Loading...
EAC Minutes 01/29/2009 S January 29, 2009 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENT AL ADVISORY COUNCIL Naples, Florida, January 29,2009 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 SPECIAL SESSION at Collier County Development Services Center, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Room 609/610 Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: William Hughes VICE CHAIRMAN: Dr. Judith Hushon Noah Standridge David Bishof Nick Penniman Michael V. Sorrell Dr. Llew Williams Ninon Rynerson ALSO PRESENT: Steve Williams, Assistant County Attorney Tom Greenwood, Comprehensive Planning Michael Deruntz, Principal Planner January 29,2009 1. Call to Order Chairman Hughes called the meeting to order at 9:00AM. II. Roll Call Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. Dr. Hushon chaired the meeting. III. Approval of Agenda Mr. Penniman moved to approve the agenda. Second by Chairman Hughes. Carried unanimously 7-0. IV. Approval of meeting minutes (deferred to next meeting) V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences February 4th - Dr. Williams and Mr. Standridge need to leave early. February 5th - Dr. Williams and Mr. Standridge will not be present. VI. Land Use Petitions None VII. New Business A. Five Year Review of the Rural Lands Stewardship Program Phase II Report, Prepared by the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee, dated January 2009. Dr. Hushon provided an overview of the format noting the Council is reviewing the Phase II Report of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Review Committee (RLSARC) dated January, 2009. The purpose of the review is to provide proposed recommendations for the Program (based on the Report) to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC). Tom Greenwood, Comprehensive Planning Department, Staff liaison for the RLSARC provided the Phase II Report presented a slide show entitled "The Collier County Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay, Five Year Review Report" of the RLSARC noting the following: . The RLSARC conducted business for the past year with public meetings. . The Powers, Functions and Duty of the RLSARC were to: a. Review data concerning the participation and effectiveness of the Ovcrlay meeting the Goal objective and Policies of the FLUE and GMP b. Review the RLSA Overlay and make recommendations to increasc thc effectiveness of the Overlay c. Assist in determining thc most effcctive venues and dates to hold public presentations, and d. Assist in promoting public interest in the review process. 2 January 29,2009 . The meetings had the input of the general public, special interest groups and numerous experts in a variety of fields related to the subject. . The Phase I Report was presented to the EAC on March 7, 2008. Brad Cornell RLSARC Member continued the presentation: . The RLSA is a landmark program as the result of a 1997 legal challenge to amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. . The Dcpartment of Community Affairs found the amendments inconsistent with the States Growth Management Act. The finding was upheld during a legal challenge . In 1999, a Final Scttlement Order required the County to complete a 3- year study of its Rural Land Policy. . In 2002, a citizen committec recommended Florida's first RLSA overlay. . The DCA found the RLSA plan consistent with the Final Order and in compliance with the Growth Management Act. . In 2004, Collier County's first RLS Town (Ave Maria) was approved. . In 2007-2008, a required 5-year rcview of the Program was initiated by the RLSARC. . The RLSA is a voluntary program providing an overlay to the existing regulated land uses. . Goals were given . The voluntary Program utilizes the concept of identifying Stewardship Sending Areas" (SSA's) which are sensitive lands and allowing the landowners of the areas to remove certain land usc layers in exchange for land devclopment "credits". . The credits are transfcrred to lands more suitable for development or "Stewardship Receiving Areas (SRA's)" via a buyer/seller market. . The credits are then utilized in the Stewardship Receiving Area's as density for land development. . The program also utilizes the concept of additional "bonus credits" for certain activities (restoration of affected land, etc.) . As of December 2008, approximately 55,595 acres of lands have been proposed (or already converted) for preservation via SSA's Gary Eidson, RLSARC Member continued the Presentation: . The Program provides incentives and increases values for the land placed in conservation. . If the landowncr does not enter the Program, the underlying land use requirements apply (for residcntial, I unit/5 acres) Bill McDaniel, RLSARC Member continued the presentation highlighting recommended changes in policy and stating the goal is to "prevent premature conversion of agriculture land" to "retain agriculture activities." (Page 45 of the Report). 3 January 29,2009 . Group 1 - 1.6.1 (Page 47) - provide property owners with a conditional period of 5 years in which they can use the SSA Credits, and if they are not able to do so, can rcvert back to the original zoning. . Group 2 (page 51) - Provide for a new credit assignment for lands designated as Agriculture SSA of 2 credits per acre for Open lands outside of the Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC) and 2.6 credits for Open lands with the ACSC. . Group 3 (page 52) - dcfine the specific number of credits assigned to the type of restoration and provide for the cstablishment of credits for a north and south panther corridor; clarify the use of Water Retention Areas for stormwater management. . Group 4 (page 55) - Establish a maximum SRA footprint of 45,000 acres; eliminate hamlcts and redefine the use of CRD's to those uses that support agriculture, natural resources and economic diversity; change the Stewardship credit density ratio from 8 credits to 10 credits per SRA acrc; public benefit use acres count towards the SRA acreage; require SRA's to provide management plans to minimize human and wildlife interactions; require SRA t 0 provide a mobility plan; address road connectivity and maintenance and mitigation; addresses the identification of historic and cultural resources within the RLSA . Group 5 (page 62) - provide map of potential crossings (wildlife) to be developed within 12 months ofGMP adoption; require the most current and complete data to be used in prcparation of management plans and call for monitoring programs for areas greater than 10 acres; address compatibility and outdoor lighting; assess historical and cultural resources. In summary, a 2050 RLSA concept plan has been developed identifying the particular areas slated for proposed types of land uses and establish a maximum developable footprint of 45,000 acres (less than Y. of the total RLSA) and increase total lands expected to be placed in SSA's from 92,000 acres to 134,300. For the Program to be successful, it must have a sustainable market for the SSA credits generated. Discussion ensued if the proposed changes will create an excess supply of credits. It was noted the current system is working. A concept under discussion is transferring the credits out of the area, to locations that already have the infrastructure in place (i.e., further west in the County). Mr. Bishofrequested Staff provide a chart by FLUCCS (Florida Land Use Cover Classifications) code category, indicating acreage oflands in the SSA's that have been placed in conversation within the Program It was noted the new incentives increase the credits within the Program to approximatcly 404,000 credits or 89,000 new credits. The exchange rate has changed the density requirement from 8 credits per unit to 10 per unit per unit. 4 January 29,2009 Break: lO:25AM Re-Convene 11:40AM Dr. Hushon noted she attended 14 of the RLSARC meetings and as a matter of public disclosure, noted the Report generated in the Planning effort were not written by Staff. The Report was generated by consultants (WilsonMil1er and Cheffy Passidomo, etc.) hired by the Eastern Collier Property Owners (ECPO) who provided support to the RLSARC. ECPO signed a Memorandum of Understanding with some special interest Environmental Groups (Defenders of Wildlife, Florida Audubon Society, etc.) who agreed not to challenge the Plan. Tom Greenwood noted the document is a Report and/or Plan; it is not a document to proposing final language to be adopted in the Growth Management Plan or other County Ordinances. The language proposed for the proposed changes were generated and approved by the RLSARC. The program is voluntary and all meetings were open to the public. The final language for proposed adopted regulations will require approval by the Board of County Commissioners and the Department of Community Affairs. The EAC may review any environmental issues the Council feels have not been addressed in the Report and recommend Policy changes. Speakers Bill McDaniel, RLSARC Member stated in addition to consultants, many other Special Interest Groups and experts provided information to the Committee. Due consideration was given by the RLSARC to the "bias" of the information provided. Further, the County Attorney was involved in consultations regarding thc Committee's work. Gary Eidson, RLSARC Member, noted whoever prepared the information was not of issue to the Committee as it was heavily scrutinized. The report is not a biased report. Elizabeth Fleming, Defenders of Wildlife, noted they have participated in all of the RLSARC Meetings with input for all imperiled species. Their organization is taking a pragmatic approach and attempting to work with landowners in habitat preservations (agreements, etc.). The approach is intcnded to be implemented via a Habitat Conservation Plan for approval by USFWS to secure a final agreement. She stated the Organization was not "silenced" by the Memorandum of Understanding" as asserted. Russell Priddy, Eastern Collier Landowner addressed the Council noting the RLSARC should not be accused of bias and noted Environmental Advisory Council member Mr. Penniman is on the Board of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida; Dr. Hushon, Dr. Williams and others members of the Council are members of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. He noted the composition of the EAC could be construed as bias in relation to issues the Conservancy brings forth to the Council. 5 January 29,2009 It was noted thc Environmental Advisory Council members were appointed by the Board of County Commissioners to deal with environmental issues. Dorothy Hirsch, Citizen noted it is the rcsponsibility of Government to protect citizens. Staff should be in charge of gathering of information, those gaining the most bearing costs. She applauded Dr. Hushon for bringing to light the transparency issue. Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida noted the biggest poliey ehange reeommended is 45,000 aeres of new towns and eities to be slated for development via additional eredits. The original intent was the overall density of 1 unit per 5 aeres to be compressed to 16,500 acres with related services with areas set aside for preservation. The area was doubled before the original adoption of the Program. They are concerned the current intent of the Program has compromised its goals. The 5-year review's purpose was not to crcate sweeping changes in the Growth Management Plan as proposed. She recommended the Council review page 465 in the document, which outlined concerns of the Program expressed by the Department of Community Affairs. Tom Greenwood noted an Executive Summary included with the Report submitted to the BCC and will contain EAC, CCPC and Staff comments on the Report. Brad Cornell, RLSARC Member (on behalf of the Audubon Society) stated the process was very transparent with all documents associated with the Review available for public scrutiny. As a member of the Committee, without interference of outside authority, he authored many of the revisions proposed. The revisions were reviewed by the full Committee. He took exception to inference WilsonMiller authored the entire report. Russell Priddy noted the landowners paid for the original Program but are not responsible for certain concepts of the Program (restoration credits, early cntry bonus credits). The concepts were proposed by other outside Agencies. Alan Reynolds, CEO Wilson Miller noted page 76 of the Report provided an analysis of the credits/developable lands/addition ofrestoration credits during the history of the Program. The analysis indicatcd how the footprint of the 43,500 acres proposed for development was derived. Discussion ensued on the original Policy, which stated compact rural development would occupy 1/10 of the footprint that would otherwise be required under baseline (density) conditions. The Policy was mis-interpreted by various individuals to stipulate 10 percent of the land would be developed. Mr. Reynolds noted the original Study led to the Program. WilsonMiller was authorized by the BCC to be hired by the property owners to facilitate the process. The County was the custodian of all documents and Staff facilitated the generation of the Study. Following the study, the County, via paid consultants was responsible for 6 January 29,2009 development of the Program. The landowners retained WilsonMiller as a consultant to the process. He recommended the Council review the comments in the Appendix Section of the document, which were provided by various parties before the RLSARC undertook the 5-year review. The RLSARC attempted to address the comments throughout. In closing The RLSARC proposes a nominal change in the developable area, but provides large increase in preserved areas. He addressed the memo transmitted to the RLSARC, which requested an "expedited" review of the Report and bypass the EAC and CCPC. It was an attempt to expedite the process to save time and Staff costs. Terry Bengtsson, South Florida Water Management District addressed the Committee regarding a letter provided by David L. Hoffman, PG of Johnson Engineering to Tom Jones of Barron Collier Companies - Re: Eastern Collier County Water Resource Availability dated February 15,2008. He noted the following: . The letter analyzcs the potential requirements for agriculture and residential land uses in the area. . There is a plan in place to address water resources in the future. . Increasing storagc to reduee withdrawals on the existing aquifers is critical in the supply of water in the area. . The agricultural users utilize more shallow water sources . The residential users utilize deeper water sources which are more brackish and treatment is required for the sources. It was noted the issue of sufficient water supply is one of the most critical issues impacting the County. The Department of Community Affairs now requires Comprehensive Plans to ensure there are sufficient water qualities available to meet future development needs. Break: 12:05PM Re-convened: 1:00PM The Council reviewed the individual Policy Groups in Section 2 of the document (beginning on Page 45). There was detailed discussion on many of the areas within the Policy Groups. Group 1 - (Page 45-50) Policy 1.6. I Discussion ensued on the concept a landowner with a permitted SSA may opt out of the SSA (utilizing a "Conditional Stewardship Easement") and return to the underlying uses within a 5-year period, with a year cxtension. To meet this requirement, no credits may have been utilized. Question was - should this Section remain in the Growth Management Plan? The Council recommended Policyl.6.1 remains within the Growth Management Plan. 7 January 29,2009 Policy 1.7, lines #5-10 Existing Language All Credit transfers shall be recorded with the Collier County Clerk of Courts; (2) a covenant or perpetual restrictive easement shall also be recorded for each SSA, shall run with the land and shall be in favor of Collier County and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Department of EHyiroflltlental COHservation, Department of .'\grieHltare and Consmer Serviecs, South Florida Watcr MaHagomeHt District, or a recogHized statewide lalld trust, or similar lang;aage; and (3) for each SSA, the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement will identify the specific land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measure. Discussion ensued regarding the possibility of the Conservation Easement including more parties for signatures. This would assist to ensure the "perpetuity" of the Conservation Easements (at least three "outside parties" as opposed to the landowner, Collier County and one "outside party" on the agreements. Speakers Nieole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida recommended as many entities possible for signatories. She expressed concern the "Conditional Stewardship Easements" where the landowner can opt out of the SSA before a 5-year period could impact future planning initiatives (wildlife corridors, etc.). Russell Priddy, Eastern Collier County landowner re-iterated this is a voluntary landowner Program and the requircment of additional signatories would increase time and costs for the landowner, creating disincentives to enter the Program. Proposed revision: All Credit transfers shall be reeorded with the Collier County Clerk of Courts; (2) a covenant or perpetual restrictive easement shall also be recorded for each SSA, shall run with the land and shall be in favor of Collier County and one of the following entities: The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Department of Environmental Conservation, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, South Florida Water Management District, or a recognized statewide land trust, and (3) for each SSA, the Stewardship Sending Area Credit Agreement will identify the specific land management measures that will be undertaken and the party responsible for such measure or similar language. Group 2 - (Pages 50-51) Policy 2.2 Detailed discussion occurred on the merits of the recommended amendment in Policy 2.2, which provides for additional incentives (credits) to retain agriculture within Open lands not designated as SSA's, etc. All non-agriculture uses shall be removed and remaining uses limited to agriculture with a credit of2.0 credits per acre outside (ACSC) and 2.6 units per acre within ACSC's. 8 January 29, 2009 Tom Jones, RLSARC Member provided an overview of the concept and noted many landowners are small landowners without any current ability to develop sending credits. Speakers Nicole Ryan and Andrew McElwaine, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, noted the existing Program has done an adequate job of protccting agricultural lands. They provided a map prepared by the Conservancy entitled "Conservancy of Southwest Florida 2050 RLSA Concept Plan." The map is an alternative of the map proposed by the RLSARC. It compresses down the developable footprint and identifies a proposed Primary Panther Zone to promote retention of Panther habitat and a larger Panther Corridor. They recommended thc Council review the entire credit structure and expressed cone ern the proposed Program may weaken Natural Resource aspects (credit values) of the Program by in fluxing a large amount of new Agriculture credits. Break: 2:20PM Reconvene: 2:25PM Dr. Hushon polled the Council and determined at this point, the Council is in favor of Policy 2.2 as written. It may be re-addressed at a later point if necessary. Group 3 - (Pages 52-55) Policy 3.11 Detailed discussion occurred on Policy 3.11 -1,2 and 3, which propose additional credits for the restorations ofCaracara habitat, exotic control burning, flow way restoration, native habitat restoration, enhancement of Panther corridors, restoration of wading bird habitat, etc. It was noted the restoration is tiered (credits awarded for proposing a restoration plan, and additional credits awarded when the restoration is completed). Speakers Elizabeth Fleming, Defenders of Wildlife, noted Brad Cornell was responsible for recommending the amendment. They support a provision for Caracara restoration that thrive on ranch lands. Bruce Johnson, WilsonMiIler noted the Caracara is listed as "threatened." There is only 500 adult Caracara (1/5 of the Bald Eagle numbers) within the State and they nest in the same location annually. If the home range becomes overgrown, the Caracara will abandon the range. The proposal creates penn anent habitat for the specIes. Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida expressed concern over permitting the tiered restoration concept for lands that have not completed restoration (or not intended to complete restoration). Also, conccrn there is not a maximum number of credits limited under 3.1 -1; the proposed Panther Corridors, (which are narrow and 9 January 29,2009 only 600 feet wide in places); and the Corridors are not scientifically based and may not be viable. It was noted a technical team is reviewing Panther data. They were to be completed by December 31, 2008, but have not yet completed their task. Bill McDaniel noted the existing Program does not acknowledge Panther Corridors; the RLSARC utilized available data to provide initial Corridor locations. As of recently, more data has, and continues to become available regarding the issue. The results of the data may be incorporated into the Program as it evolves. Tim Durham, WilsonMiIler provided an overview of the rationale for choosing the proposed corridors. Discussion ensued between EAC members, Consultants and RLSARC members regarding the parameters in locating Panther Corridors and Highway Crossings. The following was noted: . The Florida Panther Recovery Plan does provide parameters for Corridors. . The evolving data with the issue requires further analysis. . Before any "language changes" (GMP/LDC amendments) are officially proposed to the Program, (which will require an EAC vote), more data will be available at the time to assist in making more informed decisions. . The RLSARC proposed maps are not "binding," they are "concept maps." . It was noted the Panthers do not utilize an existing active "northern corridor" today. . The RLSARC attempted to provide an avenue to provide corridors via awarding credits to landowners, if feasible. . For logistic purposes, it may require a Habitat Conservation Plan concept to facilitate landowner participation (if one landowner does not comply, the Corridor would be interrupted) Elizabeth Fleming, Defenders of Wildlife supports the concept Corridors, but is awaiting analysis of further data for final determination. Many issues still need to be taken into account to ensure the Policy works for the Panther. She noted the concept should be endorsed under the understanding more information is forthcoming. Dr. Hushon polled the Council who indicated they are in favor of the "tiered restoration concept. " Policv 3.13 Discussion ensued regarding the status of Water Retention Areas (WRA) located in Stewardship Sending Areas (SSA's). If the WRA is utilized in the Stormwater Management component of a Stewardship Receiving Area (SRA), it is must be included in the acreage of the SRA. lO January 29,2009 Discussion ensued on the Johnson Engineering, Inc. letter to Tom Jones, dated February 15. 2008 - Re: Eastern Collier County Water Resource Availability. It was noted the USGS estimates Collier County residents utilize 246/gpd as opposed to 11 O/gpd estimated by Johnson Engineering and whether the RLSARC relied on the 110/gpd figure to arrive at conclusions in the RLSARC Phase II Rcport. Tom Jones noted the I 10/gpd figure was obtained through usage figures from the Ave Marie water system. Discussion ensued on this issue and the status of the future water supplies for Collier County. It was noted a high percentage of Collier County water usage is for irrigation and newer communities are "re-using" water to reduce demands on the potable water system. Tom Jones noted he would request Johnson Engineering re-analyze the Report and provide any clarifications ifnecessary. He recommellds the Council arrange a preselltation on the issue of Water Supply in Collier County. Break: 4:15PM Re-convened: 4:30PM Group 4 - (Pages 55-62) Policv 4.2 - Discussion ensued regarding the proposal of capping the total SRA designation shall be a maximum of 45,000 acres and proposed RLSA Zoning Overlay District Map. Bruce Johnson of Wilson Miller provided an overview of how the proposed 2050 "build out map" was developed and its relation to the "Primary Habitat Zone for Florida Panthers": . He referenced technical studies/information that was considered: . Landscape Conservation Strategy for the Panther for the State of Florida prepared by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service in 2002. . A Scientific Review Team Study of the above Report. . Publication "How much is enough? Landscape-scale conservation for the Florida Panther" Randy Kautz, et al. . Daryl Land, (Panthcr Coordinator for the US Fish and Wildlife Service) analysis of detailed telemetry data. . The "Primary Zone" was first detailed by the Landscape Conservation Strategy Report. . The "Primary Zonc" is defined as "areas of suitable habitat consistently occupied by Panthers the past 20 years. " . In utilizing telemetry, the "fixed kernel statistical method for calculating home ranges" concept for establishing home ranges is the most accurate according to wildlife experts. 11 January 29,2009 . He provided a "Primary Zone" map, which identified the established home rangc utilizing this method. . An alternate method of telemetry analysis is "minimum convex polygons" which is not as accurate in determining actual home ranges. . The "minimum convex polygon" takes into account a Panther moving to a point for a brief period of time and returning to the home range, inaccurately inferring a broader area of "home range." . Some Groups advocate identifying the "Primary Zone" utilizing the "minimum convex polygon" method and have proposed maps based on this information. . The "Primary Zone" map created utilizing the "fixed kernel method "mirrors the development parameters of the 2050 build out map proposed by the RLSARC. . Daryl Land, has dctermined the daytime/nighttime telemetry data indicates no significant differences in the "home range" of the Panther. Discussion ensued between Council members, Bruce Johnson and Tim Durham on the merits of utilizing or not utilizing the convex polygons method to determine "Primary Zone" and other concepts regarding suitable Panther habitat. It was noted publications by Daryl Land havc utilized this method in determining the "Primary Zone," Tim Durham noted Daryl Land, who is familiar with Collier County and studied telemetry and the Florida Panther for over 20 years and indieated he is "happy" with the overlay map proposed by the RLSARC. Bruce Johnson noted publications are prepared for different subjects within the Florida Panther issue. The author utilizes any necessary data for the intended purpose of the publication. This may explain how different parameters may be utilized to reach conclusions in a Report or Study. Speaker Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida cited the US Fish and Wildlife Service Florida Panther Recovery Plan who regulates the Endangered Species Act references Primary Zones, not fixed kernels. The Conservancy Concept is to develop Sending credits based on the identification of a Primary Zone, which would be incorporated into the RLSA Program thus directing development away from these critical areas. Mr. Penniman moved to continue the meeting until February 5, 2009 at 1 PM. Second by Chairman Hughes. Carried unanimously 7-0. 12 January 29,2009 ***** The EAC concluded their meeting at 5:45 and continued it to February 5, 2009 at 1 PM. COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Chairman William Hughes These Minutes were approved by the Board/Chairman on as presented , or as amended 13