Loading...
EAC Minutes 02/27/2009 S February 27,2009 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Naples, Florida, February 27,2009 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 1 :00 PM 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 (excused) Dr. Llew Williams Ninon Rynerson (excused) Chris Stephens ALSO PRESENT: Steve Williams, Assistant County Attorney Tom Greenwood, Comprehensive Planning Susan Mason, Sr. Environmental Specialist ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA February 27,2009 1:00 P.M. Collier County Development Services Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Room 609/610 Naples, Florida, 34104 I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of meeting minutes [deferred to next meeting] V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences 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. VIII. Old Business IX Subcommittee Reports X. Council Member Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment ****************************************************************************************************************** * 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. February 27,2009 EAC - RLSA meetim! Continued from Februarv 5. 2009. Chairman Hughes called the meeting to order at I :04 PM. Mr. Penniman moved to approve the agenda. Second by Dr. Williams. Carried unanimously 7-0. V. 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. The Review was continued from the February 5,2009 meeting: It was noted Rural Land Stewardship Area Review Committee Members, Bill McDaniel, Tom Jones and Brad Cornell were present. Dr. Hushon chaired the item. Tom Greenwood of Comprehensive Planning submitted a revised document "Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) Individual Member Comments Receivedfor Vetting Related to the EAC's Review of the January 2009 Report of the RLSA Advisory Committee Report Entitled "Five Year Review of the Rural Lands Stewardship Program" - STAFF NOTE: "Reorganized Version... Comments by General Topic. " The Council reviewed the document for providing recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners in relation to the Rural Lands Stewardship Review Area Committee (RLSARC) Phase II Report, dated January 2009. Dr. Hushon stated it had been requested the EAC hear presentations by authors Thomas Hoctor and Robert Kawala of the Kautz, et.a!. Publication "How much is enough? Landscape-scale conservation for the Florida Panther." Thomas Hoctor could not be present, but a portion of the video from his testimony on the subject matter of determining Panther Habitat would be shown. The video was from a Collier County Planning Commission meeting during their review of the RLSARC Phase II Report. Robert Kawula, of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission was present for a live presentation. George Varnadoe, Cheffy, Passidomo, Wilson and Johnson objected to ~he showing of the video, as the speaker was not present to answer questions. It is not consistent with the format for this meeting outlined by the EAC at the last meeting. Steve Williams, Assistant County Attorney noted the proceeding is Legislative and the Chair could authorize showing of the video. The EAC determined to view the video, which highlighted portions of Thomas. Hoctor's testimony to the CCPC regarding the above referenced Publication. In the February 27,2009 video, he outlined, and answered questions in relation to the process used in developing the habitat maps for the Florida Panther as presented in the Publication. Robert Kawula of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission noted the following: · He was one of the co-authors of the Kautz paper. · His contribution was in the area of home ranges and habitat. · There is significant discussion on which methods should be utilized in determining home ranges for the Panther. · The publication chose to utilize the "convex polygon method" for determining home ranges. · A more recent method is the "fixed kernel method." · The home ranges defined in the Kautz publication have been widely scrutinized and withstood peer review. · The techniques and methods used in the Publication were "sound" and have withstood peer review. Speakers Russell Priddy, Eastern Collier Landowner requested clarification on the statement made by the President of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida "a unanimous vote of the Conservancy Board supports the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission" in relation to the Phase II Report. He requested assurance that Mr. Penniman had not made any pre-determinations on the Phase II Report. Mr. Penniman stated he is on the Board of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida; however he abstained from any voting on the issue. His function on the EAC is to represent the best interests of the Citizens of Collier County based on the information presented on issues. John Passidomo, Cheffy, Passidomo, Wilson and Johnson objected to the showing ofthe video, noting only specific portions of the testimony were chosen for viewing. He asserted if all the testimony of Mr. Hoctor would have been shown, the individuals present for the meeting would have seen the credibility of the testimony and was undermined during "cross examination" type questioning. He requested the video presentation be "dismissed" from the meeting. He compared the proceeding to a criminal trial where a witness is not allowed to be cross-examined. Chairman Hughes stated the video supported arguments for both sides of the issue. Tom Jones, Eastern Collier Property Owners (ECPO) noted the following: · The Consultants for ECPO never disputed the Kautz, et.a!. Publication. · ECPO takes issue with the interpretations of the Publication by one particular organization. February 27,2009 · The Publication addresses 3 points: Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation of Panther habitat. · The Publication recognizes impacts on the Primary Panther Zone · The Publication notes if you do impact the Panther Primary Zone, certain requirements must be met. · In addition the Endangered Species Act addresses the Florida Panther, which any Applicants will need to address at the time of the proposed development reviews. Allen Reynolds, Wilson Miller representing ECPO, provided comments on the document provided by Tom Greenwood: · On page 3, paragraph 3, there is no "credit cap" for the current Program. · On page 3, paragraph 3, the current Program does not provide for the re- adjustment of Restoration credits. · ECPO supports Option 5. Accept the Current RLSA Phase II Plan as Presented shown on Page 4. The Phase II Report was the result of a citizen Committee after 2 years of work. · Concerned capping credits will restrict property owners from participating in the Program. · Policy 1.18 allows other parties to acquire the credits (Private Organizations, County, State, Federal, etc.) to ensure conservation. Discussion ensued regarding concerns the escalation of credits generated within the proposed changes to the Program will de-value the existing and proposed credits. Allen Reynolds noted the landowners are willing to assume the risk of possibly de- valuation of the credits to achieve the overall goals of the Program. Bill McDaniel, RLSARC Member noted: · The RLSARC expressed concern over placing a cap on credits generated. · The proposed Panther corridors needed to be addressed at some format so future planning could begin to identify Wildlife Crossings. · It is not responsibility of the Program to protect the water supplies for the demands placed on Collier County. · The individual developer will need to address water supply at the time of a development application. Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida provided the document "Conservancy Recommendations for the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) 5- Year Review Phase Two Report" for consideration: · She recommended the Council review the CCPC recommendations, which are endorsed by the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. · The Conservancy supports a credit cap of 315,000 credits within the Program. February 27,2009 · The Conservancy supports shifting credits within the confines of the system if necessary (agriculture to Panther Corridor, etc.). · The Program should "avoid and minimize" impacts on Primary Panther Habitat and base findings on the Kautz publication. · The location ofthe (their) Panther Corridors is based on the "least cost pathways." Mitch Hutchcraft, King Ranch and Consolidated Citrus noted: · Expressed concern the Northern Panther Corridor as proposed (by the Conservancy) is in a location where there is currently no Panther usage. · A mile swath for a Panther Corridor along their property abutting State Road 29 will not be supported by the landowner. · The least cost p<l:thways are a "model," and do not reflect a condition feasible for the landowners. · He requested the EAC support the recommendations of the RLSARC. · Any environmental decisions must take into realistic landowner considerations and potential impacts that may be imposed. Anita Jenkins, Wilson Miller noted · The CCPC recommended lighting considerations be based upon the best available standards and not limited to one particular source (i.e. Dark Skies). · The Program should address concepts on lighting with specific language provided in the Land Development Code. Don Schrotenboer of Alico, noted: · The North and South Corridors as proposed affect lands under their ownership. · Numerous other landowners own land within the proposed Corridors. · It is unrealistic to expect15-17 landowners to agree on the conditions for a Northern Corridor. · Panthers do not currently exist in the area ofthe Northern Corridor. · He would not endorse a concept of the Corridor being in place before awarded credits are released to the landowner. Jennifer Hecker, Conservancy of Southwest Florida noted: · The Committee should not dismiss the science of the Publications by Kautz, et.al. · The Publication has been peer reviewed and endorsed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service Program and incorporated into the Florida Panther Recovery Program. · The Corridors must be functional or the credits must not be awarded. · Growth should be concentrated in areas to ensure sustainability and awarded agricultural credits should be limited to the Primary Panther Zone. February 27,2009 Matthew Schwartz, Sierra Club noted: · All the various Agencies telemetry indicates the Panthers utilize Private lands, which are critical to their survival. · Development creates unrecoverable tax burdens upon County residents. · The Sierra Club supports the position of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. · The RLSA Program is difficult to comprehend and unworkable. Break- 3:00PM Re-Convene - 3:10PM Dr. Williams, Mr. Penniman, Mr. Standridge and Dr. Hushon submitted comments in the document provided. The Council reviewed the document. Discussion followed on: · Capping acreage vs. credits · The ability to transfer credits out of the RLSA to western Collier County · With more detailed studies forthcoming (long-range transportation planning, Panther Technical Review Team findings, etc.), should any proposed changes be postponed until the results of these studies are available (i.e. I year). · How to proceed with the review and in what format should it be presented to the Board of County Commissioners (should members provide individual comments, or achieve EAC consensus) · A cap on credits may not provide incentives for landowners to place land into conservation and promote Best Management Practices for the land. · Best Management Practices would improve the overall quality of the habitat in the area. Dr. Hushon polled the Board on forwarding the Phase II Report to the Board of County Commissioners. Chairman Hughes, Mr. Penniman, Dr. Williams and Mr. Bishof favored postponing submittal of the Report for approximately I year, as there are detailed studies, which will aid in the review process forthcoming. Mr. Standridge favored forwarding the Phase II Report with individual comments. Dr. Hushon favored forwarding the Phase II Report with Environmental Advisory Council recommendations. It was noted this was Mr. Stephen's first meeting where the issue of the Phase II Report has been reviewed. Discussion ensued on the function of the EAC in relation to the Phase II Report. February 27, 2009 Tom Greenwood noted the function ofthe CCPC and EAC is to review the Phase II Report and submit any comments to the Board of County Commissioners. The Council reviewed Page 7 of the document regarding Panther Corridors: · Panther Corridors as proposed should be "functional" if approved. · Should development in Primary Panther require more credits/unit in these areas? Discussion followed regarding the subject of potable water supply within the County and RLSA Mr. Standridge moved, if it is acceptable to the Committee, to forward the Phase II Report of the RLSARC to the Board of County Commissions with EA C members providing individual comments. Without a second the motion was not considered. Tom Greenwood stated he would revise the document ("Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) Individual Member Comments Receivedfor Vetting Related to the EAC's Review of the January 2009 Report of the RLSA Advisory Committee Report Entitled "Five Year Review of the Rural Lands Stewardship Program" - STAFF NOTE: "Reorganized Version... Comments by General Topic) based on input today and submit it to the EAC for review on March 4,2009. Allen Reynolds, Wilson Miller requested clarification if the EAC would be taking public comments on the individual issues addressed by the EAC at the March 4, 2009 meeting. Dr. Hushon noted public comment would be closed and the Council would develop recommendations for the Phase II Report. Steve Williams, Assistant County Attorney noted all regular meetings have a public comment section, which allows members of the public to comment on any issues. VI. Old Business A. Update members on projects None VII. Sub-Committee Reports None VIII. Council Member Comments None IX. Public Comments None February 27,2009 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chair at 5:00 PM. COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Chairman William Hughes These Minutes were approved by the Board/Chairman on as presented , or as amended