practicability determinations." The applicant's needs must be considered in the context of the desired geographic area of the development, and the type of project being proposed. Indeed, RGL 93-2 provides that "[s]ome projects may be so site-specific ... that no offsite alternative could be practicable. In such cases the alternative analysis may appropriately be limited to onsite options only." Furthermore, RGL 93-2 notes that a "reasonable, common sense approach" ought to be followed in applying the requirements of the Guidelines. When dealing with mineral extraction proposals, the Corps has given considerable deference to an applicant's overall project purpose that involves mineral extraction from a specified geographic location. Additionally, the courts have not required exhaustive analysis of off-site alternatives where the costs and logistics of such alternatives are patently more costly than the applicant's preferred alternative. Here, the overall project purpose is to continue to excavate large quantities of affordable, high- quality, construction-grade sand from this existing mine. A critical consideration of the practicability of alternatives is that Immokalee Sand LLC be able to continue to use the mining- related facilities that already have been built or are planned, and the fact that high-quality, sand deposits are found in limited locations. In turn, these operations currently provide sand to a specific market in a cost-effective manner. Hence, this analysis considers the necessity of continuing to provide a source of sand for those facilities and customers that are already linked to the existing operations in this area. The proposed permit modification is requested for the purpose of allowing Immokalee Sand LLC to continue their existing operations. High quality sand is a critical state resource that is required as a component of a variety of construction materials. The sand is an integral component of concrete and other building materials required for the completion of public projects, including schools, hospitals and roads, many environmental enhancements projects as well as private developments, supporting valuable growth of the community. Factors affecting the location of a sand mine include: quality of sand reserves; total volume of sand reserves, including surface area available for mining and the depth of the sand deposits; availability of property for acquisition; and land use and other governmental restrictions, including local opposition to mining, and other factors that would limit the right of companies to excavate sand at a given location. Page 2856 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 34 of 36 Consequently, opening a new mine or expanding an existing facility can take decades to plan and permit. The quality of sand, where it exists, varies from region to region. There are many locations throughout the county and state where high quality deposits are non-existent. Transportation costs dictate that a regional supply of affordable sand is critical to affordable public infrastructure. Transportation costs are a significant portion of the overall cost of aggregate materials because sand and the products produced from it are extremely heavy and expensive to transport. Thus, the further away a mine is from the markets it serves, the higher the transportation costs, and the higher the ultimate cost of the product. The current operations sit over an approximately 60 feet deep layer of high quality sand and the proposed expansion area has been found to also contain this same thickness of the resource. The location of the expansion area has inherent value in that it is directly adjacent to an existing processing facility. With this expansion, Immokalee Sand LLC will be able to use the plants, equipment and infrastructure developed and constructed at significant costs. Mining anywhere else will be more costly and less efficient due to lower yields, increased acreage impacts, and the inability to achieve economies of scale. This location will ultimately assist in reducing the environmental impact and additional cost of transporting unprocessed material from remote locations to the plant facility. If the project is not undertaken in its current location, transportation costs and impacts will be higher. The reduction of vehicle travel will ultimately assist in reducing the carbon footprint of the facility. The proposed mining expansion area is considered a part of the Immokalee Sand Mine and are included within the existing owned property. In addition, as mentioned above, expansion area is located directly adjacent to the existing mining and processing facilities within which the sand will be processed. Alternative sites would need to have the upland portions currently zoned for mining use and be directly adjacent to an existing in-operation processing plant facility that could be used to process the sand, thereby minimizing additional accesses onto public roadways and lessening the carbon footprint of the operation in reduced hauling. The only site meeting these requirements of equivalence is the nearby Stewart mine which is under current ownership of a competing mining company and is not available for purchase. The next level of research of alternate sites is for land areas directly adjacent to the existing mining operation which would provide access to sand that could be processed at the existing facilities. The areas to the north and west of the mine are currently in citrus grove production and are not available for mining. The area to the east of the existing mine contains a higher percentage of wetland areas. This land is not available for purchase for mining. State Road 82 lies to the south of the project site and would be a barrier to transport mined material across that busy highway to the processing plant. The following points summarize the alternative site assessment effort: • The sand resource is only located in a few locations within the area. There simply are not any other parcels with less wetlands having high quality sand available at adequate depth. The fact that the proposed area of mining provides a higher yield per acre means that the overall footprint of the mining is smaller than it would be at other locations. Overall, this means that this expansion uses less land than other areas, and therefore has less environmental impacts. • The expansion area is located directly adjacent to a processing facility so is unique and no other parcel in the area has this capability. The reduced travel distance will be an asset to Page 2857 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 35 of 36 the environment in reducing the ultimate carbon footprint of the operation. Utilizing other sites within the area would create the need for an additional processing plant which would add to the mining area footprint and lands needed for disturbance. • The mine site is located directly adjacent to SR 82 which is a major roadway corridor providing access to Collier, Lee, and Hendry Counties. • Finally, the subject site is located directly adjacent to the existing processing facility. Research of alternative sites equivalent to the expansion area reveals that no equivalent sites are available for mining by Immokalee Sand. After working through the alternatives, avoidance, and minimization criteria, any wetland impacts that cannot be avoided must be mitigated for. The following wetland mitigation is proposed to compensate for the unavoidable impacts. The wetland mitigation program proposed involves purchase of wetland mitigation credits from an approved mitigation bank.. As demonstrated through UMAM calculations/analyses, it is anticipated that this mitigation program will compensate for the project's proposed wetland impacts. A. UMAM scores for wetlands to be impacted and the functional loss resulting from these impacts. Wetland ID FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acres Impacted Functional Score Functional Loss 618 618 Willow Marsh 5.6 0.43 2.408 640 640 Non-forested wetland (man- made) 1.0 0.27 0.27 TOTALS 6.6 2.68 Page 2858 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENT JANUARY 2025 Page 36 of 36 11. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS Development of the Immokalee Sand Mine expansion area will necessitate impacts to two on- site wetlands that, together, total 6.6 acres. These wetlands are isolated and substantially degraded, with UMAM scores ranging from a low of 0.27 to a high of 0.43. The proposed mitigation credit purchase will compensate for these proposed impacts. In addition, the on-site wetland enhancement program will also improve the functional value of wetland and upland habitats located in the preserve area though this improvement is not being applied towards the project’s mitigation requirements. The wetlands to be impacted are all located within the West Collier watershed (drainage basin). Since the proposed wetland impacts will be fully compensated by mitigation banks credits from a bank located in the same drainage basin as the impacts, there should be no adverse cumulative impacts upon wetlands and other surface waters within the drainage basin. The proposed project should not adversely affect the quality of receiving waters located in the drainage basin. Appropriate best management practices employed during project construction and operation will ensure protection of off-site water quality. The project's stormwater management system has been designed to provide water quality treatment and attenuation that meets applicable design standards/criteria. Because of this, discharges from the project's lake following mine reclamation should also not adversely impact water quality in off-site wetlands or OSWs. All the wetlands proposed for impacts are completely isolated, being surrounded by active agricultural operations. This factor, coupled with the disturbed and degraded characteristics of these wetlands and their small size, prevents the wetlands from having any appreciable current contributions to the water resources in the overall drainage basin. The Western Collier drainage basin is extensive and contains several areas where future development is either already permitted or is anticipated. It is assumed that other development projects in the basin seeking to impact wetlands similar to those on the Mine property will typically provide mitigation for these impacts in the same basin. It can also be reasonably assumed that this mitigation will fully compensate for the wetland functions lost via proposed impacts and that the projects will adequately protect regional water quality, otherwise the projects would not receive necessary permits. The impacts of these other projects combined with those of the Mine project should therefore not cause unacceptable cumulative impacts upon wetlands and OSWs in the Western Collier watershed. Page 2859 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE APPENDIX A TABLES Page 2860 of 3023 Page | 2 Table 1. Major FLUCFCS categories present on the Immokalee Sand Mine property at time of original approval FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acres % of Total Property 211 Improved Pasture 11.6 1.3 214 Row Crops 261.7 29.1 221 Citrus Grove 481.3 53.7 513 Drainage Ditches 30.1 3.4 534 Ponds 2.6 0.3 618 Willow Marsh 5.6 0.6 619 Brazilian Pepper Wetland 1.2 0.1 643 Wet Prairie 7.7 0.9 740 Disturbed Lands 81.3 9.1 740H Disturbed Lands (Hydric) 1.1 0.1 7401 Disturbed Lands-Berms 10.9 1.2 814 Roads 1.9 0.2 TOTAL ACRES 896.7 Table 2. Existing Major FLUCFCS categories present on the Immokalee Sand Mine property FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acres % of Total Property 162 Sand Mine 360.5 40.2 211 Improved Pasture 414.7 46.2 513 Drainage Ditches 21.1 2.3 534 Ponds 2.5 0.3 618 Willow Marsh 5.6 0.6 640 Non-forested wetland (man-made) 1.0 0.0 643 Wet Prairie 7.7 0.8 740 Disturbed Lands 72.7 8.1 7401 Disturbed Lands-Berms 10.9 1.2 814 Roads TOTAL ACRES 896.7 Page 2861 of 3023 Page | 3 Table 3. Existing Native Vegetation FLUCFCS mapping units present on the Immokalee Sand Mine property. FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acres % of Total Native Vegetation 618 Willow Marsh 5.6 42.1 643 Wet Prairie 7.7 57.9 TOTAL ACRES 13.3 Table 4. Original wetlands present on the Immokalee Sand Mine property and the FLUCFCS composition of these wetlands. Wetland ID FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acres % of Total Wetlands W-1 643 Wet Prairie 7.7 49.4 W-2* 619 Brazilian Pepper Wetland 1.2 7.7 W-3 618 Willow Marsh 5.6 35.9 W-4* 740H Disturbed Lands (Hydric) 0.02 0.1 W-5 740H Disturbed Lands (Hydric) 1.08 6.9 TOTAL ACRES OF WETLAND 15.3 * Impacted under the original development permitting Table 5. Existing wetland FLUCFCS mapping units present on the Immokalee Sand Mine property that will be impacted by the project and the extent of these impacts. FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acres % of Total Impact 618 Willow Marsh 5.6 84.8 740 H Disturbed Lands (Hydric) 1.0 15.2 TOTAL ACRES OF WETLAND IMPACTS 6.6 Table 6. Existing (post-enhancement) conditions for the Preserve area. FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acres % of Total Preserve 310 Upland Prairie 2.5 28.2 643 Wet Prairie 7.4* 71.8 TOTAL PRESERVE ACREAGE 9.9 * A portion of the wetland lies within utility easements so 0.3 acre is not included in the preserve Page 2862 of 3023 Page | 4 Table 7. Project area breakdown by FLUCFCS category. FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description TOTAL ACREAGE MINE AREA PRESERVE AREA 162 Sand Mine 360.5 360.5 211 Improved Pasture 414.7 414.7 513 Drainage Ditches 21.1 21.1 534 Ponds 2.5 2.5 618 Willow Marsh 5.6 5.6 640 Non-Forested Wetland 1.0 1.0 643 Wet Prairie 7.7 − 7.4* 740 Disturbed Lands 72.7 68.2* 2.5 7401 Disturbed Lands-Berms 10.9 10.9 841 Roads TOTAL ACRES 896.7 884.5* 9.9 *Remaining acreage is set aside in an access right of way for properties to the north or in utility easement along the south and west boundary. Page 2863 of 3023 Page | 5 Table 8. UMAM assessment for the Immokalee Sand Mine project (A through C below). A. UMAM scores for wetlands to be impacted and the functional loss resulting from these impacts. Wetland ID FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acres Impacted Functional Score Functional Loss 618 618 Willow Marsh 5.6 0.43 2.41 640 640 Disturbed Lands (Hydric) 1.0 0.27 0.27 TOTALS 6.6 2.68 B. UMAM scores for wetlands to be preserved and the functional difference resulting from enhancement and indirect impacts. Wetland ID FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acres Preserved, Created or Retained Functional Score (existing) Functional Score (with project) Functional Delta Functional Change 643 643 Wet Prairie 7.4 0.33 0.36 +0.03 0.22 TOTALS 7.4 0.22 C. Relative Functional Gain (RFG) for mitigation resulting from completion of the proposed wetland mitigation program. Mitigation/Impact Activity Acres Preserved or Impacted Net Functional Gain Wetland Impacts 7.9 Acres -2.68 On-Site Preservation 7.4 Acres +0.22* TOTALS -2.46 * No credit towards wetland mitigation is being claimed for on-site activities, 2.68 credits will be purchased from mitigation bank. Page 2864 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE: APPENDIX B LISTED SPECIES UPDATE SUMMARY Prepared by: January 2025 Page 2865 of 3023 Page | 1 Immokalee Sand Mine –2025 Listed Species Update 1.INTRODUCTION This Immokalee Sand Mine encompasses approximately 896.7 acres located about 1 mile west of the intersection of Hwy 29 and State Road 82. These lands cover portions of Sections 6 and 7, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. State (MMR_297420-009) and Federal {SAJ-2009-03476 (SP-WDD)} permits have been issued for this mine. Construction on the infrastructure and access roadway began in late 2019. To date, approximately 360 acres of the site has been converted from agricultural to mining operations. A requirement of the State permit is to provide a listed species survey update with the annual monitoring report. CEMEX contracted Turrell, Hall, & Associates, Inc. to perform pre-construction surveys over the areas associated with the access road from SR82 into the mine site as well as the on- site work areas. This report summarizes the results of Turrell, Hall, & Associates’ listed species survey efforts. 2.EXISTING VEGETATION ASSOCIATIONS, LAND FORMS, AND LAND USES (FLUCFCS) 2.1 METHODOLOGY Vegetation associations, land forms, and land uses (FLUCFCS categories) present on and near the project site were mapped using direct field observations, interpretation of aerial photographs, and GPS mapping. Field observations were conducted primarily during the period from July through October 2008 and then updated in May and June 2015, December 2019 and January 2020, and November and December 2024 and January 2025. These observations included both pedestrian and ATV transects across the lands recording vegetation community characteristics as well as recording location points along the boundaries of certain communities/land forms using handheld GPS units. The FLUCFCS designations identified in 2015 were still consistent with current conditions The methods and class descriptions found in the Florida Land Use, Cover, and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) manual (FDOT, 1999) were generally followed when delineating areas and assigning areas to an appropriate FLUCFCS category or “code”. Level III classifications were generally employed. Certain modifications were made to the FLUCFCS class definitions presented in this manual in order to better describe and differentiate both plant communities and land uses. For simplicity purposes all drainage ditches and water retention areas are given a FLUCFCS code of other surface waters (OSW). 2.2 MAJOR FLUCFCS CATEGORIES Figure 2 of the Environmental exhibits illustrates detailed FLUCFCS map units present on the project lands and on immediately adjacent lands. Table 1 lists each of the FLUCFCS map unit codes present on the Mine property and total acreage encompassed by each FLUCFCS type. Page 2866 of 3023 Page | 2 Immokalee Sand Mine –2025 Listed Species Update Table 1. Existing Major FLUCFCS categories FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Acres % of Total Property 162 Sand Mine 360.5 40.2 211 Improved Pasture 414.7 46.2 513 Drainage Ditches 21.1 2.3 534 Ponds 2.5 0.3 618 Willow Marsh 5.6 0.6 640 Non-forested wetland (man-made) 1.0 0.0 643 Wet Prairie 7.7 0.8 740 Disturbed Lands 72.7 8.1 7401 Disturbed Lands-Berms 10.9 1.2 TOTAL ACRES 896.7 3. LISTED SPECIES SURVEYS Wildlife and listed species surveys were conducted by Turrell, Hall, & Associates on the project lands. As used herein, the term "listed animal species" refers to those animals listed as endangered or threatened by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) as well as those animal species listed as species of special concern by the FWC. Several animal species listed by FWC are also classified (listed) by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) as wetland dependent species. Turrell, Hall, & Associates’ wildlife/listed species surveys were supplemented by research concerning listed species. The following subsections document the effort and results of only the most recent survey over the project area. 3.1 DATABASE RESEARCH Prior to field investigations, color, false-color infrared, and black and white aerial photos, soils maps, and prior FLUCFCS mapping for the Mine property were reviewed to identify the various vegetation associations potentially present on and adjacent to project lands. Various publications and databases were reviewed to determine listed plant and wildlife species which could occur and those that had been previously documented on or near the project lands as well as to gather information concerning listed species. Based on the habitat types identified, existing knowledge of the project area, contacts with other consultants, and review of publications and databases, a preliminary list of animal species with the potential to occur within or near the project lands was determined. 3.2 FIELD BIOTIC SURVEY METHODOLOGY This most recent wildlife survey effort was conducted by Turrell, Hall, & Associates in November and December of 2024 and January 2025. Ongoing surveys are still underway to look for potential Caracara nesting on or near the project area. Surveys were conducted such that observations included time Page 2867 of 3023 Page | 3 Immokalee Sand Mine –2025 Listed Species Update periods that covered both sunrise and sunset. Barring seasonal considerations, the survey dates allowed for observations during likely times of probable occurrence for the majority of the listed animal species which could occur on or immediately adjacent to the project lands. The field surveys consisted of ecologists walking in relatively straight and meandering transects through the various habitats found on the project lands. Space between transects usually varied, depending on type of habitat, visibility limits, and density of vegetation. Some observations were made from field vehicles driving slowly through open areas such as the interiors of active pasture fields. Observers were equipped with compass, aerials, wildlife and plant identification books and notes, binoculars, field notebooks, handheld GPS units, and cameras. Along the transects, the biologists periodically stopped, looked for wildlife and signs of wildlife, including tracks, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. The approximate location of observed listed wildlife and their numbers were mapped on aerials and recorded in field notebooks on a daily basis as were signs of listed wildlife species that were noted. In the same fashion, observed non-listed wildlife species encountered or signs of such species were recorded daily and photographs were taken when possible. When performing pedestrian transects through appropriate habitats, particular consideration was given to looking for signs of gopher tortoises and crested caracaras. Potentially suitable gopher tortoise habitats were surveyed for gopher tortoise tracks, scat, burrows, and individuals. These efforts included examining berms associated with the Mine property's fields (e.g. perimeter berms, larger berms along drainage ditches, etc.) and pasture areas as well as the more natural upland habitats present. Any cabbage palms and larger shrubs near the palms were examined for caracara nests. The field survey methodologies utilized on the project lands were generally consistent with those prescribed by the FWC. 3.4 RESULTS 3.4.1 Research Results The review conducted of the various existing databases concerning documented listed species revealed only the caracara nesting documented by FDOT biologists in 2015. No other records of any listed animal species were documented on the project lands. Turrell, Hall, & Associates’ review of these existing databases included searching records for documented listed species occurring within approximately 10,000 feet of the Mine property boundary. Listed animal species previously documented outside the project lands but within 10,000 feet of the Mine property included listed wading birds, caracaras, and Florida panther. Four wood stork colonies were also previously documented off-site in the query area. According to FWS a major reason for the wood stork decline has been the loss and degradation of feeding habitat and approximates their core foraging area to be an 18.6 mile radius around the rookery. Databases show four wood stork foraging areas which overlap the project lands. 3.4.2 Listed Animal Species Observed on the Immokalee Sand Mine Property Several different animal species, including some listed species, were observed during the course of Page 2868 of 3023 Page | 4 Immokalee Sand Mine –2025 Listed Species Update Turrell, Hall, & Associates’ wildlife/listed species surveys. Table 2 provides a listing of all the wildlife species observed on the Immokalee Sand Mine property during the course of these surveys. The following subsections briefly address the listed animal species observed onsite (i.e. within the Immokalee Sand Mine property boundary) and in the nearby areas. American Alligator Several American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) were observed on the property on multiple occasions. Alligators were observed within the main agricultural drainage ditches, specifically in the wider ditches in the northeastern portion of the property as well as in the small pond located adjacent to the access roadway. Most alligators observed were juveniles, however a couple of larger adults were also seen. It is likely that some alligators reside on-site throughout the majority of the year whereas others may typically reside in off-site wetlands, migrating to the Mine ditches and deeper wetlands when water levels decline in the off-site wetlands. Alligators are expected to move into the larger lake areas once the excavation activities are under way. They will not be impacted by the upcoming road access work. Crested Caracara Both the FWC and the FWS classify the crested caracara (Caracara cheriway) as a threatened species. Crested caracaras were observed on almost every site visit during the course of the survey. Caracaras were observed on or flying over the project lands during Turrell, Hall, & Associates’ surveys. Subsequent survey of potential caracara habitats situated on the Mine property during the breeding season was conducted and no evidence of any caracara nesting was observed. Caracara nesting surveys have been conducted in 2009/10, 2013/14, 2016/17, 2018/19, 2019/20, and is currently underway for the 2024/25 season. No nesting was observed on the project site during any of these surveys. As outlined in the FWS BO, the cabbage palms at the front of the property were removed after the 2016/17 survey to ensure that nesting would not occur on the project lands prior to the start of the mining efforts. Also, in accordance with the FWS BO, a donation to the FWS caracara fund was made following the permit issuance as mitigation for potential impacts that might occur to caracaras as a result of the mining efforts. Considering the documented presence of these birds near the project, it is likely that several caracaras frequently hunt and forage in various habitats on the Mine property (e.g. row crop fields, pastures, edges of drainage ditches, etc.). It is also possible that caracaras may sometimes forage within the open wetland and upland habitats present within off-site areas similar to those found on-site. Based on the results of Turrell, Hall, & Associates’ survey, it is clear that caracaras presently do not use any project lands for nesting purposes and nesting activities will not be adversely impacted by the mining operations. Little Blue Heron Little blue herons (Egretta caerulea) were observed on-site on two different occasions. One of these sightings involved a solitary heron foraging in the agricultural drainage ditches on the west boundary of the property. On the other occasion, a little blue heron was observed foraging along the shoreline of the Page 2869 of 3023 Page | 5 Immokalee Sand Mine –2025 Listed Species Update small pond in the northeast portion of the property. No little blue heron nests were observed in any wetland areas nor were there signs of any past nesting activities by any wading birds. The little blue heron is an opportunistic feeder and travels long distances to find good feeding conditions, going where conditions are favorable, and food is potentially abundant. This is also the case with the other listed wading birds discussed below (i.e. snowy egret and tricolored heron). It is highly unlikely that these species ever nest within the on-site wetlands considering the proximity of the adjacent agricultural operations and the inappropriate habitat types present in some of the on-site wetlands. The observed listed wading birds certainly utilize the Mine property and portions of the on-site wetland areas for feeding purposes and occasionally roosting, but these species are not permanent residents. Snowy Egret Only one snowy egret (Egretta thula) was observed foraging within one of the pond areas on the Mine property. No snowy egret nests or signs of nesting were observed on-site or in the adjacent areas. Tricolored Heron Numerous tricolored herons (Egretta tricolor) were observed on different occasions foraging within the main agricultural drainage ditches on the Mine property and other wetland areas. One was observed foraging along the bank of the small pond that is adjacent to the access roadway. No tricolored heron nests or signs of nesting were observed on-site or in the adjacent areas. White Ibis The white ibis (Eudocimus albus) may sometimes forage in the Mine property's agricultural drainage ditches and some of the on-site wetlands when water levels are appropriate. Indications are that wetland areas mapped as 640 are rarely inundated for significant periods thereby reducing foraging potential in this wetland. However, ibis may forage inundated areas as well as pasture settings and even row crop fields, particularly when these fields are tilled. No signs of white ibis nests, wading bird rookeries, or fairly permanent roosting sites were found on the project lands. No ibis will be impacted by the access road construction. Florida Sandhill Crane There are two subspecies of sandhill cranes that can regularly be observed in Florida. These are the Florida sandhill crane (Grus canadensis pratensis) and the Eastern greater sandhill crane (Grus c. tabida), which arrives in Florida in October and begins spring migration in February. The two subspecies cannot be distinguished from each other in the field, however, sandhill cranes observed in Florida during May through September can be assumed to be the Florida sandhill crane. The Florida sandhill crane is listed by the FWC as a threatened species and as a wetland dependent species by SFWMD. The greater sandhill crane is not listed. Given the time of year when Turrell, Hall, & Associates performed biotic surveys for this project, it was assumed, but not confirmed, that the two sandhill cranes observed during the surveys were the listed Florida sandhill crane. A single sandhill crane nest was observed in SW-2 on the Mine property during the 2019/20 survey effort. No nesting was observed in this most recent effort. Habitats present on-site, including the on-site Page 2870 of 3023 Page | 6 Immokalee Sand Mine –2025 Listed Species Update wetlands, are primarily not suitable for nesting. Although this species will sometimes nest in dry pastures (present on-site as FLUCFCS 211), cranes prefer nesting in open areas of standing shallow water such as wet prairies and shallow herbaceous marshes. It is deemed likely that Florida sandhill cranes visit open fields of the Mine property primarily for foraging purposes but could occasionally nest on-site. 3.4.4 Listed Animal Species Which Have the Potential to Occur On the Immokalee Sand Mine Property But Were Not Observed Although not observed on the project lands during the extensive listed species surveys, additional state and/or federally listed faunal species could potentially occur on the Mine property or on lands adjacent to the property. Based on habitats present within these areas, land uses, species observed near the project during biotic surveys, habitats present in the general area, review of various sources of information previously, and personal experience of project ecologists, assessments were made as to the probability of occurrence of other listed species on the project lands. Two species of mammals, 3 species of reptiles, 1 amphibian species, and 8 species of birds were considered to have some potential for occurring on the Mine property and/or on lands in the adjacent areas. Florida Panther Mitigation for potential impacts to panthers was provided as a component of the issued permits and FWS BO for the project. Additional mitigation will be required for the proposed expansion. As a result of the mitigation and habitat compensation, no adverse impacts to any panthers is expected. Florida Bonneted Bat No cavity trees or other potential roost sites will be impacted by the mining operations. Foraging activities can continue over the project lands. No impacts to bonneted bats is expected. Eastern Indigo Snake Mitigation for potential impacts to indigo snakes was provided as a component of the issued permits and FWS BO for the project. Additional mitigation may be required for the proposed expansion. As a result of the mitigation and habitat compensation, no adverse impacts to any indigo snakes is expected. Gopher Tortoise No gopher tortoise burrows were observed within the current project area and no impacts are expected to any tortoises as a result of the mining operations. Gopher Frog Gopher frogs (Rana capito), listed as a Species of Special Concern (SSC) by the FWC, are potential commensals with gopher tortoises. No gopher tortoises or signs of such tortoises (scat, tracks) were found within the project area so no impacts to gopher frogs are expected. Page 2871 of 3023 Page | 7 Immokalee Sand Mine –2025 Listed Species Update Alligator Snapping Turtle Alligator Snapping Turtles (Macroclemys temmincki) are one of the largest freshwater turtles in the world. It can be distinguished by its very large head and the three prominent knobby ridges along its back. Although no snapping turtles were observed, they have the potential to inhabit drainage ditches and ponds on the project lands. It is expected that turtles within the agricultural will move into the mining lakes as the operation moves forward. Wading Birds Wading bird foraging activities will continue on the site as the mining operations continue. No nesting has been observed or documented on the project site. No impacts to wading birds is expected. 3.4.5 General Wildlife Observations During the biotic surveys conducted on the project lands, ecologists recorded sightings and signs of non- listed wildlife in addition to listed species. Table 2 contains all wildlife observed on the project lands. Signs and observations of larger mammals, such as bobcat, wild boar, and white-tailed deer, were observed in portions of the Mine property. Other mammals observed on the Mine property were armadillo, opossum, raccoon, eastern cottontail, and marsh rabbit. Observations of non-listed bird species were generally widely scattered and low in number. Although several species of non-listed birds are indicated in Table 2, the actual number of individuals and number of species observed during any given period of wildlife observations was typically low. A few of the non-migratory bird species may reside on the project lands, however no nests were observed. Observations of non-listed herpes were largely restricted to the Mine property's agricultural drainage ditches. On one occasion a ring-necked snake was seen in the mapped area 640 with a small frog in its mouth. 3.4.6 Listed Plant Species No federally listed plant species have been documented in this area of Collier County (USFWS, 2006b). No listed plant species were observed on the project lands during the course of the listed species/wildlife surveys conducted and a review of pertinent databases concerning listed plant species found no records of such plants occurring on project lands or within 10,000 feet of these lands. Considering these points, it seems highly improbable that any plant species currently listed by FWS may be present on project lands. Page 2872 of 3023 Page | 8 Immokalee Sand Mine –2025 Listed Species Update Table 2. Wildlife observed during survey efforts on project lands Common Name Scientific Name Status Observations American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis SSC In pond Anhinga Anhinga anhinga Flying over site Armadillo Dasypus novemcinctus Black Vulture Coragups atratus Flying over site Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Polioptila caerula Boat-tailed Grackle Quiscalus major Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus Cottontail Rabbit Sylvilagus floridanus Crested Caracara Caracara cheriway T Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella magna Florida Sand-hill Crane Grus canadensis pratensis T Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus Flying over site Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias Around pond Great Egret Casmerodius albus Flying over site Green Heron Butorides virescens Killdeer Charadrius vociferous Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea SSC Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus Mottled Duck Anas fulvigula Flying over site Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus Northern Mockingbird Mimus polyglottos Raccoon Procyon lotor Tracks Red Shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus Fence line and willow Red Tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis Flying over site Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus Florida Sand-hill Crane Grus canadensis pratensis T Nesting 2019/20 Snowy Egret Egretta thula SSC In ponds on site Southeastern American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulus Swallow-tailed Kite Elanoides forficatus Flying over site Tri-color Heron Egretta tricolor SSC In ditches and ponds Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura Flying over site White Ibis Eudocimus albus SSC In ditches on site White Tailed Deer Odocoileus virginianus Tracks Wild Boar Sus scrofa Wood Stork Mycteria americana Page 2873 of 3023 Page | 9 Immokalee Sand Mine –2025 Listed Species Update Yellow-rumped Warbler Setophaga coronata SSC - Species of Special Concern T- Threatened E - Endangered Page 2874 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE: APPENDIX C Listed Species Protection Plan Prepared by: Updated April 2025 Page 2875 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine – Listed Species Protection Plan Page | 1 GENERAL Educational material will be prepared and distributed to Mine personnel, mitigation contractors, and other contractors prior to commencement of Mine construction and initial wetland mitigation program activities. Signage will also be maintained during the life of the Mine operation. This material will contain: illustrations of the species discussed in the following subsections; general descriptions of these species; potential habitats in which each species may occur; as applicable, descriptions and/or illustrations of species nests/burrows/dens; general protocols and procedures to follow if a particular species or species nest/burrow/den is encountered, and; contact information for parties to be notified if a particular species or species nest/burrow/den is encountered. These pamphlets will emphasize that harming or harassing listed species as well as disturbing or damaging a listed species nest/burrow/den is strictly prohibited. ALLIGATORS Several American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) have been documented on the Immokalee Sand Mine property utilizing the larger agricultural ditches (includes ditches used for drainage and irrigation purposes) and some of the on-site wetlands. These alligators likely include individuals that frequent the property on an occasional basis and individuals that reside in appropriate habitats on a relatively permanent basis. To protect alligators during project construction and mining activities, modifications to the existing on-site drainage ditches and wetlands will be conducted mindful of the potential presence of alligators. Egress points, for alligators to move out of the area being filled or excavated, will be made available. Mine employees, contractors, and other field personnel will be notified that alligators may be present and that construction and mining activities must be conducted to minimize the potential for alligators to be harmed. Should an alligator occupying an on-site ditch or wetland that is being cleared, filled, or excavated not initially leave the area on its own accord through the established egress point(s), all activities that might harm the alligator will be ceased temporarily and will not be resumed until the alligator has departed the area. If it appears the alligator may not leave the area, a designated mine employee will contact the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's (FWC) Nuisance Alligator Hotline (1-866-392-4286) for further direction. It may be necessary for a duly licensed nuisance alligator trapper to capture the alligator and relocate it. Captured alligators may be relocated to other areas in the general project vicinity that are under the control of the current property owner. Potential relocation areas include existing agricultural ditches far from the habitat areas slated for impacts or other suitable off-site wetlands. No more than 3 weeks prior to conducting activities that will impact on-site wetland or surface water, the area to be impacted will be inspected by a qualified environmental professional. If an active alligator nest site is found during this inspection, the FWC will be contacted by the mine operator for further guidance. No work that could harm the nest site will be conducted without authorization from FWC. The Page 2876 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine – Listed Species Protection Plan Page | 2 FWC may direct that the alligator eggs be removed and relocated by a licensed nuisance alligator trapper prior to resuming work that will impact the nest site. No disturbance of any alligator nests shall be allowed without first obtaining an appropriate permit from FWC. Typically, alligators lay their eggs in late June or early July with the eggs hatching in late August or September, however, this nesting period may vary. Should an aggressive alligator be encountered, workers should contact the FWC by phoning the Nuisance Alligator Hotline (1-866-FWC-GATOR is current number; may change over time). Mine workers are prohibited from taking any actions against alligators. LISTED WADING BIRDS Little blue herons (Egretta caerulea), snowy egrets (Egretta thula), white ibis (Eudocimus albus), and tricolored herons (Egretta tricolor) have been documented foraging in various agricultural ditches and certain wetlands on the Immokalee Sand Mine property. Other listed wading birds may also occasionally visit the on-site ditches, some of the on-site wetlands, and appropriate wetland habitats in nearby off- site areas. These species could theoretically include roseate spoonbill (Ajaja ajaja) and limpkin (Aramus guarauna). No listed wading bird nests or rookeries have been found on the Immokalee Sand Mine property or in the nearby areas. Although it is unlikely that any of the cited listed wading birds will establish nests within the on-site wetlands or in the wetlands present in the adjacent areas, this possibility cannot be completely ignored. No more than 3 weeks prior to conducting any activities that will impact a particular on-site wetland during the nesting season (i.e. clearing, excavation, filling), a qualified environmental professional will inspect the wetland for the presence of listed wading bird nests. Similarly, no more than 3 weeks prior to conducting any mitigation activities that will significantly disturb an existing wetland areas during the nesting season (i.e. grading activities, initial clearing/removal of larger Brazilian pepper shrubs and trees), a qualified environmental professional will also inspect the wetland for the presence of listed wading bird nests. If active nests are found, a buffer zone extending approximately 300 feet beyond the nests in all directions will be established. No activities that might disturb the nests or nesting activities will be conducted in the established buffer zone until after the eggs have hatched and the surviving young birds have fledged and left the nests. Field personnel will be notified of the presence of the nest site(s) and buffer zones, which will be clearly marked, and advised to that any activities near the buffer zones should be conducted to minimize the potential for disruption of nesting. WOOD STORKS Wood storks (Mycteria americana) have not been documented foraging on the Immokalee Sand Mine property, however the site does contain potential foraging area. No wood stork nests, wood stork nesting colonies, or wood stork roosting sites have been found on the Mine property or in nearby areas. The nearest known wood stork colony is situated approximately 8.5 miles east of the eastern Mine property boundary. Existing wetlands on the Mine property do not contain habitats suitable for wood stork nesting nor are these habitats suitable for establishment of long-term wood stork roosting sites. Despite the extremely low probability that storks may establish a nesting colony or important roosting Page 2877 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine – Listed Species Protection Plan Page | 3 site within the project lands sometime in the future, a wood stork protection plan will be implemented as part of the Mine project. Prior to conducting any activities that will impact a given on-site wetland and prior to conducting initial mitigation activities in wetlands areas, a qualified environmental professional will inspect the wetland for the presence of wood stork nests, for wood storks, and for signs of wood stork roosting. Similar inspections will be conducted prior to conducting mining activities within approximately 1,000 feet of these wetlands. Inspections will be performed no more than 3 weeks prior to the anticipated starting date of the activities that could affect wood stork nesting/roosting. If wood stork nests are found or if an important roosting site is documented (site that may be used annually and/or by flocks of 25 or more storks), all mine construction activities or mechanized mitigation activities (as applicable) within approximately 1,000 feet of the nest site or roosting site will be halted. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) will then be contacted for guidance in developing an appropriate management plan that will help ensure adequate protection for the discovered site and the wood storks utilizing the site. Should this scenario arise, the permittee will generate an appropriate management plan in consultation with FWS, submit the plan to FWS for their review and approval, and will then implement and abide by the management plan. The mitigation activities proposed within the Preserve area will substantially improve the habitat qualities of the existing wetlands. These improvements will eventually restore certain habitats that could be used by wood storks for foraging purposes. The Immokalee Sand Mine wetland mitigation program includes conducting annual monitoring of the mitigation areas. If the first initiation of Mine blasting activities will begin 2 weeks before or during the typical wood stork nesting season (February through June), a survey for off-site wood stork nesting sites (nesting colonies) will be conducted. This survey will cover all potentially suitable wood stork nesting habitats located within approximately 1,000 feet of the Mine property boundary. It will likely consist of a combination of observations along pedestrian transects and aerial observations conducted over a period of at least 5 days with the survey focusing on times near dusk and dawn. If no nesting sites/colonies are found, blasting will commence upon completion of the survey. If an active nesting colony is located, FWS will be contacted for further guidance and an appropriate management/protection plan will be generated in consultation with FWS. The plan will be submitted to FWS for their review and approval and will subsequently be implemented. Under this scenario, initiation of the first blasting activities would not be started until appropriate authorization has been obtained from FWS. FLORIDA SANDHILL CRANES A couple Florida sandhill cranes (Grus canadensis pratensis) have been documented foraging in fields located on the Immokalee Sand Mine property. One crane nest was observed on-site during the 2020 survey update. It is doubtful that sandhill cranes will elect to establish nests on the Mine property at some point in the future but the possibility, although remote, cannot be overlooked. There will be suitable nesting habitat within the proposed preserve area. Page 2878 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine – Listed Species Protection Plan Page | 4 No longer than 3 weeks prior to conducting construction activities that will impact potentially "suitable" Florida sandhill crane nesting habitats on the Mine property (i.e. clearing, grading, excavation, filling), the areas will be inspected by a qualified environmental profession to determine if any active crane nests are present. These habitats are limited to the Preserve area and, to a lesser degree, the wet prairie area in the southwestern corner of the property. Three weeks prior to commencement of Mine construction activities, a survey will also be conducted in potentially suitable crane nesting habitats present in off-site lands located within approximately 750 feet of the Mine property boundaries immediately adjacent to the portion of the Mine that will contain the Mine operations center (i.e. containing the office buildings, asphalt batch plant, tailings pond, and aggregate processing/stockpile area). Similarly, no more than 3 weeks prior to conducting initial mitigation activities in the Preserve area that could disturb potential crane nests (i.e. grading activities, removal of larger Brazilian pepper shrubs), the wetland areas within the mitigation area will be inspected. If an active Florida sandhill crane nest is found, a buffer zone extending approximately 740 feet beyond the nest in all directions will be established. No activities that might disturb the nests or nesting activities will be conducted in the established buffer zone until after the eggs are hatched and the surviving young birds have left the nest. Field personnel will be notified of the presence of the nest site(s) and buffer zones, which will be clearly marked, and advised that any activities near the buffer zones should be conducted to minimize the potential for disruption of nesting. If the first initiation of Mine blasting activities will begin 2 weeks before or during the typical sandhill crane breeding season (beginning of January through June), a survey for off-site sandhill crane nests will be conducted. This survey will cover all potentially suitable crane nesting habitats located within approximately 2,500 feet of the limits of the area proposed for blasting. It will consist of field observations gathered along pedestrian transects conducted over a period of at least 5 days. If no active nest is found, blasting will commence upon completion of the survey. If an active nest is found within the 1,000 feet of the proposed blasting area, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) will be contacted for further guidance and an appropriate management/protection plan will be generated in consultation with FWC. The plan will be submitted to FWC for their review and approval and will subsequently be implemented. Under this scenario, initiation of the first blasting activities would not be started until appropriate authorization has been obtained from FWC. Alternatively, the first blasting activities may be relocated such that they are over 1,000 feet from the active nest site and the blasting restricted to areas >1,000 feet from the nest site until such time as the young have left the active nest. CRESTED CARACARAS Many crested caracaras (Caracara cheriway) have been observed on the Mine property, however no caracara nests been found on-site. Caracaras have been observed in areas surrounding the Mine property, suggesting that potential nesting areas are nearby. There is a remote possibility that caracaras could establish an on-site nest prior to commencement of Mine construction, hence pre-clearing surveys will be performed. Page 2879 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine – Listed Species Protection Plan Page | 5 An on-site survey for caracaras and their nests will be performed during the first breeding season preceding commencement of Mine clearing/construction activities proposed in the Mine property and in nearby off-site areas. This survey will cover the existing remnant strip of cabbage palm/pine flatwoods/woodland pasture habitat that extends along the eastern boundary. Observations will be made along pedestrian transects and stationary points during the mornings and evenings (crepuscular). The survey will be conducted 6 times (on 6 different days) during the period from January through March with 4 to 7 days between each survey event. If a caracara nest is found, the nest location will be marked and the FWS will be contacted for further guidance. No Mine clearing/construction activities will commence within the primary management zone (300 meter radius surrounding nest) or the secondary management zone (1,000 meter radius surrounding nest) associated with the nest until appropriate authorization is obtained from FWS. Under this scenario, a Special Purpose Permit may also need to be acquired from FWC should FWS recommend removal (incidental take) of the nest tree during the non- nesting season. An off-site survey for caracaras and their nests will also be performed during the first breeding season preceding commencement of Mine clearing/construction activities. This survey will be performed in the same manner as the on-site survey and will cover potentially suitable caracara nesting habitats present in the immediate vicinity of the Mine and the Mine entry road (i.e. State Road 82 west of Highway 29). The exact areas that will be covered by these off-site surveys will be determined during the course of consultation with FWS which will occur during the application processing period associated with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Section 404 Permit needed for the Mine project. Measures necessary to help ensure protection of off-site nests located during this survey as well as appropriate measures to help minimize the project’s potential secondary impacts to caracaras will also be determined via consultation with FWS. Some of these measures may include: • Prohibit Mine traffic from idling on that portion of the entry road (State Road 82) located within the primary management zone associated with the currently known caracara nest tree. Post “no idling / no parking” notification signs on the entry road at the limits of this primary zone. • During the initial Mine construction activities and throughout the operational life of the Mine, conduct daily roadkill surveys along those portions of the entry road and Highway 29 located within the primary and secondary management zones associated with the currently known caracara nest tree. Move any roadkill found to a distance at least 25 feet beyond the shoulder of these roads. • Monitoring of certain caracaras during the breeding season to determine how they respond to Mine traffic and mining activities. FLORIDA PANTHERS Florida panthers (Puma concolor coryi) have not been documented on the project lands but have been documented in more natural habitats present in the general vicinity of the Mine property. Certain measures will be taken to help minimize potential impacts of traffic generated by the Mine project to panthers. These measures will include: Page 2880 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine – Listed Species Protection Plan Page | 6 • A large sign will be posted in a conspicuous location on the Mine property visible to all vehicles leaving the site. This sign will notify drivers that panthers may cross State Road 82 or even the project entry road, will advise them of the location of the primary potential wildlife crossing corridors (i.e. road crossing zones) along Highway 29near the Mine, and will warn them to drive carefully in these areas to avoid collisions with panthers and other wildlife. This sign will also include a graphic map illustrating the primary potential wildlife crossing zones near the Mine. • Vehicles hauling (transporting) aggregate will prohibited from leaving or entering the Mine property during the period between one-half hour after sunset and 5:00 AM each day. Lighting used to illuminate the main Mine operations area (i.e. far west side of site containing the aggregate processing/stockpile area, tailings pond, office and maintenance buildings, parking lot) will be equipped with shielding to help reduce light spillage onto off-site lands. EASTERN INDIGO SNAKES Eastern indigo snakes (Drymarchon corais couperi) have not been documented on the Immokalee Sand Mine property but could theoretically be present. Because the eastern indigo snake is protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, there are civil and criminal penalties for injuring, harming, harassing or killing this species. The permittee and/or the permittee’s contractors may be held responsible for any eastern indigo snakes harmed, harassed, or killed as a result of Immokalee Sand Mine construction activities. To help avoid harm to these snakes and to help maintain any existing populations, the permittee will engage in a protection program during initial stages of Mine construction activities (i.e. clearing, excavation, filling) on-site as well as during initial mitigation activities in the conservation areas (i.e. initial clearing and grading activities, initial mechanized eradication of exotic plants). The elements of this plan are described in the following paragraphs. Educational pamphlets will be prepared and distributed to all mitigation and construction crews prior to commencement of construction and mitigation activities. These pamphlets will generally describe laws pertaining to the eastern indigo snake, characteristics of the snake (description, habitats, etc.), protocols and procedures to follow if an eastern indigo snake is encountered, and telephone numbers of pertinent agencies to be contacted if an indigo snake is found dead. If an eastern indigo snake is sighted during clearing/construction operations, the following measures will be taken: (1) Immediately cease construction/clearing activities in the area of the sighting; (2) Notify the construction or mitigation supervisor, as applicable, and the designated biologist of the sighting; (3) Allow the snake to move out of the construction/clearing area on its own before resuming construction/clearing activities in the area of sighting, or; (4) If the snake remains within or immediately adjacent to the construction/clearing area, the designated biologist will capture the snake, at which time construction/clearing operations can resume, and will relocate it to a suitable area off-site that is within the immediate project vicinity. Only the designated biologist shall come in contact with or relocate an eastern indigo snake. Any snake captured will be immediately released into appropriate habitat. Indigo Page 2881 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine – Listed Species Protection Plan Page | 7 snakes are to be held in captivity only long enough to transport them to the release site. At no time will two or more snakes be kept in the same container during transport. The designated biologist, or another qualified biologist acting under the direction and supervision of the designated biologist, will be present during the first week of major Mine construction clearing/grading activities that occur in potentially suitable indigo snake habitats. Thereafter, said biologist will conduct spot checks of these areas during initial clearing/construction operations as deemed necessary by the biologist. The biologist will also be present during the first week of the initial clearing and grubbing activities in the project’s conservation areas. Following this, the biologist will conduct spot checks of affected portions of the conservation areas during initial clearing, grubbing, and grading activities and during initial mechanized exotic eradication activities as deemed necessary by the biologist. The purpose of these inspections will be to monitor construction/clearing areas for the presence of eastern indigo snakes and to help ensure that appropriate measures are being taken to protect this species. The permittee will submit a report to the US Fish and Wildlife Service summarizing activities pertaining to the eastern indigo snake (for each major project phase) and will provide the US Army Corps of Engineers with a copy of the report. Each report shall be submitted within 60 days of the completion of land clearing/grading/initial construction activities and will include: (1) Any sightings of eastern indigo snakes and general locations of such sightings; (2) Summary information concerning any relocated snakes (e.g., capture area, snake characteristics, date captured and relocated, area of relocation); (3) Summary of site inspection dates. GOPHER TORTOISES AND COMMENSALS Burrows were found along the northwestern berm along the very edge of the property, although none appeared to be currently inhabited by a gopher tortoise. Most burrows were inactive and the few that were active had armadillo tracks and scat in the area and leading to the burrows. It is unlikely that any gopher tortoises currently reside on the Mine property, however a management plan will be implemented given that a dead gopher tortoise was found near the property off of State Road 82. Prior to any clearing or construction activities, another gopher tortoise survey will be completed. This will include qualified biologists examining the site in walking transects to scout any active burrows. Should any gopher tortoise burrows be located, a permit from FWC will be obtained to relocate any species off-site, including listed commensals such as the gopher frog. This relocation procedure will follow all FWC regulations. Page 2882 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE APPENDIX D PRESERVE MANAGEMENT PLAN MAY 2020 (NO CHANGES PROPOSED WITH 2025 EXPANSION) Page 2883 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine Preserve Management Plan Page 2 of 4 Introduction: The Immokalee Sand Mine project has proposed to establish an on-site preserve area to comply with the Collier County Land Development Code requirements for on-site preservation of native habitat. The proposed preserve area is a remnant wetland located in the south west corner of the project site. This Plan outlines the enhancement and protection activities proposed within this preserve area. It also outlines the monitoring efforts that will be done to track and document the success of the creation and restoration efforts. Wetland and upland activities are outlined below. The codes used correspond to the mitigation plan exhibits that are included with this plan. Wet Prairie – (Map FLUCFCS Code 643) This existing wetland occurs in a disturbed area in the southwest corner of the property. Plant cover is variable and mainly consists of native herbaceous wetland species and a few woody exotic and nuisance species. Eradication of the exotic and nuisance species using non- mechanized methods will be undertaken but no other enhancement activities are proposed. Presently the area is occasionally mown during the dry season. It is desirable to retain this area in its existing state due to its value for wading birds. Mowing activities will be suspended unless necessary for the road right-of-way maintenance or to control colonization by large woody species. This area will be separated from the mining operations and maintained in its existing condition. It is not being utilized for any mitigation requirements associated with the project. Supplemental planting should not be necessary but if in the future, conditions warrant planting of this area, the following species would be candidates for the planting palette. Sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense) Maidencane (Panicum virgatum) Cordgrasses (Spartina spp.) Spike Rushes (Eleocharis spp.) St. Johns Wort (Hypericum spp.) Spiderlily (Hymenocallis palmeri) Swamplily (Crinum americanum) Yellow-eyed Grass (Xeric ambigua) Whitetop Sedge (Dichromena colorata) Dry Prairie – (Map FLUCFCS Code 310) These existing uplands will provide a protective buffer around the proposed wetland preserve. The area is dominated by domestic and native grasses, with a few cabbage palms and Brazilian pepper scattered throughout. This area will be maintained as an open prairie with scattered canopy trees. Potential species to be utilized in supplemental planting activities would include the following. Canopy: Mid-story: Cabbage Palm (Sabal palmetto) Saw Palmetto (Serenoa repens) Dahoon Holly (Ilex cassine) Myrsine (Rapenea punctata) Live Oak (Quercus virginiana) Gallberry (Ilex glabra) Slash Pine (Pinus elliottii) Wax Myrtle (Myrica cerifera) Groundcover: Wiregrass (Aristida stricta) Broomsedge (Andropogon spp.) Muhly Grass (Muhlenbergia capillaries) Other appropriate native vegetation may be substituted if availability or on site conditions require amendments to the recommended planting list. Page 2884 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine Preserve Management Plan Page 3 of 4 Hydrologic Enhancement of Wetlands: An important component of the wetland mitigation program is improvement of hydrologic conditions (hydrology and hydroperiod) within preservation area wetlands. Currently the water table in the fields adjacent to the preserve area are managed (i.e. fields are de-watered) by pumping water out of field rim ditches and lateral ditches. This water is discharged via throw out pumps to the east of the property. This practice severely disrupts the normal wetland hydroperiod. Once the mining program has been established, agricultural pumping of water off of the property will be eliminated. This will help restore stable hydroperiods that are more typical of natural wetland conditions, prevent artificial over-inundation or drawdown of wetlands, and improve water quality. Protection of Wetlands and Uplands via Conservation Easements: The preserve area will be placed under appropriate conservation easements which will protect the future integrity of the created, restored, and enhanced wetlands and uplands encompassed by the conservation area. The easements will ensure that the conservation areas are preserved and protected in perpetuity. Wetland and Upland Enhancement via Maintenance Eradication of Exotic and Nuisance Plants: All exotic vegetation will be removed from the preserve areas which will be maintained in perpetuity to ensure that the areas are free from exotic/invasive plant species immediately following maintenance events and such that exotic and nuisance plane species will constitute no more then 5% of the total plant cover in the interim between these maintenance events. Exotic invasive plant species will include Category I and Category II species identified in the current “Invasive Plant List” published by the Florida Exotic Pest Plan Council (FLEPPC) as well as Class I and Class II Prohibited Aquatic Plants listed in Chapter 62C-52.011, Florida Administrative Code. Nuisance plant species will include native plant species deemed detrimental due to their potential adverse competition with desirable native species. Visual inspection for exotic, non-native and nuisance plant invasion will be conducted annually and all exotic, non-native and nuisance vegetation including those defined by County codes and the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council, found within the preserve areas will be flagged, mapped and reported for treatment. Exotic and nuisance ground covers will be treated with a U.S. EPA approved herbicide and visible tracer dye. These maintenance activities will be performed in perpetuity as needed. Wetland and Upland Enhancement via Removal of Cattle and Fencing: All of the Preserve area is currently grazed by cattle on a rotational basis. This cattle grazing has restricted development of desirable ground cover, and to a lesser degree, sub-canopy plant species. Much of the on-site Preserve is also occasionally managed for rangeland grazing via measures such as mowing. Cattle will no longer be allowed to graze on the preserve lands and rangeland management practices will be discontinued. This should increase the growth, development, and diversity of native plant assemblages by removing the grazing and management pressures. Wetland and Upland Preserve Delineation: The Preserve will be clearly delineated with appropriate signage both during and after construction activities. Protective barricades will be used to cordon off construction areas and keep construction equipment out of preserve areas. A double row of silt fence will be used along preserve areas to separate them from the construction activities. The silt fence will remain in place until the perimeter berm is installed around the area of excavation. Appropriate signage will be placed along the perimeter of the preserves at 100 to 150 foot spacing. Page 2885 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine Preserve Management Plan Page 4 of 4 Preserve Monitoring: All exotic vegetation, as defined by County Code, and all Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council, shall be removed from within preserve areas and subsequent annual removal of these plants (in perpetuity) shall be the responsibility of the property owner. Preserves shall be maintained in their natural state and must be kept free of refuse and debris. Annual monitoring reports in accordance with required annual inspections of the preserve by the preserve manager shall be provided to Collier County upon request. Preserves will be inspected, at a minimum, on an annual basis. The goal of the annual inspections as outlined in this monitoring plan is to enable evaluation and characterization of preserved areas over time and document progress through a series of scheduled monitoring reports. The reports will quantify and describe conditions within the managed areas, comparing observations with proposed standards and offering advice for corrective actions if needed. These reports shall at a minimum address exotic and nuisance vegetation removal, restoration plantings, management for listed species and general maintenance needs for the preserve. Monitoring Techniques: Meandering transects will be followed in the preserve areas for vegetation inventory and exotic, non-native and nuisance species observations. Preserves will be inspected annually in perpetuity. Reports in accordance with County requirements will be generated for a minimum of five years to provide detailed information as to the ongoing status of the restoration and enhancement activities. A Baseline Report will describe the existing conditions prior to enhancement activities. Photo points will be established in areas to monitor the understory growth of these sub-climax ecosystems. The time zero report will describe the aerial extent of exotic, non-native and nuisance removal and other restoration work, i.e., re-vegetation, photographs from referenced locations, qualitative observations of wildlife use and other information such as climatic and hydrological conditions and health of the existing vegetation. Subsequent reports will continue to monitor these same parameters. Transects will be established along with plot sampling stations to determine percent survival and percent coverage of planted and recruited plant species. Prior to this report, the conservation easements shall have been recorded in the Collier County public records for the preserve/mitigation lands. Baseline, Time Zero and Annual reports will include: • quantification of any regeneration of exotic, non-native and nuisance species and recommendations for remedial actions, where applicable. • quantification of re-vegetation of cleared areas by native species. • percent coverage, open space and water depths, as appropriate. • direct and indirect wildlife observations. • site hydrological characteristics. • site specific rainfall data. • photographs from referenced locations. A photo-point from PVC labeled stake will be established. • photographs of upland/wetland preservation areas. • Monitoring well will be installed as part of the excavation activities. The closest well will be set up to collect data once a day throughout the year. • Preserve manager responsible for report. Preserve Contacts: Preserve Manager Property Owner Tim Hall Barron Collier Company Turrell, Hall & Associates c/o Tom Jones 3584 Exchange Ave. 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34104 Naples, FL 34105-3227 Phone: (239) 643-0166 Phone: (239) 403-6869 Page 2886 of 3023 APPENDIX E CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY IMMOKALEE SAND MINE PROPERTY COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Performed for: Cemex Construction Materials Florida, LLC 11430 Camp Mine Road Brooksville, Florida 34601 Prepared by: Florida’s First Choice in Cultural Resource Management Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 (941)379-6206 Toll Free: 1-800-735-9906 March 2016 Page 2887 of 3023 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY IMMOKALEE SAND MINE PROPERTY COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Performed for: Cemex Construction Materials Florida, LLC 11430 Camp Mine Road Brooksville, Florida 34601 By: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 Marion M. Almy - Project Manager Lee Hutchinson - Project Archaeologist Rudy Westerman and Grant Stauffer - Archaeologists March 2016 Page 2888 of 3023 P16006 i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) for the ±900 Immokalee Sand Mine property in Collier County, Florida, was performed by Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) in February and March 2016. The purpose of this survey was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the property and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). This survey was conducted in compliance with a request from the Florida Division of Historical Resources (FDHR 2010 and Bendus 2016) and meets requirements set forth in Chapters 267 and 373, Florida Statutes (FS), Florida’s Coastal Management program, and implementing state regulations regarding possible impact to significant historical properties, as well as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, per U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requirements. Archaeological: Review of the Florida Master Site File (FMSF), and the NRHP, indicated that no archaeological sites have been previously recorded within the Immokalee Sand Mine property. Background research indicated a moderate to low potential for the presence of archaeological sites within the survey area. As a result of field survey, no archaeological sites were found but two archaeological occurrences (AO) were found. According to the FMSF, an AO is defined as “the presence of one or two nondiagnostic artifacts, not known to be distant from their original context which fit within a hypothetical cylinder of 30 meters diameter, regardless of depth below surface.” Thus, occurrences are not recorded as sites but do note prehistoric activity within the general area. Historic Structures: Review of the FMSF and the NRHP indicated that no historic structures (50 years of age or older) have been previously recorded within the Immokalee Sand Mine property, and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Immokalee, Fla. Quadrangle map (1958, PR 1987) indicated no potential for the presence of historic structures within the survey area. As a result of field survey, no historic structures were identified or recorded within the project area. Based on these findings, project development/mining of the property will have no impact on any significant cultural resources, including those properties listed, determined eligible, or considered potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP. No further research is recommended. Page 2889 of 3023 P16006 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Project Description .................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW .................................................................................... 2-1 3.0 CULTURAL HISTORY ...................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Paleo-Indian .............................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Archaic ...................................................................................................................... 3-4 3.3 Caloosahatchee .......................................................................................................... 3-5 3.4 Colonialism ............................................................................................................... 3-6 3.5 Territorial and Statehood ........................................................................................... 3-8 3.6 Civil War and Aftermath ......................................................................................... 3-11 3.7 Twentieth Century ................................................................................................... 3-13 3.8 Project Specific Information. .................................................................................. 3-15 4.0 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Background Research and Literature Review ........................................................... 4-1 4.2 Archaeological and Historical Considerations .......................................................... 4-1 4.3 Field Methodology .................................................................................................... 4-2 4.4 Unexpected Discoveries ............................................................................................ 4-2 4.5 Laboratory Methods/Curation ................................................................................... 4-2 5.0 SURVEY RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Archaeological Results .............................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 Historical ................................................................................................................... 5-1 5.3 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 5-1 6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................ 6-1 APPENDICES Appendix A: Survey Correspondence Appendix B: Survey Log Page 2890 of 3023 P16006 iii LIST OF FIGURES AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figures Page Figure 1.1. Location of the Immokalee Sand Mine project area, Collier County. ............................. 1-2 Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the Immokalee Sand Mine project area. .................................. 2-2 Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. .................................................................................... 3-2 Figure 3.2. 1953 and 1968 aerial photographs of the Immokalee Sand Mine project area. ........... 3-16 Figure 4.1. Location of the linear resource adjacent to the Immokalee Sand Mine project area ...... 4-3 Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests and archaeological occurrence within the Immokalee Sand Mine project area. .................................................................................................. 5-2 Figure 5.2. Location of the shovel tests within the Immokalee Sand Mine project area .................. 5-3 Figure 5.3. Location of the shovel tests and archaeological occurrence within the Immokalee Sand Mine project area. .................................................................................................. 5-4 Photos Photo 2.1. South view of relict citrus grove on property. ................................................................ 2-1 Photo 2.2. Wetland in southwest portion of project area. ................................................................ 2-3 Photo 2.3. Pond in south-central part of project area. ..................................................................... 2-3 Photo 2.4. One of the many ditches in the project area. .................................................................. 2-4 Photo 2.5. Looking east at canal in the northeast part of the project area. ...................................... 2-4 Photo 2.6. Cattle observed in the project area. ................................................................................ 2-5 Page 2891 of 3023 P16006 1-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description This Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) involved an archaeological and historical survey of the ±900-acre Immokalee Sand Mine property. The project area is located within Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Sections 6 and 7 (Figure 1.1). This survey complies with Chapters 267 and 373, Florida Statutes (FS), Florida’s Coastal Management Program, and implementing state regulations regarding possible impact to historic properties listed, or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) as well as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The resulting report meets the standards contained in Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code and follows the guidelines in the Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual (Florida Division of Historical Resources [FDHR] 2003). 1.2 Purpose The purpose of this CRAS was to locate and identify any prehistoric and historic period archaeological sites and historic structures located within the Immokalee property, and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the NRHP. The historical and archaeological survey was conducted in February and March 2016. Page 2892 of 3023 1-2 Figure 1.1. Location of the Immokalee Sand Mine project area, Collier County. Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), TomTom, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community ¹ 0 0.5 1Miles 012Kilometers 2015 Collier Lee Hendry GladesCharlotte DeSotoSarasota Highlands Lee Page 2893 of 3023 P16006 2-1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW The Immokalee Sand Mine property is located in Sections 6 and 7 of Township 46 South, Range 29 East, north of the city of Immokalee and immediately north of SR 82, a mile west of SR 29 in northwest Collier County (Figure 2.1). Wetlands are abundant in the region. Corkscrew Swamp and Baucom Cypress Strand are located south of the project area. In addition, Lake Trafford lies approximately three miles west of the property. The project area is comprised of about 850 acres of upland and approximately 32 acres of surface waters including ponds, drainage ditches, and 15 acres of wetlands. In addition, agricultural lands include row crops, cattle pasture, and citrus groves - the trees having been removed in 2013. Mining of the property will include approximately 606.85 acres which will be excavated. Future land use will include a 589-acre lake, 144 acres of dry prairie, 73 acres of roads, 40 acres of citrus, 20 acres of freshwater marsh, 13 acres of wet prairie, 6 acres of palm hammock, 6 acres of willow marsh, 6 acres of ditches and 1 acre of herbaceous wetlands (Cemex Construction Materials Florida, LLC). The area lies in the Unnamed Ditches drainage sub basin of the West Caloosahatchee drainage basin of the Caloosahatchee river water shed. Following are representative samples of what the project currently looks like (Photos 2.1-2.6). Photo 2.1. South view of relict citrus grove on property. Page 2894 of 3023 2-2 Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the Immokalee Sand Mine project area; Sections 6 and 7 of Township 46 South, Range 29 East (USGS Felda, 1973, PR 1979, and Immokalee, 1973). Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed ¹ 0 0.25 0.5Miles 00.51Kilometers Page 2895 of 3023 P16006 2-3 Photo 2.2. Wetland in southwest portion of project area. Photo 2.3. Pond in south-central part of project area. Note fill pile in foreground. Page 2896 of 3023 P16006 2-4 Photo 2.4. One of the many ditches in the project area. Photo 2.5. Looking east at canal in the northeast part of the project area. Page 2897 of 3023 P16006 2-5 Photo 2.6. Cattle observed in the project area. Paleoenvironmental Considerations: The prehistoric environment of Collier County and the surrounding area was different from that which is seen today. Sea levels were much lower, the climate was drier, and potable water was scarce. Given the changes in water resource availability, botanical communities, and faunal resources, an understanding of human ecology during the earliest periods of human occupation in Florida cannot be founded upon observations of the modern environment. Aboriginal inhabitants would have developed cultural adaptations in response to the environmental changes taking place. These alterations were reflected in prehistoric settlement patterns, site types, site locations, artifact forms, and variations in the resources used. Dunbar (1981:95) notes that due to the arid conditions during the period 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). The rise of sea level severely reduced xeric habitats over the next several millennia. By 5000 years ago, southern pine forests were replacing the oak savannahs. 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). At Lake Annie in south-central Florida, pollen cores are 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, existed in the area (Watts 1971, 1975). Roughly five millennia ago, surface water was plentiful in karst terrains and the level of the Floridan aquifer rose to five feet above present levels. After this time, modern floral and climatic and environmental conditions began to be established (Watts 1975). With the onset of the modern environmental conditions, numerous micro-environments were available to the aboriginal inhabitants in the area. By 4000 B.C.E., ground water had reached current levels, and the shift to warmer, moister conditions saw the appearance of hardwood forests, bayheads, cypress swamps, prairie, and marshlands. Page 2898 of 3023 3-1 P16006 3.0 CULTURAL HISTORY A discussion of the culture history of a region provides a framework within which the local archaeological and historic records 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 within the area. In general, archaeologists summarize the culture history of an area (i.e., an archaeological region) by outlining the sequence of archaeological cultures through time. These cultures are defined largely in geographical terms but also reflect shared environmental and cultural factors. The project area is situated within the Caloosahatchee region (Figure 3.1), which extends from Charlotte Harbor on the north to the northern border of the Ten Thousand Islands on the south and inland about 54 miles (Carr and Beriault 1984:4, 12; Griffin 1988; Milanich 1994). The Caloosahatchee region 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 medium 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 aceramic Paleo-Indian and Archaic periods are followed by the Caloosahatchee cultural sequence (500 BCE to 1500 CE [Common Era]) at which point the bearers of the Caloosahatchee culture enter into the ethnographic record as the Calusa Indians. The following overview is based on data from Griffin (1988, 2002), Widmer (1988), and Milanich (1994). The local history of the region is divided into four broad periods based initially upon the major governmental powers. 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 and 21 years later became a State (Territorial and Statehood). The Civil War and Aftermath (1861-1899) period deals with 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 defined by 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 Paleo-Indian The Paleo-Indian stage is the earliest known cultural manifestation in Florida, dating from roughly 12,000 to 7500 BCE (Milanich 1994). Archaeological evidence for Paleo-Indians consists primarily of scattered finds of diagnostic lanceolate-shaped projectile points. The Florida peninsula at this time was quite different than today. In general, the climate was cooler and drier with vegetation typified by xerophytic species with scrub oak, pine, open grassy prairies, and savannas being the most common (Milanich 1994:40). When human populations were arriving in Florida, the sea levels were still as much as 40 to 60 m (130-200 ft) below present levels and coastal regions of Florida extended miles beyond present-day shorelines (Faught 2004). Thus, many of these sites have been inundated (cf., Faught and Donoghue 1997). Page 2899 of 3023 ¹ 050100 Kilometers 02550 Miles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Post-500 BCE regions of precolumbian Florida (adapted from Milanich 1994:xix) 3-2 1 Northwest 2 North 3 North-Central 4 East and Central 5 North Peninsular Gulf Coast 6 Central Peninsular Gulf Coast 7 Caloosahatchee 8 Okeechobee Basin 9 Glades Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. The project area ( ) is within the Caloosahatchee Region. Page 2900 of 3023 3-3 P16006 The Paleo-Indian period has been sub-divided into three horizons based upon characteristic tool forms (Austin 2001). Traditionally, it is believed that the Clovis Horizon (10,500-9000 BCE) represents the initial occupation of Florida and is defined based upon the presence of the fluted Clovis points. These are somewhat more common in north Florida, although Robinson (1979) does illustrate a few points from the central Gulf Coast area. However, recent work, may indicate that Suwannee and Simpson points are contemporary with or predate Clovis (Dunbar 2006a; Stanford 1991). The Suwannee Horizon (9000-8500 BCE) is the best known of the Paleo-Indian horizons. The lanceolate- shaped, unfluted Simpson and Suwannee projectile points are diagnostic of this period (Bullen 1975; Daniel and Wisenbaker 1987; Purdy 1981). The Suwannee tool kit includes a variety of scrapers, adzes, spokeshaves, unifacially retouched flakes, flakes with beaked projections, and blade-like flakes as well as bone and ivory foreshafts, pins, awls, daggers, anvils, and abraders (Austin 2001:23). Following the Suwannee Horizon is the Late Paleo-Indian Horizon (8500-8000 BCE). The smaller Tallahassee, Santa Fe, and Beaver Lake projectile points have traditionally been attributed to this horizon (Milanich 1994). However, many of these points have been recovered stratigraphically from late Archaic and early Woodland period components and thus, may not date to this time period at all (Austin 2001; Farr 2006). Florida notched or pseudo-notched points, including the Union, Greenbriar, and Hardaway-like points may represent late Paleo-Indian types, but these types have not been recovered from datable contexts and their temporal placement remains uncertain (Dunbar 2006a:410). Archaeologists hypothesize that Paleo-Indians lived in migratory bands and subsisted by gathering and hunting, including the now-extinct Pleistocene megafauna. Since it was cooler and drier, it is likely that these nomadic hunters traveled between permanent and semi-permanent sources of water, such as artesian springs, exploiting the available resources. These watering holes would have attracted the animals that the Indians hunted, thus providing both food and drink. In addition to being tied to water sources, most of the Paleo-Indian sites are also proximate to sources of good quality lithic resources. This settlement pattern is considered logistical, i.e. the establishment of semi- permanent habitation areas and the movement of the resources from their sources of procurement to the residential locale by specialized task groups (Austin 2001:25). Although the Paleo-Indian period is generally considered to have been cooler and drier, there were major variations in the inland water tables resulting from large-scale environmental fluctuations. There have been two major theories as to why most Paleo-Indian materials have been recovered from inundated sites. The Oasis theory posits that due to low water tables and scarcity of potable water, the Paleo-Indians and game animals upon which they depended clustered around the few available water holes that were associated with sinkholes (Neill 1964). Waller postulated that the Paleo-Indians gathered around river-crossings to ambush the large Pleistocene animals as they crossed the rivers (Waller 1970). This implies periods of elevated water levels. Based on the research along the Aucilla and Wacissa Rivers, it appears that both theories are correct, depending upon what the local environmental conditions were at that time (Dunbar 2006b). As such, during the wetter periods, populations became more dispersed because the water resources were abundant and the animals they relied on could roam over a wider range. Some of the information about this period has been derived from the underwater excavations at two inland spring sites in Sarasota County: Little Salt Spring and Warm Mineral Springs (Clausen et al. 1979). Excavation at the Harney Flats Site in Hillsborough County has provided a rich body of data concerning Paleo-Indian life ways. Analysis indicates that this site was used as a quarry-related base camp with special use activity areas (Daniel and Wisenbaker 1987). It has been suggested that Paleo-Indian settlement may not have been related as much to seasonal changes as generally postulated for the succeeding Archaic period, but instead movement was perhaps related to the scheduling of tool-kit replacement, social needs, and the availability of water, among other factors (Daniel and Wisenbaker 1987:175). Investigations along the Aucilla and Wacissa Rivers, as well as Page 2901 of 3023 3-4 P16006 other sites within the north Florida rivers have provided important information on the Paleo-Indian period and how the aboriginals adapted to their environmental setting (Webb 2006). Studies of the Pleistocene faunal remains from these sites clearly demonstrate the importance of these animals not for food alone, but as he raw material for their bone tool industry (Dunbar and Webb 1996). 3.2 Archaic As the Paleo-Indian period gradually ended, climatic changes occurred and the Pleistocene megafauna disappeared. The disappearance of the mammoths and mastodons resulted in a reduction of open grazing lands, and thus, the subsequent disappearance of grazers such as horse, bison, and camels. With the reduction of open habitat, the herd animals were replaced by the more solitary, woodland browser: the white-tailed deer (Dunbar 2006a:426). The intertwined data of megafauna extinction and cultural change suggests a rapid and significant disruption in both faunal and floral assemblages and the Bolen people represent the first culture adapted to the Holocene environment (Carter and Dunbar 2006). This included a more specialized toolkit and the introduction of chipped- stone woodworking implements. However, because of a lack of excavated collections and the poor preservation of bone and other organic materials in the upland sites, our knowledge of the Early Archaic tool assemblage is limited (Carter and Dunbar 2006; Milanich 1994). Discoveries at the Page-Ladson, Little Salt Spring, and Windover sites indicate that bone and wood tools were used (Clausen et al. 1979; Doran 2002; Webb 2006). The archaeological record suggests a diffuse, yet well-scheduled, pattern of exploiting both coastal and interior resources. Because water sources were much more numerous and larger than previously, it was possible to sustain larger populations, occupy sites for longer periods, and perform activities that required longer occupation at specific locales (Milanich 1994:67). By approximately 6500 years ago marked environmental changes, which had profound influence upon human settlement and subsistence practices, occurred. Humans adapted to this changing environment and regional and local 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, and the Caloosahatchee and Peace Rivers developed. In addition to changed hydrological conditions, 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). The archaeological record for the Middle Archaic is better understood 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. 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 society’s social segmentation (Russo 2008:21). Page 2902 of 3023 3-5 P16006 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. Population growth, as evidenced by the increased number of Middle Archaic sites and accompanied by increased socio- cultural complexity, is also assumed (Russo 1994b, 2008; Widmer 1988). The beginning of the Late (or Ceramic) Archaic is similar in many respects to the Middle Archaic but includes the addition of ceramics. The earliest pottery was fiber-tempered (Orange Plain and Orange Incised). Orange series ceramics have been recovered from a number of sites in southwest Florida (Bullen and Bullen 1956; Cockrell 1970; Luer 1989c, 1999; Marquardt 1992b, 1999; Russo 1991; Widmer 1974). Although semi-fiber-tempered wares are generally attributed to the late Orange period, analysis of such sherds from a number of sites indicates that this type of ceramic occurred throughout the Orange period (Cordell 2004). Projectile points of the Late Archaic are primarily stemmed and corner-notched, and include those of the Culbreath, Clay, and Lafayette types (Bullen 1975). Other lithic tools of the Late Archaic include hafted scrapers and ovate and triangular- shaped knives (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980). Archaeological evidence indicates that South Florida was sparsely settled during this time, with only a few sites recorded. 3.3 Caloosahatchee 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 defined as the “Glades Tradition” (Griffin 1988:133). It 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 never 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 aboriginal 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. Although Widmer postulated environmental stability for the Calusa, this was far from the truth based upon the recent environmental reconstructions (Walker 2013; Widmer 1988). Inland sites show a greater, if not exclusive reliance on interior 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 ceramic sherds 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). The settlement pattern of the Caloosahatchee people at this time consisted of large villages (10 hectares [ha] (25 acres [ac]) in size with about 400 people), small villages (3-4 ha [9 ac] / 50 people), and fishing hamlets and/or collection stations (< 1 ha [2.5 ac], temporary, task specific site) (Widmer 1988). The larger sites are located in the coastal areas, whereas most of the interior sites are seen as short-term hunting stations occupied by special task groups from the permanent coastal villages (Widmer 1988:226). Caloosahatchee I, ca. 500 BCE to 500 CE, is characterized by thick, sand-tempered plain sherds with rounded lips, some St. Johns Plain ceramics, the appearance of Pineland Plain ceramics (tempered with sponge spicules and medium to fine quartz sand), and the absence of Belle Glade ceramics (Marquardt 1999:85). Based on the faunal analysis from Useppa Island and Pineland, fish Page 2903 of 3023 3-6 P16006 was the primary meat source with whelks and conchs being the primary shellfish food. Botanical materials utilized include chenopod, panic grass, talinum, mallow, red mangrove, waxmyrtle, pine, buttonwood, and seagrape (Marquardt 1999:87). Data on burial customs for this time are unknown; on Pineland, the use of burial mounds began around 1000 CE (Marquardt and Walker 2013). From 500 to 1200 CE, the Caloosahatchee II period is marked by a dramatic increase of Belle Glade ceramics in the area. Cordell (1992) has divided the Caloosahatchee II period into IIA and IIB based on the appearance of Belle Glade Red ceramics at about 800 CE. In addition, the IIA and IIB time ranges roughly correlate with two contrasting climate/sea-level episodes (Walker 2013). These changes in ceramics may also indicate the resurgence of ceremonial mound use, a characteristic of the period. Burials occurred in sand mounds and in natural sand ridges with both primary flexed and secondary bundle burials. The number of shell middens or village sites increased (Milanich 1994:319) and evidence of ranked societies appears (Widmer 1988:93). The Wightman Site has three non- mortuary ceremonial mounds connected by shell causeways (Fradkin 1976). In addition, the large Pineland Canal appears to have been constructed at this time (Luer 1989a, 1989b). It is possible that the large Pineland complex served as the center of Calusa society at this time (cf. Milanich 1995:44). During this time, it had been postulated that sea levels were higher than during the Caloosahatchee I period, or that the coastal area was under greater influence from nearby ocean inlets. This is based on the higher diversity of faunal remains and the increased number higher salinity based food stuffs (Walker 1992). The number of shell midden or village sites increased, and shell tools (hafted shell hammers and cutting edged tools) became more diverse (Marquardt 1992a:429; Milanich 1994:319). The Caloosahatchee III period, ca. 1200 to 1350 CE, is identified by the appearance of St. Johns Check Stamped and Pinellas Plain ceramics (Cordell 1992). Belle Glade Plain ceramics continue to be the dominant type, with sand tempered plain and Pineland Plain. Marquardt (1992a:430) notes that there were no obvious changes in the settlement and subsistence patterns based upon the archaeological evidence even though this is the beginning of the Little Ice Age (Marquardt 2013). Sand burial mounds continued to be utilized, often containing Englewood and Safety Harbor vessels. A number of mounds from this period have had radially placed extended burials within the mounds (Luer and Almy 1987). From 1400 to 1513 CE, the Caloosahatchee IV period is characterized by the appearance of numerous trade wares from all adjoining regions of Florida (Widmer 1988:86). These types include Glades Tooled and pottery of the Safety Harbor series. There was also a decrease in popularity of Belle Glade Plain ceramics (Milanich 1994:321). Sand tempered plain pottery, with square and flattened lips, is the most common (Cordell 1992:168). There is also an increase in Pineland Plain ceramics. Around 1400 CE, the use of incising on ceramics in the Glades and Caloosahatchee regions ceased and the ceramic assemblages of the two areas were very homogeneous (Marquardt 1992a:431). Some have suggested that this represents an expansion of the Calusa within this area (Griffin 1988; McGregor 1974). Large villages sites continued to accumulate midden-mounds and the dead were interred in sand burial mounds (Marquardt 2013). 3.4 Colonialism The Caloosahatchee V period, ca. 1513 to 1750 CE, is coterminous with the period of European contact. The only difference between Caloosahatchee III and IV is the presence of European artifacts. The Caloosahatchee area was the home territory of the Calusa, a sedentary, non- agricultural, highly stratified and politically complex chiefdom (Milanich 1998). Calusa villages along the coast are marked by extensive shellworks and earthworks. Sites are marked by the appearance of European artifacts in association with aboriginal artifacts. It was also at this time that Page 2904 of 3023 3-7 P16006 metal pendants were being manufactured by aboriginal metal smiths (Allerton et al. 1984). In addition, cultural materials from the Leon-Jefferson Mission Period in north Florida have also been recovered (Widmer 1988:86). This may be evidence of Indians fleeing Spanish missionaries and moving into southwest Florida. Spanish missionaries and European explorers found areas of large population on the southwest Florida coast, through there were interior occupations as well (Hann 1991). During the historic period, there was no reason to doubt that the Indians of southwest Florida continued to subsist mainly on resources of the sea, though they are said to have been fond of Spanish food and drink (Marquardt 1992a:431). Burial patterns also remained similar to the earlier periods, but included some European goods. The most striking feature of the Caloosahatchee mortuary pattern is its continuity through time and general lack of grave goods (Walker et al. 1996:23). 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 Native American population of 1500 has been estimated at 1.5 to 2 million (Dobyns 1983). Following exposure to Old World diseases such as bubonic plague, dysentery, influenza, and smallpox, epidemics to which they had no immunity, the Native American population of the New World 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 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 fishermen 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 Indian 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 English 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 Indians 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 English, French, and Spanish holdings in the New World. As a result, Florida was ceded to the English. After this, bands of Upper Creek, Muskogee speakers, began moving into Florida, increasing the Native American 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 (United States Congress 1837). Page 2905 of 3023 3-8 P16006 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” (United States 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 in light of 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 English 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 United States acquired the Louisiana Purchase from France in 1803, Spain was hemmed in. When the Seminoles began cross border raids from Spanish Florida into the United States, General Andrew Jackson was commission 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 subsequent actions belie either tacit instructions or a personal agenda, as he killed hundreds of Indians 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 United States (Tebeau 1980). This aggression understandably strained relations between the United States and Spain. Spain, who had more pressing concerns with its Central and South American colonies, ceded Florida to the United States 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 United States 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 Indians 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 en 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. At approximately the time when engagements were entering this part of the state, a shift in military installation paradigm occurred. In October 1840, U.S. Secretary of War Joel Poinsett Page 2906 of 3023 3-9 P16006 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 an abandonment of European-modeled 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 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 Indian 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 were allowed to do so, but the reservation boundary was redrawn, reducing Seminole lands to the south and west of Lake Istokpoga in Highlands County. In an attempt to prohibit contact between the Seminole and Cuban fishermen, 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” (United States Congress 1850). 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 Indian villages and noted that he had been into the chief haunt of the Indians 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 2907 of 3023 3-10 P16006 On December 7, 1855, Lieutenant Hartsuff again set out for the Big Cypress with orders to make reconnaissance and take note of any Indian 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 Indian 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 ranged from the use of poorly disciplined militia, to aggressive campaigns, to 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). Given the importance of remaining undetected, Seminole children were taught very early to be quiet: The first thing we’re taught when we’re little is to watch where we step, so as not to step on a snake. The next thing we’re taught is to be quiet and good and mind the older people. They pointed out why we should be good. White men were the reason. They told us about the wars and how the Indians had to run off the islands in the saw grass in the Everglades, through the swamps, away from the white soldiers. A child who wasn’t quiet and wasn’t good might be left behind. And he would be carried back to the white folks by the soldiers. I can tell you, this scared you! –Buffalo Tiger (Reno 1994:103). 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 earliest important economic activities reported in the region. Mavericks left by early Spanish explorers such as DeSoto and Narvaéz 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, cattlemen 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 southwestern Florida. Known as the “King of the Crackers,” Summerlin herds ranged from Ft. Meade to Ft. Myers (Covington 1957). Page 2908 of 3023 3-11 P16006 3.6 Civil War and Aftermath In 1861, Florida followed South Carolina’s lead and seceded from the Union as a prelude to the American 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). In an attempt 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. Mannerlyn (Akerman 1976). The cattlemen 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 in the existing Collier County (Tebeau 1966:96). These first permanent pioneers were farmers; the hunters and fishermen 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 W. L. Apthorp, and M. H. Clay surveyed land within Township 46 South, Range 29 East, including the current project area. Apthorp surveyed the exterior boundary for Township 46 South, Range 29 East in 1872; and Clay surveyed the interior section lines in 1873 (State of Florida 1872, 1873a). No historic features were depicted (State of Florida 1873b). They described the land as 3rd rate prairie (State of Florida n.d.: 783). 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 Page 2909 of 3023 3-12 P16006 land. It was as this time that Allen’s Place became known as Immokalee (Mikasuki for “home”). 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). By the early 1880s, the State of Florida faced a financial 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. Hamilton Disston, a member of a prominent Pennsylvania saw manufacturing family, in 1881, entered into 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 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). 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 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 and remained such for 36 years until July 7, 1923 when Collier County was formed with Everglades City as county seat. It was named for Barron Gift Collier, a Memphis born businessman who promoted the region’s development. All of Section 6 of the project area was purchased by the Page 2910 of 3023 3-13 P16006 Florida Commercial Company in 1896; the Carrabelle, Tallahassee, and Georgia Railroad Company purchased all of Section 7 in 1894 (State of Florida n.d.:265). 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 track record in St. Petersburg, 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 2,032 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. Improvements in transportation include 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 making an effort 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 fell the trees and oxen and mules would pull the downed trees to temporary tram railways where they were loaded for transport to the nearby mills. Page 2911 of 3023 3-14 P16006 Logging activities in the Big Cypress Swamp and Fakahatchee Strand were prevalent in the 1940s in response to wartime needs (US 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 a number of saw mills 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; US 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. Barron Collier, who promoted the region’s development and the completion of the Tamiami Trail with his personal fortune, brought modern communications, roads, and railroads (Collier County Museum 2010). His promotions eventually opened up the area’s enormous agricultural and resort potential, but modest signs of growth were halted by the Great Depression. The number of residents in 1925 of 1,256 grew to only 2,883 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). In the late 1940s, the agricultural thrust in Collier County began with approximately 640 cultivated acres along SR 29 near Ochopee-Copeland. By the 1970s, citrus, watermelons, tomatoes, bell peppers, and cucumbers were the largest producing crops in the county. Other crops included squash, cantaloupes, melons, potatoes, cabbage, lettuce, eggplant, corn, beans, and okra (Naples Daily News 1973). 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 similar to 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 5,082 in 1940 to 6,488 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. In 1949, Naples officially became a city with strict zoning laws promoting a “Naples Image” which denoted homes and lifestyles at the higher end of the scale. The county seat was moved to Naples in 1959 (Dean 1991). Based on maps from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1954 Soil Survey for Collier County, Florida, a series of trails and tram lines once spread into the swampy interior region of the County from the west coast. The railroad grades in the region appear to have led to a north-south trending line near the coast, running several miles inland. These appear to have been part of the County’s cypress and pine timbering industry (USDA 1954). Page 2912 of 3023 3-15 P16006 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, in Section 11 of Township 47 South, Range 29 East, 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 the 1950s and 1960s, US 41 was widened by adding limerock from nearby quarries. In 1967, SR 84 (Alligator Alley) or the Everglades Parkway, which lies south of the project area, 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). 3.8 Project Specific Information. The 1953 aerial photos of the project area available from the Publication of Archival, Library, and Museum materials (PALMM) indicate that native vegetation had been removed by 1953 and replaced with agricultural fields. By 1968, the historic aerials show that all of the project area had been converted into agricultural fields (Figure 3.2). Page 2913 of 3023 3-16 Figure 3.2. 1953 and 1968 aerial photographs of the Immokalee Sand Mine project area (USDA 1953, 1968). ¹ 0 0.25 0.5Miles 00.51Kilometers 11-21-68 BUN-1KK-68 ¹ 00.250.5Miles 00.51Kilometers 1-1-53 DSM-21-206 Page 2914 of 3023 4-1 P16006 4.0 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Background Research and Literature Review A review of archaeological and historical literature, records and other documents and data pertaining to the project area was conducted. The focus of this research was to ascertain the types of cultural resources known in the project area 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, cultural resource survey reports, books, articles, and maps. In addition to the NRHP and FMSF, other information relevant to the historical research was obtained from the files of ACI. No individuals with knowledge of historic or aboriginal activities specific to the project area were encountered during this project; thus, no informant interviews were conducted. It should be noted that the digital FMSF data used in this report were obtained in February 2016. However, input may be several months behind receipt of reports and site files. Thus, the findings of the background research phase of investigation may not be current with actual work performed in the general project area. In keeping with standard archaeological conventions, metric measurements are used in this section and the following report section. 4.2 Archaeological and Historical Considerations Archaeological Considerations: For archaeological survey projects of this kind, specific research designs are formulated prior to initiating fieldwork to delineate project goals and strategies. Of primary importance is an attempt to understand, based on prior investigations, the spatial distribution of known resources. Such knowledge serves not only to generate an informed set of expectations concerning the kinds of sites which might be anticipated to occur within the project corridor, but also provides a valuable regional perspective and, thus, a basis for evaluating any newly discovered sites. Background research indicated that according to the FMSF, no prehistoric or historic archaeological sites have been recorded within three miles of the project area. A review of the Collier County archaeological predictive maps (ACI 1992, 1999), countywide syntheses by the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy (Carr 1988; Dickel 1991), as well as the Cultural Resources Overview and Survey Strategy: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (New South 2008) “…which found that the most effective method used by archaeologists for isolating probability areas in southern Florida has involved the interpretation of historic black and white aerial photographs. These provide cross-references for a changing landscape through time” (New South 2008:53). In general, sites are most often found on discrete areas of higher ground relative to the surrounding terrain - such as hammock or hammock areas which once supported oak/palm hammocks, and typically situated near fresh water such as a marsh, seasonal depression, pond or a slough. Previous CRAS conducted in the general area were prepared for improvements to SR 29, and improvements to SR 82 (ACI 2009; 2004 and 2005 and Janus Research 2007), All these produced negative results for prehistoric or historic archaeological sites. Page 2915 of 3023 4-2 P16006 Based upon these data and soil type information from the soil surveys archaeological/ historical site location predictive models (ACI 1992, 1999; USDA 1954, 1998), it was anticipated that the survey parcel has a low to moderate potential for prehistoric archaeological sites. The potential for historic period archaeological sites was considered very low. Historical Considerations: A review of the FMSF data obtained in February 2016 indicated an absence of historic structures (50 years of age or older) within or near the project area. However, 8CR00979, SR 82, has been recorded (Janus 2007), and determined ineligible for listing in the NRHP. The 1954 soil survey depicts no structures along either road (USDA 1954), although several structures may have been located on the property after 1973 (Figure 4.1). 4.3 Field Methodology Archaeological field methodology consisted of surface reconnaissance and shovel testing conducted at a 10 meters (m) (33 feet [ft]), 25 m (82 ft), 50 m (165 ft), 100 m (324 ft) intervals as well as judgmentally. Shovel tests were circular, and measured approximately 50 centimeters (cm) (20 inches [in]) in diameter by 1 m (3.3 ft) in depth, unless impeded by water or limestone. 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. Following the recording of relevant data such as stratigraphic profile and artifact finds, all test pits were refilled. Historic structures field methodology consisted of a reconnaissance survey of the area to determine the location of any historic properties 50 years of age or older, and to ascertain if such resources within the project area could be eligible for listing in the NRHP. If structures were found, an in-depth study of the identified historic resources would be done, photographs taken, and information needed for completion of the FMSF forms gathered, including a physical description and interviews with residents and other individuals knowledgeable about the history of the area. 4.4 Unexpected Discoveries It was anticipated that if human burial sites such as Indian mounds, lost historic and prehistoric cemeteries, or other unmarked burials or associated artifacts were found, then the provisions and guidelines set forth in Chapter 872.05, FS (Florida’s Unmarked Burial Law) would be followed. 4.5 Laboratory Methods/Curation All recovered cultural materials were initially cleaned and sorted by artifact class. Lithics debitage was subjected to a limited technological analysis focused on ascertaining the stages of stone tool production. Flakes and non-flake production debris (i.e. cores, blanks, tested cobbles) were measured, and examined for raw material types and absence or presence of thermal alteration. Flakes were classified into four types (primary decortication, secondary decortication, non-decortication, and shatter) based on the amount of cortex on the dorsal surface and the shape (White 1963). The project-related records such as aerials, field notes, and photographs and the artifacts will be maintained at ACI in Sarasota, unless the client requests otherwise. Page 2916 of 3023 4-3 Figure 4.1. Location of the linear resource adjacent to the Immoka- lee Sand Mine project area (USGS Felda, 1973, PR 1979, and Immokalee, 1973). 8CR00979 Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed ¹ 0 0.25 0.5Miles 00.51Kilometers Page 2917 of 3023 5-1 P16006 5.0 SURVEY RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Archaeological Results Archaeological field survey included both ground surface reconnaissance and the excavation of 159 shovel tests within the Immokalee Sand Mind project area property (Figures 5.1-5.3). These were placed at a 25 m (82 ft), 50 m (165 ft), 100 m (324 ft) intervals as well as judgmentally. Shovel tests were also placed at 10 m (33 ft) intervals around positive shovel tests to bound them. As a result, no archaeological sites were found but two archaeological occurrences were found. According to the FMSF, an AO is defined as “the presence of one or two nondiagnostic artifacts, not known to be distant from their original context which fit within a hypothetical cylinder of 30 meters diameter, regardless of depth below surface.” Thus, occurrences are not recorded as sites. But they are evidence of prehistoric activity in the general project area but not considered eligible for listing in the NRHP. The two AO’s are described below. AO#1: This AO was recorded in the northwest quarter of Section 7, Township 46 South, Range 29 East (Figure 5.1). Elevation is approximately 35 ft above mean sea level (amsl). It is described as a medium (1-2 cm in length), non thermally altered chert waste flake found between 0- 40 cm below surface in grey brown sand in the southwest corner of the project area in a moderate probability area. No additional material was found within the shovel tests placed at close intervals. AO#2: This AO was recorded in the northeast quarter of Section 6, Township 46 South, Range 29 East (Figure 5.1). Elevation is approximately 40 ft amsl. It is described as a medium (1-2 cm in length), non thermally altered chert waste flake found between 0-40 cm below surface in white sand in the northeast corner of the project area in a moderate probability area. No additional material was found within the shovel tests placed at close intervals. 5.2 Historical The historical resource survey of the project area revealed an absence of historic structures (50 years of age or older). Thus, no structures listed or considered eligible for listing in the NRHP are located within the property. 5.3 Recommendations Based on the results of the background research, field survey and analysis, development of the Immokalee Sand Mine property will not impact any significant cultural resources. No further work is recommended. Page 2918 of 3023 Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests and archaeological occurrence (not to scale) within the Immokalee Sand Mine project area. 5-2 !!A!AAO #1Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community¹0500 1,000Feet0150300MetersLegendShovel Test (negative)!Archaeological OccurrenceModerate Probability zone!Amatch pointPage 2919 of 3023 Figure 5.2. Location of the shovel tests (not to scale) within the Immokalee Sand Mine project area. 5-3 !A!A!A!ASource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community¹0500 1,000Feet0150300MetersLegendShovel Test (negative)!Archaeological OccurrenceModerate Probability zone!Amatch pointPage 2920 of 3023 Figure 5.3. Location of the shovel tests and archaeological occurrence (not to scale) within the Immokalee Sand Mine project area. 5-4!!A!AAO #2Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community¹0500 1,000Feet0150300MetersLegendShovel Test (negative)!Archaeological OccurrenceModerate Probability zone!Amatch pointPage 2921 of 3023 6-1 P16006 6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY ACI 1992 Mapping of Areas of Historical/Archaeological Probability in 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. 2014 Cultural Resource Assessment survey of Lee County Electric Cooperative SR 82 and SR 29 Distribution Line Replacement, Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota 2015 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Preferred Storm Water Treatment Areas, SR 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29 Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. Allerton, David, George M. Luer, and Robert S. Carr 1984 Ceremonial Tablets and Related Objects from Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 37(1): 5-54. Austin, Robert J. 2001 Paleoindian and Archaic Archaeology in the Middle Hillsborough River Basin: A Synthetic Overview. SEARCH, Jonesville. Bendus, Robert 2016 Letter to C. Sabin, Re: Immokalee Sand Mine, January 26. 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. Carr, Robert 1988 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County, Florida. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Miami. 2002 The Archaeology of Everglades Tree Islands. In Tree Islands of the Everglades. Edited by F. H. Sklar and A. 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 P. J. Gleason, pp. 1-14. Miami Geological Society Memoir 2, Miami. Carter, Brinnen C. and James S. Dunbar 2006 Early Archaic Archaeology. In First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page- Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Edited by S. D. Webb, pp. 493-517. Springer, The Netherlands. Page 2922 of 3023 6-2 P16006 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. Clement, Gail n.d. Barron Gift Collier. Everglades Digital Library, Florida International University. http://everglades.fiu.edu/reclaim/bios/collier.htm. Copeland, Graham D. 1947 Map of Collier County Florida. Collier County Board of County Commissioners, Naples. Cordell, Ann S. 2004 Paste Variability and Possible Manufacturing Origins of Late Archaic Fiber- Tempered Pottery from Selected Sites in Peninsular Florida. In Early Pottery: Technology, Function, Style, and Interaction in the Lower Southeast. Edited by R. Saunders and C. T. Hays, pp. 63-104. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Davis, John H. 1943 The Natural Features of Southern Florida. Geological Bulletin 25. Florida Geological Survey, Tallahassee. Dickel, David N. 1991 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County, Florida. AHC Technical Report 38. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Davie. Dobyns, Henry F. 1983 Their Numbers Become Thinned. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. Doran, Glen H., Ed. 2002 Windover: Multidisciplinary Investigations of an Early Archaic Florida Cemetery. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. 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. D. Webb, pp. 403-435. Springer, The Netherlands. 2006b Paleoindian Land Use. In First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Edited by S. D. Webb, pp. 525-544. Springer, The Netherlands. 2006c 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. D. Webb, pp. 103-155. Springer, The Netherlands. Page 2923 of 3023 6-3 P16006 Dunbar, James S. and S. David Webb 1996 Bone and Ivory Tools from Submerged Paleoindian Sites in Florida. In The Paleoindian and Early Archaic Southeast. Edited by D. G. Anderson and K. E. Sassaman, pp. 331-353. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Farr, Grayal Earle 2006 A Reevaluation of Bullen's Typology for Preceramic Projectile Points. MA thesis, Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Faught, Michael K. 2004 The Underwater Archaeology of Paleolandscapes, Apalachee Bay, Florida. American Antiquity 69(2): 275-289. Faught, Michael K. and Joseph F. Donoghue 1997 Marine Inundated Archaeological Sites and Paleofluvial Systems: Examples from a Karst-controlled Continental Shelf Setting in Apalachee Bay, Northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Geoarchaeology 12: 417-458. 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. FDHR 2010 Letter to C. Newman, Re: Immokalee Sand Mine, June. Forstall, Richard L. 1995 Population of Counties by Decennial Census. United States Census Bureau, Population Division. www.census.gov/population/cencounts/fl190090.txt. FPS 1986 Historic/Architectural Survey of Collier County, Florida. Florida Preservation Services, St. Augustine. 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. 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. Page 2924 of 3023 6-4 P16006 Klinkenberg, Jeff 1994 Swamp Loggers. The St. Petersburg Times, September 18. Luer, George M. 1989b Further Research on the Pine Island Canal and Associated Sites, Lee County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 42(3): 241-247. 1989c Notes on the Howard Shell Mound and Calusa Island, Lee County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 42(3): 249-254. 1999 Cedar Point: A Late Archaic Through Safety Harbor-Period Occupation on Lemon Bay, Charlotte County, Florida. Maritime Archaeology of Lemon Bay. Florida Anthropological Society Publications 14: 43-61. Luer, George M. and Marion M. Almy 1987 The Laurel Mound (8SO98) and Radial Burials with Comments on the Safety Harbor Period. The Florida Anthropologist 40(4): 301-320. Marquardt, William H. 1992a Calusa Culture and Environment: What Have We Learned? In Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa. Edited by W. H. Marquardt, pp. 423-436. Monograph 1. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. 1999 Useppa Island in the Archaic and Caloosahatchee Periods. In The Archaeology of Useppa Island. Edited by W. H. Marquardt, pp. 77-98. Monograph 3. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. 2013 The Pineland Site Complex: Theoretical and Cultural Contexts. In The Archaeology of Pineland: A Coastal Southwest Florida Site Complex, A.D. 50-1710. Edited by W. H. Marquardt and K. J. Walker, pp. 1-22. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. Marquardt, William H. and Karen J. Walker 2013 The Pineland Site Complex: An Environmental and Cultural History. In The Archaeology of Pineland: A Coastal Southwest Florida Site Complex, A.D. 50-1710. Edited by W. H. Marquardt and K. J. Walker, pp. 793-920. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. McGregor, A. James 1974 A Ceramic Chronology for the Biscayne Region of Southeast Florida. MA Thesis, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton. Milanich, Jerald T. 1995 Florida Indians and the Invasion from Europe. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. 1998 Florida Indians from Ancient Times to the Present. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Mulroy, Kevin 1993 Freedom on the Border: The Seminole Maroons in Florida, the Indian Territory, Coahuila, and Texas. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock. Neill, Wilfred T. 1964 The Association of Suwannee Points and Extinct Animals in Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 17(3-4): 17-32. Page 2925 of 3023 6-5 P16006 Neill, Wilfred T. 1968 An Indian and Spanish Site on Tampa Bay, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 21(4): 106-116. New South Associates 2008 Cultural Resources Overview and Survey Strategy: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. FDHR, Tallahassee. Palov, Maria Z. 1999 Useppa's Cuban Fishing Community. In The Archaeology of Useppa Island. Edited by W.H. Marquardt, pp. 149-169. Monograph 3. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, 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. Reno, Jane Wood 1994 The Hell With Politics. Peachtree Publishers, Atlanta. Robinson, Major George D. 1979 Outlines and Other Data on West Central Florida Projectile Points. Central Gulf Coast Archaeological Society, St. Petersburg. Russo, Michael 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. SAA 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. Smith, Marvin T. 1987 Archaeology of Aboriginal Culture Change in the Interior Southeast: Depopulation during the Early Historic Period. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Stanford, Dennis 1991 Clovis Origins and Adaptations: An Introductory Perspective. In Clovis: Origins and Adaptations. Edited by R. Bonnichsen and K. L. Turnmire, pp. 1-14. Center for the Study of the First Americans, Corvallis. State of Florida, Department of Environmental Protection 1872 Field Notes. Volume 220. W. L. Apthorp. 1873a Field Notes. Volume 222. M. H. Clay. Page 2926 of 3023 6-6 P16006 State of Florida, Department of Environmental Protection 1873b Plat. Township 46 South, Range 29 East. J. P. Apthorp and M. H. Clay. n.d. Tract Book. Volume 25. Tebeau, Charlton W. 1980 A History of Florida. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables. 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. US Fish and Wildlife n.d. History. Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Naples. USDA 1954 Soil Survey Detailed Reconnaissance Collier County, Florida. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 1998 Soil Survey of Collier County Area, Florida. United States Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2012 Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Florida - June 2012. USDA, NRCS, Fort Worth. Walker, Karen J. 1992 The Zooarchaeology of Charlotte Harbor's Prehistoric Maritime Adaptations: Spatial and Temporal Perspectives. In Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa. Edited by W. H. Marquardt, pp. 265-366. Monograph 1. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. 2013 The Pineland Site Complex: Environmental Contexts. In The Archaeology of Pineland: A Coastal Southwest Florida Site Complex, A.D. 50-1710. Edited by W. H. Marquardt and K. J. Walker, pp. 23-52. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. Walker, Karen J., Robin L. Denson, and Gary D. Ellis 1996 Archaeological Survey of the Hickey Creek Mitigation Park. On file, Lee County Division of Public Parks and Recreation Services, Fort Myers. Waller, Ben I. 1970 Some Occurrences of Paleo-Indian Projectile Points in Florida Waters. The Florida Anthropologist 23(4): 129-134. 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 K. E. Sassaman and D. G. Anderson, pp. 28-38. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Page 2927 of 3023 6-7 P16006 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. Webb, S. David, Ed. 2006 First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Springer, The Netherlands. West, Patsy 1990 History of Post-War Seminole Settlement in the Big Cypress. The Florida Anthropologist 43(4): 240-248. White, William A. 1970 Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula. Geological Bulletin 51. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Geology, Tallahassee. Page 2928 of 3023 APPENDIX A: Survey Correspondence Page 2929 of 3023 FroRroa DppanrMENT o RICK SCOTT Governor Krista Sabin, Project Manager Mining Team Jacksonville USACE PO Box 4970 Jacksonville , FL 32232-0019 RE: DHR Project File No.: 2016-00148, Received by DHR: January 12,2016 / County: Collier Application No.: SAJ-2009-03476 (SP-EMH) / Project: Immokalee Sand Mine, new 10 year permit Applicant: CEMEX Construction Materials Florida, LLC Dear Ms. Sabin: The Florida State Historic Preservation Offrcer reviewed the referenced project for possible effects on historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, on the National Register of Historic Places. The review was conducted in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations in 36 CFR Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties. In response to a previous application to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for this development, our ofrrce requested to FDEP that a professional cultural resource asseisment survey be conducted (c.f. DltRNo.2010-A2496, June 3,2010). However, as of the date of this letter, no hard copy of a survey report associated with this project has been received by the Division of Historical Resources Compliance and Review Section. Therefore, our request for a professional survey prior to any ground disturbing activities still stands. The resultant survey report should conform to the provisions of Chapter 7A-46, Florida Administrative Code, and should be sent to our office upon completion. The report will help us complete the Section 106 review process and provide concuffence on federal determinations of effect, and recommend any necessary avoidance or mitigation measures. The Division of Historical Resources cannot endorse specific archaeological or historic preservation consultants. However, the American Cultural Resources Association maintains a listing of professional consultants at www.acra-crrn.org, and the Register of Professional Archaeologists maintains a membership directory at ***rpon"t.org. ih" liuision encourages checking references and recent work history' If you have any questions, please contact Florence McCullough, Historic Sites Specialist, by email at Florence.McCuliough@dos.myflorida.com,or by telephone at850.245.6333 ot 800'847.7278. Sincerely Ti lnterim , Division of Historical Resources and Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Enclosure KEN DETZNER Secretary of State January 15,2016 Division of Historical Resources R.A. Gray Building . 5oo south Bronough streetr Tallahassee, Florida 32399 aSO.245.63OO' 85O.245.6436 (Fax) FlHeritage'com - , tubr.rurdtasBrJ&W-' Fet*trcgs;'@- Page 2930 of 3023 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE Dawn K. Roberts Interim Secretary of State DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES Mr. Lou Neuman Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Mining and Minerals Regulation 2051 East Paul Dirac Drive Tallahassee, Florida 323 10-37 60 Re: DHR No.: 2010-02496/ Received by DHR: June 3, 2010 Application No.: N/A Applicant: Cemex Construction Materials Florida, LLC Project: Immokalee Sand Mine County: Collier June 3,2010 /r, u ru u' .fur u ": Pery *'l Dear Mr. Neuman: Our office received and reviewed the referenced project in accordance with Chapters 267 and 373, Florida Statutes, Florida's Coastal Management Program, and implementing state regulations, for possible impact to historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places, or otherwise of historical, architectural or archaeological value. The State Historic Preservation Officer is to advise and assist state and federal agencies when identifying historic properties, assessing effects upon them, and considering alternatives to avoid or minimize adverse effects. The project area has not been subjected to a systematic professional archaeological or historical investigation and contains environmental conditions consistent with those found at other archaeological sites in Collier County. For these reasons, it is the recommendation of this agency that aprofessional perform a cultural resource reconnaissance survey ofthe property, including judgmental subsurface testing, in order to assess the probability of the presence of historic properties. The purpose of this survey will be to locate and assess any cultural resources that may be present. The resultant survey report must conform to the specification set forth in Chapter 1A- 46, Florida Administrative Code, and be forwarded to this agency in order to complete the reviewing process for this proposed project and its impacts. The results of the analysis will determine if significant cultural resources would be disturbed by this development. In addition, if significant remains are located, the data described in the report and the consultant's conclusions'will assist this office in determining measures that must be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse impacts to archaeological sites and historical properties listed, or eligible for listing in the NRHP, or otherwise significant. 500 S. Bronough Street . Tallahassee,FL32399-0250 . http://www.flheritage.com tr Directoy's Office 0 Archaeological Research r' Historic Preservation 850.245.6300 . FAX 245.6436 850.245.6444'FAX:245.6452 850.245.6333 'FAX:245.6437 Page 2931 of 3023 APPENDIX B: Survey Log Page 2932 of 3023 3DJH (QW ' )06) RQO\BBBBBBBBBB 6XUYH\ /RJ 6KHHW 6XUYH\ )06) RQO\ BBBBBBBBB )ORULGD 0DVWHU 6LWH )LOH 9HUVLRQ &RQVXOW *XLGH WR WKH 6XUYH\ /RJ 6KHHW IRU GHWDLOHG LQVWUXFWLRQV ,GHQWLILFDWLRQ DQG %LEOLRJUDSKLF ,QIRUPDWLRQ 6XUYH\ 3URMHFW QDPH DQG SURMHFW SKDVH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 5HSRUW 7LWOH H[DFWO\ DV RQ WLWOH SDJH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 5HSRUW $XWKRUV DV RQ WLWOH SDJH ODVW QDPHV ILUVW . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 3XEOLFDWLRQ 'DWH \HDU BBBBBBBBBB 7RWDO 1XPEHU RI 3DJHV LQ 5HSRUW FRXQW WH[W ILJXUHV WDEOHV QRW VLWH IRUPV BBBBBBBBBBB 3XEOLFDWLRQ ,QIRUPDWLRQ *LYH VHULHV QXPEHU LQ VHULHV SXEOLVKHU DQG FLW\. )RU DUWLFOH RU FKDSWHU FLWH SDJH QXPEHUV. 8VH WKH VW\OH RI $PHULFDQ $QWLTXLW\. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 6XSHUYLVRUV RI )LHOGZRUN HYHQ LI VDPH DV DXWKRU 1DPHV BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB $IILOLDWLRQ RI )LHOGZRUNHUV 2UJDQL]DWLRQ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB &LW\ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB .H\ :RUGV3KUDVHV 'RQuW XVH FRXQW\ QDPH RU FRPPRQ ZRUGV OLNH DUFKDHRORJ\ VWUXFWXUH VXUYH\ DUFKLWHFWXUH HWF . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB .BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB .BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB .BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB .BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 6XUYH\ 6SRQVRUV FRUSRUDWLRQ JRYHUQPHQW XQLW RUJDQL]DWLRQ RU SHUVRQ GLUHFWO\ IXQGLQJ ILHOGZRUN 1DPH. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 2UJDQL]DWLRQ. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB $GGUHVV3KRQH(PDLO. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 5HFRUGHU RI /RJ 6KHHW BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 'DWH /RJ 6KHHW &RPSOHWHG BBBBBBBBBBB ,V WKLV VXUYH\ RU SURMHFW D FRQWLQXDWLRQ RI D SUHYLRXV SURMHFW" T 1R T <HV 3UHYLRXV VXUYH\ V )06) RQO\ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 0DSSLQJ &RXQWLHV /LVW HDFK RQH LQ ZKLFK ILHOG VXUYH\ ZDV GRQH DWWDFK DGGLWLRQDO VKHHW LI QHFHVVDU\ . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB . BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 86*6 0DS 1DPHV<HDU RI /DWHVW 5HYLVLRQ DWWDFK DGGLWLRQDO VKHHW LI QHFHVVDU\ . 1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB <HDUBBBBB . 1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB <HDUBBBBB . 1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB <HDUBBBBB . 1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB <HDUBBBBB . 1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB <HDUBBBBB . 1DPH BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB <HDUBBBBB 'HVFULSWLRQ RI 6XUYH\ $UHD 'DWHV IRU )LHOGZRUN 6WDUW BBBBBBBBB (QG BBBBBBBBB 7RWDO $UHD 6XUYH\HG ILOO LQ RQH BBBBBBKHFWDUHV BBBBBBDFUHV 1XPEHU RI 'LVWLQFW 7UDFWV RU $UHDV 6XUYH\HG BBBBBBBBB ,I &RUULGRU ILOO LQ RQH IRU HDFK :LGWK BBBBBBPHWHUV BBBBBBIHHW /HQJWK BBBBBBNLORPHWHUV BBBBBBPLOHV +5(5 )ORULGD 0DVWHU 6LWH )LOH 'LYLVLRQ RI +LVWRULFDO 5HVRXUFHV *UD\ %XLOGLQJ 6RXWK %URQRXJK 6WUHHW 7DOODKDVVHH )ORULGD 3KRQH )$; (PDLO 6LWH)LOH#GRV.VWDWH.IO.XV CRAS Immokalee Sand Mine, Colier Co., Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment Survey, Immokalee Sand Mine Property, Collier County, Florida ACI 2016 47 P16006, ACI, Sarasota. Almy, Marion M. Archaeological Consultants Inc Sarasota Cemex Construction Materials Florida, LLC 11430 Camp Mine Road Brooksville, Fl 34601 Lee Hutchinson 3-7-2016 Collier FELDA 1973 IMMOKALEE 1973 2-16-2016 3-4-2016 900 13 Page 2933 of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wVFUHHQ T SRVWKROH WHVWV T PDJQHWRPHWHU T VKRYHO WHVWw VFUHHQ T DXJHU WHVWV T VLGH VFDQ VRQDU T VKRYHO WHVW w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uV ZLWK 6LWH )LOH 8SGDWH )RUPV /LVW VLWH uV ZLWKRXW vw. $WWDFK DGGLWLRQDO SDJHV LI QHFHVVDU\. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB 1HZO\ 5HFRUGHG 6LWH uV $UH DOO RULJLQDOV DQG QRW XSGDWHV" /LVW VLWH uV ZLWKRXW vw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background research, surface reconnaissance, systematic subsurface testing @ 25, 50, and 100 m intervals and judgmentally(N=159); 50 cm diameter, 1 m deep, 6.5 mm mesh screen; 00 NA NA Page 2934 of 3023 Immokalee Sand Mine Section 6 and 7 of Township 46 South, Range 29 East USGS Felda and Immokalee Collier County Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed ¹ 0 0.25 0.5Miles 00.51Kilometers Page 2935 of 3023 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE FIGURES Page 2936 of 3023 HENDRY COUNTY COLLIER COUNTYLEE COUNTYL a k e T r a f f o r d I M M O K A L E E I M M O K A L E E IMMOKALEE SAND MINE STATE HWY 29STATE H W Y 8 2 COUNTY HWY 846COUNTY HWY 858EVERGLADES BLVD NCOUNTY HWY 850 S T A T E H W Y 2 9 A STATE HWY 29COUNTY HWY 846 Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Marine & Environmental Consulting 3484 Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104-3732 Email: tuna@turrell-associates.com Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239) 643-6632 IMMOKALEE SAND MINE LOCATION MAP FIGURE 1 DRAWN BY: CREATED: JOB NO.: REVISION: SHEET: SECTION- TOWNSHIP- RANGE-6&7 46S 29E RMJ 02-24-20 0823 N/A N/A N/A P:\0823 Immokalee Rd Sand Pit North \GIS\Location.mxd FILE PATH: SCALE:1:117,768.71 . 0 1 2 30.5 Mi Page 2937 of 3023 STATE R O A D 8 2 HENDRY COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY 618 740 211 211 640 740 643 211 SW-1 513 740 212 213 212 213 814 LIMITS OF FLUCCS MAPPING 643 211 221 SW-1 513 740 740 740 211 211 211 211162SW-3 534 SW-2 534 SECTION LINE (TYP) 7401 7401 P:\0823 Immokalee Rd Sand Pit\Drawings\DRAWING_SET_18_STATE\SET_18-STATE-JAN2025.dwg REVISION: CREATED: DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: TAB NAME: SCALE: SHEET: SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE- DESIGNED: Marine & Environmental ConsultingTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104-3732 Phone: (239) 643-0166Email: tuna@turrell-associates.com Fax: (239) 643-6632 TH RMJ 01-28-25 0823 N/A N/A N/A 1 OF 1 1"=1200' 6/7 46 S 29 E SITE PLAN IMMOKALEE SAND MINE EXISTING FLUCCS AND WETLANDS FIGURE 2 N E S W 0 600 1200 2400 SCALE IN FEET WETLANDS: 14.3 ACRES OFFSITE WETLANDS SW-1 513 PREVIOUSLY PERMITTED PROPERTY BOUNDARY 211 740 513EXPANSION AREA 162 Page 2938 of 3023 P:\0823 Immokalee Rd Sand Pit\Drawings\DRAWING_SET_18_STATE\SET_18-STATE-JAN2025.dwg REVISION: CREATED: DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: TAB NAME: SCALE: SHEET: SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE- DESIGNED: Marine & Environmental ConsultingTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104-3732 Phone: (239) 643-0166Email: tuna@turrell-associates.com Fax: (239) 643-6632 TH RMJ 01-28-25 0823 N/A N/A N/A 1 OF 1 1"=1200' 6/7 46 S 29 E SITE PLAN IMMOKALEE SAND MINE FIGURE 2A N E S W 0 400 800 1600 SCALE IN FEET WETLANDS: 6.6 ACRES 740 7401 640 211 EXISTING EXPANSIONS FLUCCS AND WETLANDS 211 211 211 618 740 513 740513 513 513 513 7401 7401 513 7401 PREVIOUSLY PERMITTED PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY Page 2939 of 3023 36.1 0 37.2 0 38.5 0 39.6 0 38.4 0 37.2 0 35.8 0 36. 8 0 37.6 0 38.2 0 37.7 0 37.1 0 38.6 0 38.7 0 37.2 0 39.4 0 39.2 0 38. 2 0 39.9 0 38.9 0 38.5 0 38. 4 0 38.4 0 38.9 0 39.3 0 38.6 0 36.6 0 37.6 0 37.6 0 37.4 0 37.3 0 35.6 0 35.6 0 36. 3 0 36.3 0 36.6 0 36.4 0 36.4 0 37.2 0 37.9 0 37.1 0 36.7 0 36.2 0 36.8 0 36.4 0 35.9 0 35.5 0 35. 8 0 35.7 0 39.1 0 39.0 0 39.4 0 38. 3 0 39.5 0 38.9 0 38.9 0 38.9 0 38.2 0 39.4 0 39.5 0 39.8 0 39.9 0 39. 9 0 39.5 0 39.5 0 39.9 0 40.1 0 40.4 0 40. 6 0 40. 8 0 40.8 0 41.2 0 40.9 0 40. 4 0 40.9 0 41.8 0 41.8 0 41.5 0 41. 2 0 41. 7 0 41.9 0 41.0 0 41.8 0 41.0 0 41.4 041.3 041.3 0 41.7 0 41.0 0 41.8 0 40.9 0 40.9 0 41.2 0 40. 8 0 41. 2 0 40.9 0 40.9 0 41. 0 0 41.4 0 41.3 0 40. 9 0 40.9 0 41.3 0 35.8 0 39.6 0 39.5 0 36.8 0 37.1 0 36.7 0 40.1 0 39.9 0 39.5 0 39.2 0 38.2 0 38. 9 0 40.8 0 38.7 0 40. 8 0 38. 2 0 39. 4 0 40. 8 0 39. 4 0 39. 4 0 41. 0 0 41.3 0 40.9 0 39.8 0 39.8 0 40.1 0 39.5 0 40.1 0 40. 9 0 40. 4 0 40.4 0 41.0 0 42.5 0 41.1 0 40.4 0 41.0 0 40. 9 0 40. 6 0 40.5 0 40.4 0 40. 8 0 40. 1 045. 7 0 46.9 0 40.5 0 38.7 0 38.7 0 38.9 0 39.5 0 39.5 0 39.9 0 39.8 0 39. 5 0 39.5 0 39.4 0 41.4 0 41.4 0 41.4 0 41.5 0 41.6 0 41.7 0 41.4 0 41.9 0 41.4 0 41.6 0 42.2 0 41. 7 0 42. 4 0 41.7 0 41. 9 0 41.1 0 41. 2 0 41.3 0 41.2 0 41.0 0 41. 1 0 40. 7 0 40.5 0 40.5 0 39.8 0 40.2 0 40.1 0 40.3 0 38.9 0 39.2 0 39.6 0 39.6 0 39.9 040. 3 040. 5 0 40. 4 0 41.1 0 41.3 0 41.2 0 40.9 0 40.4 0 40.1 0 40. 1 0 39. 9 0 39. 9 0 40. 6 0 40.5 0 40.7 0 39.7 0 39.9 0 39.8 0 39.8 0 40.1 0 40.1 0 40.1 0 40.1 0 39.5 0 40.1 0 39.3 0 39. 5 0 39. 4 0 39.1 0 37.4 0 37.4 0 37.3 037.7 037.6 0 37. 8 0 37.6 0 37.9 0 37.9 0 37.1 0 37.5 0 38.2 0 37.8 0 38.2 0 37. 9 0 39.4 0 39.5 0 39.4 0 40.1 0 41.0 0 40.9 0 39. 5 0 39.5 0 39.3 0 41.1 0 41.9 0 41.9 0 41.4 0 41.4 0 41.1 0 41.0 0 41.1 0 40.9 0 40.2 0 40.8 0 39. 7 0 37. 4 0 40.4 0 40.1 0 40.9 0 39. 0 0 39.0 0 38.4 0 38.7 0 38.8 0 38.4 0 38.1 0 37.7 0 38.1 0 38.5 0 39.6 0 40.4 0 39.9 0 39.0 0 38.9 0 39.0 0 39.0 0 38.3 0 38.7 0 38. 5 0 38.6 0 37.6 0 37. 6 0 38.6 0 38.3 0 39.0 0 39.4 0 38.3 0 38.4 0 36. 2 0 38. 6 0 39. 0 0 38.8 0 37.4 0 39. 0 0 38. 9 0 37. 9 0 37. 8 0 38.2 0 36.9 0 37.1 0 37.1 0 37.0 0 37.7 0 37. 0 0 37.1 0 37. 0 0 38. 3 0 38. 7 0 40.6 0 41.2 0 36.3 0 35.8 0 34.1 0 37.1 0 36.7 0 36.5 0 36.5 0 36.4 0 37.3 0 37.8 0 36. 3 0 35.8 0 35.3 0 35.1 0 36.4 0 36.4 0 36. 1 0 36. 2 0 36. 5 0 36.7 0 35.6 0 36.3 0 35. 6 0 36. 2 0 36.3 0 36.3 0 36. 2 0 36. 4 0 36.9 0 43. 0 0 43.5 0 43.7 0 41.7 0 36.7 0 36.7 0 35. 6 0 36. 7 0 38. 1 0 37. 6 0 38. 1 0 37. 7 0 38.5 0 39.1 0 39.0 0 39.0 0 40.2 0 39.0 0 39. 0 0 39. 9 0 39. 1 0 38. 1 0 38. 5 0 38. 5 0 39. 1 0 38. 7 0 38.8 0 38. 1 0 38.1 0 37.2 0 37.0 0 36.7 0 36.8 0 37.4 0 37.1 0 36.3 0 35.8 0 34. 4 0 34.7 0 31.6 0 33. 4 0 41.8 0 42.3 0 34.3 0 34.6 0 35.9 0 36.6 0 42.5 0 43.1 0 38.9 0 35. 1 0 W/S W/S W/S W/S W/S W/S W/S W/S W/S W/S W/S W/S W/S N E S W 0 500 1000 2000 SCALE IN FEET WELL LOCATIONS OUTFALL LOCATIONS P:\0823 Immokalee Rd Sand Pit\Drawings\DRAWING_SET_18_STATE\SPECIES_SOILS_TOPO_HISTO.dwg REVISION: CREATED: DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: TAB NAME: SCALE: SHEET: SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE- DESIGNED: Marine & Environmental ConsultingTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104-3732Phone: (239) 643-0166Email: tuna@turrell-associates.com Fax: (239) 643-6632 TH RMJ 07-31-15 0823 N/A N/A N/A AS SHOWN 6/7 46 S 29 E TOPOIMMOKALEE SAND MINE TOPOGRAPHICAL DATA WITH OUTFALLS FIGURE 3 Page 2940 of 3023 7 COLLIER COUNTY HENDRY COUNTY STATE R O A D 8 2 8 22 7 7 16 1722 31 22 7 20 22 1617 27 22 N E S W 0 600 1200 2400 SCALE IN FEET 27 22 2220 22 22 16 27 7 22 15 27 22 37 16 20 20 22 27 2 2P:\0823 Immokalee Rd Sand Pit\Drawings\DRAWING_SET_18_STATE\SPECIES_SOILS_TOPO_HISTO-FEB2020.dwg22 20 PROPERTY BOUNDARY NRCS SOILS DELINEATION & SYMBOL CODES7 HILOLO, JUPITER & MARGATE FINE SANDS HOLOPAW FINE SAND IMMOKALEE FINE SAND BASINGER FINE SAND MYAKKA FINE SAND OLDSMAR FINE SAND FT. DRUM & MALABAR, HIGH FINE SANDS CHOBEE, WINDER & GATOR SOILS, DEPRESSIONAL SOIL NAMESCODE TUSCAWILLA FINE SAND POMELLO FINE SAND HYDRIC YES YES NO YES NO NO NO YES NO NO IMMOKALEE - BASINGER - MYAKKA ASSOCIATION NO *OBTAINED FROM USDA NRCS HENDRY COUNTY SOIL SURVEY OF 1990. ALL OTHER DATA OBTAINED FROM USDA NRCS COLLIER COUNTY SOIL SURVEY OF 1990. 7 REVISION: CREATED: DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: TAB NAME: SCALE: SHEET: SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE- DESIGNED: Marine & Environmental ConsultingTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104-3732 Phone: (239) 643-0166Email: tuna@turrell-associates.com Fax: (239) 643-6632 TH RMJ 08-18-21 0823 N/A N/A N/A AS SHOWN 6/7 46 S 29 E TOPOIMMOKALEE SAND MINE SOILS - FIGURE 4 27 31 8 17 7 16 20 22 37 15 2* EXPANSION AREA Page 2941 of 3023 STATE R O A D 8 2 HENDRY COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY PRESERVE AREA: 9.9 ACRES REVISION: CREATED: DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: TAB NAME: SCALE: SHEET: SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE- DESIGNED: Marine & Environmental ConsultingTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104-3732Phone: (239) 643-0166Email: tuna@turrell-associates.com Fax: (239) 643-6632 TH RMJ 01-28-25 0823 N/A N/A N/A 1 OF 1 1"=1000' 6/7 46 S 29 E SITE PLAN IMMOKALEE SAND MINE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN WITH FLUCCS FIGURE 5 SECTION LINE (TYP) MINE AREA: 680.3 ACRES ACCESS EASEMENT: 4.3 ACRES EDGE OF WATER HAUL ROAD OPERATIONS FACILITIES 740 643 W-1 740 N E S W 0 600 1200 2400 SCALE IN FEET P:\0823 Immokalee Rd Sand Pit\Drawings\DRAWING_SET_18_STATE\SET_18-STATE-JAN2025.dwg 5A CONCEPTUAL SITE FLUCCS 8x11 2/10/2025 740 740 COLLIER COUNTY PRESERVE 531 8145 310 8145 531 531 310 740 641 PREVIOUSLY PERMITTED PROPERTY BOUNDARY Page 2942 of 3023 STATE R O A D 8 2 HENDRY COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY N E S W 0 500 1000 2000 SCALE IN FEET P:\0823 Immokalee Rd Sand Pit\Drawings\DRAWING_SET_18_STATE\SET_18-STATE-JAN2025.dwg REVISION: CREATED: DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: TAB NAME: SCALE: SHEET: SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE- DESIGNED: Marine & Environmental ConsultingTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104-3732Phone: (239) 643-0166Email: tuna@turrell-associates.com Fax: (239) 643-6632 TH RMJ 01-28-25 0823 N/A N/A N/A 1 OF 1 1"=1000' 6/7 46 S 29 E SITE PLAN IMMOKALEE SAND MINE WETLAND IMPACTS AND RESTORATION FIGURE 6 SECTION LINE (TYP) EDGE OF WATER BERM HAUL ROAD COLLIER COUNTY PRESERVE WETLAND IMPACTS: 7.1 ACRES WETLAND IMPACT (5.6 AC.) WETLAND IMPACT (1.0 AC.) MINE AREA: 680.3 ACRES PREVIOUSLY PERMITTED PROPERTY BOUNDARY WETLAND IMPACT (0.5 AC.) Page 2943 of 3023 N E S W 0 600 1200 2400 SCALE IN FEET STATE R O A D 8 2 HENDRY COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY HENDRY COUNTY COLLIER COUNTY 643 W-1 REVISION: CREATED: DRAWN BY: JOB NO.: TAB NAME: SCALE: SHEET: SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE- DESIGNED: Marine & Environmental ConsultingTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 3584 Exchange Ave. Suite B. Naples, FL 34104-3732Phone: (239) 643-0166Email: tuna@turrell-associates.com Fax: (239) 643-6632 TH RMJ 02-10-25 0823 N/A N/A N/A 1 OF 1 1"=1200' 6/7 46 S 29 E WETLAND IMMOKALEE SAND MINE NATIVE HABITAT MAP P:\0823 Immokalee Rd Sand Pit\Drawings\DRAWING_SET_18_STATE\SET_18._nat_hab.dwg SECTION LINE (TYP) PROPOSED COUNTY NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVE FIGURE 7 5.6 AC NATIVE HABITAT TO BE IMPACTED PROPOSED COUNTY NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVE (AC):9.9 310 310 643 EXISTING NATIVE WETLAND (AC):7.4 310 CREATED UPLAND (AC):2.5 NOTE ON ACREAGES: ORIGINAL APPROVAL IDENTIFIED 13.3 AC OF EXISTING NATIVE HABITAT. LDC REQUIRES 5.32 AC (40%) PRESERVATION. 7.4 AC (56%) OF NATIVE HABITAT IS BEING PRESERVED. Page 2944 of 3023 HENDRY COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 2340 • 640 SOUTH MAIN STREET • LABELLE, FLORIDA 33975 • (863) 675-5240 • FAX: (863) 674-4194 February 7, 2025 Jessica Harrelson, AICP 2600 Golden Gate Pkwy Naples, FL 34105 RE: Letter of No Objection Ms. Harrelson, Based on the information below, Hendry County Planning and Zoning has no objection to eliminating any requirement for a landscape buffer along the property’s northern property line, which abuts Hendry County. - The property in Hendry County that borders the Immokalee Sand Mine is Agriculturally zoned. - Existing native vegetation along the northern property line will be retained. - A min. 50’ setback will be provided to the excavation area. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 863-675-5241 or email ryan.alexander@hendryfla.net Sincerely, Ryan Alexander Director of Planning and Community Development Page 2945 of 3023 Page 2946 of 3023 Lamm RDWombles R D SR 29 NEdwards Grove RDSR 82Gator Slough LNSunshine RD¯ C:\Users\jharrelson\Desktop\2024-11-18-ZONING_EXHIBIT.mxd Date Saved: 11/21/2024 PROJECT: NOTES: EXHIBIT DESC: 2600 Golden Gate ParkwayNaples, FL 34105 CLIENT: LOCATION:SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2024) ZONING EXHIBITIMMOKALEE SAND MINE 3625 SR 82, IMMOKALEE CEMEX HENDRY COUNTY Legend IMMOKALEE SAND MINE: +/-896.7 AC ZONING A-MHO-RLSAO RLSAO DESIGNATION WRA Page 2947 of 3023 Page 2948 of 3023 Page 2949 of 3023 Page 2950 of 3023 Page 2951 of 3023 Page 2952 of 3023 Page 2953 of 3023 Page 2954 of 3023 Page 2955 of 3023 Page 2956 of 3023 Page 2957 of 3023 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING PETITIONS: CU-PL20240012171 and VA-PL20240012172 – IMMOKALEE SAND MINE A neighborhood information meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, August 20, 2025, beginning at 5:30 pm, to discuss the referenced zoning petitions. The meeting will be held at the Immokalee Community Park, located at 321 1st Street, Immokalee, Florida, 34142. The purpose and intent of this Neighborhood Information Meeting is to provide the public with notice of the impending zoning applications and to foster communication between the applicant and the public. The expectation is that all attendees will conduct themselves in such a manner that their presence will not interfere with the orderly progress of the meeting. The Applicant, Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP, has submitted formal applications to Collier County seeking approval of a Conditional Use (CU) in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, to allow for a ±91-acre expansion to the existing commercial excavation mine. The Applicant is also seeking approval of a Variance (VA) to eliminate certain landscape buffer requirements. The project involves two (2) parcels, collectively consisting of 896.7 acres, located in Immokalee within portions of Sections 6 and 7, Township 46 South and Range 29 East, (the “property”) and more specifically, at 3625 SR 82. If you have questions or would like to register to participate in the meeting remotely, please contact the individual below. Jessica Harrelson, AICP Peninsula Engineering Phone: 239.403.6751 Email: jharrelson@pen-eng.com Please note, remote participation is provided as a courtesy. The applicant and Peninsula Engineering are not responsible for any technical issues. Project information can be found on our website: www.pen-eng.com/planning-projects or by using the QR code below: Page 2958 of 3023 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 LOCATION MAP Page 2959 of 3023 1 NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME6 FOLIO BARRON COLLIER PARTNERSHIP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 00063360004 BARRON COLLIER PARTNERSHIP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 00063480007 BARRON COLLIER P'SHIP LLLP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY # 200 NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 00063320002 BROWN, DOUGLAS G PO BOX 100 FORT MYERS, FL 33902---0 00063400100 CCW82 LLC 2150 LOGAN BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34119---1411 00063560008 CCW82 LLC 2150 LOGAN BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34119---1411 00063880005 CCW82 LLC 2170 LOGAN BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34119---0 00063440005 CCW82 LLC 2170 LOGAN BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34119---0 00063520006 CCW82 LLC 2170 LOGAN BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34119---1411 00063840003 CCW82 LLC 2170 LOGAN BLVD N NAPLES, FL 34119---1411 00064280109 E & B MILLER FLORIDA FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ET AL PO BOX 728 LABELLE, FL 33975---728 00063720000 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT PROPERTY TAX DEPARTMENT 700 UNIVERSE BLVD, PSX/JB JUNO BEACH, FL 33408---0 00050560008 TIITFL/DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 801 NORTH BROADWAY AVE ATTN: GREGG BODHE TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399---3000 00063570001 TURNER GROVES CITRUS LTD PRTNR ATTN: RICH CHOMA CONSOLIDATED CITRUS LTD PRTNR 3602 COLONIAL CT FORT MYERS, FL 33913---0 00050560105 TURNER GROVES CITRUS LTD PRTNR ATTN: RICH CHOMA CONSOLIDATED CITRUS LTD PRTNR 3602 COLONIAL CT FORT MYERS, FL 33913---6636 00050040007 HENDRY COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING ATTN: RYAN ALEXANDER PO BOX 2340 LABELLE, FL 33975 LEE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPME ATTN: MIKKI ROZDOLSKI 1500 MONROE STREET FORT MYERS, FL 33901 Notice: 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: PL20240012171 | Buffer: 1000' | Date: 7/7/2025 | Site Location: 0063360004, 0063480007 Copy of POList_1000 Page 2960 of 3023 From:LauraDeJohnVEN To:Jessica Harrelson Subject:RE: Immokalee Sand Mine Date:Thursday, July 10, 2025 3:26:57 PM Attachments:CountyLogo-FullColor_948165c4-9665-41b4-9162-fbb16abff557.png Facebook_0522f546-5e75-4698-95f9-f15590a3defe.png Instagram_a8da4774-4b5b-4ad1-8d23-20e69b3b605d.png X-Twitter_8d678efc-bd14-44ce-97cf-7fbab1003b00.png Youtube_0078f7f1-7789-4afd-a015-50689fe1f99b.png 311IconforSignature_655c7bb5-b2bb-49a0-9737-5ae8a4da3ba6.png Hi Jessica, I looked these over, and they look good to go. Thanks, Laura Laura DeJohn Planner, Sr. Development Review Office:(239)252-5587 Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov From: Jessica Harrelson <jharrelson@pen-eng.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2025 9:27 AM To: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Immokalee Sand Mine 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. Hi Laura, Attached are the draft ad and mailed notice for your review. Thank you. Jessica Harrelson, AICP Planning Manager PENINSULA ENGINEERING Direct: 239.403.6751 www.pen-eng.com Only current, signed, and sealed plans shall be considered valid construction documents. Because of the constantly changing nature of construction documents, it is the recipient’s responsibility to request the latest documents from Peninsula Engineering for their particular task. 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. [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Page 2961 of 3023 Page 2962 of 3023 Page 2963 of 3023 Page 2964 of 3023 Page 2965 of 3023 Page 2966 of 3023 Page 2967 of 3023 c`‘ 031T COURT ter, o Ao Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller - Crystal K. Kinzel 6 Collier County, Florida x 3315 Tamiami Trail East, Ste. 102 - Naples, FL 34112-5324 Phone: (239) 252-2646 4. Publication Confirmation COLLIER COUNTY STATE OF FLORIDA The attached copy of advertisement, 2/24/26 BCC-Immokalee Sand Mine (CU) & (VA) PL20240012171 &PL20240012172) was published on the publicly accessible website https://notices.collierclerk.com as designated by Collier County, Florida on 02/04/2026. THIS IS NOT AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION. Page 2968 of 3023 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) at 9:00 A.M. on February 24, 2026, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room,third floor,Collier Government Center,3299 Tamiami Trail East,Naples,FL to consider: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2010-224, TO AMEND AND EXPAND A CONDITIONAL USE FOR EARTHMINING WITH EXCAVATION, ON PROPERTY ZONED RURAL AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT (A) WITH A MOBILE HOME OVERLAY WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY (A- MHO-RLSAO), PURSUANT TO SUBSECTIONS 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 AND 4.08.05 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, ON 896.7±ACRES, TO EXPAND THE EXCAVATION AREA BY 91 ACRES FOR A TOTAL OF 680.3± ACRES AND REMOVE THE WILDLIFE CORRIDOR,BUT TOTAL ACREAGE REMAINS AT 896.7± ACRES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 3625 SR 82,IMMOKALEE, IN SECTIONS 6 AND 7, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PL20240012171] AND A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO AN EARTHMINING OPERATION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATING TO LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AND ELIMINATING THE FENCE AND LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT FOR SCREENING AROUND OUTDOOR STORAGE AND EQUIPMENT AS REQUIRED BY LDC SECTION 4.02.12 ON APPROXIMATELY 896.71 ACRES ZONED RURAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT (A) WITH A MOBILE HOME OVERLAY (MHO), WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY (RLSAO), LOCATED AT 3625 SR 82, IMMOKALEE IN SECTIONS 6 AND 7, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PL20240012172] Page 2969 of 3023 Project Location SR82 z C N fA no a re ce c E ctY > I) co 0 OL W Q Johnson1D 14/ 0 Copies of the proposed Resolutions are on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection.All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed.Individual speakers will be limited to three(3)minutes on any item.The selection of any individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged.If recognized by the Chairman,a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted ten(10)minutes to speak on an item. Written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven(7)days prior to the public hearing.All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record. As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals who would like to participate remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/meeting entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website at www.collier.gov/Calendar-Events-directory after the agenda is posted on the County website. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the public meeting notice.Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user's risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at 252-8369 or email to Geoffrey.WilligAcollier.gov. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding,you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101,Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239)252-8380, at least two(2)days prior to the meeting.Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Page 2970 of 3023 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA DANIEL KOWAL,CHAIRMAN CRYSTAL K.KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER Page 2971 of 3023