EAC Minutes 07/02/2008 R w/LDC
July, 2 2008
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
Naples, Florida, July 2, 2008
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Environmental
Advisory Council in and for the County of Collier, having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION at
Building "F" of the Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
CHAIRMAN: William Hughes
VICE CHAIRMAN: Dr. Judith Hushon
Roger Jacobsen
David Bishof
Nick Penniman (Excused)
Michael V. Sorrell
Dr. Llew Williams (Excused)
Paul Lehmann
Noah Standridge
Quin Kurth
ALSO PRESENT: Jeff Wright, Assistant County Attorney
Summer Brown-Araque, Sr. Environmentalist Specialist
Barbara Burgeson, Principal Environmental Specialist
William Lorenz, Director, Environmental Services
Catherine Fabacher, LDC Manager
Tom Greenwood, Comprehensive Planning
I
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA
July 2, 2008
9:00 A.M.
Commission Boardroom
W. Harmon Turner Building (Building "F") - Third Floor
I. Call to Order
II. RollCall
III. Approval of Agenda
IV. Approval of May 5, 2008 and June 4, 2008 meeting minutes
V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences
VI. Land Use Petitions - None
VII. New Business
A. Shoreline Calculation
VIII. Old Business (Item A. shall be heard no later than 9:15 a.m.)
A. SSAlSRA Discussion
B. Review Revised LDC Amendments
C. EAC motions for approval and discussions - BCC action May 13, 2008
D. School Board Reviews
E. Update members on projects
IX. Subcommittee Reports
X. Staff Comments
XI. Council Member Comments
XII. Public Comments
XIII. Adjournment
**..........*..**...*.**..***...........*..........*****K_**_..._..
Council Members: Please notify Summer Araaue. Environmental Services Senior Environmental
Specialist no later than 5:00 p.m. on June 26. 2008 if vou cannot attend this meetina or if vou have
a conflict and will abstain from votina on a petition 1252-6290).
General Public: Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the
proceedings pertaining thereto; and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of proceedings is
made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
July, 2 2008
I. Call to Order
Chairman Hughes called the meeting to order at 9:02AM.
II. Roll Call
Roll call was taken and a quorum was established.
III. Approval of Agenda
Dr. Hushon moved to approve the agenda. Second by Mr. Jacobsen. Carried
unanimously 8-0.
IV. Approval of May 5, 2008 and June 4, 2008 meeting minutes
It was noted that the May meeting was held on May 7, 2008.
Mr. Jacobsen moved to approve the minutes of the May 7, 2008 meeting subject to
the following change:
US Army Corp to US Army "Corps" in the body of the minutes.
Second by Mr. Bishof. Carried unanimously 8-0.
Mr. Sorrell moved to approve the minutes of the June 4, 2008 meeting. Second by
Mr. Lehmann. Carried unanimously 8-0.
V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences
Dr. Hushon will be absent for the August and September 2008 meeting.
VI. Land Use Petitions - None
VII. New Business
A. Shoreline Calculations
Barbara Burgeson provided and update on the amendment request that is in
process in conjunction with input from a stakeholders group (representatives for
the marine industry, public, consultants, environmental advocacy groups, etc.).
The issue is utilizing shorelines located in conservation easements for boat slip
density calculations in relation to the Manatee Protection Plan. Staff has
identified the following options regarding density calculations:
· Exclude all shoreline outside any State or County conservation easement
· Include the shoreline outside County conservation easements
· Include all shorelines regardless if it is in a conservation easement
· Require a conditional use for any shoreline encumbered in conservation
easements with the requirement of pub lie access
· Require public access as an obligation of the Growth Management Plan
· Make no changes until the Manatee Protection Plan is completed
She noted that the stakeholders had various positions based on their represented
interest and although staff has no specific recommendation at this time, the
Environmental Advisory Committee could make a recommendation on an option
if they so desire.
2
July, 2 2008
Mr. Jacobsen noted that any applications within the process should be considered
"grandfathered".
A discussion ensued whether the application needed to be submitted or approved
to be "grandfathered."
Mr. Kurth stated he had a conflict of interest and would not participate in voting
Mr. Bishof stated that restricting an applicant's use of the area (conservation
easements) might cause apprehension in granting easements in the future.
Barbara Burgeson noted that Collier County conservation easements would only
be placed (required) in those areas if they are the "highest quality habitat on site."
Mr. Bishofnoted current conservation easements in xeric areas allow use of the
easement areas for calculating building density purposes. Further, boat slips
would need to be built outside the conservation areas with appropriate
environmental standards.
Speakers
Rich Yovanovich, Attorney, addressed the Council noting boat docks will be
built outside the preserve or conservation easement areas and applicants never
envisioned they would lose the easement area for boat slip density calculations.
The Manatee Protection Plan does not state that the area should not be counted in
density calculations. When density calculations are complete, the number of slips
constructed outside the easement area will be restricted by many other
environmental and engineering constraints to ensure the installations are
environmentally sound. This policy is not in any adopted County documents,
rather a "StaffInterpretation." He requests staff rescind the interpretation; further
the BCC did not approve (by 3-2 vote) an amendment request, which addressed
the interpretation. He requested the EAC provide staff direction as well.
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida noted that the issue was raised
when staff was consistently applying the Manatee Protection Plan and on April
24,2007 Commissioner Coyle directed staff to prepare an amendment to not
allow conservation easement areas to be used for boat density slip calculations.
The motion was approved unanimously and staff continued to follow the direction
of the BCC. Staff submitted the directive to the EAC as well as the Planning
Commission with recommendations for approval. It returned to the BCC and
after discussion no action was taken and was sent back to "workshops." She
requested EAC input as the issue moves forward to prevent environmental or
detrimental impacts and would submit any necessary documentation if requested.
She supports Commissioner Coyle's recommendation of not allowing the areas
within conservation easements to be counted in boat slip density calculations.
Mr. Bishof moved that the Environmental Advisory Council recommend for the
purpose of calculating shoreline length relative to the Manatee Protection Plan,
that areas placed in conservation easements be counted toward the shoreline
3
July, 2 2008
total. Second by Mr. Jacobsen. Motion carried 6 yes -1 no and 1 abstention.
Mr. Kurth abstained and Dr. Hushon voted "no."
Dr. Hushon voted no based upon concerns on mangrove impacts from boat docks
in general as the wake and various pollutants related to these facilities are
detrimental.
Chairman Hughes noted that beyond the density calculations utilizing
shorelines, the installation of boat docks are regulated with checks and balances to
ensure the upholding of environmental quality.
Break lO:58AM
Re-convened 1/: 13AM
VIII. Old Business (Item A. shall be heard no later than 9:15 a.m.)
A. SSA/SRA Discussion
This item was heard before Item VII A. Shoreline Calculations
Tom Greenwood, Comprehensive Planning presented a review of the Rural
Lands Stewardship Program and related 5 year Review currently in process via
the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee. He noted the following:
· The Committee is attempting to complete the review by the Fall of
2008, this goal is not mandatory; a schedule ofthe Review Committees
activities was submitted to the Council
· Any changes proposed by the Committee may require changes in the
Land Development Code
. There are 190,000 acres in the program
· Some areas are categorized as environmentally sensitive areas creating
"Stewardship Sending Areas" (SSA's) where landowners voluntarily
remove certain land use restrictions with credits obtained to be
transferred to "Stewardship Receiving Areas" (SRA's) for development
purposes. The credits must be used in the SRA's.
· There have been 10 SSA's approved to date.
· To date, the Town of Ave Maria is the only approved Stewardship
Receiving Area that has been developed.
· The land uses are removed ("stripped off') in layers, with a maximum
of 8 layers providing for an increasing number of credits granted after
each layer is removed.
· Should a landowner not participate in the program the underlying
zoning and land use restrictions remain in effect.
· There is a second level of "bonus credits" based on an approved and
completed restoration management plan for applicable lands.
· The agreements generated in the program are between the landowner,
Collier County and the Florida Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Affairs.
· The Program is "market driven", with no guarantee that the Stewardship
Sending Area credits will be able to be utilized.
4
July, 2 2008
· The Panther Protection Program may be incorporated into this program
at a future date.
Mr. Bishof requested clarification on the assurance that the Stewardship
Easement Agreement generated within the program is "permanent"
Tom Greenwood stated it is in a permanent status for 3 reasons:
· All 3 parties (Landowner, Collier County and the Florida Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Affairs) must agree to terminate the
easement.
· The encumbrance is shown on the County land use maps for
enforcement.
· The documents are recorded in the County Land Records.
A discussion ensued whether or not this document is truly "permanent" in relation
to legal requirements and the State of Florida Statutes.
It was noted that the program is currently working successfully and the Review
Committee is studying any changes that may be required to improve the program.
Bill Lorenz, Director, Environmental Services stated that no information to
date has been received from the Board of County Commissioners regarding the
Environmental Advisory Council's request to review certain projects within the
Rural Lands Stewardship Program. At this point, staff will provide any
information regarding SSA (Stewardship Sending Areas) applications for
comments, but the Council will not be an official step in the "review process."
Dr. Hnshon stated that is a poor decision based on the potential (fiscal and
environmental, etc.) impacts on the large-scale developments (1000 - 5000 acres).
Bill Lorenz was referring to reviews for SSA's not SRA's.
Dr. Hushon stated that the Council should review SRA's as a step in the
application process.
A discussion ensued whether the projects should be reviewed on a case-by-case
basis or an automatic review; and whether the Council has the authority to review
any projects deemed "necessary."
Summer Brown-Araque, Sr. Environmental Specialist noted that the memo
sent by the Council to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) regarding the
issue had not been placed on a BCC agenda for consideration.
Mr. Standridge noted that the Land Development Code currently requires
Council review the project that abuts either Conservation Lands or is a
Development of Regional Impact. He noted that the processing ofSSA's and
SRA's are different with the SSA's applications being voluntarily submitted by a
landowner.
Bill Lorenz requested clarification if the Council wants to review SSA's and/or
SRA's.
Chairman Hughes summarized the Council's request is to review any SSA's for
informational purposes. The Council has requested official review of SRA
applications via a memo to the BCC.
5
July, 2 2008
Jeff Wright, Assistant Connty Attorney, outlined the LDC requirements for
Council review within the Program which are SRA's in Areas of Critical State
Concern, projects adjoining land designated as Conservation Lands (Stewardship
Areas). The Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) Charter allows the EAC to
review any petition, which requires approval of the Collier County Planning
Commission (CCPC) or the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) where staff
receives a request from the Chairman of the EAC, CCPC or BCC for that petition
to be reviewed by the EAC. He noted this provision is "petition" specific on a
case-by-case basis, which may add an objectionable "hurdle" for applicants who
rely on the language in the LDC.
Dr. Hushon noted that she is under the impression that the EAC's request to the
BCC includes an LDC amendment, which could have been part ofthis years LDC
Cycle ofLDC amendments.
Speakers
Russell Priddy, Landowner, stated the request should include a Land
Development Code Change. He stated the program should identify the amount of
lands to be preserved and developed around this concept. He would not
recommend any changes in the SSA's process to incorporate EAC reviews.
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida stated an LDC amendment
should be undertaken and agrees the SSA's should remain as inexpensive and
simple a process as possible.
Mr. Jacobsen moved that the EAC would like to seek the appropriate method
for a Land Development Code amendment with an option to review Stewardship
Receiving Areas (SRA's). Second by Mr. Bishof.
Dr. Hushon stated she opposed the motion based on the "option to review" but
would support a "requirement to review."
Mr. Jacobsen amended the motion and moved that the EA C would like to seek
the appropriate method for a Land Development Code amendment to review
Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRA's). Second by Mr. Bishof.
Barbara Burgeson requested clarification if staff would require BCC pre-
approval before developing the amendment request.
Catherine Fabacher, LDC Manager stated the motion would not require a BCC
pre-approval for staff to prepare the amendment request.
Jeff Wright suggested the motion include the appropriate sections in the LDC for
the Amendment (Sections 4.8.07.F.l.g and 8.06.03.)
Mr. Jacobsen amended the motion and moved that the EA C would like to seek
the appropriate method for a Land Development Code amendment (Sections
4.8.07.F.l.g and 8.06.03) to review Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRA's.)
Second by Mr. Bishof. Carried unanimously 8-0.
6
July, 2 2008
Chairman Hughes directed staff to notify the Collier County Planning
Commission and the Board of County Commissioners of the above action.
B. Review Revised LDC Amendments
Dr. Hushon chaired this item.
Catherine Fabacher, Land Development Code Manager provided an updated
document of Land Development Code Amendment Requests containing pages
139-242. The document contained revisions based on Environmental Advisory
Council input at the June 4,2008 meeting and staffreview.
LDC PAGE: 3:14 & 3:23
LDC SECTIONS: 3.04.01 Generallv: 3.04.02 Species Specific Requirements:
3.04.03 Requirements for Protected Plants: 3.04.04 Penalties for Violation:
Resort to Other Remedies
Page 139-154 of the document
A discussion ensued on the proposed language as follows:
· Page 153,3.04.03 Requirements for Protected Plants, after the word
"encouraged" on line #7 stating that if the protected plants are on-site
they be included in the Preserve Management Plan cross referencing
Section 3.05.07.H.I or other applicable sections.
· On page 153,3.04.03, Requirements for Protected Plants, A statement
to encourage applicable conservancy groups to assist in plant relocation
(Natural Plant Society); Barbara Burgeson recommended that this not be
written into the code, however staff could obtain flyers from various
organizations to be passed on to applicants if necessary.
Mr. Sorrell moved to approve the wording change (or similar language) _
Page 153,3.04.03 Requirementsfor Protected Plants, after the word
"encouraged" on line #7 incorporating a statement if the protected plants
are on-site they be included in the Preserve Management Plan cross
referencing Section 3.05. 07.H. I (or other applicable Sections of the Land
Development Code). Second by Chairman Hughes. Carried unanimously
8-0.
Chairman Hughes moved to approve the wording change - Page 140,
Section 3.04.01.A.4 to state "Endangered, threatened or commercially
exploited plants listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services as currently contained in Chapter 5B-40.0055 of the
Florida Administrative Code as of July 2008." Second by Mr. Lehmann.
Carried unanimously 8-0.
· Page 144 3.04.02.7.e. - ramifications ofrequiring a minimum of25
acres for gopher tortoise relocation purposes, Barbara Burgeson stated
that the requirement is intended for "off-site" relocation. It was noted
7
July, 2 2008
that the wording appears within the "on-site" relocation area of the
section and may preclude "on-site" relocation in suitable areas less than
25 acres in size.
Dr. Hushon moved to incorporate language replacing Section 3.04.02. 7.e (Page
144) and state "If Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission permits
on-site relocation and the Gopher Tortoise is healthy, the County accept the
determination if consistent with the Growth Management Plan." Second by
Mr. Bishof. Carried unanimously 8-0.
Barbara Burgeson noted that the language regarding 25 acres minimum might
need to be included for "off-site" relocation purposes, as the intention ofthe
requirement was to assist in defining "suitable habitat" where applicable to the
section of the amendment request.
Catherine Fabacher requested clarification if the amendment request was
approved with those changes or just specific language changes in individual
sections of the request.
Dr. Hushon noted that the motions were for specific language changes in sections
of the amendment request and asked if the request would be revised and returned
to the EAC for review.
Barbara Burgeson stated that the motions are approving specific
recommendations for language changes and staff may or may not incorporate the
changes, however a summary sheet will be provided to further Boards indicating
EAC (and others if applicable) recommendations as well as staffs
recommendation for approval or disapproval of pro posed language.
LDC PAGE: 1:35-1:36; 3:28; 10;89-10:91; 10:96
LDC SECTIONS: 1.08.02.3.05.05.10.02.06
Page 155-161 of the document
Mr. Jacobsen moved to approve the Amendment Request (LDC PAGE: 1 :35-
1:36; 3:28; 10:89-10:91; 10:96 - LDC SECTIONS: 1.08.02,3.05.05,10.02.06).
Second by Mr. Sorrell. Carried unanimously 8-0.
LDC PAGE: 3:28.1 - 3:28.2
LDC SECTION: 3.05.07 Preservation Standards
Pages 163-170 of the document
The following items were discussed:
· Section 3.05.07B.2.vi (Page 167) - the ramifications of allowing
preserves requiring mechanical clearing to utilize off-site preservations
and the potential unnecessary reduction of on-site preserves and
possible inclusion of the language in Section 3.05.07.B.2.vii (Page 167)
for a 2:1 ratio of mitigation lands;
8
July, 2 2008
Catherine Fabacher stated this was a previous recommendation by the EAC and
staff disagreed with the requirement. She will research the reason and report back
to the Council at their next meeting.
Mr. Jacobsen expressed concern that the staff members were not present to
address those reasons.
Chairman Hughes stated that there is not adequate representation (staff) present
for the argument against the 2: I ratio recommended by the EAC. Without any
staff information regarding the item, it could not be thoroughly discussed.
· Section 3.05.07 A.I - paragraph 2, (Page 164) - providing a definition
for "highly disturbed pastures"
· Section 3.05.07.A.7 (Page 165) - ramifications of the wording "Re-
creation shall not be required for sites that were permitted to clear
vegetation and remain cleared" and whether individuals will be
encouraged to allow the land return with exotic vegetation to avoid
native vegetation requirements
Break-12:25PM
Re-convene - 1:28
· Section 3.05.07.B.2.c.iii - paragraph 2, line II (Page 169) - discussion
on the merits of revising the language to allow donated lands to be
"used as mitigation purposes for other Federal, State or County permit
or approval"
Speaker
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida stated she agreed with the
language proposed by staff in Section 3.05.07.B.2.c.iii (Page 169), however,
recommends removing Section 3.05.07.B.2.a. vi-vii (page 167 - 168). Further,
she recommends that Section 3.05.07.B.2.b.ii (page 168) include language for
"Lands that are utilized as habitat, as during all or a portion of the life cycle ofthe
food source species for listed species" or similar language. In addition, Section
3.05.07.B.2.b.iii (Page 169) incorporating language for management fees for
donated land similar to the wording for monetary payments identified in Section
3.05.07.B.2.c.ii (Page 168). The Conservancy had provided this recommendation
previously. She clarified it would apply to lands donated to Conservation Collier.
Catherine Fabacher stated that she was notified that staff disagrees with this
recommendation (management fees for donated lands).
Mr. Jacobsen stated he appreciated the staff that was present, however was
disappointed that the staff members opposed to language changes were not in
attendance to provide reasons for the opposition to the Council for consideration.
Mr. Bishofmoved that Section 3. 05. 07.B.2.c.iii 2nd paragraph -line 8 (Page
169) be revised from "Land donated to satisfY the offsite vegetation preservation
9
July, 2 2008
retention requirement must be located entirely within Collier County, and must
not be used as mitigation for any other Federal, State or County permit
approval" to "Land donated to satisfY the offsite vegetation preservation
retention requirement must be located entirely within Collier County." Second
by Mr. Jacobsen. Motion carried unanimously 8-0.
Dr. Hushon moved to revise Section 3. 05. 07.B.2. c. iii, paragraph 2 -last line
(Page 169) "conservation purposes." to "conservation purposes. 1fthe land is
donated to Conservation Collier it shall have no less than 25% managementfee
of the value of the land" or similar language asfound in Section3. 05. 07.B.2.c.ii
(Page 168). Second by Mr. Sorrell. Carried unanimously 8-0.
Dr. Hushon moved to revise Section 3. 05. 07.B.2.b.ii (page 168) to include
"Lands that are utilized as habitat during all or a portion of the life cycle of the
food source species for listed species" or similar language (in addition to the
other lands qualified in the Section). Second by Mr. Bishof. Carried
unanimously 8-0.
Mr. Jacobsen left the meeting at 2: 15pm
Mr. Bishof requested clarification if the preserves requiring mechanical clearing
to qualify for off site preservation are existing or proposed preserves.
Barbara Burgeson stated that the mechanical clearing section applies to
proposed preserves.
Mr. Bishof suggested the language in this section be clarified (3.05.07.B.2.a.vi)
Dr. Hushon moved to strike Section(s) 3. 05. 07.B.2.a. vi (page 167). Second by
Mr. Lehmann. Motion carried 6 yes -1 no. Mr. Bishofvoted no.
Mr. Bishof stated that he favored clarifying the language as opposed to striking it
entirely.
LDC PAGE: LDC 3:39
LDC SECTION: Section 3.05.07 Preservation Standards
Page 199 - 202 of the document
Dr. Hushon noted that several recommendations by the EAC were not included
in the revised amendment request with respect to the following points:
· Section 3.05.07H.I.h.ii.a) - (Page 200) addition oflanguage "and create
no adverse impacts" or similar wording in accordance with the GMP
requirements
· Section 3.05.07H.l.h.ii.b) - (Page 200) Provision of a definition of
"hydric soils"
· Section 3.05.07H.I.h.ii.c) - (Page 200) Not allowing discharges into non
hydric areas
10
July, 2 2008
· Section 3.05.07H.I.h.ii.c). iii - (Page 200 -201) Installation of control
structures with set levels to ensure non hydric soils are not inundated
with storm water
· Section 3.05.07H.I.h.ii.f) - (Page 201) Requirement for restoration if the
preserve is damaged
· Section 3.05.07H.l.h.ii.g) - (Page 201) First sentence should be
amended to reference "Treated storm water"
Catherine Fabacher noted that some previous requested changes were included
in the revisions however staff disagreed with some recommendations.
· Section 3.05.07H.l.h.ii.e) - (Page 201) Recommending stormwater
facilities should not be allowed within the preserve, clarification that
these areas should not be included in the preserve area.
Speaker
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida re-iterated the position that
non-hydric soils should not receive stormwater as well as additional inclusion of
the GMP language regarding "no adverse impacts."
Chairman Hughes stated the amendment request should be revised and returned
to the Environmental Advisory Council for review.
LDC PAGE: 10:6 - 10:14
LDC SECTION: 10.02.02 Submittal Requirements for All Applicants.
Pages 217-233 of the document
Catherine Fabacher reviewed the status of the requested EAC changes.
Jeff Wright, Assistant County Attorney recommended for Section
I 0.02.02.A.2.c.iii (Page 221) - the inclusion of language for the reference to the
Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) stating "as
may be amended from time to time" or similar language.
LDC PAGE: 10:104 -10:109
LDC SECTION: 10.02.06. Submittal Requirements for Permits
Pages 235-242 of the document.
Catherine Fabacher reviewed the status of the requested EAC changes.
LDC PAGE: 3:38 - 3:39
LDC SECTION: 3.05.07 Preservation Standards
Pages 191- 194 of the document
Speaker
11
July, 2 2008
Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida expressed concern that the
language in the above section is not compatible with the stormwater in Preserves
Requirements (Section 3.05.07. H.l.h.f) - (Page 201) and a cross reference to the
section should be provided.
Mr. Bishofnoted that in Section 3.05.07.H.l.g.vii - (Page 194) piesometers are
currently not allowed uses in preserves and references should be made to
"treated" stormwater throughout the section.
He also expressed concern that the monitoring requirements and subsequent
reporting may not accomplish the intended goal of maintaining on-going water
quality due to the possible lack of analysis of the information. Once the system
and associated development is constructed, if the water quality diminishes, it
would be difficult to institute changes in the system (enlarging the Stormwater
Lake, etc.). In addition, there is no long-term pre-development monitoring data
which would assist in analyzing the "adverse impacts" that may occur in the
future.
The Council noted that the intent is to collect the data and gain knowledge
whether or not approved projects are impacting existing water quality. It was
noted there is no monitoring of the preserves required at this point.
Nicole Ryan stated that the monitoring is important to determine what actually
happens once the project is constructed. She recommended ensuring the
monitoring procedure and subsequent data derived is accurate and leads to the
development of the necessary parameters to measure water quality.
Chairman Hughes stated the amendment request be submitted back to the EAC
for review.
Catherine Fabacher clarified that the following amendment requests are
returning for review.
LDCPAGE: 3:14&3:23
LDC SECTIONS: 3.04.01 Generallv: 3.04.02 Species Specific Requirements:
3.04.03 Requirements for Protected Plants: 3.04.04 Penalties for Violation:
Resort to Other Remedies
Page 139 - 154 of the document
LDC PAGE: 3:28.1 - 3:28.2
LDC SECTION: 3.05.07 Preservation Standards
Page 163 - 170 of the document
LDC PAGE: 3:38 - 3:39
LDC SECTION: 3.05.07 Preservation Standards
Page 191-194 of the document
12
July, 2 2008
LDC PAGE: LDC 3:39
LDC SECTION: Section 3.05.07 Preservation Standards
Page 199 - 202 of the document
LDC PAGE: 10:6 -10:14
LDC SECTION: Submittal Requirements for All Applicants.
Pages 217-223 ofthe document
C. EAC motions for approval and discussions - BCC actions May 13, 2008
Jeff Wright, Assistant County Attorney acknowledged that he has received
notification via e-mail of Environmental Advisory Council member Roger
Jacobsen's resignation.
Jeff Wright provided an overview of Environmental Advisory Council Powers
and Duties and submitted a copy of their Charter to the Council. He reviewed
Sections 8.06.01 - 8.06.03 and read Section 8.06.03, Powers and Duties into the
record. He noted EAC purview is environmental based and it can be difficult to
determine where "planning issues" end and "environmental concerns" begin. He
recommended that when the issue arises, members refer to their Powers and
Duties and overall Charter for direction.
Further, with a denial, specify the reason for denials and attempt to identify
sections within the Land Development Code or Growth Management Plan
applicable to the denial. If this is not possible, outline specific environmental
concerns for the record to ensure the decision will not be "called into question."
Dr. Hushon expressed a concern, specifically a member of the Collier County
Planning Commission (CCPC) indicated that concerns or conditions of approvals
(or the reason for conditions) generated by the EAC are not forwarded to the
CCPC via the Staff Report, minutes, etc.
Chairman Hughes requested that Staff begin submitting CCPC and Board of
County Commissioners' Staff Reports to EAC members for review to ensure
EAC decisions and concerns are incorporated into the report.
Summer Brown-Araque, Sr. Environmental Specialist noted that that process
will be initiated.
D. School Board Reviews
Barbara Burgeson stated it was an administrative decision that if a School Board
project required an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the EIS would not
require submission to the Environmental Advisory Council for review.
Chairman Hughes requested Jeff Wright, Assistant County Attorney research
this decision and report back to the EAC.
E. Update Members on projects
13
July, 2 2008
Barbara Burgeson reported that Esperanza Plaza, Standing Oaks, Tamiami Crossing
and Mocking Bird Crossing were approved.
IX. Sub-Committee Reports
None
X. Staff Comments
Barbara Burgeson stated that the November and December Environmental Advisory
Council (EAC) meetings will be held at the Community Development and
Environmental Services Building on Horseshoe Drive. Also, appointed EAC
member, Darren Brooks has resigned.
Summer Brown-Araque noted for logistic reasons, it is difficult to incorporate
EAC comments on LDC Amendment Requests within 30 days and recommended the
process incorporate a 60-day turnaround (requests be reviewed every other meeting
when necessary.)
XI. Council Member Comments
None
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was
adjourned by the order of the Chair at 4:02 PM.
COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL
ADVISORY COUNCIL
Chairman William Hughes
These Minutes were approved by the Board/Chairman on
as presented , or as amended
14
2008
CYCLE 1
LDC
AMENDMENT
REQUEST
BACKUP
MA TERIAL
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text e:triketRF9b1€1R is 6b1FreFlt text t9 Be 8elete8.
Bold text indicates a defined term
LDC Amendment Reauest
ORIGIN: Community Development & Environmental Services Division
AUTHOR: Barbara Burgeson, Manager, Environmental Services
Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist
DEPARTMENT:
Engineering and Environmental Services Department
AMENDMENT CYCLE: 2008 Cycle 1
LDC PAGE: LDC3: 14 & LDC3:23
LDC SECTION(S): 3.04.01 Generally
3.04.02 Species Specific Requirements
3.04.03 Requirements for Protected Plants
3.04.04 Penalties for Violation: Resort to Other Remedies
CHANGE: Include criteria for protection of selected listed plants.
Scrivener's error to correct lettering/numbering in section 3.04.02.
Update the gopher tortoise and bald eagle sections to reflect changes so
the Code is consistent with the FFWCC Bald Eagle (BE) and Gopher
Tortoise (GT) Management Plans approved last September 2007 and this
June 2008.
REASON: Required as part of the EAR-based GMP amendment to CCME Policy 7.1.6.
Policy 7.1.6 states the following:
"The County shall evaluate the need for the protection of listed plants and within one (I)
year of the effective date of this amendment adopt land development regulations
addressing the protection of listed plants."
Scrivener's error to correct lettering/numbering.
To be consistent with the FFWCC management plans for the BE and GT as
recommended by the EAC.
FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: Where listed plants identified in this
amendment occur on site and where relocation is feasible, additional expense will be
incurred upon the applicant to relocate them. Management needs for listed plants will
have to be included in preserve management plans, where applicable.
RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None
139
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008~Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (0611 08) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text e;triketl:lI:e~liIR is GlmeRt t9Xt t8 Be aeletea,
Bold text indicates a defined term
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: Required as part of the EAR-based
GMP amendment to CCME Policy 7.1.6.
OTHER NOTESNERSION DATE: Created May 1,2008. Amended June 11,2008.
Amend the LDC as follows:
3.04.00 PROTECTION OF ENDANGERED, THREATENED, OR LISTED SPECIES
3.04.01 Generally
A. The purpose of this section is to protect species in the County, by including
measures for protection. manaaement and monitorina and/or relocation of
endangered, threatened, Gf species of special concern, or species protected bv
FAC.. F.S. the Endanaered Species Act or other approved auidelines. rules or
manaaement plans (herein after referred to as protected species); listed or
protected by:
1. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) as
endangered, threatened, Gf species of special concern. species protected
bv FAC: protection pursuant to Chapter 163, FS
2. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as endangered or
threatened.
3. Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora (CITES).
4. Endanaered. threatened or commerciallv exploited plants listed bv the
Florida Department of Aariculture and Consumer Services as further
identified in section 3.04.03.
B. Applicability and Exemptions.
1. General Applicability: Except as provided in 2. below, all new
development shall be directed away from listed species and their
habitats by complying with the guidelines and standards set forth in this
section.
2. Exemptions: The following are exempt from the provisions of this Section:
a. Agricultural operations that fall within the scope of sections
163.3162(4) or 823.14(6), Florida Statutes;
b. All lle'/elellmeRt applications within the RLSA District, except as
specifically provided in section 4.08.00; and
140
1:\08 Amend the lDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or listed
Species~listed Plants lDRs (061108) SL B8.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text striketl:lrtHJQR is GlmeAt text t8 Be aeletea.
Bold text indicates a defined term
c. All de':elepment applications within the NBMO, except as
specifically provided in section 2.03.08.
C. EIS and management plans.
1. Exemption. Single-family lots that are not part of a previously approved
subdivision or SDP shall not be required to prepare an EIS or a
management plan.
2. EIS. An EIS is required as set forth in section 10.02.02. The County shall
notify the FFWCC and USFWS of the existence of any listed species that
may be discovered.
3. Management and MonitorinQ Plans.
a. General Requirements. A wildlife management and monitorino
plan shall be required for all projects where the wildlife survey
indicates listed or protected species are utilizing the site. These
plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land
uses away from listed or protected species and their habitats and
shall incorporate proper techniques to protect listed or protected
species and their habitat from the negative impacts of proposed
development.
b. References. The following references shall be used, as
appropriate, to prepare the required management plans;
i. South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, USFWS,
1999.
ii. Habitat MaRallamaRt GlliealiRas fer tAB Bald Eagle
Manaoement Plan Adopted April 9. 2008 bv the FFWCC
(and technical literature cited therein). in tAa SBllthBast
Rallis", USj;WS, 1987. the Bald and Golden Eaole
Protection Act. the Mioratorv Bird and Treatv Act. and the
FAC. 68A-16.002 Bald Eaole protection.
iii. Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise
(Gopherus polyphemus) Populations found on Lands
Slated for Large Scale development in Florida, Technical
Report No.4, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission, 1987 and the Gopher Tortoise Manaoement
Plan Adopted September 2007 bv the FFWCC (and
technical literature cited therein) .
iv. Ecology and development-Related Habitat Requirements
of the Florida Scrub Jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens),
Technical Report No.8, Florida Game and Fresh Water
Fish Commission, 1991.
141
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Tellt strikatRFElId~R is GimBRt text ts Be aeletea.
Bold text indicates a defined term
D. Protective measures. All develepmeFlt6 applications subject to this section shall
adhere to the following:
1. GeneraL
a. In those areas where clustering is permitted, all developments
shall be clustered to discourage impacts to listed species
habitats.
b. Open space and vegetation preservation requirements shall be
used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and
areas dominated by human activities.
c. Provisions such as fencing, walls, or other obstructions shall be
provided to minimize develepment impacts to the wildlife and to
facilitate and encourage wildlife to use wildlife corridors.
d. Appropriate roadway crossings, underpasses, and signage shall
be used where roads must cross wildlife corridors.
e. When listed species are directly observed on site or indicated by
evidence, such as denning, foraging or other indications, priority
shall be given to preserving the habitat of that listed species, as
provided in section 4.06.04.
f. Management Plans shall contain a monitoring program for all
preserves with listed or protected species on site or when the site
is known to be foraoino habitat for listed or protected species.
develepment6 !jreater t!olaF! 10 acree.
g. Letters of technical assistance from the FFWCC and written
recommendations from the USFWS shall be deemed to be
consistent with the GMP.
E. Single-family platted lots, seveR aml eRe half (7 112) aCHlS er less in size, shall
be exempt from the requirements set forth in section 3.04.02 B., when these lots
are not a part of a previous development which has been required to comply
with section 3.04.02 B. However, gopher tortoises shall be protected pursuant to
this section.
3.04.02 Species Specific Requirements
On property where the wildlife survey establishes that listed or protected species
are utilizing the site or where the site is capable of supporting listed or protected species
and such listed or protected species can be anticipated to potentially occupy the site, the
County shall, consistent with the GMP, consider and utilize recommendations and letters
of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and
recommendations from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing development
orders. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case by case basis,
may change the requirements contained herein and any such change shall be deemed
142
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008~Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered~Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text f.:trikettlrGlolgtl if.: SlolH8Rt t8Xt te tle aeletea.
Bold text indicates a defined term
to be consistent with this Code. The following specific species management and
protection plans shall be applicable, in addition to those required by other provision in
this section 3.04.00:
A. Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus).
1. All gopher tortoises, their habitats, and the associated
commensals are hereby protected.
2. It is expressly prohibited to take, which means to harass, harm,
hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to
engage in any such conduct, any gopher tortoise, and to alter,
destroy, or degrade the functions and values of their natural
habitat, unless otherwise provided for in this section.
3. All gopher tortoise burrows are protected, and it is prohibited to
intentionally destroy or take any such burrow by any means,
unless otherwise provided for in this section.
4. Personnel authorized by the FFWCC or the County may house
and relocate tortoises, as necessary and provided for in this
section.
5. When gopher tortoises are identified on-site, a protection~aOOief
management and monitorino plan or off-site relocation and
monitorino plan shall be submitted to the County Manager or
designee for review and approval.
6. The protection~aOOief management and monitorino plan shall
include, but not be limited to, the following items:
a. A current gopher tortoise survey, which shall be field-
verified by JllanniR!J services staff. the Countv Manaoer or
desionee.
b. A proposal for either maintaining the population in place or
relocating it.
c. A site plan identifying the boundaries of the gopher tortoise
preserve.
d. The method of relocation, if necessary.
e. The proposed supplemental plantings, if needed.
f. Detail of the gopher tortoise preserve fencing.
g. An annual maintenance plan describing exotic removal
and vegetation management.
h. Identification of persons responsible for the initial and
143
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text striketRFflloIgl=I is Gl:lrF8Flt text te be deleted.
Bold tex1 indicates a defined term
annual protection and/or management of the tortoises and
the preserve area. Suitable gopher tortoise habitat shall be
designated on the site plan at the time of the first
development order submittal. Suitable habitat preserved
on site shall be credited to the preservation requirement as
specified in section 3.05.00 of this LDC.
i. An annual monitorinQ plan in accordance with the
Gopher Tortoise ManaQement Plan Adopted September
2007 bv the FFWCC (and technical literature cited therein),
7. Suitable habitat shall be defined as having the following
characteristics:
a. The presence of well-drained, sandy soils, which allow
easy burrowing for gopher tortoises.
b. Appropriate herbaceous ground cover (if not present,
supplemental food sources shall be planted).
c. Generally open canopy and sparse shrub cover, which
allow sufficient sunlight to reach the ground.
d. Typically, includes the presence of an existing gopher
tortoise population.
e. Be a minimum of 25 acres for relocation purposes or mav
be less if the population is existinQ and is healthv.
8. Off-site relocation and monitorinQ plans shall be permitted to meet
all or part of the on-site gopher tortoise habitat preservation
requirements under the following circumstances:
a. Where suitable habitat does not exist on-site;
b. Where a property owner meets the minimum on-site native
vegetation preservations requirements of this LDC with
jurisaiclioRal wotlaRds, and cannot provide a~~ro~fiate
adequate suitable habitat for gopher tortoises as described
above; or
c. Where scientific data has been presented to the County
Manager or designee, and an environmental professional
opinion is rendered that the fOll~irement to ~ro\'iae the
rell~irea on sito gopher tortoise habitat ~reservatioR area
on site will not be conducive to the long-term health of the
on-site population of tortoises.
9. If an off-site relocation monitorinQ plan is authorized under one (1)
or more of the above conaitions criteria, approval of such a plan
ana associated shall require a FFWCC SIaIe permit, shall be
144
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text striketRF9\:lgR is G\:lfreRt text t9 be deleted,
Bold text indicates a defined term
ostaiAoEl frem tAe ~~WCC. Where appropriate, a combination of
on-site preservation and off-site relocation may be considered.
10. When relocating tortoises on-site, the density shall be reviewed on
a case-by-case basis, and shall be based on the
recommendations found in the Gopher Tortoise ManaQement Plan
Adopted September 2007 bv the FFWCC (and technical literature
cited therein) no more thaA five (Ii) tortoises !ler aoro will se
cOAsiEloma a s~itasle aeAsity .
11. When identifying the native vegetation preservation requirement
of section 3.05.07 of this LDC for parcels containing gopher
tortoises, priority shall be given to protecting the largest, most
contiguous gopher tortoise habitat with the greatest number of
active burrows, and for providing a connection to off-site adjacent
gopher tortoises' preserves. All gopher tortoise preserves shall be
platted with protective covenants, as required by this section and
section 3.05.07 H of this LDC or, if the project is not platted, shall
provide such language on the approved site development plan. It
shall be a priority to preserve scrub habitat, when it exists on-site,
for its rare unique qualities and for being one of the most
endangered habitats in the County, regardless of whether gopher
tortoises are relocated off-site.
12. Gopher tortoises shall be removed from all active aM" inactive
and abandoned burrows located within the area of construction
prior to any site improvement, in accordance with the
protection/management plan approved by County Manager or
designee
13. Exemptions. Single family platted lots, seven ana ene Aalf acres
or less in size, shall be exempt from the requirements set forth in
subsections 5 through 11 above, when these lots are not a part of
a previous development which has been required to comply with
subsections 5 through 11. However, gopher tortoises shall be
protected pursuant to 1.-, 2 and 3 above.
B. Sea Turtle Protection.
1 . The purpose of this section is to protect the threatened and
endangered sea turtles that nest along the beaches of the
County, by safeguarding sea turtle hatchlings from sources of
artificial light, and adult and hatchling sea turtles from injury or
harassment. The County shall adhere to state and federal
guidelines for the protection of sea turtles.
2. The requirements of this section apply when development or
lighting associated with development is located within three
hundred (300) feet of mean high water; when parking lots, dune
walkovers, or other outdoor lighting is proposed; and when
145
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants lDRs (061108) Sl BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
T811t stril<sU1FGI:lilA is EiI:lHSRt te)(1 t8 88 aelet8a.
Bold text indicates a defined term
reflective surfaces that will be illuminated by outdoor lighting will
be visible from the beach.
a. Outdoor lighting shall be held to the minimum necessary
for security and safety. Floodlights and landscape or
accent lighting shall be prohibited.
b. All lighting, including wall-mounted fixtures, pole lighting,
lights on balconies, and any other type of lighting not
specifically referenced by this section, shall be of low
intensity, and shall be fitted with hoods or positioned so
that the light sources, or any reflective surfaces illuminated
by such sources, shall not be visible from the beach.
c. Low profile luminaries shall be used in parking lots, and
such lighting shall be fitted with hoods or positioned so that
the light sources, or any reflective surfaces illuminated by
such sources, shall not be visible from the beach.
d. Dune crosswalks shall utilize low profile shielded
luminaries directed and positioned so that light sources, or
any reflective surfaces illuminated by such sources shall
not be visible from the beach. dune crossover lighting
shall be limited to the area landward of the primary dune.
e. If high intensity lighting is necessary, low pressure sodium
vapor luminaries shall be used and fitted with a hood or
positioned so that the light sources, or any reflective
surfaces illuminated by such sources, shall not be visible
from the beach.
f Plates of tinted glass are required for windows that are
visible from the beach. The tinted glass shall be any
window or glazing that has an industry-approved light
transmittance value of forty-five (45) percent or less. Such
transmittance shall be limited to the visible spectrum (400
to 700 nanometers), and shall be measured as the
percentage of light that is transmitted through the glass,
inside to outside.
g. Temporary security lights at construction sites shall not be
mounted more than fifteen (15) feet above the ground.
Light sources, or any reflective surfaces illuminated by
such sources, shall not be visible from the beach.
3. For existing development, existing structures with any light
sources, or reflective surfaces illuminated by such sources, that
are visible from the beach, shall be in compliance with the
following:
146
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3_04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or listed
Species-listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text &trikett:lrElij€lR i8 G~lrreAt text ta Be gelataa.
Bold text indicates a defined term
a All lights shall be turned off after 9:00 p.m. between May 1
and October 31 of each year, or fitted with a hood or
positioned so that the light sources, or any reflective
surfaces illuminated by such sources, shall not be visible
from the beach.
b. Lights illuminating dune crosswalks shall be turned off
after 9:00 p.m. between May 1 and October 31 of each
year, and must be modified to conform to the requirements
for new development in accordance with section
3.04.03(B) of this section.
c. Security and emergency exit lighting shall follow the same
requirements stated in section 3.04.03(C)(1) of this
section. If high intensity lighting is necessary, low pressure
sodium vapor luminaries shall be used and fitted with a
hood, or positioned so that the light sources, or any
reflective surfaces illuminated by such sources, shall not
be visible from the beach.
d. At least one (1) of the following measures shall be taken,
where applicable, to reduce or eliminate the negative
effects of interior light emanating from doors or windows
within the line of sight of the beach, where lights currently
illuminate the beach:
i. In windows facing the Gulf of Mexico, and all inlet
shorelines of these beaches, tinted window
treatments are required for windows that are visible
from the beach so that indoor lights do not
illuminate the beach. The tinted glass shall be any
window or glazing that has an industry-approved
light transmittance value of forty-five (45) percent or
less. Such transmittance shall be limited to the
visible spectrum (400 to 700 nanometers), and
shall be measured as the percentage of light that is
transmitted through the glass, inside to outside.
ii. Rearrange lamps and other movable fixtures away
from windows.
iii. Use window treatments, including, but not limited
to, blinds and curtains, to shield interior lights from
the beach.
iv. Turn off unnecessary lights.
4. All publicly owned lighting with light sources that are visible from
the beach, or that illuminate reflective surfaces that are visible
from the beach, shall be turned off after 9:00 p.m. between May 1
147
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008.Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL SS.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text stril,etRFGbllitR is GblrreAt text t8 be ge19te9.
Bold text indicates a defined term
and October 31 of each year, or shall be fitted with a hood, or
positioned so that the light sources, or any reflective surfaces
illuminated by such sources, are not visible from the beach.
5. It shall be unlawful, during the nesting season, to construct any
structure, add any fill, mechanically clean any beach, or grade
any dirt within 100 feet of the nesting zone of a beach where sea
turtles nest or may nest, without obtaining a construction in sea
turtle nesting area permit from the County Manager or designee.
a. If sea turtle nesting occurs within 100 yards of the
construction, measured parallel to the shoreline during
permitted construction activities, the nest area shall be
flagged by the permittee and the County Manager or
designee informed prior to 9:00 a.m. of that morning.
b. Depending on nest location, in relation to intensive
construction activities, the County Manager or designee
may require that the nest(s) be relocated by the applicant.
c. Construction activities shall not interfere with sea turtle
nesting, shall preserve or replace any native vegetation
on the site, must maintain the natural existing beach
profile, and minimize interference with the natural beach
dynamics and function.
d. Construction or repair of any structure, including, but not
limited to, dune walkovers, seawalls, or other revetments,
sandbags, groins, or jetties, shall not be permitted during
sea turtle nesting season on any County beaches, except
if permitted structures are damaged by a named storm or
other declared natural disaster and the following conditions
are met:
1. Minor repair work (lloarss fleeS to lle Railes book to
tAe s)(istiA!) iRtaot str~ct~re, or a few lloarss ROSel
to lle r.eplaceel) that can lle perfermeel cempletely
from atop tAe str~ct~re is a~thorized after obtaining
the neoessary approval of the FDEP aRs Rotifying
Collier CO~Rty Environmontal Sorvioes of tAat work.
2. Prior to aR)' major repair work (greater than that
sssmilleel iR 1 allo'/e) or recoRstr~otioR of aR, part
of tAe str~ct~re, the fellowiR!) infermation sAall be
provided to so tAat staff can eletormino if the major
repair or reoonstruction can occ~r prior to tAe eReI
of sea t~rtle RestiRg season:
a. TAe appropriate permit from FDEP.
148
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008~Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text striketRre1ol6R is Gl;:IFreRt text ta Be (jelete{t.
Bold text indicates a defined term
b. TAe lesatioR of all kRe'/lR soa t~rtle Rests.
Comm~Rity De'lelol'lmeRt and
ERviroRmeRtal Servises (CDES) staff will
I'lreviee assistaRce iR locatiR!;j Rests.
CORstr~ctioR acti'/itios shall not occ~r wilhin
10 1001 of those bounearios for 'liaelo nosts.
c. .'1 s~rvey ey a EIIJaliliee cORs~ltaRt losaliRg
any !jel'lAer tortoise e~rrews OR sile witAiR
50 foel of tAo str~st~ro. RolosalisR of
!jsl'lhor tsrtsisos will ee reEl~iree whon tAo
e~rre'''''s aro in harms way of tho
constr~ctisn activity.
d. Photographs of tho site as it existee after
tho storm to documont tho coneitions sf the
I'lrsl'lerty.
8. AR aerial of tAo I'lrsl'lerty showing tho CCSL
liRe,
f. A cSI'lY of a CCSL variance or CCSL I'lermit
if reEl~iree ane elJilein!jl'lermit al'll'lrsviR!j tAO
sri!jinal constrlJction sf the slrlJclIJre.
J. Soa turtlo nest lecations will bo roostaelisAoe IJsin!j
their woviously recordod GPS locatisns ane
accuracy dala to identify a 95% confidonce
130lJReary. ConstrlJction aclivities sAall nol occur
.....itAin 10 foet sf tAOSO eOlJndarios for viaelo nosts.
Nosts will eo csnsieome viaele fsr 80 eays frem tAo
timo tho nost was rocsreee unloss it can ee I'lrsvon
that a l'larticlJlar nest has eoon dama!jee ey the
stsrm and thoro is no chance of any hatchlin!js.
4. Minsr strlJctlJfOS, as eolinee ey Flsriea StaMes
SlJesoctisn 181.055, sf tAe Csastal ZORO
Prstectisn I\ct sf 1985, shall eo al'll'lrevee I'lre'lieee
tAat tAOY also coml'lly with:
a. Foeeral reElIJirements for olo\latisns aesve
the 100 year flooe level,
b. Collier County BlJileing Codo roquiremonts
for flooe I'lrsslin!j ,
s. ClJrrent elJileiR!j aRe life saloty codos,
e. Collier COIJRty aRe Stale of Floriea
Del'lartm8Rl of ER'IireRmeRlal Pretoctisn
CCSL!CCCL rO!jlJlatisns,
149
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Te)(t striketRr9bliR is S\:,IFrsRt text te Be eleleteel.
Bold text indicates a defined term
e. Applicable disability aGGess re€llllations of
tho /\meriGan DisaBility Aot (1'.0/\), aREl
f. Any reEl~ires Collier COllnty zoning and
other sevelopment re€llllations with the
exoeption of existin€l sensity or intensity
reElllirements estaBlishes, Ilnless
oemplianGe '....ith suoh zoning or othor
sO'ielepmont r8€lulatiens '....ollls pr.8Glllse
reGon6trllGtion ethoFwiso intensos by the
Build baok Polioy as dotermines BY the
EmergeRGY Review Boars estaBlishes
herein.
i. Minor repair work (boards need to be nailed baok to
the existinQ intaot structure. or a few boards need
to be replaced) that can be performed completely
from atop the structure is authorized after obtaininQ
the necessarv approval of the FDEP and notifvinQ
Collier Countv Environmental Services of that work.
ii. Prior to any maior repair work (Qreater than that
described in 1 above) or reconstruction of anv part
of the structure, the followinQ information shall be
provided to so that staff can determine if the maior
repair or reconstruction can occur prior to the end
of sea turtle nestinQ season:
a) The appropriate permit from FDEP.
b) The location of all known sea turtle nests.
Communitv Development and
Environmental Services (CDES) staff will
provide assistance in locatinQ nests.
Construction actiyities shall not occur within
10 feet of these boundaries for viable nests.
c) A survey bY a Qualified consultant 10catinQ
any Qopher tortoise burrows on site within
50 feet of the structure. Relocation of
Qopher tortoises will be reQuired when the
burrows are in harms way of the
construction activity.
d) PhotoQraphs of the site as it existed after
the storm to document the conditions of the
property.
e) An aerial of the properlY showinQ the CCSL
line.
150
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008.Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added,
TaJd stfik.etAr8l:!liA is EiI:!HeRt tam: 18 S8 ~aI8t8Et.
Bold text indicates a defined term
f) A COpy of a CCSL variance or CCSL permit
if reauired and buildina permit approvina the
oriainal construction of the structure.
0) Sea turtle nest locations will be
reestablished usina their previouslv
recorded GPS locations and accuracv data
to identifv a 95% confidence boundarv.
Construction activities shall not occur within
10 feet of these boundaries for viable nests.
Nests will be considered viable for 80 days
from the time the nest was recorded unless
it can be proven that a particular nest has
been damaaed bv the storm and there is no
chance of anv hatchlinas.
e. Minor structures. as defined bv Florida Statutes
Subsection 161.055, of the Coastal Zone Protection Act of
1985. shall be approved provided that they also complv
with:
i. Federal reauirements for elevations above the 100-
year flood level,
ii. Collier Countv Buildina Code reauirements for flood
proofina.
iii. Current buildina and life safetv codes,
iv. Collier County and State of Florida Department of
Environmental Protection CCSL/CCCL reaulations,
v. Applicable disabilitv access reaulations of the
American Disabilitv Act (ADA), and
vi. Anv reauired Collier Countv zonino and other
development reaulations with the exception of
existina densitv or intensitv reauirements
established, unless compliance with such zonina or
other development reaulations would preclude
reconstruction otherwise intended bv the Build back
Policv as determined bv the Emeroencv Review
Board established herein.
6. The following shall be obligations for all property owners who have
had sand washed ashore (as a result of a storm) and deposited on
the dune and seaward of the CCSL. As supported by GMP
Conservation and Coastal Management Element Objective 10.4
and Policy 10.4.8, construction seaward of the CCSL shall not
interfere with sea turtle nesting, will minimize interference with
151
1:\08 Amend the LDC\200B-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3,04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text gtril<'9t1:lI:Qldgtl iE GblrreRt text tEl t1e deleted.
Bold text indicates a defined term
natural beach dynamics, and where appropriate will restore the
historical dunes and will vegetate with native vegetation and help
in the restoration of natural functions of coastal barriers and
beaches and dunes.
The property owner may be prohibited from removing the
deposited sand when it is determined that the wash over was a
part of the natural rebuilding of the beach and dune system. Only
native salt tolerant beach or dune vegetation may be planted on
the deposited sand, after obtaining a Collier County CCSL permit.
This shall not apply to sand washed over onto yards that have
received the appropriate Collier County approvals for landscaping
seaward of the CCSL (such as single family homes along
Vanderbilt Beach).
7. It shall be unlawful for any person to kill, molest, or cause direct or
indirect injury to any species of sea turtle in Collier County or
within its jurisdictional waters. It shall be unlawful to collect or
possess any part of a sea turtle.
C. Florida Scrub Jay. Habitat preservation for the Florida scrub jay
(Aphe/ocoma coeru/escens) shall conform to the guidelines contained in
Technical Report No.8, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission, 1991. The required management plan shall also provide for
a maintenance program and specify an appropriate fire or mechanical
protocols to maintain the natural scrub community. The plan shall also
outline a public awareness program to educate residents about the on-
site preserve and the need to maintain the scrub vegetation. These
requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-
Species Recovery Plan, May 1999.
D. Bald Eagle. For the bald eagle (Haliaeetus /eucocepha/us),
the required habitat management plans shall establish
protective zones around the eagle nest restricting certain
activities. The plans shall also address restricting certain
types of activities during the nesting season. These
requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South
Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, May 1999 , the Bald
Eaqle Manaqement Plan Adopted April 9, 2008 bv the
FFWCC (and technical literature cited therein). the Bald
and Golden Eaqle Protection Act. the Miqratorv Bird and
Treatv Act. and the FAC. 68A-16.002 Bald Eaqle
protection.
,
E. Red-cockaded woodpecker. For the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides
borealis), the required habitat protection plan shall outline measures to
avoid adverse impacts to active clusters and to minimize impacts to
foraging habitat. Where adverse effects can not be avoided, measures
shall be taken to minimize on-site disturbance and compensate or
mitigate for impacts that remain. These requirements shall be consistent
with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, May 1999.
152
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened~or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Ts)(t strikett:lFSOIQR is GI:msAt tsxt t9 Be 8slste8.
Bold text indicates a defined term
F. Florida black bear. In areas where the Florida black bear (Ursus
americanus floridanus) may be present, the management plans shall
require that garbage be placed in bear-proof containers, at one or more
central locations. The management plan shall also identify methods to
inform local residents of the concerns related to interaction between black
bears and humans. Mitigation for impacting habitat suitable for black bear
shall be considered in the management plan.
G. Panther. For projects located in Priority I and Priority II Panther Habitat
areas, the management plan shall discourage the destruction of
undisturbed, native habitats that are preferred by the Florida panther
(Felis conc%r caryl) by directing intensive land uses to currently
disturbed areas. Preferred habitats include pine flatwoods and hardwood
hammocks. In turn, these areas shall be buffered from the most intense
land uses of the project by using low intensity land uses (e.g., parks,
passive recreational areas, golf courses). Golf courses within the RFMU
district shall be designed and managed using standards found in that
district. The management plans shall identify appropriate lighting controls
for these permitted uses and shall address the opportunity to utilize
prescribed burning to maintain fire-adapted preserved vegetative
communities and provide browse for white-tailed deer. These
requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-
Species Recovery Plan, May 1999, and with the provisions set forth in
this section.
H. West Indian Manatee. The management and protection ~
reauirements based upon the Manatee Protection Plan for the West
Indian Manatee are set forth in section 5.0502.
(Ord. No. 05-27, 93.J)
3.04.03 Reauirements for Protected Plants
The followina plants shall be retained on site when located within preserves. When
located within areas to be developed. the these plants shall be relocated to on-site
preserves if the on-site preserves are able to support the plants and the relocation is
considered feasible. as determined bv the Countv Manaaer or desianee. Listed plants
alreadv common within the preserve mav not have to be relocated to the preserve.
Where retention or relocation of plants to on-site preserves is not feasible or needed.
relocation to on-site open space areas or suitable locations off site is encouraaed.
Butterflv orchid
Cardinal airplant
Clamshell orchid
Cowhorn orchid
Curtis milkweed
Giant wild pine
Golden creeper
Inflated wild pine
Encvclia tampensis
Tillandsia fasciculata
Encvclia cochleata
Cvrtopodium punctatum
Asclepias curtiss!i
Tillandsia utriculata
Ernodea littora/is
Tillandsia balbisiana
153
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text strikstRn3blilR is SblFF9Rt text t8 99 gelet9d.
Bold text indicates a defined term
Inkberrv Scaevola olumieri
Pricklv apple Cereus aracilis
Satin leaf Chrvsoohvllum olivaeforme
Simpson's stopper Mvrcianthes frearens var. simosonii
Twisted airplant Tillandsia flexuosa
Wild cotton Gossvoium hirsutum
3.04.033.04.04 Penalties for Violation: Resort to Other Remedies
Violation of the provisions of this section or failure to comply with any of its
requirements shall constitute a misdemeanor. Any person or firm who violates this
section or fails to comply with any of its requirements shall upon conviction thereof be
fined, or imprisoned, or both, as provided by law. Each day such violation continues shall
be considered a separate offense. Each taking of a gopher tortoise shall constitute a
separate violation. It is not the intent to include tortoises that may be accidentally injured
or killed during an approved relocation procedure that is done by a qualified consultant,
in accordance with their protection/management plan. Any other person, who commits,
participates in, assists in, or maintains such violation may each be found guilty of a
separate offense and suffer the penalties herein provided. The county, in addition to the
criminal sanctions contained herein, may take any other appropriate legal action,
including but not limited to injunctive action, to enforce the provisions of this section.
154
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1V\mendments\Revisions\EAC\3.04.00 Protection of Endangered-Threatened-or Listed
Species-Listed Plants LDRs (061108) SL BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text str.iketRFG\:lgR is GUfFeAt text te ~e geleteg.
Bold text indicates a defined term
LDC Amendment ReQuest
ORIGIN: Environmental Advisory Council
Collier County Planning Commission
AUTHOR: Barbara Burgeson, Manager, Environmental Services
DEPARTMENT: Engineering and Environmental Services Department
AMENDMENT CYCLE: Cycle 1,2008
LDC PAGE: LDCI:35-LDCI:36, LDC3:28, LDCIO:89-LDCIO:91, LDCIO:96
LDC SECTION(S): 1.08.02,3.05.05, 10.02.06
CHANGE: Require a vegetation removal permit and provide determining criteria for
removal of vegetation containing nests or cavity trees of protected or listed animal
species.
Revise the "native vegetation definition" in accordance with the new definition adopted
with the EAR-based GMP amendments to Conservation and Coastal Management
Element (CCME).
Background: Recently authorization was given via e-mail from the Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) to a property owner of a single-family lot in Pine Ridge, to cut down a slash
pine tree containing an active bald eagle nest. Current State and Federal rules and the
adopted April 9, 2008 FFWCC Bald Eagle Management Plan require that a permit be
issued when taking a bald eagle nest. No take permit was issued from either the FFWCC
or USFWS for removal of this nest.
There is no permit required for removal of dead trees with cavities or nests of listed or
protected animal species. They are protected when they are in preserves or areas of
protected vegetation, and are protected through the threatened, endangered, and listed
species protection of the Code and Growth Management Plan.
Currently there are no specific criteria in the LDC that would allow for removal of a tree
with a nest or cavity of a protected or listed animal species.
In response to the above referenced incident staff received direction from the
Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) and the Collier County Planning Commission
(CCPC) to prepare an LDC amendment to preclude this from happening in the future. In
order to address the concerns of both the EAC and CCPC, the Code should be amended
as follows.
155
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.05 P nest-cavity protection (061108) BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Tent stFiketi:1rebllifi:1 is Sl:IrreRt text t9 be deleted.
Bold text indicates a defined term
1. Reinsert in the LDC the definition for "protected vegetation" and include as part of the
definition, dead woody vegetation with nests or cavities of protected or listed animal
species. When the LDC was re-codified, the definition of protected vegetation was
de I eted.
2. Include in the vegetation removal permit exceptions subsection of the LDC, the
requirement for permits when listed or protected animal species are utilizing the
vegetation.
3. Include in the vegetation removal permit subsection of the LDC a provision to allow
for the removal of vegetation containing a nest or cavity tree of listed or protected animal
species, with specific criteria.
4. Include in the vegetation removal permit enforcement and penalties subsection of the
LDC, fines for removal of vegetation containing nests or cavity trees of protected or
listed animal species.
REASON: To address the concerns of the Environmental Advisory Council and Collier
County Planning Commission, and to prevent the unauthorized removal of vegetation
containing nests or cavity trees of protected or listed animal species.
FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: A vegetation removal permit will be required
to request removal of vegetation containing a nest or cavity tree of listed or protected
animal species.
RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS:
1.08.02,3.05.05, 10.02.06
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: The change in "native vegetation
definition" is required as part of the EAR-based GMP amendment to CCME Policy 6. I.]
(I).
OTHER NOTESNERSION DATE: This version created April 16, 2008. Amended
June 11,2008.
Amend the LDC as follows:
1.08.02 Definitions
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Vegetation, Category I Invasive Exotic: Invasive exotic vegetation that alters
native vegetation communities by: displacing native plant species, changing the
structure or ecological functions of native plant communities, or hybridizing with native
species; which includes all species of vegetation listed on the 2003 Florida Exotic Pest
Plant Council's List of Invasive Species, under Category I.
156
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008~Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.05 p nest~cavity protection (0611 08) SS.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text stFiI'i:etRFGI:I€JA is GI:IFFeRt tam 1a ba deleted.
Bold text indicates a defined term
Vegetation, Category " Invasive Exotic: Invasive exotic vegetation that has
increased in abundance or frequency but have not yet altered native plant communities
by displacing native plant species, changing the structure or ecological functions of
native plant communities, or hybridizing with native species.
Vegetation, exotic. A plant species introduced to Florida, purposefully or
accidentally from a natural range outside of Florida. The terms Exotic vegetation and
Nonnative vegetation are interchangeable. Exotic vegetation includes Naturalized
Vegetation, and Category I and Category II Invasive Exotics.
Vegetation, native: Native vegetation means native southern Floridian species as
determined by accepted valid scientific references identified in section 4.06.05C. Where
this Code refers to, or requires retention of, existing native vegetation, the term native
vegetation is further defined as a vegetative cOfflfflllnity having 75% or locs cano~y
coverage of melalellca or other iR'.asive exotio ~laRt s~ecies a veaetative communitv
havina 25 percent or more canopv coveraae or hiahest existina veaetative strata of
native plant species.
Vegetation, naturalized: Exotic vegetation that sustains itself outside cultivation,
but is not prohibited exotic vegetation.
Vegetation, prohibited exotic: Category I or Category II Invasive Exotic
Vegetation limited to those enumerated in section 3.05.08 of this Code.
Veaetation. orotected: Anv livina. woodv plant (tree, shrub or aroundcover) and
anv livina or dead, woodv plant (tree, shrub or aroundcover) that has a nest or cavitv of a
listed or protected animal species (see Section 3.04.00). Nuisance invasive vines and
nuisance invasive aroundcover are not protected veaetation.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
3.05.05 Criteria for Removal of Protected Vegetation
The County Manager or designee may approve an application for vegetation
removal permit if it is determined that reasonable efforts have been undertaken in the
layout and design of the proposed development to preserve existing vegetation and to
otherwise enhance the aesthetic appearance of the development by the incorporation
of existing vegetation in the design process. Relocation or replacement of vegetation
may be required as a condition to the issuance of an approval in accordance with the
criteria set forth in this section. In addition, a vegetation removal permit may be issued
under the following conditions:
A. Protected vegetation is a safety hazard to pedestrian or vehicular traffic,
public services, utilities, or to an existing structure.
B. Diseased or otherwise unhealthy vegetation, as determined by standard
horticultural practices, and, if required, a site inspection by the County
Manager or designee.
C. A final local development order has been issued which allows removal
of the protected vegetation.
157
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008~Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.05 P nest-cavity protection (061108) BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text &trikatRrsl.IgR i& GI.IFFeFlt text ta be seletes.
Bold text indicates a defined term
D. Compliance with other codes and/or ordinances may involve protected
vegetation removal.
E. Replacement of non-native vegetation shall be with native vegetation
and shall be subject to the approval of the County Manager or designee.
Replacement vegetation shall comply with the standards of section
4.06.05 and shall include the following minimum sizes: one gallon ground
cover; seven (7) gallon shrubs; fourteen (14) foot high trees with seven
foot crown spread and dbh (diameter at breast height) of three inches.
Replacement native vegetation shall be planted within fourteen (14)
calendar days of removal.
F. On a parcel of land zoned RSF, VR, E, or other nonagricultural,
noncommercial zoning district in which single-family lots have been
subdivided for single-family use only, a vegetation removal permit may be
issued for any permitted accessory use to that zoning.
G. The proposed mangrove alteration has a DEP permit, or meets the
permitting standards in the Florida Administrative Code. However,
mangrove removal or trimming shall be prohibited in all preserves or
areas used to fulfill the native vegetation preservation requirements.
H. Removal of vegetation for approved mitigation bank sites (as defined by
the Florida Administrative Code); state, federal or county approved or
endorsed environmental preservation, enhancement, or restoration
projects, shall be permitted. Vegetation removal permits issued under
these criteria are valid for the period of time authorized by such agency
permits.
I. Vegetation relocation plan. If vegetation relocation is proposed by the
applicant prior to site development plan, construction plan or other final
approvals, a vegetation relocation permit (vegetation removal permit) may
be issued by the County Manager or his designee provided that it can be
demonstrated that early transplantation will enhance the survival of the
relocated vegetation. The vegetation relocation plan shall document
methods of relocation, timing of relocation, watering provisions,
maintenance and other information as required by the County Manager or
his designee.
J. Landscape plant removal or replacement. The removal or replacement of
approved landscaping shall be done in accordance with the regulations
that guide the landscape plans reviews and approvals in section 4.06.00.
A vegetation removal permit will not be issued for the removal or
replacement of landscape plants. That approval must be obtained through
an amendment process to the landscape plan or as otherwise authorized
by permit by the Collier County Landscape Architect.
K. Removal of vegetation for firebreaks approved by the State of Florida,
Division of Forestry, shall be permitted. The width of the approved
clearing shall be limited to the minimum width determined necessary by
the Division of Forestry.
158
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.05 P nest-cavity protection (061108) BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text strikstRr9\:,1~R is Sl:IrrsAt tS)(t t8 tae 981st99.
Bold text indicates a defined term
L. A State or Federal permit issuance depends on data that cannot be
obtained without preliminary removal of some protected vegetation. The
ciearing shall be minimized and shall not allow any greater impacts to the
native vegetation on site than is absolutely necessary. Clearing shall be
limited to areas that are outside anyon-site preserves, as identified on
the PUD master plan, PlaVConstruction Plans or Site Development Plan.
M. In conjunction with a Collier County approved Preserve Management
Plan, native vegetation clearing may be approved only when it is to
improve the native habitat or to improve listed species habitat.
N. Conservation Collier projects which may need minimal clearing for
parking, pathways for walking, or structures that may not require site plan
approvals.
O. Early clearing will be allowed as part of a final review of an SDP or PPL,
after the Environmental Services Review Staff approves the necessary
components of the project to ensure the appropriate environmental
protection and preservation on site. This can only be allowed after the
following are completed and approved: 1) final configuration and
protection of the preserve is complete, 2) the conservation easements are
completed and approved by both the environmental review staff and the
county attorney's office, 3) the environmental review staff has approved
the clearing of the site through the site clearing/preservation plan, 4)
copies of all applicable Federal, State, and Local permits must be
submitted and reviewed against the site clearing/preservation plan. This
early clearing does not authorize approval for excavation, spreading fill,
and grading. That must be approved through a preliminary work
authorization process in accordance with section 10.02.04.4.1. If for any
reason the underlying SDP or PPL is not approved, the property owner
will be responsible for revegetation of the site in accordance with Section
4.06.04A 1.a.vii.
P. Removal of Iivinq or dead veqetation with anv nest or cavitv of a listed or
protected animal species.
1. Removal of the veqetation containinq a nest or cavitv mav be
allowed when:
a. The veqetation is located on a parcel of land subdivided for
sinqle-familv use onlv, and is located in such a manner
that either:
i. the principal structure cannot be constructed, or
ii. all access to the propertv is impeded.
b. The protected veqetation poses an imminent threat to
human safetv.
159
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.05 P nest-cavity protection (061108) BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Telct strikett:lreblgR i& Gl:JrreAt text t9 139 deleted.
Bold text indicates a defined term
2. In order for veQetation containinQ a nest or cavity to be removed,
the followinQ conditions shall also be met:
a. The veQetation is located outside of a preserve or an area used to
fulfill the native veQetation preservation requirements of this Code,
unless it poses an imminent threat to human safety.
b. Permits shall be obtained from the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
authorizinQ the removal of the nest or cavitv tree, in accordance
with state and federal permit requirements.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10.02.06 Submittal Requirements for Permits
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
C. Vegetation Removal permit requirements.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2. Application contents. Application for a vegetation removal permit shall be
submitted to the County Manager or his designee in writing on a form
provided by the planning services department. The application shall
include the following information:
a. A generalized vegetation inventory which includes:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ii. Generalized written assessment and evaluation. The
generalized vegetation inventory shall be accompanied by
a brief written assessment of the plant communities which
have been identified on the site. The assessment shall
include an evaluation of character and quality of the plant
communities identified, including their rarity, viability, and
such other physical characteristics and factors that may
affect their preservation, and presence of anv listed or
protected species. The inventory assessment and
evaluation shall be prepared by a person knowledgeable in
the identification and evaluation of vegetative resources,
such as a forester, biologist, ecologist, horticulturist,
landscape architect, or certified nurseryman.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4. Vegetation removal permit exceptions. The followinQ exceptions shall
applv when there are no listed or protected animal species utilizinQ the
veQetation.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
160
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.05 P nest~cavity protection (061108) BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text striketRfeu{lR is sl:UfeAt text ts ge geleted.
Bold text indicates a defined term
E. Enforcement and penalties.
1. Fines.
a. The failure of a property owner or any other person to obtain an
approved permit as required in this section shall constitute a
misdemeanor and each protected living, woody plant, constituting
protective vegetation, removed in violation of this Code shall
constitute a separate and distinct offense and upon conviction
shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $500.00 per violation or
by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed 60 days, or by
both such fine and imprisonment. In addition to or in lieu of the
penalties provided by general law for violation of ordinances, the
board of county commissioners may bring injunctive action to
enjoin the removal of vegetation in violation of this Code.
Removal of veqetation with a nest or cavitv of a protected or listed
animal species pursuant to section 10.02.06 C. violation shall be
subiect to a fine of $5,000 per nest or cavitv tree. With reqards to
eaqle nests, each eaqle. chick and eqq usinq the nest that is
removed. shall constitute a separate and distinct offense and shall
be subiect to separate and individual fines of $5.000 each.
b. The failure of a property owner or any other person, who obtains
an agricultural clearing permit or provides notice of agricultural
clearing pursuant to Section 10.02.06 D., to put the subject
premises into a bona fide agricultural use shall constitute a
misdemeanor and each protected living, woody plant, constituting
protective vegetation, removed in violation of this Code shall
constitute a separate and distinct offense and upon conviction
shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $500.00 per violation or
by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed 60 days, or by
both such fine and imprisonment. In addition to or in lieu of the
penalties provided by general law for violation of ordinances, the
board of county commissioners may bring injunctive action to
enjoin the removal of vegetation in violation of this Code.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
161
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.05 P nest-cavity protection (061108) SS.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added,
Text strjketl:lrSl:l€lR is Sl:lfraAt tallt ta l:Ia aalata9.
Bold text indicates a defined term
This page intentionally left blank.
162
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.05 P nest-cavity protection (061108) BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text f:triketl:lral:lgA is E:l:lrreAt text ta ~e e1eletea.
Bold text indicates a defined term
LDC Amendment Request
ORIGIN: Community Development & Environmental Services Division
AUTHOR: Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist
DEPARTMENT:
Engineering and Environmental Services Department
AMENDMENT CYCLE: 2008 Cycle 1
LDCPAGE: LDC3:28.1-LDC3:28.2
LDC SECTION(S): 3.05.07 Preservation Standards
CHANGE: Clarify how the "native vegetation definition" is interpreted.
Relocate the "Exceptions" sub-section criteria to the "General Standards and Criteria"
sub-section.
Clarify single-family preserve setback requirements.
Include criteria for off-site native vegetation retention alternatives as required by the
EAR-based GMP amendments to Conservation and Coastal Management Element
(CCME).
REASON: Change made to clarify the native vegetation definition. Currently no criteria
are written on how the native vegetation definition is applied, requiring staff to apply the
definition on a project by project basis. Clarification of the native vegetation definition
will help applicants during the permitting process with the County.
Change made to clarify single-family preserve setback requirements. Unless otherwise
required in the RFMU District, single-family residences are exempt from the native
vegetation retention requirements and from having on site preserves, but not from
preserve setback requirements.
"Off-site native vegetation retention alternatives" are required as part of the EAR-based
GMP amendment to CCME Policy 6.1.1 (10).
FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: How the native vegetation definition is
applied has a direct bearing on the amount of native vegetation found on a piece of
property and subsequently the amount required to be preserved. This in turn had a direct
affect on the acreage of land that can be developed. On the other hand, preserved native
163
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 A-B Native Veg Definition Single-Family
Preserve Setback Clarification Off-Site Veg Retention Alternatives (061108) SL.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text s:trili:etl::1r6l;liJA is f.:~meRt tex{ ta sa aeleted.
Bold text indicates a defined term
vegetation within a development is esthetically pleasing and often enhances property
values.
Off-site alternatives to the native vegetation retention requirement will allow applicants
(both government and private) to develop more of their property.
RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None affected.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT:
"Off-site native vegetation retention alternatives" are required as part of the EAR-based
GMP amendment to CCME Policy 6.1.1 (10).
OTHER NOTESNERSION DATE: Created May 5, 2008. Amended June 11,2008.
Amend the LDC as follows:
3.05.07 Preservation Standards
All development not specifically exempted by this ordinance shall incorporate, at
a minimum, the preservation standards contained within this section.
A. General standards and criteria. The followino criteria shall be used to
administer the preservation standards in all areas of the Countv.
1. The preservation of native vegetation shall include all naturallv
occurrino strata includino canopy, under-story and ground cover
emphasizing the largest contiguous area j:lossilJlo, except as
otherwise provided in sub-section 3.05.07 H.1.e.
Herbaceous weedv ruderal tvpe veoetation characteristic of
roadsides and hiohlv disturbed pastures shall not be counted as
native plant species for the purpose of this definition.
2. Areas that fulfill the native vegetation retention standards and
criteria of this Section shall be set aside as preserve areas,
subject to the requirements of sub-section 3.05.07 H. Sin€llo family
resiElences are mmmpt from the reEl~irements of section d.Oe.07
J.h
3. Native vegetation to be retained as preserve areas shall be
selected in such manner as to preserve the following, in
descending order of priority, except to the extent that preservation
is made mandatory in sub-sections 3.05.07 F.3. and 3.05.07
G.3.c.:
a. Wetland or upland areas known to be utilized by listed
species or that serve as corridors for the movement of
164
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008.Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 A.B Native Veg Definition Single-Family
Preserve Setback Clarification Off-Site Veg Retention Alternatives (061108) SL.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text &trikeUmalJQR i& l;:lJrFeRt text t9 Be e1aletael.
Bold text indicates a defined term
wildlife;
b. Xeric Scrub, Dune and Strand, Hardwood Hammocks;
c. Onsite wetlands having an accepted functionality WRAP
score of at least 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation
Assessment Score of at least 0.7;
d. Any upland habitat that serves as a buffer to a wetland
area as defined in section 3.05.07 A.3.c above;
e. Dry Prairie, Pine Flatwoods; and
f. All other native habitats.
4. Preservation areas shall be interconnected within the site and to
adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors.
5. To the greatest extent possible, native vegetation, in quantities
and types set forth in section 4.06.00, shall be incorporated into
landscape designs in order to promote the preservation of native
plant communities and to encourage water conservation.
6. Where veqetation has been leqallv cleared, the amount of native
veqetation used to calculate the preservation requirement will be
that amount present at the time of development order or iand use
petition application, if the site was leqallv cleared. Where
veqetation has been illeqallv cleared. the amount of native
veqetation used to calculate the preservation requirement will be
that amount present at the time prior to the illeqal clearinq.
Criteria to determine the leqalitv and criteria for the clearinq are
found in Sections 10.02.06 and 3.05.05.
7. Re-development sites. Preservation of native veaetation shall be
calculated based on the acreaqe of native veaetation existinQ at
the time of the prior development order submittal. Redevelopment
shall not allow a site to become more non-conforminq with reqards
to the required amount of native veaetation. Re-creation shall
not be required for sites that were permitted to clear veqetation
and remain cleared.
8. Riqht-of-wav acquisitions for all purposes necessary for roadway
construction. includinq ancillary drainaqe facilities, and includinq
utilities within the Riqht-of-wav acquisition area are exempt from
preservation requirements.
9. Unless otherwise required in the RFMU District. sinqle-familv
residences shall be exempt from the native veaetation retention
requirements and from havinq on site preserves. Setbacks to
165
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 A-B Native Veg Definition Single~Family
Preserve Setback Clarification Off-Site Veg Retention Alternatives (061108) SL.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text f:triketRFG~ijR is G~rreAt tellt ta l:Ie €Ielete€l.
Bold text indicates a defined term
preserves shall be in accordance with section 3.05.07.
10. Development standards pursuant to section 4.02.14 shall applv to
all development. includinQ sinQle-familv, within the ACSC.
11. Created preserves are allowed subiect to the criteria in sub-
section 3.05.07 H.1.e.
B. Specific standards applicable outside the RFMU and RLSA districts.
Outside the RFMU and RLSA Districts, native vegetation shall be
preserved on-site through the application of the following preservation
and vegetation retention standards and criteria, ~Rless tne ae'Jelef3meRt
ecc~rs within the ACSC wnera the I\CSC staRaards rofer8l'lcea iR the
Future Lana Use Element snail af3f3ly. Tnis Section snail Rot af3f3ly to
single family a.....alling ~nits sit~atea OR indivia~allots or f3arcels.
1. Required preservation.
Development Type Coastal High Non-Coastal High
Hazard Area Hazard Area
Less tha n 10% Less than 5 10%
2.5 acres acres
Equal to or Equal to or
greater than 5
Residential and Mixed greater 25% acres and less 15%
Use development than 2.5 than 20 acres
acres
Equal to or 25%
greater than
20 acres
Golf Course 35% 35%
Less than 5 10% Less than 5 10%
Commercial and acres acres
Industrial development
and all other non- Equal to or Equal to or
specified development greater 15% greater than 5 15%
types than 5
acres
acres
Industrial development 50%, not to exceed 50%, not to exceed
(Rural-Industrial District 25% of the project 25% of the project
only) site site.
2. Excef3tieRs. An el<ception fram tne '.'elletation retention staRaards
aeove snallee llF3Rtea in tne fello'Ning circ~mstaRces:
a. where tne f3arcelv.'a6 lellally clearea of Rative velletation
166
1:\08 Amend the lDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 A-B Native Veg Definition Single-Family
Preserve Setback Clarification Off-Site Veg Retention Alternatives (061108) Sl.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text Etril<etlu81tlgl:1 iE l;urreAt tellt t9 B8 618Iet861.
Bold text indicates a defined term
~Fior to JclR~aPf 1989;
b. wRere tRe pareel sarmot reasonably assommoElate botR
the a~~lisation of tRe native '1eljetation retrmtion standar-ds
anEltRe ~ra~osoEl ~sos alloweEl ~nEler tRis CoEle, s~bjest to
tha eriteria set fertR in sastion J.Q5.Q7(H)(1 )(e).
2. Off-site veoetation retention.
a. Applicability. A properlY owner mav reouest that all or a
portion of the Collier County native veaetation
preservation retention reouirement be satisfied offsite for
onlv the followino situations and subject to restrictions
listed below.
i. Properties zoned commercial or industrial with
preserves less than 2 acres in size.
ii. Park sites with individual preserves less than one
acre in size.
iii. Essential service facilities other than parks. anv
size preserves.
iv. Preserves less than one acre in size.
v Affordable housino proiects with a BCC approved
Affordable Housino Density Bonus Aoreement. The
maximum percent of native veaetation retention
allowed offsite shall be no more than the percent of
affordable housino units allowed under the
Affordable Housino Density Bonus Aoreement
without limitation as to size of the preserve.
vi. Preserves reouirino mechanical c1earino of exotic
veoetation in order to restore the habitat. as
determined bv the Countv Manaoer or desionee.
vii. Preserves overrun bv Cateoorv 1 invasive exotics,
as defined bv the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council.
and other aooressive non-native veoetation and
where restoration is not possible. as determined bv
the Countv Manaoer or desionee. Preserves not
previouslv overrun with this tvpe veoetation and
which arrive at this state due to lack of
manaoement. shall mitioate off site at a ratio of 2 to
L
viii. Created preserves where previous restoration
reouirements have not been successful. as
determined bv the Countv Manaoer or desionee. or
167
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 A-B Native Veg Definition Single-Family
Preserve Setback Clarification Off-Site Veg Retention Alternatives (061108) SL.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Te):t striketRrsl:lgA is Gl:lfreAt text t61 be deleted,
Bold text indicates a defined term
where preserves have not been planted in a
manner which mimics a natural plant community.
b. Restrictions, when one or more of the followinQ situations
occur.
i. Xeric scrub and hardwood hammocks which are
one acre or more in size. manQrove. coastal dune
and strand environments. and native habitats
known to be utilized bv listed species or that serve
as corridors for the movement of wildlife shall not
be allowed to have the native veQetation
preservation retention requirement provided offsite.
ii. Preserves shall remain on site if located adiacent to
maior flowwavs. natural water bodies. estuaries,
preserves (not meetinQ the offsite preservation
criteria herein), conservation acquisition areas,
wildlife corridors, and protected or listed species
nests, buffers and foraQinQ habitat.
iii. RemaininQ portions of preserves left onsite must be
a minimum of one acre in size and must not meet
the offsite criteria of vi, vii and viii above, unless
preserved with hiQher Qualitv habitat not QualifvinQ
for offsite veQetation retention. RemaininQ
preserves less than one acre in size may also be
provided offsite.
c. Off-site Alternatives.
i. Off-site native veaetation retention requirements
mav be met by monetarv payment or by land
donation.
ii. Applicants shall make monetarv payment to
Conservation Collier for the purchase and
manaQement of off-site conservation lands within
the county. The monetary payment shall be
equivalent to the averaQe per-acre value found in
an appraisal of the entire site. multiplied bY the
number of acres to be preserved off-site, plus no
less than 25 percent of that amount as an
endowment for manaQement of off-site land. The
appraisal shall be based on the fair market value of
the land as if the requested zoninQ is in place. The
appraisal shall be provided bv the applicant and
must be reviewed and approved bv the Review
Appraiser of the Real Estate Services Division.
Sites valued at over $500.000 shall require two
appraisals with the monetary value to be
168
1:\08 Amend the lDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 A-B Native Veg Definition Single-Family
PreselVe Setback Clarification Off-Site Veg Retention Alternatives (061108) Sl.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Taxt &triketRrsloIflR is SblrreAt text ta tie 8alate8.
Bold text indicates a defined term
established at the averaoe of the two appraisals.
Appraisal(s) are valid for onlv 6 months. One
hundred percent of the monetarv pavment must be
made prior to final site plan/construction plan
approval. The County will develop the appropriate
fee schedule to review the appraisal(s).
iii. In lieu of monetarv pavmenl. applicants may
choose to donate land to Conservation Collier or to
another oovernment aoencv. In the event of
donation to Conservation Collier, the applicant may
ac~uire and subseouentlv donate land within the
proiect boundaries of Winchester Head, North
Golden Gate Estates Unit 53. another multi-parcel
proiect or any other land desionated bv
Conservation Collier. or contiouous to existino
preserved lands.
Applicants choosino to donate land shall be
reouired to demonstrate that the land to be donated
contains native veaetation communities eoual to
or of hioher priority as described in 3.05.07(A) than
the land re~uired to be preserved on site. In no
case shall the acreaoe of land donated be less than
the acreaoe of land re~uired to be preserved on
site. Land donated to satisfv the offsite veoetation
preservation retention re~uirement must be located
entirelv within Collier County and must not be used
as mitioation for anv other Federal. State or County
permit or approval.
Donations of land for preservation shall be made to
a federal, state or local oovernment aoencv
established or authorized to accept lands for the
conservation and manaoement of land in
peroetuitv. subiect to the poiicies and procedures of
the receivino entity. The deed to the receivino entity
shall specifv that the receivino entity will accept and
manaoe the land in perpetuity for conservation
purposes.
Evidence that donations of land for preservation
have been accepted bv and donated to the entitv
stated above shall be made prior to final site
plan/construction plan approval. Exotics shall be
removed in accordance with the time frames
provided in 3.05.07 H (2).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
169
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle l\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 A-B Native Veg Definition Single-Family
Preserve Setback Clarification Off-Site Veg Retention Alternatives (061108) SLdoc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text Etriketl'lFEH:l€l1'l IE surFeRt tell:t te ee ~elete~.
Bold text indicates a defined term
LDC Amendment Request
ORIGIN: Community Development & Environmental Services Division
AUTHOR: Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist
DEPARTMENT:
Engineering and Environmental Services Department
AMENDMENT CYCLE: 2008 Cycle I
LDC PAGE: LDC3:38 - LDC3:39
LDC SECTION(S): 3.05.07 Preservation Standards
CHANGE: Implement requirements of the GMP with regard to preserve management
plans and how they address natural diversity, stormwater management and agency
approved listed species management plans.
REASON: Required as part of the EAR-based GMP amendments to the Conservation
and Coastal Management Element (CCME).
Policy 6.1.1 (6) states the following:
"A management plan shall be submitted for all preserve areas identified by specific
criteria in the land development regulations to identify actions that must be taken to
ensure that the preserved areas will function as proposed. The plan shall include methods
to address control and treatment of invasive exotic species, fire management, stormwater
management (if applicable), and maintenance of permitted facilities. If applicable, a
listed species monitoring program shall be submitted pursuant to Policy 7.1.2 (2)(i)."
FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: Additional costs may be incurred on the part
of the applicant, where applicable, to address additional monitoring and maintenance
requirements associated with the requirements of the GMP.
Preserves less than 5 acres in size and where listed or protected species are not utilizing
the preserves will not be required to submit a preserve management plan, but only be
required to implement basic maintenance and signage requirements. Time and expense
will be saved on the part of the applicant and staff in not having to prepare and review
management plans for these smaller preserves.
RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None affected.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: Required as part of the EAR-based
GMP amendments to CCME Policy 6.1.1 (6)
OTHER NOTESNERSION DATE: Created April 14, 2008. Amended June 17,2008.
Amend the LDC as follows:
3.05.07 Preservation Standards
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
191
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 H.1.g Preserve Management Plans (061708)
SL.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Tant strikstluslJgtl iE: GloIrrsRt t9Xt t9 be 1:1818t81:1.
Bold text indicates a defined term
H. Preserve standards.
1. Design standards.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
g. Preserve management plans. Criteria i. ii, vi and vii below
are reauired for all preserves whether a manaaement plan
for the preserve has been approved or not. Preserve
Manaaement Plans shall be reauired for all preserves 5
acres or more in size or where listed or protected species
are utilizina the preserves. The Preserve Management
Plan shall identify actions that must be taken to ensure that
the preserved areas will maintain natural diversitv and
function as proposed. A Preserve Management Plan shall
be included on the approved site plans and shall include
the following elements:
i. General Maintenance. Preserves shall be
maintained in their natural state and must be kept
free of refuse and debris.
ii. Exotic vegetation Removal, Non-native
vegetation, and Nuisance or Invasive Plant Control.
eExotic vegetation removal and maintenance
plans shall require that Category I Exotics be
removed from all preserves. All exotics within the
first 75 feet of the outer edge of every preserve
shall be physically removed, or the \fee veaetation
cut down to grade and the stump treated. Exotics
within the interior of the preserve may be approved
to be treated in place if it is determined that
physical removal might cause more damage to the
native vegetation in the preserve. When prohibited
exotic vegetation is removed, but the base of the
vegetation remains, the base shall be treated with
an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved
herbicide and a visual tracer dye shall be applied.
Control of exotics shall be implemented on a yearly
basis or more frequently when required, and shall
describe specific techniques to prevent reinvasion
by prohibited exotic vegetation of the site in
perpetuity. Non-native vegetation and nuisance or
invasive plants shall be removed from all
Preserves.
iih Designation of a Preserve Manager. ^ Preserve
Manager sRall be idontifiod as the responsiele party
10 ens~re tRot tRe Preserve ManoQement Plan is
beinQ complied wilR. The indi'lidual's name,
addross and pRone n~meer sRall ee listed on tRe
Preservo Management Plan. TRe samo infermalion
192
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 H.1.g Preserve Management Plans (061708)
SL.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text ~tFik8tRr8b1f1f:1 is Eil:lrrBAt tSllt te ee eleleteel.
Bold text indicates a defined term
sAall se tlroviaea re€laraing tAe developer. 80th
tlarties will se restleAsisle lJntil slJch time that the
AemeewAers asseciation takes over the
maAa€lemeAt of tAe weseF\le. At tRat time, tRe
Romeovmers association shall amend tho plan te
previae tRe RemeewAer associatieA iAfermatieA ana
iAfermatieA re€laraiA€I the person Aima by the
asseciation to maAO€le tRe preserve. TRe
Aemeevmer's asseciatieA aAa tAe preserve
maRa€ler shall se restleRsisle fer aRRlJol
maiRteAaRce ef tAe tlreserve, in tlertletlJity. At a
miRimlJm, tAe Preserve Manager shall Ra'/e tAe
same 'llolaliflcaliens as are re'llJirea fer the alJtAer ef
an EIS, as set fertA iR sectieR 10.02.021'..:3.
iii. Desiqnation of a Preserve Manaqer. A Preserve
Manaqer shall be responsible for providinq the
developerlpropertv owner with technical assistance
reqardinq manaqement needs for the preserve and
compliance with the Preserve Manaqement Plan.
At a minimum the Preserve Manaqer shall have the
same qualifications as are required for the preparer
of an EIS, as set forth in sub-section 10.02.02 A.
The individual's names. address and phone
number shali be listed on the Preserve
Manaqement Plan. The same information shall be
provided reqardinq the developerlproperty owner.
iv. Wildlife Habitat Management. Where habitats must
be managed with regards to the species utilizing
them, Wildlife Habitat Management strategies may
be required to provide for specialized treatment of
the preserve. Where protected species are
identified, management strategies shall be
developed and implemented in accordance with
section 304.00. Where site conditions require
prescribed burns, a fire management plan will be
developed and implemented. The County will
accept state and federal manaqement plans as
lonq as they are consistent with the requirements of
the LDC.
'L Fire Manaqement. Habitats reqUlnnq special land
manaqement practices to control fire or to maintain
species diversitv in the absence of fire, must be
included as part of the preserve manaqement plan.
Where prescribed burns are not an option. habitat
manaqement plans shall include removal of dead
veqetation and periodic thinninq of veqetation. as
appropriate for the habitat type and surroundinq
land uses. Habitat manaqement plans shall be
193
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008~Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3,05.07 H.1.g Preserve Management Plans (061708)
SL.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
TeHt EtriketRrald~1:1 ill EildrreRt text tEl tie EleleteEl.
Bold text indicates a defined term
consistent with County approved wildlife
manaaement plans.
vj. Protection During Construction and Signage After
Construction. The Preserve Management Plan shall
address protective measures during construction
and signage during and after construction that are
consistent with section 3.05.04.
vii. Monitorina for stormwater in preserves. A
monitorina proaram must be implemented for
Preserve Areas that will receive stormwater. The
monitorina proaram must include provisions to
record monthlv around and surface water levels
and appropriate protocols to conduct annual
veaetation survevs. The monitorina proaram must
extend for a period of 5 vears. with annual reports
submitted to the County. A baseline report must be
submitted in accordance with a schedule contained
in the Preserve Manaaement Plan. Thereafter.
annual reports are reauired for 5 vears and must be
submitted to the County no later than 30 davs after
the anniversarv date of the baseline report. The
County will accept wetland monitorina reports
submitted to the South Florida Water Manaaement
District as lona as the reports conform to the
minimum reauirements provided herein and
address all of the Preserve Area receivina
stormwater.
viii. Inspections and Monitorina. The propertv owner
shall provide for inspections of the preserve bv the
Preserve Manaaer on a vearlv basis at a minimum
or more freauentlv when reauired to insure the
preserve functions as intended. The Preserve
Manaaer and the propertv owner shall retain copies
of written Monitorina reports in accordance with
reauired inspections of the preserve and make
them available to Collier Countv upon reauest.
ix. A preserve site plan with FLUCFCS Codes for each
of the habitat tvpes within the preserve must be
included as part of the preserve manaaement plan.
The location of pathwavs and other approved uses
within the preserve must be included on the site
plan.
194
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3,05.07 H.1.g Preserve Management Plans (061708)
SL.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text stFil<etRreblgl:1 is s\:lrFeRt text t9 be aeletea.
Bold text indicates a defined term
LDC Amendment ReQuest
ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services Division
AUTHOR: Barbara Burgeson, Manager, Environmental Services
DEPARTMENT: Engineering and Environmental Services
AMENDMENT CYCLE # OR DATE: Cycle 1,2008
LDC PAGE: LDC 3:39
LDC SECTION: Section 3.05.07 Preservation Standards
CHANGE: Add criteria to allow for treated stormwater within wetland or hydric
preserve areas when the additional stormwater will either benefit the preserve or will
have no negative impact on the native vegetation or listed species in the preserve or to the
uplands or listed species within or adjacent to the preserve.
REASON: There are times when it is appropriate for storm water to be directed into
preserves and this amendment defines those times.
FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: This will reduce the time staff spends on
requests of this type since there will be criteria to utilize. Restrictions on the types of
preserves which can be used for stormwater management may have a financial affect on
applicants who want to maximize development of their site.
RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: Required as part of the EAR-based
GMP amendments to CCME Policy 6.1.1 (5) (b).
OTHER NOTESIVERSION DATE: This version dated April 29, 2008. Amended June
18, 2008.
Amend the LDC as follows:
3.05.07 Preservation Standards.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
H Preserve standards.
1. Design standards.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
h (See Recreational Uses in Preserves amendment)
199
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 H.1.h.ii - Stormwater Uses in preserves
(061808) BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Text Eitriketlu'9\:1gA is G\:IrraRt tam: t8 Be ~eletB~.
Bold text indicates a defined term
ii Treated stormwater subiect to the fOllowino criteria.
a) Stormwater discharoes enterino the
preserve must be treated to meet the water
ouality volumetric re~uirements of Section
5.2.1Ia) of the Basis of Review For
Environmental Resource Permit
Applications Within the South Florida Water
Manaaement District. (SFWMD Februarv
2006) and meet the requirements of the
Interim Watershed Manaqement requlations
of Section 3.07.00. Discharoe of treated
stormwater into a preserve shall be in a
controlled manner to prevent erosion. scour.
and to promote even distribution.
b) Treated stormwater may be discharqed into
portions of preserves that are comprised of
iurisdictional wetlands, uplands comprised
solelv of hYdric soils. uplands that serve as
buffers around the wetland. in accordance
with the approved SFWMD Environmental
Resource Permit (ERP), or a combination
thereof. The hvdric nature of the soils must
be field verified bY an environmental
professional.
c) Where preserves include non-hydric soils
and uplands, treated stormwater may be
discharoed to the preserves provided the
followinq are met:
i) No listed species are present:
ii) The upland portion of the preserve
area is a mesic type environment
which (1) does not contain xeric
oaks, includinq mvrtle oak. live oak
and sand live oak. with scattered
patches of mostlY bare white sand
and a verv scattered overstorv of
slash pine, or (2) a closed canopy
forest of xeric oaks, includino myrtle
oak. live oak, and sand live oak. with
a scattered overstorv of slash pine
or sand pine and little oroundcover;
iii) Demonstration that the upland
portion of the preserve is not
inundated for more than 10 days
200
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 H.1.h.ii - Stormwater Uses in preserves
(061808) BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
T8xt etr-ikatl:1rS6IiR iE GlomaRt t8xt t8 se 9al8tea.
Bold text indicates a defined term
durino a reference wet season. For
the purpose of this subsection. the
reference wet season is Mav 1996
throuoh October 1996. In this
context. inundation means water
levels at or above the averaoe
oround surface of the preserve.
d) Treated stormwater may be discharoed in
wetland portions of preserves with listed
species. but shall have no neoative impact
on those listed species.
e) When treated stormwater discharoes are
allowed in preserves. the associated
stormwater facilities such as berms. swales,
or outfail structures, mav be iocated within
the preserve, but the area of such facilities
can not count towards the native veoetation
preservation re~uirement pursuant to
Section 3.05.07. These facilities are not
subiect to setback reouirements as found in
sub-section 3.05.07.H.3. These facilities
must be placed in a drainaoe easement.
f) Where treated stormwater discharoes are
allowed in a preserve, the Preserve
Manaoement Plan as reouired in sub-
section 3.05.07.H.1.o must address
potential maintenance problems and shall
also provide for a monitorino prooram.
Compatible veoetation must be planted to
replace any veoetation that mav be lost over
time in the preserve.
0) Stormwater shall be allowed in upland
preserves in the RLSA - WRA areas in
accordance with Section 4.08.00 Rural
Lands Stewardship Area Overlav District
standards and Procedures.
h.) A property owner may reouest deviations
from the above reoulations, 3.05.07.H.1.h.ii.
Staff shall review the plans and proposed
deviations to ensure wetlands in the
preserve will receive a benefit and uplands
in the preserve will receive no adverse
impact from the deviations beino proposed.
The process for orantino deviations shall
follow the procedure as set forth in the
201
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle 1\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 H.1.h.ii - Stormwater Uses in preserves
(061808) BB.doc
Text underlined is new text to be added.
Tallt stFiketl:lFel:lgR it Sl:IrraRt tellt t9 be aelated.
Bold text indicates a defined term
Appeal Section 18.06.10) for the EAC, and
shall be heard at a public hearinG of the
EAC.
202
1:\08 Amend the LDC\2008-Cycle l\Amendments\Revisions\EAC\3.05.07 H.1.h.ii - Stormwater Uses in preselVes
(061808) BB.doc