Loading...
Agenda 06/18 & 19/2002 S COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA June 18, 2002 5:05 p.m. NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITrED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS". 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 THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (941) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. 1 June 18,2002 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) AMENDMENTS AS A RESULT OF THE RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE RURAL FRINGE AREA - APPLICABLE TO THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, EXCEPT THE EASTERN LANDS PORTION OF THE ASSESSMENT AREA (ADOPTION HEARING). 3. ADJOURN INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383. 2 June 18, 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) AMENDMENTS AS A RESULT OF THE RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE RURAL FRINGE AREA - APPLICABLE TO THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, EXCEPT THE EASTERN LANDS PORTION OF THE ASSESSMENT AREA (ADOPTION HEARING). OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners review for Adoption the attached GMP Amendments intended to address the requirements of the Final Order issued by the State of Florida Administration Commission on June 22, 1999, for the Rural Fringe portion of the Rural and Agricultural Assessment (Assessment). CONSIDERATIONS: Backeround Pursuant to the Final Order imposed by the Governor and Cabinet on June 22, 1999, the State of Florida has mandated certain revisions to Collier County's Growth Management Plan. The Final Order directs the County to conduct a Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment (the "Assessment") to collect the appropriate data, gather public input and to develop amendments to the Growth Management Plan. Major issues to be addressed by the Assessment include: protecting wetlands, wildlife and their habitats; protecting prime or unique agricultural lands from the premature conversion to other uses; and, assessing the growth potential of the Area by assessing the potential conversion of these rural lands to other uses, in appropriate locations. All of this is to occur while discouraging urban sprawl, directing incompatible land uses away from critical habitat and encouraging development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques. Such techniques may include, but are not limited to, public and private schools, urban villages, new towns, satellite communities, area-based allocations, clustering and open space provisions, and mixed-use development. The Final Order allows the County to conduct the Assessment in phases. Accordingly, Collier County has divided the Assessment into two geographical areas, the Rural Fringe Area and the Eastern Lands Area, also known as the "Immokalee Area Study" (and sometimes referred to as the "Rural Lands Area"). The Final Order requires that the County adopt GMP Amendments developed as a result of the Assessment process by June 22, 2002, excluding the "Eastern Lands Area", for which adoption of the GMP amendments is required by November 1, 2002. As part of this process, Collier County has established the Rural Fringe Area Oversight Committee (RFAC) and the Eastern Lands Area Oversight Committee (ELAC) to address the planning for each respective area. The Final Order notes that public participation will be the "hallmark" of this planning effort. The primary mechanisms to involve and inform the public and solicit community input during the Assessment process have included: advertised meetings of the advisory committees; an interactive Rural Assessment web site containing all pertinent documents, meeting agendas and minutes (www.nasites.conffcollier); presentations to various BCC advisory committees and community, civic, and professional organizations; presentation to various stakeholder groups; and, several special public meetings and workshops. The RFAC, for example, has held over 50 advertised meetings prior to Transmittal of amendments in March 2002. ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 The Rural Fringe portion of the Rural Assessment encompasses approximately 95,000 acres. Characteristics of the Rural Fringe area include: most parcel sizes are relatively small (typically, tens of acres or less); oxvnership consists of a few thousand different entities; most agricultural activities are small operations, and the uses are typically tree farms, plant nurseries, ornamental nurseries, etc. - many of which supply needed vegetation for urban developments; and, the area is under tremendous development pressure and contains a sizeable residential component. The Rural Fringe is a transitional area between suburban lands in Golden Gate Estates and the coastal urban area, and between the urban area and the vast natural lands and significant agricultural operations farther to the east. The proposed GMP amendments that apply to the Rural Fringe area have been developed with consideration of the unique characteristics of this transitional area. The Rural Fringe area contains significant wetlands and valuable wildlife habitat. The data indicates that portions of these lands provide habitat for a number of listed species, including the Florida Panther, Black Bear, Wood Stork, and Red-cockaded Woodpecker. The proposed GMP amendments utilize a balanced approach, employing both regulations and incentives, to address the requirements of the Final Order. Some of the proposed policies are employed at the landscape scale and others at the site-specific scale. The regulatory scheme includes stringent environmental protection standards for areas of greatest environmental value - including the recognition of restoration potential, combined with the incentives of the TDR (Transfer of Development Rights) program as a compensatory mechanism. Below are the major highlights of the GMP amendments approved by the BCC on March 4, 2002 for Transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). Major highlights of the Transmitted GMP amendments: a. Establish preservation and native vegetation retention standards in order to protect environmentally sensitive areas, based largely upon a landscape-scale view of lands. Those percentages vary from 40% to 90%, depending upon the environmental value. However, for smaller parcels, there is a guaranteed minimum clearing allowance. b. Designate Rural Fringe lands as Sending, Receiving, or Neutral; additionally, within the Sending Lands, some properties are also designated as Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) - areas of highest environmental value. Agricultural land uses are permitted in all tancl use designations. c. Establish a voluntary Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program as a mechanism for compensating property owners whose land value has been negatively affected by these amendments. Through the TDR program, residential development rights may be transferred from Sending Lands to Receiving Lands and, on a limited basis, to Urban designated lands. Neutral Lands are not eligible to participate in the TDR program; lands under publicly ownership are not eligible to participate in the TDR program. d. Sending Lands are areas of higher environmental value; accordingly, they have the most restrictive protection standards and most restrictive list of permitted uses. Residential density is limited to I DU/40 acres or pre-existing parcel size of <40 acres. Residential density may be transferred at a ratio of 1 DU/5 acres or pre-existing parcel size of <5 acres; however, this will be reviewed further to determine if it is appropriate to have a variable ratio dependent upon a given parcel's value and/or proximity to the Urban area. Once development rights have been transferred (TDRs used), allowable land uses are further restricted - agricultural uses are allowed to continue but cannot be intensified. e. Neutral Lands have an intermediate level of environmental protection standards. Permitted uses are virtually the same as prior to the Final Order. Residential density is allowed at 1 DU/5 acres. ItEM 2002 f. Receiving Lands are areas of lesser environmental value; accordingly, they have the least restrictive protection standards and broadest list of permitted uses. Residential density is allowed at 1 DU/5 acres; for parcels >40 acres, this density may be increased via TDRs to a maximum of 1 DU/acre. g. Exceptions'~o the above density limitations include: (a) Density Blending: allows some larger properties, within a Sending or Receiving area, that straddle the Urban boundary, to shift their allowable density so as to protect environmentally sensitive lands; and, (b) Rural Villages: allows a density of between 2 and 3 DU/A, with requirement to use TDRs; allows commercial and institutional uses; requires a greenbelt around the perimeter; depending upon location, limited to between 300 and 2,500 acres; requires public facilities impact analysis. h. Establish the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District to allow for provision of County central water and sewer to all Receiving areas and most Neutral lands. i. When a parcel is cleared for agricultural purposes, there is a 25-year prohibition on using TDRs; similarly, there is a 25-year prohibition on converting to non-agricultural uses. j. Existing land uses are allowed to continue. k. Designate the +/-305 acres adjacent to the west of the landfill, in Section 36, T49S, R26E, as Rural - Industrial District. I. Establish a policy whereby the owners of land _<40 acres and located along the edge of a Sending area, may submit data to demonstrate there is no longer environmental value to the site such that it warrants change from Sending designation. m. Establish an Overlay for the North Belle Meade area, resulting from an agreement between intervener parties to previous GMP amendments, that: reduces the development limitations and environmental protection standards for the Receiving Lands within the Overlay; may lessen the likelihood of a challenge to the North Belle Meade NRPA designation since the interveners (a major landowner in the Overlay area and two environmental organizations) agree to it's boundary. n. Provide that the necessary implementing land development regulations for these amendments will be developed within one year. ORC Report and Staff Response On May 23, 2002, DCA issued their Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report based upon their preliminary review of the Transmitted GMP amendments for compliance xvith Florida Statutes. "Objections" which are not addressed may result in a determination of non-compliance. An objection might be addressed by revising the text and/or map change; providing additional data and analysis to support the amendment; a combination of the two; or, justification that missing data and analysis is not applicable (where DCA's objection is based upon lack of sufficient data and analysis). "Comments" are advisory in nature and will not form the bases for a determination of non-compliance. DCA's "Recommendations" offer one or more ways to address a given objection or comment. On pages 4-14 of the joint EAC/CCPC Staff Report, within this Executive Summary packet, the various objections, recommendations and comments are listed, each followed by staff's response. In some cases, the only response is that provided in the Staff Report. However, in many instances, staff proposes text and/or map revisions to address the ORC. Also, some additional data and analysis will be included in the Adoption submittal to DCA to justify and support proposed amendments. The entire ORC Report is included in this Executive Summary packet. All text revisions since Transmittal are contained in the Elements following the Ordinance in this Executive Summary packet, and are shown in '~-''~''- ~._11... .... 1:~- double underline format. At the Transmittal heatings, the BCC elected not to include amendments with applicability beyond the Rural Fringe area (e.g. amendments affecting the urban area), stating concems that proper notice had not been provided for the non-Rural Fringe areas, and directed staff to bring those amendments back at time of adoption. Accordingly, some of the proposed revisions have applicability beyond the Rural Fringe area. (However, the amendments do not apply to the Eastern Lands study area for which 2002 separate amendments are proposed.) Some of these revisions with broader applicability are in response to the ORC, while others are primarily based upon previous BCC direction or some discrepancies/deficiencies/needed organizational adjustments detected since Trm~smittal. (As previously noted, some of these revisions have countywide applicability, less the Eastern Lands portion of the Assessment area for which separate amendments are proposed.) Other Changes Since BCC Transmittal Hearing On March 4~ 2002 Besides the revisions noted above in response to the ORC Report, staff is proposing some additional text and map revisions. These are primarily based upon previous BCC direction, or needed adjustments detected since Transmittal. Some of these non-ORC related adjustments/deficiencies/ discrepancies/needed organizational changes are minor in nature (e.g. "housekeeping" matters), while others are more substantial. These changes are noted on pages 14-16 of the joint EAC/CCPC Staff Report. As with some amendments prepared in response to the ORC, some of these revisions have countywide applicability, less the Eastern Lands portion of the Assessment area. Thc revisions arc shown, in the respective Elements, in '~"~"~ :tSP.:: ..... ~,.~ double underline format. Additional Discussion During their Transmittal hearing, the BCC directed staff to investigate the possibility of providing for a TDR variable transfer rate, dependent upon a Sending Land's proximity to the urban area or urban services, and/or it's appraised value. Included in the Executive Summary packet is the entire TDR Report prepared by Dr. James Nicholas, including a May 30, 2002 letter regarding this variable TDR rate issue. This will be an item for discussion at the public hearings. Correspondence As the Board is aware, there has been considerable interest in these proposed amendments, especially from potentially affected property owners. The "correspondence" section of the Executive Summary packet contains written correspondence received over the past +6 weeks; also, some written correspondence sent to DCA was included with the ORC Report. Further, over the past 4 months (from time of Transmittal hearings in February/March, 2002, to present) staff has received a substantial number of communications in the form of phone calls, e-mails, and letters. While a few were in favor of the proposed amendments, or were only seeking more information, or were proposing specific revisions, the vast majority were opposed to the amendments for the same reasons stated at the Transmittal hearings, e.g. impacts upon private property rights/perceived "taking" of lands, disagreement with environmental assessment of lands. FISCAL IMPACT: Implementation of these GMP amendments will require a significant number of Land Development Code revisions. Development of these revisions may require consulting services in addition to staff time. In addition, there will be future operational impacts that will likely necessitate additional staff resources, particularly in the area of environmental review. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: These amendments are necessitated by, and in response to, the Final Order. EAC Recommendations The EAC met on June 5, 2002, to review staff's recommended revisions to the Rural Fringe 4 JUN 1 8 2002 amendments as approved by the BCC on March 4, 2002 for Transmittal to DCA. recommendations are contained in Attachment "A," EAC and CCPC Recommendations. Their CCPC Recommendations The CCPC held their hearing to consider these amendments on June 6 and 7, 2002, and forwarded their recommendations on June 7; the CCPC recommendations are also contained in Attachment "A." Following each CCPC recommendation is a staff response, and language revision to reflect the recommendation. The Elements located behind the Ordinance in the Executive Summary packet contain the revisions recommended by CCPC; all text revisions since Transmittal are shown in dzx~!z .... of ~A!:z ..:zzx~,.ddouble underline format. Not specifically listed on Attachment A , but made a part the motion to support staff's recommended changes, is the CCPC's concurrence to make "housekeeping" changes in various locations in the Elements, e.g. grammatical corrections, changing a map reference from "exhibit A" to "the Future Land Use Map", etc. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board adopt the attached GMP Amendments addressing the requirements of the Final Order for unincorporated Collier County, less the Eastern Lands portion of the Assessment area for which separate amendments are prepared, subject to the specific recommendations identified in Attachment "A", and forward these amendments to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for their review, and compliance determination. PREPARED BY: David Weeks, AICP, Chief Planner Comprehensive Planning Section gtan Litsinger, AICP ~' Comprehensive Planning Manager Interim Planning Services Director APPROVED BY: J~sel~fli IC Sch~tt, Administrator, munity Development and Environmental Services Division BCC ExSum Rural Fdnge Adop~n G, Comp, David chn/6-11-02 Date Date Date ITEM J UN 1 § 2002 pg ATTACHMENT "A" EAC and CCPC RECOMMENDATIONS with Staff Responses (June 11, 2002) Revisions to Growth Management Plan Transmittal Amendments (Adoption) for the Rural Fringe and Countywide portion of the Rural Lands Agricultural Assessment, excluding Eastern Lands ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) At its regular June 5, 2002 meeting, the Environmental Advisory Council discussed and voted on the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments for the Rural Fringe portion of' the Rural Lands Agricultural Assessment Area and Countywide policies addressing wetland and wildlife protection policies. Staff presented the EAC with the proposed changes to the Transmittal amendments in response to DCA's Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report, as well as some unrelated changes. On a vote of 3:2 in favor of the motion, the following motion nevertheless failed because the EAC needs a minimum of 5 votes in favor of the motion to take official action: Forward the amendments as Transmitted to DCA, with the changes proposed by staff, with a Recommendation of approval, subject to the following changes: · Golf courses not be allowed in greenbeits; · Agricultural uses be more restricted after a property, owner uses the TDR program; and, · Delete the uses of sewer lines and lift stations from Conservation Designated Lands, Sending Lands and NRPAs. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) On its June 6 and 7, 2002 meetings, the CCPC discussed the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments for the Rural Fringe portion of the Rural Lands Agricultural Assessment Area and Countywide policies addressing wetland and wildlife protection policies. Staff presented the CCPC with the proposed changes to the Transmittal amendments in response to DCA's Objections, Recommendations and Comments report, and the EAC's recommendations. On June 7, 2002, the CCPC voted 7:1 to approve the following motion: Forward the amendments as Transmitted to DCA, with the changes proposed by staff, with a Recommendation of approval, subject to the followine ch anges/revisions: ~C,E~, JUN 1 B 2002 EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 Allow turf areas of golf courses only within the first 100 feet of the greenbelt and only in areas where no natural vegetation exists (previously cleared areas). Staff response: Staff has no objection to this recommendation and proposes the following revision: E) Open Space and Environmental Protection: 1. Greenbelts: In addition to the requirements for parks, village greens, and other open space within the Rural Village, a greenbelt averaging 500 feet in width but not less than 300 _feet in width, shall be required at the perimeter of the Rural Village. The Greenbelt is required to ensure a permanent un-developable edge surrounding the Rural Village, thereby discouraging sprawl. Greenbelts ~ shall only be designated on Receiving Lands. The allowable residential densi(y shall be sh~fted _from the designated Greenbelt to the Rural Village. The greenbelt may be concentrated to a greater degree in areas where it is necessa~_ to protect listed species habitat, including wetlands and uplands, provide for a buffer from ad/acent natural reservations, or provide for wellfield or aquifer protection, Golf courses and existing agriculture operations are permitted within the greenbelt, subject to the native vegetation preservation requirements spec!fled below in paragraph 2. Howov~r~ .qoIf course turf areas shall ~ only be located within '100 feet of the Greenbelt boundaries (interior and exterior boundary); further, these turf areas shall only be located in previously cleared, or disturbed areas (see CCME Policy 6. 1.2(1.).). ;:'2hi.'? e Allow the uses of sewer lines and lift stations, within already cleared portions of existing rights-of-way or easements, as permitted uses in Conservation Designated lands, NRPA and Sending Lands; otherwise, only allow as a conditional use, subject to certain criteria. Staff response: Staff has no objection. Land uses for areas within the NRPA overlay are governed by the uses in Conservation or Sending Lands. (See Recommendation #10 below.) Language is revised in the FL UE as follows: Sending Lands Permitted Uses: _lr) Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses ident!fied in Section 5. a) through 5. e) such as the following: private wells and septic tanks; utility lines, except sewer lines2 ........ :g~ ':,~. ............. ~ sewer lines a.d lift ~tations~ only if located ~ ilhit? ab:cad) cleared po~fi~qs ~ existinx_ r_ig. bts-of ~yay_pr_ qa~s_e_m_f?~.._ q?.Fessqo' to ~sf~'e~ th3; flu~_q[ _T~r_ ans~ti_~n Water_and_ Sewer District.'_and, water pumping stations necessary to serve the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District,~, Conservation Lands Permitted Uses: h. Essential Services necessa~, to serve t~ermitted uses identi, fied in Section a through above such as the following: private **,ells and septic tanks: utili.~, lines, exc~_t sq~.,er ........ ~"'~ ...... ' ......... ~ sewer lines and lilt station& onl3, ii' located within alread~ cleared Text Whh single underline or single .;mketSrc. u?,5 reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the c~ Management Plan. Text with double underline or double :,,,':5l:::,'-,r:,xg5 reflects proposed changes to the Transr primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommend: Page 2 of 12 AGENDA I'l'~]d rent r~v~th ~lons. JUN 2002 EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 portion.~ of exiwing rights-of-wa>! or. easements necessary lo serve a publicly' owned or privatel)~ owned central sewer system providiug se~wice lo urban ore,t,~ ,and,'o~; l~ Rural Transi(ipq_ ~I'~qr _.q~d _Sewer _.Qj:~'t!j~t.L_.5.Ct~yk'~C.l!fi .;:a';i:::: and water pumping ~tations necessa~ to ~e~e a. pub[ic[E o3wted_or priEateI~t._owned centr~d .water s~:stem proyiding seen'ice to urban arem' and,'br the Rural Tr~sition Water and Sewer District. Use TDRs to encourage workforce housing through the Residential Inffil bonus in the Density Rating System. Staff response: Staff concurs with the CCPC recommendation. However, any increase in allowable density needs to be supported by data and analysis. Given that there is not sufficient time for staff to collect and analyze this data prior to the deadline for Adoption of these amendments imposed by the Final Order, staff recommends this issue be referred to the appropriate committee ("affordable housing") for their consideration and potential future GMP amendment. For Section 24, T48S, R26E, change the designation from Sending Lands to Neutral, but require the vegetation retention standards of Sending Lands; and, within one year, require the County to complete a red-cockaded woodpecker survey; and, if necessary, based upon the survey results, re-evaluate the Neutral designation. Staff response: Staff has no objection with this recommendation since the Sending lands'preservation requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.2 (80%) and the wildlife protection requirements of CCME Policy 7.1.2 should afford the appropriate degree of protection for RCWs. In addition to adjusting acreage figures for Sending Lands, staff has also revised the North Belie Meade Overlay language to reflect this recommendation as follows: 4. Red Cockaded Woodpeckers (RCIV) *RCW nesting and.foraging habitat shall be mapped and protected_from land use activities within Sending Lands..~and Section 24 designated Neutral Land~. Although RCW nesting and foraging habitat shall be mapped within all Sending areas within the NBM Overlap, this shall be accomplished by a study specific to Section 24 conducted by Collier Coun.ty within one year o_f the effective date of the NBM Overlay. Within Section 24, the ~ Neutral designation may be adjusted based upon the findings of the updated RCW nesting and foraging habitat study. E. NEUTRAL LANDS Within the NBM Overlay. t.h. er¢. ar¢ ± ~2~_L2_80 acres o.f land that are identified as Neutral Areas. The Neutral Areas' consist of two ~ sections located at the northeast corner of this' OI.P ] illq.4 ......... : ..... , .h. _c. -'.t'l .................. I L... d.. r'' .ll;... .'~' .... ,~. C'..L.. 1 D . .~ $ . ~ '~1 Section 24 .~_ated in the_~ northwest lZOrliod! Of this Ov¢_r_l_c02~ The. ?rt(:s'er_~t_ton Text with single underline or single :~::ctSrm:g5 reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the cu Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z_~!::t.~..-zx~.: reflects proposed changes to the Transn primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommend~ Page 3 of 12 'ent Gr~'t h ttal lah~g'~'_ ge ~ ions. JUN 1 8 ZOO2 ~ Pg. ~ EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 standards for Neutral Land~ not within Section 24 shall be those contained in CCME Polic~' 6.1.2 for Neutral Landv. The preservgtion standards JOt non-NRPA Sending Lands, ~qffi. r~d by.C~TM~pli_~y 6.1.2. shall apply_iq_~'e~.t[on 24~ The Cot~!OL)~jd!.l~ef~brm an stud ' or Section 24 and i the results o the ~tud~' warrant the Plan will ~e amended e For the Rural-Industrial District (re: +300-acre area west of the landfill), add all uses from the Urban Industrial District so that both Rural and Urban Industrial Districts allow the same uses, and establish the vegetation retention standards as 50% of native vegetation not to exceed 25% of the site (similar to Receiving Lands preservation standards). Staff res£onse: Staff has no objection to the CCPC recommendations and has made the following additional land uses in the Rural-Industrial District in the FL UE, and the appropriate revision to CCME Policy 6.1.1. ,gC. Rural - Industrial District The Rural - b~dustrial District, which encompasses approxitnately ~ 900 acres of existing industrial areas outside of Urban designated areas, is intended, and shall be reserved, for industrial O,pe uses, subject to the Interim Development Provisions. Besides basic Industrial uses, limited commercial uses are permitted. Retail commercial uses are prohibited, except as accessory to Industrial uses. The C-5 Commercial Zoning District on the perimeter of lands designated Rural - Industrial District, as of October 199 7, shall be deemed consistent with this Land Use District. All industrial areas shall have direct access to a road classified as an arterial or collector itt the Traffic Circulation Element, or access may be provided via a local road that does not service a predominately residential area. No new industrial land uses shall be permitted in the Area of Critical State Concern. For the purposes of interpreting this policy, oil and gas exploration, drilling, and production ("oil extraction and related processing ") shall not be deemed to be industrial land uses and shall continue to be regulated by all applicable federal, state, and local laws. Intensities of use shall be those related to: a. Manufacturing b. Processing; c. Storage and warehousing; d. Wholesaling; e. Distribution; f ~ ...... High..techn.o]o~o'. g; Laboratories: h ...... ~ssembly~ L ._ Comtmter..an4_d.__ata~roce~sj~g: j_. Busin_e.ys~e~ices' tiS_. Other basic industrial uses as described in the Industrial Zoning District in the Land Development Code; I. Busj!tess Pa~.k_ y.5~e.~_~_ d~.Sq_u_5.~efl__.~glow., q~d q5 ~q,~_~r~bed ~q _the ~!~.~in.~.s',~ park~Zotfin~g District of the Land Development Code; and, gm. Support commercial uses, such as child care centers and restaurants. Text w4th single underline or single s,,'n, ket~reug~ reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the currcr Management Plan. Text with double underline or double c..'x5~.:::~.-:'-'3~ reflects proposed changes to the Transmitla primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommendat~or Page 4 of 12 ~rr.}tBA ITEM Growth 1 8 2002 i EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 Polic. v 6.1.1: For the Coun~,'s Urban Designated Area: Estates Designated Area: Conservation Designated Area. and Agricultural/Rural Mixed Uge Distric6 Rural-lndustrial District and Rural-Settlement Area District as designated on the FLUM. native vegetation shall be preserved on-site through the application of the .following preservation and veg. etation retention standards and criteria, unless the development occurs within the Area of Critical State Concern t'ACSC) where the ACSC standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element shall apt~l.v. Notwithstanding the ACSC requirements, this policy shall appl.v to all non-a?icultural develot~ment except for sin£le-family ah,,elling units situated on individual lots or parcels. The standards and criteria provided.fi)r in this policy, mcty. change.for the area governed by the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. which is currently under restudy, by Plan amendment. Coastal H~gh Hazard Are_a_ Non-Coastal High Hazard Area Less than 2. 5 acres 10% Less_!h~an~5~ac_ r~es ................ ] O~ Residential and Mixed Use Eq_u_~al to or greatest' Greater than 5 acres Development than 2.5 ac. 25% and less titan 20 acres. _Equal lo or treater than 20 ac. 25°/60 Go(f Course __ 35% 35~ Commercial and IndusO'ial Less than 5 acres. 10% Less than 5 acres. I 0% Development Eaual to or ereater Eaual to or than 5 acres. 15°.4_ greater than 5 acres. 15% Industrial Develot~ment ~Rural- 50%, not to exceed 25°.4o of the 50%, ,at to exceed 2~°.4o o[_' the Industrial District onlE) projqq( ,~i(q,~ p~rojqct site, JUN 1 8 2002 . ............ IO Text with single underline or smgle .............t,., reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the curr~ Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z..'aS::ct~rzuZ.~ reflects proposed changes to the Transmitt~ anguage primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommendatioffs: Page 5 of 12 EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 For Density Blending within Sending Lands, expand the minimum threshold area from 80 to 400 acres and omit restored wetlands from the calculation of the maximum allowable area that may be impacted (development area). Additionally, provide a definition of "unified control". Staff response: Staff has no objection to this recommendation and proposes the following revisions. d. Density Blending: This provision is intended to encourage unified plans of development and to preserve wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural features that exist within properties that straddle the Urban Mixed Use and Rural Fringe Mixed Use Districts. In the case of such properties, which were in existence and under unified control (owned~ or under, c~nl~act to purchase the applicant~Vd as of dune ~___l~', 2002, the allowable gross density for such properties in aggregate may be distributed throughout the project, regardless of whether or not the density allowable for a portion of the project exceeds that which is otherwise permitted. Densio, Blending Conditions and Limitations for Properties Straddling the Urban Residential Sub-District or Cb'ban Residential Fringe Sub-District and either the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral zxd o~r Receiving Lands: ..... Density Blending Conditions and Limitations _for Properties Straddling the Urban Residential Fringe Sub-District and Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands: (a) The project must straddle the Urban Residential Fringe Sub-District and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands; (3) The project in aggregate must be a minimum of,gO 40(! acres; (c) At least 25% of the project must be located within the Urban Residential Fringe Sub- District. The pro[ect must extend central water and sewer (from the urban designated portion of the project) to serve the entire project, unless alternative interim sewer and water provisions are authorized bY Collier County; (d) The Project is currently zoned or will be zoned PUD; (e) The density to be shifted to the Sending Lands from the Urban Residential Fringe is to be located on impacted or disturbed lands, or it is demonstrated that the development on the site is to be located so as to preserve and protect the highest quali_ty native vegetation and/or habitat on-site and to maximize the connectivity of such native vegetation and/or wildlife habitat with ad/acent preservation and/or habitat areas; (D The Urban portion of the project shall comply with the native vegetation requirements identified in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (for Urban designated lands). For those lands within the project designated as Sending, the native vegetation preservation requirement shall be 90% of the native vegetation, not to exceed 60% of the total project area designated as Sending. ~ ,,,.~: ...... ,...~_ ..... z._ : ....... .~ .... ~. .... : ..... "~*~' :'- '~-"* -~:~" Wetland areas that are impacted through lhq development process, but wl!ich, result in enhance_d Text with single underline or single :~.:::..rc, gg.. reflects Transmitlal language as proposed changes to the cm Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z~!:z:.~..-zx;.~. reflects proposed changes to the Transn primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommenda Page 6 of 12 nt Gro~'~ ~ JUN 1 8 2002 EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 wetland function, including habitctt ond/or flo~,!~!!ays, shall, be considered as part ~' th~' nativ~ vegetation req~;~ment seL_~br~ in this provision and shall not he considgred.q~ i~pqct~....qreas. TO~S~ wqf[q?td ar~.ct.~ a~.td/orflowways m~ for water_,~tottage.pro~ided..t[~at_t_he_..~,~ater discha~xed in tl~ese..aceas..is_ pr~rtreated (g) Permitted tt,'es .~r._..deq,~:[~' ble~d[t~g....qnder.....t.!~(s de~;_dg~.qjtt ~d a.~',~.p~iated qd~en~t~&.[ttqh~dingg(2~'courses m~ng_~h~.criteu~ golf cottrse~_~tjlht~, ltw iS;~u_tra[_~:e.q.._...[his prov:ision is notdntendctd, to eliminal.~' any uses pqr~,itlg(~ witbin the apI![~cabl¢ t~tder(*~htnd use Allow oil extraction and related processing as a permitted use, first, through the use of directional drilling techniques to the maximum extent possible to locate the surface footprint outside of Conservation Designated Lands, NRPAs and non-NRPA Sending Lands and placement of drilling and supporting equipment in non-vegetative areas; and, secondly, if directional drilling cannot be used, then the impacts shall be limited to already cleared areas. Third, if the above two options are not met, only allow oil extraction and related processing as a conditional use. Staff response: Staff has no objection to this recommendation and proposes the following revisions. SENDING LANDS: ~4. Permitted Uses: Permitted uses ::'i:/:i:: P:'i::::::~; :::::! S'ccc::d:::-'; S'c::di::g L:.::d:: are limited to the following: ... g;. Oil extrc!qtip!~ and ~Ja(qd prac¢.~s, mg~_o_nly wltere..dir_e~:tiomd_dr_illing technigue& cannot be ut[[ized to access th6' resource from outside of_ the Sending Land,, If dir~ction~!_~'b'i[l~ng is dete.rmined not lo be ~'_axtb_!e due...(o the location o.f the ~:*'o~rc¢~.)*'it~b.~ _the previoudv..cleared or. djsturbedarea~ .(~ee CCME Policv_.6,d,2(I2~ 6. Conditional Uses: (3) Oil a,~M~n~,a~xtraction and related processing, wl~r~._c.!eari~g_~_xjs_ting nativ.~ veeetation i s necessary ( reference 5. e)~_~bove) c-- -- ~'' -s: ....... t. _: _: _ ~ CONSER VA TION DESIGNATION: Permitted Uses i) ~i~.e.~rac~ti~.~..~a~nd~re~at.e-.dpr~.ssLng~-~'wher.e...~dir~c~'i~na~-dri~.~.ingt~chnjques~ canno~ b~.utilized._tP_gC_C_eS5 tl~.Eespqrg~_fr~0_~.__ou!s d_e of the_C__onsg[~atio~n _-Lands. If_ direc~tiQ!~l drilling is determined not to be feasib!e due to the location of the resource within the Text w/th single underline or single s~:rct,.rc~:g,, reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the cu Management Plan. Text with double underline or double :~::::~.-zxg~ reflects proposed changes to the Transt primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommend Page 7 of 12 ,ual langu~gge ions'JUN ]8 2002 EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 Conserxation Lands, then the resource rnav be accessed from previously cleared or disturbed areas (see CCME Policy 6,! .2(I)), Conditional Uses (3) Oil :.::d :::i:::rz! extraction and related processing~'here clearin_g.._.(~_~:[i_.,~(ittg nati_ve vegetation is neces~'ar~' (re~,rence_iz_ab.o_ve~ ' ' ' ' ~ Incorporate standards protecting wetlands within the Rural Fringe from hydrologic alterations. Staff response: Staff agrees with the CCPC recommendation and has added an additional requirement to the Rural Fringe wetland policies to address adverse impacts from hydrologic alterations. Applicable language previously transmitted in the natural reservation buffering policy (Policy 6.5.2(d)) has been added to Policy 6.2.5(1). This standard is based upon, and specifically references, SFWMD's criteria addressing the required separation distance between a wetland and the edge of a water body at a proposed water level control elevation. Text with single underline or single stN,.c.t.rc.'--'g,, reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the cu Management Plan. Text u,.ith double tr0derline or double z~'.:::Sr.~::g.~ reflects proposed changes to the Transr primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommend~ Page 8 of 12 Policy 6.=82.5: [[Tthin the Rural Fring. e Mixed Use District. Collier County shall direct land uses away ['rom higher functioning wetlands by limiting direct i~npacts within wetlands based upon the vegetation requirements Of Policy 6.~1,1.~2 off this element,, the wetland functionality assessment described i:: Pa!lc;' 5.$. ': cf :;:ia c:z::::::: !zelow in~_a_r_a.~, aph (2), and the final permitting requirements of the South Florida Water Management District. A direct impact is hereby defined as the dredging or filling ora wetland _or_adver~'ed3Lcb~a_t~gi_~g_the_ hyctr_ol~eriod 9f'a wedand. This policy shall be implemented as_follows: (1) The County shall apply the vegetation retention requirements of Polio' 6. 7.11._2_. o_f this element to preserve an appropriate amount of native vegetation on site. Wetlands shall be preserved as part Of this vegetation requirement according to the ,Collowing criteria: a. The acreage requirements of Polic? 6.~,,4L2 of this element shall be met bY preserving wetlands with the highest wetland functionality scores. Wetland functionality assessment scores shall be those described in paragraph (2.) Of this policy. Wetlands having functionality assessment scores of at least 0.65 shall be preserved on site. This policy is not intended in all cases to require preservation o£ wetlands exceeding the acreage required by Policy 6. 7.11.2 of this element. Within one _year, the County shall develop specific criteria to be used to determine when wetlands having a £unctionali_ty assessment score greater than O. 65 shall be required to be retained exceeding the acreage required by Policy 6.,7~1.2 of this element. b. Wetlands utilized by listed species or serving as corridors for the movement of wildlife shall be preserved on site. c. Wetland flowways through the project shall be maintained. d.. P__roposq.~..._d_e_.~'_e[opme!~t_..sl~t_a.[~ ~. te!n~od~:~_at_g_t!_~a_.t__ground water table__~tT_m_vctown~_ O~ diversions will not adversely change tt~e. hydroperiod of preserved wetland~ on or t~d.'~'ite. Detention and control elevations s]udl be set to protect surro_unding wethmd, s' rent Grow'l~t~ ittal lah~:l~ge OBS. JUN 1 8 2002 EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 and be consislent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. In order tO meet these requirements ~ci.~' .~t~]Lbe t~le,$~necj b~ ~c~cordance *>'it~y~g~ipqs_~ 2 2_.~.._5 ! 1 and. 6~.[~ (~.SFl~VlO~.x_~sis ~'Review, .lamta~, 2001. Upland vegetative communities may be utilized to meet the vegetative prese~ation requirements qf Poli~v 6.~ of this element when the wetland _functional assessment score is less than O. 65. 9. Provide for adequate staff to implement the provisions of wetland and wildlife protection policies. Staff response: Policy 6. 2.8 supporting the wetlands protection Objective 6. 8 states that the "County shall provide for adequate staff to implement these provisions." Staff has revised this policy and has added similar policies supporting native vegetation protection (Policy 6.1.8) and wildlife protection (Policy 7.1.4). Poliqy 6.1.8 77~e Cotum' shall provide/bt adeqz~ale str~ t_(Lit~lem¢nl.the Folicies suM~or~tjt~ ()pjecti~? 6.1. Policy 6.~2.11~ The Coun_~ shall provide for adequate stqff to implement supl~_~rt~)bjexTiv~_6.2. Polic), 7.1.4 The ('ounO slt_al~frovidef_)_r adequale stc~' to it,pit me nt lite policies supporting Obit clive 7.1. 10. Provide for appropriate land use density and intensity for NRPAs. Staff response: Permitted and conditional uses for privately owned lands in NRPAs overlying Sending Lands are those set forth in Sending Lands.. Permitted and conditional uses for privately owned lands in NRPAs overlying Ag/Rural Mixed Use District lands are those set forth in the Ag/Rural Mixed Use District. Permitted and conditional uses for privately owned lands in NRPAs overlying Estates designated lands are those set forth in the Estates Designation. Permitted and conditional uses for publicly owned lands in a NRPA overlay are those set forth in Conservation Designated Lands. Staff has added language to clarify land use density and intensity standards for property within NRPA overlays as follows: Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs) that are not identified as "interim" above shall b_o~_'e the following standard&: Text with single underline or single :~ket~r~.ug~ reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the ci Management Plan. Text with double underline or double :..~.!:.z:~rzxg~ reflects proposed changes to the Trans, primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommend Page 9 of 12 trent (~l~6vth ~ ~ittal language .O.)UN 1 8 2002 EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 I. Vegetation Retention and Site Preservation - CalcuLa_t_e.d.at the higher value of 90% native vegetation t~resent, or 90% of the total site area. Apt~licable standards provided .for in CCME Policy 6.1.2 shall also apply.: 2, Listed species protection shall be t~rovided for as specified in CCME Policy 7.1.2.: $. Permitted and conditional uses.for publicly owned land; within an NRPA Overly' shall be those as set.forth under the Conservation Desi..tmation. 4. For pri~atel~!._..o~?~led lands_ w~thin__a_N_RPA Over!al; ~tnd designated Sending hinds or Estates, re,~ectjy¢.!y..t~ermitte_d and conditional_ uses_ shall b~ ~t. ose (ts set forth in the Rural Fringe Mixed &ge District 5. For privatel¥ o~v~ned hinds .~ithjn ~ NRPA Over!a3' and designated Estates, permilted and conditional uses shall be those as set ~)rth iii the Extales Desi~atign w?!hi!! the Golden Gate ,Irea .~fa5'tet; Plat[ in recogt~.itio~? o. f Florida's private propert)! rights Icm,s. ,ts the.se t?rivute!}, owned Estr~tes Designated lands, are ac~B~?_Tg_d~/br con~2erva_tio~ tmrposes, the Plan will b_e_ amenc~ed to change th¢. Designation to Consem'ation~ 6. There are approximately 15 sections of privately owned land within a NRPA Overlay that are not designated Sending and are not located within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (where all Sending Lands are located). Eight (8) o.f these sections, toTown as the '~;b_ole-in-the-doughnut "are located within the South Golden Gate Estates NRPA and surrounded by platted Estates lots, almost all of which have been acquired b}' the State under the Florida Forever pro?am as part o.f the Pica)'une Strand State Forest. The remaining, seven (7} sections are within an approve&tmtigation bank located north and west of Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary. Uses on these hinds are limited to restoration and mitigation and. at the completion of this restoration process, these lands will be deeded to a land management entity for conservation purposes. As these privately owned Axricuhural/Rural Des(~.?ated lands are acquired for conservation purposes, the Plan will be amended to change the Designation to Conservation. Until such time. in recognition of Florida's private property r(g. hts lrm's, permitted and conditional uses.fot7 (hese privatel~.: owned lands shall be those set £orth in the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District. 11. Clarify that the uses for the land north of the landfill do not include expansion of the landfill. Staff response: Staff has no objection to this recommendation; this is a policy decision for the BCC as it relates to the County's solid waste management strategy. The following language has been added to the FL UE Sending Lands designation. Conditional Uses: a) The_following uses are conditionally permitted subject to approval through a public hearing process: (1) Essential services .... approved. (2) Public _facilities, including solid waste and resource recoverT _facilities, and public vehicle and equipment storage and repair facilities, shall be permitted within Section 25, Township >~0~9S, Range 26E, on lands adjacent to the existing Text w/th single underline or single ............. ~,.. reflects Transmit"iai language as proposed changes to the curr¢ Management Plan. Text w/th double underline or double :.."52:::E.-z;:gE reflects proposed changes to the Transmit primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommendati~ Page 10 of 12 Gro~t. ~ language JUN 18 2002 EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 County land_fill. This shall not be i~tterIn'eted to allow/bt the expansion oj Ih_q la~dfi!l int° Section. 25for.the purpose (~solidAv~.~'te disflos_(tl_., 12. Delete the reference to the scarcity of a specific type of rock in the North Belle Meade Overlay. Staff response: Staff agrees and has made the appropriate revisions as noted below: C. RECEIVING AREAS Within the NBM Overlay, Receiving Areas are identified for clustering of residential dwelling units, central water and sewer service, and _for the trans_fer of development rights and comprise + 3,368 acres in the northern and northwestern portions of the NBM Overlay. The Receiving Areas are generally located in the northern portion of NBM Overlay and are generally contiguous to Golden Gate Estates. Two sections are directly to the south of the APAC Earth Mining Operation. The Receiving Area exhibits areas of less environmental sensitivity than other portions of the NBM Overlay, because of their proximity to Golden Gate Estates and prior clearing and disturbance to the land. Within the Receiving Area of the NBM Overlay', are located Sections 21, 28 and the west % o_f Sections 22 and 27, which have been largely assembled under one property ownership. These lands are located south of the existing APAC earth mining operation and have been largely impacted by agricultural operations. The location of Sections 21 and 28 is just to the south and west of Wilson Boulevard located in the southern portion qf north Golden Gate Estates. Because an earth mining operation and asphalt plant uses have existed for many years in the area, and the surrounding lands in Sections 21, 28 and the western halves of Sections 22 and 27 are re£_orled lo contain ~ Florida Department of Transportation grade rock for road construction, these uses are encouraged to remain and expand on Sections 21 and 28 and on the western quarters of Sections 22 and 27. No conditional use approvals shall be required for earth mining or an asphalt plant within Sections 21, 28 and the western quarters of Sections 22 and 27, however, the County's existing excavation and explosive regulations shall apply. 13. Ensure that staff "shall" consider (vs. "may" consider) the recommendations of state and federal wildlife agencies regarding listed species consistent with GMP policies. Staff response: Staff agrees and has made the appropriate revision to Policy 7.1.2(3) as shown below: (3) The County ...~W shall, qon.~![tent with app[[c(tb!e GM? policies, consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance _/'rom the Florida Fish and Wildl!fe Conservation Commission and recommendations from the US Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing development orders on property containing listed species. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case by case basis, may change the requirements contained Text with single underline or single :t,dket~reag~ reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Management Plan. Text with double underline or double :.~!::t~rv.;:g~ reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommendations Page 11 of 12 3rowth ~A ITEM angual~. 2002 EAC/CCPC Recommendations Rural Fringe Adoption Amendments June 11, 2002 within these wildlife protection policies and an3~ such change shall be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan. 14. Clarify the language providing for minimum clearing standards for small properties. Staff res£onse: Staff agrees and has made the appropriate revision to Policy 6.1.2 as shown below: .fi In order to ensure reasonable use and to protect the private properS_' rights of owners of smaller parcels of land within lands designated Rural Fringe Mixed Use District on the Future Land Use Map, including nonconforming lots of record which existed on or before dune 22, 1999, for lots, parcels or fractional units of land or water equal to or less than_five (5) acres in size, ~ native vegetation clearing ~ shall be allowed, at 20% or 25,000 square feet o_f the lot or parcel or fractional unit, whichever is greater, exclusive of any clearing necessa~_' to provide for a 15-foot wide access drive up to 660 feet in length. For lots and parcels greater than 5 acres but less than 10 acres, up to 20% of the parcel ma3: be cleared. This allowance shall not be considered a maximum clearing allowance where other provisions qf this Plan allow for greater clearing amounts. These clearing limitations shall not prohibit the clearing of brush or under-sto~T vegetation within 200feet of structures in order to minimize wildfire fuel sources. Text with single underline or single stri,.et,,reug., reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the curren Managemenl Plan. Text with double underline or double ~'.:z:Sr:.~:g~ reflects proposed changes to the Transmitta primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or response to EAC/CCPC recommendatior Page 12 of 12 Growth lan~-'J~N 18 2002 ,,. 1 JEB BUSH Governor DEPARTMENT MUNITY AFFAIRS "Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call home" STEVEN M. SEIBERT Secretary May 23, 2002 The Honorable Jim Coletta Chairman, Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 Dear Chairman Coletta: The Department has completed its review of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for Collier (DCA No. 02-R 1), which was received on March 14, 2002. Copies of the proposed amendment have been distributed to appropriate state, regional and local agencies for their review and their comments are enclosed. The County has made significant progress in responding to the Administration Commission's Final Order of June 22, 1999, for the Rural Fringe Area. The separation of the Rural Fringe Area into sending and receiving zones, the creation of a transfer of development rights program, and the incentives for developing Rural Villages are innovative and effective planning techniques and we believe the County is heading in the right direction which seeks to balance private property rights with environmental protection. We also believe that with further refinements, as are suggested in the attached Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) report, the amendment will fully address the requirements of the Final Order to protect environmentally sensitive areas, direct incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, and provide for cost-efficient delivery of public facilities and services. The Final Order called for public participation to be the hallmark of this planning effort. We are aware that the County Commission, its staff, appointed voluntary citizen boards, and the public have spent many hours gathering and analyzing the data, debating alternative approaches, and developing a systematic program for the protection of the County's natural heritage. We commend all who have participated in this effort. The attached ORC report includes both objections and comments. Our objections focus primarily on ensuring that the comprehensive plan serves as a meaningful and predictable guide 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD 3 TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2100 Phone: 850.488.8466/Suncom 278.8466 FAX: 850.921.0781/Suncom 291.0781 lnternet address: http://www.dca.state.flus CRITICAL STATE CONCERN FIELD OFFICE COMMUNITY PLANNING EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT HOUSING & CO'. 2796 I.)~erseas Highv. ay. Suite 212 2555 Shumard Oak Boule.,ard Boulevard 2555 Shumal'd Oak Boulevard Maxathon. Il. 33(150-2227 Tallaha.~see. Fl. X2399-2 [~ Talla~a~see, FL 32399-211}1! (3,~51289-24112 1851)1 488-2356 (85(1} 413-9969 IgS0) 48§-7956 2555 Shumard Oak "rallat~,~ee FL 3239~2 ~, ~'g. / C3 for the use and development of land and the preservation and protection of important natural resources. We have included recommendations for improvements to policies pertaining to Natural Resource Protection areas, Rural Villages, and the types and intensities of uses within the The Honorable Jim Coletta May 23, 2002 Page Two Receiving, Neutral, and Rural/Agricultural land use districts. It is important the County carefully considers and adequately addresses the issues raised in our objections. Our comments are advisory in nature and are intended to assist the County in further strengthening the amendments. In particular, we would suggest that the County consider including more explicit guidance and standards to ensure the form, design, and mix of uses within the Rural Villages in order to achieve the intended purpose. To that end we have included an example of policies which we think will help in the formulation of these standards. We have met several times with County staff and gone through these issues in detail. Based on these discussions, we believe there should be no difficulties in quickly addressing these issues. Upon receipt of this letter, Collier County has 60 days in which to adopt, adopt with changes, or determine not to adopt the proposed amendment. The process for adoption of local comprehensive plan amendments is outlined in Section 163.3184, F.S., and Rule 9J-11.011, F.A.C. Within ten working days of the date of adoption, Collier County must submit the following to the Department: Three copies of the adopted comprehensive plan amendment; A copy of the adoption ordinance; A listing of additional changes not previously reviewed; A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, which were not included in the ordinance; and A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes to the Department's Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report. The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a compliance review, make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent. JUN 1 8 2002 In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendment, and pursuant to Rule 9J-11.011(5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to the Executive Director of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. Please be advised that the Florida Legislature amended Section 163.3184(8)(b), F.S., requiring the Department to provide a courtesy information statement regarding the Department's The Honorable Jim Coletta May 23, 2002 Page Three Notice of Intent to citizens who furnish their names and addresses at the local government's plan amendment transmittal (proposed) or adoption hearings. In order to provide this courtesy information statement, local governments are required by the law to furnish to the Department the names and addresses of the citizens requesting this information. This list is to be submitted at the time of transmittal of the adopted plan or plan amendment. As discussed in our letter sent to you on May 25, 2001, outlining the changes to Section 163.3184(8)(b), F.S., which were effective July 1,2001, and providing a model sign-in information sheet, please provide these required names and addresses to the Department when you transmit your adopted amendment package for compliance review. For efficiency, we encourage that the information sheet be provided in electronic format. Please contact Mike McDaniel, Growth Management Administrator, or Bernard Piawah, Planning Manager at (850) 487-4545, if you need additional assistance. Sincerely, Charles Gauthier, AICP Chief, Bureau of Local Planning CGPop Enclosures: Review Agency Comments cc: Mr. David Burr, Acting Director, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Mr. David Weeks, Collier County Planning Department Ms. Nancy Linnan, Esquire, Carlton Fields AC. iEN~A ITE~4 3. JUN 1 8 2002 - Pm. ~0 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT COLLIER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT DCA No. 02-R 1 May 23, 2002 Division of Community Planning Bureau of Local Planning This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 9J-11.010, F.A.C. ,~?,[NOA JUN 1 8 2007 INTRODUCTION The following objections, recommendations and comments are based upon the Department's review of the Collier County's proposed amendment to its Comprehensive Plan (DCA No. 02-R1), pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.). The objections relate to specific requirements of relevant portions of Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Codes (F.A.C.), and Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. The objections include a recommendation of an approach that might be taken to address the cited objection. Other approaches may be more suitable in specific situations. Some of these objections may have initially been raised by one of the other external review agencies. If there is a difference between the Department's objection and the external agency advisory objection or comment, the Department's objection would take precedence. The County should address each of these objections when the amendment is resubmitted for our compliance review. Objections which are not addressed may result in a determination that the amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have raised an objection regarding missing data and analysis items which the County considers not applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a statement justifying its non-applicability pursuant to Rule 9J-5.002(2), F.A.C., must be submitted. The Department will make a determination on the non-applicability of the requirement, and if the justification is sufficient, the objection will be considered addressed. The comments which follow the objections and recommendations are advisory in nature. Comments will not form bases of a determination of non-compliance. They are included to call attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive, concerning planning principles, methodology or logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar, organization, mapping, and reader comprehension. Appended to the back of the Department's report are the comment letters from the other state review agencies and other agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are advisory to the Department and may not form bases of Departmental objections unless they appear under the "Objections" heading in this report. AC.~.~A ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 OBJECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 02-R1 COLLIER COUNTY I. CONSISTENCY WITH RULE 9J-5., FAC., & CHAPTER 163., F.S. Collier County has proposed several amendments to the Future Land Use Element, Future Land Use Map series, Public Facilities Element, and Conservation and Coastal Management Element in order to address the requirements of the Final Order of June 22, 1999. Collier County's EAR-based Amendment was found not in compliance on December 24, 1997, and subsequently underwent a formal hearing by an Administrative Law Judge who issued a recommended order on March 19, 1999, finding the County's amendment not in compliance. As a result, the Administration Commission on June 22, 1999, entered a Final Order directing Collier County to take certain remedial actions. Specifically, the Final Order directs the County to undertake a Rural and Agricultural Assessment (Assessment) of the County, utilizing public input and gathering data on a variety of subjects including wetlands, wildlife and their habitats, the directing of incompatible land uses from environmentally sensitive areas, etc. Based on the result of the assessment, the County is required to propose amendments to the comprehensive plan and could do so in phases. This package of amendment pertains to Rural Fringe area only, and it represents phase one of the Assessment related amendments. The main features of the amendment include designation of natural resource protection areas, the transfer of development rights from environmentally sensitive areas to designated receiving areas, rural villages and open space requirements. The proposed amendment tract the recommendations of the Final Order. While the Natural Resource Protection Area designations and the Transfer of Development Rights program represent significant effort by the County to offer greater protection to natural resources, the Department is concerned that certain provisions of the amendment are not adequately defined. For example the rural villages concept is lacking in detail regarding their locations and implications for public services planning. Thus, the Department has identified the following objections which need to be addressed in order to achieve compliance: OBJECTIONS Future Land Use Element: Density Blending: Provision d., page 35, would allow the blending of density within properties that straddle the Urban Mixed Use and Rural Fringe Mixed Use Districts, in order to encourage a unified plan of development and the preservation of wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural features. This provision has the potential to direct development to areas, which due to their environmental sensitivity, are intended to receive greater regulation through their designation as Sending Areas. Therefore, it is unclear from the data and analysis provided that there is a need for density blending or that it would result in directing more intensive development away from envi~ onmotatll4~A ~o,~ JUN 1 8 2002 1 sensitive lands within the receiving areas. Furthermore, because the areas eligible for this provision are unidentified, density blending introduces an element of uncertainty into the growth management program proposed for the Rural Fringe thereby undermining the establishment of meaningful and predictable standards. Section 163.3177(6)(a), (c), (d), Florida Statutes (FS); Rule 9J-5.005(2), & (6); Rule 9J- 5.006(3)(b)10., (3)(c)7., Florida Administrative Code (FAC.). Recommendation: It is important that the County justify the need for density blending, provide a separate map identifying the properties that will be eligible for the applica.tion of the proposed blending provision, and provide an analysis of the suitability of the identified areas for density blending. Density blending may be appropriate if its use is very carefully limited. Agricultural/Rural Land Use designation: The Agricultural/Rural Land Use designation (pages 45-46) allows commercial and industrial, as principal uses. However, there is no definition of the intensity and type of commercial and industrial activities that will be allowed. Furthermore, permitting commercial and industrial development without limit throughout the Agricultural/Rural Land Use designation could result in the premature conversion of agricultural lands, which will be inconsistent with the requirements of the Final Order, create incompatible land uses, encourage urban sprawl, fail to ensure the provision of public facilities, and create uncertainty. Section 163.3177(6)(a), FS; Rule 9J-5.005(6); Rule 9J-5.006(3)(b)l., 8., (3)(c), 2., 3., & 7., FAC. Recommendation: Revise the plan to define and specify the intensity standards and development controls that will be applicable to commercial and industrial uses within the Agricultural/Rural Land Use designation. Deferring to the Land Development Regulations: The type and density and intensity of uses for a number of uses in the Receiving Lands and in Rural Villages (pages 50-51) as well as in Neutral Lands (page 53) are inappropriately deferred to the land development regulations (LDR) instead of establishing them in the plan as required. This is also the case within the Agricultural/Rural Designation and elsewhere in the Future Land Use Element. For example, commercial developments, and research and technology parks are allowed in Rural Villages. However, the type, intensity and percentage distribution among the mix of uses which will be allowed in the Rural Villages are not stated in the plan. Furthermore, the term "essential services" is not defined in the plan. This level of specificity is required to be included in the plan, while the details for implementation should be included in the LDR. Section 163.3177(6)(a), FS, 163.3201, FS; Rule 9J-5.003(90)., 9J-5.005(6); 9J- 5.006(3)(c) 1., 7., & (4)(c) FAC. Recommendation: Revise the plan to specify, the type of uses and the density and intensity, that will be applicable to these uses (the details of implementation should be included in the LDR). In the case of commercial uses, and research and technology parks, the type of activities allowed as well as their intensity of uses should ....... A 2 ~o. jL JUN 1 8 2002 - .g., Intensity guidelines may be expressed in the form of floor area ratio, or other measures such as percentage of impervious surface combined with height limitation. The term "essential services" should be defined in the plan. Mixed use categories should be defined in terms of the type of uses, their densities and intensities, and the percentage distribution among the mix of uses, or other objective measurement. TDR Rate: Paragraph 3 (page 55), pertaining to the transfer of development rights (TDR), states that "to ensure appropriate compensation to land owners within the sending areas, the Board of County Commissioners may adjust the maximum transfer rate." This provision is self amending and renders the TDR rate uncertain and unreliable for planning purposes. Section 163.3184(2), FS; Rule 9J-5.003(90)., 9J-5.005(2)(g), & (6), FAC. Recommendation: Delete this provision from the plan, or require that any change to the transfer rate be done through a comprehensive plan amendment. CHHA: A portion of the Receiving Area (in the southern part of the Rural Fringe) is located in the coastal high hazard area (CHHA). The higher residential density, vis a vis, increased population concentration that will result in the Receiving Areas from the transfer of development rights, is not suitable for coastal high hazard area and is inconsistent with the commitment to direct population concentration away from the CHHA. Section 163.3177(6)(g)8.; and 163.3178(2)(d) & (j); FS; Rule 9J-5.003(17); Rule 9J- 5.006 (3)(b)5, (3)(c)1 & (4)(b)6.; Rule 9J-5.012(3)(b)5., & 6., and (3)(c)7., FAC. Recommendation: Revise the map to exclude the CHHA from the Receiving Area. Rural Villages (page 58): The proposed amendment allows the creation of rural villages in the Rural Fringe (page 59). The concept of rural villages is innovative and will encourage the clustering of land use activities into a logical urban form, thereby ensuring a complementary mix of uses. However, guidelines addressing their location and planning are incomplete. The following concerns are raised about the rural villages: The only criterium established for the location of rural villages is that they "may" not be located any closer than three miles from each other. This guideline alone does not suffice to guide and direct the location of rural villages to the most environmentally suitable parts of the Receiving Lands, where infrastructure is available and can be efficiently utilized to avoid leapfrog development, to promote viable communities, and to maintain the rural character of the area. In addition the use of the term "may" makes the three-mile minimum distance requirement discretionary and uncertain. Rural Villages are allowed anywhere within the Receiving Areas and can vary significantly in size and number of residential units. No guidance is provided regarding the characteristics of a site, within a Receiving Area, that will be considered suitable for the location of a rural village. The fact that the ~articular 3 no. 1 8 2002 sites for rural villages have not been identified and the densities and intensities of development can vary so greatly makes it difficult to determine, for planning purposes, the possible impacts of the rural villages on public facilities as well as on natural resources. For example, according to the information provided, the increased density that will result from the creation of the rural villages will not cause a degradation of the level of service standards on the existing roadway network. However, most of the areas where these rural villages are likely to locate are currently without roadways. Thus, in the absence of development controls guiding the location of these villages it is difficult to determine if new roads and other facilities will be needed to service them. Co With respect to public facilities impact analysis in support of a rural village, Item E, on page 59 of the rural village provisions, defers public facilities impact analysis to the planned unit development or the development of regional impact processes. However, this level of analysis is needed to support a land use amendment. Rural villages allow a mixture of uses including residential, commercial, institutional and recreational uses, as well as research and technology parks. However, the intensities of the non-residential uses are not specified in the plan. Furthermore, the proportion of mix or the distribution of the various uses to be allowed is not specified, but are deferred to the land development regulations. In the absence of these guidelines, it will be difficult to properly guide growth and development within the villages in order to promote a viable community. Sections 163.3177(6)(a), (b), (c); 163.3201, FS.; Rule 9J-5.003(90); 9J- 5.005(2)(a), & (6); 9J-5.006(2)(b), (3)(b)l., 10., (3)(c)1., 2., 3., 5., & (4)(c), FAC. Recommendations: Chapter 163 and Rule 9J-5 planning requirements for Rural villages can be met in one of three ways: With this amendment indicate on the Future Land Use Map the location, size, and amount of development permitted for each Rural Village, taking into account environmental suitability and demonstrating the efficient provision of adequate public facilities; or At the time of PUD or DRI approval for each Rural Village, require that the comprehensive plan be amended showing the location, size and amount of development permitted, and demonstrating environmental suitability and the efficient provision of adequate public facilities; or Include more explicit guidelines and standards in the comprehensive plan, and additional data and analysis in the supporting documentation, to ensure JUN 1 8 2002 that the location, size and amount of development for each Rural Village will be environmentally suitable and that adequate public facilities will be available and efficiently provided. Locational criteria to be considered include: 1 ) availability of existing and adequate infrastructure, 2) access to arterial roads, and 3) not within coastal high hazard areas. For example, rural villages could be required to be located at the intersection of collector and arterial roads, and at where other public infrastructure such as potable water and sewer facilities already exist or are planned so as to ensure the maximization of existing public facilities. In the case of roads determine if new roads will be needed and how they will be financed. Revise the amendment to specify the intensity of nonresidential uses that will be allowed. and the proportion of the mix of uses that the County intends to implement in the rural villages. The proportion of mix and intensity of nonresidential uses must be compatible with the need to maintain the rural character of the area. Conservation Category (page 62): The conservation category allows 1 unit to 5 acres, and 1 unit per 3 acres in the Big Cypress. This level of development is not compatible with the need to ensure the protection of environmentally sensitive areas including wetlands. Furthermore. oil and mineral extraction are allowed in the conservation designation both as an authorized use on Page 63 and as a conditional use on Page 64, thereby creating uncertainty and internal inconsistency. Sections 163.3177(6)(a), (d), (d), FS.: Rule 9J-5.003(95}: 9J-5.005(2)(a}, & (6): Rule 9J- 5.006(3)(b)1.. & 4., (3)(c)1.. 6.: and 9J-5.012(3)(bll.. & 131(ctl.. FAC. Recommendation: Revise the plan to clearly specify the uses alloxved in the conservation designation, consistent with the need to protect natural resources. The County should establish that publicly owned conservation lands will have zero density. In addition, oil and mineral extraction should be allowed only as a conditional use subject to appropriate conditions to ensure environmental protection. Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPA): According to the proposed amendment (page 71), "the Natural Resource Protection Area Overlay designation, is intended to protect endangered or potentially endangered species and to identify large connected intact and relatively unfragmented habitats, which may be important for these listed species": these areas may "include major wetland systems and regional flow-ways". To this effect, several of these areas, within the Rural Fringe, are proposed to be designated. As proposed, the NRPAs are of two categories: those within Sending Lands, and those outside Sending lands. Within Sending Lands, NRPAs will received 90 percent onsite preservation, and outside Sending Lands they ,,,,'ill receive 80 percent onsite preservation where 25 percent of the requirement may be met off site. However. there are no ~E~N:)A I'1'~ guidelines that specifically address the permitted types of uses, development controls and environmental protection standards, consistent with the purpose of the NRPA Overlay designation, that are applicable to NRPAs regardless of their location. For example, the CREW NRPA is not within a sending area, and a portion of it is in conservation while the western portion is in agriculture which means that the uses applicable to the Agricultural/Rural Land Use Designation (page 45-46) will be allowed. Sections 163.3177(6)(a), (d), FS.; Rule 9J-5.003(95); 9J-5.005(2)(a), & (6); Rule 9J- 5.006(3)(b)1., & 4., (3)(c)1., 6.; and 9J-5.012(3)(b)l., & (3)(c)1., and 9J-5.013(2)(b)2., 8,: 3., and (2)(c)6., FAC. Recommendation: Revise the amendment to include the permitted types of uses, development controls, and environmental protections standards that will apply to the NRPAs, irrespective of their location. The guidelines and policies should be designed to achieve the ultimate purpose of the NRPA designation. Comments: Item (h) on page 34 states that development rights will be transferred from "Receiving Lands" to infill parcels. This is a error that needs to be corrected. It should be from "Sending Lands" to infill parcels. The organization of the plan with an Agricultural/Rural Designation under which several sub- categories exist may need to be reexamined. Furthermore, the broad range of uses allowed in the Agricultural/Rural designation, as well as the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use designation, should also be reexamined because some of these uses / for example industrial) appear to be inconsistent with a rural designation. The plan requires greenbelts (page 59) around rural villages, but allows golf courses within the greenbelts. Allowing golf courses within the greenbelts can lead to the proliferation of golf courses in the rural area and may defeat the purpose of the greenbelts. Golf courses and its attendant uses represent a form of development which are generally more suitable in urban areas. There appears to be an inconsistency in the provisions pertaining to site preservation in the Receiving Lands. Item (7), on page 51, states that "site preservation areas are intended to provide habitat functions and shall meet minimum dimensions as set forth in the land development code", and the applicable standards shall be established within one year. On the other hand, Item 7, on page 52 refers to "Open Space and Native Vegetation Preservation Requirements" and establishes a minimum of 70 percent usable open space for lands greater than 40 acres within the Receiving Lands and referenced Policy 6.7.1 of the CCME for native vegetation preservation standards. Please correct this inconsistency. The proposal for rural villages does not include adequate criteria and guidelines for their design. In the absence adequate design guidelines, a desirable community form will ['ut AC, E~A rrr~ 6 I 2002 ~g._ ~ "-.- accomplished, thereby defeating the ultimate purpose of the rural villages. Example policies from the Sarasota 2050 proposed plan amendment have been enclosed to assist the County formulate its own approach for ensuring the form, design, and mix of uses in the Rural Villages. The plan amendment indicates that rock mining activities in the North Belle Meade area are proposed to be expanded. The expansion of these activities has the potential to increase truck traffic in adjacent neighborhoods raising compatibility and safety concerns. The County may consider designating alternate routes for :tuck traffic with this amendment. Coastal Management and Conservation Element (CCME): Comments: CCME Policy 6.1.2 (8) would allow density bonuses as incentives to encourage greater preservation amounts. However, the amount of density bonuses to be granted is not specified in the plan. The amount of bonuses should be stated in the plan so as to provide guidance for planning purposes. It appears that the intent of Policy 6.2.5 is to achieve no net loss of wetlands. Hov,'ever. according to the Fish and Wildlife Commission (FWC' see copy of their letter enclosed). the wetland functionality assessment method which the County intends to utilize has the potential to result in less wetland mitigation than destroyed. One of the instruments the County intends to use in order to ensure that preserved wetland areas remain in preservation includes deed restriction. However. according to FWC. deed restriction are difficult to enforce and may not provide a permanent preservation area since they could be changed in the future. The proposal in Policy 6.5.2 ( l )e., regarding the use appropriate measures to avoid roadway impact should include underpasses. It may be appropriate for the County to require federal and state agency review and approval for all listed species, wading bird rookeries, and shorebird nesting areas. Policy 7.1.2 regarding wildlife habitat management plans should include the adoption of wildlife guidelines for wood storks, southern American kestrels, and white ibis. Also, federal and state agency review could also be required for Policy 7.1.2. In addition, with respect to management plans for black bears, mitigation for their habitat should be considered. Public Facilities Element: The proposed Policy 1.5.3 is unclear regarding the provision of potable water and sewer facilities within the Receiving Areas will not adequately implement Objective 1.5 to discourage urban sprawl through maximization of the use of existing public f;: .illtio~: The policy appears to allow private potable water and sewer services within Receiving Areas; however, that proposal seems to be contrary to Policy 1.5.1 which requires universal potable water and sewer services in designated areas including the Receiving Areas. Rule 9J-5.006(3)(c)3., 9J-5.011(2)(b)2., & 3., and (2)(c), FAC. Recommendation: Please revise the proposed Policy 1.5.3 to clarify its intent regarding the provision of potable water and sewer services in the Receiving Areas. II. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The proposed amendments are not consistent with the State Comprehensive plan including the following goals and policies (163.3177(9):) Water Resources Goal {8)(a) and Policy (b)8., regarding the preservation of wetlands and other hydrological features: Coastal and Marine Resources Goal (9)(a) and Policy (b)3., regarding development in the coastal high hazard area: Natural systems and Recreational Lands Goal { 10tia} and Policies {b)l., 3.. & 7.. regarding the protection of wetlands and wildlife: Land Use Goal ( 16){at and Policiesib)2., 3, & 6., regarding the regulation of land uses: Public Facilities Goal (18 ){ a/and Policies (b)l.. & 2.: regarding the provision of public facilities: Recommendation: Revise the proposed amendments as indicated in the objections and recommendations of this report in order to be consistent with the above goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan. JL N I 8 2002 This Page Intentionally left blank AC. lENDA ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 Memorandum TO: FROM: ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL and COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COMMLTNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION PLANNING SERVICES DEPT., COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION and NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT DATE: RE: May 31, 2002 COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS AS A RESULT OF THE RURAL FRINGE AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENT - APPLICABLE TO ALL OF THE UNTNCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY EXCEPT THE EASTERN LANDS PORTION OF THE ASSESSMENT AREA (Adoption Hearings -june 5 EAC, and June 6 CCPC) I. Background Pursuant to the Final Order imposed by the Governor and Cabinet on June 22, 1999, the State of Florida has mandated certain revisions to Collier County's Growth Management Plan. The Final Order directs the County to conduct a Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment (the "Assessment") to collect the appropriate data, gather public input and to develop amendments to the Growth Management Plan. Major issues to be addressed by the Assessment include: protecting wetlands, wildlife and their habitats; protecting prime or unique agricultural lands from the premature conversion to other uses; and, assessing the growth potential of the Area by assessing the potential conversion of these rural lands to other uses, in appropriate locations. All of this is to occur while discouraging urban sprawl, directing incompatible land uses away from critical habitat and encouraging development that utilizes creative land use planning techniques. Such techniques may include, but are not limited to, public and private schools, urban villages, new towns, satellite communities, area-based allocations, clustering and open space provisions, and mixed-use development. The Final Order allows the County to conduct the Assessment in phases. Accordingly, Collier County, has divided the Assessment into two geographical areas, the Rural Fringe Eastern Lands Area, also known as the "Immokalee Area Study" (and sometimes ret "Rural Lands Area"). The Final Order requires that the County adopt GMP Amendm~ as a result of the Assessment process by June 22, 2002, excluding the "Eastern La which adoption of the GMP amendments is required by November 1, 2002. As part Area and the · ,rred to as the nts d~ ~ds f this vro~ess. JUN 8 2002 Collier County has established the Rural Fringe Area Oversight Committee (R_FAC) and the Eastern Lands Area Oversight Committe.e. (ELAC) to address the planning for each respective area. The Final Order notes that public participation will be the "hallmark" of this planning effort. The primary mechanisms to involve and inform the public and solicit community input during the Assessment process have included: advertised meetings of the advisory committees; an interactive Rural Assessment web site containing all pertinent documents, meeting agendas and minutes (www.nasite$.¢om/¢ollierl; presentations to various BCC advisory committees and community, civic, and professional organizations; presentation to various stakeholder groups; and, several special public meetings and workshops. The RFAC, for example, has held over 50 advertised meetings prior to Transmittal of amendments in March 2002. The Rural Fringe portion of the Rural Assessment encompasses approximately 95,000 acres. Characteristics of the Rural Fringe area include: parcel sizes are relatively small (typically, tens of acres or less); ownership consists of a few thousand different entities; most agricultural activities are small operations, and the uses are typically tree farms, plant nurseries, ornamental nurseries, etc. - many of which supply needed vegetation for urban developments; and, the area is under tremendous development pressure and contains a sizeable residential component. The Rural Fringe is a transitional area between suburban lands in Golden Gate Estates and the coastal urban area, and between the urban area and the vast natural lands and significant agr/cultural operations farther to the east. The proposed GMP amendments that apply to the Rural Fringe area have been developed xvith consideration of the unique characteristics of this transitional area. The Rural Fringe area contains significant wetlands and valuable wildlife habitat. The data indicates that portions of these lands provide habitat for a number of listed species, including the Florida Panther, Black Bear, Wood Storks, and Red-cockaded Woodpeckers. The proposed GMP amendments utilize a balanced approach, employing both regulations and incentives, to address the requirements of the Final Order. Some of the proposed policies are employed at the landscape scale and others at the site-specific scale. The regulatory scheme includes stringent environmental protection standards for areas of greatest environmental value - including the recognition of restoration potential, combined with the incentives of the TDR (Transfer of Development Rights) program as a compensatory mechanism. Below are the major highlights of the GMP amendments approved by the BCC on March 4, 2002 for Transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). Maior hi_~hli.clhts of the Transmitted GMP amendments: a. Establish preservation and native vegetation retention standards in order to protect environmentally sensitive areas, based largely upon a landscape-scale view of lands. Those percentages vary from 40% to 90%, depending upon the environmental value. However, for smaller parcels, there is a guaranteed minimum clearing allowance. b. Designate Rural Fringe lands as Sending, Receiving, or Neutral; additionally, within the Sending Lands, some properties are also designated as Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) - areas of highest environmental value. Agricultural land uses are permitted in ali land use designations. Establish a voluntary Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program as a mechanism for compensating property owners whose land value has been negatively affected by these amendments. Through the TDR program, residential development rights may be transl Sending Lands to Receiving Lands and, on a limited basis, to Urban designated lands. Lands are not eligible to participate in the TDR program; lands under publicly ownershi eligible to participate in the TDR program. 2 ~rred ~"~t40 ~ITEM NeutNl~ are not JUN 18 2002 d. Sending Lands are areas of higher environmental.value; accordingly, they have the most restrictive protection standards and most restrictive list of permitted uses. Residential density is limited to 1 DUI40 acres or pre-existing parcel size of <40 acres. Residential density may be transferred at a ratio of 1 DUI5 acres or pre-existing parcel size of <5 acres; however, this will be reviewed further to determine if it is appropriate to have a variable ratio dependent upon a given parcel's value and/or proximity to the Urban area. Once development rights have been transferred (TDRs used), allowable land uses are further restricted - agricultural uses are allowed to continue but cannot be intensified. e. Neutral Lands have an intermediate level of environmental protection standards. Permitted uses are virtually the same as prior to the Final Order. Residential density is allowed at 1 DUI5 acres. f. Receiving Lands are areas of lesser environmental value; accordingly, they have the least restrictive protection standards and broadest list of permitted uses. Residential density is allowed at 1 DUI5 acres; for parcels >_40 acres, this density may be increased via TDRs to a maximum of 1 DU/acre. g. Exceptions to the above density limitations include: (a) Density Blending: allows some larger properties, within a Sending or Receiving area, that straddle the Urban boundary, to shift their allowable density so as to protect environmentally sensitive lands; and, (b) Rural Villages: allows a density of between 2 and 3 DU/A, with requirement to use TDRs; allows commercial and institutional uses; requires a greenbelt around the perimeter; depending upon location, limited to between 300 and 2,500 acres; requires public facilities impact analysis. h. Establish the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District to allow for provision of County central water and sewer to all Receiving areas and most Neutral lands. i. When a parcel is cleared for agricultural purposes, there is a 25-year prohibition on using TDRs; similarly, there is a 25-year prohibition on converting to non-agricultural uses. j. Existing land uses are allowed to continue. k. Designate the +/-305 acres adjacent to the west of the landfill, in Section 36, T49S, R26E, as Rural - Industrial District. I. Establish a policy whereby the owners of land <40 acres and located along the edge of a Sending area, may submit data to demonstrate there is-~o longer environmental value to the site such that it warrants change from Sending designation. m. Establish an Overlay for the North Belle Meade area, resulting from an agreement between intervener parties to previous GMP amendments, that: reduces the development limitations and environmental protection standards for the Receiving Lands within the Overlay; may lessen the likelihood of a challenge to the North Belle Meade NRPA designation since the interveners (a major landowner in the Overlay area and two environmental organizations) agree to it's boundary. n. Provide that the necessary implementing land development regulations for these amendments will be developed within one year. II. ORC Report and Staff Response On May 23, 2002, DCA issued their Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report based upon their preliminary review of the Transmitted GMP amendments for compliance with Florida Statutes. "Objections" which are not addressed may result in a determination of non- compliance. An objection might be addressed by revising the text and/or map change; providing additional data and analysis to support the amendment; a combination of the two; or, justification that missing data and analysis is not applicable (where DCA's objection is based upon lack of sufficient data and analysis). "Comments" are advisory in nature and will not form the bases for a determination of non-compliance. DCA's "Recommendations" offer one or more ways to address a given objection or comment. Below are the various objections, recommendations and comments, followed by staff's response. In some cases, the only response is the explanation provided in this Staff Report. However, in many instances, staff proposes text and/or map revisions to address the ORC. Also, some additional data and analysis will be included in the Adoption submittal to DCA to justify and support proposed amendments. The entire ORC Report is included as an attachment to this Staff Repc ~t All te~ revisions since Transmittal are shown in double strike through/double underline format. At the Transmittal hearings, the BCC elected not to include amendments with applicat 3 the Rural Fringe area (e.g. amendments affecting the urban area), stating concerns that proper notice had not been provided for the non-Rural Fringe areas, and directed staff to bring those amendments back at time of adoption. Accordingly, some of the proposed revisions have applicability beyond the Rural Fringe area. (However, the amendments do not apply to the Eastern Lands study area for which separate amendments are proposed.) Some of these revisions with broader applicability are in response to the ORC, while others are noted in the next section of this Staff Report. OBJECTIONS Future Land Use Element (FLUE): Density Blending: Provision d., page 35, would allow the blending of density within properties that straddle the Urban Mixed Use and Rural Fringe Mixed Use Districts, in order to encourage a unified plan of development and the preservation of wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural features. This provision has the potential to direct development to areas, which due to their environmental sensitivity, are intended to receive greater regulation through their designation as Sending Areas. Therefore, it is unclear from the data and analysis provided that there is a need for density blending or that it would result in directing more intensive development away from environmentally sensitive lands within the receiving areas. Furthermore, because the areas eligible for this provision are unidentified, density blending introduces an element of uncertainty into the growth management program proposed for the Rural Fringe thereby undermining the establishment of meaningful and predictable standards. Section 163.3177(6)(a), (c), (d), Florida Statutes (FS); Rule 9J-5.005(2), & (6); Rule 9J- 5.006(3)(b)10., (3)(c)7., Florida Administrative Code (FAC.). Recommendation: It is important that the County justify the need for density blending, provide a separate map identifying the properties that will be eligible for the application of the proposed blending provision, and provide an analysis of the suitability of the identified areas for density blending. Density blending may be appropriate if its use is very carefully limited. Staff Response: Collier County appreciates the DCA finding that Density Blending may be appropriate if its use is carefully limited. We are of the opinion that we have, in fact, carefully limited the use of Density Blending. As proposed, Density Blending may occur under the following two distinct scenarios: · Scenario A: where properties under unified control as of June 22, 2002 straddle the Urban Residential and Urban Residential Fringe Subdistricts and the Receiving or Neutral Designated lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District; and · Scenario B: where properties under unified control as of June 22, 2002 straddle the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistdct and the Sending Designated lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. In addition to the above, properties proposing to utilize Density Blending must submit an environmental assessment providing data that indicates that the portions of the property within the Urban area, from which the density may be shifted, contain a higher degree of environmental value than the affected Rural Fringe Mixed Use District portions of the project. The project must be at least 80 acres in size and at least 25% of the project must be within the Urban designated area. The Iocational restrictions limit the potential application of Density Blending to rural sections of land. The actual application is further limited by policy as follows: ~,C.-,ENO A ITEk/ tot -of .Z- JUN !3 2002 Our research indicates that there are currently four projects that are under unified control as of the date of this response. These include: The approved Mirasol PUD, which contains 2 Sections designated Neutral in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. Only one section may qualify for Density Blending, as the PUD requires that the other Section be placed in a conservation easement. Environmental data submitted with the PUD indicate that Urban portions of the PUD contain significantly higher environmental value that the Neutral Designated Section which is highly infested with exotic vegetation. The approved Naples Reserve PUD, which contains approximately ¼ Section of land designated as Receiving in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. Environmental data submitted by the applicant at the time of rezoning clearly indicate that the Receiving designated portion of the project has significantly less environmental value (as clear farm fields) than the Urban portion, which is heavily vegetated. The proposed Heritage Bay PUD/DRI, which contains 3 Sections of Land designated as Receiving in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. Aerial photos indicate that the 3 Sections designated as Receiving have been cleared as this was (and still is) a earth-mining operation. A proposed but as of yet unnamed development that straddles the Urban Residential Fringe and the Sending designated lands within the Belle Meade NRPA. The project proposes Density Blending within those Sections of land located in close proximity to Collier Boulevard (CR 951). Preliminary environmental date indicates that these lands have significant exotic infestation and do not have the same environmental value as other lands within the proposed project that are within the Urban Residential Fringe. We have included additional available data supporting the above findings. We have submitted a map identifying the areas where density Blending may occur and where the identified projects under unified control are located. Of course additional site specific data must be submitted at the time the request for Density Blending is made. We are confident that this policy will result in significantly greater protection of the best and highest quality native vegetation and will have beneficial impacts in terms of listed species habitat and wetland protection. The pclicy requires that higher native vegetation preservation requirements (generally those applicable in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District) be applied across the entire project when Density Blending is employed. Agricultural/Rural Land Use designation: The Agricultural/Rural Land Use designation (pages 45-46) allows commercial and industrial, as principal uses. However, there is no definition of the intensity and type of commercial and industrial activities that will be allowed. Furthermore, permitting commercial and industrial development without limit throughout the Agricultural/Rural Land Use designation could result in the premature conversion of agricultural lands, which will be inconsistent with the requirements of the Final Order, create incompatible land uses, encourage urban sprawl, fail to ensure the provision of public facilities, and create uncertainty. Section 163.3177(6)(a), FS; Rule 9J-5.005(6); Rule 9J-5.006(3)(b)1., 8., (3)(c) FAC. 2., 3., & 7.~ ITEM 2002 Recommendation: Revise the plan to define and specify the intensity standards and development controls that will be applicable to commercial and industrial uses within the Agricultural/Rural Land Use designation. Staff Response: The list of permitted uses under the Agricultural/Rural designation has been modified to specify what Districts and Subdistricts allow commercial and industrial uses, similar to the pre-Final Order condition: commercial uses are allowed in the Rural Commercial Subdistrict within the Agricultural- Rural District, and in Rural Villages within Receiving Lands in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District; industrial uses are allowed in the Rural Industrial District, and Research and Technology Parks (mix of light industry and limited commercial) are allowed in Rural Villages within Receiving Lands in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. The Rural Commercial Subdistrict has been modified to identify the general types of commercial uses allowed, in addition to the previously existing text that identifies the commercial zoning districts that implement this Subdistrict, that limits use of this provision to 200 acres maximum, that contains minimum spacing criteria, that contains road classification criteria, and that limits the size of commercial development area. This Subdistrict is only applicable to three areas of the Rural Fringe (hole in the donut in southern Golden Gate Estates, the +/- seven Sections north and west of Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary, and the area north of Everglades City in the vicinity of U.S. 41 and S.R./C.R. 29 intersection). The first two locations do not comply with the Subdistrict criteria. Staff has modified the text to allow a maximum of 2.5 acres at the southwest corner of the intersection of U.S. 41 and S.R./C.R. 29, two arterial roads carrying relatively high traffic volumes through a sparsely populated region with very little commercial development. A portion of this site (.79 acres) contains existing commercial uses. The Eastern Lands portion of the Assessment area is still under the Final Order so is not eligible to utilize this Subdistrict. The Rural - Industrial District previously only recognized the two pre-existing Industrial sites in the Agricultural/Rural designated area (the Ford Motor Test Track east of Golden Gate Estates, on the north side of 1-75, and the Krehling concrete plant site on U.S. 41 East) by depicting them on the FLUM and by specifying the acreage those two sites comprised. A third site, comprising 300+ acres, is proposed adjacent to the west of the County landfill and adjacent to the east of Urban - Industrial lands (Citygate PUD/DRI and White Lake Industrial Park PUD) via designation on the FLUM and by adding it's acreage in the text. The existing Rural - Industrial District specifies the types of uses allowed. As explained further in response to another Objection, Rural Village text has been modified regarding commercial uses, and reference has been added to the Research and Technology Park Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District, as adopted on May 14, 2002. DCA raised no objection to the amendment that established the Research and Technology Park Subdistrict. Deferring to the Land Development Regulations: The type and density and intensity of uses for a number of uses in the Receiving Lands and in Rural Villages (pages 50-51) as well as in Neutral Lands (page 53) are inappropriately deferred to the land development regulations (LDR) instead of establishing them in the plan as required. This is also the case within the Agricultural/Rural Designation and elsewhere in the Future Land Use Element. For example, commercial developments, and research and technology parks are allowed in Rural Villages. However, the type, intensity and percentage distribution among the mix of uses which will be allowed in the Rural Villages are not stated in the plan. Furthermore, the term "essential services" is not defined in the plan. This level of specificity is req Jired ,~oF_.Jm~ tTFJ~. the~:~LDR. ~'~ included in the plan, while the details for implementation should be included i J lJN I ~ 2002 Section 163.3177(6)(a), FS, 163.3201, FS; Rule 9J-5.003(90)., 9J-5.005(6); 9J-5.006(3)(c)1., 7., & (4)(c) FAC. Recommendation: Revise the plan to specify, the type of uses and the density and intensity, that will be applicable to these uses (the details of implementation should be included in the LDR). In the case of commercial uses, and research and technology parks, the type of activities allowed as well as their intensity of uses should be stated. Intensity guidelines may be expressed in the form of floor area ratio, or other measures such as percentage of impervious surface combined with height limitation. The term "essential services" should be defined in the plan. Mixed-use categories should be defined in terms of the type of uses, their densities and intensities, and the percentage distribution among the mix of uses, or other objective measurement. Staff Response: LDC references in the Agricultural/Rural and Conservation designations has been made more specific by referencing the LDC as it existed on June 18, 2002, the date of adoption of these Rural Fringe amendments. Rural Village text has been modified to reference the Research and Technology Park Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District, adopted on May 14, 2002; and, a land use mix has been added to the Rural Village provision which applies to commercial and R & T Park uses, as well as residential and other uses, which provides for use mix, intensity and distribution. Also, in the Agricultural/Rural designation, a definition has been added for "essential services." TDR Rate: Paragraph 3 (page 55), pertaining to the transfer of development rights (TDR), states that "to ensure appropriate compensation to land owners within the sending areas, the Board of County Commissioners may adjust the maximum transfer rate." This provision is self-amending and renders the TDR rate uncertain and unreliable for planning purposes. Section 163.3184(2), FS; Rule 9J-5.003(90)., 9J-5.005(2)(g), & (6), FAC. Recommendation: Delete this provision from the plan, or require that any change to the transfer rate be done through a comprehensive plan amendment. Staff Response; The plan has been amended to require a comprehensive plan amendment to affect changes in the TDR rate. Coastal High Hazard Area CHHA: A portion of the Receiving Area (in the southern part of the Rural Fringe) is located in the coastal high hazard area (CHHA). The higher residential density, vis a vis, increased population concentration that will result in the Receiving Areas from the transfer of development rights, is not suitable for coastal high hazard area and is inconsistent with the commitment to direct population concentration away from the CHHA. Section 163.3177(6)(g)8.; and 163.3178(2)(d) & (j); FS; Rule 9J-5.003(17); Rule 9J-5.006 (3)(b)5, (3)(c)1 & (4)(b)6.; Rule 9J-5.012(3)(b)5., & 6., and (3)(c)7., FAC. Recommendation: Revise the map to exclude the CHHA from the Receiving Area. Staff Response.: The CHHA, that area lying south of U.S. 41 East, has been changed from Receiving Lands to Neutral Lands on the FLUM. This area is largely developed with mobile homes, a large master planned golf course community. This area will no longer be permitted to receive density, nor is it eligible for Density Blending. Rural Villages (page 58): The proposed amendment allows the creation of ru~ the Rural Fringe (page 59). The concept of rural villages is innovative and will e~ 31 vi~..es.in _~ courage me JUN 1 8 2Q02 clustering of land use activities into a logical urban form, thereby ensuring a complementary mix of uses. However, guidelines addressing their location and planning are incomplete. The following concerns are raised about the rural villages: The only criterium established for the location of rural villages is that they "may" not be located any closer than three miles from each other. This guideline alone does not suffice to guide and direct the location of rural villages to the most environmentally suitable parts of the Receiving Lands, where infrastructure is available and can be efficiently utilized to avoid leapfrog development, to promote viable communities, and to maintain the rural character of the area. In addition the use of the term "may" makes the three-mile minimum distance requirement discretionary and uncertain. Rural Villages are allowed anywhere within the Receiving Areas and can vary significantly in size and number of residential units. No guidance is provided regarding the characteristics of a site, within a Receiving Area, that will be considered suitable for the location of a rural village. The fact that the particular sites for rural villages have not been identified and the densities and intensities of development can vary so greatly makes it difficult to determine, for planning purposes, the possible impacts of the rural villages on public facilities as well as on natural resources. For example, according to the information provided, the increased density that will result from the creation of the rural villages will not cause a degradation of the level of service standards on the existing roadway network. However, most of the areas where these rural villages are likely to locate are currently without roadways. Thus, in the absence of development controls guiding the location of these villages it is difficult to determine if new roads and other facilities will be needed to service them. With respect to public facilities impact analysis in support of a rural village, Item E, on page 59 of the rural village provisions, defers public facilities impact analysis to the planned unit development or the development of regional impact processes. However, this level of analysis is needed to support a land use amendment. d. Rural villages allow a mixture of uses including residential, commercial, institutional and recreational uses, as well as research and technology parks. However, the intensities of the non-residential uses are not specified in the plan. Furthermore, the proportion of mix or the distribution of the various uses to be allowed is not specified, but are deferred to the land development regulations. In the absence of these guidelines, it will be difficult to properly guide growth and development within the villages in order to promote a viable community. Sections 163.3177(6)(a), (b), (c); 163.3201, FS.; Rule 9J-5.003(90); 9J-5.005(2)(a), & (6); 9J-5.006(2)(b), (3)(b)1., 10., (3)(c)1., 2., 3., 5., & (4)(c), FAC. Recommendations: Chapter 163 and Rule 9J-5 planning requirements for Rural villages can be met in one of three ways: 1) With this amendment indicate on the Future Land Use Map the location, size, and amount of development permitted for each Rural Village, taking into account environmental suitability and demonstrating the efficient provision of adequate pubiic facilities; or 2) At the time of PUD or DRI approval for each Rural Village, require comprehensive plan be amended showing the location, size and ~ development permitted, and demonstrating environmental suitability and th [ha~.(~BN:)~, ITF¢' moLt~' of L2. e efficient ' JUN I 2002 3) provision of adequate public facilities; or Include more explicit guidelines and standards in the comprehensive plan, and additional data and analysis in the supporting documentation, to ensure that the location, size and amount of development for each Rural Village will be environmentally suitable and that adequate public facilities will be available and efficiently provided. Locational criteria to be considered include: 1) availability of existing and adequate infrastructure, 2) access to arterial roads, and 3) not within coastal high hazard areas. For example, rural villages could be required to be located at the intersection of collector and arterial roads, and at where other public infrastructure such as potable water and sewer facilities already exist or are planned so as to ensure the maximization of existing public facilities. In the case of roads determine if new roads will be needed and how they will be financed. Revise the amendment to specify the intensity of nonresidential uses that will be allowed, and the proportion of the mix of uses that the County intends to implement in the rural villages. The proportion of mix and intensity of nonresidential uses must be compatible with the need to maintain the rural character of the area. Staff Response: Collier County appreciates the DCA finding that Rural Villages represent an innovative land use strategy that will encourage clustering of land uses into a logical urban form, thereby encouraging a logical mix of uses. Rural Villages are limited as to maximum size. Moreover, the following revisions have been made to address DCA concerns: Additional Iocational criteria have been added, including: a limitation of one rural village per Receiving area; requirements for access to an arterial or collector roadway; removal of the Receiving designation on land within the CHHA (thereby precluding a Rural Village in the CHHA); and, a revision to the three mile separation requirement between Rural Villages has been made to read "shall not be located ..." rather than "may not." Additionally, the Receiving lands have been identified through examination and analysis of the best available data, as being the most appropriate locations for the Receiving designation and for Rural Villages. These areas have been identified as suitable for such designation, in part, due to their proximity to existing and planned public facilities and infrastructure improvements. With the exception of Wilson Boulevard Extension to serve the Receiving area in the North Belle Mead Overlay and surrounding Estates residents, no new roads are anticipated at this time. Since Wilson Boulevard Extension may have a public benefit in terms of allowing residents of this area to more easily travel in and out of the area, the cost of this extension may be borne by both the County and the developer. If Wilson Boulevard is determined to be necessary, the methodology for payment must to be established prior to approval of a Rural Village in this area. If other new or improved roads, or other infrastructure improvements are required, the cost of such improvements is required to be borne by the developer, unless a broader public benefit is identified. Since the exact location of a Rural Village will be identified at the time of rezone application, the exact nature of necessary roadway improvements cannot be determined at this time. It must be noted that the Receiving areas represent only _+ 25% of the entire Rural Fringe Mixed use District. Collectively, at their maximum potential size, Rural Villages represent + 30% of the Receiving areas, or + 7% of Fringe Mixed Use District. Receiving areas are very site specific, and are id, the FLUM. Only one Rural Village may be developed in each Receiving Area. the 1:~3~o~ ~ ~ntifi~il. on We are of t 8 2002 the opinion that these conditions, coupled with the required rezone and attendant analysis of public facilities and services impacts, and land use mix caps, sufficiently regulate the location and intensity of Rural Villages. In addition, language has been added to ensure that Rural Villages are fiscally neutral in terms of their impact on countywide taxpayers. Potable water and sewer capital improvements needed to ensure capacity to serve Receiving areas and potential Rural Villages have been anticipated and are included in the County's Capital Improvement Plan. Given the location of the Receiving areas, infrastructure necessary to deliver sewer and water either already exist or is planned. These areas are located proximate or close to areas already servecl by central sewer and water, thereby minimizing the cost to extend such services. The Public Utilities CIP was previously sent to the DCA as part of the supplemental data and analysis requested after the Transmittal Amendments were sent. The amendments have been revised to specify the maximum intensity of nonresidential uses that will be allowed, and to identify the proportion of the mix of uses that the County intends to implement in the rural villages. The plan has been amended to provide greater clarity as to what is intended by the rem Rural Village. General design criteria have been identified, with specific design and development standards to be implemented through LDRs. As recommended, the County has reviewed the Sarasota 2050 Plan and other adopted an proposed plans for Rural Villages, as well as the Russell Arendt's Rural By Desi.qn~ as a basis for developing an appropriate and proportionate mix and intensity of nonresidential uses which are compatible with the need to maintain the rural character of the area. #7. Conservation Category (page 62): The conservation category allows 1 unit to 5 acres, and 1 unit per 3 acres in the Big Cypress. This level of development is not compatible with the need to ensure the protection of environmentally sensitive areas including wetlands. Furthermore, oil and mineral extraction are allowed in the conservation designation both as an authorized use on Page 63 and as a conditional use on Page 64, thereby creating uncertainty and internal inconsistency. Sections 163.3177(6)(a), (d), (d), FS.; Rule 9J-5.003(95); 9J-5.005(2)(a), & (6); Rule 9J- 5.006(3)(b)1., & 4., (3)(c)1., 6.; and 9J-5.012(3)(b)l., & (3)(c)1., FAC. Recommendation: Revise the plan to cleady specify the uses allowed in the conservation designation, consistent with the need to protect natural resources. The County should establish that publicly owned conservation lands will have zero density. In addition, oil and mineral extraction should be allowed only as a conditional use subject to appropriate conditions to ensure environmental protection. Staff Response: The plan has been revised to eliminate residential density on publicly owned Conservation lands. (Note: Dormitories and other types of housing which is clearly subordinate and incidental to the conservation use are permitted.) The plan has been amended to eliminate oil and mineral extraction as a permitted use. This use is identified as a conditional uses and is subject to appropriate local, state and federal review and requirements to environmental protection. ~ Arendt. Russell; Brabec, Elizabeth A.; Dodson, Harry L.; Reid, Christine; Yaro, Robert D.; Rural Bv Desi~ American Planmng Association APA Planners Press, Chicago Illinois, 1994 ~.0 ensure ~C_~A ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPA): According to the proposed amendment (page 71), "the Natural Resource Protection Area Overlay designation, is intended to protect endangered or potentially endangered species and to identify large connected intact and relatively unfragmented habitats, which may be important for these listed species"; these areas may "include major wetland systems and regional flow-ways". To this effect, several of these areas, within the Rural Fringe, are proposed to be designated. ,~s proposed, the NRPAs are of two categories: those within Sending Lands, and those outside Sending lands. Within Sending Lands, NRPAs will received 90 percent onsite preservation, and outside Sending Lands they will receive 80 percent onsite preservation where 25 percent of the requirement may be met off site. However, there are no guidelines that specifically address the permitted types of uses, development controls and environmental protection standards, consistent with the purpose of the NRPA Overlay designation, that are applicable to NRPAs regardless of their location. For example, the CREW NRPA is not within a sending area, and a portion of it is in conservation while the western portion is in agriculture which means that the uses applicable to the Agricultural/Rural Land Use Designation (page 45-46) will be allowed. Sections 163.3177(6)(a), (d), FS.; Rule 9J-5.003(95); 9J-5.005(2)(a), & (6); Rule 9J- 5.006(3)(b)1., & 4., (3)(c)1., 6.; and 9J-5.012(3)(b)l., & (3)(c)1., and 9J-5.013(2)(b)2., & 3., and (2)(c)6., FAC. Recommendation: Revise the amendment to include the permitted types of uses, development controls, and environmental protections standards that will apply to the NRPAs, irrespective of their location. The guidelines and policies should be designed to achieve the ultimate purpose of the NRPA designation. Staff Response: Staff has added the appropriate language to the NRPA Overlay within the FLUE to address this recommendation. The language requires the 90% preservation standards found in CCME Policy 6.1.2 and the listed species protection requirements of CCME Policy 7.1.2 to be applied to proposed nonagricultural development within NRPAs. The permitted and conditional uses allowed in NRPAs shall be limited to those uses specified under the Conservation Designation. A cross reference to these requirements is also provided in CCME Policy 1.3.1. COMMENTS Future Land Use Element (FLUE): Item (h) on page 34 states that development rights will be transferred from "Receiving Lands" to infill parcels. This is a error that needs to be corrected. It should be from "Sending Lands" to infill parcels. Staff Response: Correction made. The organization of the plan with an Agricultural/Rural Designation under which several sub- categories exist may need to be reexamined. Furthermore, the broad range of uses allowed in the Agricultural/Rural designation, as well as the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use designation, should also be reexamined because some of these uses (for example industrial) appear to be inconsistent with a rural designation. been amended 11 Staff Response: The Future Land Use Map has ~A ITEM to clearly identify the Agric ~ltural/Rural JL N ! 2002 designation. The organization of the entire FLUE will be evaluated during the next EAR, which is due by January 1, 2004. The Rural - Industrial District presently only applies to two sites that have existed since Plan adoption in 1989. These amendments propose to add a third site comprising +/-300 acres located on the north side of Landfill Road, adjacent to the County Landfill and lands designated Urban -Industrial District. The plan requires greenbelts (page 59) around rural villages, but allows golf courses within the greenbelts. Allowing golf courses within the greenbelts can lead to the proliferation of golf courses in the rural area and may defeat the purpose of the greenbelts. Golf courses and its attendant uses represent a form of development which are generally more suitable in urban areas. Staff Response: The greenbelts are intended to be primarily undeveloped open space. They must be located in the Receiving area surrounding the Village. Receiving areas allow golf courses and, therefore, we believe it appropriate to allow golf courses within the greenbelts. Nevertheless, we have added a requirement that golf course turf areas first be located within cleared or disturbed areas within the greenbelt in order to preserve existing native vegetation. There appears to be an inconsistency in the provisions pertaining to site preservation in the Receiving Lands. Item (7), on page 51, states that "site preservation areas are intended to provide habitat functions and shall meet minimum dimensions as set forth in the land development code", and the applicable standards shall be established within one year. On the other hand, Item 7, on page 52 refers to "Open Space and Native Vegetation Preservation Requirements" and establishes a minimum of 70 percent usable open space for lands greater than 40 acres within the Receiving Lands and referenced Policy 6.7.1 of the CCME for native vegetation preservation standards. Please correct this inconsistency. Staff Response: This inconsistency has been corrected. The proposal for rural villages does not include adequate criteria and guidelines for their design. In the absence adequate design guidelines, a desiraule community form will not accomplished, thereby defeating the ultimate purpose of the rural villages. Example policies from the Sarasota 2050 proposed plan amendment have been enclosed to assist the County formulate its own approach for ensuring the form, design, and mix of uses in the Rural Villages. Staff Response: See earlier comments regarding Rural Villages, and note that more specific standards will be adopted in the Land Development Code. The plan amendment indicates that rock mining activities in the North Belle Meade area are proposed to be expanded. The expansion of these activities has the potential to increase truck traffic in adjacent neighborhoods raising compatibility and safety concerns. The County may consider designating alternate routes for truck traffic with this amendment. Staff Response: These comments will be relayed to public hearing bodies for their consideration Report includes correspondence from the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic A which these issues are raised.) 12 ;soct~on in --- JUN 1 8 2O02 Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME)' CCME Policy 6.1.2 (8) would allow density bonuses as incentives to encourage greater preservation amounts. However, the amount of density bonuses to be granted is not specified in the plan. The amount of bonuses should be stated in the plan so as to provide guidance for planning purposes. Staff Response: Staff proposes to remove the 10% bonus reference in CCME Policy 6.1.2(8) and to refer to respective language in the FLUE. Density limitations addressing this bonus are therefore specified in the FLUE section addressing density standards for Rural Villages. It appears that the intent of Policy 6.2.5 is to achieve no net loss of wetlands. However, according to the Fish and Wildlife Commission (FWC; see copy of their letter enclosed), the wetland functionality assessment method which the County intends to utilize has the potential to result in less wetland mitigation than destroyed. Staff Response: The essence of this comment is that the wetland functionality assessment process has the potential to result in less wetland acreaqe mitigated than the amount of acreaqe impacted. This is possible given the nature of the assessment methodology. Staff recognizes this possibility and recommends that mitigation be at least equal in area for acreage impacted (i.e., the mitigation ratio on an area basis shall be at least 1'1) for the Rural Fringe (CCME Policy 6.1.2). This additional standard is not, however, proposed for the Urban Designated area. One of the instruments the County intends to use in order to ensure that preserved wetland areas remain in preservation includes deed restriction. However, according to FWC, deed restriction are difficult to enforce and may not provide a permanent preservation area since they could be changed in the future. Staff Response: Staff concurs with this comment and proposes to remove references to deed restrictions. We have also proposed language to ensure that preserve areas are identified or platted as separate tracts. The proposal in Policy 6.5.2 (1)e., regarding the use appropriate measures to avoid roadway impact should include underpasses. Staff Response: Staff concurs with this comment and has incorporated references to underpasses in CCME Policy 6.5.2 and CCME Policy 7.1.2. It may be appropriate for the County to require federal and state agency review and apprOval for all listed species, wading bird rookeries, and shorebird nesting areas. Staff Response: Proposed CCME Policy 7.1.2(3) provides for the ability of the County to consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish Conservation Commission and recommendations from the US Fish and Wil Furthermore, proposed Policy 7.1.3 requires that all development shall 13 :llife Service. ,~ comp~, w;th ' JUN t 8 2OO2 applicable federal and state permitting requirements regarding listed species protection. Staff considers these policies to be sufficient in protecting listed species. Policy 7.1.2 regarding wildlife habitat management plans should include the adoption of wildlife guidelines for wood storks, southern American kestrels, and white ibis. Also, federal and state agency review could also be required for Policy 7.1.2. In addition, with respect to management plans for black bears, mitigation for their habitat should be considered. Staff Response: The South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan as referenced in CCME Policy 7.1.2 already provides guidelines for wood storks. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's Nongame Technical Report No. 13, Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of the Southeastern American Kestrel (Falco Sparverius Paulus) on Large-Scale Development Sites in Florida, March 1993, could be added to the list of references in Policy 7.1.2 after staff verifies that this publication provides for appropriate guidelines for the southeastern American kestrel. Staff is unaware of any published guidelines for white ibis. Consideration for mitigating black bear habitat has been added to CCME Policy 7.1.2. Public Facilities Element: The proposed Policy 1.5.3 is unclear regarding the provision of potable water and sewer facilities within the Receiving Areas will not adequately implement Objective 1.5 to discourage urban sprawl through maximization of the use of existing public facilities. The policy appears to allow private potable water and sewer services within Receiving Areas; however, that proposal seems to be contrary to Policy 1.5.1 which requires universal potable water and sewer services in designated areas including the Receiving Areas. Rule 9J-5.006(3)(c)3., 9J-5.011(2)(b)2., & 3., and (2)(c), FAC. Recommendation: Please revise the proposed Policy 1.5.3 to clarify its intent regarding the provision of potable water and sewer services in the Receiving Areas. Staff Response: Policies in both the Sanitary Sewer and Potable Water Sub-Elements have been modified to clarify that central utilities will be provided by the County for those areas within the Rural Transition Water & Sewer Distdct (Receiving Lands and certain Neutral Lands), and, until such facilities are physically in place, that interim package plants are allowed. For Rural Fringe areas outside the Rural Transition Water & Sewer District, only individual potable wells and septic tanks are allowed. III. Other Changes Since BCC Transmittal Hearing On March 4~ 2002 Besides the revisions noted above, in response to the ORC Report, staff is proposing some additional text and map revisions. These are primarily based upon previous BCC direction or some discrepancies/deficiencies/needed organizational adjustments detected since Transmittal. (As previously noted, some of these revisions have countywide applicability, less the Eastern Lands portion of the Assessment area for which separate amendments are proposed.) The revisions, shown in double strike througl~double underline format, include: · Move the density bonus for increased preservation (applicable to Receiving Lands) from ~he CCME to the FLUE, and place reference to this provision in the CCME; Add to the density blending provisions, with limited applicability to certain lands str Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and Sending Lands, l~ng north of U.S. 41 Eas ofi-75; 14 tddlin~94~A rr~, JUN ! 2002 Add back to the FLUM, the existing Rural - Industrial District on the north side of U.S. 41 East (site of the Krehling concrete plant) inadvertently changed to Receiving Lands; Eliminate Secondary Sending Lands category from the text and FLUM, and return the + 6,550 acres to their existing designation, Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District. These lands - primarily south of U.S. 41 East, west of C.R. 29, north of Everglades City - are almost c~)mpletely marine tidal wetlands virtually eliminating the likelihood of development given the presence of these jurisdictional wetlands. Darken the color of the Rural - Industrial District on the FLUM so as to be distinguished from Urban - Industrial lands; · Add redundant density blending language, and Rural Transition Water & Sewer District Map, for Section 15 in the Mirasol PUD (this PUD straddles the Urban Residential Subdistrict and Neutral Lands, was submitted just prior to the Final Order, and was approved based upon the pre-Final Order FLUE; because of these unique circumstances, staff agreed to support this redundant language as "insurance" should their be a non-compliance finding, or challenge, to the overall density blending provision and/or Rural Transition Water & Sewer District); · Modify the Residential Infill density bonus within the Density Rating System to require utilization of TDRs for the first dwelling unit bonus, and to provide for administrative approval of such. · Add to the North Belle Meade Overlay, a paragraph recognizing the Neutral I_ands within the Overlay. · Modify Sending Lands to clarify permitted agricultural uses are those in accordance with the Right to Farm Act - as opposed to Neutral and Receiving Lands, which are allowed a broader range of uses; · Add the Rural Settlement Area District (Orangetree PUD) to the Rural Transition Water & Sewer District Map, in recognition of the County's commitment to take over the Orangetree Utility in less than 10 years, and to be consistent with the Water and Wastewater Master Plans; · Add a note to the Rural Transition Water & Sewer District Map stating the map cannot be interpreted without the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Plan (same note appears on the FLUM); · Add a note to the Rural Transition Water & Sewer District Map stating the location of lines on the map connecting the various service areas are conceptual; it is recognized that some site specific circumstances, e.g. environmental' constraints, may preclude the location being exactly as depicted on the map, especially in the fragmented North Belle Meade Overlay area; · Add to existing policy in both the Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Sub-Elements, to clarify that properties designated as Sending Lands are not eligible to connect to distribution or collection lines that may run through those Sending Lands (most likely applicable to the North Belle Meade Overlay area); and, · Add exemption text in FLUE and CCME to recognize rezone and conditional use petitions approved prior to the June 18, 2002 adoption of these amendments (for projects allowed by Final Order but not allowed by these amendments). · Countywide Wetland and Wildlife Protection Policies - At the March 4, 2002 Transmittal Hearing, the BCC directed staff to transmit amendments addressing only the Rural Fringe but to address countywide wetlands and habitat protection during the Adoption Hearings. Many of the recommended changes to the transmitted CCME are responsive to this direction. A summary of these proposed amendments is provided below: JUN I 8 2002 · Vegetation preservation standards are provided for other areas of the County (Policy 6.1.1). These standards are substantially the same as those provided in the County's existing LDC. Significant differences to the current requirements include: o Golf Course will be required to retain 35% of native vegetation; o A vegetative retention requirement of 50% is proposed for Industrial Development in the Rural Industrial District. This was added to address the industrial classification established west of the landfill. · Wetland policies addressing the Urban Designated area (Policy 6.2.4), and the Estates Designated area (Policy 6.2.7) are proposed to recognize that wetland protection will be provided by federal and state jurisdictional agencies through their permitting processes, except for a significant wetland system within the Immokalee Urban area where the requirements of the Rural Fringe will apply. · Objective 6.3 and its policies addressing submerged marine habitats reflect standards that are currently in effect the existing LDC. · Policies addressing manatees and sea turtles (Policy 7.1.2(h) and (i), and those polices supporting Objectives 7.2 and 7.3) also reflect standards and criteria contained in the County's existing LDC. South Golden Gate Estates - The interim NrRPA status for South Golden Gate Estates has changed. The area now will be considered as a "permanent" NRPA. Wetland Retention Ponds - The area required for a littoral shelf for xvet detention ponds in the Urban Designated area has been changed to reflect the current LDC requirement (Policy 6.1.6). IV. Additional Discussion During their Transmittal hearing, the BCC directed staff to investigate the possibility of providing for a TDR variable transfer rate, dependent upon a Sending Land's proximity to the urban area or urban services, ancL/or it's appraised value. An attachment to this Staff Report is the recently received brief analysis by Dr. James Nicholas regarding the implications of such a variable transfer rate. This will be an item for discussion at the public hearings. V. Staff Conclusions and Recommendations That the EAC forward the proposed amendments to the CCPC and BCC with a recommendation for adoption; and, that the CCPC consider the EAC's recommendations in their deliberations and forward the proposed amendments to the BCC with a recommendation for adoption. (As the EAC heating will be held on June 5, 2002 - the day before the CCPC heating - their recommendations will be presented at the CCPC heating.) PREP/~fRED BY: W~i~am D. Lorenz Natural Resources Director David Weeks, AICP, Chief Planner Comprehensive Planning Section 16 Date ITEM 2002 REVIEWED BY: Stan Litsinger, AICP Comprehensive Planning Manager Susan Murray, AICP ~ Interim Planning Services Director Date: Date: APPROVED BY: Joseph lC Schmi4h Administrator, C.~/mmunity Development and Environmental Services Division Staff Report jointly prepared for June 5 EAC meeting & June 6 CPCC meeting. NOTE: This petition has been advertised for the June 18, 2002 BCC meeting. Date: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MR. KEN ABERNATHY, CHAIRM.~ RF Adoption EAC-CCPC Staff Rpt. G, Comprehensive, David dw/ 17 JUN 1 8 2002 This Page Intentionally left blank JUN 1 8 2002 Final Report A Transferable Development Rights Program for Land Preservation Prepared for Collier County, Florida Prepared by James C. Nicholas November 23, 2001 Table of Contents io Empirical Results Introduction ......................... Transferable Development Rights ........ Background ................... The Economics of Land Value ..... The Economics of Density ........ Total Sample Urban - Rural Bulk - Retail mo D. Prices per Acre and per Unit ...... E. Density ....................... F. Value of Increased Density ........ G. Sending Areas .................. H. Receiving Areas ................. Keys to a Successful TDR Program ...... Incentive Options ...................... A. Affordable Housing ............... B. Native Vegetation Preservation .... 2 4 4 7 9 12 16 19 21 22 25 26 29 30 32 37 38 39 Final Report ~ C.-.-.~ A~ ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 Introduction The conversion of lands from one use to another has been a matter of concern in many areas around the country. The economic pressures for converting from one, less intensive use, to another, more intensive, are well known.~ Land tends to be more valuable in development than in farming or laying fallow, thus converting from low value to high value uses is rewarded with profit. Regulatory measures, such as zoning, can retard and even stop conversion. However, such regulatory measures have their own problems. The most obvious consequence of conversion ending regu- latory programs is a resulting loss in land value when development potentials are re- duced or eliminated. Thus, land-use planning agencies find themselves in the middle of a conflict between two compelling interests. On the one hand, there is a desire to protect and preserve land and to prevent, or at least control, certain environmental and social costs commonly associated with land conversion. On the other hand, develop- ment regulatory bodies are faced with a philosophy or property rights, which holds that regulations that reduce the value of individual's land is an unconstitutional taking of private property.-' Local governments are caught between a duty to protect public health, safety and welfare and a duty to justly compensate landowners whose property has been taken by the regulations that achieve the protection to public health, safety and welfare.3 There has been a great deal of experimentation around the country with land man- agement techniques that retain lands in existing low intensity uses without destroying the developmental values of that land. Most notable are purchase of development rights (PDR) and transfer of development rights (TDR).'* Both of these programs share the characteristic of separating development rights from the other use rights as- sociated with the land. For PDR, the development right is purchased and extin- ~ See Marion Clawson, Suburban Land Conversion itl tile United States, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins. 1971. for the seminal discussion of the process and economics of suburban land conversion. 2 See Pennsvh,ania Coal v Mahon, 260 U.S. 393 { 1922). where Justice Holmes wrote that "government hardly could go on if to some extent values incident to property could not be diminished without paying for every such change in the general law ....... The general rule at least is that while property may be regulated to a certain extent, if regulation goes too far it will be recog- nized as a taking." Emphasis added. Julian Juergensmeyer. J. C. Nicholas and B. D. Leebrick, "Transferable Development Rights and Alternatives After Suitum," The Urban Lawyer, Vol 2. Spring, 1998. 4 Mitigation is beginning to receive attention as a complementary means of achie~ preservation of environmentally important areas. See, J. Nicholas, J. Juergensmeyer m Basse, "Perspectixes Concerning the Use of Environmental Mitigation Fees as Inc Em'ironmental Liabilita*. Volume 7:2 and 7:3, 1999. Final Report ing theAGEJ~A ITEM d E. ~uo. 5'- ,ntives," JUN 1 8 2 02 guished, i.e.. not used. In the case of TDR. the right is transferred and the develop- ment that would have been undertaken on the subject land is undertaken elsewhere. In both instances, the development value of the land slated for preservation is pro- tected. The things to be called Transferable Development Rights herein go by many different names. In the New Jersey Pinelands they are Pinelands Development Credits (PDC). In Dade County, Florida, they are Severable Use Rights (SUR). In Suffork County, New York, they are known as Pine Barrens Credits (PBC) while in Montgomery County, Maryland, they are just plain old TDR. Regardless of what they are called, these rights share the common characteristic of facilitating the transfer of develop- ment from one place to another. This report will use TDR, transfer of development rights, to describe the policy. The possibility of using transferable development rights in Collier County is presently before the people and elected officials of the County. The study reported herein ana- lvzes the potential for TDR to address matters of land conservation within the Rural Fringe of the County. TDR may or may not be a good idea for Collier County. An important step in the process toward ansv,'ering the policy question is determining whether TDR is economically feasible. This study inquires into that feasibility and reports on how a TDR could address the conservation of Rural Fringe land. JUN 1 8 2002 Final Report 3 II. Transferable Development Rights A. Background Many communities have established some type of transferable development rights (TDR) program. Few would be considered successful.5 While the record for TDRs is, at best, spotty, those programs that have been successful clearly demonstrate that TDR can address difficult problems resulting from land management programs. Carefully designed TDR programs can "mitigate the impact of regulation,'~ when a developing community seeks to maintain land in low intensity or low value use. This report will discuss the background of successful TDR programs and, using the lessons learned by successful programs, set out a TDR program that is responsive to the con- ditions within Collier County. The concept behind transferable development rights is simple. Title to real estate or property ownership, under the bundle of rights (sticks) theory, consists of numerous components that may be individually severed and marketed, such as the sale of min- eral or oil rights. The right to develop property to its fullest potential is one of these sticks.7 The TDR system simply takes the development stick for a piece of property and allows it to be transferred or relocated to another piece of property,s Typically selling some defined development potential of one piece of property, the sending site, to some other entity for use at some other piece of property, the receiving site, ac- complishes the transfer.~ The transferred development potential may be measured in any one of a number of ways, such as floor area ratio or residential dwelling units. Once the transfer has occurred, most TDR systems require a legal restriction on the 5 Depending on what type of TDR is being considered, there are more than one hundred TDR programs in existence. See Richard Roddewig and Cheol Ingraru. Transferable Development Rights Programs: TDRs and the Real Estate Marketplace, 401 American Planning Ass'n Advisory Report tl 987). Also see Robt. Coughlin, "The Protection of Farmland: A Reference Guidebook for State and Local Governments," ( 1981 ). Rick Pruetz. "Saved by Development," I 1997) and American Farmland Trust, "Survey of Agricultural Preservation TDR Programs,' (1998). ~ Justice Brennan used this terminology when describing a TDR in Pennsylvania Central Transportation Co. v. CiO' of New York. 438 U.S. 104, 98 S.Ct. 2646. In Sttitum v Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. 520 U. S. 725. 738 (1997), Justice Scalia wrote, "TDRs can serve a commendable purpose in mitigating the economic loss suffered by an individual whose property' use is restricted, and property value diminished, but not so substantially as to produce a compensable taking." 7 Control," 2 Florida State University Law Review 35 (1974), page 37. See Carmichael. Donald M.. "Transferable Development Rights as a Basis for Land Use ~' Roddewig & Ingram. Supra. ~' There is no need to actually transfer ownership of the rights. Howe~er, the cussed in this manner to make sure that third party',' transfers are facilitated. .2. ance}UNd~-8 2002 Final Report 4 sending stte, prohibiting any future use of the transferred development potential. ~ The receiving site is then allowed to increase its allowed development potential by the additional number of dwelling units or floor area to which it is entitled as a result of the TDR transaction. TDRs will derive their value from receiving sites. The receiving areas are where the transferred unit will be sold, and the value of that unit will be based upon its location, location and location. If development is valuable in receiving areas, the right to trans- fer development to such areas will be valuable. Likewise, if development is not valu- able in receiving areas, the right to transfer development to such areas will have no value. The goal of TDRs is to use market forces to maintain economic values of lands being regulated by capturing a portion of the development value of lands not so regulated. The value of developed lands is largely due to the desirability of the community. A community that is a desirable place will lead to high land and developmental values. Likewise. undesirable communities result in low or even no land values. For a com- munity such as Collier Count.',', the quality of past development together with the "ambiance" of Collier County have resulted in very high values for both developed and undeveloped land. ~-' These factors create the conditions for high values, while the market forces of supply and demand implement those values. The demand for a Collier County location is a direct result of the quality of the community and the sup- ply of developable land in Collier County is diminishing. These forces combine to create a situation of ever increasing land values and ever increasing pressure to de- velop the remaining land and to develop that land more intensively. There are a number of variations on the basic theme of development rights acquisi- tion. An example is the dedication of development rights to a land trust or similar organization with the owners realizing a tax deduction for the donation'? While there are a number of precise means, the common characteristic is that the development rights are severed from the land. The land will retain all rights not specifically re- moved. In the case of agricultural preservation easements, land will retain all rights to farm. The conservation easements that sever the development rights can be struc- tured so that economically viable uses, such as agriculture, may be left after the de- velopment rights have been severed, or, alternatively, all uses of the land could be removed. The retention of uses can he an important factor in the ultimate success or failure of a TDR program. If all economically viable uses are removed, there is a problem of maintaining the now fallow land. Alternatively, leaving too many uses may defeat the conservation objective sought. Usually by the recordation of a conservation easement. ~ Costonis. John J.. "Developmen! Rights Transfer: An Exploratory Essav." 83 Ya Journal 75 ( 1973i at 85. The practice is to differentiate "development" from other uses of la agriculture. While "development" is no longer permissible, all uses not so restricted remain ~-' Collier County land values will be discussed in following sections. : La 'a~ ~'" d.s J LIN 1 8 Final Report 5 A program of TDR is an economic policy. It is a policy that attributes severable de- velopment rights to certain properties, called Sending Areas, and modifies develop- ment regulations so that the severed development rights may be used in Receiving Areas. As a precondition for success, this economic policy must be feasible. Within the context of this study, feasibility will have a working definition as having the po- tential of profit from transferring development from sending to receiving areas. JLJN 1~ 2002 Final Report 6 B. The Economics of Land Value Land has two fundamental values. The first is value in use and the second is value in exchange.~3 The value in use is that value returned to the owner from the existing uses of the land. This value can be both economic and non-economic. The value in exchange is what someone else would pay for the land. Generally, when the value in exchange exceeds the value in use, the property will be sold.TM The primary determi- nant of the value in use is the economic return received by the owner.~5 However, many properties also provide non-economic returns, especially when those lands are environmentally sensitive. These non-economic returns are typically in the form of an enhanced "quality of life," enjoyed by all.~6 When environmentally sensitive land is converted from its natural state, the owner benefits from an economic gain but also must bear any costs associated with the sale, both economic and non-economic. In many communities, the conversion of land involves a cost to be borne by the commu- nity as a whole. This cost is felt as a loss in the "quality of life." Owners will place a value on their land. They may do this subjectively or those val- ues may result from appraisals or similar objective data. Regardless of how, owners have a sense of the worth of their land. When market values exceed owners' sense of worth, the land will be sold. ter of the price offered as it is the owners' sense of the worth of the land. In this graphic we see two different situations. In the first, the owner attaches some non- economic value to the land with the result that a sale does not happen even though the offer is higher than that justified by the existing eco- nomic use. In the second in- stance the sale would occur because the owner did not Whether the land is actually sold is not as much a mat- tlo U: ~- F SL :,:,.1/ F EU .'i E With Non-Economic Value No Non-Economic Value ~3 This dichotomy was first explored by Aristotle in Ethics. ~4 Speculative motives not withstanding. ~5 The economic return can in a monetary return or an in-kind return such as the rental value of a person's own home. ~6 This is known as an e.rternalitv. In this instance, it is an external benefit. This benefi characterized as external because it is a benefit received by others and it results from no intentior the landowner. The other t3pe of externality is an external cost. This is a cost borne by others th not the intention of the owner. The characteristic that makes such benefits or costs "external" is the values of such benefits or costs are not capitalized into the price of land. 1S 2002 lat Final Report attach any non-economic value to the property. The point is that the offer - the value in exchange - was not the sole determinant of the sale. The opposite is also true. Bidders may go beyond the economic value of property for non-economic reasons. In both instances prices - the values in exchange - will appear to be beyond the underly- ing use value of the land. Of necessity, buyers will have to buy-out both the eco- nomic and non-economic values if they are to acquire that land. It would follow that only those buyers who attached the same or higher non-economic values to that land would acquire the property. In this manner subjective values are capitalized into market prices of land. This market process creates a problem. Buyers pay prices that reflect all factors relat- ing to the land. Any potential buyer who places little or no value on non-economic qualities will lose out in the bidding process to those that do value such qualities. The resulting capitalization of those qualities into market values means that if those quali- ties were to be lost, buyers would suffer a loss both in the subjective and objective values of their land. The adjacent graph depicts a situation where a buyer made an offer that covered both the economic and non-economic values of a property. The second set of columns show what would happen if non-economic values were lost. The net effect is that the new owner would incur both economic and non-economic losses as a consequence of the loss of the particular quality that was the source of the original non-economic value. A simple example makes the point. A parcel that offered a view of some spectacular scenery would have the value of that view capitalized into the price of the land. If that view were subse- quently lost, the owner would incur both eco- nomic and non-economic losses. With Non-Economic Value No Non-Economic Value The community of Collier County clearly has a substantial number of properties with values that originally were subjective in nature. These subjective values were based upon the "quality" of the community. The necessity of offering prices (values in ex- change) that exceeded the owner's value in use resulted in the capitalization of c.;c subjective qualities into objective market prices. Only potential buyers that ass equal or greater value to those various qualities would buy Collier County prope These actions both confirmed the existence of those qualities and created marke' AGENOA ITF_~ ned No. ry. val]UN 18 2002 p~. -~ "2 Final Report 8 ues beyond more narrowly defined values in use. In order for these higher values to be maintained, the "quality" of Collier County also must be maintained. C. The Economics of Density When asked what determines the value of land, "location, location and location" is the standard, almost knee-jerk, response. Of course location is critical to the value of a parcel of land, but once location is fixed, other factors come into play. The most important of the other factors is the productivity of the land. All other things being equal, i.e., location, the more productive land will command higher prices than the less productive. The precise value of a parcel of land would be a function of the land's yield per unit of land, usually an acre. For agricultural land this is commonly measured in bushels per acre, or some other recognized measure of output. The more goods that can be produced on a parcel of land, the more valuable that land. The same economic forces apply to urban land. The productivity of urban land is basically the same as agricultural - ~ield per acre. Of course the units yielded from urban land are different than agricultural and are measured in dwelling units or square footage of floor area rather than bushels per acre. But the basic point that the more than can be produced on a parcel of land the greater the expected value of a unit of land remains true for both agricultural and urban land. Unlike agriculture, the production of more urban product per unit of land tends to change the nature and value of the product. In agriculture the 100th bushel produced on an acre would have the same market value as the first or the fiftieth. The same is not true for urban products such as residences. The market tendency is /'or unit value to decline with density.~'' Thus, in an urban market the productivity of the land must be viewed together with the market for the various types of units capa- ble of being produced on the land. Land capability is a function of the physical char- acteristics of the land and the legal restrictions on the land. Thus either physical limi- tations or legal restrictions will work in conjunction with market forces to determine the productivity of land in terms of production per acre - density. prevail. In those circumstances where the market demands less density than both the physical limitations on the land and the legal restrictions could allow, the market is the sole determinant of density. When the market demands and legal restrictions would allow higher density than the physical limitations will allow, attempts to modify those physical limitations will occur until either the market or legal limits became the upper limit. When legal restrictions allow less density than the market demands and physi- cal limitations would allow, requests for rezonings and similar types of regulation changes will follow. Only when the market is the limiting factor will equilil- ~' See Arthur O'Sullivan. Urban Economics. 3rd Edition. Chicago: Irv,'in. 1996. p. commonly accepted principle is demonstrated for Collier Count,,,' in ~he follou,'ing section. JUN ~8. This 1 8 2002 Final Report 9 In a residential land market the general tendency is for value to increase per land unit (hereafter referred to simply as acre) with density but at a decreasing rate. That is, each additional unit of density will add less to total value as DIMINISHING RETURNS density is increased. In economics this is known as the Law of Diminishing Re- turns.~s A typical per acre value with re- spect to residential density would be as shown in Figure 1. In this fi,oure value per Input acre is increasing .... with additional units of density, but it is clearly increasing at a decreasing rate. If this process of increas- in_v. density on a ziven unit of land is allowed to continue, it will eventually lead to a declinino_ iotal value as shown in Figure 2. This situation would occur because each additional unit of density was of negative value, thus detracting from parcel value. This type of negative value would occur because the development would be so dense that buyers would offer less to buy or rent be- cause of excessive den- sity. Of course, no ra- tional person would knowingly increase density to such a level. Rather, they would cease density increases at levels that maxi- mized total values. DIMINISHING RETURNS Input Figure 3 shows a limit- lng factor. A limiting factor is introduced that results in less than market density and thereby limiting value and returns. Of course, if the limit could be eliminated or raised, density of develop- ment would rise and so also property values and returns. If this limitation were physical, such as being flood prone, modifying the land by providing drainage could result in increased value. Likewise, values could be increased by relaxation of any regulatory constraints that limited density below what the market would set. In the situation depicted in Figure 3, it would be very much to the advantage of the p~ bpert)~c-.,v..~ 18 See an.',' edition of Paul A. Samuelson. Economics. Ne~' York: McGra,a'-Hill. num years, for a full and in depth discussion of the law of diminishing returns. rousJUN 1 8 2O07 Final Report 10 owner to attempt to increase the density of development. This is the prime situation for TDRs. It is an unfortunate fact of modern life that the market will tend to accept more density than most community will accept. Communities, thus, enact various regulatory programs that limit development densi- ties to less than what the market would accept and re- ward. Various petitions re- sult with the goal being to increase permissible density up to what the market would accept. TDR presents a way to increase densities and also economic returns in those LIMITED RETURN Input situations where allowable densities are less than market densities. In situations where market densities are at or below permitted densities. TDRs will have no economic feasibility and thus no ability to achieve land preservation. The material presented and the points made here are commonly known. This review is presented in order to set the stage of an analysis of the role of density in the Collier County urban land market. The general theory of land economics would suggest that density of development would be a significant factor in the setting of Collier County urban land values. Furthermore, theory would suggest that the incremental or mar- ginal value v~'ould decline with density. We can turn no,.',' to the Collier County land market to discover the precise land economic relationships within Collier County. ITEM JUN 1 8 200 Final Report I 1 III. Empirical Results Several components of Collier County real estate sales were combined to create what is called the Total Sample. The Total Sample is made up of the sale of unbuilt-upon properties within the study area.~9 For purposes of this study, retail lot sales are those sales containing a single buildable unit and bulk lot sales are those with two or more buildable units (or lots) within the parcel. The components of the sample are: SALES INCLUDED IN TDR SAMPLE IRetail Sales: Urban Area Retail Lots Rural Area Retail Lots Total Retail ulk Sales: Urban Area Bulk Sales Rural Area Bulk Sales Total Bulk I)tal Urban Sales tal Rural Sales ~3rand Total 114 541 655 185 285 47o 299 1 826 1,125 All of the sales utilized are taken from Collier County' public records. These sales occurred between January 7, 1998 and September 4, 2001. All markets are rational. The problem confronting the analyst is to comprehend the rationale of a particular market. The market of concern is the Collier County land market. The particular market is the non-Gulf influence area and within the Naples market area. This includes both urban and rural properties. The goal of this inquiry is to project the value of increasing the intensity of land use within certain receiving area parcels. This value will be a function of the market valuation of the resulting increased land use intensity. These valuations will have to be imputed from sur- rounding areas. Thus, sales of buildable properties in surrounding areas are analyzed in order to project the economic value of increased intensity on receiving area proper- ties. The study area is broken out into Urban and Rural and then by Retail and Bulk. Of course there are the sub-classifications - Urban Bulk, Rural Retail and the like. It is ~o At the outset there ~'ere five sub-areas within the sales study area: the Rural Fringe Area. the Urban Area. Orange Tree. Immokalee and Bayshore. Immokalee and Bavshore are both areas appear to have ample density and limited current pressure to increase density.' While Orange Tree is very active market, increasing intensive of development in existing developed areas appears to be ec nomicallv infeasible. Therefore onl> sales in the Rural Fringe and Urban Areas will be analyzed. Final Report 12 AGENDA ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 expected that these markets would be fundamentally different. It is easy to see that there are substantial differences among the sub-categories of property. Whether Bulk Retail Rural Urban Total Sales $516,849,150 $44,084,350 $108,934,500 $451,999,000 Total Acres 27,140 1,929 20,756 8,119 Total Units 34,773 655 4,325 30,331 Average Parcel Price $1,099,679 $67,304 $131,882 $1,511,702 Price Per Acre $19,044 $22,856 $5,248 $55,670 Price Per Unit $14,864 $67,304 $25,187 $14,902 the observed differences are fundamental or merely reflecting differing conditions will be discussed below. The various sales are analyzed with multiple regression. This is a statistical technique that correlates one set of data, known as the dependent variable, with one or more in- dependent variables. The objective is to test whether there is significant correlation between the dependent variable and the independent variables. The reliability of the model is measured by a statistic known as the Correlation Coefficient (or Coefficient of Multiple Determination) - R2. This is a percentage measure, although statistical convention does not convert it to an actual percentage but leaves it in decimal form. The Correlation Coefficient is calculated by contrasting the predicted (or estimated) value of dependent variables against the actual of those variables. The extent to which the predicted values are consistent with the actual values, measured as a per- cent, is the R2. For this reason, this statistic is commonly known as "goodness of fit." meaning the extent to which the statistical explanation offered "fits" with the actual values observed. The higher the value of R2. the better the fit. The R2 reported herein are adjusted for sample size and thus the notation is shown as "R2 Adj." Two other statistical measures are employed herein. The first is the t-Stat~suc.- This statistic measures whether the coefficient of an individual independent variable is significantly different from zero. If the coefficient is significantly different from zero, then it is accepted that the independent variable affects the dependent variable in proportion to the magnitude of the coefficient. The correlation coefficient, R-', as- sesses the explanatory power of all independent variables collectively while the t Sta- tistic is relevant to each individual variable. For samples of the type analyzed, t Sta- tistics between 1.796 and 2.624 are required. The lower t Statistic is associated with the 95% level of significance and the higher is 99%. t Statistics are shown above each coefficient in parentheses. A quick rule-of-thumb is that a t Statistic must be ap- proximately 2 before is can be accepted. Another measure is the F Statistic. The F Statistic assesses the degree of co-va between the dependent and independent variables. For the type of data analyze Sometimes called the T-Ratio. Please note that the lower case "t" is not a t_~ po. ITEM JUN 1 8 2O0? Pg. Final Report 13 Statistics of 3.09 at 95% and 5.07 at 99% are required. The F-Statistic is an overall test of the multiple regression model. A total of three statistics are used: (1) R2 which measures the percent of variation in the dependent variable explained by the variation in the dependent variable(s); (2) t Statistic which measures whether an individual independent variable contributes to the explanation of the variation in the dependent variable; and (3) F Statistic which measures the degree of co-variation. Multiple regression is used to assess the factors that influence the value of land sales. The items presumed to influence parcel sales price are: the number of acres within the parcel: the number of dwelling units authorized by existing zoning; the amenities available to the parcel, whether the parcel is approved for development, and whether the parcel is within the urban area. No other factors are given consideration. In the following sections the parcel sales within Collier County are analyzed. The objective is to estimate the value of an additional unit of (residential) development. This value will be used as a basis for projecting the consequences of permitted density alterna- tions. To readers unfamiliar with statistical and multiple regression analysis this may be dif- ficult. Rather than working through the individual equations, a reader max, wish to simply employ the t Statistic rule of thumb (it should be approximately 2) and an F- Ratio rule of 5 or higher. There is no set minimum value for Rz Adj. Rather. the closer to 1 the better. But for the type of analyses undertaken herein, values of R2 Adj. of 50%/.5) are acceptable. This analysis is concerned with the incremental or marginal value of allowable den- sity (per acre). In order to establish a basis for this estimation, 1,125 Collier County land sales discussed above ,,,,'ere analyzed. The expectation is that per acre values will increase with allowable density and per dwelling unit values will decrease with allowable density. Of course, it is expected that both per acre and per parcel values vary given the presence or tack of amenities. The amenities included herein are water frontage (non-gulf), view frontage and being within a gated community. The pres- ence of such amenities is aggregated into a single variable labeled "Amenity." Given the nature of the land market, it is expected that the interactions among these vari- ables will be logarithmic- rather than linear. It is not possible to directly measure the worth of amenities. In this analysis each amenity is measured simply on the basis of whether or not it exists for each particular parcel. The regression model will then estimate the contribution of such amenities to the sales price of the lot. The objective is not to estimate amenities values. Rather, the objective is to adjust for amenities so that the fundamental land economics r lay he assessed. The binary ( 1 or O) inclusion of a characteristic is known as a "dumm -'~ Natural logs are used rather than the base 10 logs. Natural logs are used because na logs {base 2.72) are more applicable to financial data than are logs base 10. 2002 Final Report 14 variable." It is "dumb" in that the value I indicates that the characteristic exists and the value 0 indicates that it does not exist. The same approach is used to incorporate whether the parcel is approved for development or not and whether the parcel is lo- cated in the rural or urban area. For a parcel of land in a development that had a golf course, was located within the urban area and was approved for development, the values of Amenity, Approved and Urban would all be 1, indicating the presence of that quality. The general model used to explain variations in parcel prices is: Parcel Price = f (Acres, Units, Amenities,Approval,Location, Time ) This equation incorporates an hypothesis that the sales price of a parcel of land within Collier County will be a function of the size of the parcel (measured in acres), the al- lowable density (measured in maximum allowable dwelling units permitted by zoning or approvals), the amenities available (golf, some important frontage, and gated communityl, whether the property has development approvals.'-: the location of the parcel within the urban area and the date the parcel ,,vas sold. No sales ,.,,'ere for Gulf coastal properties so the effect of such locations on pt-ice should not be present. The hypothesis will be tested by subjecting 1,125 property sales within Collier County to statistical analysis. The goal of this testing is to estimate the economic value of increasing units (or density) to a given parcel of land. Increasing units to a given parcel should increase the value of the parcel. The resulting value increase would be the incremental or marginal revenue product of increased units. This prod- uct would be the value of transferred development. 2_' The relevant approvals would include subdivision. Planned Unit Development iP Development of Regional Impact I DRII. These are all classified as "approxed" or "subdixid out distinction to the actual mode of approval. ID) or ,d",diltN 18 200;' Pg., Final Report 15 A. THE TOTAL SAMPLE It is postulated, and soon will be demonstrated, that there are few significant eco- nomic differences within the study area. The observed differences, it will be shown, are due to the different characteristics or situations of the properties, such as their ap- proval for development, location within the urban development boundary, etc. ,~-,, The model used in this multiple regression analysis is:-- LogPrice= A + (bI * LogAcres)+ (b:* LogUnits)+ (b3 * Amenity)+ (b4 *Approved)+ (bs* Urban ) The regression results for the total sample are: REGRESSION OUTPUT - TOTAL SAMPLE Regression Statistics Multiple R 0.8283 R Square 0.6861 Adjusted R Square 0.6844 Standard Error 1.0523 Observations 1125 ANOVA Df Regression 6 Residual 1118 Total 1124 SS MS F 2706.17 1238.02 3944.19 451.03 407.30 1.11 Significance F O.Ou Intercept Ln(Time)2s Ln(Acres) Ln(Units) Amenity Approved Urban Coefficients Standard Error t Stat~ 9.7139 0.1034 93.9339 -0.0994 0.0314 -3.1685 0.2650 0.0546 4.8505 0.6090 0.0588 10.3551 2.1092 0.1497 14.0920 0.1685 0.1090 1.5463 0.4172 0.1674 2.4927 23 Recall that the logs are natural logs. _,4 The fact that the t Statistics for time is negative is not important. The significance of the t Statistic is not dependent on the sign, which can be ignored. :s The role of time ,xill not receive discussion. The base for time in this analysis is J. 2002. All times are expressed relative to that data. The data show that land prices have been lng at an annual rate of 9.9r7c during the 1998 - 2001 period. The model is structured so that clusions are time adjusted to l Jan _00_. AGENOA ITEM nuar}qj: ncreas- ~°~UN I $ 2002 Final Report 16 The regression equation was able to explain 68%2~ of the variation in parcel price. All of the variables are highly significant except for Approved. This interesting result suggests that the approval or non-approval of property for development appears pre- dictable and does not play a major role in explaining parcel price when all parcels are considered. The regression statistics for the Total Sample shown above may be entered into the general equation to look like: LogPrice= 9.9139+ (.265' LogAcres)+ (.609* LogUnits)+ (2.109' Amenity) + (. 1685*Approved) + (.4172' Urban ) The regression equation was in the log form.27 Converting from logs to back to a lin- ear form, the following form results: Parcel Price = M Acres ~ Units To the extent that any of the dummy variables are involved, the',' are simple multipli- ers. similar to the Intercept. M. The regression equation for a parcel located in the urban area. that has some amenity and has approval for would be: Parcel Price = Acres~ Units" M Amenity Approved Urban Because these dummy variables are simple multipliers, they need not be discussed here. The exponent for Acres is equal to 0.265-'8 and the exponent for Units 0.609? The fact that they are each less than one means that parcel price will increase with addi- tions of either acres or units, but at a diminishing rate. The fact that the total of the two exponents is less than one means that the parcel price will grow at a diminishing rate with the expansion of both acres and units.3° Mathematically: -'~ The Adjusted R Square of 0.6844 equated to 68%. '- Meaning that the magnitudes of the variables had been converted to natural logs before the regession model was run. ~G,F_NO ~, iTEM 2s The coefficient of Ln(Acres) in the regression equation. 29 The coefficient of Ln{ Units) in the regression equations. ~'~ This is the demonstration of diminishing returns. JUN I 8 2002 Final Report 17 Parcel Price~ Acres = c~ M Acres°~-~ Units" Given that ct < 1, then ct -1 < 0 and ~5 Parcel Price//~ Acres <1 and Parcel Price, e~ Units = fl M Acresc~ Units"-~ Given that 13 < 1, then 13 - I < 0 and Parcel Price//~ Units < 1 This latter expression is the one that estimates the value of increased intensity (addi- tional units/and thus is the basis for projecting the value of a transferred development rio_hr. Note may be taken of the fact that units add more to price (0.609) than addi- tional acres (0.265), indicating that there are market pressures to increase intensity, at least within the common density ranges of Collier County. Before dealing with TDR values, it would be advisable to'fully explore the sub-components of the Collier land market and to support the presumptions set out above. The Collier (or study area) land market is subdivided into Retail and Bulk sales and also into Urban and Rural areas. The number and averages for these sub-areas are set out above. The standard regression model was run for each of the sub-markets. These results are set out below. Final Report 2002 B. URBAN- RURAL" The Collier Land market analyzed herein is subdivided into urban and rural areas. These areas are defined in the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and this study uses those definitions. The summary statistics for these areas are: Rural Urban Total Total Sales $108,934,500 $451,999,000 $560,933,500 Total Parcels 826 299 1,125 Total Acres 20,756 8.119 28.875 ffotal Units 4,325 30,331 34,656 Average Parcel Price $131,882 $1,511,702, $498,608 Price Per Acre $5,2481 S55,670! $19,426 Price Per Unit $25,187 $14.902 S16,186 iAcres Per Unit 4.80 0.27 0.83 As would be expected, rural lots are much bigger than urban and command higher per unit values. Urban lots are much smaller while prices per acre are much higher. These data reflect both consumer preferences and Collier County land-use regulatory practices. The regression results for the urban and rural split are shoxvn belo,x. Some very REGRESSION OUTPUT-URBAN AREA Reqression Statistics Multiple R 0.7532 R Square 0.5673 Adjusted R Square 0.5600 Standard Error 1.2684 Observations 299 ANOVA Df SS MS F Siqnificance F Regression 5 Residual 293 Total 298 618.12 123.62 76.84 0.00 471.37 1.61 1089.49 Coefficients Standard Error t Stat Intercept 11.1063 0.4869 22.8088 Ln(Time) -0.0707 0.0790 -0.8949 Ln(Acres) 0.9872 0.2480 3.9799 3~ As pointed out above, TDR would appear to be infeasible for Orange Tree. The reason this infeasibilitv is that the value of a unit is negative, indicating that real estate sales values have hil diminishin~ returns at existing densities. The only wa), for TDR to be feasible in the Orange Tree would be f~r land currently zoned for fixe-acres being allotted to convert to Orange Tree densities xthat ~ould be new Orange Tree densities. ea :)r JUN 1 8 200; Final Report 19 Ln(Units) -0.1406 0.2609 Amenity 0.8794 0.2579 Approved 0.9062 0.2666 REGRESSION OUTPUT-RURAL AREA Regression Statistics Multiple R 0.8596 R Square 0.7388 Adjusted R Square 0.7353 Standard Error 0.6171 Observations 381 ANOVA -0.5390 3.4093 3.3988 Df SS MS F Siqnificance F Regression 5 Residual 375 Total 380 403.922 80.784 142.784 0.381 546.7O7 212.167 0.000 Coefficients Standard Error t Stat Intercept 9.32616276 0.21027 44.35405 Ln(Time) -0.00031058 0.02949 -0.01053 Ln(Acres) 0.56515833 0.13842 4.08285 Ln(Units) 0.55704552 0.15508 3.59210 Amenity 2.5364973 0.19889 12.75310 Approved 0.02774902 0.15764 0.17603 interesting differences occur. In neither sub-market is time of significance, but in the total market, time is of significance. In both markets the more important factors in explaining price are lot size and the presence of amenities. In the urban market units is insignificant while in the rural market it is highly significant. The reason for this difference is that the urban market is dominated by the retail sale of individual home- sites where the number of units is one. In the rural market there are more bulk sales and the positive contribution of units is more apparent. Thus the number of units is significant in the rural area but not in the urban. In the total sample, a dummy variable Urban was significant ( t Statistic of 2.49), meaning that parcel prices were significantly different in the Urban Area than in the Rural Area. The analysis of the Urban and Rural sub-areas confirms those differ- ences. These differences are incorporated into the total sample model by including the Urban dummy variable. JUN ! g 2002 Pi[.. ?. r Final Report 20 C. BULK-RETAIL Analysis of the bulk and retail land markets shows important differences. As would be expected, the prices realized for retail homesite sales are more individualistic, re- sponding less to the standard characteristics and more to individual site characteris- tics. Thus the R2 for retail sales drops to 29% whereas it is 60% for bulk sales. The significant factors explaining retail sales prices are lot size, the existence of amenities, and location m the urban area. - For bulk sales, the most ~mportant factor in deter- mining prices is whether or not the parcel has been approved for development. Both of these sets of determinants are easily understood and all are incorporated into the total sample either as explanatory or dummy variables. REGRESSION OUTPUT - RETAIL MARKET Regression Statistics Multiple R 0.5401 R Square 0.2917 Adjusted R Square 0.2862 Standard Error t .0836 Observations 655 ANOVA Df SS MS F Siqnificance F 5 3~3.80 62.76 53.45 1.78346E-46 649 762.10 1.17 654 1075.90 Regression Residual Total Coefficients Standard Error t Stat Intercept 9.3751 0.1221 76.7726 Ln(Time) -0.0985 0.0426 -2.3093 Ln(Acres) 0.4841 0.0582 8.3141 Amenity 1.2060 0.2071 5.8244 Approved 0.7406 0.1221 6.0636 Urban 1.1606 0.1968 5.8974 ~: The number of units does not appear because in e~ery instance the number of units there is no variation in the number of units. ~,GENOA ITEM · soj U N I 8 ?nn'2 Pg. Ii Final Report 21 REGRESSION OUTPUT - BULK SALES Regression Statistics Multiple R 0.7777 R Square 0.6048 Adjusted R Square 0.5997 Standard Error 1.1744 Observations 470 ANOVA Df SS MS F Regression 6 977.400 162.900 Residual 463 638.583 1.379 Total 469 1615.983 118.110 Coefficients Standard Error t Stat Intercept 10.3875 0.8361 12.4235 Ln(Time) -0.1090 0.0558 -1.9533 Ln(Acres) -0.0715 0.5245 -0.1363 Ln(Units) 0.9328 0.5341 1.7467 Amenity 0.5297 0.9429 0.5618 Approved 0.8424 0.2256 3.7335 Urban -0.7057 1.5869 -0.4447 Significance F O.00u D. PRICES PER ACRE AND PER BUILDABLE UNIT It is often noted that parcel prices per acre will decline with the number of acres in the parcel. The same is true for prices per buildable unit. Both of these tendencies were tested for in the Total Sample and were found to exist. Price per acre declines precipitously with the number of acres, with all other variables behaving as before. The following graphic shows the rapid decline. It is always comforting when generally accepted principles of land economics are found to exist in a sample, as they do here. Like price per acre, price per buildable unit declines with the number of units in a parcel. Unlike price per acre, the rate of decline is much less. This conclusion is optimistic for TDRs in that adding additional units will tend to reduce per unit prices and, if that reduction is great, the result could be to reduce total revenue, thereby removing any profit potential from such unit additions. How- ever, the reduction in revenues resulting from additional units will tend to be tudu~x6ENo~, ~TEM ate, thereby providing potential profit from unit increases. ~. ~., JUN I 8 2002 Final Report -- Price Per Acre Parcel Size (Acres) TOTAL SAMPLE PRICE PER ACRE Regression Statistics Multiple R 0.7714 R Square 0.5950 Adjusted R Square 0.5935 Standard Error 1.1363 Observations 1125 ANOVA Df MS F Regression 4 531.154 411.350 Residual 1120 1.291 Total 1124 Coefficients t Stat Intercept 9.0705 105.8784 Amenity 1.6050 9.0353 Approved 0.9766 10.1033 Urban 0.6137 3.9257 Ln/Acres) °0.5222 -9.7524 Significance F 0.000 ~GE. NOA ITEM 2002 Final Report 23 TOTAL SAMPLE PRICE WITH UNITS Regression Statistics Multiple R 0.5829 R Square 0.3397 Adjusted R Square0.3368 Standard Error 1.0628 Observations 1125 ANOVA df SS MS F Significance Regression 5.00 650.45 Residual 1119.00 1264,07 Total 1124.00 1914.52 130.09 115.160.00 1.13 Coefficients Standard Error t Stat Intercept 10.008 0.085 118.32u Ln(Time) -0.066 0.031 -2.126 Ln(U nits) -0.135 0.026 -5.133 Amenity 2.428 0.136 17.887 Approved -0.136 0.090 -1.506 Urban -0.199 0.110 -1.813 $25,000 S20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 PARCEL PRICE PER BUILDABLE UNIT Buildable Units Final Report A~A ITEM No, ~, JUN ! B 2002 2--$ E. DENSITY The Collier market is a low-density market. While there is always the possibility that this observation is the result of the densities permitted by Collier County land devel- opment regulations, market values appear to be so clear, showing a sharp decline in lot price with density. These data would suggest that densities higher than 3 per acre appear to be uneconomic in the market area. Note may be taken of the fact that this analysis does not consider how amenities may alter the density-price pattern.~ These Lot Price By Density $1oo,ooo $8o,ooo S6O,OOO $4o.ooo $20.000 So Urban Area Rural Area Units Per Acre data suggest that the densities that would maximize value would be in the 2 per acre range. Further, these data suggest that there will be the highest value for TDRs in the lowest density zoning classifications. In the Rural Fringe Area, the proposed receiv- ing areas are presently allowed to develop at one unit per 5 acres. The proposal is to allow development at two units per 5 acres. This is the density range that has the higher values for increased intensity of development. ~ The reason for the odd kink in the lines for densities of less than one per acres is th change in densities is not uniform belov, one per acre. JUN t8 200 the Final Report 25 F. VALUE OF INCREASED INTENSITY The objective here is to estimate the value of a TDR. This value will be estimated using the Total Sample Model and The Retail Model, both of which were setout above. Looking first to the Retail Model: RETAIL MODEL COEFFICIENTS Coefficients Intercept 9.3751 Ln(Time) -0.0985 Ln(Acres) 0.4841 Amenity 1.2060 Approved 0.7406 Urban 1.1606 Let's begin with property located in the rural area and thus zoned for one unit per 5 acres. Further lets assume a 50-acre tract where, with TDR. lots sized can go from 1 per 5 acres to 1 per 2.5 acres. The model tells us that 5-acre lots in this tract would sell for S25.701 without development approxals.- Taking the land through subdivi- sion will increase values to S53,901 for this typical 5-acre lot)5 Of course, there are costs associated with obtaining subdivision3° approvals that are not considered herein. The model output for this unsubdivided tract yields: RETAIL SALES - RURAL AREA UNSUBDIVIDED LOTS : Value Per Lot Total Value 5 $25,701 $257,010 2.5 $18,375 $367,491 Incremental Value Per Lot $12,542 Going from a 5-acre to a 2.5-acre configuration adds additional, incremental or mar- ginal revenue of $12,542 per lot. Assuming away transactions costs, this would be the value of adding additional density to a defined parcel. If this tract is taken through subdivision, the results are: ~4 $5,140 per acre. =~ 510.780 per acre. ~' Here the term un-subdixided is used in order to a,,oid the use of "unapproved." that an approval is required fl)r use. v, hich it is not. AGEI'~)A I'TEM -,L ~pLvi~t~N ] 8 2002 pg. Final Report 26 .RETAIL SALES - RURAL AREA SUBDIVIDED LOTS ~Lot Size Incremental Value Per Lot Total Value (Acres) Value Per Lot 5 $53,901 $539,011 2.5 $38,536 $770,716 $23,170 Now the incremental value rises to $23,170 per lot. The Total sample Model yields somewhat different results. Employing the same hy- pothetical, the incremental values or going from a 5-acre to a 2.5-acre configuration in the Rural Area are: IRURAL AREA Lot Size UNSUBDIVlDED SUBDIVIDED (Acres) Retail Total Sample Retail Total Sample 5 2.5 $11,048 $9,061 $23,170 $11,790 For unapproved properties the results are somewhat consistent. However. for ap- proved, the Total Sample Model yields little change in incremental value while the Retail Model projects a doubling of the incremental value. In the Total Sample there are both retail and bulk sales. Bulk sales are expected to realize lower per unit and per acre values because of the discounting both for time and for risk that the market will impose. These values are shown below. Per acre values are not all that different while per unit values are substantially different. Because average per unit values are Retail Bulk Total Total Sales $44,084,350 $516,849,150 $560,933,500 INo. Sales 655 470 1,125 Total Acres 1,928.81 27,139.56, 29,068.37 Total Units 655 34,773 35,428 Average Parcel Price $67,304 $1,099,679 $498,608 Price Per Acre $22,856 $19,044 $19,297 Price Per Unit $67,304. $14,864 $15,833 lower for bulk sales, it would follow that incremental and marginal values would also be lower. These lower values would result from the nature of the discounting rather than fundamental differences in values. Another factor could be that many of the units available by zoning are not achievable when the site is actually laid out. Simply put, the revenues to be derived from selling finished units within bulk sales parcels are relatively uncertain and will be received in the future, thus risk adjusted anq sent values will be lower. For the retail sale of unsubdivided lots there would t~ if any differential discounting, for both types of properties appear to have curr¢ value. Final Report 27 There are costs associated with transferring development from one parcel to another. These costs would include: · The cost of acquiring development rights, · . . I? · Closing costs associated with that acqms~tmn7 and · Foregone interest while awaiting the sale of transferred units. The offer price of a TDR would be the incremental revenue less these transaction costs? Studies undertaken for the New Jersey Pinelands Commission suggested a reduction of 50% from incremental value to TDR price? If this discount were to prevail, Collier County TDRs should achieve market values of approximately S12,000 in the rural fringe area. More recent TDR experience has suggested lower discounts. In the case of the Long Island Central Pine Barrens, the discount from in- cremental value to TDR market price appears to be less than 25%..*0 Using a dis- count of 20%, the projected value of a TDR for use in the Rural Fringe Area is 518.500. A TDR that was transferable into the urban area would have values approximately the same as in the Rural Fringe Area. Employing the Retail Model and re-adjusting the 50-acre hypothetical parcel from four to five units to the acre: IRETAIL SALES - URBAN AREA, APPROVED LOTS Lot Size Incremental (Acres) Value per Lot Total Value Value Per Lot .25 $40,345 S8,068,952 .20 $36,214 $9,053,394 $19,689 This results in an incremental value of approximately 520,000 per right and, at 80%. a TDR value of 516.000. Taking urban density from three to four units to the acre yields values virtually identical to those in the Rural Fringe Area. Given the data analyzed, a TDR value approximating $18,500 is warranted and will be utilized herein. This value considers the entire range of values discussed above. .~7 In some instances there are commissions to be paid since realtors actively broker TDRs where there are successful TDR programs. 3s While foregone interest is not actually a transaction cost, it will by lumped together with ac- tual transaction costs as a net deduction· ~ 30 j. Nicholas. "The Value of Pinelands Development Credits." New Jersey Pinelands mission. 19fl6. ~" J. Nicholas. "The Economic Value of Development Rights in Brookha~en, Riverk Southampton," a report prepared for the Central Pine Barrens Credit Clearinghouse, January Final Report 28 G. THE SENDING AREAS The sending areas are: PROPOSED TDR SENDING AREAS Units per TDRs Sending Area Acreage Acre Rural Fringe 20,000 0.2 4,000 Area "F" 6,550 0.1 655 :Total 26,550 4,655 There are a total of 26,550 acres of sending areas. These properties would be as- signed 4,655 TDRs. This assignment is at one TDR for each 5-acres for property in the Primary Sending Area. The property in the Primary Sending Area at this time is the Rural Fringe Area. Secondary Sending Area properties are assigned TDRs at a ratio is one TDR per 10-acres. This lower ratio is due to the lands in Secondary Sending Areas being virtually all (99%) wetlands and thus having less development potential. The property in the Secondary Sending Area at this time is Area "F". There are presently 4,655 development rights in the sending area. The Total Sample Model predicts a value of 53,793 per acre, for the same 50-acre tract if this tract was in the rural area and had no approvals. If a conservation easement were used to re- move development potential, the value would drop to approximately 5900 per acre. This would appear to be the agricultural value of tracts in the rural area. The model would project a value of 5230 per acre if agriculture were not viable. For purposes of this analysis, a residual value of 5750 will be employed for the properties in the Pri- mary Sending Area. A residual value of S230 will be used for Secondary Sending Areas, and a pre-regulation value of 51,897 (50~ of the Primary Sending Area) will be applied in those areas. These lowered figures are used to reflect the nature of the Secondary Sending Area property. If one TDR were to be allocated per development right, a total of 4,655 TDRs would be needed. At prevailing values, a total of S71,775,757 exists as development value. SENDING AREA VALUES Primary Secondary Total Acres 20,000 6,550 26,550 Prior Value $3,793 $1,897 Residual -$750: -$230 Change $3,043 $1,667 Total Change $60,860.000 $10,915,575 $71,775,575 JtoN 1 8 2002 : Final Report 29 A TDR program would transfer this development value to receiving areas. An esti- mated value of S 18,500 per TDR results from the model. Allocating 4,655 TDRs to sending area properties would generate $86,117,500 in value. This provides coverage of sending area development value at 120%. H. THE RECEIVING AREAS There are three potential receiving areas: Rural Fringe Area: Primary Receiving Area Bonus Density Bonus Units Secondary Receiving Area Bonus Density Bonus Units Total Receiving Area Total Bonus Units !Urban Area: 29,700 0.20 5,940 2.500 0.10 25O 32,200 6,190 Acres 7,912 TDR Bonus per Acre 2.0' i Total Bonus Units 15,824 Orange Tree: 42 l Acres 1.200 TDR Bonus per Acre ;.4~0© i Total Bonus Units GRAND TOTAL 24.4141 In other TDR areas a "Rule of Thumb" has evolved that there should be the ability to absorb at least twice the number of TDRs created.-~3 Here there is the ability to ab- sorb over 5 times the number of TDRs created. On the one hand, this large number of potential receiving areas adds to the feasibility of a TDR program. One the other hand, there may not be enough TDRs to meet demand, thus frustrating potential trans- fers while sending TDR values to levels that would be infeasible for many potential users. 4~ Originally the Rural Fringe Area had 31.800 acres of receiving area. This was reduced by 2.100 v;hen the northeast portion of North Belle Meade was changed from receiving area to sending area. The revised total was increased by 2.500 to incorporate the Neutral Area as a receiving area. *: Orange Tree is not included because feasibility of TDR for Orange Tree has not be onstrated. James T.B. Tripp and Daniel Dudek. "Institutional Guidelines for Designing Suco Transi'erable Development Rights Programs." }'ale Journal on Regulutio~h Vol 6. 1989. Final Report n derr~gENOl ITEM sru JUN I 8 2002 P~.., ¢, ,,_, It is recommended that the current proposed Rural Fringe Area TDR program be lim- ited to the Primary and Secondary Receiving Areas within the Rural Fringe Area. There is the potential to absorb 6,190 TDRs within this area. roughly one and one- half times the number of TDRs created. While this ratio is less than the desired two- times, if this TDR program proves successful, other possible receiving areas will be needed, so conserving those receiving areas at this time preserves options for the fu- ture. Alternatively, other receiving areas can be added if the Rural Fringe Area proves to be insufficient. The recommendation is to allow an increase in density from 0.2 units per acre in the Primary Receiving Area and 0.1 units in the Secondary to 0.4 units and 0.2 per acre. This equates to changing permitted density from one unit per five-acres to one unit per-two and one-half acres. AGENOA ITEM JL~N ]8 2002 Final Report 31 V. KEYS TO A SUCCESSFUL TDR PROGRAM There are several keys to TDR success. Following these guidelines will not guarantee success. However, a failure to follow these guidelines almost assures failure. AUTHORITY. There is no question about Collier County's authority to enact a pro- gram. First, the County Powers Act, Chapter 25, Florida Statutes, authorizes coun- ties to "prepare and enforce comprehensive plans for the development of the county.''44 Additionally, the Growth Management Act "encourages" the use of in- novative land development regulations including.., transferable development ri_hts..us While further authority may not be needed, The Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private P~-operty Rights Protection Act authorizes or recognizes TDRs as a means to deal with the economic consequences of certain land development regulations.~6 CLARITY OF PURPOSE. A TDR program must have clearly defined and attainable _ooals. In this way. movement toward those goals can be managed and attainment can also be measured. Collier County must resist the temptation to add other goals to its TDR program. RESOURCES. Collier County will have to commit some fiscal and staff resources to the on-going administration of a TDR program. Experience elsewhere has shown that the fiscal and personnel costs are not extensive, experience has also shown that if staff and fiscal resources are not made available the program will dwindle av,'ay. EVASION PROOF. The most frequent reason for failure of TDR programs is the lack of economically feasible receiving areas. The second most common reason is evasion. Developers in receiving areas are expected to purchase TDRs from sending area property owners. This analysis suggests a price of $18,500. The result of this purchase should be that the developer could increase development within the receiv- ing area. If the same increase can be had by other and cheaper means, TDRs will be eschewed in favor of the cheaper route. In designated receiving areas there must be no alternate way of increasing density other than TDR. ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY. Development rights will be traded and transferred if and only if it is economically feasible for both buyers and sellers to trade. Any TDR program must begin with economic feasibility and feasibility must be retained. The 44 Chapter 125.01(l)(g). Florida Statutes. 45 Chapter 163.3202(3 I. Florida Statutes. ~ Chapter 70.01 (4)(c )( 3 ). Florida Statutes. 2002 - pg.. 'S ~. Final Report 32 County will have to monitor the program and, where necessary, make appropriate corrections and adjustments so that the program remains viable. USE BY RIGHT. A defining difference between successful and unsuccessful TDR programs is whether the increased development in the receiving areas is by right. The alternative to use by right is to require some type of discretionary approval.47 The re- quirement for discretionary approvals removes the certainty that is the basis for eco- nomic feasibility. Additionally, requiring discretionary approvals can put the pro- gram in legal jeopardy. In French v New York, 48 the court expressed a view of TDR, saying that: [I]t is a tolerable abstraction to consider development rights apart from the solid land from which as a matter of zoning law they derive. But severed, the development rights are a double abstraction until they are actually attached to a receiving parcel, yet to be identified, acquired, and subject to the contingent fi~- ture approvals of administrative agencies, events which may never happen be- cause of the exigencies, c, f the market and the contingencies and exigencies of administrative action. TI'tis was preparatory to ruling against the Cit,,,' of New York. For economic and legal reasons, increased density by TDR must be by right in the receiving areas. If Collier County cannot make this commitment, then a TDR program may be ill advised at this time. SLMPLICITY. Any land development regulatory program tends to become complex. TDRs are perhaps more conducive to complexity than other types of development regulations. Strong efforts should be exerted to keep a TDR program as simple as possible and any effort to add requirements should be resisted as constituting a fun- damental threat to the viability of the program. TRANSACTIONS COSTS. All efforts should be undertaken to keep transaction costs to a minimum. The greater the administrative or public ~'hassle" confronting a prospective buyer or seller of rights, the less economic value the rights have and the less effective the program will be. Restrictions on the use of rights by buyers or un- certainty about the ability of sellers to sell rights inhibit participation in a rights trans- fer program. ESTABLISHING A MARKET. Two of the more successful TDR programs have established programs that supported TDRs by offering to purchase the rights at a stated but heavily discounted price. ~* Use by right does not waive or alter any land development regulation other than of dwelling units that w'ill be allowed. All environmental, safety and design requirements u in force. 350 N.E.2d 381. ho n ur~g'~ITEM ill re ~ll~i n 3UN t 8 2O02 Pg. Final Report 33 The New Jersey Pinelands. The New Jersey Pinelands Commission is a state agency. As such, it has only those resources allocated to it by the state of New Jersey. When the Pinelands Plan was adopted, it was recognized that the TDR program incorporated within the plan would require extraordinary efforts be- fore it would be viable. A total of 33,200 TDRs'~9 were created, covering 840,100 acres to be preserved,so Additionally, there were nine counties and 52 municipalities within the area managed by the Pinelands Plan. Burlington County, having much of its area in the Pinelands, established the Burlington County Conservation Easement and Pinelands Development Credit Exchange" that would purchase TDRs from property within Burlington County. They began with $1 million and later saw the amount go to $5 mil- lion.s~ The State of New Jersey had an on-going "Green Acres" program where the state would purchase conservation easements on farmland to assure the reten- tion of those lands in farming? The State authorized the use of "Green Acres" monies and created Pinelands Development Credit Bank that would buy and sell PDCs as ,,,,,ell as guarantee loans secured by PDCs. The state purchase programs paid an average of S3,239 for PDCs, ranging from a low of S 1.750 to a high of 5,650.53 The objective of the bank was to support and not to displace the PDC program. It did this by offering minimal prices for PDCs and later auctioning off those rights. The bank made a "profit" and is return- ing that profit to the people of New Jersey. Central Pine Barrens of Lon,-, Island. The plan adopted to preserve the 52.500 acres of the central Pine Barrens contained a TDR program - called Pine Bar- rens Credits (PBC).s4 The 52,500-preservation area is within three munici- palities, Brookhaven, Riverhead and Southampton. There are three separate PBCs, one for each municipality. The Commission created the Pine Barrens Credit Clearinghouse. The Clearinghouse was given an $8 million grant/loan from the New York General Assembly. These funds were used to offer to buy PBCs at $12,000. Fourteen rights were sold to the Clearinghouse. When of- These TDRs and known as Pinelands Development Credits - PDC. New Jersey Pinelands Commission. "Pinelands Development Credits, Summary Report Through December 31, 1995." (1996). 5~ See Juergensmeyer. Nicholas & Leebrick. note 3. page 449 ff. ~: Supra. ~3 Amicus brief of James C. Nicholas et al., 1997 WL 9053 at S, itum v Tahoe Re.eiot /~in~g A,~ency, 117 S.Ct 1659 (1997) (No. 96-243). 54 Here kno,xn as Pine Barrens Credits - PBC. Final Report JUN 1,3 2002 34 fered at public auction, the PBCs went for prices as high as $37,000.55 Now that the market price is established, the Clearinghouse is withdrawing from the market. The "profit" will be divided among those selling PBCs to the Clear- inghouse in the belief that it is unfair to economically punish people for sell- ing their PBCs early. In both instances funds were made available to support the program by offering minimal purchase prices. Both banks offered prices that were claimed to be below the true worth of the rights. Nevertheless, many elected to take a "sure thing" and thus a floor was established. These floors added some degree of certainty to a very uncertain and unknown program. Additionally, these banks were entities that devel- opers could approach to purchase development rights,so The existence of these banks added greatly to the acceptance of the TDR programs and their eventual successes. There certainly are TDR programs that are successful that had not had a bank, so a bank is not a requirementsr. But it sure is a good idea. Successful TDR programs have the active support of the public and of public offi- cials. This support assures that the original commitments remain respected. It also assures continuing interest in the program so that adjustments and corrections can be made as programs arise. The fundamental commitment made is that if property own- ers will sever and transfer their development rights, the.,,' can use those rights in eco- nomically feasible receiving areas. As long as this remains true. a TDR program should be successful. A final point. What if TDRs are not available at economically feasible prices? This problem has not occurred in TDR programs, at least not vet. Ho,,vever, unavailability of TDRs has to be given as much concern as the value of TDRs to sending area prop- eny owners. If TDRs are not avaiiable at economically feasible prices, this should trigger a reconsideration of the program. Such reconsideration could include' · Adding more sending areas, · Making TDRs worth more than one dwelling unit, · Selling TDRs from a bank before rights are acquired from sending area properties (TDR futures), and · Abandonment of the program. 55 Central Pine Barrens Planning Commission. press release. "First Ever Auction of Pine Bar- rens Credits Successfully Completed today," August 26. 1999. PBCs in Brookhaven sold for 537.000 and l0 PBCs in Riverhead sold for $17.000. s6 It appears that developers may prefer to purchase rights from banks. 5, Montgomery County. Maryland. is an example of a TDR program that has been s and does not have a bank. What Mot;teomery CounD's TDR program does have is no way the program and use of TDRs by right in the sending areas. ~ccessful o e,.~N I 8 2002 Final Report 35 It would appear that transferable development rights are economically feasible for Collier County. However, a successful TDR program requires diligence as v,'ell as economic feasibility. AGENC)A ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 Final Report 36 VI. INCENTIVE OPTIONS A program of transferable development rights is a set of economic incentives that seek to economically reward the preservation of certain properties. As such, TDR fits in with other development incentive programs. Developers are commonly offered incentives to develop in a manner that is deemed to be more beneficial to the public than what would have been the case. Several examples are: Allocating additional or "bonus" residential units if some portion of the dwelling units are "affordable," Allocating additional or "bonus" development, either residential or non- residential, for public open space (very commonly used in highly urbanized areas ). · "Bonuses" for the preservation of something of historic importance to the community, and · "Bonuses" for the preservation of natural or native habitat. These are merely examples but all have the same theme of economically rewarding developers for developing in a manner that the desired by the community. Again. TDR is one of the incentive measures available to encourage the preservation of some lov,'er value uses of land. such as agriculture and open spaces. The economic modeling undertaken as part of this research indicates market densities of approximately one dwelling unit per acre? This conclusion is made recognizing the low-density yield possible on the proposed receiving area properties. The pro- posal under consideration is to allow developmental density in the receiving area to go from 0.2 units per acre to 0.4. This indicates that even with the TDR bonus there is still potential for more increased density on the receiving area. Thus further bo- nuses might be economically feasible. There are two additional developmental actions of concern to Collier County as pos- sible additions to any TDR program. There two concerns are, first, affordable hous- ing and, second, the preservation of native vegetation. 5,~ That is. if there were no limits imposed on density in the subject area. the result approximately one unit per acre. Final Report 37 A. TDRs AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING Collier County already has an affordable housing bonus/incentive program. In the Urban Area developers can achieve increased density if affordable housing is pro- vided. It is entirely possible to do the same thing in the Rural Fringe Area TDR re- ceiving areas. The existing proposal is to allow development intensity in the Rural Fringe Area to increase from one unit for each five acres to two units for each five acres. It would be possible to allow three or four units for each five acres if affordable housing were provided. The question here is not could this be done. The relevant questions are, first, would the addition of affordable housing bonuses complicate and even compete with the TDR program itself and, second, would affordable housing actually result? COMPLICATING OR COMPETING WITH TDR PROGRAM. The prob- lems relating to and resulting from adding to the complexity of a TDR pro- gram were discussed in the previous section. No one can predict when an ad- ditional unit of complexity will become too much complexity. Having made these points previously, all this is necessary here is to refer back to them. If any affordable housing bonus would first require that density be transferred from sending areas, competition between the incentive programs w:ould be minimized. This would mean that before any affordable housing bonus could be achieved within a TDR receiving area, development must first be trans- ferred. For example, if maximum intensity with TDR and affordable housing would be three units per five acres, the first unit would be by right, the second unit would have to be by TDR and the third unit would be for affordable hous- lng. ACHIEVEMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. The analyses undertaken herein have identified the market demand for housing in non-coastal Collier County. Market demand is for low residential density with high amenities (golf, water features, gates, etc.). This type of development is expensive, with market values far outside of "affordable" ranges. Ihe analyses have also identified a desired density rage of up to one dwelling unit per acre within the Rural Fringe Area.59 This would indicate that there would be market pressure to add units in the Rural Fringe Area beyond the two per five acres contem- plated in the draft regulations. However, attempting to sell the resulting unit at "affordable" prices would appear to be not economically feasible in the Ru- ral Fringe Area.6° 59 See page 25, supra. The one unit per acre range incorporates the nature of the receix] area property. oc Adding $18.500 to the other costs of a unit would result in costs so high that onl> "[ mium" units would be feasible. ng ~Gr~JSlDA I'TE~ 2002 Final Report 38 There is a possibility for integration of an affordable housing bonus with a TDR program. This possibility would be the off-site provision of the afford- able housing. If the affordable housing could be provided in the urban area and the bonus density would be in the Rural Fringe Area receiving area, an af- fordable housing bonus could be economically feasible. Whether this mode of provision of affordable housing is consistent with community goals would have to be weighed against other competing interests. It would be necessao' to workout the details, but it would appear that providing a third unit of den- sity for each five acres for each affordable housing units would be economi- cally feasible. A. TDRs AND NATIVE VEGETATION As with affordable housing, TDR bonuses could be provided for the preservation of native vegetation. This is very similar to historic preservation, where additional or bonus units are made available in return for preservation of some historic site.6~ Here again the matters of complexity and competition must be full.',' considered. Unlike affordable housing that can be built in many locations, native vegetation exists on certain properties and not on others. Providing a bonus for TDRs coming from sending areas that had native vegetation would encourage to owners of those proper- ties to do what is necessary to achieve any bonus provided that the costs of native vegetation preservation is economically feasible. The costs associated with native vegetation preservation are not known therefore a feasibility analysis or even a guess cannot be made. Suffice it to say that native vegetation preservation could be encour- aged by TDR bonuses. If TDRs were seen as a means to encourage native vegetation preservation on receiv- ing sites, such bonuses would directly compete with TDRs and would make the TDR program much more complex. A way to accomplish both objectives would be to re- quire the use of TDR on a receiving site as a precondition for receipt of a bonus for native vegetation preservation. So, for example, development could go to two units per five-acres with TDR and then three or more per five-acres with native vegetation preservation. Structuring the native vegetation incentive in this manner would en- hance rather than detract from the viability of a TDR program. el One of the better-known TDR programs is New York City's. where TDRs are offere~ turn for the preservation of historic landmarks. See Juergensme}er and Roberts, Urban Plam~in La~d De~elopme~t C(mtrol Law. West. 1998. in re- '? Pg.., Final Report 39 James C. Nicholas 313 Holland Hall University of Florida Gaineswlle, FL 3261 I (352) 392-8832 ~352) 392-3005 Fax e-mail jcnicholas(~msn.corn MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: 30 May 2002 SUB J: Supplemental TDR Allocation Option The TDR allocation put forward in my original proposed program allocated TDRs on the basis of 1 TDR for each 5 or 10 acres owned, depending on location. Most sending area properties would receive 1 TDR for each 5 acres owned. This approach has the advantages of equal treatment of all properties owners and ease of administration. This approach has the disadvantage of not reco=m-fizing any differences among sending area properties. ,-tn option that the Board could consider is a supplemental TDR allocation. This allocation would be in addition to the 1 per 5 acres allocation. This supplemental allocation would capture the differences in developability among sending area properties and allocate more TDRs to the more developable properties in recognition of that characteristic. The difficulty in making such a supplemental allocation is acquiring a data set that has the necessary scope, i.e., includes all sending area properties, and provides data of at least relative developability. The Collier County property appraiser assesses every property in the County and reassesses each at least every three years. Certainly it can and should be pointed out that assessment for property tax purposes establishes taxable values and that taxable values are related to but different from market values. For the purposes here, the appraiser's dataset are a resource that can be used to recognize inherent differences among properties. Attached is 5,000 TDR supplemental allocation to properties within the sending areas. This allocation is based upon relative land value. Relative land value is calculated by: 1. Summing Property appraisers' data for all sending area Sections for; Total (i.e., market) value, b. Total assessed value, and c. Assessed value of land. ~J'iI)A JUN 1 8 2002 pg. ~ Creating a land value index by calculating the percentage of total land value within an individual section, multiplying the resultant percentage by 100 to get an index; 3. Allocating the assumed 5,000 TDRs to Sections based upon relative land value; and 4. Allocating supplemental TDRs to 5 acre parcels by division by 130 (640 acres divided by 5 acres per basic parcel size). All allocation other than 5,000 TDRs could be used. Here a 5,000 allocation is for purposes of demonstration. The next result of this supplemental allocation is that higher valued properties would receive more TDRs that lower, and thus developability would be respected in TDR allocation. The Board should consider that there is already a problem of relative shortage of receiving areas and any supplemental TDR allocation xvould further exacerbate this problem. 2O02 LUG) ZuJ ,..I ..j ~ <~ <~ · .-I i... {.uz JUN 1 8 2002 > .~_ LUz <~0 JUN ! 8 2002 o~× ITEM ~UN 1 ~ 2007 This Page Intentionally left blank ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 James C. Nicholas 313 Holland Hall University of Florida Gainesville. FL 32611 ~3523 392-8832 (3521 392-3005 Fax e-mail jcnicholas @: msn.com MEMORANDUM TO: DATE: SUBJ: Stan Litsinger 13 January 2002 Additional Questions on TDR am in receipt of three questions relating to the Rural Fringe Area/TDR program that have recommended: Would "density blending" adversely effect or compromise the potential of a TDR program? Would the potential for high value/Iow density developments in the Rural Fringe Area obviate the need for TDRs? Would eliminating or somehow restricting approximately 3,500 acres of the Big Corkscrew Island Community as receiving areas alter the economic viability of the Rural Fringe Area TDR program, thereby creating the need for additional receiving areas? I will do my best to answer these questions. DENSITY BLENDING I would see "density blending" as a form of cluster development. TDR began as an offshoot of cluster development. When simple cluster, commonly through Planned Unit Development, achieves the preservation objective, it is the preferred means. Cluster does not require any creation of development rights or the transfer thereof. In many situations cluster was either impossible or not an effective means of achieving the planning objective. TDR was the alternative. I see this as coming full circle, be- ginning with cluster, progressing to TDR, and now looking to "density blending." The density blending proposal appears to have the same goal as the Rural Fringe Area TDR and employs the same basic mechanisms. Whether density blending is an appropriate method for a particular property or set of properties will have to be de- termined on a case-by-case basis. In my opinion density blending is a tyi e of ~Fl~p.~ ~TS~,4 JUN I 8 2002 · Page 2 January 13.2002 and I see no reason to prohibit it. At the same time, I would recommend that it be a development option, perhaps by special exception, and not a use by right. HIGH VALUE/LOW DENSITY DEVELOPMENT Clearly, there is a market for high value and Iow-density development, largely golf course development, in the Rural Fdnge Area of Collier County. Developers have shown that they can profitably configure golf course developments at one unit per five acres. Twin Eagles is an obvious example. Does this possibility limit the eco- nomic desirability of TDR? I would answer this question in the affirmative. If a developer is faced with two eco- nomically viable options, one with and one without TDR, the developer will pick the most attractive alternative. To me this means that if TDRs were not available, or were not available at some "reasonable" price, development could continue in the Rural Fringe Area, albeit at very high values and presumably at relatively lower rates of absorption. There are two upper limits on the price of TDRs. The first is an income limit, meaning that the income generated by the sale of transferred units would have to exceed all of the costs associated with those additional limits, including the acquisition of the right. The second is a substitution limit. A developer would substitute the lower cost/higher profit development configuration for the higher cost/lower profit form. When non-TDR development is not economically feasible, then only the income limit applies. When non-TDR development is economically feasible, that form must compete with TDR development with the most profitable winning out. I have some familiarity with Twin Eagles. The very !ow density was, in my opinion, the result of regulatory limitations and not the desire of the developer. It appears to me that the market for developments such as Twin Eagles would accept densities higher than one unit per five acres. However, the market densities would still be Iow, less than one unit per acre, perhaps even less than one-half (two acre). This is largely due to the land area committed to the golf course together with the need for privacy providing large lots on the remainder of the land. Twin Eagles was one of the developments included in my sample. I have noted de- velopments in the same general area that share some characteristics with Twin Ea- gles. It would be expected that success would be copied. I was aware of this type of development and took it into consideration. It is very tempting to think about capturing some of the high value created by golf course developments. Whether there can be special TDR rules for ge if cQurse de- velopments is a legal question and beyond my purview. Clearly, golf :ours~l:r~J~ JUN 18 2OO2 Page 3 January 13, 2002 opments are a non-rural type of development and will change the nature of the Rural Fringe Area. One of the major concessions of a TDR program is the acceptance of a change in character of the receiving areas in retum for the preservation of that char- acter in sending areas. If the rural character were changed without any offsetting preservation in sending areas, society would suffer an uncompensated loss. Per- haps this eventuality would ju.stify special rules for golf course developments in the Rural Fringe Area. I would doubt that a minimum density for golf course developments would be effec- tive. Perhaps the golf course itself could be considered development, requiring TDR. A number of jurisdictions classify golf courses as intensive uses of land and not sim- ply as a different type of open space. In my opinion, high value/Iow density development configurations do not threaten the viability of the TDR program. Rather, they should be a source of demand for TDRs. Nevertheless, is there is a possibility to make further use of TDRs for this type of de- velopment it should be explored. EXCLUSION OF THE BIG CORKSCREW ISLAND COMMUNITY AS A RECEIVING AREA At present, the TDR program will create 4,655 development rights. The 32,200 acres in the Rural Fringe Area receiving areas can accommodate 6,190 transferred units. This is a ratio of 1.33 receiving sites for each transfer unit created. In my opinion, this is disconcertingly Iow. I prefer a ratio of two receiving sites for each transferable unit created. The preferred ratio would require 9,310 potential receiving sites. I offered the recommendation to confine the TDR program to the Rural Fringe Area given this Iow ratio with the caveat that the ratio is Iow and additional receiving areas may be needed. Pulling out as many as 700 potential receiving sites will further aggravate this concern. It would be my opinion that the Big Corkscrew Island Community would not be a pri- mary TDR receiving area because much of the land use is committed. This raises the pragmatic question as to the actual effect of removing a receiving area that had little potential as a receiving area. I have argued here and elsewhere that the re- moval of any receiving areas should be seen as destructiv6 to the goals of a TDR program, limited potential has nothing to do with it. I would continue that position here. I had wanted to confine the sending and receiving areas to the Rural Fringe Area be- cause the fundamental economics would be similar in both areas. Furth ar ~_r,~inn nf ~,GENO ~, ITEk4 JUN ! B 2002 Page 4 January 13, 2002 fringe area receiving areas would mean that we should look elsewhere for more re- ceiving areas. I see three candidates: · Allow the expansion of Orange Tree into abutting areas at densities of ap- proximately 4 units per acres with TDRs from the Rural Fringe Area, · Require additional usage of TDRs for development in the Rural Fringe Area for such uses as golf course developments, and · Allow increased densities in the urban area with TDRs from the Rural Fringe Area. All of these options appear to be economically feasible, although additional work would be required in order to develop ratios of units to be allowed in the receiving ar- eas per development unit in the sending areas. Prior analysis indicated that the fun- damental economics of golf course developments, Orange Tree and the urban area were different from those of the Rural Fringe Area. Therefore, there is a possibility that TDR use ratios would be different for the various receiving areas. An objective of the recommended program was to keep it as simple as possible. A successful Rural Fringe Area TDR program could provide an outstanding basis for other or expanded TDR programs. It is still my opinion that confining the initial pro- gram to the Rural Fringe Area would be desirable. 2002 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ;e is hereby given that on June 18, 2002 at 5:05 P.M. in the Board of County :~Tdssioners meeting room, 3rd floor of the Harmon W. Turner Building, County .9rnment Center, 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida, the Board of County ~sioners propose to adopt the following Ordinance for adoption to the State of Flodda ~t of Community Affairs for preliminar~ review and comment: -~" lANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF == COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY: AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, -~I~E LAND USE MAP AND RELATED MAPS, THE CONSERVATION AND COASTAL r:.;.,AGEMENT ELEMENT AND THE POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER 'jE~_LEMENTS OF' THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY aGWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE ;,3TECTION, PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR ~F_ ENTIRE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, INCLUDING ~_: URBAN DESIGNATED AREA; AND TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ~.:{ THE RURAL FRINGE ASSESSMENT AREA PORTION OF THE RURAL AND 3~.~GULTURAL ASSESSMENT AREA INCLUDING CERTAIN OF THE NATURAL ESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS LOCATED WITHIN THIS RURAL FRINGE ASSESSMENT a~_~ ALL TO IMPLEMENT THE FINAL ORDER OF THE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION ,~TERED ON JUNE 22, 1999 IN CASE NO. ACC 99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98-0324GM); BY ?OVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. THESE AMENDMENTS DO NOT ,VOLVE THE EASTERN LANDS PORTION OF THE RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL -;SESMENT AREA. 1~28EI R27E IR28E _ Rural Fringe - Assessment Areas ~-] Assessment Areas R26E I R27E ~iI interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. A copy of the Resolution is available ~or inspection at the Community Development and Environmental Services Division located at £500 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monclay through Friday. Any questions pertaining to these documents should be directed to ~he Comprehensive Planning Section {239-403-2300). Written comments filed with the Comprehensive Planning Section prior to June 18, 2002, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of mat proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the aroceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA JAMES N. COLETTA, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By:/s/Ellie Hoffman, Deputy Clerk AGEJ',E) A ~TF_M JUN ! 8 2002 Pg., ~ ,.~ .,,.~ NOTICEOF PUB£1C ' ' iEARING · Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier Count) Board of County Commissioners on Tuesday, June 18, 2002 at 5:05 P.M, in thc Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, 3rd Floor, Harmon W. Turner Building, County Government Center, 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida. The purpose of the hea?g is to comply with directives contained ir' 3 Administration Commission s Final Order dated June 22, 1999, ACC-99-02 (r. t Case No. 98-0324GM) by considering a recommendation for adoption of an Ordinance to the Board of County Commissioners, with the 'following title: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY: AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND RELATED MAPS, THE CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT AND THE POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SUBELEMENTS OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE PROTECTION, PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR THE ENTIRE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, INCLUDING THE URBAN DESIGNATED AREA; AND TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE RURAL FRINGE ASSESSMENT AREA PORTION OF THE RURAL AND AGRIGULTURAL ASSESSMENT AREA INCLUDING CERTAIN OF THE NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS LOCATED WITHIN THIS RURAL FRINGE ASSESSMENT AREA ALL TO IMPLEMENT THE FINAL ORDER OF THE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION ENTERED ON JUNE 22, 1999 IN CASE NO. ACC 99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98-0324GM); BY PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. THESE AMENDMENTS DO NOT INVOLVE THE EASTERN LANDS PORTION OF THE RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENT AREA. C olIIE~, Countg Flor'Ida All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. A copy of the Resolution ~s available for inspection at the Community Development and Environmental Services Division located at 2800 N. Horseshoe Ddve, Naples, Flodda, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday th~:ough Friday. Any questions pertaining to these documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section (239-403-2300). Written comments filed with the Comprehensive Planning Section to June 18, 2002, will be read and considered at the public headng. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the '2_-' Commission with respect to any matter considered at such~r~'~{i~-.~ will need a rec. ord of that proceeding, and (or such purpose~he nlk~/need ns~r~ ~ehsa~imao~;~na~mev~c~eCn°crde uOpfotnhewhPi~OhCteheedia~3gDSe~i~, m. ad.e, .whiCh. reco~s ~.~, COLLIER COUNT~ FLORIDA · ~i JAMES N. COLE31,A, CI=I~.IRMAN ~.,~'~?..~ DWIGHT E. BROCI~_CLER-K~ - ~ By:/s/Ellie Hoffman, Deputy Clerk - No. 99638153 June 7~ June 12t 200/ NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples. FL 34102 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida County of Collier Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Angela Brvant, who on oath says that they serve as the Administrative Assistant To The Publisher of the Naples Daily, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Flor/da; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising, being a in the matter of PWBLIC NOIiCE was published in said newspaper 1 tn'ne(s) in the issue on May 26, 2002. Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper pubi~shed at Naples, in said Collier Co,nD'. Fionda, and :hat the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counnes of Florida, each da)' and has been entered as second class mai! manet at the post office in Naples, in said ColtierCounry, Florida. for a period of 1 year next preceding the first publication off;ne attached cop)' of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor pron-~sed any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commtssion or refund for the purpose ofsecunng this adventsement for publicaUon in the said newspaper.s ( Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before me th)~ day of May/~.02 · * My Commission DD056338 2002 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ~otice is hereby given that on June 18, 2002 at 5:05 P.M. in the Board of Counl Commissioners meeting room, 3rd floor of the Harmon W. Tumer Building, Counl Government Center, 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida, the Board of Count Commissioners propose to adopt the following Ordinance for adoption to the State of Flodd ;apartment of Community Affairs for preliminary review and comment: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY: AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND RELATED MAPS, THE CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT AND THE POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SUBELEMENTS OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE PROTECTION, PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR THE ENTIRE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, INCLUDING THE URBAN DESIGNATED AREA; AND TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE RURAL FRINGE ASSESSMENT AREA PORTION OF THE RURAL AND AGRIGULTURAL ASSESSMENT AREA INCLUDING CERTAIN OF THE NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS LOCATED WITHIN THiS RURAL FRINGE ASSESSMENT AREA ALL TO IMPLEMENT THE FINAL ORDER OF THE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION ENTERED ON JUNE 22, 1999 IN CASE NO. ACC 99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98-0324GM); BY PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILI'FY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. THESE AMENDMENTS DO NOt' iNVOLVE THE EASTERN LANDS PORTION OF THE RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL ASSESMENT AREA. R26E I R27E _ Rural Fringe Assessment Areas Assessment Areas R26E I R27E All interested parties are invited to appea~ and be heard. A copy of the Resolution is availabl, for inspection at the Community Development and Environmental Services Division located a 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. Monday through Friday. Any questions pertaining to these documents should be directed t~ the Comprehensive Planning Section (239-403-2300). Written comments filed with th, Comprehensive Planning Section prior to June 18, 2002, will be read and considered at th, public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commissio~ with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record c that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of th~ nroceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which th, appeal is to be based. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA JAMES N. COLE'CrA, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By:/s/EIlie Hoffrnan, Deputy Clerk NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34102 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida County of Collier Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Angola Bryant, who on oath says that they serve as the AdrniMstrafive Assistant To The Publisher of the Naples Daily, a daily .newspaper pubhshed at Naples, in Collier County, Flor/da; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising, being a m the matter of PL~LIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 time(s) in the issue on May 26, 2002. Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said Collier Count, Florida, and that r. he said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distr/buted in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period cf l year next preceding the first publication oft. he attached copy of adver'nsement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor prorrused any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, comrmssion or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publicauon in the said newspaper. ( Sign"afm'e of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 38a'~lay of May, 2~2 (Si~,nature of notary pubhc) / oe~rr% Donna Chesney ~ ,~ ~ ; My Commission DD056336 AC:~NO A ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given bhat a public hearing will be held by the Collier Coun~ Planning Commission on Thursday, June 6, 2002 at 8:30 A.M. in the Board o County Commissioners Meeting Room, 3rd Floor, Harmon W. Turner Building County Government Center, 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida. The purpose of the hearing is to comply with directives contained i Administration Commission's Final Order dated June 22, 1999, ACC-99-02 (, Case No. 98-0324GM) by considering a recommendation for adoption of ar Ordinance to the Board of County Commissioners, with the following title: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY: AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND RELATED MAPS, THE CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT AND THE POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SUBELEMENTS OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROW'TH MANAGEMENT PLAN TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE PROTECTION, PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR THE ENTIRE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, INCLUDING THE URBAN DESIGNATED AREA; AND TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE RURAL FRINGE ASSESSMENT AREA PORTION OF THE RURAL AND AGRIGULTURAL ASSESSMENT AREA INCLUDING CERTAIN OF THE NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS LOCATED WITHIN THIS RURAL FRINGE ASSESSMENT AREA ALL TO IMPLEMENT THE FINAL ORDER OF THE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION. ENTERED ON JUNE 22, 1999 IN CASE NO. ACC 99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98-0324GM). THESE AMENDMENTS DO NOT INVOLVE THE EASTERN LANDS PORTION OF THE RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL ASSESMENT AREA. All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. A copy of the Resolutiol is available for inspection at the Community Development and Environment~ Services Division located at 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Flodda, betwe~'- th, hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Fdday. Any questions per to these documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning (239-403-2300). Wdtten comments filed with the Comprehensive Planning Sectio~ pdor to June 6, 2002, will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Plannin! Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or headng, h. will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensur that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes th testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Kenneth L. Abemathy, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission Collier Countg Florida ORDINANCE NO. 02- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY: AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND RELATED MAPS, THE CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT AND THE POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SUBELEMENTS OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE PROTECTION, PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR THE ENTIRE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, INCLUDING THE URBAN DESIGNATED AREA; AND TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE RURAL FRINGE ASSESSMENT AREA PORTION OF THE RURAL AND AGRIGULTURAL ASSESSMENT AREA INCLUDING CERTAIN OF THE NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREAS LOCATED WITHIN THIS RURAL FRINGE ASSESSMENT AREA ALL TO IMPLEMENT THE FINAL ORDER OF THE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION ENTERED ON JUNE 22, 1999 IN CASE NO. ACC 99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98-0324GM); BY PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE. THESE AMENDMENTS DO NOT INVOLVE THE EASTERN LANDS PORTION OF THE RURAL AND AGRICULTURAL ASSESMENT AREA. Whereas, on April 6, 1996, Collier County adopted an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) for its Growth Management Plan (GMP) as required by Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes; and Whereas, on November 14, 1997, Collier County adopted the EAR-based amendments to its Growth Management Plan; and Whereas, on December 24, 1997 the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issued its Notice and Statement of Intent to find the County's EAR-based amendments, and to find certain of the EAR-based Objectives and Policies to the Growth Management Plan not in compliance as defined by Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes; and Whereas, following a hearing the Administrative Law Judge issued a Recommended Order on March 19, 1999, finding the EAR-based amendments at issue in non-compliance; and Whereas, the Administration Commission on June 22, 1999 found the EAR-based amendments not in compliance and entered a Final Order directing Collier County to perform a 3 year Rural and Agricultural Assessment of the Growth Management Plan to identify measures to protect agricultural areas, direct incompatible land uses away from wetlands and upland habitat and assess the growth potential of the area; and Whereas, the Final Order provides that the County may conduct the Assessment in phases; and Whereas, the County has divided the Assessment into two geographical areas, the Rural Fringe Area and the Eastern Lands Area; and Whereas, on August 3 and September 14, 1999 the BCC created the Rural Fringe Area Oversight Committee (RFAC) to assist in the assessment of the area of b,,~ ¢.n,,nt,, ¢nmmnnlv referred to as the Rural Fringe Area; and AC.~[NOA ITEM JUN P~. t 8 2OO2 Whereas, the RFAC, with the collaboration of the public, and county planning and environmental staff have completed the Assessment for the Rural Fringe Area and have developed amendments to the County's Growth Management Plan; and Whereas, the Collier County Planning Commission has considered the proposed Rural Fringe Assessment Area Amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and has recommended approval of said Rural Fringe Assessment Area Amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and Whereas, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Rural Fringe Assessment Area Amendments, the DCA will review the Rural Fringe Assessment Area Amendments as set forth in Section 163.3184, Flodda Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES, THE CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT, AND THE POTABLE WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SUBELEMENTS OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts these amendments to the Future Land Use Element. Future Land Use Map and Map series, the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, and the Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Subelements of the Public Facilities Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit A. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of these amendments shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the amendments in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on these amendments may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, these amendments may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3'~ Floor, Tallahassee, Flodda 32399-2100. ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 pg. ~ PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this __ day of ,2002. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD Of COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: BY: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Marj~i~l. Student, Assistant County Attorney JAMES N. COLETTA, Chairman AGENOA ITEM JUN I 8 2002 This Page Intentionally left blank JUN 1 8 2002 I' P~;. COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Prepared By Collier County Planning Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS October, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Symbol (I) (11) (iv) (v) Date Amended Ordinance No. May 9, 2000 Ordinance No. 2000-25 May 9, 2000 Ordinance No. 2000-26 May 9, 2000 Ordinance No. 2000-27 May 9, 2000 Ordinance No. 2000-30 May 9, 2000 Ordinance No. 2000-33 December 12, 2000 Ordinance No. 2000-87 March 13, 2001 Ordinance No. 2001-11 March 13, 2001 Ordinance No. 2001-12 Note: Ordinance No. 2000-25, rescinded and repealed in its entirety Collier County Ordinance No. 99-63, which had the effect of rescinding certain EAR-based objectives and policies at issue in Administration Commission Case No. ACC-99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM). Ordinance No. 2000-26, amended Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan, having the effect of rescinding certain EAR-based objectives and policies at issue in Administration Commission Case No. ACC-99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM), more specifically portions of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element (Ord. No. 98-56), Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element (Ord. No. 97-59) and Drainage (Ord. No. 97-61) sub-elements of the Public Facilities Element, Housing Element (Ord. No. 97-63), Golden Gate Area Master Plan (Ord. No. 97-64), Conservation and Coastal Management Element (Ord. No. 97-66), and the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map (Ord. No. 97-67); and re-adopts Policy 2.2.3 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Indicates adopted portions The support document will be updated as current information becomes available. Scrivener'a Ordinance correcting omissions on Flue Map Plan Amendment CP-2000-3,4,5,7 & 11 by Ordinance No. 2001-12 on March 13, 2001 Text with single underline or single stri.!:c:hrc~g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i/:c:/::'z:~g/: reflects proposed changes to the r~ransmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page I of 80 JUN 2002 SUMMARY OVERVIEW A. B. C. TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE BASIS UNDERLYING CONCEPTS Protection of Natural Resource Systems Coordination of Land Use & Public Facilities Management of Coastal Development Provision of Adequate & Affordable Housing Attainment of High Quality Urban Design Improved Efficiency and Effectiveness in the Land Use Regulatory Process Protection of Private Property Rights SPECIAL ISSUES Coordination of Land Use and Public Facility Planning Level of Service Standards Vested Rights FUTURE LAND USE MAP Page 3-65-9 7--9-11 91'1 I1. *IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY * GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES * FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION Urban Designation Density Rating System AgriculturaVRural Designation Estates Designation Conservation Designation Overlays and Special Features * FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES *Future Land Use Map *Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Centers *Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11) *Natural Resources - Wetlands (I)* Wellhead Protection Areas (IV)* Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map Support Document: Public Facilities Natural Resources - Waterwells, Cones of Influence River, Bays, Lakes, Floodplains, Harbors, and Minerals (includes lands acquired for conservation and lands proposed for acquisition for conservation) Soils III. SUPPORT DOCUMENT: LAND USE DATA AND ANALYSIS (Separate Table of Contents) 4-1- 60 Text with single underline or single s:.~.!cc:hrc:~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tile current Gro*vll: Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:rl/:z:/::~.:cg/: reflects proposed changes to the Tr~ ~smittoAt.~.{~f. tTEl¢ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recommendations. No. ~- Page 2 of 80 JUN 1 $ 2002 \\\ SUMMARY The Future Land Use Element includes three major sections: Overview, Implementation Strategy, And Land Use Data and Analysis. The Overview simply provides an introduction as to the purpose, basis, underlying concepts and special issues addressed by the Element. The Implementation Strategy is where the Element is brought into effect. Included are the Goals, Objectives, Policies and Future Land Use Map. The third section consists of Support Document: Land Use Data and Analysis. The information found there provides a basis for the Implementation Strategy and serves to meet the requirements of Section 9J-5.006, Florida Administrative Code, minimum requirements for the Future Land Use Element. Text with single underline or single s:ri!cc:!:rcush reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to th Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ~t:'iJ:c:.~:rc::g~: reflects proposed changes to the Tra primarily in response to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 3 of 80 current Growth ~mittal~Jl~tSdTE~ JUN 1 8 2002 Pi. I. OVERVIEW A. PURPOSE The geographic framework for growth in Collier County is established by the Future Land Use Element. As such, the Element is central to planning for: protection and management of natural resources~Lpublic facilities~; coastal and rural development~; and, housing and urban community character and design. The Element is also important to the County's system of land development regulations and to private property rights. The purpose of the Future Land Use Element is to guide decision-making by Collier County on regulatory, financial and programmatic matters pertaining to land use. Most directly, this Element controls the location, type, intensity and timing of new or revised uses of land. The land use strategy in this Element is closely coordinated with a strategy for provision of public facilities as found in the Capital Improvements and Public Facility Elements of the Comprehensive Plan, and with the strateqies to protect and conserve natural resources as found in the Conservation and Coastal Manaqement Element. B. BASIS This Element is based in large part on the Future Land Use Element adopted as part of the 1983 and 1989 Collier County Comprehensive Plans. The land use strategy put forth in those Plans have served Collier County well, therefore, a general continuation is provided. The best characteristics of the 1983 and 1989 Comprehensive Plans included the use of a binding Future Land Use Map with designated "Urban" areas and the confinement of intensive Zoning Districts, thus intensive land uses, to those areas. Moreover, this Element includes a strate.q¥ for the protection of natural resources and a.qri-business in the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District.==a4;~ Scccndcr',' Scnd!~q L~dc, by employin.q various requlations and incentives to direct incompatible land uses away from such natural resources and to enhance the economic viability of aqri-business. In addition, this Element is based on the Support Document: Land Use Data and Analysis, and the summation of the detailed planning conducted for each of the other portions of the Comprehensive Plan. Data, analysis and implementation strategies from the various elements have contributed to the geographic framework through the configuration of the designations on the Future Land Use Map and the associated standards for use of land. The State Comprehensive Plan and the Southwest Florida Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan form another basis for the Future Land Use Element. Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, the "Local Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act" and Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, "Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance," provide detailed requirements on the scope and content of the Element. Finally, major contributions to this Element have been provided by the public through the followin.q: · Collier County Citizens Advisory Committee in conjunction with the Evaluation and Appraisal Report adopted by the Board of County Commissioners in April, 1996, · The Rural Frin.qe Area Oversi.qht and Eastern Lands Area Oversiqht Committees; Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:!:ra:cgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text witt~ double underline or double ~t:~.':c:.':rc::g~ reflects proposed changes to the -, ....... j~.~'~ primarily in response to tire ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recommendatiorzs. Page 4 of 80 JUN 1 $ 2002 · The Environmental Advisory Council; · Tthe Collier County Planning Commission, which is the local planning agency¢ and, · Other groups and individuals, through both written and verbal input, at1 or as a result of, hundreds of duly advertised public workshops and meetinqs. C. UNDERLYING CONCEPTS The land use strategy established by this Element is based on a series of concepts, which emerge from the foundation cited earlier. The policy direction and implementation mechanisms closely relate to these underlying concepts. Protection of Natural Resource Systems Collier County is situated in aR unique, sensitive and intensely interactive physical environment. Natural resources are abundant: a subtropical climate with annual wet and dry seasons; enormous groundwater productivity; vast wetland areas; large ranges of habitat with diverse and unique flora and fauna, including many species that are Federally and/or State listed, warranting special protection; extensive and highly productive estuarine systems; and~ many miles of sandy beach. In addition to their habitat value, :[:these natural resources perform functions wh!ch that are vital to the health, safety and welfare of the human population of the County, and serve as a powerful magnet to attract and retain visitors and residents. Therefore, protection and management of natural resources for long-term viability is essential to support the human population, ensure a high quality of life, and facilitate economic development. Important to this concept is management of natural resources on a system-wide basis. The Future ILand Use Element is designed to protect and manage natural resource systems in several ways:: · Urban Designated Areas on the Future Land Use Map are located and configured to guide concentrated population growth and intensive land development away from areas of great sensitivity and toward areas more tolerant to development. · Within the Urban Designated Areas this Element encourages Planned Unit Development zoning and assigns maximum permissible residential density based on the gross land area. Through site plan review procedures in the Land Development Regulations (LDRs), !and a!tcrat!cn and ccnstructicn development is guided to the portions of the property that is of lesser environmental quality, mom tc!crant to ,4 .... , ..... * thus, in effect, constitutinq an on-site transfer or clusterinq of development rights ^'""" · A broader i'off-site" Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) provision, set forth in this Element and primarily applicable to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District ~ L=,",d Dcvc!cpmcnt Rc~u!ctlcnc is a key component of the County's overall strategy to direct incompatible land and uses away from important natural resources, includinq large connected wetland systems and listed species and their habitat. · An Area of Critical State Concern Overlay is included on the Future Land Use Map to ensure implementation of all applicable Land Development Regulations in the Okaloacoochee Slough, Big Cypress Swamp, Fakahatchee Strand and Ten Thousand Islands areas. Text with single, underline or single s:ri!;c:hrcug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-L~:c:.'::'z.::gh reflects proposed changes to the Transminal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AP_.~d~A ITEM Page 5 of 80 No. c,~ JUN 1 8 2002 The County has designated several interim Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) overlays as permanent NRPAs, which are intended to maintain the connection between, and the preservation of, large connected wetland systems and critical habitat areas for listed species by allowing very limited land uses and through high native vegetation preservation standards and buffers from adjacent land uses. These permanent NRPA overlay areas are primarily located within the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District where these large connected wetlands systems and habitat areas occur. The County's Land Development Regulations provide standards for protection of groundwater, particularly in close vicinity to public water supply wells as cxplc~ncd bv implementing policies set forth in the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element. Natural resources are also protected through close spatial and temporal coordination of land development with the availability of adequate infrastructure {public or private facilities) to ensure optimized accommodation of human impacts, particularly in relation to water supply, sewaqe treatment, and management of solid waste. This coordination is accomplished through the provision of public facilities as detailed in the Capital Improvements and Public Facility Elements and through the Level of Service Standards (LOS) found herein. Of crucial importance to the relationship between natural resources and land use is the completion and implementation of multi-objective watershed management plans as described in the Drainage Element. Water is the greatest integrator of the physical environment in that it links together dynamic ecological and human systems. Therefore, the watershed management plan must take into account not only the need for drainage and flood protection but also the need to maintain water table levels and an approximation of natural discharge to estuaries. The watershed management plans will have implications for both water management and land use practices. Coordination of Land Use and Public Facilities At the heart of Florida's Growth Management Act (Chapter 163, Florida Statutes) is the requirement that adequate service by public facilities must be available at the time of demand by new development. This requirement is achieved by spatial coordination of public facilities with land uses through the Future Land Use Map; and temporal coordination through ~ E,e~,me LOS Sstandards. The Lcvc! cf Scrv!cc LOS S_standards are binding - no final local Development Order may be issued which is not consistent with the Concurrency Management System. Binding Lcvc! cf Scrv!cc LOS Sstandards have been established for roads, water supply, sewage treatment, water management, solid waste and parks. While the standards in the Capital Improvements and Public Facility Elements serve to guide public provision of infrastructure, within the context of the Future Land Use Element the S_standards serve to assure the availability of adequate facilities~_whether public or private. primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 6 of 80 Text with single, underline or single s:rilcc:hrc::£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double ynderline or double z:ri.':c:.'::':.x~.': reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language JUN 1 8 2002 The Urban Service Area concept manifested in this Element is crucial to successful coordination of land development and the provision of adequate public facilities. It is within Urban Designated Areas on the Future Land Use Map that the more intensive Zoning Districts are permissible, thus the more intensive land uses. Since Urban Designated Areas are where intensive land uses are guided, it is also where fiscal resources are primarily concentrated for the provision of roads, water supply, sewage treatment and water management. Alse,, Never-the-less, facilities and services such as parks, '-'~v ........., v......~..,* i.,,.w_,._...il,4;~,~.~..,, schools, =nd emergency and other essential services, and improvements to the existinq road network "'c "'""'"'"-;"' "'""*"~ '.,"*~':"' ' '-'-..-n .... ~ ............. are anticipated (;}outside of the Urban Designated Areas, primarily within the areas known as North Golden Gate Estates and the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District. In the case of desiqnated Receiving Lands within the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District, in order to protect natural resources and private property ri.qhts, extension of central sewer and water is permitted in order to: support the TDR program; allow for maximum utilization of c usterin,q of allowable residential density; foster the development of rural villages; and, as an incentive to encouraqe the use of other innovative planning techniques. "'""" ...... ;..+......,.+,, ,,....~ .... i~ ......... i......;,..~ ......+.,., .... , .... ~ ....... It is important that the Urban Designated Area not be so large that public facilities cannot be efficiently and effectively planned for and delivered; and not be so small that the supply of land available for development is extremely limited with resultant lack of site selection options and competition leading to elevated land prices. It is also important that the time frames for land use and public facility planning be coordinated as discussed later in this Overview. Management of Coastal Development Two major coastal development issues in Collier County are the protection of natural resources and the balancing of risk in natural hazard areas. Extensive populated areas in Collier County are vulnerable to periodic salt-water inundation from tropical storms or hurricanes. It is extremely important that an acceptable balance between at-risk population and evacuation capability be achieved. In addition, public and private investment in such vulnerable areas must be carefully considered. This issue is addressed here and in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element through several measures. A Coastal Management Area is identified on the Future Land Use Map essentially as all lands seaward of US 41. This line is based on the close fit to the storm Category 1 SLOSH area (potential for salt water flooding from 1 storm in 12 years) and evacuation planning areas. Within the Coastal Management Area maximum permissible residential density is limited in recognition of the level of risk, the existing deficiency of evacuation shelter space and existing patterns of density. A Coastal High Hazard Area is identified in Conservation and Coastal Management Element and policies are provided. Finally, coastal natural hazards are addressed through Land Development Regulations already in effect relating to coastal building standards, per Chapter 161, Florida Statutes, and protection of structures from floods, per County participation in the FEMA Flood Insurance Program. Text with single underline or single ............ ~'-:~'~'~ ...... ,,,.~- reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double under/me or double zrrl/:::/:r:,xg.~: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 7 of 80 NO. c~ JUN 1 8 2002 Provision of Adequate and Affordable Housinq An emerging issue in Collier County is the availability of adequate and affordable housing for Iow and moderate-income populations. The Future Land Use Element encourages the creation of affordable housing through provisions which allow for increased residential density if the proposed dwelling units would be affordable based on the standards found in the Housing Element. Attainment of High Quality Urban Design The report of the Regional/Urban Design Team for the Naples area, dated April 1987, and subsequent recommendations of the R/UDAT Citizen Committee, provide another underlying concept. While the Growth Management Plan as a whole provides the requisite foundation for superior urban design through a sound framework for growth (protection of natural resources, thoughtful guidance of land uses, adequate public facilities and adequate housing), the Future Land Use Element provides several additional measures. Major attention is given to the patterns of commercial development in Collier County. Concern about commercial development relates to transportation impacts both on a micro (access to road network) and macro (distribution of trip attractors and resultant overall traffic circulation) level and it relates to aesthetics and sense of place. Within the Traffic Circulation Element a commitment to adopt standards for road access has been accomplished through the Access Control Policy adopted by Resolution and the Access Management Plans for Mixed Use Activity Centers included in the Land Development Regulations. The Future Land Use Element includes improved Iocational criteria for commercial development. The Mixed Use Activity Centers are intended to provide for concentrated commercial development but with carefully configured access to the road network. Superior urban design is therefore promoted by carefully managing road access, avoiding strip commercial development, improving overall circulation patterns, and providing for community focal points. A second urban design initiative relates to Corridor Management Plans. The Future Land Use Element committed to the completion of such plans for two roadways initially and to extend the concept to other roads in the future. The plans will identify an urban design theme for a particular road and recommend a package of Land Development Regulations (land use, height, setback, landscaping, signage, lighting, etc.) and public works (landscaping, lighting, signage, etc.) to achieve that theme. The City of Naples and Collier County have cooperated on the first roads to be treated with this approach. The Streetscape Master Plan adopted by the Board of County Commissioners identifies appropriate landscaping treatments for the different corridors in the County. Collier County has also adopted Design Standards for all commercial development into the Land Development Code. These development standards include building design, parking lot orientation, pedestrian access, vehicular movement, landscaping and lighting. These standards will provide for quality development that is responsive to the Community's character. Improved Efficiency and Effectiveness in the Land Use Requlatory Process Attention has been devoted to improving the land use regulatory process through straightforward requirements and procedures. This has led to the style and structure of this Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:,a, rv, uF,!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double :::i;:::Srz:~g.': reflects proposed changes to the Tr, prbnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 8 of 80 JUN 1 $ 2002 pg.., Plan; a reorganization of the development review process; and the compilation of all Land Development Regulations into a single, unified Land Development Code. Protection of Private Property Ri.qhts Important to every facet of this Element is maintenance of a careful balance between private property rights and the general public interest. Although sound land use management by definition establishes limits on use of property, care has been taken to ensure the limits are rational; fair; based on the health, safety and welfare of the public; and that due process is provided. Of particular importance is the issue of vested rights, which is addressed later in this Overview. D. SPECIAL ISSUES Coordination of Land Use and Public Facility Planninq It is important that the time frames of land use planning and public facilities planning be coordinated. During the development of the Urban Area Buildout Study it became clear that an incongruity existed in that under the1989 Collier County Comprehensive Plan, enough land in the western coastal area was designated Urban for approximately 275,000 dwelling units (inclusive of the City of Naples) with a population of 458,000, with buildout occurring between 2019 and 2046, depending on the growth rate of the County. Of this, approximately 120,000 dwelling units were built as of April 1, 1996 (inclusive of the City of Naples). In the Immokalee Urban Area, enough land had been included for approximately 39,000 dwelling units with a build-out time horizon of 2105. These buildout time frames are contrasted by the time frames for public facility planning which are at 10 years for all facilities except roads where a 2020 financially feasible plan exists for the County. The 2020 plan is designed to accommodate approximately 246,500 dwelling units and a population of 393,100 (inclusive of the City of Naples). As previously discussed, Level of Service Standards for public facilities which are binding on land development are adopted for roads, water supply, sewage treatment, water management, parks and solid waste. Of these, the first are most closely tied to the development of a property - adequate roads, water, sewer and water management must be on or adjacent to a property in order for it to be developed. Parks and solid waste are a matter of ensuring adequate countywide capacity. To narrow the issue further, it is recognized that the approach to adequate water management is regulatory - a level of on-site storm flood protection is required. In the case of water and sewer, the County has provided utility systems, which are substantial and expanding. Thus, the critical issue becomes coordination of land use and transportation time frames. The difficulties that this incongruity - in land use planning and transportation planning time frames - could lead to, include: An internally inconsistent Plan; Failure to reserve adequate right-of-way at time of zoning; Condemnation of land after zoning or after development in order to obtain adequate right of way; Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:hrcug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double under/me or double z::i.~:c:/:rc::g.': reflects proposed changes to tire Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 9 of 80 No. JUN 1 6 2002 Temporary prohibitions on issuance of Development Orders due to violations of Level of Service Standards; and Progressive lowering of Level of Service Standards. The Comprehensive Plan responds to the time frame discrepancy through immediate action and through process oriented commitments. First, the Traffic Circulation Element includes an Objective to coordinate with the Future Land Use Element and a policy to complete long range transportation planning. The Urban Area Buildout Study was prepared to assist in the development of a long range "vision" of the Coastal Urban Area with a specific focus on the infrastructure improvements needed to accommodate the Urban area's potential growth based on the Future Land Use Map. Phase I, completed in 1994, provided a comprehensive review of the urban area population while Phase II was an analysis of infrastructure needed to accommodate that population. Second, the Density Rating System has been adjusted to moderate maximum permissible densities in areas subject to long range congestion. Third, commercial development opportunities in the form of Mixed Use Activity Centers are provided to include a mixture of uses which has the potential to lessen the impact on the transportation system. Fourth, the Level of Service Standards that are binding on the issuance of Development Orders are adopted as part of this Element, as well as the Capital Improvements Element. Finally, a Zoning Reevaluation Program has been established and implemented which reviewed and modified, where possible, zoning with a higher density or intensity than provided for in the 1989 Comprehensive Plan. The areas identified as subject to long range traffic congestion consist of the western coastal Urban Designated Area seaward of a boundary marked by Airport Road (including an extension north to the Lee County boundary), Davis Boulevard, County Barn Road, and Rattlesnake Hammock Road consistent with the Activity Center's residential density band located at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and County Road 951 (including an extension to the east). The basis for this determination was the 2015 Transportation Plan which forecasts future land use based on existing development, potential development and population projections. The land use forecasts are the basis for projected unconstrained traffic circulation from which, once compared to the existing roadway network, future roadway needs are derived. The 2020 Financially Feasible Road Plan, as well as the Needs Assessment Plan, which represents buildout of the Urban Area, have not met with public acceptance. Therefore, the strategy discussed above is promoted, which include: extend time frame of transportation planning; moderate maximum permissible densities in areas subject to long range congestion; provide commercial development opportunities which serve to modify the overall traffic circulation pattern; and re-evaluate existing zoning. Level of Service Standards Standards for adequate service for roads, water, sewer, water management, parks and solid waste are adopted as a part of the Capital Improvements Element. While a major purpose of the standards in the Capital Improvements Element is to drive the funding of facility expansion commensurate with the demand created by population growth, the major purpose for inclusion in this Element is to serve as a regulatory tool. Text with single underline or single s:ri!cc:hr~'.cgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Manage~nent Plan. Text with double und_~erline or double ~r:-iJ:::.'::c::~5 reflects proposed changes to tire Tran ,.itt~l laqgtLag~ primarilr in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC reco/nmenda/ions. AGENDA ITEM Page 10 of 80 JUN 1 S 2002 Objective 2 states: ... No local Development Order shall be issued unless required public facilities meet the requirements of the Concurrency Management System found in the Capital Improvements Element... As discussed in the previous section, implementation of the Standards will rely on the following strategies: Parks - Annual Certification of Adequate Capacity; Solid Waste - Annual Certification of Adequate Capacity; Water Management - Project-Specific Regulatory Requirement; Sewage - Project-Specific Capacity Test (may be provided publicly or privately as a central or individual system); Water - Project-Specific Capacity Test (may be provided publicly or privately as a central or individual system); and Roads - Project-Specific Capacity Test. It is recognized that difficulties may arise in situations where the County is not providing the facility or service but is responsible for implementation of a regulatory Level of Service Standard. This is the case with State Roads running through the County; with independent and City of Naples water and sewer districts within the County; and conversely, with County Roads running through the City of Naples. In these instances effort has been made to coordinate the "regulatory" Level of Service Standard with the "funding" Level of Service Standard. However, if there is a failure by the service provider, adjustment to the regulatory effort may be forced. For example, if the State Department of Transportation allows a road to fall below its "funding" standard, (which is the same as the County's "regulatory" standard) and there is no commitment to accelerate funding and construction, four options are available: - A moratorium may be imposed but may not be sustainable if there is no commitment to improve the road by a definite and reasonable time; - The County may improve the road; The private sector may improve the road; or - The regulatory Level of Service Standard may be lowered through a Comprehensive Plan amendment process. Vested Ri,qhts The issue of vested rights for approved but unbuilt development is an important consideration in the Future Land Use Element. The issue emerges with regard to existing zoning which is inconsistent with this Plan; with regard to the magnitude of approved but unbuilt residential dwelling units in relation to the difficulty of forecasting development trends and resultant facility needs; with regard to transportation planning time frames and right-of-way needs; and with regard to approved but unbuilt commercial zoning (C-l-C-5 and PUD) in 1995 which found that of the approximately 4,152 acres of commercially zoned land, 1,780 acres, or 43%, are developed. This Comprehensive Plan responds to the vested rights issue by establishing a program which reviewed all previously approved zoning. Within three years after Plan was adopted, all zoning was reviewed. If it is was determined to be inappropriate and is not vested, the zoning was adjusted to an appropriate classification. Annually thereafter, zoning will be re-evaluated on the Text with single, underline or single z:d!cc:hra::gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double c:ri.~:c:.~:rc::Z~J: reflects proposed changes to the Trans~nittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 11 of 80 No. JUN 1 8 2002 fifth anniversary of its approval as identified in the Land Development Regulations. (See Appendix C of the Support Document for a complete discussion of the vested rights issue). E. FUTURE LAND USE MAP The Future Land Use Map depicts the desired extent and geographical distribution of land uses in the County. Mixed-use categories are used to generally describe the character of allowed development. Within each of these categories, a range of uses arc is permitted based upon specific standards as described in the Designation Description Section of this Element. These uses include residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, conservation, educational, community, and public facilities. The Future Land Use Map series includes additional map series: Future Land Use Map - Mixed Use Activity Centers and Interchange Activity Centers Future Land Use Map - Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9, 5.10, 5.11) Future Land Use Map - Natural Resources: Wetlands; The following Future Land Use Maps are located in the Support Document: Future Land Use Map - Public Facilities, which shows existing and planned public facilities; Future Land Use Map - Natural Resources: Waterwells, Cones of Influence, Rivers, Bays, Lakes, Floodplains, Harbors and Minerals (this map also shows those properties proposed for public acquisition by the State Department of Environmental Protection Conservation and Recreational Lands Program (CARL) and the South Florida Water Management District's Save Our Rivers Program); Future Land Use Map - Natural Resources: Soils. Text with single, underline or single s:rikc:hrc:cgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double :.::i.~:::J::c:zg~ reflects proposed changes to ~q Tratt~p~ittal laneun~,~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 12 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 II. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY GOALS~ OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL: TO GUIDE LAND USE DECISION-MAKING SO AS TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN A HIGH QUALITY NATURAL AND HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WITH A WELL PLANNED MIX OF COMPATIBLE LAND USES WHICH PROMOTE THE PUBLIC'S HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE CONSISTENT WITH STATE PLANNING REQUIREMENTS AND LOCAL DESIRES. OBJECTIVE 1: Unless otherwise permitted in this Growth Management Plan, new or revised uses of land shall be consistent with designations outlined on the Future Land Use Map. The Future Land Use Map and companion Future Land Use Designations, Districts and Sub-districts shall be binding on all Development Orders effective with the adoption of this Growth Management Plan. Standards and permitted uses for each Future Land Use District and Subdistrict are identified in the Designation Description Section. Through the magnitude, location and configuration of its components, the Future Land Use Map is designed to coordinate land use with the natural environment including topography, soil and other resources; promote a sound economy; coordinate coastal population densities with the Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan; and discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl. Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN- 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. (n) 8. 9. (V)IO. B. URBAN- 1. 2. (V) 3. 4. C. URBAN 1. MIXED USE DISTRICT Urban Residential Subdistrict Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict Business Park Subdistrict Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict Traditional Neighborhood Design Subdistrict Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict Livingston/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Business Park Subdistrict - INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT Business Park Subdistrict Policy 1.2: The AGRICULTURAL/RURAL Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use.. Districts and Subdistricts for: Text with single underline or single s:ri!;c:/:rc',~g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Te.rt with double underli~ze 07' double z:ri.';z:.'::'c::g!: re. fleets proposed changes to the Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recomntendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 13 of 80 No. ~ JUN 1 8 2002 .. A. AGRICULTURAL/RURAL- MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Rural Commercial Subdistrict B. RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT BC. RURAL - INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT CD.RURAL - SE3-1'LEMENT AREA DISTRICT Policy 1.3: The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts: as described in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Policy 1.4: The CONSERVATION Future Land Use Designation shall include a Future Land Use District. Policy 1.5: Overlays and Special Features shall include: A. Area of Critical State Concern Overlay B. P, rcac cf En';!rc.".mcnta! Ccnccrn Ovcrlc~,' North Belle Meade Overlay C. Natural Resource Protection Area Overlays D. Airport Noise Area Overlay (IV)[. Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay OBJECTIVE 2: The coordination of land uses with the availability of public facilities shall be accomplished through the Concurrency Management System of the Capital Improvements Element and implemented through the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance of the Land Development Code. Policy 2.1: The County shall prepare annually the Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) on Public Facilities which shall include a determination of the existing conditions of capital public facilities, determine the remaining available capacity, forecast future needs in the five year capital improvement schedule and identify needed improvements and funding to maintain the level of service adopted in Policy 1.1.5 of the Capital Improvements Element. Policy 2.2: Deficiencies or potential deficiencies that have been determined through the Annual Update and Inventory Report on capital public facilities may include the following remedial actions: establish an area of significant influence for roads, add projects to the Capital Improvements Element or defer development until improvements can be made or the level of service is amended to ensure available capacity. Policy 2.3: Continue the Certificate of Adequate Public Facility Adequacy regulatory program, which requires the certification of public facility availability prior to the issuance of a final local development order. Text with single underline or single c:ri!:c:!:rc:~£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Groa;th Managenlent Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri~:c:J:r£::gJ: reflects proposed changes to the Trans.liual languc[ge primarily in response to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 14 of 80 [40. '~ 2002 OBJECTIVE 3: Land Development Regulations have been adopted to implement this Growth Management Plan pursuant to Chapter 163.3202, F.S. in order to ensure protection of natural and historic resources, the availability of land for utility facilities, promote compatible land uses within the airport noise zone, and to provide for management of growth in an efficient and effective manner. Policy 3.1: Land Development Regulations have been adopted into the Land Development Code that contain provisions to implement the Growth Management Plan through the development review process and include the following provisions: a. The Collier County Subdivision Code shall provide for procedures and standards for the orderly development and subdivision of real estate in order to ensure proper legal description, identification, documentation and recording of real estate boundaries and adequate infrastructure for development. Protect environmentally sensitive lands and provide for open space. This shall be accomplished in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District and ',:ndc d-'_:!qr, ctcd cc ~ .... -~, ~--'~ p:."t through various Land Use Designations that restrict higher intensity land uses and require specific land development standards for the remainin,q allowable land uses and through the adoption of permanent NRPA Overlays and integration of State of Florida Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern regulations into the Collier County Land Development Code. This shall also be accomplished throuqh requlations such as minimum open space and native vegetation preservation requirements, and/or through incentives that encouraqe the use of creative land use planning techniques and innovative approaches to development in the County's Agricultural/Rural Desiqnated Area. Drainage and stormwater management shall be regulated by the implementation of the South Florida Water Management District Surface Water Management regulations. (I)d. Identified potable water wellfields are depicted on the Future Land Use Map Series as wellhead protection areas. Policy 3.1.1 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element specifies prohibitions and restrictions on land use in order to protect these identified wellfields. Regulate signage through the Sign Ordinance, which shall provide for frontage requirements for signs, shared signs for smaller properties, definitions and establishment of an amortization schedule for non-conforming signs. The safe and convenient on-site traffic flow and vehicle parking needs shall be addressed through the site design standards as well as site development plan requirements which include: access requirements from roadways, parking lot design and orientation, lighting, building design and materials, landscaping and buffering criteria. Text with single underline or single stri!;c:!:rc:~g5 reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double undcrli/~e or double z:ri.':::.~:.-:::~.~: reflects proposed changes lO tire Transn_dttal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGE. N~A ITEM Page 15 of 80 No. ~ JUN 1 8 2002 Ensure the availability of suitable land for utility facilities necessary to support proposed development by providing for a Public Use Zoning District for the location of public facilities and other Essential Services. ho The protection of historically significant properties shall be accomplished, in part, through the adoption of the Historic/Archaeological Preservation Regulations which include the creation of an Historic/Archaeological Preservation Board; provides for the identification of mapped areas of Historic/Archaeological probability; requires a survey and assessment of discovered sites; and provides a process for designation of sites, structures, buildings and properties. The mitigation of incompatible land uses with the area designated as the Naples Airport Noise Zone shall be accomplished through regulations which require sound-proofing for all new residential structures within the 65 LDN Contour as identified on the Future Land Use Map; recording the legal descriptions of the noise contours in the property records of the County and through an inter-local agreement to notify the Naples Airport Authority of all development proposals within 20,000 feet of the airport which exceed height standards established by the Federal Aviation Administration. No development orders shall be issued which are inconsistent with the Growth Management Plan, except for where a Compatibility Exception or Exemption has been granted or where a positive Determination of Vested Rights has been made pursuant to the Zoning Reevaluation Program. Policy 3.2: The Land Development Regulations have been codified into a single unified Land Development Code (Ordinance 91-102). The development review process has been evaluated and improved to focus on efficiency and effectiveness through unification of all review staff in a single organizational unit and through streamlining procedures, OBJECTIVE 4: In order to improve coordination of land uses with natural and historic resources, public facilities, economic development, housing and urban design, the Future Land Use Element shall be continually refined through detailed planning. Future studies might address specific geographic or issue areas. All future studies must be consistent with the Growth Management Plan and further its intent. Policy 4,1: A detailed Master Plan for Golden Gate Estates has been developed and was incorporated into this Growth Management Plan in February, 1991. The Master Plan addresses Natural Resources, Future Land Use, Water Management, Public Facilities and other considerations. Text with single underline or single s::'i.!;c:,S:.rc.:cgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'i::c:~::'c:zg.~ reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 16 of 80 JUN 8 2002 /¢.5 Policy 4.2: A detailed Master Plan for the Immokalee has been developed and was incorporated into this Growth Management Plan in February, 1991. The Master Plan addresses Natural Resources, Future Land Use, Public Facilities, Housing, Urban Design, Land Development Regulations and other considerations. Major purposes of the Master Plan shall be coordination of land use and transportation planning, redevelopment or renewal of blighted areas and elimination of land uses inconsistent with the community's character. Policy 4.3: A detailed Master Plan for Marco Island has been developed and was incorporated into this Growth Management Plan in January 1997. The Master Plan addresses Population, Public Facilities, Future Land Use, Urban Design, Land Development Regulations and other considerations. Policy 4.34: Corridor Management Plans have been developed by Collier County in conjunction with the City of Naples. The Plans identify appropriate urban design objectives and recommend Land Development Regulations and Capital Improvements to accomplish those objectives. Plans have been completed for the following road corridors: Goodlette-Frank Road south of Pine Ridge Road, and Golden Gate Parkway from US 41 to Santa Barbara Boulevard. Future Corridor Management Plans may be prepared as directed by the Board of County Commissioners. The goals for each Corridor Management Plan will be established prior to the development of the Plan. Corridors that may be considered jointly with the City of Naples include: a. Pine Ridge Road from US 41 to Goodlette-Frank Road; b. Davis Boulevard from US 41 to Airport Road; c. US 41 from Creech Road to Pine Ridge Road; and d. US 41 from Davis Boulevard to Airport Road. The Board of County Commissioners will determine the boundaries of the corridors selected and the time frame for completion. Policy 4.46: An Industrial Land Use Study has been developed and a summary incorporated into the support document of this Growth Management Plan. The study includes a detailed inventory of industrial uses, projections of demand for industrial land, and recommendations for future land use allocations and Iocational criteria. Upon completion of the Economic Plan, a study will be undertaken to identify the need for additional Industrially designated land within the Coastal Urban Area. Policy 4.56: Access Management Plans for each of the Mixed Use Activity Centers designated on the Future Land Use Map have been developed and incorporated into the Collier County Land Development Code. The intent of the Access Management Plans is defined by the following guidelines and principles: Text with single underline or single s:,~&c:!:rc.:~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growtl~ Managemenl Plan. Text with double underlm~ or double z::'i.~:c:~,::'cz:~:: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language pri~narily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AC. iE.t~A ITEM Page 17 of 80 ~ ~ JUN 1 8 2002 a. The number of ingress and egress points shall be minimized and shall be combined and signalized to the maximum extent possible. b. Spacing of access points shall meet, to the maximum extent possible, the standards set forth in the Collier County Access Management Policy (Resolution #92-442, adopted August 18, 1992). c. Access points and turning movements shall be located and designed to minimize interference with the operation of interchanges and intersections. d. Lots, parcels, and subdivisions, which are created, shall be encouraged to dedicate cross-access easements, rights-of-way, and limited access easements, as necessary and appropriate, in order to ensure that the above-mentioned standards (a. - c.) are complied with. Policy 4._6~: Redevelopment Plans for existing commercial and residential areas may be considered by the Board of County Commissioners. These plans may consider alternative land use plans, modifications to development standards, and incentives that may be necessary to encourage redevelopment. For properties that have been reviewed under the Zoning Reevaluation Program, changes to the density and intensity of use permitted may be considered, in order to encourage redevelopment in these areas. Some of the specific areas that may be considered by the Board of County Commissioners for redevelopment include: a. Pine Ridge Road between U.S. 41 North and Goodlette-Frank Road; b. Bayshore Drive between U.S. 41 East and Thomasson Drive; c. U.S. 41 East between Davis Boulevard and Airport-Pulling Road; d. Davis Boulevard between U.S. 41 East and Airport-Pulling Road; e. U.S. 41 North in Naples Park; f. C.R. 951 between Green Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway; and, g. Bonita Beach Road between Vanderbilt Drive and the west end of Little Hickory Shores #1. Policy 4.Z8: Maintain and update, on an annual basis, the following demographic and land use information: existing permanent population, existing seasonal population, projected population, existing dwelling units, and projected dwelling units. Included with this database shall be a forecast of the geographic distribution of anticipated growth. (I) Policy 4._8g Prepare a Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment, or any phase thereof, and adopt plan amendments necessary to implement the findings and results of the Assessment, or any phase thereof, pursuant to the Final Order (AC-99-002) issued by the Administration Commission on June 22, 1999. The geographic scope of the assessment area, public participation procedures, interim development provisions, and the designation of Natural Resource Protection Areas on the Future Land Use Map are described in detail in the Agricultural/Rural Designation Description Section. Text with single underline or single strl]:c:hrc::£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Managetnent Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'i::c:J::-c:z~J: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language prbnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 18 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 (i) Policy 4._9-1-g Public participation and input shall be a primary feature and goal of the planning and assessment effort. Representatives of state and regional agencies shall be invited to participate and assist in the assessment. The County shall ensure community input through each phase of the Assessment which may include workshops, public meetings, appointed committees, technical working groups, and established advisory boards including the Environmental Advisory Committee and the Collier County Planning Commission in each phase of the Assessment. OBJECTIVE 5: In order to promote sound planning, protect environmentally sensitive lands and habitat for listed species while protectin.q private property ri,qhts, ensure compatibility of land uses and further the implementation of the Future Land Use Element, the following general land use policies shall be implemented upon the adoption of the Growth Management Plan. Policy 5.1: All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. Property zoned prior to adoption of the Plan (January 10, 1989) and found to be consistent through the Zoning Re-evaluation Program are consistent with the Growth Management Plan and designated on the Future Land Use Map series as Properties Consistent by Policy. Zoning changes will be permitted to these properties, and to other properties deemed consistent with this Future Land Use Element via Policies 5.9 through 5.12, provided the amount of commercial land use, industrial land use, permitted number of dwelling units, and the overall intensity of development allowed by the new zoning district, except as allowed by Policy 5.11 are not increased. Policy 5.2: All proposed development shall be reviewed for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and those found to be inconsistent with the Plan by the Board of County Commissioners shall not be permitted. Policy 5.3: Discourage unacceptable levels of urban sprawl in order to minimize the cost of community facilities by:confining urban intensity development to areas designated as Urban on the Future Land Use Map~; and b~,' requiring that any changes to the Urban Designated Areas be contiguous to an existing Urban Area boundary,.;, and by encouraqin,q the use of creative land use planninq techniques and innovative approaches to development in the County's Aqricultural/Rural Desiqnated Areal which will better serve to protect environmentally sensitive areas, maintain the economic viability of aqriculture and other predominantly rural land uses1 and provide for cost efficient delivery of public facilities and services. Policy 5.4: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, subject to meeting the compatibility criteria of the Land Development Code (Ordinance 91-102, adopted October 30, 1991, as amended. Text with single, underline or single s:riJ:c:hra::g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plat~. Tex! with double underline or double z::iJ~c:.'::-c;-'~J: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 19 of 80 ,;-% JUN 1 8 2002 Policy 5.5: Encourage the use of,.~.....""~"i~'~'.u land presently ~ desi.qnated for urban intensity uses before desi(]natinQ .... ~I,,,-, develef~me~ el-other areas for urban intensity uses. This shall occur by planning for the expansion of County owned and operated public facilities and services to existing L~)ned lands desi.qnated for urban intensity uses, the Rural Settlement District (Oran.qetree PUD), and the Rural Frin.qe Mixed Use District before servicing ether new areas. Policy 5.6: Permit the use of clustered residential development .".c'--'s~nG, Planned Unit Development techniques, mixed-use development, rural villa.qes, new towns, satellite communities, transfer of development ri.qhts, agricultural and conservation easements and other innovative approaches, in order to conserve open space and environmentally sensitive areas. Continue to review and amend the zoning and subdivision regulations as necessary to allow and encouraqe such innovative land development techniques. Policy 5.7: Encourage recognition of identifiable communities within the urbanized area of western Collier County. Presentation of economic and demographic data shall be based on Planning Communities and commonly recognized neighborhoods. Policy 5.8: Group Housing, which may include the following: Family Care Facility, Group Care Facility, Care Units, Assisted Living Facility, and Nursing Homes, shall be permitted subject to the definitions and regulations as outlined in the Collier County Land Development Code (Ordinance 91-102, adopted October 30, 1991) and consistent with the Iocational requirements in Florida Statutes (Chapter 419.001 F.S.). Family Care Facilities, which are residential facilities occupied by not more than six (6) persons, shall be permitted in residential areas. Policy 5.9: Properties which do not conform to the Future Land Use Element but are improved, as determined through the Zoning Re-evaluation Program described in Policy 3.1 K, shall be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element and identified on the Future Land Use Map Series as Properties Consistent by Policy. Policy 5.10: Properties for which exemptions based on vested rights, dedications, or compatibility determinations, and compatibility exceptions have been granted, as provided for in the Zoning Re-evaluation Program established pursuant to Policy 3.1K, and identified on the Future Land Use Map series as Properties Consistent by Policy, shall be considered consistent with the Future Land Use Element. These properties shall be considered consistent with the Future Land Use Element only to the extent of the exemption or exception granted and in accordance with all other limitations and timelines that are provided for in the Zoning Re-evaluation Program. Nothing contained in this policy shall exempt any development from having to comply with any provision of the Growth Management Plan other than the zoning reevaluation program. Text with single, underline or single s:ri!~c:!:ra:cg!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tt~e current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underlb~c or double x::-i::c:!:rc:z~ reflects proposed changes to tire Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior' BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AG~A ITEM Page 20 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 O) Policy 5.11: Properties determined to comply with the former Commercial under Criteria provision of the Future Land Use Element shall be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element. These properties are identified on the Future Land Use Map Series as Properties Consistent by Policy. These properties are not subject to the building floor area or traffic impact limitations contained in this former provision. Policy 5.12 Properties rezoned under the former Industrial Under Criteria, or with the provision contained in the former Urban-Industrial District which allowed expansion of industrial uses adjacent to lands designated or zoned Industrial provision as adopted in Ordinance 89-05 in January, 1989, shall be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element. These properties are identified on the Future Land Use Map Series as Properties Consistent by Policy. Policy 5.13 The following properties identified by Ordinance #98-82; 98-91; 98-94; 99-02; 99-11; 99-19; 99- 33; and 2000-20; located in Activity Centers #1,2, 6, 8, 11 & 18 were rezoned pursuant to the Activity Centers boundaries designated in the 1989 Comprehensive Plan, as amended. Those properties were rezoned during the interim period between the adoption of the Future Land Use Element in October, 1997 which was not effective due to the notice of intent finding the Future Land Use Element not "in compliance". Those properties, identified herein, which have modified the boundaries of the 1997 Activity Centers are deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element. Text with single underline or single z:ri!:c:!:ra, ug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text witi~ double underh'ne or double z::iJ:c:.~:rc::.'g~,: reflects proposed changes to tile Transmittal languag~ primarily in response to tile ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENOA ITEM Page 21 of 80 JUN I 8 2002 J'3O (IV) FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION The following section describes the land use designations shown on the Future Land Use Map. These designations generally indicate the types of land uses for which zoning may be requested. However, these land use designations do not guarantee that a zoning request will be approved. Requests may be denied by the Board of County Commissioners based on criteria in the Land Development Code or on special studies completed for the County. I. URBAN DESIGNATION Urban Designated Areas on the Future Land Use Map include two general portions of Collier County: areas with the greatest residential densities, and areas in close proximity, which have or are projected to receive future urban support facilities and services. It is intended that Urban Designated Areas accommodate the majority of population growth and that new intensive land uses be located within them. Accordingly, the Urban Area will accommodate residential uses and a variety of non-residential uses. The Urban Designated Area, which includes Immokalee and Marco Island, represents less than 10% of Collier County's land area. The boundaries of the Urban Designated Areas have been established based on several factors, including: patterns of existing development; patterns of approved, but unbuilt, development; natural resources; water management; hurricane risk; existing and proposed public facilities; population projections and the land needed to accommodate the projected population growth. Urban Designated Areas will accommodate the following uses: ao Residential uses including single family, multi-family, duplex, and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts, and Subdistricts and Overlays that follow. Non-residential uses including: 1. Essential services as defined by the most recent Land Development Code. 2. Parks, open space and recreational uses; 3. Water-dependent and water-related uses (see Conservation and Coastal Management Element, Objective 11.1 and subsequent policies and the Manatee Protection Plan contained in the Land Development Code); Child care centers; Community facilities such as churches group housing uses, cemeteries, schools and school facilities co-located with other public facilities such as parks, libraries, and community centers, where feasible and mutually acceptable; 6. Safety service facilities; 7. Utility and communication facilities; 8. Earth mining, oil extraction, and related processing; 9. Agriculture; (I) 5. Text with single underline or single s:ri&c:hrc::£.t: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::"::::/:z~x~;: reflects proposed changes to tile Transmittal language pritnarily itl response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recom~nendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 22 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 (V)10. (II)(IV)(V)12. (IV) 15. Travel trailer recreational vehicle parks, provided the following criteria are met: (a) The density is consistent with that permitted in the Land Development Code; (b) The site has direct principal access to a road classified as an arterial in the Transportation Element, direct principal access defined as a driveway and/or local roadway connection to the arterial road, provided the portion of the local roadway intended to provide access to the RV park is not within a residential neighborhood and does not service a predominately residential area; and (c) The use will be compatible with surrounding land uses. 11. Support medical facilities such as physicians' offices, medical clinics, treatment, research and rehabilitative centers, and pharmacies provided the dominant use is medical related and located within ~A mile of existing or approved hospitals or medical centers which offer primary and urgent care treatment for all types of injuries and traumas, such as, but not limited to, North Collier Hospital. The distance shall be measured from the nearest point of the tract that the hospital is located on or approved for, to the project boundaries of the support medical facilities. Approval of such support medical facilities may be granted concurrent with the approval of new hospitals or medical centers which offer primary and urgent care treatment for all types of injuries and traumas. Stipulations to ensure that the construction of the support medical facilities are concurrent with hospitals or medical centers shall be determined at the time of zoning approval. Support medical facilities are not allowed under this provision if the hospital or medical center is a short-term leased facility due to the potential for relocation. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Traditional Neighborhood Design Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict, Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict and Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, and in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, and Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, and Livingston/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, and in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. 13. Commercial uses accessory to other permitted uses, such as a restaurant accessory to a golf course or retail sales accessory to manufacturing, so long as restrictions or limitations are imposed to insure the commercial use functions as an accessory, subordinate use. Such restrictions or limitations could include limiting the size and/or location of the commercial use and/or limiting access to the commercial use. 14. Industrial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Industrial District, in the Urban - Mixed Use District, and in the Urban Commercial District, certain quadrants of Interchange Activity Centers. Hotels/motels consistent by Policy 5.9, 5.10, and 5.11, or as permitted in the Immokalee Area, Golden Gate Area and Marco Island Master Plans, and as permitted in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. 16. Business Park uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Commercial District and Urban-Industrial District. Text with single underline or single ;:ri!ccthrc.'.~£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'iJ~c::::'£z:g:: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal languag~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. ~,GE~D-~ ITEhl Page 23 of 80 No. ~ JUN 1 8 2002 A. Urban - Mixed Use District This District, which represents approximately 116,000 acres, is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential land uses, including mixed-use developments such as Planned Unit Developments. Certain industrial and commercial uses are also allowed subject to criteria. This may be accomplished by encouraging coordinated mixed-use sites of water-dependent and water-related land uses are permitted within the coastal region of this District. Mixed-use sites of water-dependent and water-related uses and other recreational uses may include water-related parks, marinas (public or private), yacht clubs, and related accessory and recreational uses, such as boat storage, launching facilities, fueling facilities, and restaurants. Any water-dependent and/or water-related land use shall encourage the use of the Planned Unit Development technique and other innovative approaches to conserve environmentally sensitive features and to assure compatibility with surrounding land uses. Priorities for shoreline land use shall be given to water dependent principal uses over water-related land uses. In addition to the criteria of compatibility with surrounding land uses and consistency with the siting policy of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (Policy 11.1.4), the following land use criteria shall be used for prioritizing the siting of water-dependent and water-related uses: a. Presently developed sites; b. Sites where water-dependent or water-related uses have been previously established; c. Sites where shoreline improvements are in place; d. Sites where damage to viable, naturally functioning wetlands, or other environmentally sensitive features, could be minimized. Port of the Islands is a unique development, which is located within the Urban Designated Area, but is also totally within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern. However, a portion of the development was determined "vested" by the State of Florida, thus exempting it from the requirements of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. Further, there is an existing Development Agreement between Port of the Islands, Inc. and the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs dated July 2, 1985, which regulates land uses at Port of the Islands. Port of the Islands is eligible for all provisions of the Urban - Mixed Use District in which it is located to the extent that the overall residential density and commercial intensity does not exceed that permitted under zoning at time of adoption of this Plan. 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for higher densities in an area with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. This Subdistrict comprises approximately 93,000 acres and 80% of the Urban Mixed Use District. Maximum eligible residential density shall be determined through the Density Rating System but shall not exceed 16 dwelling units per acre except in accordance with the Transfer of Development Rights Section of the Land Development Code. Text with single, underline or single s:ri,~c:,a, ra::£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i.~::_:,~::':.::g:: reflects proposed changes to tiw Tran'. mtta[ lan~ua,~e primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. ~2~.NDA I'fF,.M Page 24 of 80 -- JUN 1 8 2002 (IV) 2. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide transitional densities between the Conservation Designated Area and the Urban Designated Area. It includes that area south of US 41 between the City of Naples and Collier-Seminole State Park, including Marco Island and comprises approximately 18,000 acres and 15% of the Urban Mixed Use District. In order to facilitate hurricane evacuation and to protect the adjacent environmentally sensitive Conservation Designated Area, residential densities shall be limited to a maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre, except as allowed in the Density Rating System to exceed 4 units per acre through provision of Affordable Housing and Transfer of Development Rights, and except as provided in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. Rezones are recommended to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development. The Marco Island Master Plan shall provide for density, intensity, siting criteria and specific standards for land use districts on Marco Island. 3. Urban Residential Frinqe Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide transitional densities between the Urban Designated Area and the Agricultural/Rural Area and comprises approximately 5,500 acres and 5% of the Urban Mixed Use District. Residential land uses may be allowed at a maximum density of 1.5 units per gross acre, or 2.5 units per (;ross acre via the transfer of development ri,qhts from lands within one mile of the Urban Boundary, and desi,qnated as Rural Frin,qe Mixed Use District Sendin,q. These residential land uses subj~o-t-k~ fc!!c';;!ng ccnd!ticns: and are not subject to the Density Rating System, but are subiect to the followinq provisions: a. All rezones are encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development; and b. Proposed development in the area shall be fully responsible for all necessary water management improvements, including the routing of all on-site and appropriate off-site water through the project's water management system, and a fair share cost of necessary improvements to the CR 951 canal/out-fall system made necessary by new development in the area. 4. PUD Neighborhood Villaqe Center Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to allow for small-scale retail, offices, and service facilities to serve the daily needs of the residents of a PUD. The acreage eligible for Neighborhood Village Center designation and uses shall be sized in proportion to the number of units to be served, but in no event shall the acreage exceed 15 acres. The Neighborhood Village Center uses may be combined with recreational facilities or other amenities of the PUD and shall be conveniently located to serve the PUD. The Village Center shall not have independent access to any roadway external to the PUD and shall be integrated into the PUD. Phasing of construction of the Neighborhood Village Center shall be controlled so that it occurs concurrent with the residential units. The Planned Unit Development district of the Land Development Code shall be amended within one (1) year to provide standards and principles regulating access, location or integration within the PUD of the Village Center, allowed uses, and square footage and/or acreage thresholds. Text with single underline or single s:ri~c:F, ra:;g,a. reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ~::-i::::::rcxg;: reflects proposed changes to the Transminal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 25 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 5. Business Park Subdistrict The Business Park Subdistrict is intended to provide for a mix of industrial uses and non- industrial uses, designed in an attractive park-like environment with Iow structural density where building coverage ranges between 25% to 45% and where landscaped areas provide for buffering and enjoyment by the employees and patrons of the park. Business Parks shall be allowed as a Subdistrict in the Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Commercial District and Urban Industrial District and may include the general uses allowed within each District, the specific uses set forth below, and shall comply with the following general conditions: a Business Parks shall be permitted to include up to 30% of the total acreage for non- industrial uses of the type identified in "c" below, and will reserve land within the industrially designated areas for industrial uses. The percentage and mix of each category of use shall be determined at the time of zoning in accordance with the criteria specified in the Land Development Code. b Access to arterial road systems shall be in accordance with the Collier County Access Management Policy and consistent with Objective 7 and Policy 7.1 of the Traffic Circulation Sub-Element. c Non-industrial uses may include uses such as certain offices, financial institutions, retail services, institutional, cultural facilities, medical facilities, hotels/motels at a density of 26 units per acre, and recreational facilities. Retail Uses shall be limited to those uses which serve the employees of businesses within the Park or are related to the products, goods and services that are manufactured, distributed, produced or provided by businesses in the Park. d When the Business Park is located within the Urban Industrial District or includes industrially zoned land, those uses allowed in the Industrial Zoning District shall be permitted provided that the total industrial acreage is not greater than the amount previously zoned or designated industrial. When a Business Park is located in the Urban Commercial District or Urban-Mixed Use District, the industrial uses shall be limited to light industry such as light manufacturing, processing, and packaging in fully enclosed buildings; research, design and product development; printing, lithography and publishing; and similar light industrial uses that are compatible with non-industrial uses permitted in the district; and, the Planned Unit Development Ordinance or Rezoning Ordinance for a Business Park project shall list specifically all permitted uses and development standards consistent with the criteria identified in this provision. e Business Parks must be a minimum of 35 acres in size. f Business Parks located within Interstate Activity Center quadrants that permit Industrial Uses shall also be required to meet the standards as stated under the Interstate Activity Center Subdistrict for commercial and industrial land uses. g Business Parks shall adopt standards for the development of individual building parcels and general standards for buffering, landscaping, open space, signage, lighting, screening of outdoor storage, parking and access management. h When located in a District other than the Urban Industrial District, the Business Park must have direct access to a road classified as an arterial in the Traffic Circulation Sub- Element. i Business Parks are encouraged to utilize PUD zoning. Text with single, underline or s~gle s:ri!:c:hrc.;cgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Managelnent Plan. Text with double underli,e or double z::'i/:::J:r:x~.: reflects proposed changes to the TransJ ;"~ tr,,,2,,.~-~--- primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 26 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 175 The maximum additional acreage eligible to be utilized for a Business Park Subdistrict within the Urban-Mixed Use District is 500 acres, exclusive of open space and conservation areas. 6. Office and In-fill Commercial Subdistrict The.intent of this Subdistrict is to allow Iow intensity office commercial or in-fill commercial development on small parcels within the Urban-Mixed Use District located along arterial and collector roadways where residential development, as allowed by the Density Rating System, may not be compatible or appropriate. Lower intensity office commercial development attracts Iow traffic volumes on the abutting roadway(s) and is generally compatible with nearby residential and commercial development. The criteria listed below must be met for any project utilizing this Subdistrict. For purposes of this Subdistrict, "abuts" and "abutting" excludes intervening public street, easement (other than utilities) or right-of-way, except for an intervening local street; and "commercial" refers to C-1 through C-5 zoning districts and commercial components of PUDs. a. The subject site abuts a road classified as an arterial or collector as identified on the five-year Future Traffic Circulation Map, as contained in the Traffic Circulation Sub- Element. b. The site utilized for commercial use is 12 acres or less in size, and the balance of the property in excess of 12 acres, if any, is limited to an environmental conservation easement or open space; c. The site abuts commercial zoning: (i) On one side and non-commercial zoning on the other side; or, (ii) On both sides; d. The depth of the requested commercial does not exceed the depth of the abutting commercial parcel(s); e. Project uses are limited to office or Iow intensity commercial, except for land abutting commercial zoning on both sides, as provided for in (c) above, the project uses may include those of the highest intensity abutting commercial zoning district; f. The parcel in question was not created to take advantage of this provision and was created prior to the adoption of this provision in the Growth Management Plan on October 28, 1997; g. At time of development, the project will be served by central public water and sewer; and h. The project will be compatible with existing land uses and permitted future land uses on surrounding properties. i. For those sites that have existing commercial zoning abutting one side, commercial zoning used pursuant to this subsection shall only be applied one time to serve as a transitional use and will not be permitted to expand. j. The maximum acreage eligible to be utilized for the Office and Infill Subdistrict within the Urban-Mixed Use District is 250 acres. 7. Traditional Neiqhborhood Design Subdistrict The purpose of this provision is to encourage the development of Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) projects. TNDs are typically human-scale, pedestrian-oriented, interconnected residential neighborhood projects that are centered around a village green Text with single underline or single c:ri!:c:!:rc.'~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Pla/z. Text with double underline or double z:riJ:c::::-z'.:g,': reflects proposed ct~anges to the Transmittal language primarily in response to tire ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGE_NDA ITE.M Page 27 of 80 No. JUN 1 8 2002 with a mix of commercial uses including retail, office and civic amenities that complement each other. Residential uses are often located above retail uses. A grid pattern is the basis for the transportation network. The main street component of the TND is appropriately integrated in the TND and sized in proportion to the scale of the project with a maximum of 15 acres of commercial permitted. Standards shall be developed in the Land Development Code which will regulate access, permitted uses, square footage and/or acreage thresholds, lot frontage dimensions, street widths, setbacks, and other standards that are integral to the TND concept. (11) 8. Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict The intent of this district is to allow for limited small-scale retail, office and residential uses while requiring that the project result in a true mixed-use development. The Activity Centers to the North and South provide for large-scale commercial uses, while this subdistrict will promote small scale mixed-use development with a pedestrian orientation to serve the homes both existing and future in the immediate area. This Subdistrict is intended to be a prototype for future mixed-use nodes, providing residents with pedestrian scale development while also reducing existing trip lengths for small-scale commercial services. Commercial uses for the purpose of this section are limited to those allowed in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 zoning districts except as noted below. The development of this subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. A unified planned development with a common architectural theme which has shared parking and cross access agreements will be developed. c. Retail uses will be capped at a maximum of 5,000 sq. ft. per acre for the total project. d. Office uses will be capped at a maximum of 7,000 sq. ft. per acre for the total project. e. Residential development will be subject to the density rating system. f. Maximum lot coverage for buildings is capped at 17.5% for the total project. g. No more than 25% of the total built square footage will be devoted to single story buildings. h. Primary entrances to all retail and commercial uses shall be designed for access from the interior of the site. Buildings fronting on Airport Road and Orange Blossom Road will provide secondary accesses facing those streets. i. All four sides of each building must be finished in a common architectural theme. j. A residential component equal to at least 25% of the allowable maximum base density under the density rating system must be constructed before the subdistrict completes an aggregate total of 40,000 square feet retail of office uses. k. Residential units may be located both on the North and South side of Orange Blossom Drive. I. Integration of residential and office or retail uses in the same building is encouraged. m. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties where feasible and desired by adjoining property owners. n. No building footprint will exceed 5,000 square feet. Common stairs, breezeways or elevators may join individual buildings. o. No building shall exceed three stories with no allowance for under building parking. Text with single underline or single x:rik::hr~::gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri.~:::/:z::::~5 reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language pritnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recomtnendations. AGEI~A Page 28 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 (V)10. p. Drive-through establishments will be limited to banks with no more than 3 lanes architecturally integrated into the main building. q. No gasoline service stations will be permitted. r. All buildings will be connected with pedestrian features. s. Twenty foot wide landscape Type D buffers along Orange Blossom Drive and Airport-Pulling Road and a 20 foot wide Type C buffer along all other perimeter property lines will be required. t. Parking areas will be screened from Airport-Pulling Road and Orange Blossom Drive. u. The Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict provision is not appllcable to any properties adjacent to this Subdistrict. 9. Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict This subdistrict consists of 31 acres and is located at the northeast quadrant of two major arterial roadways, Pine Ridge Road and Goodlette-Frank Road. In addition to uses allowed in the Plan, the intent of the Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict is to provide shopping, personal services and employment for the surrounding residential areas within a convenient travel distance. The subdistrict is intended to be compatible with the neighboring Pine Ridge Middle School and nearby residential development and therefore, emphasis wili be placed on common building architecture, signage, landscape design and site accessibility for pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as motor vehicles. Access to the Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict may feature a traffic signalized access point on Goodlette-Frank Road, which may provide for access to the neighboring Pine Ridge Middle School. Other site access locations will be designed consistent with the Collier County access management criteria. Development intensity within this district will be limited to single-story retail commercial uses, while professional or medical related offices, including financial institutions, may occur in three-story buildings. A maximum of 275,000 square feet of gross leasable area for retail commercial and office and financial institution development may occur within this subdistrict. Retail commercial uses shall be limited to a maximum of 125,000 square feet of gross leasable area on the south +/-23 acres. No individual retail tenant may exceed 65,000 square feet of gross leasable area. Unless otherwise required by the South Florida Water Management District, the .87+/- acre wetland area located on the northeastern portion of the site will be preserved. Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict This Subdistrict is located on the north side of the intersection between the two (2) major roadways of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Collier Boulevard, consisting of approximately 33.45 acres of land. The intent of the Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict is to provide convenient shopping, personal services and employment for neighboring residential areas. The Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict will reduce driving distances for neighboring residents and assist in minimizing the road network required in this part of Collier County. This subdistrict is further intended primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 29 of 80 Text with single, underline or single s:~Sc:hrc,::gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed ctmnges to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri'.cz:Sr:x~.~: reflects proposed changes to tlw Transmittal language ' AC~--NOA ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 to create a neighborhood focal point and any development within this Subdistrict will be designed in a manner to be compatible with the existing and future residential and institutional development in this neighborhood. Development intensity for this Subdistrict shall be limited to a maximum of 200,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. Rezonings are encouraged to be in the form of a PUD zoning district which must contain development standards to ensure that all commercial uses will be compatible with neighboring residential and institutional uses. In addition to retail uses and other uses permitted in the Plan, financial institutions, business services, and professional and medical offices shall be permitted. Retail uses shall be limited to a single-story. Financial services and offices shall be limited to three stories. All principal buildings shall be set back a minimum of one (1) foot from the Subdistrict boundaries for each foot of building height. Development within the Subdistrict shall be required to have common site, signage and building architectural elements. The property shall provide for potential interconnection with adjacent properties. Text with single underline or single s:ri.~c:hrcug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double u~derlb~e or double z::i.':c:~:rz:-'g.~: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal languagc~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. A~A ITEM Page 30 of 80 NO. ~ JUN 1 8 2002 MAP 5 A GOODLETTE/PINE RIDGE COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT PINE RIDGE ROAD (C.R. 896) PINE RIDGE ROAD (C.R. 896) INDICATE8 BOUNDARY OF GOODLETTE/PINE RIDGE COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT Text with single, underline or single c::'i.,~c:hrc'.~g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ziJ:c:.'::-c-.cg.': reflects proposed changes to tire Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 3 t of 80 JUN 1 8 20 2 (IV) DENSITY RATING SYSTEM This Density Rating System is only applicable to areas designated Urban, Urban - Mixed Use District, as identified on the Future Land Use Map, exclusive of the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, and exclusive of Urban areas encompassed by the Immokalee Area Master Plan, Golden Gate Area Master Plan, and Marco Island Master Plan. The Density Rating System is applicable to the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the extent that the residential density cap of 4 dwelling units per acre is not exceeded, except for the density bonus for Affordable Housing and Transfer of Development Rights, and except as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. This Density Rating System only applies to residential dwelling units. Within the applicable Urban Designated Areas, a base density of 4 residential dwelling units per gross acre is permitted, though not an entitlement. This base level of density may be adjusted depending upon the characteristics of the project. a. Density Bonuses Consistency with the following characteristics may add to the base density. Density bonuses are discretionary, not entitlements, and are dependent upon meeting the criteria for each bonus provision and compatibility with surrounding properties, as well as the criteria in the Land Development Code. All new residential zoning shall be consistent with the Density Rating System, except as provided in policies 5.9, 5.10 and 5.11 of the Future Land Use Element. 1. Conversion of Commercial Zoninq If the project includes conversion of commercial zoning which is not located within an Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center, or which is not consistent with the Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, a bonus of up to 16 dwelling units may be added for every 1 acre of commercial zoning which is converted. These dwelling units may be distributed over the entire project. The project must be compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. Proximity to Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchanqe Activity Center If the project is within one mile of a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center and located within a residential density band, 3 residential units per gross acre may be added. The density band around a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center shall be measured by the radial distance from the center of the intersection around which the Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center is situated. If 50% or more of a project is within the density band, the additional density applies to the gross acreage of the entire project. Density bands are designated on the Future Land Use Map and shall not apply within the Estates Designation or for properties within the Traffic Congestion Area. 3. Affordable Housinq To encourage the provision of affordable housing within the Urban Designated Area, a maximum of up to 8 residential units per gross acre may be added to the base density if the project meets the definitions and requirements of the Affordable Housing Density Bonus Ordinance (Section 2.7.7 of the Land Development Code, Ordinance #91-102, Text with single underline or single s:ri.!cc:!:rc:~gh re. fleets Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growqh Management Plan. Text with double under/mc or double ::ri~:c:J::'c~'g.': r~flects proposed clmnges to the Transmittal languag~ pri~kv in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 32 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 adopted October 30, 1991). In the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, Affordable Housing projects must provide appropriate mitigation consistent with Policy 13.1.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. 4. Residential In-fill To encourage residential in-fill in urban areas with o__f existing development outside of the Coastal Hi.qh Hazard Area, a maximum of 3 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be added if the following criteria are met: (a) The project is 4-0 20 acres or less in size; (b) At time of development, the project will be served by central public water and sewer; (c) The project is compatible with surrounding land uses; (dj The property in question has no common site development plan with adjacent property; (f) There is no common ownership with any adjacent parcels; and (g) The parcel in question was not created to take advantage of the in-fill residential density bonus and was created prior to the adoption of this provision in the Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989. (h} Of the maximum 3 additional units, ~e=te one (1) dwellin.q unit per acre ~ shall be transferred '-" '~"* from ~ Sendina Lands tc !nfil! ;cftc!:. (i) Projects aualifving under this orovision may increase the base densitv administratively by a maximum of one dwelling unit per acre by transferring that additional density from Sending Lands. Within one year, the County will adopt LDRs to implement this "by ri.qht" Rural-to-Urban transfer process, subject to the above criteria~ excludina Ici. 5. Roadway Access If the project has direct access to 2 or more arterial or collector roads as identified in the Traffic Circulation Element, 1 residential dwelling unit per gross acre may be added. Density credits based on future roadways will be awarded if the developer commits to construct a portion of the roadway (as determined by the County Transportation Department) or the road is scheduled for completion during the first five years of the Capital Improvements Plan. The Roadway Access bonus is not applicable to properties located within the Traffic Congestion Area. 6. Transfer of Development Ri.qhts To encourage preservation/conservation of natural resources, density transfers are permitted as follows: (a) Within that portion of the Urban designated area subject to this Density Rating System~..[;)d_ensity may be increased above and beyond the density otherwise allowed by the Density Rating System in accordance with the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Section 2.2.24.11 of the Land Development Code adopted by Ordinance #91-102, on October 30, 1991, as amended;.= (b) From Pr!m:~,' c.-.-'_ S_'c':c~dcr',' Sendin,q Lands in coniunction with qualified infill development; and, Text with single underline or single s:ri.!;c:!:.ra:~g.t: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growltt Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i::c:.';:-c:,'g.': reflects proposed chat~gcs to the Transmittal language primarily in response to tire ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 33 of 80 JUN Pg .. 2002 (c) From Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe, at a maximum density increase of one (1) unit per gross acre. ......... ,~,,,,,4,,, shall density ""* be transferred into the Coastal In no case '"' ........ , ....... ~ .... ~ Hiqh Hazard Area from outside the Coastal Ma~ High Hazard Area. Lands lying seaward of the Coastal Ma~ Hi.qh Hazard Boundary, identified on the Future Land Use Map, are within the Coastal !~ Hi.qh Hazard Area. b. Density Reduction Consistency with the following characteristic would subtract density: 1. Traffic Con.qestion Area If the project is within the Traffic Congestion Area, an area identified as subject to long range traffic congestion, 1 dwelling unit per gross acre would be subtracted. The Traffic Congestion Boundary is shown on the Future Land Use Map and consists of the western coastal Urban Designated Area seaward of a boundary marked by Airport- Pulling Road (including an extension north to the Lee County boundary), Davis Boulevard, County Barn Road, and Rattlesnake Hammock Road consistent with the Mixed Use Activity Center's residential density band located at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and County Road 951 (including an extension to the east). Properties adjacent to the Traffic Congestion Area shall be considered part of the Traffic Congestion Area if their only access is to a road forming the boundary of the Area; however, if that property also has an access point to a road not forming the boundary of the Traffic Congestion Area it will not be subject to the density reduction. c. Density Conditions: The following density condition applies to all properties subject to the Density Rating System. 1. Maximum Density The maximum permitted density shall not exceed 16 residential dwelling units per gross acre within the Urban designated area, except when utilizing the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Section 2.2.24.10 of the Land Development Code adopted by Ordinance #91-102, on October 30, 1991, as amended. do Density Blendin.q: This provision is intended to encouraqe unified plans of development and to preserve wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural features that exist within properties that straddle the Urban Mixed Use and Rural Frinqe Mixed Use Districts. In the case ot such properties, which were in existence and under unified control (owned; or under contract to purchase, by the aDplicant(sB as of June ~ 1~. 2002, the allowable qross density for such properties in a,q.qre,qate may be distributed throuqhout the project, regardless of whether or not the density allowable for a portion of the project exceeds that which is otherwise permitted. Text with single underline or single stri~c:.t:.rc:~£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Managetnent Plan. Text with double underline or double z:rl;:c:!:rc:cgJ: reflects proposed changes to the Transtni: primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 34 of 80 JUN Pg._ 1 8 20uz Density Blending Conditions and Limitations for Properties Straddling the Urban Residential Sub-District or Urban Residential Frinoe Sub-District and either the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral ~ or Receiving Lands: (al The proiect must straddle the Urban Residential Sub-District or Urban Residential Frinoe Sub-District and either the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral or Receiving Lands; (bi The proiect in a.q¢lre.qate is a minimum of 80 acres in size; (c/ At least 25% of the project is located within the Urban Mixed Use District. The entire proiect is located within the Collier County Sewer and Water District Boundaries and will utilize central water and sewer to serve the project unless interim provisions for sewer and water are authorized by Collier County; (d/The project is currently zoned or will be rezoned to a PUD; (el Density to be shifted to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District from the Urban Residential Sub-District is to be located on impacted lands, or it is demonstrated that the development on the site is to be located so as to preserve and protect the highest quality native veqetation and/or habitat on-site and to maximize the connectivity of such native vegetation and/or habitat with adjacent preservation and/or habitat areas; (fl The entire project shall meet the applicable preservation standards of the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District. These preservation requirements shall be calculated upon and apply to the total project area. (al Section 15 fTownship 48 South: Ranae 26 East), which straddles the boundary of the Urban Residential Sub-district and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. is 0esianated Neutral. and is in the approved Mirasol PUD, ma.v utilize this density btendina provision, subject to the above criteria. Density Blending Conditions and Limitations for Properties Straddlinq the Urban Residential Fringe Sub-District and Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands: (al The proiect must straddle the Urban Residential Fringe Sub-District and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sendinq Lands; (b) The project in a.qqre.qate must be a minimum of ~ 400 acres; (c) At least 25% of the project must be located within the Urban Hesidential Frin.qe Sub-District. The project must extend central water and sewer (from the urban desiRnated portion of the project) to serve the entire project, unless alternative interim sewer and water provisions are authorized by Collier County; (d) The Proiect is currently zoned or will be zoned PUD; (e) The density to be shifted to the Sending Lands from the Urban Residential Fringe is to be located on impacted or disturbed lands, or it is demonstrated that the development on the site is to be located so as to preserve and protect the highest quality native veqetation and/or habitat on-site and to maximize the connectivity of such native veqetation and/or wildlife habitat with adjacent preservation and/or habitat areas; (fl The Urban portion of the project shall comply with the native ve.qetation requirements identified in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element {for Urban designated landsl. For those lands within the project desiqnated as Text with single underline or single s:ri~c:hrz:~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ~t:-i?:c:J::c;:~h reflects proposed changes to tire Trans~l ~'~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations, A~A ITEM Page 35 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 Sending, the native vegetation preservation requirement shall be 90% of the native vegetation, not to exceed 150% of the total proiect area desi,qnated as ^'~ .... ; .... * ~^~'~ ;~ "~;~ ~';~" Wetland areas that are impacted throuoh the, development process; but which result in enhanced wetland function, ncludinr~ habitat and/or flowwavs, shall be considered as Dart of the native veeetation reouirement set forth in this Drovision and shall not be considered as impacted areas. These wetland areas and/or flowwavs may be used for water storaae provided that the water discharged in these areas is ore-treated, Permitted uses for densitv blending under this provision include residential development and associated amenities: includino oolf courses meeting the criteria for oolf courses within the Neutral area. This provision is not intended to eliminate an.v uses permitted within the aoDlicable underl.vin9 land use designation. B. Urban Commercial District This District is intended to accommodate almost all new commercial zoning; a variety of residential uses, including higher densities for properties not located within the Urban Coastal Fringe or Urban Residential Fringe Subdistricts; and a variety of non-residential uses. 1. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Mixed Use Activity Centers have been designated on the Future Land Use Map Series identified in the Future Land Use Element. The locations are based on intersections of major roads and on spacing criteria. There are 19 Mixed Use Activity Centers which comprise approximately 3,000 acres, including 3 Interchange Activity Centers (#4, 9, 10) which wilt be discussed separately. Two Activity Centers #19 and 21 have been deleted and replaced by the land use designations identified in the Marco Island Master Plan and Future Land Use Map. (ll)(IV)(V) The Mixed-Use Activity Center concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can readily be accommodated, to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal points within the community. Additionally, some commercial development is allowed outside of Mixed Use Activity Centers in the PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Traditional Neighborhood Design Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict, Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Subdistrict, Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, Livingston/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and by Policies 4.7, 5.9, 5.10, and 5.11 of the Future Land Use Element. Mixed Use Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in character. The actual mix of the various land uses - which may include the full array of commercial uses, residential uses, institutional uses, hotel/motel uses at a density consistent with the Land Text with single, underline or single x:ri!:::hr~ugh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'iSz:/::zx~J: reflect~ proposed changes to the Transmittal languag~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recom~nendations. - AGENOA ITEM Page 36 of 80 No. JUN 1 8 2002 Development Code - shall be determined during the rezoning process based on consideration of the factors listed below. For residential development, if a project is within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict or Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, up to 16 residential units per gross acre may be permitted. This density may be distributed throughout the project, including any portion located outside of the boundary of the Mixed Use Activity Center. The factors to consider during review of a rezone petition are as follows: Rezones within Mixed Use Activity Centers are encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development. There shall be no minimum acreage limitation for such Planned Unit Developments except all requests for rezoning must meet the requirements for rezoning in the Land Development Code. - The amount, type and location of existing zoned commercial land, and developed commercial uses, within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two road miles of the - Mixed Use Activity Center; - Market demand and service area for the proposed commercial land uses to be used as a guide to explore the feasibility of the requested land uses; Existing patterns of land use within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two radial miles; Adequacy of infrastructure capacity, particularly roads; Compatibility of the proposed development with, and adequacy of buffering for, adjoining properties; Natural or man-made constraints; Rezoning criteria identified in the Land Development Code; - Conformance with Access Management Plans for Mixed Use Activity Centers contained in the Land Development Code; - Coordinated traffic flow on-site and off-site, as may be demonstrated by a Traffic Impact Analysis, and a site plan/master plan indicating on-site traffic movements, access point locations and type, median opening locations and type on the abutting roadway(s), location of traffic signals on the abutting roadway(s), and internal and external vehicular and pedestrian interconnections; Interconnection(s) for pedestrians, bicycles and motor vehicles with existing and future adjacent projects; Conformance with the architectural design standards as identified in the Land Development Code. The approximate boundaries of Mixed Use Activity Centers have been delineated on the maps located at the end of this section as part of the Future Land Use Map Series. The actual boundaries of Mixed Use Activity Centers listed below by Activity Center and location are specifically defined on the maps and shall be considered to delineate the boundaries for those Mixed Use Activity Centers. # I Immokalee Road and Airport Road # 6 Davis Boulevard and Santa Barbara Boulevard # 8 Airport Road and Golden Gate Parkway Text with single underline or single s::'i.!;c:hrc.::gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double :::'i.~:::~.:r£:.'g.~: reflects proposed changes to/be Transmittal languag~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 37 of 80 NO. ~ JUN 1 8 2002 #11 Vanderbilt Beach Road and Airport Road #12 US 41 and Pine Ridge Road #13 Airport Road and Pine Ridge Road #15 Golden Gate Parkway and Coronado Boulevard #16 US 41 and Airport Road #17 US 41 and Rattlesnake-Hammock Road #18 US 41 and Isles of Capri Road #20 US 41 and Wiggins Pass Road The mix of uses in all of these specifically designated, except for #6 at Davis Boulevard and Santa Barbara Boulevard, range from 80 to 100% commercially zoned and/or developed property. Activity Center #6 is approximately 60% commercially zoned and/or developed. For purposes of these specifically designated Activity Centers, the entire Activity Center is eligible for up to 100%, or any combination thereof, of each of the following uses: commercial, residential, and/or community facilities. Mixed Use Activity Centers may be designated as Master Planned Mixed Use Activity Centers. Master Planned Mixed Use Activity Centers are those which have a unified plan of development in the form of a Planned Unit Development, Development of Regional Impact or an arsa-wide Development of Regional Impact. Property owners within Mixed Use Activity Centers shall be required to utilize the Master Planned Mixed Use Activity Center process. # 2 US 41 and Immokalee Road # 3 Immokalee Road and CR 951 # 5 US 41 and Vanderbilt Beach Road # 7 Rattlesnake-Hammock Road and CR 951 #14 Goodlette-Frank Road and Golden Gate Parkway In recognition of the benefit resulting from the coordination of planned land uses and coordinated access points to the public road network, Master Planned Activity Centers are encouraged through the allowance of flexibility in the boundaries, mix and location of uses permitted within a designated Mixed Use Activity Center and may be permitted to modify the designated configuration. The boundaries of Master Planned Mixed Use Activity Centers depicted on the Future Land Use Map Series are understood to be flexible and subject to modification during final site design; however, the approved amount of commercial development shall not be exceeded. The actual mix of land uses shall be determined using the criteria for other Mixed Use Activity Centers. All of the following criteria must be met for a project to qualify as a Master Planned Mixed Use Activity Center: The applicant shall have unified control of the majority of a quadrant in a designated Activity Center. Majority of the quadrant shall be defined as at least 51% of the privately owned land within any Activity Center quadrant. However, if a property owner has less than 51% ownership within a quadrant, that property owner may still request a rezoning under the provisions of a Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict subject to the maximum acreage allowed in Paragraph 2 below. Property owners with less than 51% ownership are Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:,~:rc'ag~ reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underli~¢ or double z:.-iJ:c:~nc:.'~J: reflects proposed changes to the Transmitta_l langu~c primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGE~'-A ITF..Nt Page 38 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 I't"l encouraged to incorporate vehicular and pedestrian accesses with adjacent properties within the Activity Center. Any publicly owned land within the quadrant will be excluded from acreage calculations to determine unified control; 2. The permitted land uses for a Master Planned Mixed Use Activity Center shall be same as for designated Activity Centers; however, a Master Planned Mixed Use Activity Center encompassing the majority of property in two or more quadrants shall be afforded the flexibility to redistribute a part or all of the allocation from one quadrant to another. The maximum amount of commercial permitted at Activity Centers # 3 and #7 is 40 acres per quadrant for a total of 160 acres maximum in the entire Activity Center, the balance of the of the land uses shall be for residential and/or community facilities. Activity Center #14 shall have a maximum of 45 acres for commercial use, the balance of the land uses shall be for residential and/or community facilities. Activity Centers #2 and #5 have approximately 80% of the area zoned or developed for commercial uses. For purposes of these two Activity Centers, the entire Activity Center is eligible for up to 100% or any combination thereof, of the following uses: commercial, residential and/or community facilities. 3. The location and configuration of all land uses within a Master Planned Mixed Use Activity Center shall be compatible with and related to existing site features, surrounding development, and existing natural and manmade constraints. Commercial uses shall be oriented so as to provide coordinated and functional transportation access to major roadways serving the Activity Center, and functionally related or integrated with surrounding land uses and the planned transportation network; and 4. Adjacent properties within the Activity Center that are not under the unified control of the applicant shall be considered and appropriately incorporated (i.e. pedestrian and vehicular interconnections) into the applicant's Master Plan. New Mixed Use Activity Centers may be proposed if all of the following criteria are met and an amendment is made to delineate the specific boundaries on the Future Land Use Map series for Mixed Use Activity Centers: · The intersection around which the Mixed Use Activity Center is located consists of an arterial and collector road, or two arterial roads, based upon roadway classifications in the Traffic Circulation Element. · The Mixed Use Activity Center is no closer than two miles from any existing Mixed Use Activity Center, as measured from the center point of the intersections around which the existing and proposed Mixed Use Activity Centers are located. · Market justification is provided demonstrating need for a Mixed Use Activity Center at the proposed location. 2. Interchan.qe Activity Center Subdistrict Interchange Activity Centers have been designated on the Future Land Use Map at each of the three Interstate 75 interchanges and include numbers 4, 9 and 10. The boundaries of these Interchange Activity Centers have been specifically defined on the maps located Text with single underline or single s::'i.!cc:kra:cgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'i!:c::::~.;.'g;: reflects proposed changes to tile Transmittal la~l~uag_st primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. ~A ITEM Page 39 of 80 JUN 2002 at the end of this Section as part of the Future Land Use Map Series. Any changes to the boundaries of these Interchange Activity Centers shall require an amendment to the Future Land Use Map Series. Interchange Activity Centers #4 and #10 allow for a mixture of land uses - which may include 100% or any combination thereof, of each of the following uses: the full array of commercial uses, residential and non-residential uses, institutional uses, hotel/motel uses at a density consistent with the Land Development Code, and Business Parks; and industrial uses as identified below in the southwest and southeast quadrants of Interchange Activity Center #4. No industrial uses shall be allowed in Interchange Activity Center #10. The actual mix of uses shall be determined during the rezoning process based on consideration of the same factors listed under the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. Interchange Activity Center # 9 shall be subject to the requirement of the development of an Interchange Master Plan (IMP). The IMP is intended to create an enhanced "gateway" to Naples. The IMP process shall be initiated by the property owners and/or their representatives by meeting with the County planning staff within 60 days of the adoption of this Growth Management Plan amendment and a finding of compliance from the Department of Community Affairs. The purpose of the meeting will be to establish a mutually acceptable vision statement for Activity Center # 9. The Interchange Master Plan shall be adopted by Resolution by the Board of County Commissioners. All rezones thereafter shall meet the intent of the vision statement. (111) Subsequent to the development of the vision statement, new projects within Activity Center #9 are encouraged to have a unified plan of development in the form of a Planned Unit Development. The mixture of uses allowed in Interchange Activity Center # 9 shall include the full array of commercial uses; residential and non-residential uses; institutional uses; Business Park; hotel/motel uses at a density consistent with the Land Development Code; industrial uses in the northeast, southwest and southeast quadrants. The mix and intensity of land uses shall meet the intent of the vision statement and be defined during the rezoning process. The entire Interchange Activity Center is eligible for up to 100% of the entire acreage to be developed for any of the uses referenced above, except the maximum amount of commercial acreage shall not exceed 55% of the total acreage (632.5 ac.) of Interchange Activity Center # 9. The factors to consider during review of a rezone petition shall be in compliance with the vision statement and those included for the Mixed Use Activity Center. For residential development, if a project is within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center, which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and not within the Estates Designation, up to 16 residential units per gross acre may be permitted. This density may be distributed throughout the project, including any portion located outside of the boundary of the Activity Center. Based on the unique location and function of Interchange Activity Centers, some Industrial land uses that serve regional markets and derive specific benefit when located in the Text with single, underline or single s:r:.Sc:hrc.:;gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::i.~:c:,'::y.z~/: reflects proposed changes to tire Transmittal languag~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENOA ITEJ~ Page 40 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 Interchange Activity Centers shall be allowed, provided each such use is reviewed and found to be compatible with existing and approved land uses. Industrial uses shall be limited to: manufacturing, warehousing, storage, and distribution. The following conditions shall be required to ensure compatibility of Industrial land uses with other commercial, residential and/or institutional land uses in the Interchange Activity Centers; to maintain the appearance of these Interchange Activity Centers as gateways to the community; and to mitigate any adverse impacts caused by noise, glare or fumes to the adjacent property owners. The Planned Unit Development and/or rezoning ordinance shall contain specific language regarding the permitted Industrial land uses, compatibility requirements, and development standards consistent with the following conditions. Site- specific development details will be reviewed during the Site Development Plan review process. - Landscaping, buffering and/or berming shall be installed along the Interstate; - Fencing shall be wooden or masonry; -Wholesale and storage uses shall not be permitted immediately adjacent to the right-of-way of the Interstate; - Central water and sewage systems shall be required; - State Access Management Plans, as applicable; - No direct access to the Interstate right-of-way shall be permitted; - Joint access and frontage roads shall be established when frontage is not adequate to meet the access spacing requirements of the Access Control Policy, Activity Center Access Management Plans, or State Access Management Plans, as applicable; - Access points and median openings shall be designed to provide adequate turning radii to accommodate truck traffic and to minimize the need for U-turn movements; -The developer shall be responsible to provide all necessary traffic improvements - to include traffic signals, turn lanes, deceleration lanes, and other improvements deemed necessary - as determined through the rezoning process; A maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for the designated Industrial land uses component of the projects shall be established at 0.45. (V) 3. Livin.qston/Pine Ridqe Commercial Infill Subdistrict This Subdistrict consists of 17.5 acres and is located at the southeast quadrant of Livingston Road, a collector roadway and Pine Ridge Road, a minor arterial roadway. In addition to uses allowed in the Plan, the intent of the Livingston/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict is to provide shopping, personal services and employment for the surrounding residential areas within a convenient travel distance and to provide commercial services in an acceptable manner along a new collector roadway. The Subdistrict is intended to be compatible with the neighboring commercial, public use and high density residential properties and will utilize well-planned access points to improve current and future traffic flows in the area. If permitted by the South Florida Water Management District, emergency access to the North Naples Fire District fire station located immediately east of the property will be provided improving response times to all properties located south along Livingston Road. Interconnection to adjacent properties immediately to the South and immediately to the Text with single underline or single s:ri!cc:!:ra::gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri~.:c:!:rv.x~5 reflects proposed changes lo the Transmit/a/language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGEN%'A ITEhl Page 41 of SO JUN 1 8 2002 East will be studied and provided if deemed feasible, as a part of the rezoning action relating to the subject property. Building height is limited to one stow with a 35 foot maximum for all retail and general commercial uses. General and medical office uses are limited to three stories with a 50- foot maximum height. Any project developed in this Subdistrict may be comprised of any combination of retail commercial and/or office uses, provided that the total square footage does not exceed 125,000 square feet. A minimum 50-foot buffer of existing native vegetation will be preserved along all project boundaries located adjacent to areas zoned agricultural. 3. Business Park Subdistrict The Business Park Subdistrict is intended to provide for a mix of industrial uses and non- industrial uses, designed in an attractive park-like environment with Iow structural density where building coverage ranges between 25% to 45% and landscaped areas provide for buffering and enjoyment by the employees and patrons of the Park. Business Parks shall be allowed as a subdistrict in the Urban Commercial District subject to the criteria set forth under the Business Park Subdistrict in the Urban-Mixed Use District. C. Urban - Industrial District The Industrial Land Use District is reserved primarily for industrial type uses and comprises approximately 2,200 acres. Besides basic Industrial uses, limited commercial uses are permitted. Retail commercial uses are prohibited, except as accessory to Industrial or Business Park uses. The C-5, C-4 and PUD Commercial Zoning Districts along the perimeter of the designated Urban - Industrial District that existed as of October 1997 shall be deemed consistent with this Land Use District. Industrially designated areas shall have access to a road classified as an arterial or collector in the Traffic Circulation Element, or access may be provided via a local road that does not service a predominately residential area. Intensities of use shall be those related to: a. Manufacturing; b. Processing; c. Storage and warehousing; d. Wholesaling; e. Distribution; f. High technology; g. Laboratories; h. Assembly; i. Computer and data processing; j. Business services; k. Other basic industrial uses as described in the Industrial Zoning District of the Land Development Code; Business Park uses as discussed below and as described in the Business Park Zoning District of the Land Development Code; and Support commercial uses, such as child care centers and restaurants. Text with single underline or single s:,~.&ct.t:rc;cg!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text witt~ double underline or double z:ri:;c:.':r~:.'gJ: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 42 of 80 No. JUN 1 8 200: (i) 1. Business Park Subdistrict The Business Park Subdistrict is intended to provide for a mix of industrial uses and non- industrial uses, designed in an attractive park-like environment with Iow structural density where building coverage ranges between 25% to 45% and landscaped areas provide for buffering and enjoyment by the employees and patrons of the Park. Business Parks shall be allowed as a Subdistrict in the Urban Industrial District subject to the criteria set forth under the Business Park Subdistrict in the Urban-Mixed Use District. II. AGRICULTURAL/RURAL DESIGNATION Rural & Agricultural Area Assessment The Governor and Cabinet sitting as the Administration Commission, on June 22, 1999, issued the Final Order (AC-99-002) pursuant to Section 163.3184(10)(b), Florida Statutes, in Division of Administrative Hearing Case No. 98-0324GM. Pursuant to the Order, Collier County is required to prepare a Rural and Agricultural Assessment (Assessment). This Assessment may be phased. The Geographic Scope of the Assessment Area shall be as follows: Includes: All land designated Agricultural/Rural, except as noted below; Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC), except as noted below; Conservation lands outside the Urban Boundary, except as noted below, and; South Golden Gate Estates_. Excludes: All Urban designated areas;. Northern Golden Gate Estates.' The Settlement District. The Assessment has been completed for these areas: The Rural Frin.qe Mixed Use District, ~ Other privately-owned lands generally located north of Everglades City; and, North Belle Mead, Belle Meade, and CREW NRPAs. The Assessment, or any phase thereof, shall be a collaborative, community-based effort with full and broad-based public participation and assistance from applicable State and Regional agencies. At a minimum, the Assessment must identify the means to accomplish the following: 1. Identify and propose measures to protect prime agricultural areas. Such measures should prevent the premature conversion of agricultural lands to other uses. 2. Direct incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat in order to protect water quality and quantity and maintain the natural water regime as well as to protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats. 3. Asses.,; the growth potential of the Area by assessing the potential conversion of rural lands to other uses, in appropriate locations, while discouraging urban sprawl, directing incompatible land uses away from critical habitat and encouraging development that utilizes Text with single underline or single strikc:hrc:~$h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ~t:-i'r:C::::'~X~;: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal languag~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 43 of 80 No. c:~ JUN 1 8 2002 (i) creative land use planning techniques including, but not limited to, public and private schools, urban villages, new towns, satellite communities, area-based allocations, clustering and open space provisions and mixed use development. The Assessment, or any phase thereof, shall recognize the substantial advantages of innovative approaches to development which may better serve to protect environmentally sensitive areas, maintain the economic viability of agricultural and other predominantly rural land uses, and provide for the cost efficient delivery of public facilities and services. Interim Development Provisions for the Agricultural/Rural Assessment Area Amendments based on the Assessment shall be completed by June 22, 2002 for the Rural Frin.qe Area, and by November 1,2002 for the balance of the Assessment Area. Residential and other uses in the Area for which completed applications for development approval, rezoning, conditional use, subdivision approval, site plan approval, or plats were filed with or approved by Collier County prior to June 22, 1999, shall be processed and considered under the Comprehensive Plan as it existed on June 22, 1999. If the County elects to address a specific geographic portion of the Area as a phase of the Assessment, the interim land use controls shall be lifted from the specific geographic area upon completion of the applicable phase of the Assessment and the implementing Comprehensive Plan amendments for that phase becoming effective. Until the Assessment is complete and comprehensive plan amendments to implement the Assessment, or any phase thereof, are in effect the only land uses and development allowable in the area shall be those set forth in the Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District and the Land Development Code (Section 2.2.2) in effect on June 22, 1999 for the Agricultural/Rural District, except the following uses are prohibited and shall not be allowed: 1. New golf courses or driving ranges. 2. Extension or new provision of central water and sewer service into the Area. 3. New package wastewater treatment plants. 4. Residential development except farmworker housing or housing directly related to support farming operations, or staff housing (12 du/ac) and other uses directly related to the management of publicly-owned land, or one single family dwelling unit per lot or parcel created prior to June 22, 1999. 5. Commercial or industrial development except gas and telephone facilities, electric transmission and distribution facilities, emergency power structures, fire and police stations, emergency medial stations. 6. Transient residential such as hotels, motels, and bed and breakfast facilities. 7. Zoo, aquarium, botanical garden, or other similar uses. 8. Public and private schools. 9. Collection and transfer sites for resource recovery. 10. Landfills 11. Social and fraternal organizations. 12. Group care facilities. 13. Sports instructional schools and camps. 14. Asphalt and concrete batch making plants. 15. Recreational Vehicle Parks Text with single underline or single s:ri!~c:hrc:;gh re~flects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Texl witit double uttder[itlc or double z::'i!:c:~rc:.'gh reflects proposed changes to the Trai ~,,dtta{ primarily in response to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM No,. Page 44 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 (i) These interim development standards shall not affect or limit the continuation of existing uses. Existing uses shall also include those uses for which all required permits have been issued, or uses for which completed applications have been received by the County prior to June 22, 1999. The continuation of existing uses shall include expansions of those uses if such expansions are consistent with or clearly ancillary to the existing use and do not require a rezoning or comprehensive plan amendment. Interim Natural Resource Protection Areas {NRPAs) The following areas shall be generally mapped and identified as interim Nat'--'ra! Rccc'--';ce Prctcct!cn Arcac (NRPAs): Camp Keais Strand, ~ ~u3.d_tB~Okaloacoochee Slough, Beile-Mea~e ~'~ ~"' '*~' '"~"""~ '~-"'~ "'~'~'~" ' These interim Nat'Jm! Rcceurcc Protect!c,", Artec (NRPAs) are designated on the Future Land Use Map: 1. Within these areas, only agriculture and directly-related uses and one single family dwelling unit per parcel or lot created prior to June 22, 1999, shall be allowed; 2. These interim development standards shall not affect or limit the continuation of existing uses. Existing uses shall also include those uses for which all required permits have been issued, or uses for which completed applications have been received by the County prior to June 22,1999. The continuation of existing uses shall include expansions of those uses if such expansions are consistent with or clearly ancillary to the existing use and do not require a rezoning or comprehensive plan amendment; 3. The general location shall be identified on a map as the interim NRPAs and shall be refined as_actual data and analysis is made available during the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment. (I) The Agricultural/Rural Land Use Designation is for those areas that are remote from the existing development pattern, lack public facilities and services, are environmentally sensitive or are in agricultural production. Urbanization is not promoted, therefore most allowable land uses are of Iow intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. The following uses and densities are generally permitted subject to the Interim Development Provisions-:, where applicable - but may not be permitted in all Districts and Subdistricts, and may be subiect to specific criteria, conditions, development standards; permitted densities may be .qreater, or lesser, than that stated below, in some Districts and Subdistricts. a. Agricultural uses such as farming, ranching, forestry, bee-keeping; b. Residential uses at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per five gross acres, except for legal non-conforming lots of record; c. Habitat preservation uses; d. Parks, open space and recreational uses, golf courses; e. Essential services, which are defined as facilities and services~ includinq utilities, safety services, and other oovernment services, necessary to promote and protect public health, safety and welfare ~c f. S:fcty cc.".'!_-'c ej,f.Community facilities such as churches, group housing uses, cemeteries; and schools which shall be subject to the following criteria: Text with single underline or single s:rihc:hra, ug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double under/me or double ~t:-i::z::::'c. xg.': reflects' proposed changes to thc Transmit/al language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 45 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 (v) (I) · Site area and school size shall be subject to the General Educational Facilities Report submitted annually by the Collier County School Board to the Board of County Commissioners. · The Site must comply with the State Requirements for Educational Facilities adopted by the State Board of Education. · The site shall be subject to all applicable State or Federal regulations. i~. Migrant labor housing as provided in the Land Development Code; j,,h. Earthmining, oil extraction and related processing; k.'_b Asphalt plant as a Conditional Use as defined in the Land Development Code provided that the asphalt plant: is compatible with surrounding land uses; is not located in a County, State or Federal jurisdictional wetland area and any required buffer zones; is not located within 1,000 feet of a Florida State Park; is not located within the Area of Critical State Concern as depicted on the Future Land Use Map; and, is not located within 1,000 feet of a natural reservation; ii. Commercial uses accessory to other permitted uses, such as restaurant accessory to golf course or retail sales of produce accessory to farming, so long as restrictions or limitations are imposed to insure the commercial use functions as an accessory, subordinate use. Such restrictions or limitations could include limiting the size and/or location of the commercial use and/or limiting access to the commercial use; ¢~.k. Commercial uses as principal uses, '"""';"' *~'" upon criteria as provided for within the Rural Commercial Subdistrict and Rural Villages within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Subdistrict.. and based upon the criteria set forth therein, respectively; ~.l.lndustrial uses as provided for within the Rural-Industrial Subdistrict and for Research and Technology Parks within Rural Villages in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Subdistrict. and based upon the criteria set forth therein: respectively; w!th!n the R',:'ra! Industrial District; ~rn.Travel trailer recreational vehicle parks, provided the following criteria are met: 1. The density is consistent with the Land Development Code; 2. The site has direct principal access to a road classified as an arterial in the Transportation Element, direct principal access defined as a driveway and/or local roadway connection to the arterial road, provided the portion of local roadway intended to provide access to the RV park is not within a residential neighborhood and does not service a predominately residential area; and 3. The use will be compatible with surrounding land uses. A. A,qricultural/Rural - Mixed Use District The purpose of this District is to protect and encourage agricultural activities, conserve and preserve environmentally sensitive areas, provide for Iow-density residential development, and other uses identified under the Agricultural/Rural Designation. These areas generally lack public facilities and services. Urbanization is not promoted, therefore most allowable land uses are of Iow intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. Residential uses are allowed as fc!Ic';:c listed below, subject to the Interim Development Provisions. r-, .... ,,: ..... ;, .....~'~ ' .... ~ .... '~ "~ "'~' ~ "~ ~ '""~ ~:~":~' d~c!q~ct_'cd an ......... ~ .......... , ......................... ~._ ."t ................... Text with single, underline or single s:ri.~c:hrc;;£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text ~'ith double underline or double z::'i/:::.'::'c:;~,': reflects proposed changes to the Transmit,~al language__ _ prirnarily irt response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 46 of 80 2002 uT - .......... ,"1 wi' ....... a. Low density residential dwelling units, at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per five gross acres, except for legal non-conforming lots of record; b. Dormitories, duplexes and other types of staff housing, as may be incidental to; and in SUDDOrt of. ~-. .... ;.4~.4; ....; .... ,; ..... :'~' conservation uses, ~' 2 '"""~;';,' !n ..... '~ ....... thc Lend -r'c':c!cFmcnt c. Group housing uses subiect to the followino density/intensity limitations:_.~': '~"~;"'_ ...... , accord:hoc ';.'!th that perm!tied :~ thc L~nd Dc:'c!cpmc~t Ccd~ · Family Care Facilities: 1 unit oer,5 acres; · Grouo Care Facilities and other Care Housino Facilities: Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) not to exceed 0.45. .. _.ry..J .... ~. .......... d. Staff housing as may be incidental to. and in SuoDort of: ~" ^~: .... " ..... ;'~' safety service facilities and essential service~, ~! -~ dc~c!ty !~ ~ccc:d:~cc '::!th thc__' "~'~ ....~'_._,~'^;~""+...v... e. Farm labor housing limited to 10 acres in any sinole location: )~ cccc.~d:~cc ':.'!th thc · Sinole family/duplex/mobile home: 11 dwellina units per acre: · Mu tifamily/dormtmry: 22 dwelling units/beds per acre. f. Recreation camps r')ot to exceed 1 cabin/lodging unit oer 5 gross acres: cc dcf!.".cd !~, g. Existing units approved for the Fiddler's Creek DRI may be reallocated to those parts of Sections 18 and 19, Township 51 South, Range 27 East added to Fiddler's Creek DRI together with part of Section 29, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, at a density greater than 1 unit per 5 gross acres provided that no new units are added to the 6,000 previously approved units, which results in a gross density of 1.6 units per acre for the Fiddler's Creek DRI; and further provided that no residential units shall be located on that part of Section 29 within the Fiddler's Creek DRI; and further provided that South Florida Water Management District jurisdictional wetlands impacted by the DRI in said Sections do not exceed 10 acres. ([) 1. Rural Commercial Subdistrict Within the Agricultural/Rural - Mixed Use District, commercial development, up to a maximum of 200 acres, may be allowed providing the following standards for intensity of use are met and subject to the interim Development Provisions: a. The project, or that portion of a larger project, which is devoted to commercial development, is 2.5 acres or less in size; b. The project, or that portion of a larger project which is devoted to commercial development, is no closer than 5 miles, measured by radial distance, from the nearest developed commercial area, zoned commercial area or designated Mixed Use Activity Center, except that the southwest quadrant at the intersection of US 41and S.R. 29; is eli(]ible for commercial zonin(] under this orovision; c. The proposed uses 17,_'c!'_'dc are limited to office; retail, and personal services intended to serve the rural population and the travelina public, and are identified as ~ Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:hro'.:g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double undcrli,~e or double z:riJ~c:.'::'z;:~:: reflects proposed changes to the Transmi ~__ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITF_~ Page 47 of 80 -- JUN 1 8 2002 em=those uses permitted in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Zoning Districts of the Land Development Code; d. Commercial intensity shall not exceed 10.000 square feet of gross leasable floor area per acre: e, The project is located on an arterial or collector roadway as identified in the Traffic Circulation Element; and ef. The project is buffered from adjacent properties. B. Rural Fringe Mixed Use District The Rural Frin,qe Mixed Use District is identified on Future Land Use Map. This District consists of approximately 93,600 acres, or 7% of Collier County's total land area. Si.qnificant portions of this District are adjacent to the Urban area or to the semi-rural, rapidly developinq, lar,qe-lot North Golden Gate Estates platted lands. A.qricultural land uses within the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District do not represent a si,qnificant portion of the County's active a,qricultural lands. As of the date of adoption of this Plan Amendment, the Rural Frin,qe Mixed Use District consists of more than 5,550 tax parcels, and includes at least 3,835 separate and distinct property owners. Alternative land use strate,qies have been developed for the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District, in part, to consider these existinq conditions. The Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District provides a transition between the Urban and Estates Desi,qnated lands and between the Urban and A,qricultural/Rural and Conservation desi,qnated lands farther to the east. The Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District employs a balanced approach, includin.q both re,qulations and incentives, to protect natural resources and private property ri.qhtSl providin.q for larqe areas of open space, and allowin.q, in desiqnated areas, appropriate types, density and intensity of development. The Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District allows for a mixture of urban and rural levels of service, includin.q limited extension of central water and sewer, schools, recreational facilities, commercial uses and essential services deemed necessary to serve the residents of the District. In order to preserve existinq natural resources, includinq habitat for listed species, to retain a rural, pastoral, or park-like appearance from the major public ri.qhts-of-way within this area, and to protect private property ri.qhts, the followinq innovative planninq and development techniques are required and/or encouraged within the District. Transfer of Development Ri.qhts (TDR), and Sendin.q and Receivin.q Designations: The primary purpose of the TDR process within the Rural Frin.qe Mixed Use District is to establish an equitable method of protectin,q and conservin.q the most valuable environmental lands, includin.q lar.qe connected wetland systems and si.qnificant areas of habitat for listed species, while a owin.q property owners of such lands to recoup lost value and development potential throu,qh an economically viable process of transferrinq such riqhts to other more suitable lands. Within the Rural Frin,qe Mixed Use District and within desi.qnated areas of the A,qricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, residential density may be transferred from lands desiRnated as SendinR, Lands ,'r"'; ........ ...... , ...... . c .... - ...... .~ .... ,,~ to lands desiqnated as Receivinq Lands on the Future Land Use Map, subject to the followin.q: Text with Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ot:-it:c:~.:rz::F~5 reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal primaril)' in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. single underline or single s::ff~c:hra:cgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth language AGEH[:)A ITF.~ Page 48 of 80 JUN 1 § 2002 A) Receivinq Lends: Race vin.q Lands are those lands within the Rural Fr n,qe Mixed Use District that have been identified as bein.q most appropriate for development and to which residential development units may be transferred from area=; designated as Sendin.q Lands. Based on the evaluation of available data, thesu lands have a lesser de.qree of environmental or listed species habitat value that.! areas designated as Sending and .qenerally have been disturbed throu,qh development, or previous or exist n.q a.qricultural operations. Various incentives arc employed to direct development into Receivinq Lands and away from Sendin~ Lands, thereby maximizinq native veqetation and habitat preservation and restoration. Such incentives include, but are not limited to: the TDR process; clustered development; density bonus incentives; and, provisions for central sewe!..' and water. Within Receivinq Lands, the followinq standards shall apolv, except fo3; those modifications that are identified in the North Belle Meade Overlay: 1. Maximum Density: The base residential density allowable for designated Receivinq 'Lands is one (1) unit per five (5) qross acres (0.2 dwellinq units per acre). The maximum density achievable in Race vin.q Lands throuqh the process is one (1) dwellinq unit per acre. Once the maximum density is achieved throuah the use of TDRs: a densit,v bonus of no more than 10% of the maximunl density Der acre shall be allowed for each additional acre of native veaetatio~l preserved exceedin.a, the minimum preservation reauirements set forth in Policy ' This maximum densit is exclusive of the Densi Blendin' c~;,:~.,~ ,~ .~..~,^,~ ~..;~ '--~'~ Dwellinq Units may only be transferred into Race vinq Lands in whole unit increments {fractional transfers are prohibited).:. 2. Clusterinq: Where the transfer of development r qhts is employed to increase residential density within Receivinq Lands1 such residential development shall bu clustered in accordance with the followinq provisions: a) Consistent with the provisions of the Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Sub- elements of this Plan, central water and sewer shall be extended to the project. Where County sewer or water services may not be available concurrent with development in Receivin,q Lands, interim private water and sewer facilities may be approved. b) The maximum lot size allowable for a single-family detached dwellin.q unit is one acre. c) :The clustered development shall be located on the site so as to provide to the qreatest de.qree practicable: protection for listed species habitati preservation of the highest quality native veqetation; connectivity to adjacent natural reservations or preservation areas on adiacent developments; and, creation1 maintenance or enhancement of wildlife corridors. 3. Minimum Proiect Size: The minimum proiect size required in order to receive transferred dwellinq units is 40 contiguous acres. 4. Emerqency Preparedness: a) In order to reduce the likelihood of threat to life and property from a tropical storm or hurricane event, community facilities1 schools1 or other public build nqs shall be desiqned to serve as storm shelters if located outside Text with single underline or single sr:'i.!:c:.t:rc'.~£.t: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i::c:?::-z'.z[,5 reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language._._ primarih' in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGE. ND_hA ITEM Page 49 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 areas that are likely to be inundated durinq storm events, as indicated on tho Sea, Lake, and Overland Surge from Hurricane Map for Collier County. Impacts on evacuation routes, if any, must be considered as well. Applicants for new residential or mixed use developments proposed for Receiving Lands shall work with the Collier County Emergency Management staff to develop an Emerqency Preparedness Plan to include provisions for storm shelter space, a plan for emergency evacuation, and other provisions that may be deemed appropriate and necessary to mitigate aqainst a potential disaster. b) ADr>licants for new developments proposed for Receiving Lands shall work with the Florida Division of Forestry, Collier County Emergency Management staff, and the Managers of any adjacent or nearby public lands, to develop a Wildfire Prevention and Mitiqation Plan that will reduce the likelihood of threat to life and property from wildfires. This plan will address, at a minimum: project structural desiqn; the use of materials and location of structures so as to reduce wildfire threat; firebreaks and buffers; water features; and, the impacts of prescribed burning on adjacent or nearby lands, Permitted Uses: Uses within Receivinq Lands are limited to the following: a) Agricultural uses such as farminq, ranching, forestry and bee-keeping; b) Single-family residential dwellinq units, including mobile homes where a Mobile Home Zoning Overlay exists. c) Multi-family residential structures shall be permitted under the Residential Clusterin.q provisions of this plan subject to the development of appropriate development standards to ensure that the transitional semi-rural character of the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District is preserved. These development standards include, but are not limited to: buildin.q hei.qhts; desi.qn standards; and, buffers and setbacks. d) Rural Villaqes, subject to the provisions set forth in I1. B.3 of this element. e) Dormitories, duplexes and other types of staff housinq, as may be incidental to; and in support of, ~rc:'!_.d. cd ''~ ccnj'.:.'q.:t!__..". ';:!th conservation uses.=.et=~ L~-nd _'Dc:'_'c!c;m_-'~t c_cdc Group housing uses subject to the following. density/intensity limitations: · Family Care Facilities: 1 unit per 5 acres; · Group Care Facilities and other Care Housin~ Facilities: Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) not to exceed 0.4[;, ,q) Staff housinq as may be incidental to. and in SUpDOrt of. !~ cc~j::2ct!c2 '.'.'!th safety service facilities and essential services, ct c '~"--;';.' !.-. ..... .~ .............. · ;.'!th thc L-'~ LDc'.'cfc~mc.-.t h) Farm labor housing limited to 10 acres in any sinole location: !.-. · Sinole family/duBlex/mobile home: 11 dwellino units per acre: · Multif. a[gjJyLd_o._~nitory: 22 dwellino units/beds per acre, i) Sporting and Recreational camps not to exceed 1 cabin/Iod.ging, unit Der 5 oross acres; cc '~;"~ :- ~_~ ~. .,.~ .~_.:,.. ~,, ..... ,~ ~,. ..~ i .... , Text with single underline or single s:d~c:hrc:cgh r~flects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Gro,t~h Management Plan. Text with double underline or double c:.-i]:::/:rc:.'gh reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal languag~ pritnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGE~--A Page 50 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 i) k) Essential services cs Golf courses or driving ranges, subject to the following standards: (1) The minimum density shall be as follows: (a) For golf course projects utilizing L)ensity Bending Provisions set forth in the Density Rating System of the FLUE: one (1) dwe Ing unit per five (5) .qross acres. {b) For .qolf course projects not utilizing Density Blend ng Provisions, including freestanding ,clolf courses: the minimum density shall one (1) dwellinq unit per five (5) qross acres, and one additional dwellin,q unit per five (5) qross acres for the land area utilized as part of the ,qolf course, includin,cl the clubhouse area, rouqh, fairways, greens, and lakes, but excludinq any area dedicated as conservation, which is non-irriqated and retained in a natural state. The additional required density for such qolf course development shall be achieved by acquirinq TDRs from Sendinq Lands. (2) Golf courses shall be desiqned, constructed, and manaqed in accordance with Audubon Inter, national's Gold Siqnature Program. (3) In order to prevent the contamination of soil, surface water and qround water by the materials stored and handled by qolf course maintenancu operations, golf courses shall comply with the Best Manaqement Practices for Golf Course Maintenance Departments, prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, May 1995. (4) To protect .qround and surface water quality from fertilizer and pesticide usaqe, qolf courses shall demonstrate the fo owin.q mana.qemenL practices: (a) The use of slow release nitrogen sources; (b) The use of soil and plant tissue analysis to adjust t ming and amount of fertilization applications; (c) The use of an integrated pest mana.qement proqram usinq both b olo.qical and chemical a,qents to control various pests; (d) The coordination of pesticide applications with the timinq and application of irri.qation water; (e) The use of the procedure contained in IFAS Circular 1011, Mana.qing Pesticides for Golf Course Maintenance and Water Quality Protection, May 1991 (revised 1995) to select pesticides that will have a minimum adverse impact on water quality (5) To ensure water conservation, golf courses shall incorporate the fo Iowin.q in their desi.qn and operation: (al Irriqation systems shall be desi.qned to use weather station information and moisture-sensin,q systems to determine the optimum amount of irrigation water needed considerinq soil moisture and evapotranspiration rates. (b) As available, qolf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water consistent with Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element Objective 1.4 and its policies; Text with single underline or single c:ri!cc:!:ra'cg!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underh'm' or doul le .............. ,.. reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recomnlendations. AGEI~A ITEM Page 51 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 m) (c) Native plants shall be used exclusively except for special purpose areas such as .qolf greens, fairways, and buildin.q sites. Within these excepted areas, landscaping plans shall require that at least 75% of the trees and 50% of the shrubs be freeze-tolerant native Floridian (6) species. At least 75% of the required native trees and shrubs shall also be drouqht tolerant species. Stormwater management ponds shall be desiqned to mimic the functions of natural systems: by establishinq shorelines that are sinuous in confiquration in order to provide increased lenqth and diversity of the littoral zone. A Littoral shelf shall be established to provide a feedinq area for water dependent avian species. The combined lenqth of vertical and rip-rapped walls shall be limited to 25% of the shoreline. Credits to the site preservation area requirements, on an acre- to- acre basis, shall bP, given for littoral shelves that exceed these littoral shelf area requirements (7) Site preservation and native veqetation retention requirements shall be the same as those set forth ~- thc R'_':c! in CCME Policy 6.1.2. £!t_'c ;.'_'cc_-'.".':t!_'cn These areas are intended to provide habitat functions and shall meet minimum dimensions as set forth in the Land Development Code. These standards shall be established within one year. Commercial development as permitted '_'nd_-'r thc R'-r:! Ccmmc:c!nl ~"~'"~*':^' ^' "':~ ~' .... * ~' as part of an approved Rural Villaqe. Within one year of adoption of these amendments, the County will develop appropriate standards for commercial development within Rural Villaqes, with particular focus on desiqn, scale, and access provisions that will maintain the rural character or semi-rural character of the District. Research and TbchnoloRy Parks. consistent with the Research and Technolo(3v Park Subdistrict provided for in the Urban designation, and within an approved Rural Villaqe. Within one year of adoption of these amendments, the County will develop appropriate standards for Research and Technoloqy Parks within Rural Villaqes, with particular focus on desiqn, scale, and access provisions that will maintain the rural character or semi- rural character of the District. n) Zoo, aquarium1 botanical qarden, or other similar uses. o) Public and private schools, subject to the followinq criteria: · Site area and school size shall be subject to the General Educational Facilities Report submitted annually by the Collier County School Board to the Board of County Commissioners. · The Site must comply with the State Requirements for Educational Facilities adopted by the State Board of Education. · The site shall be subject to all applicable State or Federal requlations. p) Facilities for the collection, transfer, processin.q and reduction of solid waste. q) Community facilities, such as, places of worship, child care facilities, cemeteries, social and fraternal orqanizations. r) Sports instructional schools and camps. s) Earth-mining, oil :Md m!.".~ra! extraction and related processinq. Text with single underline or single c:H!;c:.a, rc',;gP, reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:.-i.~:c:~rc;;~.': reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recommendations. -- AGENOA ITEM Page 52 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 t) Asphalt and concrete batch-makino plants. Density Blendin,q: Subject to the provisions set forth in the density ratin,q system. Open Space and Native Ve,qetation Preservation Requirements: a) Usable Open Space: Within ReceivinR Lands projects .qreater than 40 acres in size shall provide a minimum of 70% usable open space. Usable Open Space includes active or passive recreation areas such as parks, playarounds, .qolf courses, waterways, lakes, nature trails, and other simila, open spaces. Usable Open Space shall also include areas set aside fo, conservation or preservation of native ve,qetation and landscape areas. Opef l water beyond the perimeter of the site, street ri,qht-of-way, except where dedicated or donated for public uses, driveways, off-street parkinR and Ioadin,q areas, shall not be counted towards required Usable Open Space. b Native Ve etation Preservation: Native--on shall be reserved as set forth in ' ~ Neutral Lands: Neutral Lands have been identified for limited semi-rural residential development. Available data indicates that Neutral Lands have a hi.qher ratio ol native ve,qetation, and thus hiqher habitat values, than lands desiqnated a~ Recevn,q Lands, but these values do not approach those of Send n,q Lands. Therefore, these lands are appropriate for limited development, if such development is directed away from existinq native ve,qetation and habitat. A lower maximum ,qross density is prescribed for Neutral Lands when compared to Receivin,q Lands. Additionally, certain other uses permitted within Rece vin.q Lands are not authorized in Neutral Lands. Within Neutral Lands, the followinq standards shall aDDIv; 1. Maximum Density: I dwellin,q unit per 5 .qross acres (0.2 units per acre). 2. Clusterin.q: Clusterinq of residential development is allowed and encoura.qed. Where clustered development is employed, it shall be in accordance with thu followin.q provisions: a/ If within the boundaries of the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District, and consistent with the provisions of the Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Sub- elements of this Plan, central water and sewer shall be extended to the project. Where County sewer or water services may not be available concurrent with development in Neutral Lands, interim private water and sewer facilities may be approved. b/ The maximum lot size is one acre. c) The clustered development shall be located on the site so as to provide to the qreatest degree practicable: protection for listed species habitat; preservation of the hiqhest quality native vegetation; connectivity to adjacent natural reservations or preservation areas on adjacent developments; and, creation, maintenance or enhancement of wildlife corridors. d) The minimum project size shall be at least 40 acres. 3. Permitted Uses: a) Agricultural uses such as farminq, ranchinq, forestry and bee-keeping; b) Single-family residential dwelin,q units, includinq mobile homes where a Mobile Home Zoninq Overlay exists. Managentent Plan. Text with double underlitic or double s::'i.':c::::'c:'g5 reflects proposed changes to the Transmitta~l primarily itt response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 53 of 80 Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:!:rc'.~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth · language JUN 1 8 2002 c) Dormitories, duplexes and other types of staff housinq, as may be incidental to.. and in SUDDOFt.. of, ,-~ ...... .... ~'"^"_ ..."" __.'o'_nj' 'n:t!cn ;':ith conservation uses,=~=a e) f) h) i) Land D'c'.'c!c;mcnt Codo Grouo housing uses subject to the followinq densit.v/intensitv limitatior~8: · Family Care Facilities: 1 unit per 5 acres; · Group Care Facilities and other Care Housino Facilities: Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) not to exceed 0.45. Staff housinq as may be incidental to. and in suooort of, ;- _-'_-'nj"nct!cn '.':!th safety service facilities and essential service~, ct - d--.nc!t7 ''- '::!th th__. L~_nd D__.'.'c!_-'~m__.nt Codo; Farm labor housin.q limited to 10 acres in any sinole location: · Sinole family/duplex/mobile home: 11 dwelline units Der acre; · Multifamily/dormitorv: 22 dwellin.o, units/beds per acre, Sportin.q and Recreational camps, not to exceed I cabin/lodging unit per _r2c'.'c!s;mc~t Gsa:lo. Essential services cc d_--f!~_--__. !n thc Land ~c:"c!c;mont Coda. Golf courses or driving ran.qes, subject to the followinq standards: (1) Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and manaqed in accordance with Audubon International's Gold Siqnature Pro.qram. {2) In order to prevent the contamination of soil, surface water and ground water by the materials stored and handled by qolf course maintenance operations, .qolf courses shall comply with the Best Manaqement Practices for Golf Course Maintenance Departments, prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, May 1995. (3) To protect .qround and surface water quality from fertilizer and pesticide usaqe, .qolf courses shall demonstrate the followinq manaqement practices: (a) The use of slow release nitroqen sources; (b) The use of soil and plant tissue analysis to adiust timinq and amount of fertilization applications; (c) The use of an integrated pest manaqement proqram usinq both biolo¢l, ical and chemical aqents to control various pests; {d) The coordination of pesticide applications with the timin.q and application of irriqation water; {e) The use of the procedure contained in IFAS Circular 1011, Mana.qin.q Pesticides for Golf Course Maintenance and Water Quafity Protection, May 1991 (revised 1995) to select pesticides that will have a minimum adverse impact on water quality J4) To ensure water conservation, ,qolf courses shall incorporate the followinq in their desiqn and operation: (a) Irri~ation systems shall be desiqned to use weather station information and moisture-sensinq systems to determine the optimum Text with single underline or single c:/.!:c:hrc:~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Managetnent Pla.. Text with double undetqitt¢ or double c::i.rcc:.':rc:~g]: reflects proposed changes to the Transm~ iai laneuav._~ _ primari(v in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 54 of 80 JUN 1 8 2lJ0 (5) (6) (b) (c) amount of irrigation water needed considering soil moisture and evapotranspiration rates. As available, golf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water consistent with Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element Objective 1.4 and its policies; Native plants shall be used exclusively except for special purpose areas such as golf greens, fairways, and building sites. Within these excepted areas, landscaping plans shall require that at least 75% of the trees and 50% of the shrubs be freeze-tolerant native Floridian species. At least 75% of the required native trees and shrubs shall also be drouqht tolerant species. Stormwater management ponds shall be desiqned to mimic the functions of natural systems: by establishinq shorelines that are sinuous in confiquration in order to provide increased length and diversity of the littoral zone. A Littoral shelf shall be established to provide a feedin.q area for water dependent avian species. The combined length of vertical and rip-rapped walls shall be limited to 25% of the shoreline. Credits to the site preservation area requirements, on an acre- to- acre basis, shall be given for littoral shelves that exceed these littoral shelf area requirements Site preservation and native vegetation retention requirements shall be the same as those set forth in the Rural Frin,qe Mixed Use District criteria. Site preservation areas are intended to provide habitat functions and shall meet minimum dimensions as set forth in the Land Development Code. These standards shall be established within one year. j) Zoo, aquarium, botanical garden, or other similar uses. k) Public and private schools, subject to the fol owing criteria: · Site area and school size shall be subiect to the General Educational Facilities Report submitted annually by the Collier County School Board to the Board of County Commissioners. · The Site must comply with the State Requirements for Educational Facilities adopted by the State Board of Education. · The site shall be subject to all applicable State or Federal requlations. I) Facilities for the collection, transfer, processing and reduction of solid waste. m) Community facilities, such as, places of worship, child care facilities, cemeteries, social and fraternal organizations. n) Sports instructional schools and camps. O) Earthmining. oil extraction and related processing. 3. Native veqetation and preservation requirements: Native vecletation shall be preserved as set forth in thc Ccnccr.'ct!cr. "'nd C-'_cct-'! Mcnc.q'cmcnt 5!c.m. cr.t 1~,ie~.,6.,-7-,,4, CCME Policy 6.1.2 C) Sending Lands: Sending Lands are those lands that have the hi,clhest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and Renerally include significant wetlands, uplands, and habitat for listed species. Scnd!n.q I "~'~ cr ..... ~ ............... ~ Text with single underline or single s:ri~c:hroagh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'i.';c:.~::-cxS:: re, fleets proposed changes to tire Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. A ~ ~T~Q::~A ITEM Page 55 of 80 No. _'~ JUN 1 8 2002 1. ;;k4mae¢ Sending Lands are located entirely within the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District, and are depicted on the Future Land Use Map. Based upon their location, ~ Sendinq Lands are the principal target for preservation and conservation. Private Property owners of lands desiqnated as ,~ Sending Lands may transfer density to Receivinq Lands within the Rural Frin.qe Mixed Use District, and to lands within the Urban Desiqnated Area subject to limitations set forth in the Density Rating System. All privately owned lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District that have a Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) Overlay are designated ~ Sending Lands. ,3_2. Maximum Transfer Rate: Dwelling Units may be transferred from ~ Sendinq Lands at a maximum rate of 0.2 dwelling units per acre (1 dwellinq unit per five acres) n .... ,,~ ,,~, ..... ~.~ , .... , .... .~ ~.~ ~ .... .~ .... ~.~ ~Transfers may only occur in whole number increments (fractional transfers are prohibited). In the case of legal nonconforminq lots or parcels in existence as of June 22, 1999, where such lot or parcel is less than 5 acres in size, one dwellin~ unit may be transferred from said lot or parcel. To ensure appropriate compensation to land owners within Sendinq Lands, the Board of County Commissioners may adjust the maximum transfer rate: such an adjustment shall require a Gro~h Management Plan Amendment. The basis of such adjustment shall be an analysis of prope~y values within Sendinq Lands, and may include consideration of proximiW of such prope~ies to the urban area. ~. Limitations and Procedures: a} Transfers shall not be allowed from sendinq lands where a conse~ation easement or other similar development restriction prohibits residential development. b) The transfer of units shall be recorded in public records utilizinq a leqal instrument determined to be appropriate by the County Attorney's Office. Said instrument shall clearly state the remaininq allowable lands uses on the subject property after all, or a portion, of the residential density has been transferred from the property. Text with single underline or single s:ril~c:hrc.:~g/: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growtt~ Management Plan, Text with double underli~le or double z:rJ/:c:/:r£:.'g.~: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal languag~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations, AGENDA ITEk4 Page 56 of 80 No. '~ JUN 1 8 2002 c) Where residential density has been transferred from Sending Lands, such lands may be retained in private ownership or may be sold or deeded by gift to another entity. _64_. Permitted Uses: Permitted uses '::!th!n Prlmcr'; are limited to the following: a) Agricultural uses .... ~' "" ~"'~: ...... ":"~ ~ .... *-. '-~ ' .... ~-~ consistent with Chapter 823.14(6) Florida Statutes (Florida Right to Farm Act). b) Detached single-family dwelling units, incuding mobile homes where the Mobile Home Zoning Overlay exists, at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per 40 acres or one dwelling unit per lot or parcel of less than 40 acres, which existed on or before June 22, 1999. For the purpose of this provision, a lot or parcel which is deemed to have been in existence on or before June 22, 1999 is 1) a lot or parcel which is part of a subdivision recorded in the public records of Collier County, Florida; or 2) a lot or parcel which has limited fixed boundaries, described by metes and bounds or other specific legal description, the description of which has been recorded in the public records of Collier County Florida on or before June 22, 1999; or 3) a lot or parcel which has limited fixed boundaries, for which an agreement for deed was executed prior to June 22, 1999. c) Habitat preservation and conservation uses. d) Passive parks and other passive recreational uses. e) Sporting and Recreational camps, within which the Iodaina component shall not ~ exceed 1 ~ unit per 4.~ 5 qross acres, ac dof!ncd !'~'~'1 2'~'d 2t f) Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses identified in Section 5.a) throuqh 5.e) such as the following: private wells and septic tanks; utility lines, except sewer lines; :c:'::gs !!fi __.t:t!cn end sewer lines and lift stations, only if located within already cleared portions of existing rig. hts-of-wa.v or easements, necessary to serve the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District; and, water pumpinq stations necessary to serve the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District~ g) Oil extraction and related processing; only where directionat-drillin~ techniques~ cannot be utilized to access the resource from outside of the Sending Lands. If directional drilling is determined not to be feasible due to the location of the resource within the Sending Landsr. then the resource may be accessed from previously cleared or disturbed areas (see CCME Policy o Conditional Uses: a) The following uses are conditionally permitted subject to approval throuqh a public hearinq process: (1) Essential services not identified above in 5f) cc del!nc__. ~- thc '-' .... ' ..... ~ '"-"~ Within one year, Collier County will review ~ cc.".d!t!__.xc!!',' ~crm!ttc-'_ essential services currently allowed in the Land DeveloPment Code and will define those uses intended to be Text with single underline or single s:rikc:!:ra:~£!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan, Text with double underline or double z::i~.:c:5:zzZ/: reflects proposed changes to the Transnzittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGF.'N~A ITEM Page 57 of 80 I~. JUN 1 8 2002 b) 7. Where Lands, a) b) d) conditionally permitted in Sendinq designated lands. Durin,q this one-year period or if necessary, until a comprehensive plan amendment identifyinp conditionally permitted essential services, no conditional uses for essential services within Sending desi,qnated lands shall be approved. (2) Public facilities, includin.q solid waste and resource recovery facilities, and public vehicle and equipment stora.qe and repair facilities, shall be permitted within Section 25, Township 64~49S, Ran,qe 26E, on lands adjacent to the existin.q County landfill. This shall not be interpreted to allow for the exBansion of the landfill into Section 25 for the DUrDOSe of solid waste disposal, (3) Oil "nd m!n=:al oxtraction and related processin,a, where clearing of existina native veaetation is necessary freference 5.aL above~ {'4) Commercial uses accessory to permitted uses 5.a), 5.c) and 5.d), such as retail sales of produce accessory to farming, or a restaurant accessory to a park or preserve, so Ion,q as restrictions or limitations are imposed to insure the commercial use functions as an accessory, subordinate use. In addition to the criteria set forth in the Land Development Code, Conditional Uses shall be allowed subject to the followinq additional criteria: (1) The applicant shall submit a plan for development that demonstrates that wetlands, listed species and their habitat are adequately protected. This plan shall be part of the required ElS as specified in Policy ~ 6.1,7 of the Conservation and Coastal Manaqement Element. Conditions may be imposed, as deemed appropriate, to limit the size, location, and access to the conditional use. residential density is transferred from Pr!mc."',' c: Sccc~d2."',' Sendinq allowable uses shall be limited to the following: A~iricultural uses consistent with Chapter 823.14(6) Florida Statutes (Florida Right to Farm Act), including water manaqement facilities, to the extent and intensity that such operations exist at the date of any transfer of development rights. Cattle qrazin.q on unimproved pasture where no clearing is required; Detached sinqle-family dwellinq units, including mobile homes where the Mobile Home Zoninq Overlay exists, at a maximum density of one dwellin.q unit per 40 acres. In order to retain these development ri.qhts after any transfer, up to one dwellinq must be retained {not transferred) per 40 acres. One detached dwellinq unit, includinq mobile homes where the Mobile Home Zoning Overlay exists, per each preexisting lot or parcel of less than 40 acres. For the purpose of this provision, a preexistinq lot or parcel is one that was in existence on or before June 22, 1999 and is: 1) a lot or parcel which is part of a subdivision recorded in the public records of Collier County, Florida; or 2) a lot or parcel which has limited fixed boundaries, described by metes and bounds or other specific le,qal description, the description of which has been recorded in the public records of Collier County Florida on or before June 22, 1999; or 3) a lot or parcel which has limited fixed boundaries, for which an a.qreement for deed was executed prior to June 22, 1999. In order primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 58 of 80 Text with single, underline or single c:ri.!;c:.a, ro:~£,a. reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. fexl with double underline or double ::ri:cc:.~:r::~]: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language AGENDA ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 7. Native Veqetation shall be preserved as set forth in thc to retain these development ri,qhts after any transfer, up to one dwellin,q must be retained (not transferred) per each lot or parcel. e) Habitat preservation and conservation uses. f) Passive parks and passive recreational uses. ,q) Essential services, as authorized in Sendin,q Lands. h) Oil ch'J_ m!.".__.;c! extraction and related processin,q, excludin.q earth m nin.q, if a Conditional Use for such is approved.=. ,,..,.,,.,,.,,_, ,~, ,..,.q , r--, .... , D~,:%. ~ ", '~ CCME Policy 6.1.2. .......... :.._ cm_-'.". ........... Adjustment to the Sendin,q Land Boundaries. Under the followinq conditions, adjustments may be made to Sendin.q Land boundaries: a) A property is 40 acres or less in size and is desiRnated SendinR; b) The property is conti,cluous to Neutral or Receivinq Lands; c) Site specific environmental data submitted by the property owner indicates that the subject property does not contain characteristics warranting a Sendinq desi,qnation; d) An adjustment to the Sending land boundary requires an amendment to the Future Land Use Map. D) Additional TDR Provisions: Within one year of adoption of this plan amendment, Collier County will amend its land development re.qulations to adopt a formal process for authorizin,q and trackin,q the Transfer of Development Ri,qhts. This process will include, at a minimum: 1. The establishment of a simple, expeditious process whereby private property owners may, by riqht, "sell" residential dwellinq units from lands desiqnated as "Sendin,q Lands". Said units may then be "transferred" by riqht to lands desiqnated as "Receivin.q Lands". or to Urban Lands where authorized. Once established, the TDR proqram shall be administratively reviewed and approved, requirin.q no further public hearin.q or Board approval if consistent with the provisions for administrative approval. 2. The establishment of a process for trackinq and recordinq all transfers of residential units in the public records of Collier County. This shall include the identification of the entity or department responsible for on-.qoinq administration of the TDR pro.qram. In addition, the County shall consider the feasibility of establishin.q a "TDR Bank," to be administered by the County or some other not- for-profit qovernmental or quasi-governmental public a.qency established for this purpose. As part of these considerations, proiections for an annual bud.qet for administration of the TDR proqram shall be developed which would include the projected costs and fundinq associated with initial purchase of residential development ri,qhts. 3. The establishment of a process to evaluate the TDR pro,qram and the de.qree to which it is beinq utilized, culminatin.q in an annual report to the Board of County Commissioners on the Rural Frin,qe Mixed Use District TDR pro,qram. 4. The TDR process shall be the only mechanism to achieve increased density within Receivin.q Lands, excludinq the Density Blendin.q provisions of this Plan, and any density bonuses authorized in the Rural Frin,qe Mixed Use District. Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:hra.'.cgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double under/mc or double z::-?.:c:.~:rczg~ reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal langu._a_g..c, primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENOA ITEM Page 59 of 80 No. JUN 1 8 2002 5. A 25-year prohibition on utilizinq TDRs where a parcel within Sending Lands has been cleared for agricultural ~"~" ~ . purposes, ...... :'.'_ after June ~.,318, 2002. Buffers Adjacent to Maior Public Riqhts-of-wa¥: In order to maintain and enhance the rural character within the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District, within one year of adoption of this amendment, Collier County will adopt land development requlations establishing buffering standards for developments adjacent to existing or proposed arterial and collector public roadways. These standards shall include, but are not limited to: applicability provisions, includin.q establishin.q a minimum project size below which these requirements shall not apply; the degree to which water features, includin.q water manaqement lakes and canals, may be a part of this buffer; credits for existing native ve.qetation that is to be retained; and, credits toward any open space and native veqetation preservation requirements. Rural Villages: Rural Villaqes may be approved within the boundaries of the Rural Frin.qe Mixed Use District in order to: maximize the preservation of natural areas and wildlife habitat within the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District; to reduce the need for residents of the District and surrounding lands to travel to the County's Urban area for work, recreation, shopping, and education; and, to enhance the provision of limited urban and rural levels of service through economies of scale. Rural Villages shall be comprised of several neighborhoods designed in a compact nature such that a ma!ority of residential development is within one quarter mile of Neig. hborhood Centers, Neighborhood Centers may include small scale service retail and office uses; and shall include a public Dark. sauare, or areen. Village Centers shall be designed to serve the retail, office; civic., government uses and service needs of the residents of the village. The Village Center shall be the primary location for commercial uses, Villages shall be surrounded by a green belt in order to protect the character of the rural landscape and to provide separation between villages and the Iow density rural development., agricultural uses~ and conservation lands that may surround the village. Villages shall be designed to include the following: a mixture of residential housinq types; institutional uses; commercial uses; and, recreational uses, all of which shall be sufficient to serve the residents of the Villa.qe and the surroundinq lands. '-' .... ' ~:" ..... ~'~'~ ~' ''~ ........ ' '~;~*;~? .... ,"1 ...........1 ..... ~ .... "1 .....,"I .......... !ccct!c.". f__.r ccmmc;c!-'! ~ccc. In addition, the following criteria and conditions shall apply, except for those modifications that are identified in the North Belie Meade Overlay: A) Process for Approval: Within one year of the date of adoption of this amendment, the Collier County Land Development Code shall be amended to include provisions for the establishment of Rural Villages. These provisions will establish specific development requlationsl standards, and land use mix requirements. Subsequent to the creation of these provisions, applications shall be submitted in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezone and, where applicable1 in coniunction with a Development of Reqional Impact (DRI) application as provided for in Chapter 380 of Florida Statutes, or in conjunction with any other Florida provisions of law that may supercede the DRI process. Text with single underline or single s:rlkcthr:.~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::i~.:c:~.::czg.~. reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. ~.. Page 60 of 80 2002 B) Locational Restrictions: 1, A Rural Vila,qe mc;' shall not be located any closer than 3.0 miles from another Rural Village. 2. No more than one Rural Villa(]e may be located in each of the distinct Receivin(] Areas de[~icted on the FLUM. 3. A Rural Villa(]e shall have direct access to a roadway classified by Collier County as an arterial or collector roadway. Alternatively; access to thc Villaoe may be via a new collector roadway directly accessin(] an existina arterial, the cost of which shall be borne entirely bv the developer. 4. A Rural Villa(]e shall be located where other oublic infrastructure, such as potable water and sewer facilities: already exist or are olanned. C) Rural Villaqe Sizes and Density: 1. Rural Villa.qes shall be a minimum of 300 acres and a maximum of 1,500 acres, except within Receivin,q Lands south of the Belle Meade NRPA where the maximum size may not exceed 2,500 acres. The Rural Villaqe size is exclusive of the required green belt area. Rural Villages shall include a V Ila.qe Center and a minimum of two distinct neighborhoods. 2. The minimum and maximum qross density of a Rural Village shall be 2.0 units per .qross acre and 3.0 units per acre, respectively. The density calculation for a Rural Vllaqe may include the base residential density permitted for the qreen belt area, if such density is shifted to the Rural Villaqe area. 3. Density may be achieved as follows: a) The base density for the Agricultural/Rural Desiqnation of 0.2 dwelling units per acre (1.0 dwelling units per five acresl for lands within the Rural Village, and the land area desiqnated as a greenbelt surroundinq the Rural V Ilaqel is .qranted by right for allocation within the designated Rural Villa.qe. b) The additional density necessary to achieve the minimum required density for a Rural Villaqe shall be achieved by an equal amount of TDRs and bonus units. That is, for each TDR acquired one bonus unit shall be granted. c) Additional density between the minimum and maximum amounts established herein may be achieved through TDRs, and/or through a 0.b unit bonus for each unit that is provided for lower income residents and for entry level and workforce buyers,, and/or through a densit.v bonus of r~o more than 10% of the maximum density per acre allowed for each additional acre of native ve(]etation [~reserved exceedino the minimum preservation requirements set forth in Policy 6,1.2 of the CCME. D) Land Use Mix: 1. Acreag. e Limitations a) Neiohborhood Center - 0.5% of the total Villaoe acreaoe, not to exceed 10 acres, within each Nei(]hborhood Center. b) Nei.qhborhood Center Commercial - Not to exceed 40% of the Neiohborhood ~ and 8,.500 square feet of (]ross leasable floor area per acre. c) Village Center - Not to exceed 10% of the total Villaoe acreaoe. Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:P, ro'.~g,t: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text ~'ith double t4nderlme or double z::'iJ;c:~.:rc'.~g:: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal language primarily in response to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM Page 61 of 80 No. ~ 2002 d) Village Center Commercial - Not to exceed 30% of the Village Center acreage and 10;000 square feet of gross leasable floor area per acre. e) Research and Technology Parks - Consistent with the provisions of the Research and Technology Park Subdistrict in the Urban Mixed Use District. excluding paragraph !.; the Park shall not exceed 4% of the total Villaae aoreaae. f) Civic Uses and Public Parks - Minimum of 15% of the total Village acreaae. E) Open Space and Environmental Protection: 1. Greenbelts: In addition to the requirements for parks, village greens, and other open space within the Rural Villaqe, a greenbelt averaqin.q 500 feet in width but not less than 300 feet in width, shall be required at the perimeter of the Rural Village. The Greenbelt is required to ensure a permanent un-developable ed.qe surrounding the Rural Villaqe, thereby discouraqinq sprawl. Greenbelts ma,¥.shall only be designated on Receivinq Lands. The allowable residential density shall be shifted from the designated Greenbelt to the Rural Villaqe. The greenbelt may be concentrated to a qreater deqree in areas where it is necessary to protect listed species habitat, includinq wetlands and uplands, provide for a buffer from adjacent natural reservations, or provide for wellfield or aquifer protection, Golf courses and ex sting agriculture operations are permitted within the qreenbelt, subject to the native veqetation preservation requirements specified below in paragraph 2. However: oolf course turf areas shall f4r,~ only be located within 100 feet of the Greenbelt boundaries (interior and exterior boundary); further, these turf areas shall only be located in previously cleared, or disturbed areas (see CCME Policy 6.1.2(1Y~. '::!th!~ thc G:cc.-.bc!t thct crc 2. Open Space and Native Veqetation Retention. a) Native Vegetation shall be preserved as set forth in the Conservation and Coastal Manaqement Element Policy ~6.1.2. b) Open Space: Within the Rural Villaqe and required Greenbelt, in ag.qre.qate, a minimum of 70% of Open Space shall be provided. 3. An environmental impact statement for the Rural Villaqe and surroundinq greenbelt area shall be submitted an accordance with Policy ~ 6.1.7 of the CCME. P'--'b!!: Fcc!!!t!cc 2~d Ec.".'!ccc Fiscal Neutrality: A Rural Village may only be approved after demonstration that the Village will be fiscally neutral to county taxoa.vers outside of the Village. 1. An analysis shall be conducted and submitted in coniunction with the PUD rezone and/or DRI application evaluatinq the demand and impacts on levels of service for public facilities and the cost of such facilities and services necessary to serve the Rural Villaqe. This evaluation shall identify projected revenue sources for services and any capital improvements that may be necessary to support the Village. Additionally; this analysis shall demonstrate that the costs of providing necessaW facilities and services shall be fiscally neutral to County taxpayers outside of the Village. At a minimum, the analvsis shall consider the followin,q: a) Stormwater/drainaqe facilities; Text with single, underline or single s:ril~c:hrcu£,a, reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Gro:a'th Management Plan. Text with double under/me or double z:~J:c:/:rz:;g:: reflects proposed cha~ges to the Tra~smitta/ language primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AC~I~ A ITr~" Page 62 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 b) Potable water provisions and facilities; c) Reuse or "Grey" water provisions for irriqation; d) Central sewer provisions and facilities; e) Park facilities; f) Law enforcement facilities; g) School facilities; h) Roads, transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities and pathways; i) Solid Waste facilities. 2. Development Dhasino and fundino mechanisms to address any impacts to level of service in accordance with the County's adooted concurrency manaoement Drooram. Accordin(]ly. there shall be no deoradation to the adopted level of ~service for public facilities and infrastructure identified above. ~G) As part of the development of Rural Village provisions, land development regulations shall identify specific design and development standards for residential, commercial and other uses. These standards shall protect and promote a Rural Village character and shall include requirements for parks, qreens, squares, and other public places. In addition to the public spaces required as a part of a Village Center or N~eiqhborhood Center. Rural Villages shall incorporate a Village Park and neighborhood parks. In addition, the followinq shall be addressed: 1. Rural Village, Village Center and neighborhood desiqn quidelines and development standards: · A formal street layout, using primarily a qrid desiqn and incorporatinq village qreens, squares and civic uses as focal points. · Neighborhoods and the villaqe center will be connected through local and collector streets and shall incorporate traffic calming techniques as may be appropriate to discourage high-speed traffic. · Consideration shall be qiven to the location of public transit and school bus stops. · Pedestrian paths and bikeways shall be designed so as to provide access and interconnectivity. · The siting of both schools and housing units within the village shall consider the minimization of businq needs within the community. · Each Rural Villaqe shall be served by a binary road system that is accessible by the public and shall not be gated. The road system within the village shall be designed to meet County standards and shall be dedicated to the public. · A Rural Village shall not be split by an arterial roadway. · Interconnection between the Rural Villaqe and adiacent developments shall be encouraged. 2. Specific allocations for land uses including residential1 commercial and other non-residential uses within Rural Villages, shall include, but are not limited to: · A mixture of housinq types, includinq single-family attached and detached, as well as multi-family. Housing that is provided for lower income residents and for entry level and workforce buyers shall receive a credit of 0.5 units for each unit constructed. Collier County shall develop, as part of the Rural Village Overlay, a methodology for determining the rental and fee-simple Text with single underline or single striJ;c:,t:.rc::$h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ~t:-~.:c:k:-c.:cg~.: reflects proposed changes to tire Transmitt, 1 primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEI~ Page 63 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 market rates that will qualify for such a credit, and a system for trackinq such credits. · A mixture of recreational uses, includin.q parks and villa(3e (~reens. · Civic, community, and other institutional uses. · A mixture of lot sizes, with a desi.qn that includes more compact development and attached dwellin.q units within nei.qhborhood centers and the Villa.qe Center, and reduced net densities and increasin.qly lar.qer lot sizes for detached residential dwellinqs .qenerally occurrinq as development extends outward from the Villa.qe Centers. · A mixture of retail, office, and services uses. Specific development standards, includin.q but not limited to, maximum net densities; required yards; landscapinq and bufferin.q, and buildinq heiqhts. If requested by the Collier County School Board durinq the PUD and/or DRI review process, school sites shall be provided and shall be located to serve a maximum number of residential dwellinq units within walkinq distance to the schools. Accordin.o. ly: schools: if re(]uested, shall be located within or adjacent to the Village Center. Where a school site is requested and provided, a credit toward any applicable school impacts fees shall be provided based upon an independent evaluation/appraisal of the value of the land and/or improvements provided by the developer. Exemptions from the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District Development Standards - ~ ~rc:'!dcd for !.". thc F!.-."! O:dc:, ~T~he requirements of this District shall not apply to, affect or limit the continuation of existincl uses. Existin,q uses shall include: those uses for which all required permits were issued prior to June 18. 2002; ,==or ~ projects four which a Conditional use or Rezone petition has been approved by the County prior to June 18. 2002: .... ,~,~.4 --~;!!c2t!cnc .......... "'~"' or. land use oetitions for which a completed application has been submitted and which have been determined to be vested from the requirements of the Final Order by thc C:'..:'~ty prior to ~ 1~. The continuation of existinq uses shall include expansions of those uses if such expansions are consistent with or clearly ancillary to the existin.q uses. Hereafter, such previously approved developments shall be deemed to be consistent with the Plan's Goals, Objectives and Policies and for the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District, and they may be built out in accordance with their previously approved plans. Chan.qes to these previous approvals shall also be deemed to be consistent with the Plan's Goals, Policies and Objectives for the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District as Ionq as they do not result in an increase in development density or intensity. (I) BC. Rural - Industrial District The Rural - Industrial District, which encompasses approximately ce4~ 900 acres of existing industrial areas outside of Urban designated areas, is intended, and shall be reserved, for industrial type uses, subject to the Interim Development Provisions. Besides basic Industrial uses, limited commercial uses are permitted. Retail commercial uses are prohibited, except as accessory to Industrial uses. The C-5 Commercial Zoning District on the perimeter of lands designated Rural - Industrial District, as of October 1997, shall be deemed consistent with this Land Use District. All industrial areas shall have direct access to a road classified as an arterial Text with single underline or single s::ff.~c:hrc'.:gh re. flects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Managetnent Plan. Text with double underline or double ~::-!J:::.~:::.::~.: reflects proposed changes to the Tran,. primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. A~A ITEM Page 64 of 80 JUN 1 8 200, or collector in the Traffic Circulation Element, or access may be provided via a local road that does not service a predominately residential area. No new industrial land uses shall be permitted in the Area of Critical State Concern. For the purposes of interpreting this policy, oil and gas exploration, drilling, and production ("oil extraction and related processing") shall not be deemed to be industrial land uses and shall continue to be regulated by all applicable federal, state, and local laws. Intensities of use shall be those related to: ao Manufacturing; Processing; Storage and warehousing; Wholesaling; Distribution; Hiah technoloav; Laboratories: Assemblv: Computer and data orocessina; Business services; Other basic industrial uses as described in the Industrial Zoning District in the Land Development Code; Business Park uses as discussed below and as described in the Business Park Zonina District of me Land Development Code; and. Support commercial uses, such as child care centers and restaurants. (V)¢D. Rural - Settlement Area District This District consists of Sections 13, 14, 23, 24, and a portion of 22, Township 48 South, Range 27 East (the former North Golden Gate Subdivision), which was zoned and platted between 1967 and 1970. In settlement of a lawsuit pertaining to the permitted uses of this property, this property has been "vested" for the types of land uses specified in that certain "PUD by Settlement" zoning granted by the County as referenced in that certain SETTLEMENT AND ZONING AGREEMENT dated the 27th day of January, 1986. This Settlement Area is commonly known as Orangetree PUD. Refer to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan for permitted uses and standards. III. ESTATES DESIGNATION The Estates Land Use Designation encompasses lands which are already subdivided into semi-rural residential parcels (2.25 acres as an average) essentially consisting of the Golden Gate Estates Subdivision. The area is identified as having potential for population growth far removed from supportive services and facilities. Expansion of the area shall be discouraged. Pursuant to Policy 4.1 of the Future Land Use Element, the Golden Gate Area Master Plan encompassing the Estates Designation was adopted by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners on February 5, 1991. Refer to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan for siting criteria and development standards for specific land uses. Text with single underline or single s::'i!:c:hro'.:gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plat~. Text with double underline or double z::'i.~:::/:::.'.~.~. reflects proposed changes to the Transminal_languagc primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGE~'A tTl~, Page 65 of 80 I'~. ~ JUN 1 8 2002 O) V. CONSERVATION DESIGNATION The overall purpose of the Conservation Designation is to conserve and maintain the natural resources of Collier County and their associated environmental, and recreational and economic~ benefits. All native habitats possess ecological and physical characteristics that justify attempts to maintain these important natural resources. Barrier Islands, coastal bays, ~ wetlands, and habitat for listed species deserve particular attention because of their ecological value and their sensitivity to perturbation. It is because of this that all proposals for development in the Conservation Designation must be subject to rigorous review to ensure that the impacts of the development do not destroy or unacceptably degrade the inherent functional values. The Conservation Designation is intended to protect certain vital natural resource areas of the County, which are primarily owned, pdmad!:,', by the public, although private in-holdings and privately owned conservation areas do exist. This Designation includes such areas as Everglades National Park, Big Cypress National Preserve, Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve, Collier-Seminole State Park, Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Recreation Area, and the National Audubon Society's Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary (privately owned). The boundaries of the Conservation Designation may periodically change as properties are acquired by public entities or private land mana.qement or conservation ,qroups. Natural resource protection strateqies and Sstandards for development in the Conservation Designation are found in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and the County's Land Development Regulations. The Conservation Designation will accommodate limited residential development and future non-residential uses. The following uses are~.v, .... ,,,,..v~ authorized in this Designation=, subject tc thc !ntcrim Dcvc!cpmcnt Prc,;!sicnc idcntif!cd in thc a. For privately held lands. ~ingle family dwelling units, and mobile homes where the Mobile Home Zoning Overlay exists, at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per five gross acres, or one dwelling unit per 3 gross acres for private in-holdings within the Big Cypress National Prese~e - each dwelling unit must be physically situated on a minimum five acre parcel, or minimum 3 acre parcel for private in-holdings within the Big Cypress National Prese~e. This Plan does not allow residential density on publicl~ owned lands. b. For publicl~ and privately held lands. ~ormitories, duplexes and other ~ t~pes of housing, as may be incidental to. and in suppo~ of. prey!dod ~n 33~ju~ot~3~ v.'~th conse~ation uses, at a dc~c~ty ~_~ ..... ............. ~ ....... ~'~ ~+..._ .... permitted ~ *~ _~..~' c. Group housing uses ct c dcncffy '~ 2cscrdcnc3 ':.'fth thct po:mitred in thc Lend ~ ....' ..... ' ~ subject to the followine density/intensity limitations: · Famil~ Care Facilities: 1 unit per 5 acres: · Group Care Facilities and other Care Housine Facilities: Maximum Floor Area Ratio fFAR) not to exceed 0.45.; Text with single, underline or single str~!:c:,a, rc=g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Pla~. Text with double u~zderlme or double :::L~;c.:.'-.:-:.'.:~J: reflects proposed cba~ges to the Transmittal I_anguagc primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or £AC/CCPC recommendations. A~D:~-A ITEJ~ Page 66 of 80 No. ~ JUN { 8 2002 rt._l-1 5 ~ Sporting and Recreational camps incidental to Conservation uses on public lands:-: or. on privately held lands: within which the Iodoina component shall cc dcf~n'cd !n, :nd ct thc ~;*" ~" ..... '~ bT, "'~ ' ""'" r~ .... , e. Habitat preservation and conservation uses; h.f. Passive P-parks, ~ and other passive recreational uses; ,..h~,,h ~,l,,,-,ll I-, .... ~";'"'"'* *" thc fc!Ic;':inG Cc'- -'~ty r'"' '"" "";" ~' ~"" C :$ k. acccsccr/ ...................... · '~' OpOr-'~-t!O,r~, Of' 3 D,,~,,b ,,,,,, 0 I I+;I;t~ ~,,-,~ ~,~n-,,,-',, ,nh""'+;O.~, .~n,-,;I;~;,-,~.. ~. ~ A~r!cc'.::.::'c ?,oricultural uses consistent with o:.':c~'. "c !!.-..!'._'cd b;' Chapter 823.14(6) Florida Statutes (Florida Riqht to Farm Act); and, h, Essential Services necessary to serve permitted uses identified in Section a throuoh above such as the followino: private wells and seotic tanks: utility lines: exceot sewe~ lineal ¢o'.'.'gqo !fit _~'.gt!on and ~ewer lines and lif't stations: only if located within already cleared portions of' existino riohts-o~-way or easements: necessarv to serve a oublicly owned o[' privately owned central sewer system orovidino service to urban areas and/or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District: cc;':=_-'-_c llft c:='.!cn and: water oumoing station,~ necessary to serve a oublicly owned or orivatelv owned central water system providin~ service to urban areas and/or the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District. i) Oil extraction and rela~ed processinq, only where directional-ddllino techniques, cannot be utilized to access the resource from outside of the Conservation Lands. I~ directional driltin.q is de~ermined not to be ~easible due to the location of the resource within the Conservatio~ Lands~ then the resource may be accessed from oreviously cleared or disturbed areas (se~ GCME Policy 6.1.2(1 The fo Iowin,q uses may be permitted as Conditional Uses: a} The followinq uses are conditionally permitted subiect to approval throu,qh a public hearinq process: (1) "' .....;~' ....:~ '~'~;'~"'~ !n ~"~ i ~.-.~ D'c'.'c!c~.m. cnt '"^'~" ~^';'~'; ......... ...... '_'_ _ _. ................................................. ~ .... .., o,~.~;-~ -~;~,--~ '~,~ ,~," ~' ......... ~ Essential services not identified above in paragraoh h. Within one year: Collier County will review essential service~ Text with single underline or single s:riJ:c:hrc.'.~£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Platt. Te.u witl~ double underline or double #::f/::::::'c;:~/: reflects proposed cha,ges to the Transmittal la~gt~agc primarily in respo,se to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendatio,s. AC.~"'A' ITEM Page 67 of 80 No. JUN 1 8 2002 Pi[-_ currently allowed in the Land Develor)ment Code and will define those uses intended tO be conditionally permitted in Conservation desionated lands. During this one-year period or if necessary until a comprehensive Dian amendment identifyinq conditionally permitted essential services, no conditional uses for essential services within Conservation designated lands shall be anproved. (2) Staff housin.q in conjunction with safety service facilities and essential services, at a density in accordance with the Land Development Code. as it existed on June 18. (3) Oil :Md mi~cr"! extraction and related processinq, where clearina of existino native. veaetation is necessary (reference. ii. above~ e×-'_!' 'd!nq ~ ~ ""~_ .............. --~.,.~' (4) Commercial uses accessory to permitted uses e, f and .q above, such as retail sales of produce accessory to farmin.q, or a restaurant accessory to a park or preserve, so Ionq as restrictions or limitations are imposed to insure the commercial use functions b) as an accessory, subordinate use. In addition to the criteria set forth in the Land Development Code, Conditional Uses shall be allowed subiect to the following additional criteria: (1) The applicant shall submit a plan for development that demonstrates that wetlands, listed species and their habitat are adequately protected. This plan shall be part ot the required ElS as specified in Policy 6.,.7-,6~.1.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Manaqement Element. (2) Conditions may be imposed, as deemed appropriate, to limit the size, location, and access to the conditional use. V. OVERLAYS AND SPECIAL FEATURES A. Area of Critical State Concern Overlay The Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC) was established by the 1974 Florida Legislature. The Critical Area is displayed on the Future Land Use Map as an overlay area. The Critical Area encompasses lands designated Conservation, Agricultural/Rural, Estates and Urban (Port of the Islands, Plantation Island and Copeland). Chokoloskee is excluded from the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern. All Development Orders within the Critical Area shall comply with Chapter 28-25, Florida Administrative Code, "Boundary and Regulations for the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern". Those regulations include the following: 1. Site Alteration a. Site alteration shall be limited to 10% of the total site size, and installation of non-permeable surfaces shall not exceed 50% of any such area. However, a minimum of 2,500 square feet may be altered on any permitted site. b. Any non-permeable surface greater than 20,000 square feet shall provide for release of surface run off, collected or uncollected, in a manner approximating the natural surface water flow regime of the area. c. Soils exposed during site alteration shall be stabilized and retention ponds or performance equivalent structures or systems maintained in order to retain run off and siltation on the construction site. Restoration of vegetation to site alteration areas shall be substantially completed within 180 days following completion of a development. Re-vegetation shall be accomplished with pre-existing species or other Text with single underline or single stri, t~c:!:ra'.;gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Gro,~'th Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'i.~;z:!::'c::g.~. reflects proposed cha~ges to the Transmitt primarily in response to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. A~A IIF, LI¢, Page 68 of 80 JUN 1 8 2u02 suitable species except that undesirable exotic species shall not be replanted or propagated. Exotic species are listed below. Australian Pine - (Casuarina spp.) Bishopwood - (Bischofia javanica) Brazilian Pepper- (Shinus terebinthfolius) Melaleuca (cajeput) - (Melaleuca leucadendra spp.) Downy Rosemyrtle - (Rhodomytus tomentosa) Earleaf Acacia - (Acacia auriculiformis) Catclaw Mimosa - (Mimosa pigra) Java Plum - (Syzygium cumini) d. No mangrove trees or salt marsh grasses shall be destroyed or otherwise altered. Plants specifically protected by this regulation include: All wetland plants listed by the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation in Chapter 17-301, Florida Administrative Code, as amended. d. Fill areas and related dredge or borrow ponds shall be aligned substantially in the direction of local surface water flows and shall be separated from other fill areas and ponds by unaltered areas of vegetation of comparable size. Dredge or borrow ponds shall provide for the release of storm water as sheet flow from their downstream end into unaltered areas of vegetation. Access roads to and between fill areas shall provide for the passage of water in a manner approximating the natural flow regime and designed to accommodate the 50 year storm. Fill areas and related ponds shall not substantially retain or divert the total flow in or to a slough or strand or significantly impeded tidal action in any portion of the estuarine zone. f. Man-made lakes, ponds, or other containment works shall be constructed with a maximum slope of 30 degrees to a depth of six feet of water. Whenever mineral extraction is completed in new quarrying lakes, shoreline sloping, planting of littoral shelves with nursery grown aquatic vegetation, restoration or revegetation of the property and disposal of spoils or tailings shall be completed before abandonment of the site. Existing quarrying lakes are exempt from this provision, except that whenever any person carries out any activity defined in Section 380.04, Florida Statutes, as amended as development or applies for a development permit as defined in Section 380.031, Florida Statutes, as amended to develop any existing quarrying lake area, these regulations shall apply. g. Finger canals shall not be constructed in the Critical Area. h. This rule shall not apply to site alterations undertaken in connection with the agricultural use of land or for the conversion of land to agricultural use. 2. Drainage a. Existing drainage facilities shall not be modified so as to discharge water to any coastal waters, either directly or through existing drainage facilities. Existing drainage facilities shall not be expanded in capacity or length except in conformance with paragraph (2) below; however, modifications may be made to existing facilities that will raise the ground water table or limit salt water intrusion. b. New drainage facilities shall release water in a manner approximating the natural local surface flow regime, through a spreader pond or performance equivalent structure or Text with single underline or single s:d!:c:hra:,'£!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Management Plan. Text with double underlir~c or double z::i~:c:J::'zc.'g.~: reflects proposed changes to the Transminal language primarily irt response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEJ~ Page 69 of 80 No. ~ JUN 1 8 2002 Co system, either on site or to a natural retention, or natural filtration and flow area. New drainage facilities shall also maintain a ground water level sufficient to protect wetland vegetation through the use of weirs or performance equivalent structures or systems. Said facilities shall not retain, divert, or otherwise block or channel the naturally occurring flows in a strand, slough or estuarine area. New drainage facilities shall not discharge water into any coastal waters either directly or through existing drainage facilities. This rule shall not apply to drainage facilities modified or constructed in order to use land for agricultural purposes or to convert land to such use. 3. Transportation a. Transportation facilities which would retain, divert or otherwise block surface water flows shall provide for the re-establishment of sheet flow through the use of interceptor spreader systems or performance equivalent structures and shall provide for passage of stream, strand, or slough water through the use of bridges, culverts, piling construction or performance equivalent structures or systems. b. Transportation facilities shall be constructed substantially parallel to the local surface flow, and shall maintain a historic ground water level sufficient to protect wetland vegetation through the use of weirs or performance equivalent structures or systems and as feasible, the flows in such works shall be released to natural retention filtration and flow areas. c. Transportation facility construction sites shall provide for siltation and run-off control through the use of settling ponds, soil fixing or performance equivalent structures or systems. Structure Installation Placement of structures shall be accomplished in a manner that will not adversely affect surface water flow or tidal action. Minimum lowest floor elevation permitted for structures shall be at or above the 100- year flood level, as established by the Administrator of the Federal Flood Insurance Administration. The construction of any structure shall meet additional Federal Flood insurance Land Management and Use Criteria (24 CFR 1910), as administered by the appropriate local agency. This rule shall not apply to structures used or intended for use in connection with the agricultural use of the land. All Development Orders issued for projects within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern shall be rendered to the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs for review with the potential for appeal to the Administration Commission per Chapter 9J-1, Florida Administrative Code, 'Development Order Requirements for Areas of Critical State Concern". Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:hrc:;£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Growth Managetnent Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri::c:.':."c'.~J: reflects proposed changes to tile Transmittal la~ primarily in response to tile ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AC_.~r_N~A ITEIv Page 70 of 80 JUN 1 8 200 B. North Belle Meade Overlay The North Belle Meade (NBM} Overlay is depicted on the FLUM. Uses shall be as provided for in Receiving, Neutral, NRPA and non-NRPA Sendin,q Lands. Development and preservation standards within this Overlay shall be as provided herein. IN GENERAL The North Belle Meade area is surrounded by Golden Gate Estates to the north, east, and west and 1-75 to the south. This area, desiqnated as the North Belle Meado Overlay, comprises +24 sections of land J.± 15,552 acres~ dependin.q on the size ol individual sections)~ / .... ~,~-~.~ and is de[~icted on the Future Land Use Map and North Belie Meade Overlav MaD E×hlb!t .~.~. The NBM Overlay area is unique to thu Rural Fr nqe area because it is surrounded by areas that are vested for development o~ three sides. Because this area is larqely undeveloped and includes substantial veqetated areas, the Sending Lands can and do provide valuable habitat for wildlife, includ n,q endanqered species. Within the NBM Overlay area are also areas that have been previously impacted by canal construction and past clear n.q and aqricultural practices which have altered the natural hydroperiod. The cha en.qe for the NBM Overlay area is to achieve a balance of both preservation and opportunities for futuru development that takes into account resource protection and the relationship betweet~ this area and the Estates developinq around the NBM Overlay area. Accordinqly a moru detailed and specific plan for the NBM Overlay is set forth herein. Unless otherwisu specifically stated, no other Goals, Obiectives and Policies of the Future Land Usc Element, Conservation and Coastal Manaqement Element, or Public Facilities Element in the Growth Manaqement Plan or implementing LDRs, includin,q specifically but not limited to wetlands and wildlife protection, shall be applicable to the NBM Overlay Recevin.q Lands other than this NBM Overlay Plan and its implementinq LDRs. O~1 Receivinq Lands any development shall comply with the non-environmental administrative review procedures of Collier County for site development plans and plattin.q. Within the NBM Overlay there are four distinct areas, as depicted on the Future Land Use MaD and MaD series, that require separate treatment based on existinq conditions within this area. These areas include the Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA), ti ~e Rece vin.q and the Sendinq Areas for the transfer of development rights, and a Neutral area, which is neither a SendinCl nor a Rece vinq Area compr sin_q a.two sections ~ ,,,-,-"~ *~- .... ' of land~ cr '.. ~'~ ....... ,~,--;~,~,~ ~ ""~';"':" "^" It is the intent to pedorm the physical planning of the NBM Sendinq Lands within twelve (12) montl',s after the effective date for Red Cockaded Woodpeckers1 Greenways and Wildlife Crossings. Text with single underline or single s;rl/cc:hra.'.zgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the curre~zt Growth Manage.tent Plan. Te.~'l with double u~zderlme or double ~;:'i'~:::.'::-z'.:~ reflects proposed changes to the Transmi pritnarilv m response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recotmne~datio~s. AGENOA ITF..M Page 71 of 80 JUN 1 8 2002 Planninq Considerations 1. Wildlife Crossinq and Wildlife Corridor * The County should support construction of a wildlife crossinq under 1-75 connectin,q the NBM and South Belle Meade (SBM), and the creation of a wildlife corridor connectin.q the NBM with the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuqe to the east. 2. Transportation *An existin,q access road (presently providinq access to County water wells) alonq the northern section lines of Sections 22, 23 and 24 of Ranqe 27 East may be maintained and improved, and an extension of Wilson Boulevard should be provided throu.qh Section 33, Ran.qe 27 East comprisinq a collector or arterial road extendinq to the south to Interstate 75 via an interchanqe or service road for residential development should it commence in Sections 21, 28 and 27, or in the alternate a haul road alon.q an extension of Wilson Boulevard to service earth mininq activities with a connection throuqh Sections 32 and 31 to Landfill Road. * Lands required for the extension of Wilson Boulevard will be dedicated to Collier County at the time of rezoninq. The riqht-of-way shall be a sufficient size accommodate collector road requirements should there be a demonstrated need. *The western 1/4 of Sections 22 and 27 will be buffered from the NBM NRPA to the east by a buffer preservation that includes all of the eastern Y2 of the western 1/4 of Sections 22 and 27 which would consist of lake excavation areas between the Wilson Boulevard extension road ri.qht-of-way and the NRPA. Other than the new and improved Wilson Boulevard extension and service haul road as described above, all new roads and improvements in the Sendinq Area shall be routed so as to avoid traversinq publicly owned natural preserves, parks and recreation areas, areas identified as environmentally sensitive wildlife habitat, wildlife corridors, or .qreenways, unless there is no feasible and prudent alternative. Other than the referenced Wilson Boulevard extension and service haul road, any new roads and improvements to existinq roads within sendinq areas shall be desiqned with aquatic species crossinqs, small terrestrial animal crossings, and lar.qe terrestrial animal crossinqs pursuant to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission criteria. The portion of Wilson Boulevard that traverses throuqh the Sendinq Area shall be desiqned with aquatic species crossinqs and small terrestrial animal crossinqs. The implementinq Land Development Requlations for the NBM Overlay shall address bike lanes and pedestrian pathways. 3. Greenway *A NBM Greenway shall be created within the NRPA or sendinq lands followinq natural flowwaysl as contemplated in the Community Character Plan prepared by Dover Kohl. 4. Red Cockaded Woodpeckers (RCW) *RCW nestinq and foraqinq habitat shall be mapped and protected from land use activities within Sending Lands. _"2~!'.' and Section 24 desiqnated Neutral Lands. Althouqh RCW nesting and foraqin.q habitat shall be mapped within all Sendinq areas within the NBM Overlay, this shall be accomplished by a study specific to Section 24 conducted by Collier County within one year of the effective date of the NBM Overlay. Within Section 24, the ~ Neutral desiqnation may be adiusted based upon the findin.qs of the updated RCW nesting and foraqin.q habitat study. AGENDA JUN 1 8 2002 B. NRPA The NBM NRPA includes seven sections of lands and three partial sections or a total of + 6,075 acres and is located in the eastern portion of the NBM Overlay. This area comprises about thirty-nine percent of the NBM Overlay. The NBM NRPA area has concentrations ol wetland land cover and listed species habitat1 consistent with other Rural Fringe NRPA's. :ccc '"-~.~-;' "^"~ This consideration combined with the fragmented ownership pattern and the state's desire to purchase significant portions of this area warrants a different level of protection than in other NRPA areas, particularly for incentives for the consolidation of lots to assist in the future preservation of lands. Plannin~l Considerations 1. Consolidation * The County should amend the Land Development Code to encourage further consolidation of small parcels. 2. Public Acquisition * The County and the property owners should support acquisition of privately owned land in the NBM NRPA area as a mechanism for protection. 3. Sendin.q Area * The NBM NRPA shall be desiqnated as a sending area for the Transfer of Development Ri.qhts (TDR/. 4. TDRs *Owners of lands located in the NBM NRPA may transfer their development ri.qhts to Sections 21 and 28 and the west 1/4 of section 22 and 27, and/or other suitable locations within the Rural Fringe Area at a ratio of 1 unit per 5 acres from Sending Lands, or one unit per individual deeded parcel or lot that existed as of June 22, 1999, whichever is qreater. C. RECEIVING AREAS Within the NBM Overlay, Receivinq Areas are identified for clusterinq of residential dwellin.q units, central water and sewer service, and for the transfer of development ri.qhts and comprise + 3,368 acres in the northern and northwestern portions of the NBM Overlay. The Receiving Areas are generally located in the northern portion of NBM Overlay and are generally contiquous to Golden Gate Estates. Two sections are directly to the south of the APAC Earth Mininq Operation. The Receiving Area exhibits areas of less environmental sensitivity than other portions of the NBM Overlay, because of their proximity to Golden Gate Estates and prior clearinq and disturbance to the land. Within the Rece vin.q Area of the NBM Overlay, are located Sections 21, 28 and the west ~4 of Sections 22 and 27, which have been ar.qely assembled under one property ownership. These lands are located south of the ex sting APAC earth minincl operation and have been ar.qely impacted by agricultural operations. The IocatioT, of Sections 21 and 28 is iust to the south and west of Wilson Boulevard located in the southern portion of north Golden Gate Estates. Because an earth mininq operation and asphalt plant uses have existed for many years in the area, and the surroundinq lands in Sections 21, 28 and the western halves of Sections 22 and 27 are reported to contain.v._..,'~"" ........ v__.w Florida Department of Transportation grade rock for road construction, these uses are encouraged to remain and expand on Sections 21 and 28 and on the western quarters of Sections 22 and 2/. No conditional use approvals shall be required for earth mininq or an asphalt plant within Sections 21,28 and the western quarters of Sections 22 and 27, however, the County's existing excavation and explosive regulations shall apply. AGENDA I T Fr.L~ underlined are added. Words struck ~ ..... ~ are deleted; words 73 JUN 1 8 2002 ,,.. The extension of Wilson Boulevard to the south with an ultimate connection to the vicinity of Interstate 75, will serve to alleviate traffic con.qestion on Golden Gate Boulevard and serve as an alternate evacuation route for Golden Gate Estates. Sufficient area for ri.qht-of-way is available at the present time for the extension of this roadway. Additional ri.qht-of-way area may be required outside of Sections 21 and 28. Because of the proximity of Sections 21 and 28 and west 1/4 of section 22 and 27 to Golden Gate Estates, as well as other locations in the NBM Overlay Receivin,q Area, they are a Ioqical locations for the development of a Rural Villaqe or Nei,qhborhood Villaqe Center with a mix of uses which may include clusterinq of residential uses and civic and institutional uses, includin,q limited retail uses at an intersection to be established with Wilson Boulevard. Planning Considerations 1. North Belle Meade Rural Village The standards for the Rural Villa.qes/Commercial in the NBM Overlay Receivin.q Area shall be .qenerally the same as provided for in the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District, however, because of the NBM Receivin.q Area's location adiacent to Estates, the NBM NRPA, and other Sendinq lands, it does not have access to existin.q commercial uses, which should be encouraqed on NBM Receivinq Lands. The followin.q exceptions shall aDDIv: * The minimum .qross density shall be 1.5 dwellinq units per .qross acre and a maximum of 3 units per .qross acre. * A minimum of .5 dwellin.q units per .qross acre shall be acquired throu.qh the transfer of development ri.qhts. Sidewalks shall be required on both sides of the streets in the NBM Rural Villaqe * Greenbelts shall not be required for any NBM Receivinq Lands includinq any Rural Villa.qe. * Schools should be located within the NBM Rural Villaqe whenever possible in order to minimize businq of students and to eei;,eea~ co-locate schools with public facilities and civic structures such as parks, libraries1 community centersl public squares, .qreens and civic areas. Elementary schools shall be accessed by local streets, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and shall be allowed in and adiacent to the Rural Villa.qe Center, provided such local streets provide adequate access as needed by the School Board. D. SENDING AREAS Within the NBM Overlay are ± ~-,-,-,-,-,-,-,-,-,~ 4..598 acres of land that are identified as Sendin.q Areas for the transfer of development riqhts that are located in the western, eastern and southern portion of the study area. The Sendinq Areas consist of the NRPA lands and +5 and 3,~ sections west of the NRPA,,'e~ .............. ,-v~.;~.=, ,,,,,,,,. The sendinq areas are locations where residential development is discouraqed. Endan.qered and threatened species are located within the Sendin.q Areas, includin.q colonies of Red Cockaded Woodpeckers~,__~,',~,~ ............,-v~.;~...+ ,,,,,,~,. Therefore, the protection of endan.qered and threatened species includin.q the protection of habitat are primary plannin.q considerations in this area. Words ...... '-" ~ ..... ~ are deleted; words underlined are added. 74 JUN 1 8 2002 Planning Considerations 1. TDRs *Stron,qly encoura.qe the transfer of development ri,qhts from the NBM Sendin,q Areas to other locations within the Rural Frin,qe or NBM Overlay outside the boundary of the NRPA, or to the Urban Area. 2. Mitigation Credit * Lands located in the NRPA and the adioinin,q buffer areas, which will be dedicated to a public or private entity for conservation use may also be credited towards meetin,q any ,qovernmental mitiqation requirements and on a one to one acrea,qe basis towards meetin.q the onsite veqetation preservation requirements of NBM Receivin,q Lands. 3. Habitat Protection * The Goals, Obiectives and Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Mana.qement Element for wildlife habitat protection shall apply to NBM Sendin,q Lands. 4. Public Acquisition *The County should support the public acquisition of Sendinq areas in the NBM Overlay, particularly in locations where endan,qered or threatened species are located. E. NEUTRAL LANDS Within the NBM Overlay there are + ~ 1.280 acres of land that are identified as Neutral Areas. The Neutral Areas consist of two 1/2 sections located at the northeast corner of this Overlay and ....... ;~'~"' ~ '"'" ........... , ~... ,~.~ r-~,,;~, r, .... .,, ~A~.~, ,-,^~..~ A~,~ Sectiorl 24 located in the nc."t.h__.-'__.t northwest portion of this Overlay. The preservation standards for Neutral Lands not within Section 24 shall be those contained in CCME Policy 6.1.2 for Neutral Lands. The preservation standards for non-NRPA Sending Lands. as reouired b.v CCME Policy 6.1.2. shall apDI.v in Section 24. The County will perform an RCW study for Section 24 and. if the results of the study warrant, the Plan will be amended. t;}. C. Natural Resource Protection Area Overlay The purpose of the Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPAI Overlay desiqnation is to protect endanqered or potentially endanqered species and to identify larqe connected intact and relatively unfra.qmented habitats, which may be important for these listed species. NRPAs may include major wetland systems and reqional flow-ways. These lands qenerally should be thu focus of any federal, state, County or private acquisition efforts. Words struck tkrcu~k are deleted; words underlined are added Pa~e 75 NRPAs are located in the fo owing areas: 1. Clam Bay Conservation Area (within Pelican Bay Plan Unit Development); 2. CREW (Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed); 3. North Belle Meade; 4. Belle Meade; 5. South Golden Gate Estates ':~'^';~", .... ~ ..... ,, 6. Okaloacoochee SIou,qh (interim); and 7. Camp Keais (interim). NRPAs located in the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District, or on nearby or adiacent Conservation Desiqnated Lands are identified as Pr!mcr; Sendin,q Lands. Private property owners within 2002 (iv) these NRPAs may transfer residential development ri,qhts from these important environmentally sensitive lands. Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs) that are not identified as "interim" above shall have the followino standards: 1, Veoetation Retention and Site Preservation - Calculated at the hioher value of 90% of the native veoetation present: or 90% of the total site area. or as may otherwise be permitted under the Density Blendina provisions of the FLUE. Applicable standards provided for in CCME Policy 6.1.2 shall also apply; 2. Listed species protection shall be provided for as specified in CCME Policy 7.1.2: 3. Permitted and conditional uses for Dublicly owned lands within an NRPA Overla.v shall be those as set forth under the Conservation Desionation. 4, For privately owned lands within a NRPA Overlav and desionated Sendina lands or Estates. respectively, permitted and conditional uses shall be those as set forth in the Rural Frinae Mixed Use District for Sending Lands. 5. For privately owned lands within a NRPA Overlay and desionated Estates: permitted and conditional uses shall be those as set forth in the Estates Desionation within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, in recognition of Florida's private property riahts laws. As these privately owned Estates Designated lands are acauired for conservation purooses: the Plan will be amended to chanae the Designation to Conservation. 6, There are approximately 15 sections of privately owned land within a NRPA Overlay that are not desianated Sending and are not located within the Rural Frinae Mixed Use District (where all Sending Lands are located). Eight (8) of these sections., known as the "hole-in- the-doughnut." are located within the South Golden Gate Estates NRPA and surrounded b.v platted Estates lots, almost all of which have been acouired by the State under the Florida Forever proqram as Dart of the Picayune Strand State Forest. The remainina seven (7) sections are within an approved mitigation bank located north and west of Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary.. Uses on these lands are limited to restoration and mitigation and. at the completion of this restoration process, these lands will be deeded to a land management entity for conservation purposes. As these privately owned Agricultural/Rural Designated lands are acquired for conservation purposes: the Plan will be amended to change the Designation to Conservation. Until such time: in recognition of Florida's private property rights laws: permitted and conditional uses for these Drivatel.v owned lands shall be those 8et forth in the Aaricultural/Rural Mixed Use District. C.. D. Airport Noise Area Overlay The Naples Airport Authority developed an airport noise compatibility plan under the guidelines of the Federal Aviation Regulation, Part 150. This plan included identifying noise contours at the 65, 70 and 75 Ldn (day-night average sound level). The Airport Noise Area Overlay shown on the Future Land Use Map reflects the 65 Ldn contour, the least severe impact of these three noise contours. Residential and other noise sensitive land uses are considered "normally unacceptable" in areas exposed to levels between 65 Ldn and 75 Ldn. This Overlay is informational and has no regulatory effect. However, the Land Development Code contains an Airport Overlay District, which regulates development near the Naples Municipal Airport. O-E. Bayshore/Gateway Trian.qle Redevelopment Overlay The Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, depicted on the Future Land Use Map, is within the boundaries of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Plan adopted underlined are ad( ed. AGENOAI~-~ Words struck tkrcugk are deleted; words Page 76 JUN 1 8 2002 by the Board of County Commissioners on March 14, 2000. The intent of the redevelopment program is to encourage the revitalization of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area by providing incentives that will encourage the private sector to invest in this urban area. This Overlay allows for additional neighborhood commercial uses and higher residential densities that will promote the assembly of commercial uses and higher residential densities that will promote the assembly of property, or joint ventures between property owners, while providing interconnections between properties and neighborhoods. The intent of this Overlay is to allow for more intense development in an urban area where urban services are available. One or more zoning overlays will be adopted into the Collier County Land Development Code to aid in the implementation of this Overlay. The following provisions and restrictions apply to this Overlay: 1. Mixed-Use Development: Mix of residential and commercial uses are permitted. For such development, commercial uses are limited to C-1 through C-3 zoning district uses plus hotel/motel use. Mixed-use projects will be pedestrian oriented and are encouraged to provide access (vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle) to nearby residential areas. The intent is to encourage pedestrian use of the commercial area and to provide opportunity for nearby residents to access these commercial uses without traveling onto major roadways. Parking facilities are encouraged to be located in the rear of the buildings with the buildings oriented closer to the major roadway to promote traditional urban development. 2. Residential uses are allowed within this Overlay. Permitted density shall be as determined through application of the Density Rating System, and applicable FLUE Policies, except as provided below and except as may be limited by a zoning overlay. 3. Non-residential/non-commercial uses allowed within this Overlay include essential services; parks, recreation and open space uses; water-dependent and water-related uses; child care centers; community facility uses; safety service facilities; and utility and communication facilities. Properties with access to US-41 East are allowed a maximum density of 12 residential units per acre. In order to be eligible for this higher density, the project must be integrated into a mixed-use development with access to existing' neighborhoods and adjoining commercial properties and comply with the standards identified in Paragraph #9, below, except for mixed use projects developed within the "mini triangle" catalyst project site as identified on the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map. The "mini triangle" project site is eligible for the maximum density of 12 units per acre, with development standards to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners at a later time. For projects that do not comply with the requirements for this density increase, their density is limited to that allowed by the Density Rating System and applicable FLUE Policies, except as may be limited by a future zoning overlay. Properties with access to Bayshore Drive, as identified in the Bayshore Drive Mixed Use Zoning Overlay District, are allowed a maximum density of 12 residential units per acre. In order to be eligible for this higher density, the property must meet the specific development standards that will apply to residential and mixed-use development along the Bayshore Drive corridor, and must comply with the standards identified in Paragraph #9, below. For projects that do not comply with the requirements for this density increase, Words struck through are deleted; words Page 77 underlined are ad ted. AGE~-AiTEM JUN 1 8 2002 their density is limited to that allowed by the Density Rating System and applicable FLUE Policies, except as may be limited by a future zoning overlay. The Bayshore Drive Zoning Overlay will be developed and adopted into the Land Development Code in the present or next available amendment cycle. Expansion of existing commercial zoning boundaries along Bayshore Drive within the Bayshore Drive Mixed Use Zoning Overlay District will not be allowed until the zoning overlay is in place. Non-commercially zoned properties within the Bayshore Drive Mixed Use Zoning Overlay District may be eligible for in-fill, Iow-intensity commercial development provided they meet the criteria listed below: ao If one parcel in the proposed project abuts commercial zoning on one side, the commercial zoning may be applied for the entire project site. The following requirements must be met: joint access and/or vehicular interconnection; pedestrian interconnection; and the entire project site must comply with Division 2.8 of the Land Development Code, as may be modified by the Bayshore Drive Mixed Use Zoning Overlay. The depth of a parcel for which commercial zoning is sought may exceed the depth of the abutting commercially zoned property. Adequate buffers must be provided between the commercial uses and non-commercial uses and non-commercial zoning. c. The project must be compatible with existing land uses and permitted future land uses on surrounding properties. Parcels currently within the boundaries of Mixed Use Activity Center #16 will continue to be governed by the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict. A zoning overlay may be developed for these properties within the Mixed Use Activity Center to provide specific development standards. Existing zoning districts for some properties within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay allow uses, densities and development standards that are inconsistent with the uses, densities and development standards allowed within this Overlay. These properties are allowed to develop and redevelop in accordance with their existing zoning until such time as a zoning overlay is adopted which may limit such uses, densities and development standards. To qualify for 12 dwelling units per acre, mixed use projects within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay must comply with the following standards: a. Buildings containing only commercial uses are limited to a maximum height of three stories. Buildings containing only residential uses are limited to a maximum height of three stories except such buildings are allowed a maximum height of four stories if said residential buildings are located in close proximity to US-41. Words ctruck thrsu~h are deleted; words Page 78 underlined are adde JUN 1 8 2002 10. 11. 12. 13. fo Buildings containing mixed use (residential uses over commercial uses) are limited to a maximum height of four stories. Hotels/motels will be limited to a maximum height of four stories. For purposes of this Overlay, each 14 feet of building height shall be considered one story. For mixed-use buildings, commercial uses are permitted on the first two stories only. Each building containing commercial uses only is limited to a maximum building footprint of 20,000 square feet gross floor area. h. One or more zoning overlays may be adopted which may include more restrictive standards than listed above in Paragraphs a -g. For properties outside of the Coastal High Hazard Area, any eligible density bonuses, as provided in the Density Rating System, are in addition to the eligible density provided herein. For properties within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), only the affordable housing density bonus, as provided in the Density Rating System, is allowed in addition to the eligible density provided herein. For all properties, the maximum density allowed is that specified under Density Conditions in the Density Rating System. A maximum of 388 dwelling units are permitted to be utilized in this Overlay for density bonuses as provided in #4 and #5 above for that portion of the Overlay lying within the CHHA, except that 156 dwelling units with direct access to US-41 East shall not be counted towards this 388 dwelling unit limitation. These 388 dwelling units correspond with the number of dwelling units to be rezoned from the botanical gardens sites, as provided for below, resulting in a shift of dwelling units within the CHHA. There is no such density bonus limitation for that portion of the Overlay lying outside of the CHHA. The Botanical Garden, Inc. properties located in Section 23,Township 50 South and Range 25 East and shown on the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map, shall be limited to non-residential uses except for caretaker, dormitory, and other housing integrally related to the Botanical Garden or other institutional and/or recreational open space uses. Within one year of the effective date of this amendment establishing the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, the properties to be developed with a botanical garden or other non-residential use, will be rezoned from the present 388 residential zoning districts to a non-residential zoning district(s). No portion of the dwelling unit density bonuses within the CHHA can be utilized until a corresponding number of dwelling units has been rezoned from.the botanical gardens site(s), as provided for above. Words struck thrc'agh are deleted; words Page 79 underlined are added. AGENDA ITE~ JUN 1 8 20( (IV) FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Future Land Use Map Mixed Use & Interchange Activity Centers Properties Consistent by Policy (5.9,5.10,5.11) Natural Resources Wetlands Map (I) Wellhead Protection Areas Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Map North Belle Meade Overlay Map Words tkrcugk are deleted; words Page 80 underlined are added i .1- CIerA' i ! I - .-'F ---~'-'~ ...... -' I ~ i ~ ................................................. H- ....................... -I- .............. .... T ................... ~ , , , i ! (I,§6 19 D) t319'¢A':l-lnog 19':11'1-10 OE [_1.2 ~ JUN 14 2002 This Page Intentionally left blank 2002 I T 53 S I T 52 S T 51 S T 50 S 0 T 49 S T 48 S T 47 S T 48 S S ZG J. S 16 J. [)R()WARD CC JN T ~ I S 06 I i S 6~ J. S 81~ .L S Lt~ .L S 6~ J. COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT Prepared By Collier County Planning Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS October, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT Symbol Date Amended May 9, 2000 May 9, 2000 May 9, 2000 Ordinance No. Ordinance No. 2000-25 Ordinance No. 2000-26 Ordinance No. 2000-27 Ordinance No. 2000-25, rescinded and repealed in its entirety Collier County Ordinance No. 99-63, which had the effect of rescinding certain EAR-based objectives and policies at issue in Administration Commission Case No. ACC-99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM). Ordinance No. 2000-26, amended Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan, having the effect of rescinding certain EAR-based objectives and policies at issue in Administration Commission Case No. ACC-99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM), more specifically portions of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element (Ord. No. 98-56), Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element (Ord. No. 97-69) and Drainage (Ord. No. 97-61) sub-elements of the Public Facilities Element, Housing Element (Ord. No. 97-63), Golden Gate Area Master Plan (Ord. No. 97-64), Conservation and Coastal Management Element (Ord. No. 97-66), and the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map (Ord. No. 97-67); and re-adopts Policy 2.2.3 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. Ordinance No. 99-82, amended Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan, pursuant to the Final Order dated June 22, 1999, in Administration Commission Case No. ACC-99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM). This Ordinance was found "in compliance" by DCA, that determination was Challenged, an Administrative Law Judge issued a Recommended Order that sided with DCA, and DCA issued a Final Order finding the Ordinance "in compliance." Indicates adopted portions Note: the support document will be updated as current information becon es av~. ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 Collier County Growth Management Platt Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element GOAL 1: THE COUNTY SHALL CONTINUE TO PLAN FOR THE PROTECTION, CONSERVATION, MANAGEMENT AND APPROPRIATE USE OF ITS NATURAL RESOURCES. OBJECTIVE 1.1: By August 1, 1994, the County will complete the development and implementation of a comprehensive environmental management and conservation program that will ensure that the natural resources, including species of special status, of Collier County are properly, appropriately, and effectively identified, managed, and protected. Species of special status are defined as species listed in the current "Official Lists of Endangered and Potentially Endangered Fauna and Flora in Florida", published by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Policy 1.1.1: By August 1, 1989, appoint, and establish operational procedures for a technical advisory committee to advise and assist the County in the activities involved in the development and implementation of the County Environmental Resources Management Program. Policy 1.1.2: By the time mandated for the adoption of land development regulations pursuant to Chapter 163.3202, F.S., including any amendments thereto August 1, 1989 incorporate the goals, objectives, and policies contained within this Element into the County's land development regulations as interim environmental resources protection and management standards. Policy 1.1.3: By January 1, 1990, the County will have in place an appropriately administered and professionally staffed governmental unit capable of developing, administering, and providing long-term direction for the Collier County Environmental Resources Management Program. Policy 1.1.4: Ensure adequate and effective coordination between the Environmental Resources Management Program staff and all other units of local government involved in land use activities and regulations. Policy 1.1.5: Avoid unnecessary duplication of effort and continue coordination and cooperation with private, Regional, State, and Federal agencies and organizations. Work with other local governments to identify and manage shared natural resources. Policy 1.1.6: When developing the County conservation program, attempt to equitably balance the relationship between the benefits derived and the costs incurred to both the public and private sectors. Text with single underline or single z:ri/;cr!:rc:cgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes t6 Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:riS::.~:rz;:;5 reflects proposed changes to the primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recornraendations. Page 1 of 63 Collier CounO' Growth Management Pla~ Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Manage~nent Elemet~t Policy 1.1.7: Continue with the phased preparation and adoption of all natural resources management and environmental protection standards and criteria needed for use in the Collier County land development review process. Implementation shall occur on an annual basis as standards and criteria are developed. Policy 1.1.8: Continue with the phased preparation and adoption of all natural resources management and environmental protection standards and criteria needed for use in the Collier County land development review process. Implementation shall occur on an annual basis as standards and criteria are developed. OBJECTIVE 1.2: Maintain the framework for an integrated, computer-based environmental resources data storage, analysis, and graphics system and annually update the databases based on previous year's analytical data in order to monitor the status of the County's natural resources and propose potential protection measures when appropriate. Policy 1.2.1: As much as possible, the system will be compatible and capable of being tied into existing geographic information and/or data management systems currently utilized by the South Florida Water Management District, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and the Florida Natural Areas Inventory. Policy 1.2.2: Data gathering will be coordinated with that of Federal, State and private resource management organizations to minimize duplication of effort and enhance the quality of information. Policy 1.2.3: Collected and/or compiled data will be organized by established water-shed and sub-basin units. Policy 1.2.4: County environmental resources data will be made available to both public and private entities in order to promote and improve local environmental resources planning and management. Policy 1.2.5: The system will be maintained by the County staff and updated on a cooperative basis by qualified public and private organizations. OBJECTIVE 1.3: Pursuant to Administration Commission Final Order AC-99-002 dated June 22, 1999, complete the phased delineation, data gathering, management guidelines and implementation of the NRPA program as part of the required Collier County Rural and Agricultural Assessment. The purpose of NRPAs will be to protect endangered or potentially endangered species (as listed in current "Official Lists of Endangered and Potentially Endangered Fauna and Flora in Florida", Text with single underline or single z:ri,!:c:hrc'.~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to t) Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:v!.':c:.'::-~xgh reflects proposed changes to the Tr~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 2 of 63 current Growth Collier CounO' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-029 Conservation and Coastal Management Element published by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, the predecessor agency of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission) and their habitats. Pursuant to the Administration Commission Final Order, the County has mapped and identified the Camp Keais Strand, CREW Lands, Okaloachoochee Slough, Belle Meade and South Golden Gate Estates as NRPA's, with the express understanding that during the Rural and Agricultural Assessment (Assessment) required by the Final Order, the goal of assisting in the protection of endangered species and their habitat will be further addressed and that appropriate protection measures will be incorporated into comprehensive plan amendments to be adopted at the conclusion of the Assessment. In the interim, and during the Assessment, a development moratorium as set forth in the Final Order and in Ordinance 99-77 will be in place until comprehensive plan amendments are adopted. The County has determined that the development moratorium, the NRPA boundaries approved November 23, 1999, and the additional restrictions that apply within the existing Area of Critical State Concern provide sufficient protection for these resources on an interim basis until adoption of the final comprehensive program to protect these resources. In selecting the final comprehensive program the County, as part of the Assessment, will evaluate the NRPA program and its criteria and implementation as well as other programs which may better provide adequate protection to the resources. Policy 1.3.1: The program will, subject to completion of the Assessment and adoption of the comprehensive plan amendments, include the following: a. Identification of the NRPAs in map form as an overlay to the Future Land Use Plan Map. Pursuant to the Final Order, the general areas of Camp Keais Strand, CREW Lands Okaloachoochee Slough, Belle Meade and South Golden Gate Estates have been mapped and identified as NRPAs on the Future Land Use Map. These areas shall be further refined as the Assessment is implemented as a collaborative and community- based effort. All available data shall be further considered and refined during the Assessment to determine the final boundaries of these NRPAs. As part of the Assessment, the County shall evaluate the merits of including additional areas into these boundaries including, but not limited to, the area of Northern Belle Meade, the area known as the "Stovepipe" to the north, northwest and northeast of the Okaloachoochee Slough and the area southwest of the Okaloachoochee Slough to the southeastern portion of the Camp Keais Strand which is south of Oil Well Road (CR 858). During the Assessment for the Rural Fringe area, the County has determined that CREW Trust lands, the Belle Meade, and a portion of the Northern Belle Meade shall be identified as NRPAs. The County also has determined that the South Golden Gate Estates is a NRPA. The specific boundaries have been identified as NRPAs on the Future Land Use Map: ~^t~,~, ,~. ......,;..., ..~ ,~... ~.,....~. p..,,.. ~s,..,~.. e,,,,~,, Area, The~e "'~'*'*""'""' status of the other interim NRPAs and study areas arc shown on the Future Land Use Map will be addressed at the completion of the Assessment. Within these remaininq study areas, the following shall be the primary focus of addition study: Text with single, underline or single s:ri~c:/:roug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to th~ Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::i~,:::.~::c::;.~: reflects proposed changes to the Trar primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 3 of 63 current Growth 2002 Collier Count3~ Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element **** Stovepipe Study Area (a) examine the level of existing and permitted agricultural improvements and impacts on listed species and their habitat; (b) examine whether the existing Area of Critical State Concern program affords sufficient protection to listed species and their habitat; (c) examine the possibility of acquisition of these properties by State or Federal programs, including partial acquisition programs, an example of which would be conservation easements; (d) examine whether use of transfer of development rights would be appropriate in this area and, if so, whether there should be any restrictions on their use; (e) examine and analyze the Florida panther's use of agricultural lands and whether such agricultural lands constitute critical habitat for the species; and (f) examine and analyze whether any lands should be restored. **** Oil Well Road (CR 858) Study Area (a) examine the extent to which existing agricultural and mining operations, improvements and facilities have impacted listed species and their habitat; (b) examine documented movement of the Florida panther in the area; (c) examine and analyze the Florida panther's utilization of agricultural lands and whether such agricultural lands constitute critical habitat for the species; (d) examine whether use of transfer of development rights would be appropriate in this area and, if so, whether there should be any restrictions on their use; and (e) determine whether the east/west wildlife corridor provided by the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge and the Big Cypress National Preserve provides sufficient connectivity to protect the species. **** In addition to the moratorium referenced above, the County shall give notice to the Florida Department of Community Affairs of all applications to develop or otherwise impact the above special study areas. b. A process for verifying the existence and boundaries of NRPAs during development permit applications; c. Guidelines and standards for development of NRPAs including conservation guidelines to protect natural resource values, to maintain ecologically functioning systems, and to restore or mitigate NRPAs already degraded. Allowable land uses, veoetation preservation standards., development, standards.r and listed species. .Drotect .,,, ~., ih,..;,:~.[~..LM..._....._ ..- Text with single underline or single s:ri.~:.a, ra. ugh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to Management Platt. Text with double underline or double z:ri:;z:.'::-z-.cZ]: reflects proposed changes to the T primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 4 of 63 he current Growth Collier Count' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element the "~,D, EW1 .1~.~.~.~..1~. ~f-.!!~.~ '~'Q~'~:~"~t :nd Bc!!c Mc:dc NRPAs are those contained in the NRPA Overlay within the Future Land Use Element. d. A review process, integrated into the normal development application review, to ensure that the guidelines and standards are being met and, in those cases where Environmental Impact Statements are prepared, that the site-specific and cumulative environmental impacts of development are being adequately assessed and addressed; e. A program to defer development of NRPAs. First consideration should be fee simple purchase (based on public referenda approving and funding purchases). Other options should include, but not be limited to, tax incentives and transfer of development rights; f. A program to pursue Delegation of Authority Agreements with State and Federal Permitting agencies for local regulation of activities that may alter the biological and physical characteristics of NRPAs; g. The County shall seek assistance from and support State (e.g. CARL, SOR) or Federal land acquisition programs for County areas qualifying as NRPAs. **** The County recognizes that the NRPA program is not the only mechanism to protect significant environmental resources and that the NRPAs being established at this time are of an interim nature in conjunction with the development moratorium required by the Final Order. As a consequence, the designation of an area as a NRPA or as part of a special study area is not intended to affect property valuation on specific parcels. It is anticipated that the Assessment will address all of the issues identified above and that the resulting comprehensive plan amendments will provide resource protection measures best suited to meet the goals and objectives of this comprehensive plan. Policy 1.3.2: Continue with management guidelines as defined within the County LDC that provide for the management and conservation of the habitats, species, natural shoreline and dune systems for the undeveloped coastal barrier and estuarine natural resources protection area. Policy 1.3.3: Guided by the Technical Advisory Committee, designate and adopt management guidelines and performance standards for County natural resource protection areas. Implementation shall occur on an annual basis as NRPAs and their implementation criteria are developed. Policy 1.3.4: Where possible, the implementation of the NRPA program shall be coordinated with the preparation and implementation of watershed and sub-basin management plans. Text with single underline or single ::ri£z:!:rcug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to ti Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:~.'c::::rz::~.~: reflects proposed changes to the Tr~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 5 of 63 e current Growth nsmitJ~J~n~u~g~.O02 Collier Count~' Growth Management Platt Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation attd Coastal Management Element GOAL 2: THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT ITS SURFACE AND ESTUARINE WATER RESOURCES. OBJECTIVE 2.1: By January 1, 2000, the County shall prepare Watershed Management Plans that will address appropriate mechanisms to protect the County's estuarine and wetland systems. Policy 2.1.1: These Plans will evaluate activities in the watersheds that drain into the estuaries in order to evaluate cumulative impacts on the estuarine system as well as impacts within the watersheds themselves. Policy 2.1.2: The Plans will provide for various tasks such as monitoring land-disturbing activities in the watersheds, collecting canal flow and water quality data, stormwater quality data, and assessing habitat changes. Policy 2.1.3: The Plans will also evaluate structural and non-structural controls for restoring historical hydroperiods in impacted watersheds where possible and for reducing the impacts of canal and stormwater discharges to estuaries. Policy 2.1.4: All Watershed Management Plans should address the following concepts: a. Appropriate wetlands are conserved; b. Drainage systems do not unacceptably affect wetland and estuary ecosystems; Surface water that potentially could recharge ground water is not unduly drained away; d. When feasible the extent and effects of salt-water intrusion are lessened; eo The timing and flow of fresh water into the estuaries from the watershed shall, as a minimum, not degrade estuarine resource value; and fo The needs of the watershed's natural resources and human populations are balanced; g. The effects on natural flood plains, stream channels, native vegetative communities and natural protective barriers which are involved in the accommodation of flood waters; and ho Text with single, underline or single s:riSc:hra.:~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri:c::.~:r:.z:g.': reflects proposed changes to the T prirnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Non-structural rather than structural methods of surface water management should be considered first in and proposed new works. AGENDA ITEM msmittal language JUN 1 8 2002 Page 6 of 63 Collier Counta' Grcwth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11 - 02 ~ Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 2.1.5: As appropriate, integrate environmental resources data collection, planning, and management activities with the water management basin studies described in other parts of this Plan. Policy 2.1.6: Promote intergovernmental cooperation between Collier County and the municipalities Naples and Everglades City for consistent watershed management planning. of Policy 2.1.7: Until the completion and adoption of individual watershed management plans, promote water management permitting on a basin by basin approach. OBJECTIVE 2.2: All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable Federal, State, or local water quality standards. Policy 2.2.1: Wastewater treatment plants shall not be allowed to discharge directly to rivers, canals or jurisdictional wetlands unless they meet DER regulations and are not in violation of other Goals, Objectives, and Policies of this Element. Policy 2.2.2: In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater run-off, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity and quality of fresh water to the estuarine system. Non-structural methods such as discharge and storage in wetlands are encouraged. Policy 2.2.3: Chemical spraying for aquatic weed control should be conducted with extreme caution. The use of appropriate biological and mechanical (use of harvesting equipment to remove vegetation) controls in both the canal system and stormwater detention ponds is encouraged. Manufacturers and EPA guidelines for chemical use in aquatic habitat will be followed. Policy 2.2.4: Continue and expand when needed the existing water quality monitoring program for sampling canals and rivers and assess the data annually. Policy 2.2.5: By December 31, 1998, identify stormwater management systems that are not meeting State water quality treatment standards. OBJECTIVE 2.3: All estuaries shall meet all applicable federal, state and local water quality standards. Policy 2.3.1: No new untreated point source discharge shall be permitted directly to the estuarine rivers or canals that flow into the estuarine system. Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:hro:~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tt Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:riSz:Sr:.zF~5 reflects proposed changes to the Trc primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 7 of 63 system or AGE~NDA ITEM current Growth 's'"ity~J~*~e2002 Collier CounO' Growth Management Platt Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 2.3.2: Stormwater systems discharging directly to estuaries shall be designed to meet the same requirements as stated in Policy 2.2.2. Policy 2.3.3: In an attempt to increase ground water levels and to restore the natural hydroperiod for the natural freshwater input to the estuarine system, any future modification of public water control structures in the watershed above the control structure which would amount to 50% or more of the cost of a new structure shall be designed to retain as much water as appropriate. Policy 2.3.4: Continue to implement and refine a water quality and sediment monitoring program for the estuarine system Policy 2.3.5: Continue to have staff coordinate with the City of Naples staff regarding coordinated and cooperative planning, management, and funding programs for limiting specific and cumulative impacts on Naples Bay and its watershed. At a minimum, this agreement includes the following: a. Insure adequate sites for water dependent uses, b. Prevent estuarine pollution, c. Control run-off, d. Protect living marine resources, e. Reduce exposure to natural hazards, f. Ensure public access, g. Provide a continuing monitoring program. Policy 2.3.6: Restrict development activities where such could adversely impact coastal water resources. OBJECTIVE 2.4: By June 30, 1998, complete a draft agreement with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection regarding coordinated and cooperative planning, management and monitoring programs for Rookery Bay and Cape Romano - Ten Thousand Islands Aquatic Preserves and their watersheds. The agreement shall identify the process for notifying FDEP of development projects within the watersheds of these preserve areas. Policy 2.4.1: At a minimum the County shall notify Department of Environmental Protection of proposed land development projects that could affect these preserves. Policy 2.4.2: The County shall request the Department of Environmental Protection staff to participate in the development of future coastal and watershed management plans. Text with single underline or single stri!;c:hrt.~£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to th, Managenlent Plan. Text with double underline or double c:.~i.~::~zc:.'~!: reflects proposed changes to the Tral primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 8 of 63 current Growth smitt , g ate 2002 Collier Counta' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 2.4.3: The County will request the cooperation of the Department of Environmental Protection to gather data and information needed for monitoring water quality, habitat changes and land use activities within the watersheds of these preserves. OBJECTIVE 2.5: The County will continue with the implementation of its estuarine management program by requiring development to meet its current standards addressing stormwater management, and the protection of seagrass beds, dune and strand, and wetland habitats. Policy 2.5.1: Identify land quality. use activities that have the potential to degrade the estuarine environmental Policy 2.5.2: This management program shall incorporate information obtained from the various watershed management plans described elsewhere in this Element. Policy 2.5.3: This program shall in part be based on the estuarine data analyses and management recommendations contained in the County's coastal management program's technical reports. Text with single, underline or single z:ri!:c:hr:~u~,!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tt Managetnent Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri&z:J:rz.:cg~: reflects proposed changes to the Trc primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 9 of 63 cur~;¢t~g ISr, owth Collier CounO' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element GOAL 3: THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT THE COUNTY'S GROUND WATER RESOURCES TO ENSURE THE HIGHEST WATER QUALITY PRACTICAL (I) OBJECTIVE 3.1: Ground water quality shall meet all applicable Federal and State water quality standards by January 2002 and shall be maintained thereafter. (I) Policy 3.1.1: Wellhead protection areas identified on the Future Land Use Map Series shall be protected as follows: 1. Wellhead protection areas shall consist of four (4) Wellfield Risk Management Zones defined as follows: a) W-1 is the land area surrounding the identified potable water wellfield wellheads and extends to the five percent ground water capture zone boundary line (which approximates the one year ground water travel time to the wellfield). b) W-2 is the land area between the W-1 boundary line and the ten percent ground water capture zone boundary line (which approximates the two year ground water travel time to the potable water wellfield). c) W-3 is the land area between the W-2 boundary line and the twenty-five percent ground water capture zone boundary line (which approximates the five year ground water travel time to the potable water wellfield). d) W-4 is the land area between the W-3 boundary line and the 100 percent ground water capture zone boundary line (which approximates the twenty year ground water travel time to the potable water wellfield). 2. Land uses are restricted within the wellfield risk management zones as follows: a) Future solid waste disposal facilities: prohibited in all wellfield risk management zones. b) Future solid waste transfer stations: prohibited in W-l, W-2, W-3. c) Future solid waste storage, collection, and recycling storing hazardous products and hazardous wastes: prohibited in W-l, W-2, W-3. d) Future non-residential uses involving hazardous products in quantities exceeding 250 liquid gallons or 1,000 pounds of solids: provide for absorption or secondary containment in W-l, W-2, W-3. e) Future domestic wastewater treatment plants: prohibited in f) Future land disposal systems: must meet high level disinfection standards as found in 40 CFR part 135. g) Land application of domestic residuals: limit metal concentrations, nitrogen based on uptake ability of vegetation), and require a conditional use. h) Future petroleum exploration and production and expansions of existing: prohibited in W-1 and W-2, conditional use required in W-3 and W-4. i) Future on-site disposal systems (septic tanks) requiring a soil absorption area greater than 1,000 square feet are allowed to discharge in zone W-1 subject to complying with construction standards and provision of an automatic dosing device and a Iow-pressure lateral distribution. j) On-site sewage disposal systems (septic tanks) serving existing industrial uses and subject to the thresholds in d) and e) above within wellfield zones W-l. W-2, and W- AGFd~DA ITEM Text with single underline or single s:ri!~c:hrc:~g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tl~e Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:yi:'.c:;::£'.~g?: reflects proposed changes to the ,'ansmittal la!tguase primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. JUN 1 8 2002 Page !0 of 63 Collier Count3.' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft ( 6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element 3 shall meet all construction and operating standards contained in 64E-10, F.A.C. as the rule existed on August 31, 1999 and shall implement a ground water monitoring plan. Conditional uses shall be granted only in extraordinary circumstances and where impacts of the development will be isolated from the Surficial and Intermediate Aquifer. (i) OBJECTIVE 3.2: The County shall implement a well construction compliance program under criteria specified in the Collier County Well Construction Ordinance, which is designed to ensure proper construction of wells and promote aquifer protection. (I) Policy 3.2.1: County inspectors who are appropriately trained and knowledgeable of drilling and grouting techniques required in Collier County will inspect the drilling and grouting process of all types of wells drilled in the County. (I) Policy 3.2.2: Implement the South Florida Water Management District's well construction standards in the Collier County Well Construction Ordinance that will provide for inspections and penalties if well drillers do not follow these standards. (I) Policy 3.2.3: A committee of well contractors and drillers, County staff, Health Department staff, and South Florida Management District staff will continue to evaluate the need for well construction standards that are more specific to Collier County and reflect Collier County conditions. (I) Policy 3.2.4: The County will inform well contractors and drillers and the public on the necessity for proper well construction and hold. workshops for well drillers on proper techniques for well construction in Collier County. (I) Policy 3.2,5: The County shall cooperate with the South Florida Water Management District in identifying and plugging improperly abandoned wells. (I) OBJECTIVE 3.3: Continue to identify, refine extents of, and map zones of influence and contribution around potable wellfields in order to identify activities that must be regulated to protect ground water quality near wellfields. (Refer to Objective 1.1 in the Natural Ground Water Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element.) (I) Policy 3.3.1: Maintain and refine a 3-dimensional computer model that calculates cones of depression around significantly sized existing and planned potable wellfields. Text with single underline or single c:ri!:c:hrc',~£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ~ reflects proposed changes to the Tran primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page ! 1 of 63 AGENDA ITEM current Growth ,,,itta~u[g~ 200~. Collier Count)' Growth Management Plat~ Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element (i) (I) Policy 3.3.2: Use the results of this analysis to modify the calculated "cones of influence" and amend the Comprehensive Plan to include these areas as "environmentally sensitive lands". Policy 3.3.3: Continue to identity and delineate existing land uses that possess the greatest potential for wellfield contamination. Policy 3.3.4: Continue to establish and apply technically and legally defensible criteria for determining and mapping zones of protection. (I) Former OBJECTIVE 3.3 and Policies 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4 [deleted] OBJECTIVE 3.4: Collect and evaluate data and information designed to monitor the quality of ground water in order to identify the need for additional protection measures. (Refer to Objective 1.3 in the Natural Ground Water Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element.) Policy 3,4.1: Continue the existing water quality monitoring program to provide base-line data, evaluate long-term trends, identify water quality problems, and evaluate the effectiveness of the County's ground water protection program. Policy 3.4.2: Coordinate data gathering activities with State and Federal agencies to minimize duplication of efforts and enhance the quality of information gathered. Policy 3.4.3: Assess the data annually to determine whether monitoring activities and County Ordinances require expansion, modification or reduction. Policy 3.4.4: Gather and use appropriate data to refine and improve the database used in the County's 3-dimensional ground water model. Text with single, underline or single s:ri!:c:hr:.;;gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::!5::/::T, xg:: reflects proposed changes to the primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 1.2 of 63 AGENDA ITEM !he c-rr~nt Collier CounO' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element GOAL 4: THE COUNTY SHALL CONSERVE, PROTECT AND APPROPRIATELY MANAGE THE COUNTY'S FRESH WATER RESOURCES. OBJECTIVE 4.1: Collect and evaluate data and information designed to more accurately determine water use in Collier County such as the County's database tracking all permitted wells and wells having consumptive use permits. Policy 4.1.1: Use as much as possible the existing reporting requirements and computer database of the South Florida Water Management District. Policy 4.1.2: Work with the agricultural community to devise a method for determining agricultural pumpage. Policy 4.1.3: Compile from appropriate local, State, Federal and private organizations the water use requirements of the native plant and animal community associations within the County. OBJECTIVE 4.2: The County will promote conservation of its water supply and by April 1, 1998, develop a comprehensive conservation strategy, which will identify specific goals for reducing per capita potable water consumption. Policy 4.2.1: Continue to rely on the South Florida Water Management District to take appropriate measures to conserve water in emergency situations. Policy 4.2.2: Negotiate agreements with area golf courses to accept and use treated wastewater effluent for irrigation when and where same is available from existing and future wastewater treatment plants. Policy 4.2.3: Identify existing and future publicly owned lands suitable for irrigation with treated wastewater effluent, such as government building grounds, parks and highway medians, and incorporate these into future planning for effluent disposal. Policy 4.2.4: Identify existing and future privately owned lands suitable for irrigation with treated wastewater effluent, such as cemeteries, agricultural operations, nurseries and commercial/industrial parks, and incorporate these into future planning for effluent disposal. Policy 4.2.5: Evaluate and make recommendations, where appropriate, for plumbing fixtures and landscapes that are designed for water conservation purposes. Policy 4.2.6: Evaluate and make recommendations, where appropriate, for plumbing fixtures and landscapes that are designed for water conservation purposes. AGENDA ITE. M Text with single underline or single c:dk.c:hrc:~£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tJ Management Platt. Text with double underline or double st:i::c::::z::F,.~: reflects proposed changes to the Trc prirnarily itt response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 13 of 63 cur t h 2002 Collier Count3' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element GOAL 5: THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT, CONSERVE AND APPROPRIATELY USE ITS MINERAL AND SOIL RESOURCES. OBJECTIVE 5.1: Allow the extraction or use of mineral resources in the County provided such activities comply with applicable industry and government standards regarding health, safety, and environmental protection. Policy 5.1.1: The County shall allow mineral extraction operations as provided in the zoning code. Policy 5.1.2: A water use plan must be prepared by the applicant and approved by the County Water Management Department before new mineral operations are permitted. Policy 5.1.3: Mineral extraction operations shall comply with standards and criteria as provided in the County's Excavation and Blasting Ordinances. Policy 5.1.4: Depth of excavation and dewatering shall be restricted in areas where saline water can intrude into the bottom of the pits. (Also, refer to Policy 3.3.1). Policy 5.1.5: Monitoring shall be required to determine compliance with State water quality standards. Mining activities shall stop if water quality standards are violated as a result of the mining operation. OBJECTIVE 5.2: Continue to reclaim the total disturbed area of extraction sites in order to ensure adequate assessment and mitigation of site specific and cumulative impacts resulting from mineral extraction activities. Policy 5.2.1: The Program will define reclamation standards for the protection and restoration of wildlife habitat. OBJECTIVE 5.3: On biennial basis, beginning in October, 1998, review and refine estimates of types and quantities of existing minable mineral resources in Collier County, based in information collected during previous biennium. Policy 5.3.1: Work with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Florida Geological Survey and local mining industry officials to inventory and evaluate the reserves in Collier County. Text with single underline or single s:ri.!:c:hro:;gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ~:ri.':::.~::~xg,': reflects proposed changes to the primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 14 of 63 Collier Counth' Growth Management Plat~ Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element OBJECTIVE 5.4: The County shall maintain its program to control soil erosion through its regulations identifying criteria to control and reduce soil erosion and sediment transport from construction and other nonagricultural land disturbing activities. Policy 5.4.1: Rely on the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service to provide the County with appropriate soil conservation guidelines for agriculture. Text with single, underline or single s:ri!cc:!:r~.:cg!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed change: Management Plan. Text with double underline or double c:.-i~.:::.':::.-xg:: reflects proposed changes to tJ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 to the current Growth Transmittal, l~rr~agc Page 15 of 63 Collier CounO' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6- I 1-021 Conservation and Coastal Management Element GOAL 6: THE COUNTY SHALL IDENTIFY, PROTECT, CONSERVE AND APPROPRIATELY USE ITS NATIVE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES AND WILDLIFE HABITAT. ;;'c'.!cndc, end hc:d':.'ccd Text with single underline or single c:rlkc:!;rc;;g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to t Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i~:c:/:r:.:.g/: reflects proposed changes to the Tr. primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 16 of 63 ~W:M)A frE~ e current Growth p~. Collier Count3.' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element · a,~.~ ~v-, ~l+~rr~4';.,~ 6~,,~1 ~.~;~+~ ~*,,, ~,~.~ D~P,q ,~( r~,,~+,, Text with single underline or single ;:;f'-.z:,%rc'.~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::f::c:;::u'.cgh reflects proposed changes to the T~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 17 of 63 m ! t ! D -~"""'A'd--' ' "': ~lax -~- ie current Growth Collier CounD' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Text with single, underline or single ~:dkc:,':.r~.:cg;; reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to i Management ?lan. Text with double underline or double ::ri.':::/:~:::g:: reflects proposed changes to the T~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior ~CC direction, or £AC/CCPC recommendatiOnSr Page 18 of 63 A~=NDA ITF~ Pi.. Collier Count), Growth Management Platt Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Dcca.'t.m:nt :f En:'!r:nmznta! Dc'.' Text with single underline or single crri!:c:Src'.;g,a. reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to th Management Plan. Text with double underline or double st~k~n~n~h reflects proposed changes to the Tra primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 19 of 63 " :AGENDA l'rE~ curr~ C ..... ~' xmittal language JUN 1 8 2002 pg. ,=%\\ Collier Count3.' Growth Management Platt Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Text with single underline or single s:rl/:c:/::'c.',;gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the ci Management Platt. Text with double underline or double z::".::c:.'::c.J:g;: reflects proposed changes to the Trans~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 20 of 63 hGENDA ITFJ~ rrent~.,tl; ~ ttal language JUN 1 8 20O2 Collier Count)' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element OBJECTIVE 6.;q The County shall protect native veqetative communities n;...~. ~-.~ ~, .... '~"'; e~-'";~q ' ~'"~, ~ '~^^;"~'~'~ ^- *"^ :' "~" through the application of minimum presewation requirements. The following policies provide criteria to make this objective measurable. ~:- ~:--':.----~ ........................ ~ ................................. r ........ ~ ...... t ...... ~ ..... ~ These policies shall spplv to ~11 of ~ollier ~ou~ty except for the Easter~ La~ds Studv ~rea: for which policies are reouired to be Text with single, underlin_e or single s:ri!:c:hrc, ug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the c Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri.':c:h:z'.;;:: reflects proposed changes to the Transn primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 21 of 63 rrent Growth ittallJ~Je8 20~,. Collier County Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6- I 1-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 6.1.1: For the County's Urban Desianated Area: Estates Desi~_nated Area: Conservation Desio_nated Area. and Aaricultural/Rural Mixed Use District.. Rural-Industrial District and Rural-Settlement Area District as designated on the FLUM: native vegetation shall be preserved on-site throuoh the application of the following preservation and veoetation retention standards and criteria, unless the development occurs within the Area of Critical State Concern (ACSCl where the ACSC standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element shall armlv. Notwithstandina the ACSC reouirements, this [~olicv shall apply to all non-aoricultural development except for sinale-familv dwellino units situated on individual lots or parcels. The standards and criteria Drovided for in this Policy may chanoe for the area ooverned bv the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. which is currently under restudy= by Plan amendment. Coastal Hioh Hazard Area Non-Coastal Hioh Hazard Area Less than 2.5 acres 10% Less than 5 acre,s, 10% Residential and Mixed Use Eoual to or oreater Greater than 5 acres D~Le,~42J3~cJ~ than 2.5 ac. 25% and less than 20 acres. 15% greater than 20 ac. 25% Golf Course 35% 35% Commercial and Industrial Less than 5 acres. 10% Less than 5 acres. 10% Eaual to or greater ~. than 5 acres. 15% areater than 5 acres. 15% Industrial Development fRural- 50%. not to exceed 25% of the 50%. not to exceed 25% of the Industrial District onlv~ [~roiect site. Droiect site. The followino standards and criteria shall ODDLY to the veoetation retention reauirements referenced above: ~11 For the [~uroose of this policy.. "native vegetation" is defined as a vegetative community havino 75% or less canoov ¢overaoe of melaleuca or other invasive exotic plant soecies. The veoetation retention requirements specified in this policy are calculated based on the amount of "native veoetation" that conforms to this definition. (2~ The preservation of native ve.a. etation shall include canopy: under-story and oround cover .emphasizino the largest contig, uous area possible. (31 Areas that fulfill the native veg. etation retention standards and criteria of this policy shall be set aside as preserve areas. All on-site or off-site oreserve areas shall be identified as seoarate tracts and r~rotected by a permanent conservation easement to pr{ development, consistent with the reauirements of this policy. Text with single, underline or single ~0":~'~'~ ............ ....... z,,.s' reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ~ reflects proposed changes to the Tran primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or E~4C/CCPC recort~endations. Page 22 of 63 hihit fHrth~.r AGENDA ITEM 'urrent Growth nitta~ulg8 2002 Collier County Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft t6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element (4) Selection of preservation areas shall reflect the following criteria in descending order of priority: a. Onsite wetlands shall be preserved pursuant to Policy 6.2.4 of this element; b. Areas known to be utilized b.v listed species or that serve as corridors for the movement of wildlife shall be preserved and protected in order to facilitate the movement of wildlife throuoh the site. This criterion shall be consistent with the reouirements of Policy 7.1.1 of this element. Parcels containina oopher tortoises shall protect the largest; most contiouous oopher tortoise habitat with the oreatest number of active burrows, and orovide a connection to off site adjacent oopher tortoise preserves. c. Upland habitat shall be part of the r)reservation reouirement when wetlands alone do not constitute all of the requirement. Upland habitats have the followina descendino order 1. Any upland habitat that serves as a buffer to a wetland area, 2. Listed plant and animal species habitats. 3. Xeric Scrub.. 4. Dune and Strand: Hardwood Hammocks. 5. Dry Prairie, Pine Flatwcods: and 6. All other upland habitats. d. Exceptions to these priorities are noted in (7) below. (5) Passive recreational uses such as pervious nature trails or boardwalks are allowed within the preserve areas, as long as an.v clearing required to facilitate these uses does not impact the minimum rec]uired veaetation. (§) A management plan shall be submitted 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., and maintenance of permitted facilities. (7~ Exceptions, by means of mitigation in the form of increased landscape requirements shall be granted for parcels that cannot reasonably accommodate both the preservation area and the proposed activity. Criteria for allowing these exceptions include: (~) Where site elevations or conditions requires placement of fill thereby harming or reducing the survivabilit.v of the native vegetation in its existing locations: (b) Where the existing vegetation required by this oolicv is located where proposed site improvements are to be located and such improvements can not be relocated as to protect the existina native vegetation: (¢) Where native preservation requirements are not accommodated., the landscape pian shall re-create a native olant community in all three strata (around covers: shrubs and trees), utilizina laroer r)lant materials so as to more ouickl.v re-create the lost mature (8) Parcels that were leoallv cleared of native vegetation Drior to January 1989 shall be exempt from this reouirement. (9) Preservation areas shall be interconnected within the site and to adioining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors. (10) Should the amount of wetland veaetation exceed the minimum veaetation reauirements as specified herein: retention of wetland veoetation havino sianificant habitat or hvdroloaic value is encouraoed. Increased preservation shall be fostered through incentives including, but not limited to: clustered development: reduced development standards such as open space: setbacks: and landscape buffers: to allow for increased areas of prese, rved Text with single, underline or single s::'i.&c:hr~.:~g~ reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the cur Management Plan. Text with double underline or double st, il~vd~,~gh reflects proposed changes to the Transmit primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 23 of 63 ent O~n,th ~ language JUN 1 8 2002 Collier CounO' Growth Management Pla~ Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Elemet~t wetland veoetation. Sic~nificant habitat or hydrologic value is determined by wetland function, not the size of the wetland. Policy 6.;r1.~2: For the County's Rural Frin.qe Mixed Use District. as designated on the FLUM. native veqetation shall be preserved on site through the application of the followin,q preservation and veqetation retention standards and criteria: Preservation and Native Veqetation Retention Standards: a. Receivinq Lands: A minimum of. 40% of the native vegetation present, not to exceed 25% of the total site area shall be preserved. b. Neutral Lands: A minimum of 60% of the native ve.qetation present, not to exceed 45% of the total site area shall be preserved. c. Non-NRPA Sendinq Lands: Calculated at the hiqher value of 80% of the native ve.qetation present, or 80% of the total site area; d. NRPA Sending Lands: Calculated at the hiqher value of 90% of the native vegetation present, or 90% of the total site area. or as ma.v otherwise be r)ermitted under the Density Blending provisions e. Provisions a. throu.qh d. above shall also be consistent with the wetland protection policies set forth under CCME Objective 6.@~. f. In order to ensure reasonable use and to protect the private property riqhts of owners of smaller parcels of land within lands designated Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District on the Future Land Use Map, includinq nonconforming lots of record which existed on or before June 22, 1999, for lots, parcels or fractional units of land or water equal to or less than five (5) acres in size, ~ native vegetation clearing ~ shall be allowed, at e m!~!mvm 20% or 25,000 square feet of the lot or parcel or fractional unit, whichever is greater, exclusive of any clearinq necessary to provide for a 15-foot wide access drive up to 660 feet in length. For lots and parcels qreater than 5 acres but less than 10 acres, up to 20% of the parcel may be cleared. This allowance shall not be considered a maximum clearing allowance where other provisions of this Plan allow for greater cleafin.q amounts. These clearing limitations shall not prohibit the clearinq of brush or under-story vegetation within 200 feet of structures in order to minimize wildfire fuel sources. .Cl. Within Receiving and Neutral lands where schools and other public facilities are co- located on a site, the native vegetation retention requirement shall be 30% of the native ve.qetation present, not to exceed 25% of the site. (1) For the purpose of this policy, "native vegetation" is defined as a vegetative community havinq 75% or less canopy coverage of melalueca or other invasive exotic plant species. The ve.qetation retention requirements specified in this policy are calculated on the amount of "native vegetation" that conforms to this definition. (2) The preservation of native vegetation shall include canopy, under-story and ground cover, emphasizing the larqest contiguous area possible. (3) Areas that fulfill the native vegetation retention standards and criteria of this policy shall be set aside as preserve areas. All onsite or offsite preserve areas shall be lentified aC Text with single underline or single z:ri!;z:hrcug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the Managetnent Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i;cv:J:r:.:cg.~: reflects proposed changes to the Trans primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 24 of 63 urrent Growth Collier Counn' Growth Management Pla~ Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02 ~ Consen'ation and Coastal Management Elemet~t separate tracts and protected by a permanent conservation easement to prohibit further development, consistent with the requirements of this policy. (4) Selection of the preserve areas shall reflect the following criteria in descendinq order of priority: a. Onsite wetlands shall be preserved pursuant to Policy 6.~.~3~2.5 of this element; b. Areas known to be utilized by listed species or that serve as corridors for the movement of wildlife shall be preserved and protected in order to facilitate the movement of wildlife through the site. This criterion shall be consistent with the requirements of Policy 7.44.1,1 of this element. Parcels containing gopher tortoises shall protect the larqest, most contiguous gopher tortoise habitat with the greatest number of active burrows, and provide a connection to off site adjacent gopher tortoise preserves. c. Upland habitat shall be part of the preservation requirement when wetlands alone do not constitute all of the requirement. Upland habitats have the following descending order of priority: 1. Any upland habitat that serves as a buffer to a wetland area. 2. Listed plant and animal species habitats, 3. Xeric Scrub, 4. Dune and Strand, Hardwood Hammocks, 5. Dry Prairie, Pine Flatwoodsl and 6. All other upland habitats. (5) Passive recreational uses such as pervious nature trails or boardwalks are allowed within the preserve areas, as Ionq as any clearinq required to facilitate these uses does not impact the minimum required native vegetation. {6) A management plan shall be submitted 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 manaqement, and maintenance pt permitted facilities. (7) Off-site preservation shall be allowed to provide flexibility in the project desi.qn. a. Within Receivin.q Lands, off-site preservation shall be allowed for up to 50% of the veqetation retention requirement. 1. Off-site preservation areas shall be allowed at a ratio of 1:1 if such off-site (8) preservation is located within desi.qnated Sending Lands or at a ratio of 1.5:1 anywhere else. 2. Like for like preservation shall be required for Tropical Hardwood and Oak Hammock vegetative communities. b. Within non-NRPA Sending Lands, off-site preservation shall be allowed for up to 25% of the site preservation or vegetative retention requirement, whichever is controlling. 1. Off-site preservation areas shall be contiguous to designated Sending Lands and shall be allowed at a ratio of 3:1. c. Off-site preservation shall not be allowed in NRPA Sendinq Lands. Density Bonus Incentives shall be granted to encourage preservation amounts greater than that required in this policy, as provided for in the FLUE for Receivino Lands and Rural Villaaes. -r~.;~ ~. ...... ~..,, ~,, ~,, ..... ~ ~,.. ~-^. *~- ....~ .~* ...... ~-~ '~' .... ; .... ............................... ! ~,~ .... ~ I~'Vl~ ~''~''T '~ .... ~ ................... ch!to :!!o:'.'cg for Rur:! \'[!!xqcc. Within one (1) year of the effective date of these Text with single underline or single s:ri~c:!:r:.::gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the cu Management Plan. Text with double underline or double gt:-iJ:c:/:rz::g.': reflects proposed changes to the Transmit primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 25 of 63 'ent O~O-,'t ~ al language JUN 1 8 200 Collier Count' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Eleme~t (9) (10) (11) (12) amendments, Collier County shall adopt specific land development reflulations to implement this incentive pro.qram. On-site preservation areas shall also conform to the Open Space requirements as specified in the Future Land Use Element. These preservations shall be part of and counted towards the Open Space requirements. ExistinR native veRetation that is located contiRuous to the natural reservation shall be preserved pursuant to Policy 6.5.2 of this element. Natural reservation is defined as that specified in CCME Objective 6.5 of this element; Preservation areas shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoinin,q off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors; e!onc ..... .... ~ ...... .',,., ..... "-~'..._ ..... '~'~ po.'t.!cn '-'_ ........ "-^ -';*'-_ rcq'_'~rcd '~._ '-~__ prcc'cr:__.'2_. Should th. amount of wetland veoetation exceed the minimum vegetation reouirements as specified herein, retention of wetland veoetation havino sionificant habitat or hvdroloaic value i~ encouraoed. Increased preservation shall be fostered through incentives includino, but not limited to: clustered development, reduced development standards such as open space. setbacks: and andscaoe buffers: to allow for increased areas of preserved wetland veoetation. Significant habitat or hydrologic value is determined b.v wetland function,, not the size of the wetland. Policy 6.;[_1_.a,~ Prohibited invasive exotic veqetation shall be removed from all new developments. (1) Applicants for development permits shall submit and implement plans for invasive exotic plant removal and Ionq-term control. (2) Maintenance plans shall describe specific techniques to prevent re-invasion by prohibited exotic vegetation of the site in perpetuity. (3) The County shall maintain a list of prohibited invasive exotic veqetation in the Land Development Code and update it as necessary. Policy 6.~1.~a4_ Aqriculture shall be exempt from the above preservation requirements contained in Policy 6.~:~.l~and 6.1.2 of this element provided that any new clearin.q of land for aqriculture shall not be converted to non-a,qricultural development for 25 years. For any such conversions in less than 25 years, the requirements of Policy 6.~.1.1 and 6.1.2 of this element shall be applied to the site at the time of the conversion. The percenta,qe of native veqetation preserved shall be calculated on the amount of ve.qetation occurring at the time of the agricultural clearinq, and it found to be deficient, a native plant community shall be restored to re-create a native plant community in all three strata (ground covers, shrubs and trees}l ut izinq lar.qer plant materials so as to more quickly re-create the lost mature vegetation. Policy Exemptions from the '~ .... , ~.;~ ~,;~^.~ ~ ,,... r',:~,.;~, _rDc,..c!c~mc.-.t ~,~.-'~-."-- 13~tive veoetation retention reauirements of CCME Policy 6.1.2- ..~^ ...... .. .... ;'~'~--- ~^'.~ .............. ;- "~'" '-;~' """~'- .... , T~he requirements of this D!ctrL. t Policv shall not apply to, affect or limit the continuation of existing, uses. Ex sting uses shall include; those uses for which all required permits were issued prior to ~ or ~ ~for which ii I " n ' ' ' b_y_the County_grior to Text with single underline or single s:ri!w:hr~.ugk reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the t Management Plan. Text with double underline or double zJTi.~c:r~.7~.2~g,s'. reflecls proposed changes to the Transt prflnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 26 of 63 ~rrent Growth ittal I.~a4e~ 2002 Collier Count3' Growth Managernent Pla/~ Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11- 02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element 2002: or. land use petitions for which a completed application has been submitted and which have been determined to be vested from the requirements of the Final Order prior to June 18, 2002. The continuation of existinq uses shall include expansions of those uses if such expansions are consistent with or clearly ancillary to the existinq uses. Hereafter, such previously approved developments shall be deemed to be consistent with the Plan's Goals, Policies and Obiectives for the Rural Fringe area, and they may be built out in accordance with their previously approved plans. Changes to these previous approvals shall also be deemed to be consistent with the Plan's Goals, Objectives and Policies for the Rural Frinqe Area as Ionq as they do not result in an increase in development density or intensity. On the County owned land located in Section 25, Township 26 E, Range 49 S (+/-360 acres), the native veqetation retention and site preservation requirements may be reduced to 50% if the permitted uses are restricted to the portions of the property that are contiguous to the existinq land fill operations; exotic removal will be required on the entire +/- 360 acres. Policy 6.;~ The County shall require native vegetation to be incorporated into landscape designs in order to promote the preservation of native plant communities and to encouraqe water conservation. This shall be accomplished by: {1) Providing incentives for retaining existing native vegetation in landscaped areas; (2) Establishing minimum native veqetation requirements for new landscaping; and, (3) Wet detention ponds within the Urban Designated area shall have a littoral shelf with an area equal to 2.5% of the ponds surface area measured at the control elevation and be planted with native aquatic vegetation. Wet detention ponds within the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District, shall have a littoral shelf with an area equal to 30% of the ponds surface area measured at the control elevation and be planted with native aquatic veqetation. Policy 6.;~1._~Z An Environmental Impact Statement (ELS) is required, to provide a method to objectively evaluate the impact of a proposed development, site alteration, or project upon the resources and environmental quality of the project area and the community and to insure that plannin.q and zoninq decisions are made with a complete understandinq of the impact of such decisions upon the environment, to encourage projects and developments that will protect, conserve and enhance, but not degrade, the environmental quality and resources of the particular project or development site, the general area and the .qreater community. An ElS shall be required for: 1. Any site with an ST or ACSC-ST overlay, or within the boundaries of Sendinq Lands or NRPAs. 2. All sites seaward of the Coastal High Hazard Area boundary that are 2.5 or more acres. 3. All sites landward of the Coastal Hi.qh Hazard Area boundary that are ten or more acres. 4. Any other development or site alteration, which in the opinion of the development services director, would have substantial impact upon environmental quality. The ElS requirement does not apply to a sinqle family or duplex use on a single lot or parcel. The ElS requirement may be waived subject to the fol owing: 1. Agricultural uses as defined in 9J-5.003(2), includin.q aquaculture for native species. 2. After inspection by County staff and filin.q of a written report, any land or parcel of land has been so altered as to have irreparable damage to the ecoloqical, draina.cle, or groundwater recharqe functions; or that the development of the site will improve or A,G~.NOA ITEM 'ent q~'tt, al la~i~'~'~a~~--- Text with single underline or single s:ri~c:hr~,::g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes lo the cm Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri.~:::.l::~::;.~: reflects proposed changes to the Transmii primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 27 of 63 JUN 1 8 2002 Collier CounO~ Growth Management Plat~ Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element correct the existinq ecolo.qical functions or not require any major alteration of the existin.q landforms, drainage, or flora and fauna elements of the property. For thu purpose of this policy, maior alteration shall mean greater than 10% of the site. Exemptions shall not apply to any parcel with an ST or ACSC-ST overlay, or within the boundaries of Sending Lands or NRPAs except for single family homes or as otherwise allowed by the ST or ACSC-ST criteria. The County shall provide for adeauate staff to imolement the POliCies supDortina Objective 6.1. OBJECTIVE 6.82: The Coun shall rotect and conserve wetlands and the n~atural functions of wetlands.~ ~ ~The f~~riteria to make ~ measurable.-=T,h~ ,, ;_ .:_ __., ~ .. ., _ :.~ ., · -, -- o,- =' '"' These oolicie$ _'_C ..................... · ........ -~ ...... , ...... shall aool_v to all of Collier County except for the Eastern Lands Study Area: for which policies are reouired to be adoeted by November 1; 2002. As required by Florida Administrative Code 9J5-5.006(1)(b), wetlands identified by the 1994-95 SFWMD land use and land cover inventory are mapped on the Future Land Use Map series. These areas shall be verified by a jurisdictional field delineation, subiect to Policy 6.82.2 of this element, at the time of project permttinq to determine the exact location of jurisdictional wetland boundaries. Wetlands shall be defined pursuant to Section 373.019 Florida Statutes. The location of iurisdictional wetland boundaries are further described by the delineation methodoloRy i~ Section 373.421 Florida Statutes. Policy 6.-82. ,3 Collier Coun~ shall implement a comprehensive process to ensure wetlands and the natural functions of wetlands are protected and conserved. The process outlined within this policy is primarily based on directinq concentrated population qrowth and intensive development away from large connected wetland systems. These wetland systems have been identified based o~ their type, values, functions, sizes, conditions and locations within Collier County. Thesu systems predominantly occur east of the Urban boundary. Many fall within public lands or land~ taroeted for acouisition. Hioh ouality wetlands systems located on private property are primarily protected throuoh native veaetation preservation reouirements, or throuoh existina PUD commitments: conservation easements, or via the NRPA or Sendin(~ designations in the Rural Frinoe. Protection measures for wetlands and wetland systems located within the Easten, Lands portion of the County's Rural and Aoricultural Assessment fdeDicted on the FLUM) will be adopted odor to November 1. 2002. Within the Urban and Estates desianated areas of thu County. the County will rely on the jurisdictional determinations made by the applicable state or federal aoencv. Where permits issued by such state or federal aqencies allow for i ~Dacts tu AC_.~ID A ITEM Text with single underline or single stri~:hr:.::£!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the cm Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-15::/::-~::~.5 reflects proposed changes to the Transmi, primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 28 of 63 language JUN 1 8 2002 Collier Countx' Growth Management Pla~t Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element wetlands within Urban and Estates designated areas and require mitigation for such impacts, this shall be deemed to preserve and protect wetlands and their functions. The larqe connected wetland systems that exist at the landscape scale in Collier County shall be protected through various Land Use Designations and Overlays that restrict higher intensity land uses and require specific land development standards for the remaininq allowable land uses. Collier County shall direct incompatible land uses away from these larqe landscape scale wetland systems by the following mechanisms: (1) Conservation Des~qnation Best available data indicates that 76% of all wetlands found in Collier County are contained within the boundary of the land desiqnated as Conservation on the Future Land Use Map. The overall purpose of the Conservation Desiqnation is to conserve and maintain the natural resources of Collier County and their associated environmental, recreational, and economic benefits. The allowed land uses specified in the FLUE's Conservation Designation (Reference FLUE Land Use Des~qnation Section IV.) will accommodate limited residential development and future non-residential development. These limitations support Collier County's comprehensive process to direct concentrated population growth and intensive land development away from larqe connected wetland systems. (2) Biq Cypress Area of Critical State Concern Overlay (ACSC) Best available data indicates that 74% of the County's wetlands are within the Biq Cypress Area of Critical State Concern Overlay. The land development requlations contained in the ACSC Overlay District on the Future Land Use Map provide standards that facilitate the goal of directinq higher intensity land uses away from wetland systems. The development standards for the ACSC Overlay specifies that site alterations shall be limited to 10% of the total site. A larqe percentaqe of the land contained within the ACSC is also within the Conservation Desiqnation and thus is subject to the land use limitations of that Land Use Designation. (Land Use Desi.qnation Section V.) (3) Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs) Major wetland systems and reqional flow-ways were used as criteria to establish the NRPA Overlay District as shown on the Future Land Use Map. These areas identify hi.qh functioninq wetland systems in the County and represent an additional 12%___ of County wetlands that are not located in Conservation Lands. Based on the relatively hi.qh concentration of wetlands within NRPA desiqnated lands, incompatible land uses shall be directed away from these areas. ~ ,~ ..... ;~;~ ~-~ ......... ;~';~-~ ) Allowable land uses for ~ NRPAs '~* ~'~ '~'~ n thc ~ ...., ~.:~ ,,~ ,,~ n,~,.t~, are also subject to native vegetation and presewation standards of 90%. (Reference CCME.~';~- (4) Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sendm~ Lands Best available data indicates that 16,000~ acres of wetlands are contained within designated Sendin~ Lands constitutin~ 70%~ of land cover in these areas. Incompatible land uses are directed away from the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District Sendinq Lands throuqh an incentive-based Transfer of Development Rights Pro~ram that allows land owners within these Sendinq Lands to transfer their residential densiW out of the Sendinq Lands to Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Receivin~ Lands. Incompatible land uses are also directed away from Sendinq Lands by restrictinq allowable uses. (Reference FLUE Rural Frin.qe Mixed Use District.) Finally, allowable uses within these lands are also subject to Text with single underline or single $:rikc:hro;;g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tit Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri::::/:r~:~g:: reflects proposed changes to the Tra primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 29 of 63 AGENi~A ITENt currier Cr;: :,th c~ ~mittal language JUN 1 8 2002 Collier Counta' Growth Management Platt Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element native ve.qetation retention and preservation standards of 80% to 90%. (Reference CCME Po/ic , 6. 7. l) Collier County shall allow for more intensive development to occur in Rural Frinqe Receivin,q Lands, North Golden Gate Estates, the Rural-Settlement Area District, and the Urban Designated Areas subject to the land uses identified in the Future Land Use Element, the Immokalee Area Master Plan, and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. These areas account for only 6% of Collier County's wetlands. Except for tidal wetlands within the coastal portion of the Urban Designated Area, the County finds that the wetland systems in these areas are more fraqmented and altered than those systems located within the Conservation Lands, ACSC and NRPA overlays, and Rural Fringe Sendin.q Lands. On a project-specific basis, wetlands and wetland functions shall be protected throuqh the following mechanisms: (1) Federal and State jurisdictional a.qency review and wetland permittin,q; (2) Vegetation preservation policies supporting CCME Objective 6.~_1_; (3) Wetland protection policies supportin.q CCME Objective 6.~,2; and (4) Clusterin.q provisions specified in the FLUE (Reference FLUE Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District.). Within the Urban Designated area. the County shall rely on the wetland jurisdictional determinations and permit requirements issued by the applicable jurisdictional agency. This policy shall be implemented as follows: (1) Where permits issued by such jurisdictional agencies allow for impacts to wetlands within this designated area and require mitigation for such impacts: this shall be deemed to meet the objective of protection and conservation of wetlands and the natural functions of wetlands within this area. (2) The County shall require the appropriate jurisdictional permit prior to the issuance of a final local development order permitting site improvements., except in the case of single-family residences which are not part of an approved development or are not platted. (3) Collier County will work with the jurisdictional agencies and applicants to encourage mitigation to occur within targeted areas of the County including; but not limited to: Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs~: lands targeted for a acquisition by a public entity such as CREW lands; public or private mitigation banks; and other areas appropriate for mitigation: such as flow ways and areas containing habitat for listed species. (4~ Within the Immokalee Urban Designated Area. there exists high quality wetland system connected to the Lake Trafford/Camp Keais system. These wetlands require greater protection measures and therefore the wetland orotection standards set forth in Policy 6.2.5 shall aoDIv in this area. As part of the County's Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), the County. shall identify this area and map its boundaries on the Future Land Use Map. Text with single underline or single s:ri!;c:kra;cgh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:r!..~:ct.~:rc:.'g:: reflects proposed changes to the Trar primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 30 of 63 AGENDA ITEM curre~Growth ~ mittat languag~ JUN 1 8 2OO2 Collier County Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element c~~_ .... ~ ....... ~vv~' ' '~ .... ~ r" PI, v ....~ ~, ..j .... I'"'' ~ ' .v.~. ,~ ~ .............. ............ ~. .... ~,,,r,-~-.~,~ ....~ ~v~ ~..~! ,,~.,, .,,~ ,,,.,,i,,~ .............. "1 ..... ~''~ ~ ...... "1 "' assessment score ,qreater than 0.65 shall be required to be retained exceedinq the acreaqe required by Policy 6...-7:41,2 of this element. b. Wetlands utilized by listed species or servin,q as corridors for the movement of wildlife shall be preserved on site. c. Wetland flowways throu,qh the proiect shall be maintained. d, Pror>osed develoDment shall demonstrate that ground water table drawdowns or diversions will not adversely change the hydror>eriod of preserved wetlands on or offsite. Detention and control elevations shall be set to protect surroundina wetlands and be consistent with surrounding land and r>roject control elevations and water tables. In order to meet these requirements., proiects shall be desioned in accordance with Sections 4.2.2.4, 6.11 and 6.12 of SFWMD's Basis of Review. January. 2001. e. Upland ve.qetative communities may be utilized to meet the ve,qetative preservation requirements of Policy 6...:7~-. 1.2 of this element when the wetland functional assessment score is less than 0.65. (2) In order to assess the values and functions of wetlands at the time of project review, applicants shall rate functionality of wetlands using the South Florida Water Manaaement District's Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP).. as described in Technical Publication Re.a.-001. dated September 1997, and ur>dated August 1999: until such time as the District adopts the proposed Unified Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method. described Policy 6..82.5: Within the Rural Frinae Mixed Use District, Collier County shall direct land uses away from hi,qher functioning wetlands by limitin,q direct impacts within wetlands based upon the ve,qetation requirements of Policy 6.~-4.1.2 of this element.-~ the wetland functionality assessment described ir. P-'_!!c;' ~.°_.'! cf th!: 'c!cmcnt below in DaraoraDh (2)1 and the final permitting requirements of the South Florida Water Manaqement District. A direct impact is hereby defined as the dred.qin.q or fillinq of a wetland or adversely chanaina the hydroperiod of a wetland. This policy shall be implemented as follows: (1} The County shall apply the ve,qetation retention requirements of Policy 6..2-~-..1.2 of this element to preserve an appropriate amount of native veqetation on site. Wetlands shall be preserved as part of this veqetation requirement accordinq to the followinq criteria: a. The acrea,qe requirements of Policy 6..:~-~-.. 1.2 of this element shall be met by preservin,q wetlands with the hi,qhest wetland functionality scores. Wetland functionality assessment scores shall be those described in paragraph (2) of this policy. Wetlands havinq functionality assessment scores of at least 0.65 shall be preserved on site. This policy is not intended in all cases to require preservation of wetlands exceedinq the acreaqe required by Policy 6...m4-. 1.2 of this element. Within one year, the County shall develop specific criteria to be used to determine when wetlands havinq a functionality Text with single underline or single ::ri!:::hrc:;g/: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the Management Plan. Text with double underline or double :::i'.:::::::::g~ reflects proposed changes to the Tran~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 31 of 63 'urrerl~ijrowth ~ Ninal language JUN 1 8 2002 Collier Count3' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02~ Conservation and Coastal Management Element in draft form and identified as F.A.C. Chapter 62-345-Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method. The applicant shall submit to county staff, aoency accepted WRAP' scores. County staff shall review this functionality assessment as Dart of the County's El5 provisions and shall use the results to direct incompatible land uses away from the highest functionino wetlands accordino to the requirements found in paraoraph (1) above. f3~ All direct impacts shall be mitiqated for pursuant to the requirements of ~ paraoraph (6) of this ~ Dolic.v, (4} Sinqle family residences shall follow the requirements contained within Policy ~ 6.2.7 of this element. The CounW shall separate oreserved wetlands from other land uses with appropriate bufferinq reouirements. The County shall reouire a minimum 50-foot veoetated upland buffer adiacent to a natural water body, and for other wetlands a minimum 25-foot yeoetated upland buffer adjacent to the wetland. A structural buffer may be used in coniunction with a veoetative buffer that would reduce the veoetative buffer width b.v 50%. A structural buffer shall be required adjacent to wetlands where direct impacts are allowed. Wetland buffers shall conform to the following standards: ¢. The buffer shall be measured landward from the approved jurisdictional line. b. The buffer zone shall consist of preserved native vegetation. Where native veoetation does not exist, native vegetation compatible with the existina soils and expected hydrologic conditions shall be planted. ¢, The buffer shall be maintained free of Cateqory I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. O. The followino land uses are considered to be compatible with wetland functions and are allowed within the buffer: 1, Passive recreational areas, boardwalks and recreational shelters: 2. Pervious nature trails: 3. Water management structures: 4, Mitigation areas: 5. Any other conservation and related open space activity or use which is comparable in nature with the foreaoing uses. e. A structural buffer may consist of a stem-wall, berm, or vegetative hedge with suitable fencina. (6) Mitigation'~hall be required for direct impacts to wetlands in order to result in no net loss of wetland functions. a, Mitigation Requirements: 1, "No net loss of wetland functions" shall mean that the wetland functional score of the proposed mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland functional score of the impacted wetlands. However; in no case shall the acreage proposed for mitigation be less than the acreaoe being impacted. Loss of storage or conveyance volume resultino from direct impacts to wetlands shall be compensated for by providino an equal amount of storage or conveyance capacity on site and within or adjacent to the impacted wetland. Protection shall be provided for Preserved or created wetland or upland veoetative communities offered as mitigation by olacino a conservation easement over the land in perpetuity, providing for initial exotic plant removal fClass I invasive exotic plants defined bv the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council) and continuin.g exotic plant maintenance. AG~I',,E) A ITE.~ Text with single underline or single s:ri!rc:hrc'.~g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the cu Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri.':c:/:rzzg/: reflects proposed changes to the Transm~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 32 of 63 rent Growth ,ac Icj l . 8 2002 Collier Count' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6- I 1-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element 4. Prior to issuance of any final development order that authorizes site alteration, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with oaragraphs f6)a.1, (6)a.2. and (6)a.3 of this policy. If agency permits have not provided mitioation consistent with this policy, Collier County will require mitigation exceeding that of the iurisdictional agencies. 5. Mitioation requirements for single-famil.v lots shall be determined by the State and Federal aoencies durino their oermittino process., pursuant to the requirements ot Policy 6.2.7 of this element. Mitioation Incentives: 1. -(~ollier County shall encoura.qe certain types of mitigation by providina a variety of incentives in the form of density bonuses and credits to open space and veoetation retention reouirements. Density bonuses shall be limited to no more than 10% ot the allowed density. 2. Preferred mitioation activities that would qualify for these incentives include, but are not limited: to the following: (al Adding wetland habitat to or restoring wetland functions within Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sendina Lands. (bi Creatino. enhancing or restoring wadino bird habitat to be located near wood ~;tork.. and/or other wading bird colonies. 3. Within one (1/ .year of the effective date of these amendments. Collier County shall adopt specific criteria in the LDC to implement this incentive program, and to identify other mitioation priorities. .... ~ ........ ~., ~ ..... ~ ........ ~ ....~ .......... ~l~l"-''v'~ I .... ~ ............. .'t.-'t'.:'r, ':.'!th th_-' forc.qc!n.q ~ AGEI~-A iTE~ Text with single underline or single .;tri.~:rthroush reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the urrent Growth Management Pla,,. Text ,'itt, double underline or double z::~::::.'::z'.:;h reflects proposed change* to the Dan, ~ittalj~j[~a~e~ prirnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 33 of 63 Pg. ~'~- Collier CounO~ Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Drab (6-11-02~ Conservation attd Coastal Management Element Within the Urban Desianation and the Rural Frinae Mixed Use District~ ~/~wetland preservation, buffer areas, and miti,qation areas shall be dedicated as conservation and common areas in the form of dood.__...-'~"~'=~'~ ...... ..... -. +'-....__,.q~-.. conservation easements and shall be identified or platted as separate tracts: and, in the case of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), these areas shall also be depicted on the PUD Master Plan. These areas shall be maintained free from trash and debris and from Cate(Ion/I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. Land uses allowed in these areas shall be limited to those listed i~ Policy E.E.~('!.~ ..6.2.5(5~d of this element and shall not include any other activities that aru detrimental to draina.qe, flood control, water conservation, erosion control or fish and wildlifu habitat conservation and preservation. Text with single underline or single strl;ar:.a, ra'ag!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to th Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'i::c:.~::'z:cg.~. reflects proposed changes to thc Trai primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 34 of 63 AGENDA ITEM currJ~O. Growth smittal language JUN 1 8 2002 Collier Count3' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 6.2.7 Within the Estates Designated Area and the Rural Settlement Area~ the County shall rely on the wetland jurisdictional determinations and permit requirements issued by the applicable jurisdictional agency. This policy shall be implemented as follows: (1) For single-family residences within Southern Golden Gate Estates or within the Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern. the County shall require the appropriate federal and state wetland-related permits before Collier County issues a buildina permit, (2~ Outside of Southern Golden Gate Estates and the Area of Critical State Concern. Collier County shall inform aDr)licants for individual sing. le-family buildino permits that federal and state wetland permits may be required prior to construction. The County shall also notify the applicable federal and state aoencies of single family building, permits applications in these areas, (3) Within one (1) year of the adoption of these amendments. Collier County shall work with federal and state agencies to identify properties that have a hioh probabilities of wetlands or listed species occurrence. The identification process will be based on Hvdric soils data and other applicable criteria. Once this identification process is complete, the County will determine if it is sufficiently accurate to reouire federal and state wetland approvals prior to issuing a building permit within these areas. The County shall use this information to inform property owners of the potential existence of wetlands on their property. Policy 6.~,2..'~. ~ The County shall provide for adequate staff to implement *"...~_ ........ ,.. .... ;~;~--v.v.._ the .r)olicies supporting Ob!ective 6.2. OBJECTIVE 6.3 The County shall protect and conserve submerged marine habitats. Policy 6.3.1 The amount of oermitted wet slips for marinas shall be no more than 18 boat slir)s for every. 100 feet of shoreline where impacts to sea-grass beds are less than 100 square feet. When more than 100 square feet of sea-9, rass beds are impacted, then no more than 10 boat slips for every 100 feet of shoreline are allowed. Text with single underline or single ;:ri£r:!:r:.~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the c~ Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::i/:::,'::-:.;z~/; reflect~ proposed changes to the Transm primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Impacts to sea-9, rass beds shall be minimized by locating, boat docks more than 10 feet from existin~ sea-~rass beds. Where this is not possible, boat docks shall be sited to impact the ~rent ~l,~owth tal langa,i~ Page 35 of 63 JUN I 8 2002 Collier Count3.' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conserx'ation and Coastal Management Element smallest areas of sea-grass beds possible, be no lower than 3.5 feet NGVD. have a terminal platform no greater than 160 square feet. and have the access dock be no wider than 4 feet. The protection of sea-crass beds shall be a factor in establishino neWr. or revising existing, ~,peed zones to reoulate boat traffic. OBJECTIVE 6.~ The County will protect, conserve and appropriately use ecological communities shared with or tangential to State and Federal lands and other local governments. Policy 6.~1: The County shall coordinate with adjacent counties, State and Federal agencies, other owners of lands held in the public trust, and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council to protect unique communities located along the County's border by controlling water levels and enforcing land development regulations with regard thereto. Policy 6.~2: Continue to meet with the appropriate counties at a specified frequency to discuss upcoming land development projects that would have an impact on ecological communities in both Counties. Policy 6.7-~.3: The County shall assist to assure compliance with all State and Federal Regulations pertaining to endangered and rare species living in such "shared" ecological systems. OBJECTIVE 6.8.+9-_ 5: The County shall protect natural reservations from the impact of surrounding development. For the purpose of this Objective and its related policies: natural reservations shall include only Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs) and desi.qnated Conservation Lands on the Future Land Use Map; and, development shall include all projects except for permittin.q and construction of sinqle-family dwellinq units situated on individual lots or parcels. ~ ...................... t~r.,g .... · ................. , .... : .... "-- ~' ""~ Unless otherwise noted, these oolicies shall ........ ,'I I A~A1 ...... 'I .................... · ' apply to all of Collier County except for the Eastern Lands Study Area.. for which policies are required to be adopted by November 1: 2002. _Policy 6.~1: All requests for lend development wlthir. !OOOfcct cf conti,quous to natural reservations shall be reviewed as part of the County's development review process; *'"... insurc .......... ,.~ .,,...~.....~.._...,..*~ Text with single underline or single s:riSc:hrc:~$!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tit Management P/an. Text with double under/me or double z:rl;:c::::cx~/: reflects proposed changes to the Tra primarily in response to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Policy 6.~1.e=,5.2: The fo IowinR criteria ccntalncd;.... ll,-,,.l~,l,~ ,-,1-,;,-,,.,*; ...... ,4 ,-,,-,,;,..;,-,~. ~,t t~iS '-I .... "shallapply to development contiquous to nc=r natural reservations~ in order to reduce ne,qative impacts to the natural reservations: AGENOA ITEM ' cl~rrenf ~un Page 36 of 63 Collier County Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Consen,ation and Coastal Management Element (1) The required open space shall be used to provide a buffer between the project and the natural reservation. Open space allowed between the project's non-open space uses and the boundary of the natural reservation shall include those areas of natural preserves, natural or man-made lakes, .qolf courses, recreational areas, required yard set-back areas, and other natural or man-made open space requirements. Existing agricultural operations shall be allowed within the open space requirements with additional agricultural clearinq allowed subject to best management practices, consistent with the provisions of the Riqht to Farm Act. a. The following open space uses are considered acceptable uses contiquous to the natural reservation boundary: (1) preservation areas; (2) golf course rouqhs maintained in a natural state; {'3) stormwater management areas; (4) pervious nature trails and hikinq trails limited to use by nonmotorized vehicles. b. The uses in paragraph a above are encouraqed to be located as to provide a buffer between the natural reservation and more intensive open space uses, including play.qrounds, tennis courts, qolf courses (excludinq roughs maintained in a natural statel, and other recreational uses and yards for individual lots or parcels, or open space uses that are impervious in nature. !~ ~c cacc hc'::c'.'cr ch-'!! Within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District~ these more intensive open space uses ma.v not be located closer than 300 feet to the boundary of the natural reservation. In addition, where woodstork (Mycteria americana) rookeries, bald ea.qle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nests, and wadin.q bird roosts are found in the adiacent natural reservation, the open spaces identified in sub-sections 1.a.(1) throuqh (3) are considered acceptable for placement within a buffer as specified below: (1) Woodstork (M¥cteria americana) rookeries, bald ea.qle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nests - 1,500 feet; (2) Wadinq bird roost - 300 feet; (3) These buffer distances shall only apply to the identified entity within the natural reservations. (4) These requirements shall be modified on a case by case basis, if such modifications are based upon the review and recommendations from the USFWS and the FFWCC. Any such chanqes shall be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan. Existing native veqetation that is located contiquous to the natural reservation shall be preserved as part of the preservation requirements specified in ~ Policy 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 of this element. Where wildlife corridors exist for listed species, provision shall be made to accommodate the movement of the listed species throuqh the proiect to the natural reservation. The County shall consider the recommendations from the USFWS and the FFWCC in the delineation of the corridors. Appropriate accommodations include: (1) Use of fences, walls or other obstructions to encourage wildlife to use natural corridors or to separate wildlife corridors from areas of human activity, (2) Location of roads away from identified corridors; {'3) Use of appropriate roadway crossings, underoasses and siqna.qe where unavoidable for roadways to cross wildlife trails; (4) Any other techniques recommended by the USFWS and the FFWCC. Text with single underline or single s:rikc:!:ra, ug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the ct Management Plan. Text with double underline or double :.::-i~.~::J::~:~g:: reflects proposed changes to the Transm primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 37 of 63 it is Iai language JUN 1 8 2002 Collier Count~' Growth Management Plat~ Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element f. Outside of this open space buffer, other permitted uses shall be located in such a manner as to place the most intensive land uses the furthest distance from the natural (2) (3) (4) reservation. g. The County shall consider the recommendations by the USFWS and the FFWCC when considering the placement of open space next to natural reservations and setback distances from listed species as noted above. Any such changes shall be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan. The wildlife protection criteria of ~ policv 7.1.1 shall also aDDIv. Within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. E~stormwater manaclement svstems dischar.qin,q directly to the natural reservation shall meet the Outstanding Florida Water criteria of one- half inch of dry retention or retention pretreatment as specified in Section 5.2.2(b), of the SFWMD's Basis of Review for Environmental Resource Permit Applications within the South Florida Water Mana,qement District, Auqust 2000. Proposed development shall demonstrate that ,qround water table drawdowns or diversions will not adversely impact the natural reservation. Detention and control elevations shall be set to protect the natural reservation and be consistent with surrounding land and proiect control elevations and water tables. In order to meet these requirements, proiects shall be designed in accordance with Sections 4.2.2.41 6.11 and 6.12 of SFWMD's Basis of Review. Text with single underline or single s:r~!;c:hrc, ug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the ct Management Plan. Te.rt with double underline or double z:ri~.:c:~ro::~ reflects proposed changes to the Transm prbnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 38 of 63 AGENDA iTEM ,'rentGrowth rtal/~g~ 8 2002 Collier Count)' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element GOAL 7: THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT AND CONSERVE ITS FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE. OBJECTIVE 7.4=1 The County shall direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their ,,__ r~ o o __.., o .a o .a ,---,- -- -, · .., -- ok-- ,:r,,,-z These oolicies ........................ · ........ .--i ...... T ...... ,~ .................... . shall apply to all of Collier County except for the Eastern Lands Study Area. for which policies are required to be adopted b.v November 1; 2002. Policy 7.4=~.1 Incompatible land uses are directed away from listed species and their habitats by the followinq mechanisms: (1) Conservation Desiqnation on the Future Land Use Map The overall purpose of the Conservation Designation is to conserve and maintain the natural resources of Collier County and their associated environmental, recreational and economic benefits. These areas have been demonstrated to have hiqh wildlife value. The allowed land uses specified in the FLUE's Conservation Desiqnation will accommodate limited residential development and future non-residential development. These limitations help direct many incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats contained in this Future Land Use Desiqnation. (Reference FLUE: Future Land Use Des~qnation, Description Section.) (2) Biq Cypress Area of Critical State Concern Overlay (ACSC) The land development requlations contained in the ACSC Overlay district provide standards that facilitate the .qoal of directing incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. (Reference FLUE: Future Land Use Desiqnation, Description Section.) (3) Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs) The purpose of Natural Resource Protection Areas {NRPAs) is to support State and Federal agencies' efforts to protect endanqered or potentially endangered species and their habitats (Reference CCME: Objective 1.3). These areas describe large, intact and relatively unfraqmented habitats important for many listed species. Allowable land uses. vegetation preservation standards: development standards; and listed species protection criteria within NRPAs are specified in the FLUE. (Reference the FLUE for the specific requirements.) The NRPA Overlay is intended to direct incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. (4) Sending Lands (Transfer of Development Rights): Sending Lands are those lands that have a hiqh deqree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include wetlands, uplands, and habitat for listed species. Due to their high environmental value, Sendin.q Lands are tar.qeted for preservation and conservation either through acquisition or throuqh incentives for private property owners. Privately owned lands within the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District that have a Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) Overlay are considered to be Sending Lands. Allowable land uses within Sendinq Lands are specified in the FLUE: Future Land Use Desi.qnatiop, Text with single underline or single s:ri!cc:!:ra:~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed ctmnges to ti~e ~ Management Plan. Text with dcuble underline or double £::-i/:c:/:::.a-g:: reflects proposed changes to the Transt primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 39 of 63 AGENDA ITE.~ rrent~, a,v'.!: ~ :ttal language JUN 1 8 2002 Collier Countw Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Description Section, B. Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. These limitations help direct many incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. (5) All other policies supporting Obiective 7.41 of this element. Non-aqricultural development, exc uding individual single family residences, shall be directed away from listed species and their habitats by complying with the following quidelines and standards: (1) A wildlife survey shall be required for all parcels when listed species are known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site or where listed species are directly observed on the site. The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) quidelines. The County shall notify the FFWCC and USFWS ot the existence of any listed species that may be discovered. (2) Wildlife habitat management plans for listed species shall be submitted for County approval. A plan shall be required for all projects where the wildlife survey indicated listed species are uti izincl the site, or the site is capable of supporting wildlife. These plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. (a) Management plans shall incorporate proper techniques to protect listed species and their habitat from the negative impacts of proposed development. Developments shall be clustered to discouraqe impacts to listed species habitats. Open space and vegetation preservation requirements shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and areas dominated by human activities. Provisions such as fencing, walls, or other obstructions shall be provided to minimize development impacts to the wildlife and to facilitate and encourage wildlife to use wildlife corridors. Appropriate roadway crossinqs, underpasses, and si.qnage shall be used where roads must cross wildlife corridors 1. The fo owinq references shall be used, as appropriate, to prepare the required manaqement plans; a. South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, USFWS, 1999. b. Habitat Manaqement Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region, USFVVS, 1987. c. Ecoloqy and Habitat Protection Needs of Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus i~olyphernus) Populations found on Lands Slated for Larqe Scale Development in Florida, Technical Report No. 4, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1987. d. 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. 2. The County shall consider any other techniques recommended by the USFWS and the FFWCC, subject to the provisions of '~';~"" ~ '~°' ^~ *~':" ^' .... ' Dara(]raoh (3) of this policy. 3. When listed species are directly observed on site or indicated by evidence, such as denning, foraqing or other indications, priority shall be given to preserving the listed species habitats first, as a part of the retained native veqetation requirement contained in Pc!!c7 ~.7.! Policy 6.1.1 and Policy 6.1.2 this element. The County Text with single underline or single strike:brough reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri.~:::kr:.xF, 5 reflects proposed changes to the Tran primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 40 of 63 Collier Count3' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Consen'ation and Coastal Management Element (b) (c) shall also consider the recommendations of other a.qenciesl subject to the provisions of ~,ie~7-.,4.,L~,~ DaraaraDh (3~ of this policy. For parcels containing gopher tortoises (Gopheru$ polyphernus), priority shall be Riven to protecting the largest most conti.cluous gopher tortoise habitat with the .qreatest number of active burrows, and for providinR a connection to off site adjacent .qopher tortoise preserves. Habitat preservation for the Florida scrub lay (Aphelocoma coerule$¢ens) shall conform to the guidelines contained in Technical Report No. 81 Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 1991. The required manaqement 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 proqram to educate residents about the on-site preserve and the need to maintain the (d) scrub veqetation. These requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, May 19991 subject to the provisions of Pc!!:',' 7.'!..2(3) cf th!: c!cm_-'~t. Daraaraph (3) of this policy. For the bald eaqle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), the required habitat manaqement plans shall establish protective zones around the eaqle nest restricting certain activities. The plans shall also address restrictinq certain types of activities durinq the nestin.q season. These requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species (e) Recovery Plan1 May 1999, subject to the provisions of "'"'"~" '~ ~ °'°' ^' "-=~ ~' .... ~ DaraaraDh (3~ of this Dolicv. 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 foraqinq habitat. Where adverse effects can not be avoided, measures shall be taken to minimize on-site disturbance and compensate or mitiqate for impacts that remain. These requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi- (f) Species Recovery Plan, May 1999, subject to the provisions of Pc!!c',' 7.~..2(2) cf th!c e~me4~, paragraph (3) of this policy. In areas where the Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) may be present, the manaqement plans shall require that .qarbaqe be placed in bear-proof containers, at one or more central locations. The mana.qement plan shall also identify methods to inform local residents of the concerns related to interaction between black bears and (,q) humans. Mitigation for impacting habitat suitable for black bear shall be considered in the manaaement Dian. For projects located in Priority I and Priority II Panther Habitat areas, the management plan shall discouraqe the destruction of undisturbed, native habitats that are preferred by the Florida panther (Fells concolor cowl) by directinq intensive land uses to currently disturbed areas. Preferred habitats include pine flatwoods and hardwood hammocks. Text with single underline or single stri!;c:!:r~.ug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to th Management Plan. Text with double underline or double c::i::::::rc:~g:: reflects proposed changes to the Tra primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. In turn1 these areas shall be buffered from the most intense land uses of the project by usin.q Iow intensity land uses (e.g., parks1 passive recreational areas, .qolf courses). Golf courses within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District shall be desiqned and mana.qed usin.q standards found in that district. The mana.qement plans shall identify appropriate li.qhtin.q controls for these permitted uses and shall also address the opportunity to utilize prescribed burninq to maintain fire-adapted preserved veqetative communities and provide browse for white-tailed deer. These requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, May 1999, subiect to the provisions of c,^,.,~,, -, ~ ,-,~o~ ^~ ,.;~ ^, .... ~ DaraaraDh (3~ of this Dolicv. sminal language JUN 1 8 2002 Page 41 of 63 Collier Counn' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Drq[t (6-11-02 ~ Consen,ation and Coastal Management Element (3) (h) In order to protect the West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatus) and its habitat, a marina siting rating system based on water depth, native marine habitat and manatee abundance shall be used to limit new or expanded wet-slip densities to no more than 18 boat slips per 100 feet of shoreline for all multi-slip docking facilities with ten (10) slips or more. and for all marina facilities. All multi-slip dockino facilities with ten slips or more. and all marina facilities, shall adopt and implement a Manatee Awareness and Protection Plan to include an Education and Public awareness orooram and the postin9 and maintaining of Manatee awareness sions. These reouirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery. Plan. May 1999, subiect to the provisions of Policy 7.1.2(3~ of this element. (i) In order to protect Ioooerhead (Caretta caretta) and other listed sea turtles that nest alono Collier County beaches, proiects within 300 feet of the MHW line shall limit outdoor liahting to that necessary for security and safety. Floodlights and landscape or accent liohtino shall be prohibited. These requirements shall be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery. Plan: May 1999; subject to the provisions of Policy 7.1.2(3). ~ The Management Plans shall contain a monitoring program for developments qreater than 10 acres. The County may shall, consistent with applicable GMP policies, consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and recommendations from the US Fish and Wildlife Service in issuinq development orders on property containinq listed species. It is recoqnized that these a.qency recommendations, on a case by case basis, may chan.qe the requirements contained within these wildlife protection policies and any such chanqe shall be deemed consistent with the Growth Manaqement Plan. Policy 7.1.3 All development shall comply with applicable federal and state permittin_c] rec~arding listed species protection. requirements Policy 7.1.4 The County shall provide for ade(~uate staff to implement the policies supporting. Objective 7.1. OBJECTIVE 7.2 Historical data from 1990-1996 shows that the average number of manatee deaths in Collier County due to incidents with watercraft is approximately 3.2 per year per 10,000 boats. ;.'::r :'.':.':g:. Throu.qh Policies 7.2.1 through 7.2.4, the County's objective is to minimize the. number of manatee deaths due to boat related incidents. Policy 7.2.1: =.~_.~.*~' ~.~^*~"+;"' ......... *"'~*~....~ .... The County. shall aoDIv.. . the marina sitinc]. ..... criteria contained in Polic~ Text with single underline or single s:rikc:!:raag/: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to /he curr, Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:~!.~:::.~::c:;~.~: reflects proposed changes to the Transmitt~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 42 of 63 AGENDA ITEiv~, ,,t GroN~:rh ~'~ Collier Counn' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element 7.1.2 (2)(h) of this element in order to direct increased boat traffic awa.v from sensitive manatee habitats. Policy 7.2.2: · '""~'~ *~ ..... +~"* *~'~* *~ ;"= ..... * .... +~ ~c s.~ .~,~ Sea-orass beds shall be protected throuoh the application of Policies 6.3.1:6.3.2 and 6.3.3 of this element. Policy 7.2.3: In order to protect manatees, marinas shall be discouraged in designated manatee critical habitat unless other protective measures are provided. (Reference Policy 11.1.5).The County shall maintain the manatee protection speed zones that were adopted in the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan and make revisions as needed. ,Ge~,e.~,~7..~4.-The County ~shall continue to work with appropriate State and Federal agencies to identify areas where the use of propeller driven boats may be restricted or ;-:!!! b_-' prohibited, .. or where speed zones may need to be changed. Text with single underline or single s:ri. hc:hrc:~g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the c, Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ~ reflects proposed changes to the Transt~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 43 of 63 rrent Growth 20;.,,. Collier County Growth Management Plm; Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element on th~ Cc'.:nty F'.:'t'.:rs Land 'Jzz .Ma~. OBJECTIVE 7.3 Historical data from 1996-1999 shows that the average number of sea turtle disorientations is 5% of total nests, Through the following policies, the County's objective is to minimize the number of sea turtle disorientations. Policy 7.3.1 The County shall aPPly the lighting criteria contained in Policy 7.1.2(2~(i) of this element in order to protect sea turtle hatchlings from adverse lighting conditions. County staff shall conduct reaular inspections to ensure coastal properties comply with proper lightino conditions and with applicable prohibitions of overnight storage of furniture and other equipment during sea turtle season (Ma.v 1 through October 30). Text with single underline or single s:rikc:hrcug!: reflects Transminal language as proposed changes to the ct Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'J/:c:J;:~.:.'gh reflects proposed changes to the Transm primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 44 of 63 'rent l~wth tat language JUN 1 8 2002 Collier Count3~ Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6- I 1-02) Consera'ation and Coastal Managenlent Elenletlt Policy 7.3.3: The County shall update the public awareness materials designed to inform coastal residents and visitors how the.v can protect sea turtles. OBJECTIVE 7..1~_ The County shall continue to improve marine fisheries productivity by building additional artificial reefs. Policy 7.,1~_.1: The County should continue to apply for reef materials on the existing permitted sites. construction grants and annually place more Policy 7..1~_.2: The County will coordinate its activities with the Florida Department of Protection, the Marine Extension Office and other appropriate agencies. Environmental Text with single underline or single ;:rikct!:rc.::g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes lO the cuJ Management Plan. Text with double underline or double ztriS::J:rcxg!: reflects proposed changes to the Transnzii prirnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 45 of 63 AGEhK)A ITE.~ 'ent Growth Collier CounO' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft t 6- I 1-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element GOAL 8: QUALITY. THE COUNTY SHALL MAINTAIN COLLIER COUNTY'S EXISTING AIR OBJECTIVE 8.1: All activities in the County shall comply with all applicable federal standards. and State air quality Policy 8.1.1: The County will rely on the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the Florida Division of Forestry or the local fire departments as appropriate under their jurisdiction to permit and visually inspect the permitted air pollutant sources in the County. Policy 8.1.2: The fire departments and the County will receive complaints concerning air pollution problems and refer them to the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Florida Division of Forestry, or the local fire departments as appropriate. Policy 8.1.3: The local fire departments, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and the Florida Division of Forestry will investigate and act on complaints that are called in or referred to them. Policy 8.1.4: Automobile emissions will be reduced by the policy of the Sheriff's Department to stop smoking vehicles and either warn or ticket the operator for the offense, and by the policy of the County to require bike paths or sidewalks on new subdivisions and major County roadways and improvements. Policy 8.1.5: By January 1, 2000, the County shall investigate the need for a more comprehensive local air quality monitoring program. Text with single underline or single s:ri!;c:!:rc'~g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the curr Managemen! Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i~.:c:J:r:-::g.~: reflects proposed changes to ti~c Transmitt~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 46 of 63 n, 1 8 2002 language Collier County Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-1 !-02) Conseta,ation and Coastal Management Element GOAL 9: THE COUNTY SHALL APPROPRIATELY MANAGE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTE TO PROTECT THE COUNTY'S POPULOUS AND NATURAL RESOURCES AND TO ENSURE THE HIGHEST ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. OBJECTIVE 9.1: The County shall implement and update biennially a hazardous materials emergency response element as part of its Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. Policy 9.1.1: The plan shall be developed in cooperation with the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council and the local planning committee established underTitle II1. Policy 9.1.2: The plan shall identify a community coordinator, facility coordinators, and other Federal, State and local agency contacts (especially the City of Naples) including the responsibilities and duties of each agency. Policy 9.1.3: The plan shall identify emergency notification procedures and lines of communication among reacting agencies. Policy 9.1.4: The plan shall provide a description of community and industry emergency equipment and facilities and the identity of persons responsible for them. Policy 9.1.5: The plan shall address hazardous substances, transportation routes, location of significant hazardous materials, probable affected areas in the event of a release, and emergency evacuation plans. Policy 9.1.6: A training program shall be developed for emergency response personnel. Policy 9.1.7: The Collier County Emergency Management Department shall be responsible for developing, implementing, and evaluating the effectiveness of the plan, including periodic updates. OBJECTIVE 9.2: The County shall verify the management and disposal practices of identified businesses that are potential generators of hazardous waste, at a rate of 20% of these businesses per year. Policy 9.2.1: During the verification visits the County shall advise businesses on proper management and disposal of hazardous wastes and shall encourage the reduction of hazardous waste through recycling. Text with single underline or single x:ri!:c:hrz:;gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the cu Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:rl;::::::-~:zg~.: reflects proposed changes to tiw Transmi primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 47 of 63 Collier Count).' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02 ~ Conservation and Coastal Management Element O) O) O) Policy 9.2.2: The verification visits shall concentrate on businesses generating waste oil and spent solvents and other hazardous waste in areas close to potable wellfields. OBJECTIVE 9.3: The Collier County Solid Waste Department shall continue to collection day at least once per year. hold its hazardous waste Policy 9.3.1: The hazardous waste collection day shall target residential households but also allow small businesses to participate to some extent. OBJECTIVE 9.4: The County shall continue to implement its_local storage tank compliance program. Policy 9.4.1: The County shall implement provisions of the contract with the Department of Environmental Protection under the Super Act provisions in order to avoid any duplication of effort. Policy 9.4.2: The County shall concentrate on storage tank installation, inspection, and contractor certification and oversight of maintenance and monitoring of petroleum contamination sites. Policy 9.4.3: Unless otherwise provided for in CCME Policy 3.1.1, storage tank systems shall adhere to containment provisions required in 62-761, F.A.C., as it existed on August 31, 1999. (I) OBJECTIVE 9.5 and Policy 9.5.1 [deleted] Text with single underline or single stri!~c:!:rc, ug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:rl;:::~.:rz-:g5 reflects proposed changes to the T, primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recommendations. ,e cuJ N ar ',: O02 msmittal language Page 48 of 63 - Collier Counn.' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02 ~ Conservation and Coastal Management Elemem GOAL 10: THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT, CONSERVE, MANAGE, AND APPROPRIATELY USE ITS COASTAL BARRIERS INCLUDING SHORELINES, BEACHES AND DUNES AND WILL PLAN FOR, AND WHERE APPROPRIATE, WILL RESTRICT ACTIVITIES WHERE SUCH ACTIVITIES WILL DAMAGE OR DESTROY COASTAL RESOURCES. OBJECTIVE 10.1: Priorities for shoreline land use shall be given to water dependent uses over water related land uses and shall be based on type of water-dependent use, adjacent land use, and surrounding marine and upland habitat considerations. Policy 10.1.1: Priorities for water-dependent uses shall be: a. Public Boat Ramps; b. Marinas; 1. commercial (public) marinas over private marinas; 2. storage over wet storage; c. Commercial fishing facilities; d. Other non-polluting water-dependent industries or utilities. Policy 10.1.2: No deep water ports shall be allowed. Policy 10.1.3: Priorities for water-related uses shall be: a. Recreational facilities b. Marine supply/repair facility c. Residential development Policy 10.1.4: The following priority ranking for siting of shoreline development and the resultant destruction or disturbance of native vegetative communities for water dependent/water related land uses shall apply: a. b. C. d. e. f. g. areas presently developed, disturbed uplands, disturbed freshwater wetlands, disturbed marine wetlands, viable, unaltered uplands, viable, unaltered freshwater wetlands, viable, unaltered marine wetlands. Policy 10.1.5: In order to protect manatees, marinas shall be discouraged in designated manatee critical habitat unless other protective measures are provided. (Reference Policy 7.2.3.) AC-:-:-:-~HD A I TE.I~ Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:!:ro'ag/: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the , Ma~;agement Plan. Text with double underline or double z:rl/:::/:rzzg~.: reflects proposed changes to the Trans~ primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recomntendations. Page 49 of 63 urre'q l~ffm[h- Collier Counta' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-I 1-02) Consen'ation and Coastal Management Element Policy 10.1.6: New marinas shall conform to the following criteria: a. Marinas must provide vehicular parking and sewage pump-out facilities; b. Fueling facilities shall be designed to contain spills from on-land equipment and shall be prepared to contain spills in the water. c. Marina facilities must be accessible to all public services essential to ensure their safe operation. d. Marinas and multi-slip docking facilities shall prepare hurricane plans for approval which describe measures to be taken to minimize damage to marina sites and neighboring properties and the environment; this hurricane plan shall be reviewed and approved by the County. e. Dry storage should be encouraged over wet storage. Policy 10.1.7: Marinas and other water-dependent and water-related uses shall conform to other applicable policies regarding development in marine wetlands. Marinas that propose to destroy wetlands shall provide for use by the general public. Policy 10.1.8: All new marinas that propose to destroy viable naturally functioning marine wetlands shall demonstrate the economic need and feasibility for such development. Policy 10.1.9: These policies shall designated lands. serve as criteria for the review of proposed development in "ST" OBJECTIVE 10.2: The County shall continue to insure that access to beaches, shores and waterways remain available to the public and continue with its program to expand the availability of such access and a method to fund its acquisition. Policy 10.2.1: Existing access for the public to the beach shall be maintained by new development. New beachfront development shall show on their site-plans existing beach access ways and the proposed development shall continue that access way, relocate it on the site, or donate it to the County. Policy 10.2.2: Evaluate appropriate public access intervals for renourished beaches considering the demand for recreation and the ability of the natural system to support the demand. If existing access is not sufficient, then the County shall acquire additional access points as a p~ renourishment project. Text with single underline or single c:ri!:c:hrr.::g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tile ct Management Plan. Text with double l~nderline or double z:ri.~:::::rz::F, 5 reflects proposed changes to the Transm primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or £AC/CCPC recommendations. Page 50 of 63 .'"t_ ''''f th~ AGF_NOA ITE. J~, rent ~rl~'tl~ ,al 8 2002 Collier Count)' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft t6-11 Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 10.2.3: A credit towards any developed recreation and open space impact fee shall be given for developments, which provide public access facilities. Policy 10.2.4: All public access facilities shall include parking facilities and roadway access. Policy 10.2.5: The County shall accept donations of shoreline lands suitable for use as public access facilities. Policy 10.2.6: The County shall coordinate with State and Federal agencies regarding use of and access to Federal and State owned properties in the Coastal Zone for public use. OBJECTIVE 10.3: Undeveloped coastal barriers shall be maintained predominantly in their natural state and their natural function shall be protected, maintained and enhanced. Policy 10.3.1: "Undeveloped" coastal barrier systems shall be defined as set forth in the Federal Guidelines based on the amount of structures per acre of fastlands and for which no development approval or permits have been issued by Collier County, or plats recorded. "Fastlands" are the upland area as defined in the Federal Guidelines. Policy 10.3.2: Any development activities on an undeveloped coastal barrier must protection of the natural form and function of the coastal barrier system. be compatible with Policy 10.3.3: The highest and best use of undeveloped coastal barriers are as functioning natural systems; therefore the first alternative to development should be consideration of acquisition by or for the public benefit to preserve the natural function. Policy 10.3.4: Public expenditure shall be limited to property acquisition and for public safety, education, restoration, exotic removal, recreation and research facilities that will not substantially alter the natural characteristics and the natural function of the undeveloped coastal barrier system. Policy 10.3.5: Native or other County approved vegetation shall be required as the stabilizing medium in any coastal barrier vegetation or restoration program. Policy 10.3.6: Prohibit construction of structures seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line on undeveloped coastal barriers. Exception shall be for passive recreational structures access crossovers, and where enforcement would not allow any reasonable economic utilization of Text with single underline or single z:rikc:hrc:~gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to rite curre Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i~.cc:.'::Tz;.~: reflects proposed changes to the Transmitta, primarily in response to the ORC Report, prtor BCC direction, or F..AC/CCPC recommendations. Page 5 i of 63 t Gro~h languag'e JUN 1 20[ Collier Count3' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Consen, ation and Coastal Management Element such property. In the latter event, require construction that minimizes interference with natural function of such coastal barrier system. Policy 10.3.7: Participate in and encourage Regional and State programs to acquire naturally functioning, undeveloped coastal barrier systems to insure the preservation of their natural function. Policy 10,3,8: Development density on undeveloped coastal barrier systems shall not exceed the lowest density provided in the Future Land Use Element. Policy 10.3.9: Native vegetation on undeveloped coastal barriers should be preserved. To the extent that native vegetation is lost during land development activities and the remaining native vegetation can be supplemented without damaging or degrading its natural function, any native vegetation lost during construction shall be replaced by supplementing with compatible native vegetation on site. All exotic vegetation shall be removed and replaced with native vegetation where appropriate. Policy 10.3.10: No new bridges, causeways, paved roads or commercial marinas shall be permitted to or on undeveloped barrier systems. Policy 10.3.11: Shoreline hardening structures (e.g., rip-rap, seawalls, groins, etc.) shall not be allowed on undeveloped coastal barriers except in the interest of public safety or of land use related hardship. Policy 10.3.12: Require the use of the "Planned Unit Development" (PUD) provisions of the Zoning Ordinance for new developments or redevelopment's proposed to take place within areas identified as Coastal Barrier system with the exception of one single family dwelling unit on a single parcel. Policy 10.3.13: These policies shall be implemented through the existing "ST" zoning procedures. Policy 10.3.14: Substantial alteration of the natural grade on undeveloped coastal barriers by filling or excavation shall be prohibited except as a part of an approved dune and/or beach restoration program, or as part of a DER approved wastewater treatment system or as part of an approved public development plan. Text with single underline or single stri.!;c:!:rc, ug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i~.:c:;:rc::F, 5 reflects proposed changes to the Trans primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recontmendations. Policy 10,3,15: Agriculture and timbering are not exempt from the above Goals, Objectives, and Policies related to coastal barrier systems. 'urren/ Growth Page 52 of 63 Collier Count~' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Elemeut OBJECTIVE 10.4: Developed coastal barriers and developed shorelines shall be continued to be restored and then maintained, when appropriate by establishing mechanisms or projects which limit the effects of development and which help in the restoration of the natural functions of coastal barriers and affected beaches and dunes. Policy 10.4.1: Promote environmentally acceptable and economically feasible restoration of the developed coastal barriers and the urban beach and dune systems. Policy 10.4.2: Prohibit further shore hardening projects except where necessary to protect existing structures, considering the total beach system and adjacent properties. Policy 10.4.3: Prohibit activities which would result in man induced shoreline erosion beyond the natural beach erosion cycle or that would deteriorate the beach and dune system. Policy 10.4.4: Require dune stabilization and restoration improvements in land development projects along beach areas. Policy 10.4.5: Initiate and support beach and dune restoration and preservation programs where appropriate. Policy 10.4.6: Require native vegetation as landscaping in development activities in developed coastal barrier systems and on the beach and dune systems. Policy 10.4.7: Prohibit construction seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line except where the same would be permitted pursuant to the provisions of the Florida Coastal Zone Protection Act of 1985 or where said prohibition would result in no reasonable economic utilization of the property in questions, or for safety reasons. In such cases, construction will be as far landward as is practicable and effects shall be minimized on the beach and dune system and the natural functions of the coastal barrier system. Text with single underline or single s:ri!:e:l:rc, ug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to /he Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:vlhc:h:-~xg?: reflects proposed changes to the Trans primarikv in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Policy 10.4.8: Construction seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line will be allowed for public access and protection and restoration of beach resources. Construction seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line shall not intedere with sea turtle nesting, will utilize native vegetation for dune stabilization, will maintain the natural beach profile, will minimize interference with natural beach dynamics, and where appropriate will restore the historical dunes and will vegetate with native vegetation. AGEN[)A ITEM 'urrent Growth Page 53 of 63 Collier County Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02 ) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 10.4.9: Seawall construction fronting the Gulf of Mexico shall be prohibited except in extreme cases of hardship. Policy 10.4.10: Vehicle traffic or traffic on the beach and primary dunes shall be prohibited except for emergency and approved maintenance purposes. The County shall enforce this requirement with the existing Vehicle On The Beach Ordinance. Policy 10.4.11: Develop tax incentives and other land use incentives to encourage additional access or parking areas to provide utilization of the high capacity urban beaches. Policy 10.4.12: In permitting the repair and/or reconstruction of shore parallel structures, require, where appropriate, at a minimum: a. All damaged seawalls will be replaced with, or fronted by, b. Where appropriate, repaired structures will be redesigned engineered stabilization Policy 10.4.13: Development and redevelopment proposals shall consider the implications of potential rise in sea level. OBJECTIVE 10.5: For undeveloped shorelines, provide improved opportunities for recreational, educational, scientific, and esthetic enjoyment of coastal resources by protecting beaches and dunes and by utilizing or where necessary establishing construction standards, which will minimize the impact of manmade structures on the beach and dune systems. Policy 10.5.1: Recreation that is compatible with the natural functions of beaches and dunes is the highest and best land use. Policy 10.5.2: Prioritize acquisition efforts in order to meet the projected need for additional public beaches. Policy 10.5.3: Prohibit activities which would result in man induced shoreline erosion beyond the natural beach erosion cycle or that would deteriorate the beach dune system. Text with single underline or single strikc:!:rc, ug/: reflects Transtnittal language as proposed changes to lhe cu Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'i::c:::rc:~g5 reflects proposed changes to the Transmit prirnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Policy 10.5.4: Prohibit construction of any structure seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line. Exception shall be for passive recreational structures access crossovers, and where enforcement would not allow any reasonable economic utilization of such property. In the latter event, require construction that minimizes interference with natural function of such beaches and dunes. · ent Growth 8 2002 Page 54 of 63 Collier County Growth Management Pla. Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 10.5.5: Prohibit motorize vehicles on the beaches and dunes except for emergency and maintenance purposes. The County shall enforce this requirement with the existing Vehicle On The Beach Ordinance. Policy 10.5.6: Regulate activities so that they will not threaten the stability of the dunes or the beach itself. Policy 10.5.7: Pursue the acquisition development. of undeveloped beaches and dunes as the first alternative to Policy 10.5.8: Prohibit shoreline armoring processes and encourage non-structural methods for stabilizing beaches and dunes. Policy 10.5.9: Prohibit construction seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line except as follows: a. Construction will be allowed for public access; b. For protection and restoration of beach resources; c. In cases of demonstrated land use related hardship or safety concerns as specified in The 1985 Florida Coastal Zone Protection Act, there shall be no shore armoring allowed except in cases of public safety. Policy 10.5.10: Construction activities shall not interfere with the sea turtle nesting, shall preserve or replace any native vegetation on the site, and shall maintain the natural beach profile and minimize interference with the natural beach dynamics and function. Policy 10.5.11: The County will waive all other non-safety related setback requirements and site planning requirements before allowing construction seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line. Policy 10.5.12: For all beach front land development related projects require dune stabilization and restoration improvements, the removal of exotic vegetation, and replacement with native vegetation, as appropriate. (I) OBJECTIVE 10.6: The County shall conserve the habitats, species, natural shoreline and dune systems contained within the County's coastal zone. (I) Policy 10.6.1: In addition to those applicable policies supporting Objectives 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, and 10.5, development within the County's coastal zone shall also meet the following criteria: 1. Densities on the following undeveloped coastal barriers shall not exceed 1 unit per 5 acres: a. Wiggins Pass Unit FL-65P, ~,[NOA Text with single underline or single s:ri!;c:hrc::£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the cur Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri.~:c:~rc::g.t: reflects proposed changes to tile Transmiti primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 55 of 63 ent Growth Collier Count' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Consen'ation and Coastal Management Element (i) (i) (i) o b. Clam Pass Unit FI-64P, c. Keywaydin Island Unit P-16, d. Tigertail Unit FI-63-P, e. Cape Romano Unit P-15. Site alterations shall be concentrated in disturbed habitats thus avoiding undisturbed pristine habitats (Reference Policy 10.1.4). Beachfront developments shall restore dune vegetation. Projects on coastal barriers shatl be landscaped with native Southern Floridian species. Boathouses, boat shelters and dock facilities shall be located and aligned to stay at least 10 feet from any existing seagrass beds except where a continuous bed of seagrass exists off of the shore of the property, in which case facility heights shall be at least 3.5 feet NVGD, terminal platforms shall be less than 160 square feet and access docks shall not exceed a width of four (4) feet. Policy 10.6.2: The requirements of Policy 10.6.1 identifies the guidelines and performance standards for the undeveloped coastal barriers and estuaries contained within the coastal barrier and estuarine NRPA (CCME Policy 1.3.2). These standards therefore satisfy the requirements of CCME Policy 1.3.2. Policy 10.6.3: For shoreline development projects where an ElS is required, an analysis shall demonstrate that the project will remain fully functional for its intended use after a six-inch rise in sea level. Policy 10.6.3: Collier County supports federal and state agency efforts to deny permits and establish a permanent moratorium on the offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling along the west coast of Florida, and to the extent allowed by law, shall take appropriate actions to oppose any offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling projects in this sensitive area. Text with single underline or single stri!:c:!:raug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the ct Management Plan. Texl will1 double .ll/~de/'line or double z:ri~.:c:J::':.'.~g.~: reflects proposed changes to the Transm primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 56 of 63 AGENDA ITEM rrent Growth ,,al tJ b g$ 8 2002 Collier Coun~~ Growth Management Pla~ Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element GOAL 11: THE COUNTY SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION, PRESERVATION, AND SENSITIVE RE-USE OF HISTORIC RESOURCES. OBJECTIVE 11.1: To protect historic and archaeological resources in Collier County. Policy 11.1.1: Continue in effect regulations regarding development and other land alteration activities that ensure the conservation, sensitive re-use, preservation of significant historic and archaeological resources, or appropriate mitigation in accordance with State standards. Policy 11.1.2: There shall be no loss of historic or archaeological resources on County-owned property and historic resources on private property shall be protected, preserved or utilized in a manner that will allow their continued existence. Conservation techniques shall include at a minimum: a. During the development permit review process, historic or archaeological sites shall be identified and shown on the site plans; The County shall establish waivers for non-safety related set back requirements and site planning requirements in order to accommodate historic structures or historic sites within a proposed development; Co As an alternative to preserving archaeological sites, the Owner may allow excavation of the site by the State of Florida Division of Historic Resources or the approved alternate prior to development. Should a site be scientifically excavated, then development may proceed without preserving the site; d. The County shall accept donations of historic or archaeological sites; e. Archaeological sites that are to be preserved may be utilized to satisfy required setbacks, buffer strips or open space up to the maximum area required by development regulations. Conservation of such historic or archaeological sites shall qualify for any open space requirements mandated by development regulations. Policy 11.1.3: If, during the course of site clearing, excavation, or other constructional activities, an archaeological or historical site, artifact, or other indicator is discovered, development activities at that specific archaeological site shall be immediately stopped and the appropriate agency notified. Development will be suspended for a sufficient length of time to enable the County or a designated consultant to assess the find and determine the proper course of action in regard to its salvageability. The County will respond to any such notification in a timely and efficient manner so as to provide only a minimal interruption to any constructional activity. Text with single underline or single s:rikc',hrc:cg!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the curr~ Management Plan. Tex~ with double underline or double z::'i.~:c:.~:rzxg.~: reflects proposed changes to the D'ansmitta primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 57 of 63 it Growth q ,. Collier Count)' Growth Management Platt Proposed Adoption Draft (6-I1-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element GOAL 12: THE COUNTY SHALL MAKE EVERY REASONABLE EFFORT TO ENSURE THE PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH AND WELFARE OF PEOPLE AND PROPERTY FROM THE EFFECTS OF HURRICANE STORM DAMAGE. (i) (i) OBJECTIVE 12.1: The County will maintain the 1994, hurricane evacuation time for a Category 3 storm at a maximum of 28 hours as defined by the 1996 Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Hurricane Evacuation Study Update, and reduce that time frame by 1999, to 27.2 hours. Activities will include on-site sheltering for mobile home developments, increased shelter space, and maintenance of equal or lower densities of the Category I evacuation zone as defined in the 1996 Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Hurricane Evacuation Study Update. Policy 12.1.1: A comprehensive awareness program will be developed and publicized prior to May 30th of each year. Evacuation zones and routings shall be printed in each local newspaper. This information shall be made readily available to all hotel/motel guests. Policy 12.1.2: Land use plan amendments in the Category 1 hurricane vulnerability zone shall only be considered if such increases in densities provide appropriate mitigation to reduce the impacts of hurricane evacuation times. Policy 12.1.3: The County shall continue to identify shelter space that complies with Red Cross standards for 45,000 persons by 1998 and 60,000 by 2002. Shelter space will be determined at the rate of 20 square feet per person. Policy 12.1.4: The County shall continue to maintain requirements and standards for hurricane shelters for all new or existing mobile home subdivisions in the process of expanding, which are 26 units or larger in size to provide emergency shelter on-site or provide funding to enhance existing public shelters off-site. Building will be of such a size to house park residents at the rate of 20 sq. ft per resident. Resident size will be estimated by averaging park population during the June-November time frame. On-site shelters shall be elevated to a minimum height equal to or above the worst case Category 3 hurricane flooding level utilizing the current National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's storm surge model, known as Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH).; The design and construction of the required shelters shall be guided by the wind loads applied to buildings and structures designated as "essential facilities" in the latest Standard Building Code, Table 1205. Shelters shall be constructed with adequate emergency electrical power and potable water supplies; shall provide adequate glass protection by shutters or boards; and shall provide for adequate ventilation, sanitary facilities and first-aid equipment. A telephone and battery-operated telephone is also required within the shelter. Text with single underline or single stri&c:!:rcugh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to th~ Management P/an. Text with double llnderlinc or double :.::~i~.~::.'::'z'.zg~.: re. fleets proposed changes to the Trat primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 58 of 63 . current Grow'li~ Collier County Growth Management Plat~ Proposed Adoptio/~ Draft (6-11-02) Conser~,ation and Coastal Management Element Policy 12.1.5: The directors of the Transportation and Emergency Management Departments will review, at least annually, evacuation route road needs to assure that necessary improvements are incorporated within the Capital Improvement and Traffic Circulation Element projects, as indicated in Table 1 of the Appendix. Policy 12.1.6: The County shall update the hurricane evacuation portion of Collier County Peacetime Emergency Plan prior to June 1st of each year by integrating all regional and State emergency plans in the identification of emergency evacuation routes. Policy 12.1.7: The County's land development regulations include mitigation policies addressing flood plains, beach and dune alteration and storm water management. (I) Policy 12.1.8: Upon approval of the "Local Hazard Mitigation Strategy" by the Department of Community Affairs Collier County will begin implementation of the Local Mitigation Projects as listed in the Plan. (I) Policy 12.1.9: Construct all new Public Safety facilities to be floodproofed and designed to meet 160 mph wind load requirements. (I) Policy 12.1.10: The County will continue to coordinate with Collier County Public Schools to ensure that all new public schools outside of the Coastal High Hazard Area be designed and constructed to meet the Public Shelter Design Criteria in "State Requirements for Educational Facilities" (1997), Section 5.4(15). (i) Policy 12.1.11: The County will continue to work with the Board of Regents, State University System to ensure that all new facilities in the State University System that are located outside of the Coastal High Hazard Area be designed and constructed to meet the Public Shelter Design Criteria in "State Requirements for EducatiOnal Facilities" (1997), Section 5.4(15). (I) Policy 12.1.12: The County will continue to mitigate previously identified shelter deficiencies through mitigation from Developments of Regional Impact, Emergency Management Preparedness and Enhancement grants and from funds identified in the annual Shelter Deficit Studies. (I) Policy 12.1.13: All new nursing homes and assisted living facilities that are licensed for more than 15 clients will have a core area to shelter residents and staff on site. The core area will be constructed to meet the Public Shelter Design Criteria that is required for new public schools and public community colleges and universities. Text with single underline or single ::ri&c:,qro:;gh reflects Transmittal language as proposed ci~anges to t~ Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri~.:::.~:rz::~h reflects proposed changes to the Trt primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recomtnendations. Page 59 of 63 e cur~ Growth ~ ,?smiltal language JUN 1 8 2002 Collier CounO' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Consen,ation and Coastal Management Element (I) (i) Policy 12.1.14: The County will consider establishing one-way evacuation routes on County maintained roads for storm events that have the potential for inundating Iow-lying populated areas. The County will coordinate with FDOT to consider one-waying State maintained roads that are primary evacuation routes for vulnerable populations. OBJECTIVE 12.2: The County shall ensure that building and development activities are carried out in a manner, which minimizes the danger to life and property from hurricanes. The public shall limit its expenditures involving beach and dune restoration and renourishment, road repair, publicly owned seawalls, docking and parking area. All future unimproved requests for development in the coastal high hazard areas will be denied. Policy 12.2,1: The Hazard Mitigation Annex of the peacetime Emergency Plan (PEP) shall be reviewed and updated every three (3) years beginning in 1988. The Director shall also incorporate hazard mitigation reports from other agencies into the Peacetime Emergency Plan. Policy 12.2.2: The calculated needs for public facilities will be based on the adopted level of service standards and future growth projections within the coastal high hazard area. The Future Land Use Element limits new residential development, (thus obligation to infrastructure expenditures) to a maximum of four dwelling units per gross acre within the coastal high hazard area. In addition, existing zoning not vested shall be re-evaluated within three years and may change to a density level consistent with the Future Land Use Element. Policy 12.2.3: The County shall participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Policy 12.2.4: The County shall maintain requirements for structural wind resistance as stated in the latest approved edition of the Southern Standard Building Code. Policy 12.2.5: The County shall consider the coastal high-hazard area as that area lying within the Category 1 evacuation zone as defined in the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Hurricane Evacuation Study Update. Policy 12.2.6: The County shall require that all new sanitary sewer facilities in the coastal high-hazard flood area be flood proofed, be designed to reduce leakage of raw sewage during flood events to the maximum extent practicable, and new septic tanks shall be fitted with back-flow preventers. Text with single underline or single s::'i!cc:!:rc',cg!: reflects Trans/nittal language as proposed change$ to the ct Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri.':c:::rc::g~.: reflects proposed cbange~ to the Transm primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Policy 12.2.7: The County shall continue to assess all unimproved property within the coastal high hazard area and make recommendations on appropriate land use. AGENDA ITE_k4 'rent ~i~r.'~v:!: '~ r/al language JUN 1 8 2002 Page 60 of 63 Collier County Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11- 02) Conservation and Coastal Management Element Policy 12.2.8: Public facilities that are dependent on county funding shall not be built in the coastal high-hazard area unless the facility is designed for public access or for resource restoration. OBJECTIVE 12.3: The County shall develop and maintain a task force that will plan and guide a unified County response to post-hurricane disasters. Policy 12.3.1: The Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan shall comply with the policies under this objective, and shall contain step-by-step details for post disaster recovery. Policy 12.3.2: After a hurricane that necessitated an evacuation, the Board of County Commissioners shall meet to hear preliminary damage assessments. This will be done prior to re-entry of the population. At that time, the Commission will activate the recovery task force and consider a temporary moratorium on building activities not necessary for the public health, safety and welfare. Policy 12.3.3: The recovery task force shall include local law enforcement authorities, the Community Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning and Zoning Director, Emergency Management Director and other members as directed by the Board of County Commissioners. Representatives from municipalities receiving damage from the storm should also be members of the recovery task force. Policy 12.3.4: The recovery task force shall review and decide upon emergency building permits, coordinate with State and Federal officials to prepare disaster assistance applications, analyze and recommend to the County Commission hazard mitigation options including reconstruction or relocation of damaged public facilities, recommend amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, Peacetime Emergency Plan and other appropriate policies and procedures. Policy 12.3.5: Immediate repair and clean-up actions needed to protect the public health and safety include repairs to potable water, wastewater, and power facilities, debris removal, stabilization or removal of structures that are in danger of collapsing, and minimal repairs to make dwellings habitable. These actions shall receive first priority in permitting decisions. Policy 12.3.6: Structures in the coastal high-hazard area which have suffered damage to pilings, foundations, or load-bearing walls on one or more occasion shall be required to rebuild landward of their current location or to modify the structure to mitigate any recurrence of repeated damage. Policy 12.3.7: The County shall develop and adopt a Post-disaster Recovery, Reconstruction and Mitigation Ordinance prior to May 30, 1997, to evaluate options for damaged public facilities ir, Text with single underline or single ::riJ:c:!:rc;c£h reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the curret Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:.-15c:kvzx~k reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal prirrmrily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 61 of 63 ...... '~GE--NO A ITrrJ Growth 'angt~ 1 0 ZO Collier CounO Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02~ Conservation and Coastal Management Element abandonment, repair in place, relocations, and reconstruction with structural modifications. This process shall consider these options in light of factors such as cost to construct, cost to maintain, recurring damage, impacts on land use, impacts on the environment and public safety. Policy 12.3.8: Within 30 days of a hurricane resulting in disaster the County shall identify non-public structures in the coastal high-hazard area, inventory their assessed value, judge the utility of the land for public access and make recommendations for acquisition during post-disaster recovery. OBJECTIVE 12.4: The County shall make every reasonable effort to meet the emergency preparedness requirements of people with special needs such as the elderly, handicapped, the infirmed and those requiring transportation from a threatened area. Policy 12.4.1: All new hospitals, nursing homes, and adult congregate living facilities shall prepare an emergency preparedness plan for approval by the Emergency Management Department prior to receiving a final development order. Policy 12.4.2: The County, in cooperation with other public agencies and public service groups, shall make a reasonable effort to provide for the emergency transportation needs of people having limited mobility that do not reside in licensed institutions serving people with special needs. Policy 12.4.3: The County, in cooperation with the Collier County Health Department and other public service groups shall make a reasonable effort to provide basic medical services in selected shelters designated as special needs shelters. Text with single underline or single s:rikc:!:rct.'g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the ~ > , a ~' r ects ro)osed chan er to the Transt Managemen! Plan. Text with double underline or doul le z:ri.c::.:rz:.'g., eft P I g - primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommemtations. Page 62 of 63 AGENDA ITEM ~rrent Growlh 2002 Collier CounO' Growth Management Plan Proposed Adoption Draft (6-11-02) Conservation and Coastal Management Elemet~t GOAL 13: THE COUNTY SHALL AVOID UNNECESSARY DUPLICATION OF EXISTING REGULATORY PROGRAMS. OBJECTIVE 13.1: To establish, prior to the adoption of any land development regulation to implement this Element, including but not limited to NRPA management guidelines and watershed management plans, a program to review such regulations and identify existing regulatory programs exercised by regional, State, or Federal agencies with jurisdiction over the activities sought to be regulated. Policy 13.1.1: There will be no unnecessary duplication of existing Regional, State, or Federal permitting programs. Policy 13.1.2: The County may adopt regulations to strengthen existing permitting programs. Policy 13.1.3: Prior to adopting any new regulations to implement this Element, the following guidelines shall be met: a. It fulfills an important need not presently adequately met by existing Regional, State, or Federal regulation. b. The regulation can be effectively and efficiently administered by authorized increases to County staff. c. The cost to the County of implementing the regulation shall have been identified and considered. Text with single underline or single z:ri!~c:!:r:.ugh reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the Management Platy. Text with double underline or double z:r!Sc:J:r:.:cg5 reflects proposed changes to the Trans primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Page 63 of 63 AGENDA ITEN4 ~rrenl Growth i"al af 8 · COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT Potable Water Sub-Element Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Adopted October, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT Potable Water Sub-Element Symbol DATE AMENDED ** October 28, 1997 ORDINANCE NO. Ordinance No. 97-57 ** This is the EAR-based amendment. Due to the magnitude of the changes - which included reformatting the entire Element, affecting every page of the Element - a Roman Numeral is not assigned. * Indicates adopted portions Note: the support document will be updated as current information becomes available. AGENDA ITEM J U N 1 8 2002 V. GOALS~ OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL 1: TO PROTECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC BY ENSURING ACCESS TO ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND, COST EFFECTIVE AND IMPLEMENTABLE POTABLE WATER FACILITIES AND SERVICES. OBJECTIVE 1.1: The County will locate and develop potable water supply sources to meet the needs of the County owned and operated systems for the five (5) and ten (10) year planning time frames of this Plan, said supply sources meeting the minimum Level of Service Standards established by this Plan. Policy 1.1.1: By June 1998 complete the pilot ASR ( Aquifer Storage and Recovery) system Study as a potential emergency and seasonal potable water source. Policy 1.1.2: Continue to implement a program for the protection of existing and potential potable water supply sources. Policy 1.1.3: Identify sufficient quantities of brackish water to meet the County's estimated 10 year growth related needs. OBJECTIVE 1.2: The County will implement the following policies to make certain that public and private sector potable water service utilities provide, repair and/or replace potable water supply, treatment and distribution facilities to correct existing deficiencies in their respective service areas as may be required to meet or exceed the Level of Service Standards established in this Plan. In addition, public sector potable water service utilities will be expanded as necessary to provide for future growth. Policy 1.2.1: Continue the development of a Collier County Regional Potable Water System consistent with the Capital Improvement Element and Water Master Plan Update to correct existing deficiencies and provide for future growth. Policy 1.2.2: Consistent with the urban growth policies of the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, provision of central potable water service by the County is limited to the service areas shown in this Plan and depicted on the Collier County Water and Sewer District (Mar> ~,PW-1 ).. the Rural Transition Sewer and Water District (Maps ~.PW-3 and PW-4).. and to areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities and services as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Policy 1.2.3: By the time mandated for the adoption of land development regulations pursuant to Chapter 1'63.3202, F.S., including any amendments thereto, require to the extent of the County's authority private sector potable water service utilities, establish and file with the County a statement of their policy and criteria, consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of this Plan for the expansi6n, PW- I Text with single, underline or single s:rikc:,~:rc:;~r!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::i::c:.~:zz:~g.': reflects proposed changes to the Transmitta in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recomtnendations. current Growtt~ replacement, and/or repair of their facilities to correct existing deficiencies and provide for future growth within their respective service areas. Policy 1.2.4: permit development of potable water SUDDIV. . systems cfr_ ............ in~;,,;A, ,~1 .'"~*~'~ ................. ..... . ....... I: ...... u~ as follows: within the Desionated Urban Area of the Plan and as depicted on the Collier County Water and Sewer District (Map/,PW-1). and in the outlying urban areas of Immokalee: Co[~eland. Chokoloskee. Plantation Island. and Port of the Islands: within the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District (Maps ~.PW-3 and PW-4)' in Sending Lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District when Density Blending: as provided for in the Density Rating System of the Future Land Use Element,. is utJJJz.e.~ and: in areas where Countv water service is not currently available. Such potable water SUpDIv systems shall onlv be allowed on an interim basis until County service is available. Individual potable water SUDDI.v wells may be permitted in all of the above areas on an interim basis until County service is available~, and outside of the above referenced boundaries where potable water SU[~[~lv systems are not anticipated. Policy 1.2.5: Continue enforcement of ordinances requiring connection of existing and new development to central potable water systems when they become available. Connections to a central system shall be made pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 88-4. Policy 1.2.6: Where Community Development Districts, or other similar special districts are established to provide a tool for developers to finance infrastructure or other purposes, wholly or partially within the Collier County Water-Sewer District, water service shall be connected to the regional system, and internal facilities shall be conveyed, when acceptable, to the Collier County Water-Sewer District for operation and ownership in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 88-76, the Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance, adopted September 27, 1988 or its latest revision, and District construction and operating policies. OBJECTIVE 1.3: By the time mandated for the adoption of land development regulations pursuant to Chapter 163.3202, F.S., including any amendments thereto, implement procedures to ensure that at the time a development order is issued, potable water facility capacity that meets or exceeds the minimum Level of Service Standards established herein is available or will be available to serve the development under the guidelines established for concurrency in the Capital Improvement Element of this Plan. Policy 1.3.1: The following Level of Service Standards are hereby adopted and shall be used as the basis for determining the availability of facility capacity and the demand generated by a development: Review of water usage data since 1989 indicated the LOS standard for finished water should be increased to 185 gpcd. Review of the historical ratio of residential to non-residential demand PW- 2 Text with single underline or single ~:ri!:c:!:reu~,!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to Management Plan. Text ~'ith double underline or double c:ri.~:::Sr:.::g5 reflects proposed changes to the Transmitt. in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENOA ITEM , l o I language primaF~l'3r- indicated that approximately 17% of the total water usage is non-residential. Thus the residential demand is 154 gcpd and the total finished water demand is 185 gpcd. FACILITY/SERVICE AREA COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES County Water and Sewer District Marco Water and Sewer District Goodland Water District LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD 185 gpcd 200 gpcd 163 gpcd CITY OF NAPLES FACILITIES Unincorporated Service Area 163 gpcd EVERGLADES CITY FACILITIES Unincorporated Service Area 163 gpcd INDEPENDENT DISTRICTS/PRIVATE SECTOR SYSTEMS The standard hereby adopted is the following "sewage" flow design standards, unless otherwise approved by the Board of County Commissioners to address economic, social and construction method variations between individual systems: (Source: Chapter 10D-6, Florida Administrative Code) GALLONS PER TYPE OF ESTABLISHMENT DAY (GPD) COMMERCIAL Airports a. per passenger 5 b. add per employee 20 Barber and Beauty Shops (per chair) 100 Bowling Alleys (toilet wastes only per lane) 100 Country Club a. per resident member 100 b. per member present 25 c. per employee 20 Dentist Offices a. per wet chair 200 b. per non-wet chair 50 Doctors Offices (per doctor) 250 Factories, exclusive of industrial wastes (gallons per person per shift) a. no showers provided b. showers provided 20 35 Food Service Operations a. Ordinary Restaurant (per seat) 50 b. 24 hour Restaurant (per seat) 75 c. Single Service articles only (per person) 25 d. Bar and Cocktail Lounge (per person) 30 PW- 3 Text with single underline or single s:rikc:!:rvug!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tt Management Plan. Text with double underlb~e or double z::-i.'cc:Srczg~.: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. current Grow, ang~J~t~Jri~irgU[J2 e. Drive-in Restaurant (per car space) f. Carry Out only i. per 100 square feet of floor space ii. add per employee g. Institutions (per meal) 5O 5O 2O 5 Hotels and Motels a. Regular (per room) b. Resort Hotels, Camps, Cottages (per person) c. add for establishments with self service laundry facilities (per machine) 150 75 4OO Office Building (per employee per 8 hour shift) 20 Service Stations (per water closet and per urinal) 25O Shopping Centers without food or laundry (per square foot of floor space) Stadiums, Race Tracks, Ball Parks (per seat) Stores per square foot of floor space Swimming and Bathing Facilities, public (per person) Theaters a. indoor, Auditoriums (per seat) b. Outdoor, Drive-ins (per space) Trailer/Mobile Home Park (per trailer space) Travel Trailer/Recreational Vehicle Park a. Travel Trailer (overnight), without water and sewer hookup (per trailer space) b. Travel Trailer (overnight), with water and sewer hook-ups (per trailer space). INSTITUTIONAL Churches (per seat) Hospitals (per bed) (does not include kitchen wastewater flows) Nursing, Rest Homes (per bed) (does not include kitchen wastewater flows) Parks, Public Picnic a. with toilets only (per person) b. with bathhouse, showers and toilets (per person) Public Institutions other than Schools & Hospitals (per person) PW- 4 Text with single underline or single ~-'~:~'~.,,, ..... ....... gt' reflects. Transmittal language as proposed changes t Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri::c:~.:rc.:cgJ: reflects proposed ctu~nges to the Transtar in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC reco~nmendation~. 0.1 5 0.1 10 5 10 200 75 100 3 20 100 5 10 100 AGENDA ITEM l/~e current Growth Schools (per student) a. day-type b. add for showers c. add for cafeteria d. add for day school workers e. boarding-type 15 5 5 15 75 Work/Construction Camps Semi-permanent (per worker) 50 RESIDENTIAL Residences a. Single or multiple family (per dwelling unit) 1 bedroom and 600 square feet or less heated or cooled area bedrooms and 601 - 1000 square feet heated or cooled area 3 bedrooms and 1001 - 2000 square feet heated or cooled area 4 or more bedrooms and more than 2000 square feet heated or cooled area 150 300 450 600 b. Other (per occupant) 75 FOOTNOTES: 1. For food service operations, kitchen wastewater flows shall normally be calculated as sixty-six percent (66%) of the total establishment wastewater flow. Systems serving high volume establishments, such as fast food restaurants and service stations located near interstate type highways, require special sizing considerations due to above average sewage volume expected from restroom facilities. Policy 1.3.2: In order to ensure these Level of Service Standards are maintained, methodologies for determining available capacity and demand shall incorporate appropriate peak demand coefficients for each facility and for the type of development proposed. Policy 1.3.3: These Level of Service Standards are the minimum criteria for replacement, expansion or increase in capacity of potable water supply facilities. Policy 1.3.4: Annually review historical potable water demand records and adjust these Level of Service Standards if so indicated by said annual review. OBJECTIVE 1.4: The County will continue to promote conservation of potable water supplies by developing and implementing an integrated, comprehensive conservation strategy which will identify specific consumption per capita goals. PW- 5 / ~ i ~15 FO osed cl~l~ ¢$ lo I1 Text with single underline or single ;:ri,;c:,:r~:;g,: reflects Transmittal language p P g ' ' ' ro osedchan es to the Transmittal Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i.~::.:::4;g.: reflects p p g ' in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGENOA ITEM" Policy 1.4.1: Negotiate agreements with area golf courses to accept and use treated wastewater effluent for irrigation when and where same is available from existing and future wastewater treatment plants. Policy 1.4.2: Continue to connect existing and future publicly owned lands suitable for irrigation with treated wastewater effluent, such as government building grounds, parks, and highway medians when economically feasible. Policy 1.4.3: Continue to connect existing and future privately owned lands suitable for irrigation with treated wastewater effluent, such as cemeteries, nurseries and commercial/industrial parks when economically feasible. Policy 1.4.4: Pursuant to general law (Chapter 91-68, Laws of Florida), by November 1, 1992, adopt a resolution promoting the use of xeriscape techniques (drought resistant landscaping) to minimize potable water use for landscaping irrigation. Policy 1.4.5: By January 1, 1998, develop a public water conservation program for reducing potable water use. Policy 1.4.6: At such time as excess effluent is available, permit construction and connection of dual water systems to the County's effluent transmission system (i.e., separate potable water and treated wastewater effluent) in new subdivisions when the construction and or connection of a dual water system will not negatively impact the potable water systems regulatory compliance or operation. Policy 1.4.7: By January 1998 complete a study to determine the feasibility of using treated effluent to create a salinity barrier to reduce the potential for salt water intrusion in to the County current and future wellfields. OBJECTIVE 1.5: The County will discourage urban sprawl and the proliferation of private sector potable water service suppliers in an effort to maximize the use of existing public facilities through the development order approval process by implementing the following policies. Policy 1.5.1: Discourage urban sprawl by permitting universal availability of central potable water systems only.' in the Designated Urban Area, ~ in Receivinq and certain Neutral Lands within the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District, and in the Rural Settlement District. all of which are depicted on ef the Future Land Use _,~...~ ......................... Map?~ m ... · ~* '":~ PIc~, ~'~ ~" ^~ '"~';~' These areas are further identified as: within the Collier County Water and Sewer District Boundaries on Map PW-1 of the Potable Water Sub-element, e;xcept the outlyin(] urban areas of Immokalee: Copeland. Chokoloskeer. Plantation Island~ and Port of the Islands: or within the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District Boundaries on Map PW-3 of the Potable Water Sub-element; or in Sendinq Lands within the Rural Frin,qe Mixed Use District when Density Blendin.q !c '_';:.!5-'cd, as provided for in the Density Ratinq System of the Future Land Use PW- 6 Text with single under/ine or single ztri!;c:!:rc.::g!: reflects Transmittal language a~ proposed changes to Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::g!:::hrz:~gh reflects proposed changes to the Transmit~ in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. the current Oron'th Element. is utilized; and, in areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities and service outside the Urban Area as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Within Section 1,5 (Township 48 South. Range 26 East) of the approved Mirasol PUD. which is designated Neutral. central potable water systems may be permitted. This area is depicted on the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District-Mirasol Map (PW-4). Policy 1.5.2: The County will discourage urban sprawl and the proliferation of private sector and/or package potable water treatment systems through the development order approval process to insure maximum utilization of the existing and planned public facilities. No existing private sector or potable water treatment systems will be permitted to add customers unless all Levels of Service Standards are met, and operations are in conformance with all DER permits. Policy 1.5.3 Under criteria. Droiects may be eligible for central potable water service from Collier County Utilities, or a private sector/independent district, within the ~ ~reas identified on the Rural Transition Water and Sewer Map (PW-3) of the Potable Water Sub-element, subiect to availability. Qualif¥inq criteria will be limited to the requirements and incentives established in the Future Land Use and the Conservation and Coastal Manaqement Elements of the Plan to obtain preservation standards established for environmentally sensitive lands in the Sending Areas of the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District. Criteria for potable water service eligibility may include, but are not limited to, plans for development which utilize creative planning techniques such as clustering, density blending, rural villages, and TDRs from identified environmentally sensitive areas. Criteria for eli.qibility may be amended and additional Sendinq and Receiving Lands may be desiqnated in the future. Central Potable Water distribution lines, within the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District, ma.v extend through Sending Lands: however, no properties designated as Sending Lands may connect to the distribution lines. PW- 7 Text with single underline or single z:ri!~c:!:rc~,/; reflects Transmittal language ax proposed changes Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:,-i::c:Sr:zg!: reflects proposed changes to the Transn in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGF. h~)A ITEJgl the current Growth ttal l(~g} l~i~ MAP PW--1 COLLIER COUNT'CS THREE (3) WATER DISTRIC'I'~ - BOUNDARIES · I I I I I I I I I I I I AND/OR I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I_ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I· · DISTRICT PW-8 SEWER · % I DISTRICT I I JUN 1 2002 COLLIER PW-2 COUNTY WATER AND SEWER (CWS) POTABLE WATER 'FACILITIES Collier County, Florido LEE. CO COLLIER. CO DISTRICT- CARICA TWO 5 I~GO GROUND STORAGE TANKS 12 MC.,D NORll-I REGIONAL WATER TREAlldENT PLANT 12 MGO STORAGE 27 iaGO INSTALLED RAW WATER WEI/.FiELD (51.7 MGD laAX. DAJLY PE:R~TTED WTHDRAWAL) RAW WATE~ ~RANSMISSION MAIN C~TY OF NAPLES WA"I~R SERVICE AREA Cl GULF' OF laEXICO ($,.iL 12 MOD REGIONAL WATER TREATlaE. NT PLANT ~111..I 6 MG AND 2 lag GROUND STORAGE: TANKS LEGEND ~ INDICAT[S AREAS CURRENTLY S~rRV~D BY COUNTY WATER TREATMENT PLANTS REPUlaP FAC~JllES STORAGE TA~KS COCUER CO~/HTY WAI~R AND S~R (CWS) D~S~CT SCALE lUL 2~1. MANATEE ROAD REPUMP FACIUTY 2MG GROUND STORAGE TANK COUJER STAT[ ISLES 0t:* CAPRI REPUUP FAOUTY AND 0,25 MO GROUND STORAGE TANK JUN 1 B Pg. RURAL TRANSITION WATER & SEWER DISTRICT MAP PW-3 (this ie · new map) N S LEGEND R 2~t 2002 E R 26 E R 27 E R 26 ~ RURAL TRANSITION WATER & SEWER DISTRICT - MIRASOL MAP PW-4- (this is a new map) N S LEGEND IN 1 8 200~ PW-1 1 PROJECT NO. 800 801 809 811 812 813 815 816 817 818 819 820 823 TABLE PW-11 COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND SEWER (CWS) DISTRICT POTABLE WATER FACILITIES FY88/89 - FY94/95 (See Map PW-19 for Project Locations) PROJECT DESCRIPTION 16" Water Main - Manatee Road - Manatee Road Pump Station to US 41; US 41 - Manatee Road to Westwind Drive Mobile Home Park (Master Plan Project Nos. 465; Part 516) Deleted 20" Water Main - Rattlesnake Hammock Road - County Barn Road to US 41 (Master Plan Project Nos. 452, 453) Completed Carica Road Storage Tank Pumping Facilities (Master Plan Project No. PS-1) Completed Land Acquisition for North County Regional Water Treatment Plant (Part of Master Plan Project No. NWTP- 1) Completed Hydrogeologic Services - North County (Coral Reef) Regional Wellfield (WMP #NRP-1 ) Completed 12" Water Main - Radio Road - Countryside to Foxfire (Master Plan Project No. 406) Completed 16" Water Main - Pine Ridge Road - Airport Road to Livingston Road (Master Plan Project No. 188) Completed 20" Water Main - Goodlette Road - Pine Ridge Road to Carica Road Storage Tank (Master Plan Project No. 256) Completed 12" Water Main - Seagate Drive - US 41 to Pelican Bay Master Meter (Not in Master Plan) Completed 16" Water Main - Airport Road - Vanderbilt Beach Road to Immobile Road (Master Plan Project No. 179) Completed 12" Water Main - Immobile Road -Airport Road to Willoughby Acres (Master Plan Project No. 198) Completed 16" Water Main - Immobile Road - Willoughby Acres to Livingston Road (Master Plan Project No. 178) Completed 12" Water Main - CR-951 - Manatee Road to CR-952 (Master Plan Project No. 509, 527) Completed TABLE PW-I1 (continued) PW - 12 Text with single underline or single s:ri!;c:!:rau',z!: reflects Transtnittal language as proposed changes Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:rL~:c:?::-z:cg.~: reflects proposed changes to the Transm in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. ACtA ITE~ rtal language pri~narily 824 825 COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND SEWER {CWS) DISTRICT POTABLE WATER FACILITIES FY88/89 - FY94/95 (See Map PW-19 for Project Locations) 12" Water Main - CR-952 - CR-951 to Isles of Capri Pump Station (Master Plan Project No. 523) Bid - Construction 20" Water Main - Rattlesnake Hammock Road - Lely Resort to County Barn Road (Master Plan Project Nos. 450, 451) Completed PROJECT NO. 826 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 12" Water Main - 6th Street - 91st Avenue to 11 lth Avenue (Master Plan Project Nos. 137,140) Completed 827 16" Water Main - Gulfshore Drive, Vanderbilt Beach Road, Vanderbilt Drive, and 91 st Avenue; 11 lth Avenue to 6th Street (Master Plan Project Nos. 261,262, 263,264, 265, 266) Completed 828 North County (Coral Reef) Regional Wellfield - Phase I (Master Plan Project No. NRW-1) Deleted 829 North County Regional Water Treatment Plant (Master Plan Project No. NWTP- 1) Completed 83O 36" Water Main - Immobile Road - CR-951 to North County Regional Water Treatment Plant (Master Plan Project No. 216) Completed 831 36" Water Main - CR-951 - Vanderbilt Beach Road to Immobile Road (Master Plan Project No. 215) Woodlands PUD (Master Plan Project No. 214) Completed 832 24" Water Main - Immobile Road - CR-951 Completed 833 20" Water Main - Immobile Road - Woodlands PUD to Quail Creek PUD (Master Plan Project No. 212) Completed 834 835 16" Water Main - Quail Creek PUD - Immobile Road to Quail Creek Storage Tank (Master Plan Project No. 211 ) Completed 16" Water Main - Immobile Road - Quail Creek PUD to Oaks Blvd. (Master Plan Project No. 202) Completed 836 12" Water Main - Immobile Road - Oaks Blvd. to Livingston Road (Master Plan Project No. 184) Completed TABLE PW-11 (continued) COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND SEWER {CWS) DISTRICT PROPOSED POTABLE WATER FACILITIES FY88/89 - FY94/95 PW - 13 Text with single underline or single strihc:!;rc;;g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::~Sc:::vc;:g5 reflects proposed ctmnges to the Transmir in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM No,, ire curre~I Gro~vl, 837 838 (See Map PW-19 for Project Locations) 16" Water Main - Livingston Road Extension (North Naples Roadway MSTU) - Immobile Road to Old US 41 (Master Plan Project Nos. 169,170, 171,255) Not CIE - MSTU 1.5 MGD Elevated Storage Tank - US 41 and Old US 41 (Master Plan Project No. ET-I) Deleted PROJECT NO. 839 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 16" Water Main - Old US 41 - Livingston Road to US 41/Old US 41 Elevated Storage Tank (Master Plan Project No. 167)Deleted 840 16" Water Main - Pine Ridge Road - Livingston Road to Vineyards PUD (Master Plan Project Nos. 302, 303) Completed 841 16" Water Main - Davis Boulevard - Foxfire PUD to Glades Water Treatment Plan (Master Plan Project No. 417) Completed 842 5 MG Ground Storage Tank and Pumping Facilities - Collier DRI (Master Plan Project No. GST-4, PS-5) Deleted 843 12" Water Main - Pine Ridge Road - Goodlette Road to Airport Road (Master Plan Project No. 189) Completed 844 12" Water Main - Pine Ridge Road - US 41 to Goodlette Road (Master Plan Project No. 190) Completed 846 12" Water Main - US 41 - Vanderbilt Beach Road to Gulf Park Drive (Master Plan Project No, 161 ) Deleted 847 12" Water Main - Immobile Road - Airport Road to North County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant Entrance Road (Master Plan Project No. 175) Completed 848 12" Water Main - US 41 - Gulf Park Drive to Pine Ridge Road (Master Plan Project No. 191) Deleted 849 North County (Coral Reef) Regional Wellfield - Phase II (Master Plan Project No. NRW-2) Deleted 850 Golden Gate Regional Wellfield Expansion Plan Project No. SRW-2) Completed New North County Regional Water Treatment Plant 8 mgd expansion TABLE PW- 11 (continued) COLLIER COUNTY WATER AND SEWER (CWSI DISTRICT PROPOSED POTABLE WATER FACILITIES FY88/89 - FY94/95 (See Map PW-19 for Project Locations) PW - 14 Text with single underline or single s:ri!~c:.t:rr:::g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::i::c:::yz::~.~: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittc in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. current Growth lang~P~'~r~O02 New New New New 8 MGD RO Water Treatment Facility 12" Water Main - Tamiami Trail - Manatee Road to end of System 12" Water Main - Livingston Road Wyndemere and Radio Road 16" Water Main - Radio Road - Santa Barbara Blvd. - CR 951 PROJECT NO. PROJECT DESCRIPTION New 12" Water Main- Livingston Road Immobile Rd to Vanderbilt Beach Road New 12" Water main - Livingston Road - Vanderbilt Road - Pine Ridge Road Notes: 1. Project numbers correspond to those presented in the Capital Improvement Element of this Comprehensive Plan. Source: Collier County Water/Sewer District, 1995 The County has established a Concurrency Management System to monitor the Level of Service provided by the private sector. The County has not direct authority to require other private or public systems to address existing and projected deficiencies. This is a politically sensitive topic and State law does not provide direct authority to Counties to accomplish this task. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the County must continue to expand efforts to conserve potable water supplies. The County has made significant inroads in this regard by negotiating agreements with area golf courses for use of wastewater effluent for irrigation needs. This program continues and will be expanded to promote effluent use wherever suitable and sufficient quantities of effluent are available. Further, the County needs to develop an effective public information program promoting conservation methods in general. The recommendations described above are one basis of the Goals, Objectives and Policies presented in the following section. PW - 15 Text with single underline or single s:rikc:!::'c::g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed chang, Management Plan. Text with double underline or double x::-i::c:.':rc.z:gJ: reflects proposed changes to the Tra~ in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. : to the current Growt, COLL~E~ COUNTY WATER & SEgEI~ DISTI~CT l~ev~sed Potable WAter Yac~iC~es FY 90/gl-FY 93/9~ Amended Hay 19. 1992 PW-16 ITEM 20O2 This Page Intentionally left blank ITEM 2002 "~.'"'~ .._~ COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Adopted October, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element Symbol DATE AMENDED ** October 28, 1997 ORDINANCE NO. Ordinance No. 97-58 This is the EAR-based amendment. Due to the magnitude of the changes - which included reformatting the entire Element, affecting every page of the Element - a Roman Numeral is not assigned. Indicates adopted portions Note: the support document will be updated as current information becomes ~va~a,l~A ITEM 2002 ¥. GOALS~OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL I: TO PROTECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC BY ENSURING ACCESS TO ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND, COST EFFECTIVE AND IMPLEMENTABLE SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES AND SERVICES OBJECTIVE 1.1: The County will implement the following policies to make certain that public and private sector sanitary sewer service utilities provide, repair and/or replace sanitary sewer collection, treatment and disposal facilities to correct existing deficiencies in their respective service areas, as may be required to meet or exceed the Level of Service Standards established in this Plan. In addition, public sector sanitary sewer service utilities will be expanded as necessary to provide for future growth. Policy 1.1.1: Continue the development of the Collier County Regional Sanitary Sewer System consistent with the Capital Improvements element to provide for future growth. Policy 1.1.2: Consistent with the urban growth policies of the Future Land Use Element of this Plan, provision of central sanitary sewer service by the County is limited to._' the service areas shown in this Plan and depicted on the Collier County Water and Sewer District (Map {PW-1)?; the Rural Transition Sewer and Water District (Maps ~.PW-3 and PW-4): Sendin~ Lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District when Density Blending. as provided for in the Density Ratin~ System of the Future Land Use Element.. is utilized: and_, to areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities and services as of the date of adoption of this Plan. Policy 1.1.3: By the time mandated for the adoption of land development regulations pursuant to Chapter 163.3202, F.S., including any amendments thereto, the County will establish and implement a program requiring that private sector sanitary sewer service utilities establish and file with the Collier County Utilities Division an annual statement of their policy and service criteria, including level of service provided, consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of this Plan, for the expansion and/or replacement of their facilities to correct existing deficiencies and provide for future growth within their respective service areas. Also, County Ordinance 80-112 requires and new development connecting to private STP submit capacity availability information with building permit applications. Policy 1.1.4: Permit development of package sewage treatment plant systems in areas identified in Policy 1,1.2, on an interim basis until County service is available. ~ fc!!c'.-:c: ec~y '::!th!n thc ~cc!;.".ctcd Urban systems within the County only when connection to an existing central system is not readily accessible to render service and note that where septic systems are allowed, and future County sewer service becomes available, said septic systems will be required to connect to the County regional system. SS- 1 Text with single, underline or single ~:ril;ct!:rc;;g!: r~flects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the curreni Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::'i::c::::c;cg:: reflects proposed changes to the Transmitt~ prirnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Growth / a,, fl 1 8 2002 Policy 1.1.5: Continue enforcement of ordinances requiring connection of existing and new development to central sanitary sewer systems when they become available. Connections to a central system shall be made pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 88-4. Policy 1.1.6: The County will give planning and budgetary priority to regional sanitary sewer system projects which will provide the means for phase out and connection of existing package sewage treatment plants and areas of high concentrations of septic tanks where such facilities may reasonably be expected to adversely affect public health and safety or the environment. Policy 1.1.7: Where Community Development Districts, or similar special districts are established to provide a tool for developers to finance infra-structure or other purposes, wholly or partially within the Collier County Water-Sewer District, sewer service will be connected to the regional system, and all facilities shall be conveyed, when acceptable, to the Collier County Water-Sewer District for operation and ownership in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 88-76; the Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance, adopted September 27, 1988 or its latest revision, and District construction and operating policies. OBJECTIVE 1.2: By the time mandated for the adoption of land development regulations pursuant to Chapter 163.3202,, F.S., including any amendments thereto, implement procedures to ensure that at the time a development order is issued, sanitary sewer facility capacity that meets or exceeds the minimum Level of Service Standards established herein is available or will be available to serve the development under the guidelines established for concurrency in the Capital Improvement Element of this Plan. Policy 1.2.1: The following Level of Service (LOS) standards are hereby adopted and shall be used as the basis for determining the availability of facility capacity and the demand generated by a development: [Note: The County Standard of 100 gpcd (gallons per capita per day) plus the 21% non- residential adjustment factor discussed in Section III is presented below as 121 gpcd (100 x 1.21 = 121) for simplicity.] LEVEL OF SERVICE FAClLITYISERVICE AREA STANDARD Collier County Facilities North Sewer Service Area Central Sewer Service Area South Sewer Service Area Marco Sewer Service Area 121 gpcd 121 gpcd 121 gpcd 121 gpcd City of Naples Facilities Unincorporated Service Area 121 gpcd Everglades City Facilities Unincorporated Service Area SS- 2 121 gpcd Text with single underline or single s:ri~c:hrc.:;g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current 6 Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:ri'.:c:/:rz~g5 reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal, primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EA C/CCPC recommendations. AGENDA ITEM .o..,bjUN 1 8 2002 mg:~age Independent Districts/Private Sector Systems The standards hereby adopted are the following sewage flow design standards (Source: Chapter 10D-6, Florida Administrative Code) unless otherwise approved by the Board of County Commissioners to address economic, social and construction method variations between individual systems. TYPE OF ESTABLISHMENT GALLONS PER DAY (GPD) Commercial Airports a. Per passenger 5 b. add per employee 20 Barber and Beauty Shops (per chair) 100 Bowling Alleys (toilet wastes only per lane) 100 Country Club a. per resident member 100 b. per member present 25 ¢. per employee 20 Dentist Offices a. per wet chair b. per non-wet chair 2OO 5O Doctors Offices (per doctor 25O Factories, exclusive of industrial wastes (gallons per person per shift) a. no showers provided b. showers provided 2O 35 Food Service Operations a. ordinary restaurant (per seat) b. 24 hour restaurant (per seat) c. single service articles only (per person) d. bar and cocktail lounge (per person) e. drive-in restaurant (per car space) ~=. carry out only :[. per 100 square feet of floor space ~.. add per employee 5O 75 25 30 5O 5O 20 Hotels and Motels a. Regular (per room) Resort hotels, camps, cottages (per person) ¢. add for establishments with self service 100 75 SS- 3 Text with single underline or single z:rikct!:rc.~?.!: re. lqects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::iS::::vzxg;: reflects proposed changes to the Transmitta primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. :rowth laundry facilities (per machine) 400 Office Building (per worker) 20 Service Stations (per bay) 5OO Shopping Centers without food or laundry (per square foot of floor space) 0.1 Stadiums, Race Tracks, Ball Parks (per seat) 5 TYPE OF ESTABLISHMENT GALLONS PER DAY (GPD) Stores (without food service) a. private toilets, for employees only (per employee) ]~. public toilets (per square foot of floor space) 2O 0.1 Theaters b. Indoor, auditoriums (per seat) Outdoor, drive-ins (per space) 5 10 Trailer/Mobile Home Park (per trailer space) 200 Travel Trailer/Recreational Vehicle Park a. Travel trailer (overnight), without water and sewer hook-up (per trailer space) b. add for water and sewer hook-up (per trailer space) 50 100 Swimming and bathing facilities (per person) 10 Institutional Churches (per seat) Hospitals (per bed) 200 Nursing, rest homes (per person) 100 Parks, public picnic a. with toilets only (per person) b. with bathhouse,showers and toilets (per person) 5 10 Public institutions other than schools and hospitals (per person) 100 Schools (per student) a. day type ~. add for showers c. add for cafeteria SS- 4 Text with single underline or single str:.!:c:!:rc:c~z!: re. flects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Management Plan. Text with double underline or double st:-i::c::::'c.::g.': reflects proposed changes to the Transmitta primarily in response to the ORC Report. prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. 15 5 5 AGENDA iTEM ~rowlh ]k! 1 8 2002 cl. add for day school workers e. boarding type Work/Construction camps semi-permanent (per worker) Residential Residences a. Single family (per bedroom) b. apartment (per bedroom) ¢. Mobile home not in a trailer park (per bedroom) d. Other (per occupant) 15 75 5O 150 150 150 75 Footnotes: 1. For food service operations, kitchen wastewater flows shall normally be calculated as sixty-six percent (66%) of the total establishment wastewater flow. Systems serving high volume establishments, such as fast food restaurants and service stations located near interstate type highways, require special sizing considerations due to above average sewage volume expected from restroom facilities. Policy 1.2.2: In order to ensure these LOS standards are maintained, methodologies for determining available capacity and demand shall incorporate appropriate peak demand coefficients for each facility and for the type of development proposed. Policy 1.2.3: These LOS standards are the minimum criteria for replacement, expansion or increase in capacity of sanitary sewer treatment facilities. Policy 1.2.4: Annually review historical sanitary sewer demand records and adjust these LOS standards if so indicated by said annual review. Objective 1.3: The County will continue to ensure utilization of environmentally sound and economically beneficial methods for disposal of treated sludge and septage. Policy 1.3.1: Include sludge de-watering and stabilization facilities with all County wastewater treatment plants to produce sludge de-watered and stabilized to a degree suitable for use as cover material for County landfills or to be used for any suitable manner that is permitted by law. OBJECTIVE 1.4: The County will continue to promote the use of treated wastewater effluent for irrigation purposes in order to provide an environmentally sound disposal method and to conserve potable water and groundwater supplies by developing and implementing an integrated, comprehensive strategy for the following Policies. SS- 5 Text with single underline or single stri!cc:hrv::g!: r~flects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tire curret; Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:d!~::::rcx;5 reflects proposed changes to the Transmitr prinmrily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. AGEI~A ITEM 1 8 200 Policy 1.4.1: Negotiate agreements with area golf courses to accept and use treated wastewater effluent for irrigation when and where same is available from existing and future wastewater plants. Policy 1.4.2: Connect existing and future publicly owned lands suitable for irrigation with treated wastewater effluent, such as government building grounds, parks, and highway medians when economically feasible and in accordance with the direction and policy of the Board of County Commissioners. Policy 1.4.3: Connect existing and future privately owned land suitable for irrigation with treated wastewater effluent, such as cemeteries, nurseries and commercial/industrial parks, when economically feasible and in accordance with the direction and policy of the Board of County Commissioners. Policy 1.4.4: At such time that effluent will be available, permit the construction and connection of dual water systems to the county's effluent system (i.e., separate potable water and treated wastewater effluent) in new subdivisions, provided that said connection causes no adverse impact to the potable water system. Policy 1.4.5: Where Community Development Districts, or other similar special districts are established to provide a tool for developers to finance infrastructure or other purposes, wholly or partially within the Collier County Water-Sewer District, and where such districts make provisions for irrigation via dual systems utilizing effluent and/or other irrigation sources, said systems shall be connected to the regional system when available, and all internal irrigation systems shall remain in private ownership and master metered by the County. OBJECTIVE 1.5: The County will discourage urban sprawl and the proliferation of private sector sanitary sewer service suppliers in an effort to maximize the use of existing public facilities through the development order approval process by implementing the following policies. Policy 1.5.1: Discourage urban sprawl by permitting universal availability of central sanitary sewer systems only: in the Designated Urban Area, ~ in Receivin,q and certain Neutral Lands within the Rural Frinqe Mixed Use District, and in the Rural Settlement District. all of which are depicted on of the Future Land Use Map~. E!cmc~~. cf ~.~!c P!:~, c~d ~ These areas are further identified as; within the Collier County Water and Sewer District Boundaries on Map PW-1 of the Potable Water Sub- element, except the outlyin(~ urban areas of Immokalee; Copeland.. Chokoloskee: Plantation Island. and Port of the Islands: or within the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District Boundaries on Map PW-3 of the Potable Water Sub-element; ~;~Lin Sendin,q Lands within the Rural Frin.qe Mixed Use District when Density Blendinq ie=a4~ee~, as provided for in the Density Ratin,q System of the Future Land Use Element. is utilized: and, in areas where the County has legal commitments to provide facilities and service outside the Urban Area as of the date of adoption of this Plan. SS- 6 Text with single underline or single~,."'~'~'~... ..... ...... .~,,~' reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to tile current Management Plan, Text with double underline or double z::i;:c::::c.:~g:: reflects proposed changes to the Transmitt~ primarily in response to tile ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations, Within Section 15 (Township 48 South. Range 26 East) of the approved Mirasol PUD, which is desianated Neutral. central ""*~'J ..... *~- sanitary sewer systems may be permitted. This area is depicted on the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District-Mirasol Map (PW-4). Policy 1.5.2: The County will discourage urban sprawl and the proliferation of private sector and/or package sanitary sewer treatment systems through the development order approval process to insure maximum utilization of the existing and planned public facilities. No existing private sector or package treatment system will be permitted to add customers unless all Levels of Service Standards are met, and operations are in conformance with all DER permits. Policy 1.5.3 Under criteria may be eliqible for central sanitary sewer service from Collier County Utilities, or a private sector/independent district, within the Receivin,q Areas identified on the Rural Transition Water and Sewer Map (PW-3) of the Potable Water Sub-element, subiect to availability. Qualifyin.q criteria will be limited to the requirements and incentives established in the Future Land Use and the Conservation and Coastal Mana,qement Elements of the Plan to obtain preservation standards established for environmentally sensitive lands in the Sendinq Areas of the Rural Frin,qe Mixed Use District. Criteria for central sanitary sewer service eli,qibility may include, but are not limited to, plans for development which utilize creative planning techniques such as clusterin,q, density blendinq, rural villa,qes, and TDRs from identified environmentally sensitive areas. Criteria for eliqibility may be amended and additional Sendin.q and Receivinq Lands may be desiqnated in the future. Central Sanitary. Sewer collection lines, within the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District. may extend through Sending Lands: however, no properties designated as Sending Lands ma.v connect to the collection lines. SS- 7 Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:hrc::g!: r~llects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the curren Management Plan. Text with double ~t~derline or double z:ri!:c:!:rz'.zF,!: reflects proposed changes to the Transmitt pritnarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. Growth la"8 dl¢ 1 8 2002 8 8 I < -F' ~ I--- Z n,"' < O O0 Z II ¢u LF OF Z , I JUN 1 SS-8 MAP SS-5 SOUTH SEWER SERVICE AREA- SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES Collier County, Florida 24' SCALE I I 1MI. 2MI, LEGEND EXISTING TRANSMISSION MAINS SOUTH COUNTY WASTE:WATER TREATMENT PLANT MASTER PUMP STAT1ON AREAS SERVED BY NORTH ww-rP PREPARED COMMUNITY DEV~r. L0i~M£NT AND [NVIRONMID~ SOURCE COt. UE:R COUNTY UTIU~ES DlVtSl01 DATE: $/95 AGENOA JUN 1 8 ~PORT S[C11C~ ~.' S[RVlCI[S DI¥1SIOI~I 1995 SS-9 GULF OF W£XICO SOUTHERN UTILI~ES,/t~C. SEWAGE ~REATMENT MAP SS-6 MARCO SEWER SERVICE AREA- SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES Collier County, Florido APPROX~MA'rE AREAS CURRENTLY SERVED BY COUNTY OWNED/OPERATED COLLECTION SYSTEMS (TYPICAL)-TREA~MENT PROVIDED BY SOUTHERN STATES UTIUTIES, INC. PLANT C.R. 92 o© PI~:PARL'D BY: GR,M~-IICS AND TECNNICAL SUPPORT COMMUNITY ID["V[LOPMENT AND ~.NVIR~IMENTAL ~'R~IC~$ SOURC[: COLUER COUNTY U1~UTtES DIVI~ON, 1~95 DATE: g/is F'l~r': SS-6.DWG 4. N LEGEND INDICATES SEWER SERVICE AREA SEWAC,[ TREATMENT PLANT SCALE SS-10 JUN~' 8 2002 TABLE SS-18 COLLIER COUNTY SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES FY88/89 - FY94/95 (See Map SS-34 for Project Locations) PROJ. NO. 901 9O2 9O6 9O8 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.0 MGD Expansion (to 4.5 MGD) of North County Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility & Effluent Distribution System Completed East and South Naples Sanitary Sewer Collection System Completed Utilities Administration Building Deleted 8" Sewage Transmission Main - CR-951 - from Pump Station No. 3.15 to Pump Station No. 3.20 Under Construction, combined with Roads 12" Sewage Transmission Main - CR-951 - from Pump Station No. 3.19 to Pump Station No. 3.20 No Plans due to lack of Growth 10" Sewage Transmission Main - Davis Blvd. - from Pump Station No. 11 to Santa Barbara Blvd. Completed South County Regional Master Pump Station No. 3.11 Deleted 10" Sewage Transmission Main - Davis Blvd. - from Pump Station No. 3.14 to Pump Station No. 3.11 Completed South County Regional Master Pump Station No. 3.14 Design Completed, Construction on Hold 20" Sewage Transmission Main - US 41 -from Pump Station No. 3.18 to Pump Station No. 3.01 Completed South County Regional Master Pump Station No. 3.18 Completed 8.0 MGD Expansion (to 12.0) of South County Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility Delayed, expansion to 16 MGD presently being addressed. 4.5 MGD Expansion (to 7.5 MGD) of North County Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility Completed 20" Sewage Transmission Main - Rattlesnake Hammock Road - from Pump Station No. 3.20 to Pump Station No. 3.02 Completed SS- 11 Ne. ~ Crop,tN 1 8 2002 Il language Text with single underline or single s:ri!:c:hra:;g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the curren Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z:riJ:c:~.:rc:cg5 reflects proposed changes to the Transmin primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. 919 92O TABLE SS-18 Continued COLLIER COUNTY SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES FY88/89 - FY94/95 (See Map SS-34 for Project Locations) South County Regional Master Pump Station No. 3.20 South County Regional Master Pump Station No. 3.16 On Hold Completed PROJ. NO. 921 922 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 12" Sewage Transmission Main - CR-951 - from Pump Station No. 3.16 to Pump Station No. 3.18 Completed Telemetry System for North County Regional Pump Stations Deleted ss CIE Notes: 1. Project Numbers correspond to those presented in the Capital Improvement Element of this Comprehensive Plan 2. MGD is million gallons per day 3. Additional CIE's added to the Update and Amendments of the Capital Improvement Element have been completed and are shown on Map SS-34. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the County must continue and expand efforts for conservation of potable water supplies by increasing the use of treated wastewater effluent, or reclaimed water, for irrigation use. The County has already made significant inroads in this regard by negotiating agreements with area golf courses for the use of wastewater effluent for irrigation needs. This program needs to be continued and expanded to promote effluent use wherever suitable. Further, the County needs to develop an effective public information program promoting these efforts. The above discussed recommendations are the basis of the Goals, Objectives and Policies presented in the following section. SS- 12 Text with single underline or single z:ri!:c:!;r:.',~g!: reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the currei Management Plan. Text with double underline or double z::-i.~:::.'::.r:cg.~: reflects proposed changes to the Trans*nii primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. 2002 Collier County Sanitary Sewer Fac£1tttes Improvements FY88/89 - FY94/95 '[AS'I'~WATRR TRANSMISSION IJl41~ AND MASTER PUMP STATIONS Amended May 19, 1992 SS-13 Text with single underline or singleo,. .... .,..:~'~'~,,,. ....... v.,~. ,,;' reflects Transmittal language as proposed changes to the current Gro Management Plan. Text with double underline or double .n::'i.Lz:]::uxg/: reflects proposed changes to the Transmittal Iai primarily in response to the ORC Report, prior BCC direction, or EAC/CCPC recommendations. j- AGE/~A ITE~ 'th "= JUN 1 8 2002 April 11, 2002 THE CONSERVANCY Of Southwest Florida 1450 Merrihue Drive · Naples. Florida 3-1102 941.262.0304 · Fax 941._~_.f)67_ Mr. Charles Gauthier State of Florida Department of Community Affairs Bureau of State Planning 2555 Shumard Oak Blvd. Tallahassee FL 32399-2100 Transmittal of Collier County's Growth Management Plan Amendments for the Rural Fringe Assessment Area Pursuant to the Governor and Cabinet's Final Order of June 22, 1999 Dear Mr. Gauthier, On behalf of The Conservancy of Southwest Florida, I would like to thank you and your staff for taking the time to meet with the Capital Connection of Collier County during their recent visit to Tallahassee. Nicole Ryan, our Environmental Policy Manager, attended that meeting and appreciated the opportunity to hear your thoughts on agricultural land use policies and growth management for Collier County. The Conservancy has watched and participated in the formation of Collier County's proposed plans for our rural areas. We have held a seat as a member of the Rural Fringe Area Oversight Committee and commented numerous times to the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) on the proposed Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendments. While many aspects of these amendments may be beneficial to managing growth, our primary concem is that they will not provide sufficient safeguards for natural resource protection. The Conservancy believes that the GMP amendments for the Rural Fringe Assessment Area, passed by the BCC on March 4, 2002, provide more than sufficient protection for private property rights. Moreover, the package of amendments not only gives a solid framework for future development in the Rural Fringe, but will likely change the character of the rural areas by creating a system that goes beyond the intensity and density of development allowed in these areas prior to the Final Order. The GMP amendments provide the framework for future development in the fringe to be clustered. However, the concept of villages and towns in these rural areas needs to be balahced With areas Where development is curtailed and protection of resources is emphasized. Therefore, The Conservancy is concerned that while future devek P"~'~A i'r~ the fringe has been provided for, sufficient protection of natural resources has n >t. no. ~ JUN 1 8 2O02 Leadi/zg the challenge to protect and sustain South west Fit rida's natural envirodtment. . The Conservancy supports the underlying structure of the GMP amendments, which is the concept of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). Moreover, we supported, in general, Collier County staff's proposal for a TDR program in Collier Country, as presented at the February 27 GMP amendments public hearing. Unfortunately, between the time of the February 27 public hearing and the continuation of that hearing on March 4, significant changes were proposed and recommended on the part of county staff. In the opinion of The Conservancy, some of these recommendations could jeopardize one of the main intents of the Final Order, which is to shift incompatible land uses away from environmentally sensitive lands. The staff's proposed changes were substantial and their impact on the feasibility of a Collier County TDR program were not reviewed by Dr. James Nicholas, the county's TDR expert and consultant, prior to a BCC vote. Perhaps the most potentially detrimental aspect of the amended amendments recommended and approved at the March 4 hearing is what their impact will be when taken in combination with each other and implemented as part of a TDR program. While any one of the amendments has the potential to create a negative impact, the amendments, taken as a whole, may actually undermine the goal of protecting environmental resources and fail to satisfy the Final Order. The GMP amendments that The Conservancy is especially concerned about are: Agriculture Exemptions on Sending Lands The Conservancy was extremely concerned about county staff's recommendation to exclude agriculture in the fringe from land use planning policies. It is our finn belief that Collier County has the authority, and the responsibility, to implement land use policies and that agriculture cannot be exempt if natural resources are to be protected. County staff based their position on the opinion of their outside legal council. Council for the Florida Wildlife Federation and Collier County Audubon came to a very different conclusion, opining that the county could, and should, implement land use policies that consider agricultural uses. The BCC agreed with staff's recommendation and did not put any land use policies in place that relate to agriculture. The Conservancy firmly believes that the entire concept of shifting incompatible land uses away from sensitive natural resources would be compromised if future agricultural uses are exempt from land use policies. (CCPC) and county staff at the time of the February 27 public hearing. Staff's Exemptions on Lands when Development Rights are Sold Collier County's outside legal council did, however, opine that ifa landowner within a Sending Lands designation voluntarily participates in the TDR program, then the county has the authority to establish parameters for what agricultural practices can occur on the property after development fights are sold. This position was supported by the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), Collier County Planning Comm :~:,:.c,r,,~.,r~r)A rrr~ 2002 recommendation had changed at the March 4 hearing. On March 4, county staff came forward with the option of allowing landowners in Sending Lands to sell their development rights and still retain full use of their agricultural lands, as long as there is no "intensif'~cation" of agricultural use. The exact del'tuition of"intensif'~cation" is unclear. The Conservancy believes that this policy will, as with exempting agriculture from land policies, be detrimental to natural resource protection in the fringe areas. Paying someone for development rights on their property while allowing them to continue full agricultural use of their land is a double payoff and creates an economic windfall for that property owner, while failing to protect the land where development rights were sold. The ConservancY advocated for a policy that would require agricultural landowners in the Sending Lands, who choose to participate in the TDR program, to restore their agriculture fields to at least native range or unimproved pasture prior to transferring anY development rights from that property. Such a policy would ensure that lands protected through TDRs have the high natural resource value, which is the goal for Sending Lands. We believe that such a policy is necessary to protect natural resources. Clearing in the Sending Area As stated before, The Conservancy believes that Collier County should apply land use policies to agricultural areas. One important issue related to this is holding agriculture to a set of standards with regard to preservation and land clearing. For example, even though wetland standards do apply to agricultural lands, if a property is entirely upland, currently 100% clearing is allowed. Due to the importance of upland habitat for flora and fauna, standards should be in place. Unfortunately, Collier County is not recommending any agriculture policies, which is a deficiency in the GMP amendments. Density Blending Between the February 27 public hearing and the March 4 hearing, county staff formulated a proposal for density blending between urban fringe lands and adjacent Sending Lands. Property owners who owned adjacent acreage in these two areas would be allowed to blend their density by going through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. This recommendation was approved by the BCC, despite the fact that density blending in this area was never previously recommended by the EAC, CCPC or staff. Moreover, the Sending Lands that would be affected are designated as Natural Resource Protection Area (NIt.PA) and are within the boundaries of the Belle Meade Florida Forever project. While this GMP provision may not be extremely detrimental, caution should be exercised so that density is not inappropriately increased within a NR_PA. Increasing Base Density in Sending Areas The premise for creating a TDR program is to shift incompatible land uses away from sensitive areas while duly compensating the landowner for the lost use of their property. In order to fulfill the requirements of the Final Order, urban and residential development must be shifted away from the sensitive Sending Lands. This is why a TDR pr~. proposed. Dr. Nicholas assessed the feasibility of the TDR program on one uni' per ~ 2002 parcel in the Sending Lands. The recommendation to increase this base density to one unit per 40 acres seem arbitrary and could unravel the balance needed to create a successful TDR program. In addition, this increase in density may not sufficiently protect the resources in the Sending Lands. Parcel by the Landfill At the March 4 hearing, the suggestion to re-classify specific Sending Lands to Industrial was suggested and approved by the BCC in a 4-1 vote. Though this land is surrounded by development (and the landfill), The Conservancy is concemed that the minimal preservation requirement, for Industrial-zoned land, even with the property owner agreeing to preserve more that the 15% requirement, may not be sufficient to protect the red-cockaded woodpecker habitat in that area. Other Amendments The BCC voted on other amendments that The Conservancy does not believe will have a significant impact on the success of the program. However, one amendment does allow more TDR credits for land closer to the urban area, due to this land's increased value. While it seems fair to implement such a policy, Dr. Nicholas has adamantly stated that for a TDR program to work, it must be kept simple. The Conservancy would like for Dr. Nicholas to review these amendments and comment on their potential impact prior to any adoption. The Conservancy has been involved with the Rural Fringe Assessment since its inception. We appreciate all of the work that the DCA, Collier County, the Rural Fringe Area Oversight Committee, environmental organization and concerned citizens have contributed to this effort. We believe a TDR program can be implemented that will preserve critical natural resources while still allowing for agriculture and future development. However, the above-mentioned GMP amendments may, as a whole, create a program that does not fulfill the intent of the Final Order. We ask that you review the amendments carefully and address the following concerns in your Objections, Recommendation and Comments (ORC) Report pertaining to: · Exempting agricultural land use policies in Sending Lands; · Allowing agricultural uses to continue once development rights are sold; · Allowing agricultural clearing in lieu of requiring agriculture to adhere to preservation standards; · Allowing density blending between the urban fringe and Sending Lands; · Increasing base density in the Sending Lands, and; JUN 1 § 200~ If you have any questions on The Conservancy's position regarding the GMP amendments, please contact Nicole Ryan, Environmental Policy Manager, at (239) 403- 4220. Sincerely, Kathy Prosser President and CEO CC: Michael McDaniel Commissioner James Carter Commissioner Jim Coletta Commissioner Fred Coyle Commissioner Donna Fiala Commissioner Tom Henning ITEM, JUN ~ 8 2002 'Golden Gate Estates A '"' ' Civic Association --April 19, 2002 Mr. Michael McDaniel Growth Management Administrator Department of Community Affairs State of Florida 2555 Shumard Oak Blvd. Tallahassee, Florida 32399 APR 2 2 2002 Dear Mr. McDaniel: Per our telephone conversation of April 10, 2002, I am writing to you regarding the concerns of the Golden Gates Estates Area Civic Association that were addressed at our general meeting on April 17, 2002. The association voted to not support the North Belle Meade portion of the Rural Fringe Assessment Amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan because of the possible negative effects on our community and the surrounding area of Golden Gate Estates. Following are excerpts from the presentation that I made at the meeting: The North Belle Meade Overlay is part of the Rural Fringe Assessment that has been forwarded to the Department of Community Affairs for final approval. It describes an expansion of APAC and the opening of Wilson Boulevard south to the landfill road. One of the justifications for the expansionof APAC is because "these sections contain locally scarce Florida Department of Transportation grade rock for road construction." There are other rock quarries in Collier County that would not use Wilson Boulevard exclusively and that have the same quality mate. rial that is needed for road building. Of the ten that I called six said yes (theyhave the material), three said no and one is closing down. There is also the possibility of rock quardes being established in the Eastern Lands portion of the Rural and Agriculture Assessment. Eight years ago APAC was unable to get a unanimous vote from the Board of Collier County Commissioners to expand their operations. One of the main reasons was sixty (60) dump trucks-a-day utilizing residential roads. At that time 5th Street SW and Golden Gate Boulevard were taking the brunt of these trips. Judging by the new traffic light,mn 5th Street SW and Golden Gate Boulevard, it looks like they will still continue to use as well as an extended Wilson Boulevard. If these dump trucks are alldwed to utilize an extended Wilson Boulevard, it would certainly be more than all the building that will be taking place north and south of Immokalee APAC driving south to the landfill road and then backtracking to Imm~ Collier Boulevard. To Protect and Preserve Our Estates Way of L'ife ~oa4;~,~.l can't (alee' Roao JUN 18 2002 It is a tremendous impact to put all those dump trucks on a road that goes through the heart, of a residential neighborhood. And let's face it. It is not cost effective for these drivers to go the speed limit. They get paid for the amount, of dirt they deliver. $o it. is, therefore, ver~ dangerous. We have school bus st.ops all along Wilson Boulevard. I pulled on t.o Wilson Boulevard one morning and encountered four (4) dump trucks on the three-minut, e drive t.o Golden Gate Boulevard. That's approximat.el¥ b~venty an hour. Triple that. The other problem is the effect, t.hat, a rock quarry can have on t.he resident.s adjacent or nearby. In the past. homeowners have experienced blasting-relat.ed noise and damage to their homes and pot.able water wells. This amendment, if accepted, will se~le a pending lawsuit the environmentalists filed regarding nat. ural resource prot.ect.ion areas in the rural fringe. They made a deal wit. h the landowner, East. Naples Land Company, but neglected to include the people that will be effect.ed on a long-term basis - t.hose living in or near t.he sect. ions involved - in this deal making. The Golden Gate Estates area has a diverse population of hard working, independent residents wit.h varying incomes. We take pride in our communit.¥ but feel threatened by what is emerging from the Rural Fringe Assessment Amendment. To sum it up, there is too much emphasis being placed on accommodat.ing a future population and not enough consideration being given t.o t.he one that already exists. Sincerely yours, Patricia Humphries For the members and Board of Directors Golden Gates Estates Area Civic Association 441 20th Avenue NW Naples, Florida 34120 Copy: Mr. Bernard Piowah, Panning Manager, Department of Community Affairs Commissioner Jim Coletta, Chairman, Board of Collier County Commissioners Mr. Stan Litinger, Comprehensive Planning Manager, Collier County Mr. Bill Lorenze, Collier County Natural Resources Director Representative Dudley Goodlette Senator Burt Saunders AGENDA ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 V ~)'~ 2301 McGregor Blvd. Ft. Myers, FL 33901 E-Mail: cr~w~u~uno.com Web Site: www.~org 941-332-7771 · Fax: 941-338-2936 May 1, 2002 Mr. Michael McDaniel, Growth Management Administrator Dept. of Community Affairs/Div. of Resoume Pluming and Management 2555 Shumard Oak Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 0'6 2OO2 Re: Collier County's Growth Management Proposal De~ Mr. McDaniel: The CREW Land & Water Trust is a public/private parmership that was formed in 1989 to protect the 60,000-acre Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed that sU'addles Lee and Collier Counties. The Trust is made up of a diverse Board representing governmental agencies, businesses, environmental interests and private citizens (list of Trustees attached). Since 1989 over 25,000 acres have been protected through local, state, and federal funding. As pan of a lawsuit challenging Collier County's Growth Management Plan, Collier County has submitted a Transfer of Development Rights Proposal to help address future growth while protecting wetlands, wildlife and agricultural conversion. The CREW Land & Water Trust would like to address one of the receiving areas within While the members of the Trust support the concept behind the transfer of development rights process and the rural village concept, one of the receiving areas to be developed as a rural village under the Collier County plan is within the CREW project boundaries. This receiving area consists of the eastern half of two sections (crosshatched on attached map) on the west side of lmmokalee Road. These half sections have a flowway running through the center of the two sections, and they also adjoin lands owned by the stale and managed by the South Florida Water Management District under the Save Our Rivers Program (map attached). The Trust would like to see at least a one-half-mile buffer between sending (conservation) areas and receiving areas. This proposed rural village would have no buffer between corrse~ation lands and the receiving area. This would affect land management practices, such as prescribed burning, along with impacting the protection of water quality, flows, and wildlife habitat. Sincerely, Ellen Lindblad Executive Director Collier County is trying to take a step in the right direction to incorporate protection of environmentally sensitive areas while providing for growth. In order to ensure responsible protection of water resources and land management, we respectfully request that no rural receiving area be located within CREW boundaries. cc: Collier County Commissioners CREW Land & Water Trust EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Wayne Dainty - C'bairman Southwest FL Regional Planning Council i~vid GrMmm -Vim. Clmi~n Ed Cari~on - S~retary National ~ndubon Society Commtuioner ltty Jndah - Trtuurtr Lee CounO' CommiHioner Donna Fiala Collier County Dr. John Fitch Florida Gulf Coast University Dr. Bill Hammond Florida Gulf Coast University Stanley W. Hol~, P.E. (nenrnd) Neena Lurvey Friendr of CREW TR US TEE S Ken Alvartz Dept. of Erin Protection Rick Barber .~gnoli, Barber & Brundage Dorothy Brown E. stem'Civic Association Terrey Dolan WCI Communities Dr. Allan Egbert FI. Fish & W'ddlilfe Conservation Katy Hogan ~ Nature Conservancy Mayor Jim Humphrey c~ o/rt. Ron Inge Florida Rock Industries, Inc. Tom Jonea Collier Compani~ Jim Krakow~ki FL Panther NWR Frank Lap, Icy Teco Arena Councilman Ben Negro, Jr. City of Bonita Springs Bill Opp Lee Co. Mosquito Control Fred Partin BonUa Springs UnTmes Kathy Pro.er Conservancy of SW Florida Michael Taylor Steve Walker Lewis, Longnum & Wa/kef Trudi Williams South FL Water Mgmt. District Dedicated to the preservation and stewardship of th~ water resources and natural communities in and around the CORKSCREW REGIONAL ECOSY$TEM WATERSKED AGENDA ITEM No. ~ JUN 1 8 2002 LEE i CO. I I i HENDRY CO, COLLIER COUNTY CREW AGENDA ITEM JUN I 8 2002 Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Water~~ MEMORANDUM RECEIVED ~/~ :..~.'.,.,' '~: :c:,: NATURAL RESOURCES/'~-_ ~CPARTMENT DATE: May 7, 2002 TO: FROM: Bill Lorenz Natural Resources Director Donna Fiala Commissioner, District 1 Growth Management Proposal Attached, for your information, is a copy of a recent letter I received fi.om Ms. Ellen Lindblad, Executive Director of CREW Land & Water Trust, regarding Collier County's Growth Management Proposal. I have also supplied Mr. Mike Ramsey of Collier Soil and Water with a copy. Thank you. Donna tFiala, Commissioner, District 1 DF/kmm Attachment Cc: Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager JUN 1 8 2002 FLORIDA WILDLIFE FEDERATION Southwest Florida Office 2590 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 105 Naples, Florida 34105 941/643-4111 (TEL) 941/643-5130 (FAX) fwf~eganet, com (EMAIL) May 9, 2002 Mike McDaniel Growth Management Administrator Florida Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Re: Collier County Rural Fringe Amendments Dear Mr. McDaniel: Florida Wildlife Federation (Federation) offers the following comments on Collier County's Transmittal of Proposed Rural Fringe Growth Management Plan Amendments, pursuant to Final Order No. AC-99-002. 1. Adjustments to Sending Land Boundaries The County is proposing that changes can be made to the boundaries of Sending lands "if the property owner indicates that the subject property does no: contain characteristics warranting a Sending designation." (FLUE, page 57) The County has provided no opportunity for others to petition for an adjustment of the boundaries and the County has provided no option to petition to include lands in the Sending, Conservation, or Natural Resource Protection Area designation. Furthermore, the County should be required to conduct an independent study or analysis to determine the environmental AC-~ENDA ITE~ values of lands in dispute, no. ~2~ JUN 18 20b,. 2. Rural Villages Please see comments submitted by the Federation's attorney, Tom Reese. 3. Conservation Designation The County agreed to review and finalize within one year the list of essential uses allowed on both Sending and Conservation designated lands. The policy for Sending lands (FLUE, page 56) reflects this, but the Conservation policy does not. The Conservation policy states that the County "will del'me those uses intended to be conditionally permitted in Sending designated lands. During this one-year period, no conditional uses for essential services within Sending designated lands shall be approved." (FLUE, page 64) Conservation land uses should be more restrictive than Sending lands uses. Therefore, the Conservation policy should replace the word "Sending" with Conservation. 4. North Belle Meade Overlay The North Belle Meade Overlay plan is the result of nine months of negotiations with the Federation, Collier Audubon Society, James Brown, and other interested parties including the Collier County School Board. The Federation supports the North Belle Meade Overlay and urges the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) to accept it as proposed. (FLUE, page 67) 5. Wildlife Policies The Federation contends that the wildlife protection policies should not be applicable to only the Rural Fringe. The policies should be countywide -- the remaining rural 1.ands, Golden Gate Estates, Orangetree, and the urban areas including Immokalee. (CCME, page 35) The Federation objects to policies that rely upon the landowners or developers' consultants to confirm habitats of listed species. This results in a site-by-site approach to habitat protection with no consistent County oversight and no guarantee of an on-site evaluation by County staff. Wetland Policy 6.8.11 that states the "County shall provide for adc staff to implement these provisions." There is no similar policy fc 2 JUN ~ 8 2002 O protection. The Federation advocates the same policy for wildlife protection. There is no overall strategy presented by the county to map species-specific habitat, no plan to protect that habitat from the landscape to site scale, and no mechanism to access cumulative and secondary impacts. For example, the red-cockaded woodpecker policy refers only to "active clusters" and minimizing impacts to foraging habitat. (CCME, page 37) Acting only on information provided by the applicant, County staff declared that a 13-acre private fishing lake in red-cockaded woodpecker habitat had "no environmental concerns." Because the site has no wetland impacts, there is no required federal review of this project. Linda Ferrell, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), was prompted to write the County on April 4, 2002, stating that: "The environmental impact statement for the proposed project... addressed the short-term effects of the project. There did not appear to be a section addressing the long-term effects of the project. "The long-term effects would, in the Service's opinion, include the gradual loss of unoccupied and occupied red-cockaded woodpecker habitat in north Belle Meade. Numerous small developments would gradually reduce suitable but unoccupied habitat to the point that it would be incapable of ever supporting red-cockaded woodpeckers. This would preclude opportunities for the local population to expand or to simply shift breeding territories as necessary due to habitat loss or habitat declines in occupied territories. "Numerous small developments would reduce the amount of foraging habitat in occupied territories to a point that the birds would be unable to find enough food to sustain their young. The birds would then abandon the side for better territory, if better territory could be found, or they would simply die off. Thi~ has been the fate of red- cockaded woodpeckers once found in the David Road corridor between County Barn Road and Collier Boulevard. (Emphasis Added) - ~.,mo~, Iw-~ .)UN ~ {~ 2002 "The Service recommends that Collier County devise a strategy for conserving red-cockaded woodpecker habitat." The Service volunteered to assist the County and the Federation has repeatedly encouraged the County to coordinate efforts with both the Service and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. We do not know the status of any coordination efforts. The red-cockaded woodpecker policy must protect all red-cockaded woodpecker habitat - occupied and potential. The policy should also reference implementation of a habitat protection plan within one year of the effective date of these amendments. The policy pertaining to the Florida panther refers to Profity I and II panther habitats. (CCME, page 37) Priority I is def'med as the "lands most frequently used by the panther and/or lands of high quality native habitat suitable for the panther should be preserved first." Priority II is defined as the "lands less frequently used by the panther and/or lands of lower quality native habitat interspersed with intensive agriculture serve as buffer zones to urban development and other forms of undesirable encroachment and should be preserved second." All Priority I and II lands are "identified for preservation" by the Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan. The County's panther policy only provides protection of "undisturbed, native habitats that are preferred by the Florida panther." This policy, at best, protects those sites used by panthers during the day when they are resting. It fails to protect other lands routinely used by panthers including foraging lands, dispersal areas, and travel corridors. All Priority I and II habitats must be included and protected in the panther policy. The County must implement a panther protection plan within one year of the effective date of these amendments. Lastly, the County must not continue to shift habitat planning and protection responsibilities to state and federal permitting agencies that do not have authority to implement meaningful protections on a landscape scale and do not have authority to review all projects impacting wildlife habitat. 4 J U N 1 8 2002 6. Southern Golden Gate Estates The transmittal package includes no policies for Southern Golden Gate Estates. 7. Agriculture Please see comments submitted by the Federation's attorney, Tom Reese. The Federation requests that thoughtful consideration be given to the comments submitted by Collier Audubon Society and The Conservancy of Southwest Florida. Sincerely, Nancy Anne Nancy Anne Payton Southwest Florida Field Representative Payton CC: Manley Fuller Thomas Reese, Esq. Brad Comell Kathy Prosser Nancy Linnan, Esq. Marjorie Student, Esq. Bob Mulhere Bill Lorenz Stan LitZinger David Weeks Charles Gauthier Shaw Stiller Bernard Piawah JUN 1 B 2, April 12, 2002 COLLIER COUNTY AUDUBON SOCIETY P.O. Box 11387 Naples, FL 34101 Mr. Michael McDaniel State of Florida Department of Community Affairs Bureau of State Planning 2555 Shumard Oak Blvd. Tallahassee FL 32399-2100 RE: Comments on Collier County's transmitted GMP amendments for its Rural Fringe Dear Mr. McDaniel: On behalf of Collier County Audubon Society, I wish to submit comments on Collier County's recently transmitted Growth Management Plan amendments mostly regarding its Rural Fringe assessment area. These have been offered in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Administration Commission's Final Order of June 22, 1999. Collier County Audubon Society was one of the intervenors in this case on the side of the Department of Community Affairs. We have worked diligently with the public, landowners, environmental groups, county staff and commissioners, and attended a majority of the various advisory committees' meetings and hearings. Notably, Collier Audubon, along with the Florida Wildlife Federation, negotiated a precedent-setting agreement/settlement with a major landowner in the North Belle Meade, which results in protection for over two-thirds of the 15,000 acres here, including considerable Florida panther and red-cockaded woodpecker habitat. This, of course, only is implemented if ultimately adopted in the principle and spirit of the original agreement. Our overall comment On the product of over two years of work on these amendments, up until the final draft of the Transmittal Document, is to say it has been very positive and promising. The amendments, which are aimed at protecting rural natural resources, provide a good foundation of strong preservation requirements and more than adequate private property considerations. The Transfer of Development Rights principle being utilized is very progressive and holds great promise for compensating landowners while directing incompatible land uses away from critical wetlands and wildlife habitat. However, Collier County Audubon Society does have some strong concerns with the amendments transmitted. In particular, the final draft of the Transmittal Document withdrew almost all applicability county-wide and in so doing, undermined some important protection policies, especially for wetlands and native habitat (Objectives 6.7 and 6.8). In large part, this seems due to tortured re-writing of policies to awkwardly accommodate narrowing the focus to JUN 1 B 2002 just the Rural Fringe. We understand they will be re-written again for the Adoption heam~$, but we all have little time to respond then. Our concerns are outlined below: 1. After all advisory committee heatings and even one of two transmittal hearings of the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), staff changed their recommendation on residual land uses on Sending Lands after transfer of developments rights, through the formal TDR program. While the intent of the program is to compensate landowners for eliminating all but native range, unimproved pasture, and one house per unplatted parcel, staff changed their recommended policy on this to allow continued agriculture of any intensity that currently exists even after volunlary participation in the TDR program. This was approved by the BCC and is among the transmitted policies before you. Collier Audubon is very concerned that such a duplicative compensalion for landowners in Sending Areas is unnecessary, and the residual land uses could undermine ll~e goal of the resource protections otherwise in fome in sending areas. This is also a bad prccedent for the Rural Eastern Lands policies. 2. While much preliminary debate occurred on the subject of including agricultural land unes in local land use policies, the BCC chose to defer discussion of the issue to the Rural Eastern Lands policy efforts. For further support of our contention that Collier County can and should include agricultural uses in resource protection policies, please see the legal memorandum submil~ed to you by our counsel, Thomas Reese, under separate cover. 3. Wetland policies (Objective 6.8 and policies) have been undermined considerably from the document discussed at the March 4 hearing. This apparently is due to lack of legal notice with respect to application outside of the Rural Fringe area. However, Collier Audubon has str,mg concerns over how these will be restored and corrected from the present transmittal docurnent mess. At a very minimum, countywide application is necessary, and restoration of some d. eleted policies is critical. Policy 6.8.10 in particular needs to reflect the desire of many citizens institute a policy of requiring state and federal agency wetland and wildlife permits or exemptions before issuance of building permits on properties previously mapped as havir~g a high probability of either wetlands or listed species. Policy 6.8.10 should be restored to rtad: Policy 6.8.10 Collier County shall rely upon federal and state wetland permitting for single-farm:ly residences which are not part of an approved development project as follows: { 1) Such single-family residences shall be exempt from the wetland functionality assessment requirements of Policy 6.8.4 of this element. (2) For single-family residences within Southern Golden Gate Estates or within tha~ Big Cypress Area of Critical State Concern, the County_ shall require the appropriate f~deral and state wetland-related permits before Collier County issues a building permit. (3) Outside of Southern Golden Gate Estates and the Area of Critical State Con~'m~ Collier County shall inform applicants for individu_a! single-family building permi~ts that federal and state wetland permits may be required prior to construction. The Cournty shall also notify the applicable federal and state agencies of single-family buildin~,;5 _~-mnit applications in these areas. ~,C.,Et~A ~T~ JUN 1 8 2002 (4) Within one (1) year of the adoption of these amendments, Collier County shall work with federal and state agencies to identify properties that have high probabilities of wetlands or listed species occurrence. The identification process will be based on hydric soils data and other applicable criteria. Once this identification process is complete, the County will determine if it is sufficiently accurate to require federal and state wetland approvals prior to issuing a building permit. The County shall use this information to inform property owners of the potential existence of wetlands or listed species on their property. Additionally, Collier Audubon feels that there are already sufficient data to implement a program of mapping, notification and proof of agency permits for local building permits to be issued in environmentally sensitive areas. Such a program already exists in Lee County. 4. Habitat and native vegetation preservation standards (Objective 6.7 and policies), as with wetlands policies, should be restored to applicability countywide. 5. Inclusion of urban areas for reception of TDR units is very good and more extensive urban involvement should be encouraged, beyond the infill currently proposed. 6. If the County allows agricultural uses that alter the water table (Policy 6.10.2) in open space buffers next to natural reservations, without restriction, then increased upland buffers should be required within the natural reservation boundaries (NRPAs or conservation lands). Such buffers should be ~,,5 to one mile in distance, as demonstrated by several existing wetland impact studies in Collier County. 7. Collier Audubon opposes increasing the building allowance in sending areas to one unit per forty acres from one unit per parcel. This is an unnecessary disincentive to use the TDR program and increases likely impacts to protection areas, including Natural Resource Protection Areas (NR~As). This concern over compensating large landowners results in over-compensation because the program is already designed to fully account for potential lost use. The TDR program will have annual performance reviews during which issues such as unexpected lack of adequate compensation may be corrected. 8. Rural villages policies need to be more specific in guiding appropriate development to rural receiving areas. Compact, diverse and efficient should characterize the smart growth principles needed to avoid urban impacts to rural, agricultural and sensitive areas and still be a functional "sink" for TDR units. Please refer to our specific input on this topic, submitted under separate cover, in a letter written by our counsel, Thomas Re. ese. 9. A March 4 addition of a policy allowing landowners on the boundaries of sending, neutral and receiving areas to bring new data to staff in order to petition for removal from sending areas ignores the obvious other option which is for any person to bring new data to staff to petition for receiving lands to be put in sending area designation. If any boundary changes are to be considered, they ought to be possible for moving in any direction amongst sending, n mtral and receiving areas, given updated, reliable and adequate data. s,c.~not~ rrroa JUN I 8 2002 10. Relative to the ultimate resource protection purposes of the TDR program via compensation, two additional adjustments should be considered to avoid abuse and defeat of its purposes: a) lengthen the 25-year prohibition on utilizing/selling TDRs where a parcel has been cleared for agricultural purposes to 40 years (see FLUE under Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Additional TDR Provisions), and b) likewise, lengthen the 25-year prohibition on conversion to non- agricultural uses of land newly cleared for agricultural uses, to 40 years (see. CCME Policy 6.7.3). While we have enumerated a number of important concerns, I want to emphasize that Collier County Audubon Society has been very impressed with the overall results of the Rural Fringe amendment process up until the drafting of the final Transmittal Document. Staff, committees, commissioners and the community have collaborated to a surprising degree in producing what is essentially a workable set of policies, with adjustments. With the reinstatement of the wetland and habitat preservation policies of CCME Objectives 6.7 and 6.8, we believe the changes we have recommended here are important improvements to that workable foundation and will help ultimately satisfy the rural fringe portion of the Administration Commission's Final Order, AC- 99-002. If you have any questions on this input, please contact Collier Audubon's policy advocate, Brad Cornell at 239-592-7805, or millercornell@mindspring.com. Thank you very much for consideration of our comments. Very sincerely, Susan Boggs Conservation Committee Collier County Audubon Society CC: Commissioner James Coletta Commissioner Tom Henning Commissioner James Carter, PhD Commissioner Donna Fiala Commissioner Fred Coyle -.~ AGENDA ITEM No._ ~ JUN 1 8 200z YV-~t~rr~e!on S..~eder ROOERS~ Brand Vegetal)lc ~eeos 10290 Greenway Roaci Naples, FL 34114 Tom. Wi Iliams(~.sy~ genta- co m syng nta Honorable Bob Crawford Commissioner of Agriculture The Capitol Tallahassee, Florida 32399 RECEIVED ,' 6 2002 NATURAL RESOURCES April 24, 2002 Dear Mr. Crawford: ;~PARTNENT I apologize for the belated nature of this letter and I hope it's not too late to consider taking corrective~''q ~ action. I would like to call your attention to what I consider a travesty in land use planning, relative to the importance of preserving valuable agricultural land in the state of Florida. As a matter of brief background, you may be familiar with Governor Bush's mandate to the Collier County's Board of Commissioners as it relates to the growth management plan, to assure protection of wetlands and prime or unique agricultural lands, t have highlighted the latter since the board of county commissioners voted to extend the rural fringe boundry in some sections of Collier County to include the South Belle Meade area, much of which parallels US 41. A major portion of this area now includes-prime and unique agricultural lands. The prime and unique aspect is in the winter temperature advantage offered by its' location. I am the former branch manager of Syngenta Seeds research center in Naples. Our research center is located in the South Belle Meade area, and has been here since 1986. This research station is the largest private vegetable breeding station east of California. I specifically chose this location because of the temperature advantage that this area offers in terms of having less frost risk than other areas of Collier County. Since many of our crops match the vegetable production timeframe in the area, it is very critical to avoid crop loss due to frost or freezing. The So_uth_Belle Meade area of Collier County has the second longest frost free growing season in the continental U.S., next to Homestead, Florida. This same area is at least 4-5 degrees warmer than the Eastern agricultural areas of Collier County that our commissioners have elected as lands for future agricultural activity. My point is by extending the rural fringe boundry into this agriculturally vital South Belle Meade area, development is inevitable and this valuable resource will be lost, forever. Of course, the planners and commissioners who approved the extension of the rural boundry cannot alter the continued use for agriculture in this area. But the problem is that now this land will become so valuable, the farmers won't be able to afford not to sell. And once. d~.velopment g~.t.~ it.~' grip,, mtr re.~.arch center will have to be relocated because we'll be surrounded by golf courses and homes. So, I would appeal to you, the governor and environmentalists to consider some sort of preservation of this valuable agricultural resource. Thanks for your consideration. Dr. Tom V. Williams cc: Collier County Commissioners William Lorenz, Stan Litsinger Joseph Schmitt AGE~A ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 --J~ Mary Simmons 20525'Island Rd. Miami, FL 33189(~ ~M JUN 1 8 2002 4562 Eagle Key Circle Naples, FL 34112-5205 June 4, 2002 Mr. Kenneth L. Abernathy, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: 5Acres -W 1/2 ofSW1/4 of SW1/4 of SE 1/4 of Section 30-49-27 Dear Sir: This is being filed with the Comprehensive Planning Section for consideration, pursuant to Notice of Public Hearing appearing in the Naples Daily News on Sunday, May 26, 2002. As will be noted from the attached copy of Deed, my husband Gus and I are the owners of an~ have been paying taxes on the above-described 5 acres since 1956 - 46 years. We were planning to build a home and retire there. However, when Collier County moved the landfill to its present location on the eastern side of Section 36 which borders the west side of Section 31, we changed our plans because we did not think it would be nice living so close to the landfill. Our 5 acres is in Section 30 and borders Section 31 on the north. We understand that the County now is planning to extend the landfill northward into Section 25, which Section 25 is west of and adj'~,acent to Section 30. This puts our 5 acres one-half mile, or approximately 5 city blocks east of the landfill. Hence our thinking was that our property could and shoudl logically be used for and changed to industrial zonin . '~'~oA~r~ JUN 1 8 2002 Page 2 June 4, 2002 sections of land immediately surrounding landfill Section 36 are very, very similar, if not exactly the same, as far as the kinds of plants and animals are concerned ecologically and environmentally. And, in that regard, lands WEST of the landfill have indeed already been changed to industrial zoning. Furthermore, our particular 5 acres, in all the 46 years that we have been paying taxes on them, have neve.__..~r been considered or designated as being environmentally sensitive. In fact, about two years ago at a hearing regarding environmentally sensitive lands where Miss Wolok, the then attorney for the Conservancy, was involved, she told me our land was not included as such. Nothing has changed except all of a sudden because of Gov. Bush's Final Order of June 22, 1999, and the designation of '~Rural Fringe Assessment Areas", certain areas are to be '~rotected" and growth is to be controlled by establishing "development regulations for the Rural Fringe Assessment Area . . ·" IMPORTANTI .'.' May I respectfully point out and it will be noted from the map provided in the Notice of Public Hearing, that in delineating the Rural Fringe Assessment Areas, there are included in Township 49 S, Range 27 E, certain sections where development and growth are already in existence and continuing: Section 36 (landfill section), Section 25 (landfill extension and golf club), and Section 24 (golf JUN 1 8 2002 Page 3 June 4, 2002 This being the case, why are these Sections 36, 24 and 25 even included in the Rural Fringe Assessment Area, and, further, inasmuch as Sections 30 and 31 are immediately adjacent to those sections, why should they likewise be included ? In view of the foregoing and also because of this area's proximity to Golden Gate Estates and Golden Gate city, where there has been full-blown development , it is respeciffully requested that the Plan- ning Section recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that the logical thing to do would be to exclude these five sections - 36, 25, 24, 30 and 31 - from the Rural Fringe Assessment Area. There is already growth and planned growth and benefits to the environment, if any, would be minimal. However . . · If the Planning Commission is not inclined to make the suggested exclusion recommendation to the Commissioners, at least exclude our 5 acres from the Rural Fringe Assessment Area, based on the extenuating circumstances of 46 years of ownership. Thank you. Sincerely, (Mrs. Gus Stamatinos) ms Att. DEED ~* (~ue S~matinoe and ~ary S~atlnos, his ~fe, ~ ~-- ~ Z7~i S.W. 6~ Street, ~Amt IS. ~or~d~ ~'D~:'~T¥' I)P' COI.I.I):R SOUTHERN BIOMES, INC. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION SERVICES 1602 Woodford Avenue, Fort Myers, Flodda 33901 Tel: (239) 334-6766 Fax: (239) 337-5028 June 4,2002 William D. Lorenz Jr., P.E. Natural Resources Director Collier County Natural Resources Department 3301 East Tarniami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Dear Bill Lorenz: After reviewing the responses to the comments from DCA, on the COLLIER COUNTY GROVVTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS, I would like to share may comments to the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) portion of the amendments, specifically regarding wetland mitigation. For ease in identification, I have included the DCA comments and staff responses, followed by my comments. Conservation and Coastal Mana,qement Element (CCME): 1. CCME Policy 6.1.2 (8) would allow density bonuses as incentives to encourage greater preservation amounts. However, the amount of density bonuses to be granted is not specified in the plan. The amount of bonuses should be stated in the plan so as to provide guidance for planning purposes. Staff proposes to remove the 10% bonus reference in CCME Policy 6.1.2(8) and to refer to respective language in the FLUE. Density limitations addressing this bonus are therefore specified in the FLUE section addressing density standards for Rural Villages. Southern Biomes Comments: No comment It appears that the intent of Policy 6.2.5 is to achieve no net loss of wetlands. However, according to the Fish and Wildlife Commission (FWC; see copy of their letter enclosed), the wetland functionality assessment method which the County intends to utilize has the potential to result in less wetland mitigation than destroyed. functionality, and not on an area for area basis. It would be unrealistic to assume th~ of 75% melaleuca infested forested wetlands would have the same ecological value, same function or benefit than would a ten acres cypress forest. The WRAP assess~ The essence of this comment is that the wetland functionality assessment process has the potential to result in less wetland acrea.qe mitigated than the amount of acreaqe impacted. This is possible given the nature of the assessment methodology. Staff recognizes this possibility and recommends that mitigation be at least equal in area for acreage impacted (i.e., the mitigation ratio on an area basis shall be at least 1:1) for the Rural Fringe (CCME Policy 6.1.2). This additional standard is not, however, proposed for the Urban Designated area. Southern Biomes Comments: The wetland functional assessments are designed to provide a habitat based value assessment for wetland habitats as they relate to wetland condition and =° ' 9k:I~SE)A ITEM )vide' rde a~"~,~ 2002 · Page 2 June 4,2002 proposed wetland functional assessment takes into consideration the habitat conditions as well as the secondary impacts imposed by the development of the project when determining the assessment of the pre and post development wetland habitats. In so doing it penalizes the developer for impacting high quality wetlands more than Iow quality wetlands, plus additionally penalizes the developer for constructing the development adjacent to the remaining wetlands. Therefore, there is a cumulative affect resulting in mitigation that significantly exceeds the typical Environmental Resources Permit (ERP) mitigation ratios that are currently approved and applied by the SFWMD or FDEP under regulatory requirements. Therefore, I propose that 'a minimum of 1:1 ratio on an area basis', as the staff recommends, is not necessary to meet the intent of policy, and should be revised to state; 'because the more viable wetlands will require a signi~ant increase in wetland creation or restoration, there will be sufficient cornpensatlon provided to balance the potential differences between the wetland area lost and the wetland function and habitat quality gained". e One of the instruments the County intends to use in order to ensure that preserved wetland areas remain in preservation includes deed restriction. However, according to FWC, deed restriction are difficult to enforce and may not provide a permanent preservation area since they could be changed in the future. Staff Respons~ Staff concurs with this comment and proposes to remove references to deed restrictions. We have also proposed language to ensure that preserve areas are identified or platted as separate tracts. Southern Biomes Comments: I concur with DCA and the staff response The proposal in Policy 6.5.2 (1)e., regarding the use appropriate measures to avoid roadway impact should include underpasses. Staff Response: Staff concurs with this comment and has incorporated references to underpasses in CCME Policy 6.5.2 and CCME Policy 7.1.2. Southern Biomes Comments: No comment o It may be appropriate for the County to require federal and state agency review and approval for all listed species, wading bird rookeries, and shorebird nesting areas. Proposed CCME Policy 7.1.2(3) provides for the ability of the County to consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and recommendations from the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Furthermore, proposed Policy 7.1.3 requires that all development shall comply with applicable federal and state permitting requirements regarding listed species protection. Staff considers these policies to be sufficient in protecting listed species. Southern Biomes Comments: I concur with the staff response. o state agency review could also be required for Policy 7.1.2. management plans for black bears, mitigation for their habitat should be considered. Policy 7.1.2 regarding wildlife habitat management plans should include the adoption of,_ __ ,wi ldl ife guidelines for wood storks, southeastern American kestrels, and white ibis. Also, fc ,;.I~=~C[-A~_NOA ITEM In addition, with No. JUN 1 8 2002 · Page 3 June 4,2002 The South Florida Multi. Species Recovery Plan as referenced in CCME Policy 7.1.2 already provides guidelines for wood storks. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's Nongame Technical Report No. 13, Ecology and Habitat Protection Needs of the Southeastern American Kestrel (Falco Sparverius Paulus) on Large-Scale Development Sites in Flotfda, March 1993, could be added to the list of references in Policy 7.1.2 after staff verifies that this publication provides for appropriate guidelines for the southeastem American kes~'el. Staff is unaware of any published guidelines for white ibis. Consideration for mitigating black bear habitat has been added to CCME Policy 7.1.2. Southern Biomes Comments: It should also be noted that during State and Federal permitting both the FFWCC and FWS have opportunities to review and respond to proposed development p~3s, and require management plans for all the listed species identified on site. In addition, habitat compensation is already considered for majority of the listed species. Therefore, including these guidelines as part of the County policies should not significantly change the permitting process. I hope that you take these comments into consideration when finalizing the Growth Management Plan Amendments. More specifically, take into consideration my comments to No.2 above, which refers to wetlands assessments and compensation. I do not feel that it is necessary to set a minimum area ratio for wetlands compensation, since both the Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP) and the Unified Wetland Miti.qation Assessment Method take into consideration both pre and post development habitat conditions and wetland functions, plus potential development impacts to remaining wetlands. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter in greater detail, please feel free to call my office. Sincerely, Geza Wess de Czege President/Biologist JUN 1 2002 COLLIER COUNTY AUDUBON SOCIETY 556 109Ti'I Avenue, North Naples, FL 34108 June 5,2002 TO: FROM: RE: Collier County Planning Commission Brad Cornell, Environmental Policy Analyst Comments on Adoption amendments for the Rural Fringe Collier County Audubon Society has reviewed the amendments proposed for adoption by Collier County for the Rural Fringe portion of the Final Order requirements. We continue to support the general direction of the policies represented in the amendment language. The combination of strong preservation requirements in specific areas and effective Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) compensation program should achieve the overall resource protection goals for this portion of the county. However, some specifics of several policies still require changes, in our opinion, and are detailed below. 1. Agricultural policies need to be strengthened. · Allowing existing agriculture operations to continue after voluntary TDR transfer and compensation is unnecessary and undermines the purpose of the protection status of Sending lands and the TDR Program (FLUE item #7 on p.62). Passive agricultural uses should be all that is allowed after TDR compensation. · We still assert that Collier County should, and is legally permitted to apply intensity standards to agricultural land uses. 2. Wetland policies need to incorporate a better way to buffer natural reservation wetlands from water table drawdowns (see CCME Policy 6.5.2(4) on p.38). The proposed policy relies on the SFWMD Basis of Review procedures for avoidance of drawdown effects where a water table gradient is calculated from a water contr( structure to the wetland edge. There are existing studies in Collier County which have been presented in the course of this Assessment which document the minimum need for 0.5 to 2 mile buffer distances to protect wetlands adjacent to development (see studies presented by Dr. Mike Duever with SFWMD). Here is a reasonable recommendation: · Keep the minimum 300 foot open space/preservation buffer on projects, which expands as needed for wi Idlife buffering. · Keep the use of SFWMD drawdown avoidance demonstration, which has some uncertainty in its implementation. · Add a prescriptive minimum setback distance, only for water control structures, from the wetland edge within natural reservations, of 3000 feet in the Corkscrew Area and 6000 feet south of 1-75 (potentially lengthened by the SFWMD calculations.) 3. We support the policy to use a minimum 1' 1 ratio in mitigating wetland impacts, in addition to the functional equation (CCME Policy 6.2.5(6) on p.32). We prefer to also see mandatory onsite retention of all high quality wetlands. 4. In order to improve coordination and communication with the outside commenting and permitting wildlife agencies, the County should add a policy, among CCME Goal 7 wildlife policies on p.39, which requires permits, letters, or approvals from these agencies before issuance of local development permits on projects with listed species. This is due to the level of reliance on these agencies' authority for adequate wild--ns, I 2002 PAVESE, HAVERFIELD, DALTON, HARRISON & JENSEN, L.L.P. A FLORID& UMI'r~D LIABILITY pAR'TN~R~HIP )MM Mmtt~m~ry E-MI#: i~el~M1~O~:)rTw'y~pev®~e blrw. corn aTIREET ADORES8: t833 HENDRY STREET FORT MYERS, FLORIDA 331t01 P~ REPLY TO: Junc5, 2002 Mr. Stem Litsingcr, AICP Comprehensive Planning Manager Collier County Pla,ming Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Dear Mr. Litsingcr: I am writing on behalf of Paul P. Wisman, as Successor Trustee under The North Naples Land Trust Agreement dated June 1, 1989 (Paul P. Wisman, Trustee), who operates and owns a busincss within Collier County. Paul P. Wisman, Trustee supports the plan amendments 02- Rlundcr consideration by Collier County. Paul P. Wisman, Tmstcc specifically supports the concept of density blending. The areas dcsignatccl for density blending are appropriatc. Should thc County desire additional information on the suitability of thc property located in Township 48 South, Sections 10, 15, and 22, Range 26 East for density blending to assist in responding to thc Department of Community Affairs, please advise. Amendment 02-R1 includes changes to thc public facilities element. It is submitted that these changes do not encourage sprawl. These changes promote thc public health, safety and welfare and should bc adopted. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on thc pending plan amendment. Sincerely, NM:fib F:\W~DA TA\NMU~ RLET.W'PD AGENDA ITEM JUN 1 8 2002 ' P,. M1 ~. MAIN $~a. EET P.O. DRAWER 2288 (~) ~ 8uITE '203 45Z4 GUN CLUB RO&~ WEST p~J...M BEACH. FLOI~DA 3341S (581) 471-1386 F~ac (MI) 471 ~Z2 DaSd A. Hamed 1705WindingridgeDrive Richmond. Vkginia 23233-4134 804-740-2686 June 5, 2002 Mr. Jam~s N. Colerta Collier County Commission Chairman 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 D~ar Mr. Coletta: Subject: TDR Following up on our r~cent discussion regaxding my property in the Rural Fringe Assessment Area (property description: 30 49 27 El/2 of NWl/4 of SEl/4 of SWI/4 5ac), I have discussed the TDR plans with other county officials, realtors, ~tc., and I have a few points to make and a couple of suggestions which I believe would help smooth things out and improve the overall result. I believe the TDR plan can he modified slightly to improve the chances of a win-win-win outcome for the county, the environmental groups, and the property owners. You know what the problem spots and touchy issues are, probably better than 1, but let me lend a little personal perspective to this whole matter, which at fa'st may appear to compound the issues but if properly addressed as I propose should help improve the end result for all concerned parties. From my perspective, there ar~ some significant issues of fairness and equity which can be effectively resolved and improve the whole process without adding any more bureaucracy or significant cost and add a further boost to the county and the environmenutl side of the equation. To get a better a better perspective of whore I'm coming bom, let me give you a brief overview of my history with South Florida and Collier County, and th~ 1 will explain thc rationale of my proposal and how it wili benefit the major stakeholders in the current development/enviroru"nent quandary. I helieve my proposal will enhance the resolution of environmental concerns, while/reproving the financial base and political posture of Collier County. Also, this proposal will improve the balance of fairness and equity for property owners who axe senior, long-term 'taxpayers and supportive of protecting the environment. With 35+ years of experience as a business execu'five and management consultant, I have a strong background in performatr~ management, compensation, in~ntive systems, and conflict r~solution. I tend to look for ways to minimize friction, build teamwork, and develop appropriate incentives for people with apparently diverse objectives to identi~ areas of mutual ben~§t and come together with a workable strategy. At various times in the 1940's, 50's and 60's I have lived in South Florida, and I ha, spent some time there in each subsequem decade. I Imve watched the development ~ AC=F_NDA ITEI~ fth%. JUN 1 8 2002 JUN--O~--2002 04:58 PM DAVID. A.HARHED 884 ?48 2686 P.02 Tamiami Trail, Alligator Alley, Golden Gate Estates, and most of the other major highway and building projects in and around Collier County. For nearly 40 years I have owned my sect.30 property in Collier County, fully expectin~ it to appreciate significantly as the result of being in thc inevitable path ofdeveloprmnt, I have paid property taxes over this entire period, supporting a school system in which I never enrolled any children, and otherwise received no benefit other than the potential appreciation of the property through development. But I didn't want to see just any development there, as I preferred responsible development which would be sensitive to thc environment. AccordinglY, I took a pass on several developmental opportunities which I did not think would be in thc best lena- term interests of the county and thc environment. This includes discussions with chemical companies, paving contractors, and shopping center developers, to name a few. In some cases, it would have been necessmT to buy adjacent property or work with other land owriers to do a deal, but in each case I felt that a more favorable situation would eventually develop that would be better from both economic and environmental perspectives. Perhaps it just doe~'t pay to be a good citizen, for the current TDR proposal tends to favor those who went ahead and developed their property, and maybe without much consideration to environmental factors. Is this really the kind of attitude that environmentalists want to foster? l would hope not, for this merely scts thc stage for accelerated developme~ and confrontation with the end lena-term result of lose-lose. The simple point that I'm making here is that all property owners should not be considered equal~and not just based on property size alone. There are other rational standards that are both appropriately logical and quantifiable. As a matter of equity, it seems reasonable to me that property owners who have "stayed the course" over many, many years, paid their taxes, and supported thc environment--intentionally or otherwise--should bc recognized for their support of the county and the environment, and further, be provided with an appropriate incentive to continue on that path, Also, I would point out that most people who have paid taxes for thirty or forty years are probably senior 6itizens by now, and they are likely to bc in thc minority in relation to the total number of landowners. Most states, including Florida, have long recognized that aide and seniority are valid considerations regarding not only employment, but also in matters regarding property taxes and other aspects of life impacted by the loss of W-2 income, which is often the case with folks over age 60. For most of us who are over age 60, there isn't another 30 or 40 years ahead--the future is now, and from an equity perspective that should be recognized. So much for the background.., now I would like to propose some adjustments to the TDR process which t.,,~:.. ...... ,.,,ia ,,,.,,,~;~1~ th,. ,~,-,.~rv hv'~tive tn imnrnve the I~el~od of success for 2002 of acres owned( provided, of course that it is at kast $ acres). This would result in WI'N- WIN-WIN as follows: WIN#1 for older, long-term taxpaying property owners--- an appropriate level of pm-rata equity to recognize their long and faithful property stewardship AND the INCENTIVE to further delay development since there is potential to receive yet another TDR; WIN#2 for the ENVIRONMENT since the TDR incentive structure could potentially defer development much longer than under the current proposal (e.g., a 30 year old who has owned 5 acres for three years could sec a good opportunity to go from one TDR to two TDR's by waiting eight years);and WIN#3 for the county, as it has an opportunity to maximize tax revenues, while protecting the environment and slowing the rate ofgrowtlL getting the State of Florida off it's back, and reducing potential litigation costs. This would provide some level of incentive for everyone involved. Developers would also win to the extent that there would eventually be some development, and ultimately they would have the opportunity to buy more TDR's, albeit at a price which would Nkely be higher---and the higher price, along with the deferral incentive, would tend to moderate long-term development. I would be glad to discuss the concept of an incentive based TDR deferral system with you, Mr. Litsinger, other commissioners, or whomever you choose. The TDR approach can work, but to be truly effective it must be adjusted in order to achieve equity and proper balance for all concerned parties. ! look forward to your response. cc: Mr. Stan Litsinger JUN 1 8 2002 JOHN G. VEGA, P.A. 201 8~ Street South, Suite 207 N^PLEF, FLORID^ :34112 (941) 732-1350 (94l) 732- 67ll June 5, 2002 Board of Collier Commissioners Board of County Commissioners Planning Commission Collier County Government Complex 301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, F1 34112 Re: Rural Fringe NBM Overlay. Dear Sirs: I represent Francis D. and Mary P. Hussey; owners of section 32 and the southern half of section 29, as well as portions of section 33, all in Township 41 South, Range 27 East. Together, those lands comprise in excess of 1,000 contiguous acres. Under the current Rural Fringe Proposal, those lands are within the North Bell Meade "NBM" overlay and have been designated as Sending Lands. The Husseys acquired the land in sections 29 and 32 in 1988. For the past fourteen years, this land has had a residential density zoning of one unit per five acres and had earth mining as a potential use. Over the past three years, the Husseys have been negotiating with Florida Rock Industries for the use of these lands for the mining of Florida DOT grade rock for road construction. An agreement as to terms was reached at the end of last year and formal documents completed shortly thereafter. The contract calls for minimum payment of seven and one-half million dollars over the next thirty years and anticipates payments of closer to ten million dollars. I have noted the following language in the March draft of the Rural Fringe Proposal: Within the Receiving Area of the NBM Overlay, arc located Sections 21, 28 and the west halves of Sections 22 and 27, which have been largely assembled under one property ownership. These lands are located south of the existing Al>AC earth mining operation and have been largely impacted by agricultural operations. The location of Sections 21 and 28 is just to the south and west of Wilson Boulevard located in the southern portion of north Golden Gate Estates. Because an earth mining operation and asphalt plant uses have existed for many years in the area, and the surrounding lands in Sections 21, 28 and the western halves of Sections 22 and 27 contain locally scarce Florida Department of Transportation grade rock for i'oad construction these uses are encouraged to remain and expand on Sections 21 and 28 and on the western quarters of Sections 22 and 27. No AGENO A ITE~ JUN 1 8 2002 conditional use approvals shall be required for earth mining or an asphalt plant within Sections 21, 28 and the western quarters of Sections 22 and 27, however, the County's existing excavation and explosive regulations shall apply. This statement is significant for two reasons. First, the statement that Florida DOT grade rock for road construction is "locally scarce" is incorrect as it is also available in the Hussey owned acres which adjoin section 28. Also noteworthy is the fact that APAC is a business competitor of Florida Rock, and it often competes with Florida Rock in the business of supplying road construction grade rock. The Rural Fringe Proposal permits the expansion of the existing Al)AC earth mining operation by almost two thousand acres (into Section 21, 28 and the west halves of Section 22 and and 27). At the same time as granting this expansion, language within the Proposal denies the ability for any of APAC's competitors to establish earth mining operations within the Rural Fringe. Specifically, the designation of the Hussey lands as Sending Lands not only prohibits earth mining as a Permitted Use, it also prohibits earth mining as a Conditional Use. Given that "oil and mineral extraction and related processing," are permitted Conditional Uses, while earth mining is excluded, it appears that the motivation for the exclusion of earth mining is not the potential nature of the land use but the protection of APAC's mining interests. The language in the Rural Fringe Proposal regarding the fact that, within the NBM overlay, there are sections within the NBM overlay that which have been largely assembled under one property ownership also applies to the Hussey land. The statement that those lands contain transportation grade rock for road construction also applies to the Hussey lands. The Hussey lands are located further to the west of the APAC lands and, according to the maps attached to the Rural Fringe Proposal, appear to have less significance as wetlands, panther habitat, and woodpecker habitat. Transportation of material out of the Hussey lands along the 1-75 canal would be preferable to the existing APAC route and its impact on residential areas. In short, I can conceive of no reasonable explanation for the disparate treatment of the APAC and the Hussey lands. Given the weight of road construction rock, the distance between a mine and its destination dramatically affects its costs. While it may be that Florida Rock is able to open a competing mine at a significant distance, it would not be cost effective to do so. Passage of the Rural Fringe Proposal in its current form would virtually guarantee that APAC becomes the dominant road rock provider within Collier County for the next thirty years. The absence of a competition will mean, decreased price competition, as there will not be a cost effective alternative. These increased costs will be borne by the Collier County taxpayers. From a legal basis, I am confident that the Husseys have a protected investment expectation in Sections 29 and 32 by virtue of ownership of that land for the past fourteen years. Earth mining was a possible use when it was acquired, and it has had a residential density of one unit per five acres. Its permitted uses and residential density have remained unchanged a decade. In the event that this proposal is passed in its current form, the Husseys will be forced to institute a takings action under the Bert Harris Act as well as the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution. The cost ofdefendin~ such an action, and the award obtained thereby, will also be borne by the Collier County xpay~NoA rrF_~ I cannot understand the rationale behind creating a virtual monopoly for a private ente~ risking a substantive taking action with multi-million dollar damages. This problem can b by the County and the Planning Commission by changing the designation of the Southe Section 29 and all of Section 32 from a Sending area to either a Neutral or Receiving area. se while avojl~Nt l 8 2002 half of alternative would be change the conditional use language within Sending areas to permit the possibility of earth mining if following an appropriate review. To foreclose such a possibility and render the county liable for significant damages does not seem appropriate or sensible. ega, P.A AGENDA ITEM 2002 LEASE QPTION A~REEMENT THIS A~REEM~I~T, made and entered into this /Y~i day of ~/~//--.- , 2002, by and between FLORIDA ROCK INDUSTRIES, INC., a Florida corporation, with its principal place of business at 155 East 21st Street, Jacksonville, Florida 32206 (hereinafter referred to as "Lessee"), and DR. FRANCIS D. HUSSEY and MARY ~.~/~// HUSSEY, his wife, at 1350 Spyglass Lane, Naples, Florida 34102, (hereinafter referred to as "Lessor", which term shall include the plural and the heirs, personal representatives, assigns and/or successors in interest, wherever the context so requires). WITNE S SETH THAT Lessor, in consideration of the sum of THIRTY THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($30,000.00) (hereinafter referred to as the "Option Money") in hand paid, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged by Lessor, does hereby grant unto Lessee (a) the right to enter upon the lands hereinafter described and to explore and prospect the same to determine the quantity and quality of rock, gravel, sand, limerock, limestone, screenings, calcium, calcium products, clay, topsoil, tailings and overburden (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Construction Materials") underlying the same, and (b) the option to lease said lands, all on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth: 1. D~scriDtion of Lands. The lands above and hereinafter referred to as "Leased Lands" located in Sections 29, 32 and 33, Township 41 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida and containing 1,300± acres are depicted on the drawing attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 2. QDtion Period. Lessee shall have the right, for a period of one hundred fifty (150) days from this date, to enter upon the Leased Lands a~.d the exclusive right to prospect the same in the usual and customary manner by drilling or digging holes for the ' JUN 1 It 2OOZ purpose of determining whether deposits of Construction Materials are located on the Leased Lands in sufficient quantities and of a quality that would warrant the mining thereof. For that purpose, Lessee, its agents and employees, shall have the right of ingress and egress to and from Leased Lands with the right to go upon the same at any and all times during said one hundred fifty (150) day period and to take and use thereon, and to remove therefrom, all tools, machinery and paraphernalia necessary to accomplish such prospecting. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Lessee shall have the right to bore holes, make excavations and remove trees and underbrush as may be reasonably necessary for the systematic prospecting of the Leased Lands. Lessee agrees to indemnify and hold Lessor harmless from mechanic's or materialmen's liens arising from Lessee's prospecting activities on the Leased Lands. 3. Exercise of OPtion. Lessee shall have the right and option to lease the Leased Lands together with sufficient land for vehicular access to and from the one thousand three hundred (1,300) acre tract and U.S. Highway 951. The lease of said Leased Lands is for the purpose and upon the consideration, terms and conditions as hereinafter set forth, which option shall extend and continue during the period allowed in and by paragraph 2 above for the exploration and prospecting thereof. The option may be exercised at any time prior to the expiration of said period by giving Lessor written notice of such exercise by hand delivery or mailing the notice by United States mail addressed to Lessor at the place hereinafter set forth. If such option is not so exercised, this Agreement shall terminate at the end of said option period and the $30,000.00 prepaid royalty paid to Lessor by Lessee upon execution of this Agreement shall be returned to Lessee. 4. ~DDlicabilitv of Terms and Conditions. If Lessee exercises said option as aforesaid, the terms and conditions as hereinafter set forth shall govern the conduct and relationship of the parties during the term of Lessee's activities on the Leased - 2 - JUN 1 8 2002 Lands for mining, processing, storing and shipping Construction Materials. 5. Zonin~ and PermittinG. Lessor understands certain zoning and various governmental permits and approvals including sufficient land for vehicular access to and from the Leased Lands and U.S. Highway 951 (hereinafter referred to as "Approvals") are required before Lessee can commence the construction of facilities and equipment and engage in mining and manufacturing activities on the Leased Lands. Upon exercise of the lease option, Lessee will thereafter seek the Approvals needed. Lessor agrees to cooperate with and assist Lessee in obtaining the necessary Approvals, but at no cost to Lessor. In addition, Lessor agrees to give Lessee twenty-four (24) months beginning on the first day of the calendar month next following the date Lessee exercises the option to apply for and receive the Approvals (hereinafter referred to as "Permitting Period"). If Lessee is unable to obtain such Approvals, within the twenty-four (24) month Permitting Period, Lessee may terminate the Agreement or elect to extend the Permitting Period for an additional twelve (12) month period (hereinafter referred to as "Secondary Permitting Period"), by notifying Lessor in writing prior to the expiration of the twenty- four (24) month Permitting Period. At anytime during the Permitting Period and/or the Secondary Permitting Period, Lessee may (1) notify Lessor that the conditions precedent have been met, (2) notify L~ssor that Lessee waives such conditions precedent or (3) notify Lessor that Lessee terminates this Agreement. If Lessee does not obtain the necessary Approvals prior to the expiration of the Secondary Permitting Period and Lessee does not waive the requirement that the Approvals be obtained prior to the expiration of the Secondary Permitting Period, then this Agreement shall terminate. During the twenty-four (24) month Permitting Period provided herein prior to the commencement of the plant construction period or prior to the termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first, Lessee shall pay to Lessor prepaid royalties of $10,000.00 per month beginning the first calendar month of the - 3 JUN 1 8 2002 Permitting Period and ending the month the Agreement is terminated or the last month of the Permitting Period, whichever occurs earlier. During the twelve (12) month Secondary Permitting Period, prior to the commencement of the plant construction period or prior to the termination of the Agreement, whichever occurs first, Lessee shall pay to Lessor prepaid royalties of $15,000.00 per month beginning the first calendar month of the Secondary Permitting Period and ending the month the Agreement is terminated or the last month of the Secondary Permitting Period whichever occurs earlier. Lessee shall be able to recover any prepaid royalties paid to Lessor upon the execution of this Agreement and during the Permitting Period and/or Secondary Permitting Period by credit for subsequently due earned royalties hereunder in excess of the guaranteed minimum royalties to be paid pursuant to paragraph 9 below, but not otherwise. If Lessee does not obtain the necessary Approvals prior to the expiration of the Permitting Period and/or Secondary Permitting Period, and Lessee does not waive the requirement that the Approvals be obtained prior to the expiration of the Permitting Period, or Secondary Permitting Period, then this Agreement shall terminate and the consideration paid to Lessor as recoverable prepaid royalty shall be retained by Lessor. Any sums paid as recoverable prepaid royalty under this paragraph shall accrue in a prepaid royalty account and Lessee may recover the balance in the prepaid royalty account by credit for earned royalties due during subsequent periods of this Agreement. The payment of prepaid royalties payable under this paragraph during the Permitting Period and Secondary Permitting Period shall be made by the fifth (5~) day of the month for which such prepaid royalties are due. 6. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of thirty-=hree (33) years beginning on the first day of the calendar month next following the date of mailing the notice of exercise of option referred to in paragraph 3 hereof, unless sooner terminated or extended pursuant to the provisions 'hereinafter set. , forth. 2002 7. Use of Lan~s. During the term of this Agreement, Lessee, its employees, agents or assigns, shall have the right to enter upon and use Leased Lands for the purpose of mining, quarrying and removing therefrom, by blasting and otherwise, such deposits of Construction Materials, clay, topsoil and overburden as may exist thereon or thereunder, together with the optional .right to construct, maintain and operate mining, quarrying, washing, crushing and other plants, including a baserock (limerock) plant, machinery, dams, dredges, ponds, settling basins, roads, railway spur lines, power lines, telephone lines, pipe lines, ditches and other equipment and related facilities such as a ready mixed concrete plant or an asphaltic concrete plant to the extent that any of the same are found by Lessee to be necessary or incidental to or desirable in connection with the blasting, dredging, excavation, quarrying, mining, processing, or sale and removal (hereinafter collectively called "Mining") of the Construction Materials. Lessee, its employees, agents or assigns, shall remove any or all of such facilities and equipment from the Leased Lands at any time during the period of this Agreement and within a period of six (6) months following the termination hereof. Title to all facilities and equipment placed on the Leased Lands by or for Lessee shall remain in Lessee throughout the term of this Agreement. Within the six month period following the termination of this Agreement, Lessee agrees that it will, at Lessee's sole cost and expense, 'reclaim the portions of the Leased Lands disturbed by Lessee's activities in accordance with a plan of reclamation approved by all applicable governmental authorities, and in accordance with all applicable governmental requirements. 8. Use of Leased Lands bv Lessor. Lessor shall have the right to use the Leased Lands or any part thereof for any lawful purposes which do not interfere with the rights granted to Lessee hereby and hereunder. In addition to the foregoing, Lessee shall release to Lessor portions of the Leased Lands in three hundred (300) acre increments on the thirteenth (13~h) anniversary of the - 5 - AGENDA ITEI~ JUN 1 B commencement of the lease term, and the other on the twenty-third (23rd) anniversary of the commencement of the lease term. In consideration for Lessee releasing such acreage to Lessor, Lessor agrees, during the term of this Agreement, to restrict the use of such released parcels to acres which are compatible with Lessee's mining activities. 9. Royalties. Lessee agrees to pay to Lessor, for the use and possession of the Leased Lands for the above described purposes, royalties as hereinafter set forth, namely: (a) As earned royalties, a sum equal to eight percent (8%) of the annual average net sales price (as hereinafter defined) per ton (2,000 pounds) for Construction Materials removed, processed, sold and shipped from the Leased Lands or a sum equal to fifty cents ($.50) per ton (2,000 pounds) for Construction Materials removed, processed, sold and shipped from the Leased Lands, whichever is greater. Net sales price is defined as the FOB mine site sales price that Lessee receives for the Construction Materials less discounts for prompt payments. Lessee's fiscal year commences October 1':, and at the end of each fiscal year, Lessee shall compute the annual average net sales price for Construction Materials sold and shipped from the Leased Lands during the fiscal year, taking into account both price and tonnage shipped. The fiscal year average net sales price shall be deemed the "annual average net sales price" for purposes of paying earned royalties under this subparagraph throughout the following fiscal year, then at the end of the next fiscal year, the fiscal year average net sales price shall be computed for payment of earned royalties in the following year and so forth throughout the term hereof. A sum equal to fifty cents ($.50) per ton (2,000 pounds) shall be paid to Lessor for Construction Materials processed and shipped from the., Leased Lands during that portion of the lease term AG~A JUN 1 8 2002 Occurring prior to the initial computation and application of the annual average net sales price as herein provided; however, after the initial computation and application of the annual average net sales price is performed, if eight percent (8%) of the initial computation of the annual average net sales price is greater than fifty cents ($.50), the difference between the earned royalty paid at fifty cents ($.50) per ton during the period of the Agreement prior to the initial computation of the annual average net sales price, and the earned royalty that would have been paid during that same period based on eight percent (8%) of the annual average net sales price shall be paid to Lessor within sixty (60) days following the end of the first fiscal year. In like manner, during the remaining term of this Agreement, following each fiscal year and the computation of the average net sales price for that fiscal year, if eight percent (8%) of that computation of the annual average net sales price is greater than the eight percent (8%) of the computation of the annual average net sales price for the preceding fiscal year, the difference between the earned royalty paid and the earned royalty that should have been paid during that same period based on the computed annual average net sales price for that period shall be paid to Lessor within forty-five (45) days following the end of that fiscal year. By making the aforesaid adjustments at the end of each fiscal year, it is the intent of the parties that Lessor receive royalties for each fiscal year during the term of this Agreement based on the annual average net sales price computed for that fiscal year. It is understood that in Preparing some Construction Materials for sale and shipment, it is necessary to crush, process, and wash the materials. In this process, certain plant washings and tailings may be developed consisting of clay, sand and JUN 1 B 20b find particles. These plant washings and tailings may be deposited in what is known as a "slurry pond". Lessee shall not be required to pay for such materials which are produced in the ordinary crushing, processing, and washing and deposited in the slurry pond. (b) A sum equal to eight percent (8%) of the sales price per cubic yard for all clay, topsoil, tailings and overburden shipped by Lessee from the Leased Lands. (c) In the event that earned royalties under subparagraph (a) and (b) above do not equal or exceed $250,000.00 during any year of this Agreement, (except as to the term of this Agreement affected by the Permitting Period and Secondary Permitting Period specified in Paragraph 5 hereof, and except for partial years, which shall be prorated, as provided below) then Lessee shall remit to Lessor the difference between the total earned royalties paid during such year and $250,000.00 as a guaranteed minimum royalty at the end of such year. Any sums paid as guaranteed minimum royalties under this subparagraph (c) shall be deemed to have accrued in a prepaid royalty account and Lessee may recover the balance in the prepaid royalty account by credit for earned royalties due during subsequent periods of this Agreement. It is the intent of this subparagraph that Lessor shall receive a total of at least $250,000.00 during each year of this Agreement subsequent tO the Permitting Period and Secondary Permitting Period, specified in Paragraph 5 hereof through either earned royalties or guaranteed minimum royalties and that Lessee shall be able to recover any guaranteed minimum royalties by credit for subsequently due earned royalties hereunder but not otherwise. If either or both the first year and last year for which minimum royalties are due under the terms of this Agreement is less than a full year, then the guaranteed - 8 - JUN 1 8 2002 ,,,... DD- minimum royalties shall be prorated so that Lessor is paid for only that portion of the first and last years in which royalties are due. 10. ~vment of Royalties. The payment of earned royalties payable under the provisions of paragraph 9 hereof for Construction Materials mined from the Leased Lands, processed, sold and shipped shall be made within twenty (20) days from the end of the month in which the Construction Materials are shipped from Lessee's plant. At the time of making such payment, Lessee shall deliver to Lessor, at the address hereinafter stipulated, a report showing the amount of each category of Construction Materials for which royalties are payable that have been sold and shipped during the preceding month. Lessor shall have the right, at all reasonable times during business hours, to check Lessee's operations hereunder and its records thereof to determine the accuracy of Lessee's reports and payments made with respect to the amount of materials so shipped. It is understood that Lessee's business records contain proprietary information and Lessor agrees to maintain the confidentiality of any information it obtains in connection with inspections authorized by this paragraph. The payment of guaranteed minimum royalties under subparagraph (c) above shall be made within forty- five (45) days from the end of the year for which such minimums are due. 11. Termination. Lessee may terminate this Agreement at any time by giving Lessor six (6) months prior written notice of such intention. It is agreed, however, that this does not affect Lessor's rights and interest in any earned royalties which may be due. Failure to pay such royalties shall not automatically cancel this Agreement, but if Lessor shall notify Lessee in writing of its failure to pay said royalties and if said royalties are not paid within ten (10) days from date such notice is received by Lessee, this Agreement may be terminated by Lessor. 12. ~91ease from Damaces and Liability Insurance. Lessor. hereby releases Lessee from any and all damages that might occur to 9 - AGEI~A ITE. I~ JUN 1 8 2002 the Leased Lands, improvements or property of Lessor arising out of the quarrying, blasting or other normal mining, processing and manufacturing operations of Lessee during the period of this Agreement; provided however this release shall not extend to damages arising from the negligence or willful and wanton misconduct of Lessee, its agents, or employees on the Leased Lands. In order to protect the parties hereto against liability for damage claims through the use of or arising out of accidents occurring on the Leased Lands, Lessee agrees to procure and maintain in force during the term of this Agreement and any extension thereof, at its expense, comprehensive general liability insurance 'providing personal injury and property damage coverage. A certificate of insurance evidencing such coverage shall be provided Lessor. 13. Qther Minerals. Any valuable minerals located on the Leased Lands other than Construction Materials, shall be considered the property of Lessor and not be subject to the terms of this Agreement, but Lessor agrees that the same will not be sold or leased to anyone other than Lessee without first giving Lessee written notice of Lessor's intention to sell or lease the same, and Lessee shall have sixty (60) days within which to negotiate with Lessor for the purchase or lease thereof. If within such sixty (60) day period the parties are unable to agree upon terms and conditions for such sale or lease, Lessor shall be free to dispose of such other minerals to whomsoever and upon such terms as Lessor may choose. ' Any such sale or lease to others, however, shall provide that the removal of such other minerals shall not be accomplished in such a way as to interfere with Lessee's operations authorized hereby and hereunder. 14. Conduct of Miniga Operations. Lessee shall have the right to determine when and where Mining is to be commenced, on the Leased Lands. Lessee shall provide Lessor and/or Lessor' s representative with a copy of Lessee's mining and reclamation plan prior to submitting such plan to governmental permitting authorities. The parties hereto recognize that Lessee's mining and ~ 10 - AG~NOA I~.~ JUN 1 8 2002 reclamation plan, to a great extent, is dependent upon the location of the construction materials underlying the Leased Lands. To the extent that it is practical and provided it does not unreasonably interfere with Lessee's proposed mining activities, Lessee will incorporate the suggestions of Lessor and/or Lessor's representative into the mining and reclamation plan. Lessee shall be under no obligation to commence or continue Mining on the Leased Lands or portions thereof if Lessee determines for any reason that it is undesirable, uneconomical or inexpedient for Lessee to do so. 15. Covenant Not to Compete. As long as this Agreement is in force, Lessor will not mine, sell, lease or grant any privileges to mine Construction Materials on any other property owned or controlled by Lessor within three (3) miles of the Leased Lands described herein. 16. Plant Tailinas. Lessor agrees that Lessee shall have the right to deposit plant washings and tailings generated in its mining operations on Leased Lands or on such portions of the Leased Lands as Lessee may deem advisable consistent with good mining practices throughout the term of this Agreement. 17. ~ Lessor understands that substantial quantities of water are required in connection with Lessee's operations. Lessee shall have the right to drill wells and construct water holding facilities on Leased Lands as are necessary to obtain and~store sufficient water for its operations, and, if it is unable at any time to obtain sufficient water for its operations from wells on said lands, then Lessee shall have the right, at its option, to cancel this Agreement, upon written notice to Lessor. Lessor shall retain any and all monies earned by it up to and including the time of such cancellation. 18. Warranty of Title. Lessor covenants and warrants that (i) it has the full right and lawful authority to lease the Leased Lands as herein provided; and (ii) said lands are free from any liens or encumbrances which would interfere with Lessee's exercise - 11 - AGENDA ITE~ 2002 of the rights granted to Lessee hereunder. Lessor agrees to indemnify and save Lessee harmless from damages assessed against Lessee for its activities hereunder by third parties claiming an ownership interest in the Leased Lands. Lessor further agrees tc indemnify and save Lessee harmless from its legal fees in defense of any such third-party claims. 19. Hazardous wastes. Lessor represents to the best of its knowledge that the Leased Lands have not been used for the storage, dumping or disposal of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants [as defined in the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act 42 U.S.C.A., Section 9601 (West Spp. 1987)]. Lessee shall have access to the premises during the option period provided herein to take soil tests and conduct other tests. Should Lessee determine that hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants have been stored, dumped or disposed of on The Leased Lands, then Lessee may terminate this Agreement. 20. Indemnification bY Lessor. kny provision herein to the contrary notwithstanding, Lessor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Lessee from all claims, costs and expenses (including attorney's fees) as a consequence of any incident prior tc this Agreement resulting in the pollution of air, water, land and/or ground water on the Leased Lands, and from any claim or liability arising from federal or state law dealing with the pollution cf air, water, land and/or ground water on the Leased Lands. Likewise, Lessee agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Lessor from all claims, costs and expenses (including attorney's fees) as a consequence of Lessee's Mining activities on the Leased Lands subsequent to this Agreement and Lessee taking possession of the Leased Lands which activities result in the pollution of air, water, land and/or ground water on the Leased Lands, and from any claim or liability arising from federal or state law dealing with the pollution of air, water, lan~ and/or ground water on the Leased Lands. - 12 21. ~ns. It is agreed between the parties that Lessee may pay off and/or satisfy any and all mortgages, taxes or other liens against the Leased Lands if Lessor fails to do so. Such payments made on any mortgage or in discharge of tax or other liens by Lessee for the account of Lessor may be deducted from any amounts that might be owed to Lessor under the terms of this Agreement. Lessor agrees to notify Lessee of any action that may be taken tc foreclose on the Leased Lands due to any mortgage or other lien. 22. Notices. Any notice required or desired to be served upon Lessee shall be deemed to have been sufficiently served if mailed by registered or certified United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to Lessee at Post Office Box 4667, Jacksonville, Florida 32201, or at such other place as Lessee may from time to time designate by written notice to Lessor. Any notice required or desired to be served upon Lessor shall be deemed tc have sufficiently served if mailed by registered or certified United States Mail, postage prepaid, addressed to Lessor at 1350 Spyglass Lane, Naples, Florida 34102 or at such other place as Lessor may from time to time designate by written notice to Lessee. 23. Indemnification by Lessee. Lessee agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Lessor from and against all losses or expenses (including costs and attorneys' fees) by reason cf liability imposed by law upon Lessor for damages because of bodily injury, including death at any time arising therefrom, sustained by any person or persons or on account of damage to property (except Lessor's property per paragraph 12 above), includinG loss of use thereof, arisinG out of or in consequence of the performance of Lessee's operations under this Agreement. 24. CQmprehensive Plan/Rezonina. It is understood that the comprehensive plan and/or present zoning classification of the Leased Lands may have to be changed to permit Lessee's intended use thereof. Lessee shall have full responsibility at its own cost to obtain the requisite comprehensive plan amendment and/or zoning 13 - JUN 8 200 P~. · reclassification to permit such operations. Lessor agrees to cooperate with and assist Lessee in obtaining such comprehensive plan amendment and/or present zoning reclassification. Any application for comprehensive plan amendment and/or rezoning shall be made at Lessee's discretion. 25. Taxes. Lessor agrees to pay all ad valorem taxes levied against the Leased Lands during the term of this Agreement prior tc the time the same shall become delinquent; provided however, Lessee shall reimburse Lessor for the real estate taxes attributable to the Leased Lands. Lessor shall furnish Lessee with timely notice of tax assessments on the Leased Lands and improvements and Lessee shall have the right to appeal or negotiate such assessments with the taxing authority. Similarly, in order for Lessee to receive the maximum discount for early payment, Lessor shall furnish Lessee with a timely demand for reimbursement and a written explanation for any real estate tax reimbursements due under this section together with a copy of the receipts for the taxing authority for such taxes paid by the Lessor. Lessee shall reimburse Lessor for such taxes within thirty (30) days after receipt of the written demand, explanation and receipts for such taxes. Lessee agrees to pay any and all mining taxes, severance taxes or other like taxes in connection with the minin~ or removing of the Constructicn Materials, clay, topsoil and overburden together with all taxes cn buildings and other property and installations constructed or placed upon the Leased Lands by Lessee. 26. ~Q~ice Prior to Minina. Lessee shall give Lessor one hundred twenty (120) days notice before it needs the use or possession of any portion of the Leased Lands for its operations under this Agreement. During such one hundred twenty (120) day period, Lessor may remove or cause to be removed any existing improvements. Subsequent to the passing of such one hundred twenty (120) day period, Lessee may destroy or remove any improvements remaining on the Leased Lands without liability to Lessor for such destruction or removal. 14 1 2002 - 27. Time. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. 28. Construction of Roads and Qperatin~ Areas. Lessor agrees that Lessee may, without royalty or charge, excavate and use clay, rock, gravel, sand, topsoil and fill from the Leased Lands for the construction of roads and operating areas reasonably necessary for Lessee's operations on the Leased Lands. 29. ~ssicrnment. This Agreement may be assigned by Lessee with Lessor's approval which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. This Agreement and all the terms, covenants, conditions and provisions herein contained shall inure to and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. 30. Memorandum A~reement. The parties agree that this Agreement is not to be recorded in the public records of the respective counties wherein the Leased Lands are situate. At the request of either party, upon the exercise of the option, a memorandum agreement shall be executed by the parties for recording. IN WITNESS W~EREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument in duplicate the day and year first above written. Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: SEAL) DR. FRANCIS D. HUSSEY As to Lessor As to Lessor (SEAL) MARY R. HUSSEY "Lessor" - 15 JUN 1 As tO Lessee ' ~ ~ FLORIDA ROCK INDUSTRIES, INC. (Corporate Seal "Lessee" - 16 - 2002 I' JUN 1 8 2002 JUNE 18, 2002 BCC AGENDA MAP OF. · FUTURE LAND USE MAP DRAFT NAPLES, FLORIDA ON FILE IN THE CLERK TO THE BOARD MINUTES & RECORDS DEPARTMENT