Agenda 11/09/2010 Item #17B
Agenda Item No. 17B.
November 9, 201':.
Page 1 of 19t.
.
r
"
t
10-10: IS8 NWN, LLC; t'G, H, LLC 4 CityGate Develop....;..
'(.1' J",~JnIth of Davidsola bPa~ IDe., nqaestiD&.. . .
" '...........ent Order to eoaAra to Gle City Gate Habitat C
and die CitfGlllt,."'" Fish and Wildlife Permit. The .....dlDeat .. to: y,,'
DRlIM,,~,JJlU.C Order .....,ICoUier Caety R~..tiv. 1# 90-01), SedlrIllF.'
V..... .. ~edands, iD ............ ......... c _tided ~ ,,'
ad ..........,. ... Red Cockaded Woedpecker Maaagemeat ...... TI...." ,"
IocaW at tile II.. nHIiea of CoDier JIeuInanI.(CR 951) ... CIty Gate
Sectioa 35. T.... , .- ", 49 Eat, Raage 26Soat1a, eo.... Con." FIoridL' f '
TO PUDA-PL2tl~
OBJECI1VE:
To have the Board of CfJUlII1 :Commiasioners (BeC) "review ""~
recommendations ",with tho ~ ,of the Collier, County
(CCPC) regarding the,*"", ~ pdition'aud render a, decision
amendment petition; and' eDIIR 1be project ,is in harmony with all the app'
regulations in order to CIISUIe that dae comm1lPity's interests are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS:
.
,
This DR! Resolution pl'OpoIeJ tQ. .,' 41IPmd the Development of Regional lInpad.;. .
Development Order to ~ ~'Keel 'Cocbded Woodpecker Management Plan to ',"!,~
the City Gate Habitat CoDsemIdon~ and the City Gate Federal FJSh and Wildlife Pta~i~:.
FISCAL IMPACf:
The County coUects impact fees prior to the issuance of bUilding ~:~,
impacts of each new developDllDt OIl public facilities. These impact "'c. '...
projects identified in the CapballmprovemeDl Element of the Growth"" '...,
needed to maintain adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. AdditionaUf~
to meet the requirements of COIICUDalCY management. the developer of every Joca1 '
order approved by Collier COUntfJ. requiIaI to pay a portion of the ~ .1: ,
Impact Fees associated with_ ~inaccordance with Chapter 74 of. CoiIier'
Code of Laws and Ordiqa~OI!a.ri=es coDectedprior to issuance of a bui1diaa~
building permit review ~,... additional revc:uue is gena:atal byH appIi.../
valorem tax rates, and tbat_ ~~is directly related to tbevalue of the . ' , ., . "..,'::::
note tbat imr1_ aa4 ~.~ ~not included in the criteria used by sta<<;'"
Planning ComJQissioIl.~..petition. .
, ;:il",'i:.
J.:; - ~ ":'i
, ':,"..
, ; '~:
'" r,_~,"
l
,J.
J"~,I" -.1i)pl' ~ , r, ' ,':
GRO~AGDJENT p~ (GMP) IMPAct-i "';.:'ii
. ,. " , 'I , . ',: h. _ ~~, }.
=::::~~~==:.~~~=.r..'
PUDA companion petitioD. , ." { ",i' .
CO'.I.tER ~~O COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMEND4TJq&-
This item was hea1d by the CCPC at the September 16, 2010 hearing, ancl by a vote of 8-0
recommended to forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a
recommendation of 8J'PfCMl,of1his petitioll, as~ft~
Because staff ~ftVI!ndM ~ the CCPCappmvat recomn~stiOQ was unanimous, and
there were no lettc;rs of objection subnri~ tbispetilion can be placed on the Summary Agenda.
LEGAL CONSIDERADONS:.
This request complies with ~' 380.()6.F.8.' It is ready for BoanI CODSidt..aon and
approval.--(HFAC) .. , '
.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request for DOA-
PUOIO-843, City Gate ~ Park DR! ~to the attached DR! Development Order
Amendment and Resolution.
PREPARED BY:
Kay DeSeleni, AlCP, Princip8I,flam1er, Land ~1opment Services
Growth Management Divisioa.P1;q,mng and Replation
Attachments: 1) StaffRepo1t
2)bk>>lution
,3) Application
.
~COMMERCE CENTER~,
,
t.,i""",.,',.",,'
(,::i;.lJl{;"<
.,,$.,
i.
,,1,;1 .
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 3 of 197
.
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Item Number:
Item Summary:
178
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members: DOA-PL2010-843: 850 NWN, LLC, CG II, LLC & CityGate
Development Inc., represented by Josh Fruth of Davidson Engineering Inc., requesting an
amendment to the City Gate DRI Development Order to conform to the City Gate Habitat
Conservation Plan and the City Gate Federal Fish and Wildlife Permit. The amendment is to
the City Gate DRI Development Order 90-4 [Collier County Resolution # 90-431], Section 4
entitled Vegetation and WildlifelWetlands, in particular paragraph c entitled Off-site Mitigation
and paragraph d entitled Red Cockaded Woodpecker Management Plan, This project is
located at the intersection of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and City Gate Boulevard North in
Section 35, Township 49 East, Range 26 South, Collier County, Florida, (Companion to
PUDA-PL2010-845)
11/9120109:00:00 AM
Meeting Date:
Prepared By
Kay Deselem, AICP Planner, Principal Date
Community Development & Zoning & Land Development Review 10/11/2010 6:02:21 PM
Environmental Services
. Approved By
Judy Puig Operations Analyst Date
Community Development & Community Development & 10/12/20108:46 AM
Environmental Services Environmental Services
Approved By
Norm E. Feder, AICP Administrator - Transportation Date
Transportation Division Transportation Administration 10/12/201010:41 AM
Approved By
Nick Casalanguida Director - Transportation Planning Date
Transportation Division Transportation Planning 10/12/20105:15 PM
Approved By
Heidi F. Ashton Section Chief/Land Use-Transportation Date
County Attorney County Attorney 10/13/20109:32 AM
Approved By
Ray Bellows Manager - Planning Date
Community Development & Zoning & Land Development Review 10/13/20106:13 PM
Environmental Services
. Approved By
William D. Lorenz, Jr., P.E. Director - CDES Engineering Services Date
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 4 of 197
Engineering & Environmental Services
10116120109:48 AM
Approved By
OMB Coordinator
County Manager's Office
Date
Office of Management & Budget
101251201012:09 PM
Approved By
Jeff Klatzkow
County Attorney
Date
Approved By
101281201010:57 AM
Therese Stanley
Office of Management &
Budget
Manager - Operations Support - Trans
Date
Office of Management & Budget
1012912010 2:49 PM
Approved By
Leo E. Ochs, Jr.
County Managers Office
County Manager
Date
County Managers Office
1112120102:27 PM
.
.
.
.
Co~T County
~ --~ --
Agenda Item No. 176
A~~tt~
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING SERVICES-LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DMSION-PLANNING & REGULATION
HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 16,2010
SUBJECT: DOA-PL2010-843, CITY GATE COMMERCE CENTER DR! (COMPANION
TO PUDA-PL2010-845)
PROPERTY OWNER &APPLICANT/AGENTS:
Ownerl Applicant
Agent:
850 NWN, LLC, CG IT, LLC &
City Gate Development, LLC
159 Main Street, Suite 500
Akron, OH 44309
. REQUESTED ACTION:
Josh Fruth, Project Manager
Davidson Engineering, Inc.
3530 Kraft Road, Suite 301
Naples, FL 34105
The petitioner is requesting an amendment to the City Gate Development of Regional Impact
(DR!) Development Order (DO) so that document will match the City Gate Habitat Conservation
Plan and the City Gate Federal Fish and Wildlife Permit. The amendment is to the City Gate DR!
Development Order 88-2 [Collier County Resolution # 88-309, as amended], Section 4 entitled
Vegetation and WildlifelWetlands, in particular paragraph c entitled Off-site Mitigation and
paragraph d entitled Red Cockaded Woodpecker Management Plan.
GEOGRAPIDC LOCATION:
The subject property, consisting of 287 :f: acres, is located at the intersection of Collier Boulevard
(CR 951) and City Gate Boulevard North in Section 35, Township 49 East, Range 26 South,
Collier County, Florida (See illustration on the follOWing page).
PURPOSFJDESCRIPTlON OF PROJECT:
The applicant seeks to amend Section 4 in the City Gate DR! DO entitled Vegetation and
WildJife/Wetlands, specifically paragraph c entitled Off-site Mitigation and paragraph d entitled
Red Coc/wded Woodpecker Management Plan.
.
PUDA-Pl2010-845. City Gate Commerce Center PUD
September 16. 2010 CCPC
Rev: 8I3Of10
Page 1015
/ ~
cl~1 c
c ~'~~/!
.
-:
- :::- \ ", p ~~
1 !--l-l, :' ,
Z
0
~'< . :. ". I L t'7
mO :- 1 L ~
9 > , . ~ 'L 'II /
\: :: ! :- 'i I _ ......:fJ ~
~--~ .' .-> ....rl~!l~ 1//
- ---
",., - < IL ___I
. ; " . '...., ,
.~ ~ - ~ I
i J ',' : -,' " :- ~ ,; ~
.'", r -\ 9'/ ~-"-
-' \ " ':,::-
= ':-.. L ----, '-'L I-
- '- - .. /, ~ T VI /"<-~ ';::
- - I "., :>:. :.(''i +- ......--
-.... ~ 1-' :."... :'.: r-- '1--
..... ,'.....' N':: U/
-.::-..... I, I I ! I--
I '- ~'. .. I ',' [JJf
)j- 'J' .i; . ~r
Cl I' W
'i II ~... ""'\"'''''Ii
, .
--P:i r- ~ r )r.
.rlP'l' CI." :1,-, .r.JV /
I ~ I ~- If- ,,~ F j '/\/-[ liil. _oh.
I I r l
_1IOl -- II
..... ~ I.
.. -7, J \. J~_I , /~_. -~
n, 7\
T,{(..... Jill I ~ \ _
JWZ"_ / ~
-
.
D-
<(
~
C>
Z
-
Z
o
N
~I
01
0:
N' .
.
..J
lL.
.
<
0
0
..
z
0
~
1-'
W,
lL.i
I
D-
c:(
~
z
o
-
.-
<(
U
o
...J
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 7 of 197
The original City Gate DR! DO was approved in 1988, with the provisions to be amended added in
an amendment approved in 1990. A 2000 amendment recognized that mitigation and management
strategies would evolve and change by providing that before development could proceed in the
areas of the DR! designated as a temporary Red Cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) preserves, the
RCW management plan must be "refreshed". These changed mitigation and management
strategies are reflected in the City Gate Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) approved by and the City
Gate Federal Fish & Wildlife Permit issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in
2009. Accordingly, City Gate must amend the DR! DO to reflect the latest listed species
mitigation strategies and management methods required by the HCP and Permit.
Several changes to the original DR! DO have occurred. These are as follows:
1. The original DR! DO was adopted on December 13, 1988 via DR! DO 88-2. That DO was
appealed by Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) with the appeal being resolved on
October 29, 1990.
2. On February 21, 1295, an amendment was approved in DR! DO 95-2 to extend the
mandatory development date to October 28, 2000.
3. DR! DO 2000-02 was adopted on May 23, 2000 to further extend the DR! DO until
October 27,2014. That DO contained the following statement:
11)e Citygate ~;ect contains 299 acres of buildioe sites. exclusive of
streets. labs. and other non bwldinv site areas. Until th~ wetlAnd
iurisdiction lines and the Red-Cocke4-ed Woodpecker Management Plan
have been refteshgJ. any neeessas;y Master Plan and/or PUD modifications
made. a comnlete new TIS p~ and a new DOA 1lDPl'OvecL
developmenl i.e.. bullding permit issmmce. shall be Jimited to 15% of the
Project site acres. which is 31.35 site acres. The 31.35 acre maximum
develomnent grea slJ.dLbe located west of the FPL easement except for th;
area east of the FPL easement in which there are no jurisdictional wetland.l
and in which no Red Cockaded Woodpecker nesting or foraging area has
been established. Water mAnagement facilities to accormnodate the initial
devetonment area msty occur east of the FPL easement as nrovided. for in
SECTION ONE: Para~h 4.c. of Development Order 90-41
The petitioner's agent notes the following in a February 19,2010 letter to JeffKIatzkow (A copy
of that letter is included in the application package.):
A subsequent DOA adopted in 2000 recognized that mitigation and management
strategies would evolve and change by providing that before development could
proceed in the areas of the DRl designated as a temporary Red Coc/caded
Woodpecker (RCW) preserves, the RCW management plan must be "refreshed".
These changed mitigation and management strategies are reflected in the City Gate
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) approved by and the City Gate Federal Fish &
Wildlife Permit issued by the US. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2009.
PUDA-PL2010-845, City Gate Commerce Center PUD
September 16, 2010 CCPC
Rev: 8130110
Page 2 of 5
Agenda Item No, 178
November 9,2010
Accordingly, City Gate must amend the DR! DO to reflect the latest listed species Page 8 of 197
mitigation strategies and management methods required by the HCP and Permit.
The agent's letter goes on to note that the current RCW mitigation and management methods have .
changed from what was originally approved 20 years ago. Therefore, the petitioner is revising the
DR! DO to remove the outdated language and replace it with language consistent with the newly
adopted man~gement plan.
The agent's letter refers to Florida Statutes (FS) regarding the process by which the amendment is
approved as quoted below:
The first point of analysis in any DOA is to determine whether it is a substantial
deviation. Florida Statute 380.06(19)(e) provides in subsection (2) that certain
development order changes are not substantial deviations, including subsection (h)
which provides that:
Changes required to conform to permits approved by any federal, state, or
regional permitting agency, provided that these changes do not create
additional regional impacts.
The Statute further provides that such a change is processed by an application for DO
amendment through the local government without the necessity of filing for an NOPC
with the Regional Planning Council (RPC). The statutory language is as follows:
This subsection does not require the filing of a notice of proposed change
but shall require an application to the local government to amend the
development order in accordance with the local government's procedures
for amendment of a development order. In accordance with the local
government's procedures, including requirements for notice to the applicant
and the public, the local government shall either deny the application for
amendment or adopt an amendment to the development order which
approves the application with or without conditions.
.
This method of a DOA is different than the norm, where the applicant files a Notice of
Proposed Change (NOPC) with the County and Regional Planning Council.
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL (RPC):
Copies of the submittal documents were provided to the RPC for review. The RPC recognizes the
need to amend the DR! DO and PUD documents and agrees with the applicant that Florida Statutes
do not require the filing and approval of a formal Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC). RPC staff
has determined that no formal review by the RPC is required and a hearing before the RPC is not
required.
.
PUDA-PL2010-84S. City Gate Commerce Center PUD
September 16, 2010 CCPC
Rev: 8130110
Page 30fS
STAFF REVIEW:
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 9 of 197
Development parameters contained in DR! Development Orders are prerequisite to zoning actions
. that implement DR! approved land use authorizations. DR! Development Orders are structured to
contain regulations that respond to relationships dictated by State Administrative rules.
Specifically, those relationships and questions that an applicant is required to analyze and report on
as part of their Application for Development Approval (ADA) are included in the DR! DO. As
noted above, the DR! DO contained a provision that required the petitioner to revisit and update
the listed species mitigation strategies and management methods. That has been done and this
amendment will incorporate the revised and now corrected language into the DR! DO.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for this petition revised on August 30,
2010.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition DOA-PL-
2010-843 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval as
described by the amending DR! Development Order resolution.
.
.
PUDA-PL2010-845, City Gate Commerce Center PUD
September 16, 2010 CCPC
Rev: 8130110
Page 4 of 5
PREPARED BY:
~~
KA SELEM, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
REVIEWED BY:
RAYM V.BE WS,ZONINGMANAGER
DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
~~.:Wb
ILLIAM D. LORENZ, , P.E., DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
APPROVED BY:
~t1!x
NICK CAS~ GUIDA, D~MINISTRATOR
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DNISION
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION:
!4~~~
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 10 of 197
.
8' LJI~O
I ATE
~'l'3'lo
DATE
08. 2~--2..0to
DATE
.
oB.-] to. 2010
DATE
~-I' "It>
DATE
Tentatively scheduled for the November 9, 2010 Board of County Commissioners Meeting
City Gate DRI, DOA-PL2010-843
September 16, 2010 CCPC
Revised 8/11/10
.
Page 5 of5
coo'" c .Ula .
",_en
_0.....
.C\l_ ""'"
M
- as
asQ)a.
-0>
c:O
Q)Z
C) a.
4:
---- <(
~
.. I C>
I Z
-
Z
0
" N
",- -i-"
-.roo _
. \
i g \
. nw:6 Ql "'" / ~
-
:: 0 a N ::
N N .,
11 11 ~
~
h s ~
wI
~~i ~ ~i ~ ;; ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~
0
I-z g
00
11 w- i
,!<
e 00 ~!:
w~ :::g ~- a.
~~i . ., a .~
N N ., ,-- ~ ~
I ~ <(
~
Q .
~
~ ~ Z
~ ~= J~
.., ~i a
w N N !I 0
" I ~~
i
-
o",,,,3Y1OlI IBmCXl 195-H"O J-
~S6 -1::1 :;) <(
~ A ~~ ~ ! h U
w e ~~ ~~o ~~ II
a t- " ~I !i"
II <( ; N zi! U~ 0
i Cl I h ~ir ~
~ i
. u "g -I
!
. ~Il~ ~c :l U!
~ ~ "~
i -Iii a
'" i N
Ii i I h >~ ~ w
=1 ~ ~.-
ow....... ~ ~L ~~!
OWA.3'YlO8 WYmM3 W'HNS ~ ~~
C')
'<t
co
o
~
o
N
-'
a..
<(
o
o
""
z
o
l-
I-
W
a..
cojft. Cmmty
- ~ -
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 12 of 197
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLUERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252.2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
.
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR (check one):
o DRf Application for Development Approval (DRI)
o DRf Notice of Proposed Change (DOA)
lEI Other DRI Development Order Amendment (DOA)
PROJECT NUMBER
PROJECT NAME
DATE PROCESSED
DOA-P1201G-843 REV:1
CITY GATE COMMERCE CENTER PHASES
ONE, TWO, AND THREE
DATE: 5/7/10
DUE: 6/7/10
]
APPLICANT INFORMATiON
APPLlCANT(S) 850 NWN. LLC & CG fl. LLC. CITYGA TE DEVELOPMENT. LLC
FIRM
ADDRESS 159 MAIN STREET. SUITE 500 CITY AKRON STATE OHIO ZIP 44309
TELEPHONE # 330-998-0225 CELL # FAX # 239-593-1309
E-MAIL ADDRESS: ROGERRICECCi>.EARTHLlNK.COM
Is the applicant the owner of the subject property? 00 Yes 0 No
Please provide the following information on separate sheets.
o (a) If applicant is a land trust, so indicate and name beneficiaries.
D (b) If applicant is corporation other than a public corporation. so indicate and name officers
and major stockholders.
00 (c) If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership or other business entity. so indicate and
name principals.
o (d) If applicant if an owner, indicate exactly as recorded, and list all other owners, if any.
o (e) If applicant if a lessee. attach copy of lease, and indicate actual owners if not indicated on
the lease.
o (f) If applicant is a contract purchaser, attach copy of contract, and indicate actual owner(s)
name and address.
.
.
.
.
.
Coli! County
~ - ,~~-
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 13 of 197
COWER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLUERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
(
AGENT INFORMATION
NAME OF AGENT JOSH FRUTH
FIRM DAVIDSON ENGINEERING. INC.
ADDRESS 3530 KRAFT ROAD. SUITE 301 CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34105
TELEPHONE # 239-434-6060 EXT. 2969 CELL # FAX # 239-434-6084
E-MAIL ADDRESS: JOSHlCi>.DAVIDSONENGINEERING.COM
BE AWA~ THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE
YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH
THESE REGULATIONS.
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Detailed leaal descriotion of the orooerty covered bv the aoolication: (If space is inadequate, attach
on separate page.) If requestinvolves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal
description for property involved in each district. Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent
survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-
application meeting. NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If
questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be
required.
SectionlT ownshiplRange 35149126
Lot: Block: Subdivision: CITY GATE COMMERCE PARK PHASES ONE. TWO &
THREE
Plat Book 41&49 Page #: 6-7 & 97-100 Property 1.0.#: SEE ATTACHED LIST
Metes & Bounds Description: SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT
Size of property: 2163' +/- ft. X 5182' +/- ft. = Total Sq. Ft. 12.509.996.40 SF Acres 287.19+/- AC
Address/aenerallocation of sublect property: CR 951 & CITY GATE BLVD.
(
Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? If so,
give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on
separate page). NO
SectionlTownshlplRange _1---1_
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book _ Page #: _ Property I.D.#: _
Metes & Bounds Description: _
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 14 of 197
COLUER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COWERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
.
DETAIL OF REQUEST
Does the proposed action comply with the Collier County Growth Management Plan? 1RI Yes D No
If no, provide a written explanation.
Has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? 1RI Yes 0 No If so, please
provide a written explanation of the hearing.
At the December 1, 2009 BCe meeting, Item 8 0 and E concern City Gate. The agenda indicated
tha following:
80. This item has been continued from the October 27,2009 and the November 10~ 2009BCC
meeting. Recommendation to consider adoption of an ordinance establishing the City
Gate Community Development District (COD) pursuant to Section 190.005, Florida
Statutes. (This is a companion item to 10E.)
8E. This Item continued from the November 10, 2009 BCC Meeting. This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Recommendation to consider adoption of an ordinance amending the City Gate
Commerce Park PUO (Ordinance No. 88-93) to allow streets to be public. (This is a
companion to Item 10E.)
Note: Item 10 E was the Developer Contribution Agreement
If this is a NOPC application, has any portion of the DRI been
DEVELOPED? If so, please provide a written explanation.
Please provide a detailed narrative statement that explains the requested action and why this action is
proposed. Provide applicable supporting material and a list of all previous actions on the subject site,
begInning with the original DRIfPUD approval and including all subsequent amendments. Include
hearing number. hearing dates and a summary of the approved action. SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS
.
o SOLD and/or
o
Section 10.03.05.B.3 of the Land Development Code requires an applicant to remove
their public hearing advertising sign (s) after final action is taken by the Board of County
Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public
hearing advertising sign (s) immediately
RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer (spedfy name) at Its expense shall record in
the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or Notice of
Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of the land use
petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the Ordinance. The
Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the recording requirements
of Chapter 695, FS. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the Collier County
Planned Unit Development Monitoring staff within 1 5 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. .
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 15 of 197
.
COWER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COWERGOY.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252~358
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT
DRI, DOA
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
THIS COMPLETED CHECKUST IS TO BE SUBMITIED WITH APPUCATION PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER
USTED BELOW W/COVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION.
NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBITTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
.
REQUIREMENTS #OF REQUIRED NOT
COPIES REQUIRED
Additional set If locateCI in the BayshorelGateway Triangle D
RedeveloDment Area 1 IBl
Completed Collier County Public Hearing Application 6 mJ D
Pre-application meeting notes 6 lEI D
Site plan 24" x 36" and One 8 W x 11" copy, and one jpg copy (from 0 D
DRI Develooment Order) (iJ
Completed State NOPC Form with all attachments (If amendment) [ ] 0 IXJ
Completed State ADA Form with all attachments (If original DRI) D D (iJ
Draft DRI Development Order to address proposed change [ l 0
Legal Description 2 1m D
List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation 2 (RJ D
OWner/Agent Affidavit signed & sealed 2 mJ 0
Completed Addressing checklist (no older than 6 months) 2 mJ 0
Copies of Notices sent to DCA aRe RPC Oetter only as courtesy) 2 IiSI 0
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and digital/electronic copy of
EIS or exemotion'iustification 3 0 IXJ
Survey signed & sealed (no older than 6 months) 4 0 [&l
Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) or waiver 5 0 IBl
Aerial photographs (taken within the previous 12 months mln scaled 5 mJ C
1"=200'), showina FLUFCS Codes, LeQend, #'s and oroiact boundary
Electronic copy of all documents in Word format (CD-ROM or 3 mJ 0
Diskette)
Project Narrative (please provide details and dates) 6 !XI 0
.
(
(
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 16 of 197
COWER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COWERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
.
Emi
o $10,000 DRI Review (in addition to cost of Rezone) pus $25.00 acre (or fraction thereof).
o $2,250.00 Comprehensive Plan Consistency Review (does Dot apply to DR! amendment)
1m $6,000 DRIIDOA Amendment Development Order plus $25.00 acre (or fraction thereof) the acreage
charge does not apply for amendments which only change the build-out date of the DO for a time period
of less than fIVe years.
o $150.00 Fire Review Fee.
1m ($500.00) Pre-application credit (Applications submitted 9 months or more after the date of the last
pre-app meeting shall not be credited towards application fees and a new pre-application meeting
will be required.
lEI $925.00 Legal Advertising Fee for CCPC meeting (to be reconciled upon receipt of Invoice from Naples
News).
IXI
o
o
$500.00 Legal Advertising Fee for BCC meeting
$2500.00 Environmental Impact Statement review fee
Property Owner Notification fees. Property Owner Notifications $1.50 Non-certlfied; $3.00 Certified
return receipt maR (to be paid after receipt of invoice from Depl of Zoning '& Development Review)
.
TranSpOrtation Fees. if reauired:
o $500.00 Methodology Review Fee, if required
o $750.00 Minor Study Review Fee, if required
o $1,500.00 Major Study Review Fee, if required
Note: An additional fee for the 5th and subsequent re-submittal will be accessed at 20% of the original fee.
.
.
.
a
0
.-
-
~
rI.l
='
0
.-
t
t1
-
-
c:I
f.+-l
0
.....
rI.l
.-
-
to;S
rI.l
.-
OIl
d
.~
0
-
-
. c.E
0
t::
::a
J
CJ
.S
1
ta
>
e
8:'
to;S
0\ - l'f") -
0 ~ ~ lI')
l'f") - -
I I g
00 lI')
00 0\ 0\
~ 0 0 0
z z z
~ ~ :j ~
g ~
~ '- ~ ~ ~
.e "E -e
0 0 0
>
8
~ -a .... ~ ....
0 a3 0 a3
0 ~ 6 6 6
0 g. g. g.~
Q) - - '0'
i 0" ...... o~
>~ >0
to ' ' a; I 00
000 O~ O~
000 00\
N OIld-o--g.....rI.l- 0 0 g
I ~ .~ -0 ~ "fa ~ 5 ~ :g
rI.l <'a 'tl .~
to;S ~.sa~~ 5 (I) '.8
S ''::: o (I) ..g -5
~5 ~0Il(,)"'l:) .~ rI.l 00
= rI.l rI.l ....
c:I -0 >~~ ~a:s t)Q t)Q 0 g
rI.l .... ~ ..p..:b~Oi ~ .S = ....
(I) o rI.l a3
d e ,J:J~tlSOo 0 .... ~
10 ~ I ~ S ~.~ 5 '5 ~ ~ ! ~ 8.
~ (I) S -a ~
~E "E'J:l ~ t)Q t)Q a 0 0
o ~ 'J:l ~ .p< 00 t)Q t)Q Q) ~
~ P< .- p.. = a .9 .S @
~ ." rI.l 00 t)Q~ 0 rI.l t
0 o Q) "5"~ ~Q)to;S- 00 "'d
"E ::> rg 5 5 Q o .
u! 8.~' ~ >f.+-l.s m~
0 ~"B ::s .... 0 0 ~ ~ .0
t) ..... _t/.) Q 'm
5 ~ .es .gf.+-ls~~ ~] '"' '"' o g
~ a ~El 00. 0000 tS tS m Uo
g. '"' t 8 ...~ ~~ou I t)Q ,S,J:J
8tS o .... .a 8. - .... ~ tIS 0
.! "i3 rgraiooo(l) ~ 0 0....
I~ U
t 00 'Q '= 0';; -:S l' .... .... .o~
00='=--=0 < > > 0
0 0\00=~C+.<0 e e ';j .... (I)
(I) -u~ 0 O....u UJ:l
..r:: ;a o 0 o ....0 p..~ p..~ 0 o l:I.l
.s u..... -:SQ)~O ~ao .....~ ....<<j .0 .;; ~
0 0 d:.::a;"'dQ)='od 5-0 5-0
~ 0 ~E 13 0 ~ ~ (I).> ~ d .@~ S k> U 1S~
<<j 08 -ood 1S -0 c:I
-0 0 "5 s~..g] g p..~ 5 0 515 ~ 53
(I) ~ .~.~ ~~]!8 ~~] ~] ~] 5 ~~
] ....
- U u<
(,)
..s 00 00 0 lI') 0
r1.i 00 00 0\ 0\ 0 0\ 0\
..... 0\ 0\ 0\ 0\ 0 0 0
5 - - - - ~ 0 0
... ... 00- ... .. N N
.g l'f") l'f") ...... l'f") ... ..
- - ~ N ~ - -
5 g g oil ~ ~ d d
< 0 (I)
~ 0 0 !:1. ~ Q Q
5 ~ 0 (I)
~ ~ ~
~~ doo .S ~
l:I.l :€j\O
.g '"' I '"' I "S'
rI.l ogg og og
(
(
j
Q,
Ill:
i
..ef",
::.;""'"
",UIll:
Ill:CI:%
""...
~;EQ
co;EZ
o8~~o
;;",,0;::'..
!::f...::oi:.....;:::.
Q,<J;U\.....
I c" 1&1" .. \C
~~z~...
QOO~5
@13
~
o
ta.;;
.5 t+.<
00
'C:
o
o
oS
oS
.~
'i~
'50
~"'O
o
......
.-
l:I.l
O..Q
o
:E"
~,J:J
o
oS
=
o
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 18 of 197
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
~.COLUERGO~NET
AFFIDA vir
Well, Joseoh R. Weber being first duly sworn, depose and say that wen am/are the owners of
.the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all
the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information,
all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this
application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. Well understand that
the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the
content of this fonn, whether computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public
hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required
information has been submitted.
As property owner Well further authorize Davidson Enaineerina. Inc. to act as our/my
representative in any matters regarding this Petition.
850 NWN, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company
CG II, LlC, a Florida limited
liability company
By: Joseph R. Weber, its Vice President
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
.
By: Joseph R. Weber, its Vice President
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
The foregoing
9tM
produced
instrument was acknowledged before me this Aqfl day of
I 2010, by Joseph R. Weber, who is personally known to me or has
as identification.
State of Ohio
County of Summit
",""....."
"'''',,~\AL 6"
!~~ (C'\.
f ~ ," ", -s;. '\ Anne Petersen
~ * ' ~ Resldeat Summit COantr
~ ' * 'j Rotary P8blIc, Slate of OJIio
\.!'~ ~() l My Commission Expires: () 8' /)3'lC I t/
'4,l"j Of I;:)'f.+,~ 'I' '/ '
"'"".,,.'m''''''''~
~.
{ ignature of Notary Public - State of Ohio
IIl1n~ E. 7Jkj/'~M
(Print, Type I or Stamp Commissioned
Name of Notary Public)
DOA-PUOlo-843 REV:l ES
cITY GATE COMMERCE CENTER pHAS
ONE, TWO, AND THREE
DATE: 5/7/10
DUE: 6/7/10
.
dmer CoU.l1ty
~~..::-.:==.,
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 19 of 197
.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLfERGOV.NET
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358
(
AFFIDA vir
We/I, Joseoh R. Weber being first duly sworn, depose and say that we/I am/are the owners of
the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all
the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information,
all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this
application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. Well understand that
the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the
content of this form, whether computer generated or Couhty printed shall not be altered. Public
hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required
information has been submitted.
As property owner Well further authorize Davidson Engineerino. Inc. to act as our/my
representative in any matters regarding this Petition.
Citygate Development, LLC, a Florida limited
. liability company
(
y: Joseph R. Weber, its Vice President
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
The foregoing
~
produced
instrument was acknowledged before me this J..qtl day of
. 2010, by Joseph R. Weber, who is personally known to me or has
as identification.
.
4.
( ignature of Notary Public - State of Ohio
Jlnne E. #.fe/spn
(Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned
Name of Notary Public)
State of Ohio
County of Summit
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 20 of 197
A'ITORNEY'S AFFIDAVIT
Development Order Amendment
DOA-PI2Ol 0-843; CITY GATE COMMERCE CENTERDRI
.
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally on this 8111 day of July, 2010, appeared
ROGER B. RICE, who to me is well known, and having been sworn and under oath, deposes and
states:
1. My name is ROGER B. RICE. I am over the age of twenty-one (21) years, and
otherwise sui juris, and have pelSOnal knowledge of1he facts contained herein.
2 I am a licensed attorney, Florida Bar Number 0752444, authorized to practice in 1be State of
Florida. My business address is: 9010 Strada Stell Court, Suite 207, Naples, Collier County, Florida
34109. My business telephone number is: (239) 593-1002. My business mailing address is: 9010
Strada Stell Court, Suite 207, NapleS, Florida 34109.
3. This Affidavit is given to the Board of COlmty Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, in support of 1he Petition for a Development Ordex Amendment (OOA-PI2010-843; CITY
GAlE COMMERCE CENTER DR!).
4. 850 NWN, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, and CG n, LLC, a Florida
limited liability company, (collectively "Owners'') own the DR! property east of the FPL Easement
5. The Affiant has examined company records of 850 NWN, LLC through July 8, 2010,
including but not limited to, the operating agreement., the articles of organization, resolutions and
company records of members, if any.
6. 850 NWN, LLC is organized, existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of
Florida.
.
7. 'The Operating Agreement of 850 NWN, LLC provides that officers of 1he company may
be designatfrl.
8. The managing member and members have apJX>inted Joseph R Weber as Vice
President of 850 NWN, LLC, and Joseph R Weber has full power and authority, in his capacity as
Vice President, to execute any and all documents necessary to effectuate the Petition for a Development
Order Amendment (DOA-PL201 0-843; CITY GAlE COM1\1ERCE CEN1ER DR!).
9. The Affiant bas examined company records of CG II, LLC through July 8, 2010,
including but not limited to, the operating agreement, the articles of organization, resolutions and
company records of members, if any.
10. CO II, LLC is o~ existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of
Florida
11. The Operating Agreement of CO II, LLC provides that officers of the company may be
designroM-
DOA-P12010-843 REV;Z .
OTY GATE COMMERCE
CENTER PHASES ONE, TWO, AND THREE
DATE: 7/13/10
DUE; 8/3/10
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 21 of 197
" _.
12. The members and manager have appointed Joseph R Weber as Vice President of CO
II, LLC, and Joseph R Weber and has full power and authority, in his capacity as Vice President,
to execute any and all documents necessaxy to effectuate the Petition for a Development Order
Amendment (DOA-PI2010-843; CITY OAlECOMMERCECEN1ERDRI).
13. Affiant fin1her states that the infozmation contained in this Affidavit is, to the best
of his knowledge, true, correct and current as of the date this Affidavit is given, except ~ othe1wise
provided herein.
Witnesses:
)..(uJ(4. . -zaVk. be. {{ "
Print name of witness # 1
~QOfx'~~^' ~
Witness #2
t:.\erac M. U~
Print name of witness #2
(
(
STAlE OF FlORIDA
COUNIYOFcx)IllER
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 8th day of July, 2010, by ROGER B. RICE,
who is personally known to me.
This instnment prepared by:
Roger B. Rice, Esq.
Roger B. Rice, P.A
90 1 0 Strada Stell Cotnt
Suite 207
Naples, Florida 34109
}bre:~ ~11~
Notary ublic
My Connnission Exp' . 3...;, ')- ( C>
.==
STATE OF FLORIDA
Comm# 000947324
. · Explres 3/2212014
(
CIVIL ENGINEERING · PLANNING · ENVIRONMENTAL
Agenda Item No. 178
DOE~J~
DAVIDSON
ENGINEERING
.
July 8, 2010
Ms. Kay Deselem
Collier County Growth Management Division
Department of Land Development Services
2800 N. Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
DOA-P12010-843 REV:2
CITY GATE COMMERCE
CENTER PHAsES ONE TW
DATE: 7/13/10 ' O,ANDTHREE
DUE: 8/3/10
RE: DOA-PL2010-843 City Gate Commerce Center DRI
rReview
Dear Ms. Deselem:
Included for your review are the following:
. Six (6) copies of this cover letter;
. Six (6) copies of the Revised Resolution;
. One (1) original and Five (5) copies of the Attorney's Affidavit;
. Three (3) CD's with electronic submittal documents;
The following responses are to the June 21, 2010 review comments provided by you regarding the
above referenced project.
LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES/ZONING REVIEW - Kav Deselem/'
.
1. Miscellaneous Corrections Needed: Please provide the disclosure and owner information
requested by the county attorney in the 6/3/1 0 email message.
Response: Ownership of City Gate Entities:
Citygate Development, LLC:
99% owned by the David L Brennan Trust -2003 kstatement.
1% owned by Ann A. Brennan Trust- 2003 RestIltement.
850 NWN, LLC:
99% owned by Exit 15 Development, LLC, a Florida limited liability company.
1% owned by 500 Investment DJmpany, LLC
Exit 15 Development, LLC:
99% owned by Brennan Holdings, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company
1% owned by the David L Brennan Trust-2003 Restlltement.
Bren1Ul1l Holdings, LLC:
Owned by five trusts: the David L. Brennan Trust -2003 Restatement and the Ann A.
Brennan Trus!- 2003 Restatement own 42% and their family trusts own the remaining
58%.
.
Page 1 of4
Revised 7/8/1 0
3530 Kroft Rood. Suite 301 · Naples, Florida 34105 · Phone: 239.434,6060 · Fax: 239.434.6084
\41\AI\41 r.,.,virl~,.,,'\l=nnin~p.rinn _ ~nm
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
rien~
DAVIDSON
ENGINEERING
(
CG H, LLC: 65% owned by the David L Brennan Trust -2003 Restatement
35% oWMt/ by Brennan Holdings, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company.
Bremum Holdings, LLC: OwMd by five trusts: the David L Brennan Trust -2003
Restatement and the Ann A. Brennan Trust- 2003 RestIltement own 42% and their family
trIlsts own the remaining 58%.
DavUI L Brennan and his wife, Ann A. Brennan, live at 850 Nelsons Walk, Naples,
Florida 34102.
COUNTY ATTORNEY - Heidi Ashton-Cicko./
Miscellaneous Corrections Needed:
Please proVide the additional iliformation requested in the 6/3/10 emai1 message.
1. Disclosures: Need % of ownership of individuals of corporate entities- Citygate
Development, LLC, etc. for CCPC and BCC conflict determinations.
Response: See Response above.
2. See minor revisions to proposed ordinance.
Response: An email with the draft of the resolution in Wordformat was sent to
Assistant County Attorney Heidi Ashton-Cicko on July 8, 2010.
(
3. Provide managing member detail for Sunsetview Management Co., LLC, an Ohio limited
liability company.
Response: Brennan Management Group, UC is the manager of Sunset Vrew
Management Co., LLC. Sunset View Management Co., LLC is the Manager of Citygate
Development, LLC and CG H, Uc. Joseph R. Weber is the Vice- President for all
three of these companies and authorized to sign on behalf of these companies. See next
response for further details.
4. Provide evidence that Joseph R. Weber is authorized to sign for Citygate Development,
LLC and 850 NWN, LLC and CO IT, LLC on Affidavit. Is he managing member of
Sunsetview Management Co., LLC?
4
Response: The Operating Agreement for Citygate Development, UC and 850 NWN,
LLC and CG II, LLC specifICally provide that officers of the companies may be named.
Joseph R. Weber has been properly named the Vice-President for all three companies
and has the authority to sign on behalf of these companies. See Attorney Affulavit
herewith and note that Joseph R. Weber signed the Developer Agreement on behalf of
850 NWN, LLC and CG II, LLC as their ~P.
Page 2 of 4
Revised 7/8/10
(
Agenda Item No, 178
Den~
DAVIDSON
ENGINEERING
.
5. Please e-mail Word draft of ordinance.
Response: An e-mail with the revised draft of the resolution in Wordformat was sent to
Assistant County Attorney Heidi Ashton-Cicio on July 8,2010.
The followinf comments were received. are informational and/or may include
stipulations: .
GENERAL COMMENTS: Kav Deselem
1. Additional comments or stipulations may be forthcoming once a complete application bas
been submitted for review.
Response: Understood. .
2. Please ensure that all members of your review team that may testify before the CCPC and the
BCC are registered as lobbyists pursuant to the county regulations regarding that issue.
Response: This has been accomplished.
3. When addressing review comments, please provide a cover letter outlining your responses
to each comment. Include a response to all comments. Please put revised dates on all
exlu'bits and in the title block of the Map H. Documents without revision dates and a "page .
x of y" notation on each page may be rejected. Plans without title block revision dates may
be rejected.
Response: This rover letter and all exhibits/plans comply with these requests.
4. Please provide electronic copies of the documents and exhibits (Word or jpg, as
appropriate).
Response: An electronic copy of the documents and exhibits is provided herewith. An e-
mail with a draft of the resolution in Word format was sent to Assistant County Attorney
Heidi Ashton-Cicko on July 8, 2010.
5. A partial resubmittal cannot be accepted; please do not resubmit until you can respond to
ALL review comments.
Response: Understood.
6. Please copy the Regional Planning Council with any resubmittal.
Response: Copies of this cover letter and all exhibits/plans will be provided to Dan
Trescott at the SWFRPC immediately foUowing the Neighborhood Information meeting.
.
Page 3 of4
Revised 7/8/10
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
Dem~
DAVIDSON
ENGINEERING
Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly @ 239-
434-6060 ext. 2969.
Sinc~W~' /'I. U, '
. ~ 1:111 UjlL-
WE!~~ruth
~Project Manager
cc: via e-mail:
Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Asst. County Attomey
Dan Trescott, SWFRPC
Applicant: 850 NWN, LLC, CG n, LLC & Citygate Development, LLC
Page 4 of4
Ftevised 7/8/10
'(
(
(
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 26 of 197
Roger B. Rice
Attorney at Law
9010 Strada Stell Court
Suite 207
Naples, Florida 34109
Phone: 239-593-1002 Facsimile: 239-593-1309
.
Jeffrey Klatzkow, Esq.
Office of the County Attorney
Harmon Turner Building
3301 East Tamiami Trail
Naples, Florida 34112
February 17, 2010
Re: Meeting on February 25,2010 at 3:00 in regard to City Gate
Commerce Center Development Order Amendment
Dear Jeff,
I have scheduled a meeting for February 25, 2010 at 3:00 pm at your
office. At this meeting, Don Pickworth, John Steinhauer and I would like to
discuss the impending application for an amendment to the City Gate DR!
DO to conform to the City Gate Federal Fish & Wildlife Permit.! The City,
Gate DR! DO paragraphs to be amended are in Section 4 entitled Vee-etation
and WildlifelWetlands, specifically paragraph c entitled Off.site Mitie-ation
and paragraph d entitled Red Cockaded Woodpecker Manae-ement Plan.
.
The City Gate Development Order was approved in 1988, and the
provisionS sought to be amended were formulated in a 1990 Development
Order Amendment (DOA). A subsequent DOA adopted in 2000 recognized
that mitigation and management strategies would evolve and change by
providing that before development could proceed in the areas of the DRl
designated as a temporary Red Cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) preserves, the
RCW management plan must be "refreshed". These changed mitigation and
management strategies are reflected in the City Gate Habitat Conservation
Plan (RCP) approved by and the City Gate Federal Fish & Wildlife Permit
issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in 2009. Accordingly,
City Gate must amend the DR! DO to reflect the latest listed species
mitigation strategies and management methods required by the HCP and
Permit.
J The Department ofthe Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Federal Fish and Wildlife Permit dated
July 1,2009 issued to CO II, LLC and 850 NWN, LLC is an Incidental Take Permit authorizing the take of
RCWas well as habitat ofRCW and Florida panther within the project issued pursuant to Section 10 ofthe
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.
Page 1 of3
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 27 of 197
.
February 17,2010
Letter to County Attorney Jeffery Klatzkow
Re: City Gate Commerce Park DR! DOA
(
The latest listed species mitigation strategies and management
methods were required by the U.s. FWS to be incorporated in the City Gate
HCP and the City Gate Federal Fish & Wildlife Permit. Predictably, the
current RCW mitigation strategies and management methods vary with the
now twenty year old RCW mitigation and management plan found in the City
Gate DR! D.O. This amendment sought will be to supplant these two
paragraphs in the DR! DO, as amended, with the mitigation and
management plans found in the City Gate HCP and Federal Fish & Wildlife
Permit.
The proposed DOA is also required by the County Growth
Management Plan, which provides in Policy 7.1.2 of the Conservation and
Coastal Management Element that
"[T]he County shall, consistent with applicable GMP
policies, consider and utilize recommendations ... from the
US Fish and Wildlife Service in iSSuing development
orders on, property containing listed species."
.
These latest listed species mitigation strategies and management
methods incorporated in the City Gate HCP have been reviewed and
unanimously approved by the County's Environmental Advisory Committee,
and have been lauded by the Florida Wildlife Federation.2 .
(
This amendment benefits the County as it removes a potential
impediment to the County's use of City Gate Blvd. North as a public corridor
roadway as contemplated in the recent City Gate Developer Agreement.s
This amendment will also benefit the County as the City Gate Federal Fish &
Wildlife Permit includes the over clearing into the designated temporary
preserve :areas by the County's contractor in the establishment of the raw
water transmission lines along City Gate's north boundary for the north well
field of the South Collier Regional Water Treatment Plant."
Amendment Process
The first point of analysis in any DOA is to determine whether it is a
substantial deviation. Florida Statute 380.06(19)(e) provides in subsection
.
2 See, Habitat Conservation Plans: A Creative Approach City Gate HCP, Florida Fish and Wildlife News;
Volume 23, Issue 3, August 3,2009.
3 See, City Gate Developer Agreement recorded in O.R. Book 4517, Page 640, et seq., of the Public
Records of Collier County, Florida.
4 See, Settlement Agreement and Release, dated November 15,2005, by and between Citygate
Development, LLC and CO II, LLC and Collier County and the Collier County Water-Sewer District,
recorded in O.R. Book 3965 Page 2813 et seq. of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida.
Page 2 of3
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Page 28 of 197
February 17,2010
Letter to County Attorney Jeffery Klatzkow
Re: City Gate Commerce Park DR! DOA
.
(2) that certain development order changes are not substantial deviations,
including subsection (h) which provides that:
Changes required to conform to permits approved by any
federal, state, or regional permitting agency, provided
that these changes do not create additional regional
impacts.
The Statute further provides that such a change is processed by an
application for DO amendment through the local government without the
necessity of filing for an NOPC with the Regional Planning Council (RPC).
The statutory language is as follows:
This subsection does not require the filing of a notice of proposed
change but shall require an application to the local government
to amend the development order in accordance with the local
government's procedures for amendment of a development order.
In accordance with the local government's procedures, including
requirements for notice to the applicant and the public, the local
government shall either deny the application for amendment or
adopt an amendment to the development order which approves
the application with or without conditions.
.
As you can see, this method of a DOA is different than the norm, where
the applicant files a Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) with the County and
Regional Planning Council. For that reason, Don, John and I would like to
meet with you to discuss the county's procedure to be followed and the
specific items that need to accompany the application.
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Very truly yours,
Roger B. Rice
RBR/laz
cc: John Steinhauer, Esq.
Donald Pickworth, Esq.
.
Page 3 of3
DeselemKay
From:
'4f
Subject:
Attachments:
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 29 of 197
Roger B Rice (rogerrice@earthlink.net]
Thursday, August 19, 20102:06 PM
ashton_h; DeselemKay
'Donald Pickworth'
City Gate DOA
DOC081910-004.pdf
Heidi,
Early last week I forwarded to you a copy of the City Gate Federal Permit, the City
Gate Habitat Conservation Plan, and the USFWS Biological Opinion on City Gate.
The majority of the City Gate Federal Permit conditions have already been
completed. My attached letter provides a current status of a~ the permit
conditions G (1)-(19). This ts addressed ih detail in the Time, Zer<;> Monitoring
Report (which was provided to.the County with the 2009 PUB Monitoring Report)
and the First Annual Monitoring Report (which will be provided to the County
with the 2010 PUD Monitoring Report).
ROGER B. RICE, ESQ.
.0 Strada Stell Court
~uite 207
Naples, Florida 34109
Phone: (239) 593-1002
Fax: (239) 593-1309
-e
1
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 30 of 197
Roger B. Rice
Attorney at Law
9010 Strada Stell Court
Suite 207
Naples, Florida 34109
Phone: 239-593-1002 Facsimile: 239-593-1309
c.
August 19, 2010
Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Esq.
Assistant County Attorney
Office of the County Attorney
Harmon Turner Building
3301 East Tamiami Trail
Naples, Florida 34112
Re: City Gate Commerce Park 2010 DOA Petition No. DOA-PL-2010-843
Dear Heidi,
On August 9, 2010, I sent you hard copies and digital copies of the City Gate
Federal Fish & Wildlife Permit, the City Gate Habitat Conservation Plan,
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Biological Opinion.
c.
The majority of the City Gate Federal Permit mitigation conditions G(1)-(19)
have already been completed, and funding has been secured for those
conditions yet to be completed. For your convenience, please see the Table
attached hereto regarding these permit conditions and their status.
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.
RBRIlaz
Enclosures (as stated)
cc: Kay Deselem, Principal Planner
Donald Pickworth. Esq.
c.
.
.
.
G1
City Gate Incidental Take Pennit Conditions and Status
August 18,2010
The Permittees shall acquire parcels totaling 86 acres of
suitable habitat for panthers and RCWs in the Picayune Strand
State Forest area before the start of ground clearing.
The Permittees shall restore the parcels acquired in the
Picayune Strand State Forest area before the start of ground
clearin2.
The Permittees shall donate to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
approved entity the parcels acquired in the Picayune Strand
State Forest area for perpetual conservation and management
within 2 years of permit issuance
The Permittees shall establish' a perpetual management
endowment for the Picayune Strand State Forest parcels in the
amount of $100,333. In that amount, an escrow account will
be established or . letter of credit will be posted within 90 days
of permit issuance ~d Will be assigned to a U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service approved entity within 2 years of pennit
issuance.
The Permittees shall restore through invasive plant control and
prescribed fire 324 acres in the Picayune Strand State Forest.
Initial treatment will occur before the start of ground clearing,
and final treatment will occur within 5 years of pennit
issuance. The period ending 5 years following permit issuance
shall be known as the off-site mitigation period.
G2
G3
G4
GS
G6
The Permittees shall establish five RCW recruitment clusters
within the restored Picayune Strand State Forest area before
the start of ground clearing. These recruitment clusters will be
maintained by annual inspection and replacement of dead or
destroyed cavity trees during the off-site mitigation period
G7
The Permittees shall translocate the female floater RCW on the
City Gate site to one of the RCW recruitment clusters
established in the Picayune Strand State Forest before the start
of ground clearing.
The Permittees shall translocate the young produced by the
RCW group on the City Gate site to created recruitment
clusters in the Picayune Strand State Forest for a period of five
(5) years after the initial translocation (which occurred in the
fall of 2005). This period shall be known as the on-site
mitigation period. The Permittees shall start the translocation
of subadult RCWs from the City Gate site to the recruitment
clusters established in the Picayune Strand State Forest before
the start of ground clearing. The final translocation will occur
by January 31, 2010. Individual on-site subadult RCWs may
be translocated with umelated subadult RCWs to a created
G8
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 31 of 197
Completed
Completed
Donation
Pending
$100,333
Escrow
Established
Assignment
Pending
Donation
Restoration
Completed
4 years
remaining of
annual
monitoring
Restoration
Completed
4 years
remaining of
annual
monitorin2
Completed
Completed
G9
GIO
Gll
G12
G13
G14
City Gate Incidental Take Permit Conditions and Status
August 18, 2010
recruitment cluster in the Picayune Strand State Forest, or
individual on-site subadult RCWs may be translocated to
single bird clusters in the Picayune Strand population of
RCWs, in the event that latter opportunity arises. In the event
of on-site breeder mortality more than three (3) years after the
initial translocation of on-site subadults but prior to completion
of the on-site mitigation period, the Permittees may then
translocate the remaininsz adults.
The Permittees shall start the translocation of three (3) pairs of
subadult RCWs in alternate years from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service RCW Southern Range Translocation
Cooperative (SRTC) to the recruitment clusters established in
the Picayune Strand State Forest before the start of ground
clearing. The second prospective translocations of three (3)
pairs of subadult RCWs from the SRTC is scheduled for
October 2009-January 2010 and the third and final
translocation of three (3) pairs of sub adult RCWs is scheduled
for October 2011-January, 2012.
The Permittees shall translocate the adult RCWs on the City
Gate site to recruitment clusters established in the Picayune
Strand State Forest by March 31. 2010. Once these adults have
been translocated. allan-site habitats required for their
maintenance may be removed as needed for development.
This will include the removal of all cavity trees and all
fo~iI1g habitat.
The Permittees shall acquire 16 acres of suitable habitat for
panthers and occupied by an RCW cluster in the North Belle
Meade area before the start of ground clearing
The Permittees shall restore the 16 acre parcel acquired in the
North Belle Meade area before the start of ground clearing and
maintain suitable roosting cavities for resident birds until
donation.
The Permittees shall donate to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
approved entity the parcel acquired in the North Belle Meade
area for perpetual conservation and management within 2 years
of permit issuance.
The Pennittees shall establish a perpetual management
endowment for the North Belle Meade parcel in the amOtmt of
$18,667. In that amount, an escrow account will be established
or letter of credit will be posted within 90 days of permit
issuance and will be assigned to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service approved entity within 2 years of permit issuance.
2
Agenda Item No, 178
November 9,2010
Page 32 of 197
c.
1st & 2nd
Translocation
of 3 pairs
suhadult
RCW
Completed
2007 & 2009
3rd & Final
Translocation
Scheduled
Fall 2010
Completed
c.
Completed
Completed
Donation
Pending
S18,667
Escrow
Established
Assignment
Pending
Donation
c.
.
.
--
GIS
GI6
G17
GIS
G19
City Gate Incidental Take Permit Conditions and Status
August 18t 2010
The Permittees shall provide grant funding for a wildlife
crossing study within the Panther Focus Area before the start
of 'und clearin .
The Permittees shall construct a panther-friendly wildlife
crossing with fencing on County Road 846 in Collier County,
Florida. The design and cost estimate will be Rrovided before
the start of ground clearing. Funds for the crossing and
fencing will be deposited in an escrow account or letter of
credit will be posted within 90 days of permit issuance. The
crossing and fencing will be installed and construction
co leted b A ri12011.
The Pennittees shall provide an initial mitigation and
monito . It before the start of und clearin .
The Permittees shaH provide. a monitoring report annually by
March 31 of each y~Jor 5 years following permit issuance.
This monitoring report will include ROW statust wildlife
crossing assessment and restoration results. The estimated
funds ($10,000) for an annual mitigation and monitoring report
will be deposited in an escrow account within 90 days of
permit issuance and released upon submittal of the finaJ
monitoring report. The final monitoring report will be
provided at least 8 months after final RCW translocation or 5
ears followi rmit issuance, which ever is later.
The Permittees shall follow the standard protection measures
for the eastern indigo snake during construction activities
within the Pro' ect area.
3
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 33 of 197
Completed
Construction
funds
escrowede
$10,000
Escrow '
Established
4 years
remaining of
annual
monitoring
Completed
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 34 of 197
CITY GATE DOA NARRATIVE
On December 13, 1988, the Board of County Commissioners adopted (1) Ordinance
No. 88-93, the City Gate Commerce Park Planned Unit Development (the "PUD") and (2)
Development Order 88-02 (the "1988 Development Order''), which approved a Development of
Regional Impact (DR!) known as Citygate Commerce Park. The Florida Department of
Community Affairs (DCA), appealed the 1988 Development Order) and the appeal was settled by
a Settlement Agreement between Collier County and DCA, which resulted in Development
Order 90-4. Development Order 90-4, approved as Resolution No. 90-431 dated August 28, 1990
(1990 DOA)) amended the 1988 Development Order by amending Section One: Conclusion of
Law, Section 4, Vegetation and Wild1ifelWetlands, including paragraphs c and d (which were
entitled "Off-Site Mitigation" and "Red Cockaded Woodpecker Management Plan",
respectively) of the 1988 Development Order. As a result, the provisions of the 1990 DOA are
the currently effective provisions relating to Red Cockaded Woodpecker Management and
mitigation. 850 NWN, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, and CG II) LLC, a Florida limited
liability company, (collectively "Petitioner'') own the PUD property east of the FPL Easement, and
in phmning the development of this property) entered into a formal consultation with the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). As a result) the Petitioner developed the City Gate
Habitat Conservation Plan (City Gate HCP)) which incorporates the latest Red-Cockaded
Woodpecker (RCW) management methods, and which was approved by the USFWS on March 30,
2009. On July 1) 2009) USFWS issued a Federal Fish &Wildlife Permit (City Gate Federal Permit)
which incorporates the most current RCW mitigation strategies.
c.
The RCW Management Plan and RCW mitigation strategy in the 1990 DOA vary
from the RCW management plan and mitigation strategy required by the City Gate HCP
and Federal Permit, and therefore, Petitioner has petitioned the Board to amend the 1990
DOA to conform the RCW Management Plan and mitigation strategy of the DRl
Development Order to the RCW management and mitigation requirements of the City Gate
HCP and Federal Permit respectively. These requested changes are required by the County
Growth Management Plan, which provides in Policy 7.1.2 of the Conservation and
Coastal Management Element that
c.
"[T]he County shall, consistent with applicable GMP policies,
consider and utilize recommendations ... from the US Fish and
Wildlife Service in issuing development orders on property
containing listed species."
Received/revised 8/19/10
Page 1 of 2 ( .
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 35 of 197
Upon the approval of this Petition and the adoption of a resolution amending ~e 1990
_. DOA, which will constitute the 2010 DOA, the operative RCW management and mitigation
requirements for the City Gate DRI/PUD will be the requirements of the 2010 DOA For
clarity and anminiRtrative efficiency, and in accordance with County policy, the RCW
management and mitigation requirements for the City Gate DRIlPUD should be the
requirements of the City Gate HCP and Federal Permit respectively which will be
incorporated into the 2010 DOA. Any actual or potential conflicts between the DRl and
PUD with respect to RCW management and mitigation requirements should be eliminated
by deleting all provisions regarding RCW management and mitigation from the PUD, so
that these requirements shall be only as set forth in the 2010 DOA.
This Petition is being processed pursuant to Section 380.06(19)(e)2, Florida
Statutes, which provides that certain enumerated changes to a DO are not substantial
deviations, and that a DO may be amended without the filing of a Notice of Proposed
Change (NOPC) and review of the proposed change by the regional planning council.
The replacement of the RCW management and mitigation requirements with the
requirements of the HCP and Federal Permit is an authorized change under Section
380.06(19)(e) which provides in subsection (2) that certain development order changes
are not substantial deviations, including subsection (h) which provides that:
Changes required to conform to permits approved by any
federal, state, or regional permitting agency, provided that
these changes do not create additional regional impacts.
.
The Statute further provides that such a change is processed by an application for
DO amendment through the local government without the necessity of filing for an
NOPC with the regional planning council. The statutory language is as follows:
This subsection does not require the filing of a notice of proposed
change but shall require an application to the local government to
amend the development order in accordance with the local
government's procedures for amendment of a development order.' In
accordance with the local government's procedures, including
requirements for notice to the applicant and the public, the local
government shall either deny the application for amendment or adopt
an amendment to the development order which approves the
application with or without conditions.
-- Received/revlsed 8/19/10
Page 2 of2
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 36 of 197
Roger B. Rice
Attorney at Law
9010 Strada Stell Court
Suite 207
Naples, Florida 34109
Phone: 239-593-1002 Facsimile: 239-593-1309
c.
Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Esq.
Assistant County Attorney
Office of the County Attorney
Harmon Turner Building
3301 East TAm;Rm; Trail
Naples, Florida 34112 .
August 18,2010
Re: City Gate Comme~ Park 2010 DOA; Petition No. DOA-PL-2010-843
Dear Heidi,
Initi.aIly, this petition provided for the amendment of paragraphs b, c and d of
Development Order 90-4, Resolution No. 90-431 dated August 28, 1990, Section One:
Conclusion of Law, Section 4, "Vegetation and WildlifelWetlands." Paragraphs c and
d are entitled "Off-Site Mitigation" and "Red Cockaded Woodpecker Management
Plan", respectively, and as you Tecall from our earlier discussion with you and Jeff,
are being modified to supplant the provisions of the 1990 DOA with the provisions
of the 2009 City Gate Habitat Conservation Plan and Federal Permit. Paragraph b
of the 1990 DOA contained the requirement to preserve 2.47 acres of wetlands.
c.
We acknowledged in the narrative provided at the time this Petition was filed
that the elimination of the wetlands may not be covered by the See. 380.086(19)(e)2
procedure [1.e. NOPC not required]. To date. we have been unable to clarify whether the
removal of some or all of these wetlands will be deemed to be procedurally permissible
as part of this application. Therefore, we have removed the request for the elimination
of these wetlands as part of this application. This has been accomplished by revising
the DOA application narrative and the proposed DCA resolution. Please find attached
hereto the revised narrative as well as the revised DOA resolution.
IT you have any questions or concerns in advance of our meeting tomorrow,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
~~
Roger B. Rice
RBRIlaz
cc: Kay Deselem, Principal Planner
Donald Pickworth, Esq.
(.
.
.
-e
. \
.
.
Agenda It~m No. 176
Novern~r 9,2010
Page 37 of 197
I
DEVELOPMENT ORDER 90- 4
RESOLUTION 90- 431
DEVELOPMENT ORDER AND RESOLUTION OF THE'
BOARD OF COUNTY COMHISSIONERS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, FOR THE CI'1'YGATE
COHHERCE PARK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,
AMENDING DEVELOPMENT ORDER 88-2,
RESOLUTION 88-309, PURSUANT '1'0 THE TERMS
OJ' A STIPULATED SE'l"J.'LEMEN1' AGREEMEN'l'
BE'l'WEEH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
APFAIU, SOU'l'HWEST FLORIDA :REGIONAL
PLANNING COtJNCIL AND CITIZENS AND
SOUTHERN TRUST COMPANY, LOCATED IN
SBC'l'ION 35, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST, COLLIER COtJNTY, FLORIDA.
" .~
.."
1
.
,',
WHEREAS, on December 13, 1988, the Board of County
com:m.issioners, at an open public hearing in accordance with
Sectio~ 380.06, Florida statutes, considered the application
for Development of Reqional Impact for cityqate C01IlJIIerce Park
submitted by Vines and Associates, 'Agent for citizens and
Southern Trust Company (Florida) N.A. as Trustee under Land
Trust #5360; the report and recommendations of the Southwest
Florida Reqional Planning Council (SWFRPC); the certified
record of the dOCU1llentary and oral evidence presented to the
collier County Planning commission; the report and
recommendations of the Collier County Planning commission;
the reCODl1llendations of Collier county Staff and Advisory
Boards; and the comments upon the record made before this
Board of county commissioners at said meeting, and did
approve Development Order 88-2 by Resolution 88-309; and
WHEREAS, on February 3, 1989, DCA appealed the Collier
County Development Order for the citygate Commerce Park
Planned Unit Development pursuant to Section 380.07, Florida
statutes (1987); and
WHEREAS, the parties have negotiated and reached'
agreement as to specific revisions of the Development Order
whiCh, if adopted, resolve the issues raised in the DCA
appeal Petition. The specific revisions are set forth in
Words underlined are additions; Words s~r~ek-~hre~~h are deletions.
-1-
---~_"'::--"'~I;A,"--"""~'''_'''''''''_f.__'_'''__N''''-:''';'.''--~--...a:r.~...._~'~"",,-~~_~
~'-_."'"
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 38 of 197
. "
o
rkvdpf'~~
COLUER COUNTY COURTHOUSE COMPLEX
NAPLES, FLORIDA 33962-4977
ANNE GOODNIGHT
ca.tM1SSlONEJl
RICHARD S. SHANAHAN
COMMISSIONER
MAX A. HASSE..JR. ( .
COIollMISSlONl!R
BURT L. SAUNOERS
COI6lISSlCNER
MICHAEL J. VOLPE
COMloIlSSlONEA
JAMES C. GILES
ClERK
August 30, 1990
Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council
Attention: Mr. Dan Trescott
4980 Bayline Drive, 4th Floor
P.o. Box 3455
North Fort Myers, Florida 33917-3909
I~~
s.~. FLGR1)A REGIONAL
PLANNING COUi~CIl
Dear Mr. Trescott:
Enclosed is a certif~ed copy of Resolution 90-431/Development
Order 90-4, for the Citygate Commerce Park Planned Unit Development,
amending Development Order 88-2, adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Naples, Florida, during Regular
Session, on August 28, 1990.
Very truly yours,
3AMES C. GILES, CLERK
C5(~~
Louise Chesonis, Deputy Clerk
Encl.
LO
...-._.........._""",..-.__... .... ..........
______I4:lo-.-_.........~-...o-=~..'"""""._~_......_.......~~..._~__
~: -.;..~--~~---~-
c.
(.
-.
this alIIendment to the Development order; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 380.031, Florida statutes,
the DCA has the authority to enter into agreements which
effectuate the intent and provisions of Section 380.06 of the
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 39 of 197
. .
'.
, ~
Florida statutes; and _ .-:-1""
, .01
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 186.505, Florida statutes,
..
the SWFRPC has the authority to enter into agreements which
effectuate the intent and provisions of Section 380.06 of the
Florida statutes.
HOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and
conditions set forth hereafter, and the full, complete, and
final settlement of all claims raised, or arising out of
claims raised'i'n DOAH and Case No. 89-1841 DRl:, the Board o~
County COJIlIlissione;os o~ Collier county does hereby approve
the following amendments to Development Order No. 88-2,
City-qate C01IIJRerce Park and effectuated by Res.olution No.
88-309:
SECTION ONE: Conclusion of Law, Section 4, Vegetation and
wildlife Wetlands, is hereby amended as
follows:
.
4.
VEGETATION AND WJ:LDLXFE/WETLAHDS:
a. Golden Polypody Ferns and Butterfly orchids shall
be relocated to appropriate protected areas
on-site.
b. T.be 2.47 acres of wetlands preserve shown on the
approved Haster Development plan shall be
preserved.
e~ Pr~e~-~e-~ss~aftee-eE-eeftS~e~ieft-perm~~s-fe~-aft
app~eved-deveiepmeft~phase-ef~~e-ei~y~a~e-p~e;ee~,
a-Re4-eeeka4e4-Woe4peeke~-fRewT-s~ey-~~iiiein,
'p~evie~siy-app~eve4__e~e4eietr-viii-Be-eeft4~e~e4
~e-in~e-~a~-Rews-ftave-no~-es~l!lbiisftea-ftes~
el!lvi~ies-ift-~e-aeveiepaen~-a~ea~--~e-s~ey-sftaii
ee~-v~~in-69-aars-eE-~e-s~I!l~~-ef-eons~~~~~en,
afta-~!-~~-is-ae~erminea-~a~-Rew-ne9~-el!lv~~ie9-ftaVe
Been-es~aBiishea-ift-~e-eefts~~~ien-areaT
ae~erminl!l~ien-9ftaii-Be-made-br-~e-a~eneies
~espensibie-fo~-Rew-p~o~eeeien-iaws-as-~e-~e
fteeess~~y-e!-.e4~fY~ft~-~fte-ReW-Hafta~emen~-Pian.
~ Off-Site Mitiaation
~ Develonment of the nro;ect area located west
of the Dowerline easement mav commence
immediatelY. toaether with the two narcels
--
Words underlined are additions; Words s~ek-~hre~~h are deletions.
-2-
'.~--....
_---=----I..____.____~_fw>U~_..,~ .~ .
s:.:ta.IOW-.-...........,...~~.
east or the Dowerline easI!!>_nt necessarY to
p~~vid; t:~ori'!-~i wast.ewater t.reat:Jlent. and
~iBDO&al faci 1.~_8A and st.orJIlWater JUmaaement
f~;-;h;~;; w-=t, o~ - the DOWSrU.ne easement.
Th~ ;~ea -;';-st: ;;i the nowerline easement. shall
n~';; ;;c;ed t;elve (12\ acres in total and
~h;ll b; in the. aDnroximate locat.ions shown on
i;hibit. nAn. The eiaht (8\ acres more or less
to be utilized for wat.er manaaement DUmoses
~ilinot reauire massive clearina and a
mgj~ritv ~i the mat.ure trees (8"+ diameterl
wiii b; ';intained until _itiaation is
p;~ided for said nronert.v. . These acres east.,
~f th; ~o;;;line easeaent beina ut.ilized shall
~ ;-itiaat.ed with the firat release of
addit.i;;;;;i ;~;;ae aouaht hereunder. Prior to
~; i~suance o~ congtruction nermits for
d;;velomftent of any of the nroiect areas
iocat;d east of the Dowerline easement. exceDt
;s set f;;rth 8bove. _i tiaat.ion for the imDacts
~ on-s! te Red cockaded Wocdneckers and their
habitat shall occur as set forth herein.
Southwest Florida Reaional Plannina Council
CSWFRPC\ is currentlY cont.e1IlDla~ina the
establishment of a Reaional Mit1aation plan
for the off-site mitiaation of imnacts to Red
CoCkad~ WoodDeCkers and other listed SDecies.
If the Southwest Florida Reaional Plannina
council adODts such a Reaional Mitiaation Plan
which mitiaates the' imDacts of the Red
Cockaded WoodDecker off-site and is acceDted
bv DCA durina the nendencv of this DeveloDment
order. ADDlicant mav. at its sole oDtion.
choose to Dart.iciDat.e in said reaional
mitia8tion DIan as to anv acres unmitiaated as
an alternative to furthermitiaation under
this Sedion. Further. in the event that Red
Cockaded Woodneckers are removed from the list
of Drotected snecies of the state of Florida
durina the nendencv of this DevelOD1llent order.
ADDlicant shall have no furt.her'obliaation
from 8nd 8fter th8t time. for mitiaation of
imDacts t.o said snecies.
~ The on-site and off-site mitiaation for the
Red cockaded WOodDeckers and,their foraaincr
habitat is as follows:
La..
ilo.. There are an aareed UDen 198 acres of
suitable Red Cockaded WoodDecker foraaincr
habitat on site (see Exhibit "Bn\ and the
AD~licant's off-site mitiaation shall be
limited to an acre for acre Dhased
Off-site purchase and convevanceof
mitiaation DrODertv or Davment of money
as set forth herein.
1il The ADplicant shall acauire and
convey on an acre for acre basis.
suitable Red Cockaded WoodDecker
habitat. sub;ect to conditions and
criteria stated in Daragraph 5.1'1.
throuah s.t. Suitable habitat shall
be determined bv the DeDartment of
Community Affairs with
recommendations bv the Florida Game
and Fresh Water Fish Commission.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 40 of 197
)
i.
c.
.' '. ~
c.
Words underlined are additions; Words s~~ek-~ftre~~h are deletions.
c.
-3-
~,.___""",_~_^,....._...._.......__,-,,.,.,.-.-....._.~.-..-.~~~v _~_'
:'.
.
--
. .
1i1l AS an alternative to the Applicant's
direct acauisition of miticration
property as -set forth herein. the
ADDlioant shall have the alternative
of ~avina for the acauisition of Red
Cockaded WoodDecker habitat on a
Dhased basisnursuant to ,this
oaraerraDb .In the event Southwes1: ,.,
Florida Regional Planning Council. !
other-crovermaental acrencv. state or
national conservation orcranization
identifies and obtains or has the
right to ,obtain' a large contiauous
acreacre for wildlife Droteotion and
manacrement and which meets the
criteria set forth herein. ADDlicant
shall have the alternative (on a
Dhased basis as set forth herein. or
U1:lon : a.-sinale DaYment basis) to Dav
to said aaency or oraanization for
its reauired mitiaation. The amount
of said ~aYment shall be eaual to
the number of acres beincr mitiaated
multi1:l1ied bv the cost of the land
on a l:Ier'acre basis.
. ~ ..
Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
c01IIJ\\ission will actively and
expeditiouslv assist in the location
ofmiti9ation DrODertv which meets
the criteria . set forth herein. Said
DrODertv shall not be immediatelY
ad1acent todevelol:lment areas or in
areas S1:lecified in local aovernment
comcrehensiveDlans for urban
develoument. said l:IroDerties shall
be within the Southwest Florida
Reaiimal Plannina Council area. but
need not be within Collier County.
:If Daraerral:lh 3.a. (i) is utilized. the DroDertv
shall be conveYed to the entity witb
resDOnsibilitv for the manacred area. The
DrOl:lertv shall be l:Ireserved in pert:letuitv in
its l:Iredominantlv natural and existincr
condition with a1:lDrODriatemanacrement to
insure the continued existence of suitable Red
CockadedWoodDecker habitat. Conveyance may
occur in Phases as set forth herein. Prior to
the, conveyance of, any Dropertv. the Dronertv
shall be deemed acceDtable by the DeDartment
of Community Affairs. who may seek the advice
of a1:lDrODriate environmental agencies as to
the acceDtabilitv of the DroDertv in auestion.
~ The Dhased miticration aDDroach for the
Dro,ect's imDacts on Red Cockaded Woodl:leckers
and Red Cockaded Woodoecker habitat is
acceDtable. subieat to the followin9
conditions and criteria:
.L.
A.:. All the miticration DroDertv shall be
contiauous and there shall be an
accel:ltable method for the Dhased
aCCJUisition of the nrODerty. AcceDtable
method shall mean a lecrallv enforceable
riaht to obtain the nrODerty bv the
aPDlicant on a l:Ihased basis.
Words underlined are additions; Words s~~ek-~hreugft are deletions.
-4-
~-!,lI_~....~
~-~~~'I;.W.""""""::-'
""""l'''-'L:.~.'':';'=--~~~J
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 41 of 197
..b
.hs.
At the time of the a'l)nT'DVllI or the
;1 tiaati~n pronertv. Red ~ocltaded
Wo~~e~s shall be nAStinCl or foraaina
on the ;i tiaation ~O!)Artv. or the
Rro~ will be otherwise deemed
acceptable bv DCA.
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
fage 42 of 197
s...
~e mitiaation pronerty shall be
I;;;edlately adiacent to or in close ".;
p;;;xi;i~;.to exist.1na lands owned or - ~
:;';;;;~;d :bv a'DQ~1ic aClencv or awned or
;;;;;;;;S ~ a conservation oraanization
~; ~e ;;~o~ection or wildlife. or within
a;; ~~a deslanat&4for nublic pcauisition
;; rildlife habitat for which nubHe '
rundina has nothae.n committed.
The mitiaation nroDertv shall be deeded
to the enti tv ownincr the ccntiauous or
~;;-~ent wlld1ifehabitat or to another
;;;:tit; anDroved. bv DCA and the Southwest
Ff~;i: ~::~~~ Plannina council and
w _1 __ ____ ___tricted for preservation
in Dereetuitv as a wildlife habitat.
.~
c.
sL:.
b
Conveyances or Davments shall be for at
least 25 acre increments. whereU'Don a
ccrrespondina amount of suitable Red
COCkaded Woodoecker habitat east of the
~oweriine eaAl!dftent in the respective
Phas; shall be released for develooment
pu~~ses. No releases'shall occur within
phase Two until all suitable Red cockaded
Wood'08ckar habitat within Phase One has
be;n released. DevelomBent of unsuitable
Red Cockaded Woodnecker habitat lands may
occur simultaneouslY with develomaent of
ad;oinina released Red Cockaded
wo~~~~;r habitat wi thin each reS'08cti ve
Ph_s_. No releases shall occur within
Phase Three (staae :en until the
reauirelllents of -oaraaraph 6 hereof have
been met. Phase Three (staae n\ shall
be the Red Cockaded WoodDecker preserve
as the same may be modified fr01ll time to
time as provided herein. The Phases are
deDicted on Exhihit "A- attached hereto.
In the event that the Red Cockaded
Woodneckers totallY abandon the citvaate
sit; for a Dariod of two Years. applicant
aarees to totallY mitiaate its,imoacts _by
ac~irinCl the remainder of the mitiaation
prooertv pursuant to this aareement at
that time. Uoon acauisition- of the
remainder of the mitiaation property. the
entire remainder o~ the Droiect.
including the 72 acre Dreserve area. will
be available for develomnent. In the
event that one of the two pureorted
colonies abandons the site for a Deriod
of two Years. aDDlicant aarees to have a
aualified biologist re-analvze the
habitat use patterns and needs of the
remainina colony usina a methodoloav
reasonablY acceptable to the Game and
Freshwater Fish c01IIlIIission. That portion
of the 72 acres outside this area sha1\
be released for develooment upon
acauisition of an eaual acreaae of
mitiaation prooertv.
c.
L.
Words underlined are additions; Words s~r~ek-~e~~h are deletions.
-5-
c.
.~~....~_,....._..~__"oJ~":"'__'~~-=
.
'0
".
.
!L.
-e
h'
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
east Page 43 of 197
There are two staaes to the off-site
mitiaation DrOoraD. staae I (Phase I & II
of powerl!ne containina a total of
approximatelY 168 acresl contains 129.5 acres
of suitable Red CoCkaded WoodDecker habitat
located east of the Dowerl!ne easement but
outside of the Red Cockaded Woodpecker
nraserve boundarY. and. Staae II constitutes
the 72 acres within the RedCockaded f' ('
Woodnecker nreserve boundarv - (68. 5 acres 0 ,
suitable'Red,CockadecS Woodpecker habitat)
shown on Man H attached, to this Develonment
Order. Nooff-site mitiaation shall be
allowed for 'or develonment occur within staae
II until and unless~ all Red Cockaded
Woodneckers have abandoned all cavitv trees on
site for two vears or more as demonstrated by
the annual 'surveYS snec!fied herein except as
'nrovided in ,ParaarBPh 5.f. hereof.
,.;I
The reauirements for off-s~te mitiaation are
in addition to anv reauirements of the
citvaate Red Cockaded Woodpecker Manaaement
Plan described below.
Prior to issuance of construction,nermits for
roads. water and sewer for an a1;lProved
develotmlent-Phase of the Citvcrate project. a
Red CoCkaded Woodpecker (RCWl survey
utilizinq Drevion.'vaDDroved methodoloav will
be conducted to insure' that Rew's have not
established nest cavities in the develOPment
area. The sUrVev shall occur within 60 davs
ofthe startof:develoDJRent activities. and if
it is determined thatRCW nest cavities have
been established in the construction area.
anpronriat:e modifications shall be made to the
RCW Marll~aement Plan.
Red Cockaded Woodcecker Manaaement Plan.
L.
.!L..
dT~ Annual RCW surveys, utilizing the previously
approved methodology, will be undertaken until
5 five yearjl after final build-out of the
Citygate project, with results of the annual
RCW surveys to be reported to Game and Fish
Commission (GFC), u.s. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), SWFRPC, and Collier County
within 30 days of survey completion.
eT~ ProPosals to modify the Cityqate ROW
Management Plan, inCOrPorated herein bv
reference. may be submitted at any time. Such
proposals shall be supported by a current
survey of on-site Rqw nesting and foraging
patterns, and such additional information as
is required to evaluate the proposed
Management Plan modification. Upon
determination throuah the annual ROW survevs
that the on-site colonies in any area sought
to be removed frolll the RCW preserve have been
abandoned ~ at least two vears. and 8fty
re~ired off-site mitigation is beinq
concurrentl~ provided, appropriate
modification to the ROW Management Plan shall
be approved and shall not be considered a
substantial deviation since the impacts
thereof are beina rnitiaated concurrent
therewith.
Words underlined are additions; Words ~~~~ek-~~re~~~ are deletions.
-6-
--"-~~""_"--..r.o~~__~""'~_'-"",""",""",~~_I ."....:... 'II Jl '~_""-"___'110110.:~~~
. ,
. .
I .
!T2L Kelaleuca and other exotic vegetation within
the RCW preserve area and elsewhere on the
cityqate site will be eradicated ~
aD'Oroval of the l)rol)osedr~V81 bv the
FGl"WPC ~. thus significantly enhancinq the
quaiity of RCW forage area on site.
9T.L. Excessive u.nderqrowth will be controlled by
burning and/ or by uSe of aechanical equipmenT--
if determined bv the PCPWPC to not: otherwise,
confliCt with the 'l)rotection ,of the RCW
habitat ort site.
hT2.s. Pine trees having a Diameter Breast Height
(DSH) )of 8' or more, located outside the RCW
preserVe (Phase Ul:). but w~ thin the required
yard and bUffer areas J.n the remainder of the
site, will be conserVed to provide additional
RCW forage areas., East of the FP&L easement
in the vicinity of the RCW preserve area.
identi.fied on the Master plan the mini1llWl
parcel sizes are to be 2 acres; lIlinimuJII yard
requir81llents lU:'e. front 50' ~ rear 50' ~ side
25'; not 1IIOre than 20' of these required yards
may be devoted to vehicular drives and parking
spaces; at least 30' of each development site
1IIUst' be devoted to natural and/or installed
landscape areas.
iT Joaftu-vi~ift-~e-Rew-p1"esel!'Ve-a1"ea-Jllay-be
~~isieea-!er-siai~e4-reerea~ieftlls-p~eees
s~eh-as-va%kways7-;~ift9-~ai:S7-pieftie
iaei%i~ieS7-e~eT;-s&-ieft9-as-ai.~~Bllftee-~e
fta~ive-Vege~a~ieft-is-.iftima%-aft4-~e
reerea~iefta:-ae~ivi~ies-ave~-~e-Rew-ftes~
~eeST
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 44 of 197
.~
c.
;T Bftaer,reafta-u~i:i~ies-aft4~.~faee-draifta,e
swaies-may-eress-~e-Rew-preserve-areaT
.L. Unreleased lands within stage I and stage II
may be utilized for limited recreational
purposes such as walkways, joggi.ng trails, and
other passive recreational facilities, so long
as disturbance of native vegetation is minimal
and the activities avoid an area encompassing
a 200 foot radius around each nest tree.
Unc1erqround utilities and surface drainage
swales JDaY cross the unreleased lands wi thin
stage i provided that they are insta1led
outside of an area constituting a 200' radius
arounQ each active nest tree and are designed
to have mini.Jllal impact. Underground utilities
and surface drainage swales JDaY cross the
unreleased lands within stage II provided that
they are installed outside of an area
constituting a 200' radius around each active
nest tree, are designed to have a minimal
impact, and further provided that surface
drainage swale locations be approved by the
Department of community Affairs. It is
understood there 1IlaY be a reduction in
foraging trees within the unreleased area as a
result of these activities, but the same shall
be minimized to the maximum extent
practicable.
c.
-7-
c.
Words underlined are additions; Words s~r~ek-~e~9h are deletions.
__lolIol....,...U~
".
.
--
I~ ~
I.. ·
. .
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 45 of 197
k...z.... The preserve area shall be posted with signs
which indicate that it is an RCW preserve and
tha~ disturbance of the birds is prohibited
and unlaWful.
Wheft-a-~~~efta~-mi~iga~~eft-p~aft-ie-epp~eve~
afta-iap:~eea-~e-app:ieafteLs-p%an-sha~%-~e
s~~ee~-~e-~e-p~evisieft5-~eree!T
JIlT.L., All of the commitments made by the APPlican~,,;'"
either in the Cityqa~e ADA or in Sufficiency
dOCUJlents, not in conflict with the above
requiremen~s, saaii-be ~ incorporated as
conditions Ee~-4eYeiepmeft~-e~ae~-app~evai gt
this DeveloDlllen~ Order.
i..
. ~
SECTION TWO: Tha~ Section 3, paqe 12 is hereby amended by
addinq a termination date as follows:
3 . This Developmen~ Order shall remain in effect
for the duration of the project. However, in
the event tha~ siqnificant physical
developlllen~ has not CClDlDIenced within five (5)
years from the date ot tinal approval of the
Developllent Order, devel.opment approval will.
terminate and this devel.opment order shall no
longer be effective. For purposes of this
requirement "siqnificant physical. development"
does not include roads, drainaqe or
landscapinq but does include construction of
buildinqs or installation of utilities and
facilities such as sewer and water lines.
This time periOd may be extended by the Board
of county Co1lImissioners.upon request by the
Developer in the event that uncontrollable
circumstances delay the commencement of
development. This Develo'D1llent Order shall
terminate on December 31. 2007.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County
commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 28th day of
August
, 1990.
"
:-==-_..!',lA 1111 .
. ~'frES'1': O.:O~.
.:iTAHES c.. G~, CLERK
f:, ..'" '.r~",:e.
~~~ .~ " .:. \ ~ ~.(.
~.. ~ . ....t \' :~
':."~p' OVED'.~:~'F RM AND
SUFF'Ic:::tENCY :
, .'Pl '. ....' .:\';) "
, ,Q4 '1.""~~ ,-
'~.:.) ...:,.."'7)1. ~
HARJ~ H. STODEN'f
AssrSYAiT COUNTY ATTORNEY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
::~a~~
A. HASSE," JR., CHAI
l. James C. ClltI. Clertt at Courts Ill,. <flIr"~' ~ lfo
IIereIIy cctIlfy lllal ltl<. -'>awe lnsttIImef!I.-l,$ ~:~. ~~~ .
allhe 0tlciM "hlCOJ Is on.111e III .w,.~.JIl:~'~:, ".'
...~ Colli.. Coun\)', FlDrid8 ,}'~. ',7 ';'\'~;i';,: ,<,':, :.;... - Ii /'-:
unde!'myhanllMd..., - ~. "' ,~.flI;':'''~: '..:;':
~ 1;t:;. ). ;-";'~" ,:"~',.: ~ :
:r~..d. 1'" "..-.. # t -.' ~'."O:'.' -
JAUisc.~~: . "-:-~.:,:,::}Y~?: ,:
DOA-90-2 RESOLUTION
md
.... ~. ..' O$U\)' Cltrlo
'~
Words underlined are additions; Words 9~raek-~reu~h are deletions.
-8-
.....---~ ---'--"~---.lol."'._'''''.........-:.r..~;<..~oltoV_.~.._.. ~. 1 .......~.""'"~~.....~._.~.
e
DAVIDSON
ENGINEERING
TRANSMITT AL
TO:
.PROM:
Tocia Hamlin for Josh Froth
Dan Trescott
COMPANY:
Southwest Florida Regional
Planning Council
ADDRESS:
PO Box 3455
N. Ft. Myers, FL 33918-3455
(Via Reg. Mail)
DATE:
JULY 14,2010
PHONE NUMBER.:
(239) 338-2550 Ext. 220
REi:
YOUR REFERENCE NUMBER.:
City Gate 'Commerce Park
Development Order 88-02
Collier County, FL
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 46 of 197
[8] A IT ACHED 0 FOR REVIEW 0 PLEASE COMMENT 0 PLEASE REPLY 0 PLEASE RECYCLE
Dan:
Attached for your records are copies of the PUDA and DOA submittals made to Collier
County. There have been two (2) submittals made for each application.
Should you have any questions, please contact Josh Froth in our office @ 239-434-6060
ext.2969.
Thanks
Cc Via Email: Roger Rice, City Gate Development, LLC
850 NWN, LLC
Kay Deselem, Collier County Growth Management Division
Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Assistant County Attorney
Don Pickworth. P.A.
3530 Kraft Road, Suite 301 . Naples, Florida 34105 . Phone: 239.434.6060 . Fax: 239.434.6084
www.davidsonenaineerina.com
Davidson Engineering, Inc.
c.
c.
c.
~:r County Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
: Page 47 of 197
-- ......... ""'"
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
~.COlUERGOV.NE1 (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968
,
DeVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMP ACT
PRE-APPLICATION MEETING NOTES
o Application for Development Approval (DRl)
o ~ of Proposed Change (NOPC) (DRI Amenelmen! DOA)
Other DRf Development Order Amendment (DOA)
~'O-8D (
! L. . PL#~
Date. i. d9, 10 n_ /.:t S Firm:~V lDS;;O"-L ~,~,~ ~,. ,,_
PROJECT NAM~ C./+~ G-t-n;. DI<c
Applicant Name: -=rO~ ~ J::Lt~1--\ LH..l Phone: tI?It -fc,O{,{)
Owner Name: Phone:
Owner Address: City: Stcde: _ ZIP:
If an amendment, State Development Order Number:
DRI name C-liY hATG Local Resolution Numben R.o<..q u..t-rA1l . ,;)C())-15l
~ignedPIOnner~~alV\ IqBB Dl2.I
eeting Attendees: (attach Sign In Sheet)
l Meeting Notes 1
~~~G:~ ~
.i-to\J'\~ ~~ <2f ~~(n.'~cl'ft~~Il\"'-'+ ~o..A c
-~~. SJo '~~ J7k , .
\7 TV,) , r 0IYy\ ""WI:: ~ ^" <-I c .-1./ dpf , ;"/ .cr D,>., ~ v ~ t;;;
. ~ V;~~ ~ OfZt 10 (' . <-I- -J- d..W/".Jr'"
~ .
DOA-Pl201o-B43 REV:1
CITY GATE COMMERCE CENTER PHASES
ONE, TWO, AND THREE
DA TE: 5/7/10
DUE: 6/7/10
-- -1-
:3:\Current\DESELEM\DRI petitions\City Gate\Pre-app form 4-28-10.docx
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW .--.
WWW.COLUERGOV.NET
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 48 of 197
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968
(
c.
SUBMIIIAL REQUlR~ (refer to application for additional requirements)
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMP ACT
DRI, DOA
SUBMITTAL CHECKLtST
THIS COMPLETED CHECKUST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPUCATlON PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER lISTED BELOW W/COVER
SHEETS AnAQ(ED TO EACH SECTION.
NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBln ALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
#OF NOT
REQUIREMENTS COPlES REQUIRED REQUIRED
1 V
~ V-
"........
3
2
2
3
2
../
c.
3 /
4 V
5 v....-:
3
5 V
3 v-:
-'--
~ Copy of submittal package must be forwarded to Robi!1 SUl~r, PlaMing Director, City of Naples
tfOTES FOR INTAKEIROUTING: PROVIDE COPIes TO THE FOllOWING STAFF MEMBERS:
-2-
(
G:\Current\DESELEM\DRI petitions\City Gate\Pre-app form 4-28-1 a.docx
eo1re-r County
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 49 of 197
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
/~.COLLlERGOV.NET
FIEsz AppllcatJon Fee.
181
181
f8I
[81
o
o
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE'
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252.2400 FAX (239) 643-6968
o
o
o
$10,000DRI Review (In addition to cost of Rezone) pus $25.00 acre (or fraction thereof).
$2,250.00 Comprehensive PIon Consistency Review (applies to DRI only)
$6,000 DRI/DOA Amendment Development Order plus $25.00 acre (or fraction thereof) 'the acreage charge does not
apply for amendments which only change the build-out date of the DO for a time period of less than flve years.
$150.00 Fire Review Fee
($500.00) Pre--application credit (Applications submiHed 9 months or more after the date of the last pre-app meeting
shan not be credited towards application fees and a new pre-application meeting will be required.
$925.00 Legal Advertising Fee for CCPC meeting (to be recondled upon receipt of Invoice from Naples News).
$500.00 legal Advertising Fee for BCe meeting
$2,500.00 EnVlronmentallmpad 'Statement review fee .
Property Owner Notification fees. .Property oWner Notifications $1.50 Non-cerfiliecl; $3.00 Certilied return receipf mail
( to be paid after receipt of invoice from Dept. of Zoning & Development Review)
Transportation Fees, If requirecL (submit separate checlc for Transportation Fees)
o $500.00 Methodology Review Fee, if required
o $750.00 Minor Study Review Fee, if required
o $1,500.00 Major Study Review Fee, if required
.
--
-3-
G:\Current\DESElEM\DRI petitions\City Gate\Pre-app form 4-28-10.docx
COWER COUNTY ZONING DEPARTMENT
REQUEST FOR MEETINGS
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 50 of 19?
. - "REASON FOR MEETlNG (check one)
c.
m Pre-Application Meeting
o Telephone Consultation for SOP, SIP Insubstantial Changes
CI Telephone Consultation for ICP Insubstantial Change
o One-On-One Sufficiency Review Meeting
*indlcates required field
YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION
NAME:. Tocia REPRESENTING:. City Gate
PHONE' 434-6060 EMAll: tocia@davidsonengineering.com
. -
liFE OF APPUCATION:. DRI Amend~ent
PROPERTY INFORMATION
FOLIO NUMBER;- 00292280007
ZONING OR PUD NAME (you must supply original PUD name):. City Gate Commerce Park 88-93
STREET ADDRESSOR LOCATION:. comer of CR 951 and City Gate Blvd.
SDP/SIP# (required for Insubstantial change):
CITY: ZIP:
DETAilED DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED WORK:.
~eIow for detailed description
Additional Information
For Pre-Application Meeting, please bring the following items:
. Signed and Verified Addressing checklist (allow 3 days for processing)
. $500 pre-Application Meeting Fee
. $75 Fire Review Pre-App Fee
c.
For ADDlication SUbmittal Review:
. Submittal Checklist must be attached to the application package
. All items in the package must be submitted in the exact order of the checklist
. Cover page must be attached to each group of items
We will contact you with the scheduled time and person you will be meeting with.
Amendment to the City Gate DRI DO to confonn to the City Gate Habitat Conservation Plan and the
City Gate Federal Fish & Wildlife Pennit. The amendment is to the City Gate DRI DO 90-4 [Collier
County Resolution # 90-431], Section 4 entitled Vegetation and WildlifelWetlands, in particular
paragraph c entitled Off-site Mitigation and paragraph d entitled Red Cockaded Woodpecker
Management Plan. On April 5. 2010, Don Pickworth, John Steinhauer and Roger Rice met with
Nick Casalanguida, Susan Mason, Kay Deselem and Bill Lorenz regarding the amendments.
c.
DeselemKay
Subject:
LocatIon%
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Page 51 of 197
Pre-app PUDA, Tocia Hamlin, applicant; Kay Deselem (ext 2931), planner
Conference Room C
..
Wed 4/28/20101:15 PM
Wed 4/2812010 2:15 PM
Recurrence:
(none)
Accepted
CDS-C
DeselemKay; Darcochristopher. Tocia Hamlin; ashton_h; AuclairClaudine; beard_t.
BuchheitDavid; CallisCraig; chrzanowskLs; GreeneMichael; jarrellJ>; longo_r. PauloMartins;
PodczerwinskyJohn; RussoAnthony; wiley-r. WilliamsSteven
RamirezHeather
Meeting Status:
Organizer:
Required Attendees:
Optional Attendees:
When: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 1:15 PM-2:15 PM (GMT-D5:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).
Where: Conference Room C
Note: The GMT offset above does not reflect daylight saving time adjustmel')ts.
*-*-*-.-*-*-*-*~*~.
Pl2010-G82
Please see attachment for pre-app details.
.~ ~
PL201D-682.pdf DR! Amendment
Pre-app App sub...
Under Florida Law. e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want )'our e-mail address released in response 10 a public records request, do not send
electronic mail to this entity, Instead. contact this office by lelephone or in writing_
-e
1
Agenda Item No. 1?B
November 9,2010
Page 52 of 19~
NOTES'
(.
c.
c.
-
'. Q)
c:
->
C) 0
s:: 12>
0 =
(J) U) .~
(J) U) (5
:2!: f ()
- @
0 "
CD " E
- C1J (J)
to Q)
0 -
- VI
C1J (])
Fi= ~
0
W ~
"
~ ~
CD
C) .Q
E -
Z C")
~ ~
- z
I-
W CI) ll) .
w C N ~
I- 0 -
:e 0-. t,
III .s:: &
1&1 ~ D.. ~
Z x:
0 0 Q.
Z W
- U)
t~ < ~
W
-J (])
'>
-0 CD (]) \!)
... ~
a- E -
c:
D- ca (])
C Z E
U) Q. J
. 0 ~
W U) Q)
CD
a= c > 0>
A. - (]) ~ 0 \ 0
U) Q I
....
= -0 0~ ....
-
m c: co
:t:J 0 .~ \L ;j
-l CI)
~ 06 tIJ
CD ">
C 0> ~
...... c: 0
C "c 0
0 0 "0
t;J .- ~ a;
U) fB CI)
.- ~
.~ tIJ
Q .5
C U c
C)
Iii
Q.
Q.
-;:
~
a..
a;
Q.
Z Q.
E co
-. ..... e
() (])
CD (J) a..
.~ VI S
0.. CD Q) Ii:
E Q
as >-
0
Z ~
.2
~
::::)
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 54 of 197
- .--.'"""'S'%~-:-;:'':'':-'.u::..':' .
.1". _
-.-- -, -
....--.....-....
- - =: .- --.,:",-=-.-:-:~ ~ :..:. .::.-= ---
LlER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
.RESSING DEPARTMENT
28.00 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
~APLES. FLORIDA 34104
c.
";\
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
ase complete the following and fax to the Addressing Department at 239-252-5724 or submit. in person to the
iressing Department ~ the above address. Form must be sionad bv Addressina personnel Prior to ore-aoolication
eline. please allow 5 daYS for processing.
l aft items will apply to everJ projed:.. iiems in Doid iype are required. FOUO w...:.mE.~S MUST BE PROV!DED.
ms older than 6 months wtll require adcfltional review and approval by the Addressing Department
:TI11ON lYPE (check petition type below, complete a separate Addressing Ch8CkJist for each Petition Type)
BL (Blasting Penna)
BD (Boat Dock Extension)
i Carnival/Circus. Permit
I CU (Conditional Use)
I EX? (ExcaVation permit)
I FP (Final Plat
1 UA (Lot Una Adjustment)
1 PNC (Project Name Change)
] PPL (Plans & Plat Review)
] pSP (preliminary Subcfrvision Plat)
] PUD Rezone
] RZ (standard Rez.one)
o SOP (Site Development Plan)
o SOPA (SOP Amendment)
o SOPI (1nsubstantial Change to SOP)
o SIP (Site Improvement ~)
o SIPI (Insubstantial Change to SIP)
o SNR (street Name Change)
o SNC (Street Name Change - Unplatted)
o TOR (Transfer of Development Rights)
o VA (Variance)
o VRP (Vegetation Removal Pennil)
o VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill Permit)
o OTHER
c.
EGAl DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached) -
C-\,'\ Gf\"\C CD.'M.~~ ~~ ~f\~ \ '\ \-0'""6 \ -{ ~ f\~ \~
~_ \ , ~ ~ ~ _<:- <2..\ \. ~ G~~ "'r-.\U~CF. C' ~. \. \::::~~~~J?t'~~ c>--- \...ef(S \-"2...0 ~
:OUO (PropertY 10) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to"";OfassOCiBtewil1i, legal description if more than oneJ--n:~II" j Il\ t:::...
_ ~-r- ~ ,~c....\'5 r\ \.J
::::>EE;" ..-~ , ~C1\~ p...~t:> ~, ?.. ~
>TREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned) ~f\f::-CE\.... \
. LOCA nON MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest pub9c road right-of-way
. SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties)
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (I applicable)
PROPOSED STREET NAMES (If applicable)
c.
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for eXisting projects/sites only)
SOP orAA#
r:r.:~
_.. _ _ &P"l'! he_
2!1 ~,~
='" "~t!f2QtD ISHii
atyQlde PaIioh
,......a..... _...M. _h_~"_--"~_
1tCII;L___ ._ff~~~~I_.&
cz.,.~ o'tS 0 OO:5L, Cf
~oq500OOq.q.
7-.U-eQ>OOOO ~
-z..fpoq~oooo GtO
Z609$OODOI6
~OJ
)Q.SO(10125
26095000161
. 2D50001U
2a:5Otm06
~,
2SIt.SOOO:M8
26Ot5OCJQ2.64
20500Q21l)
2D5OOCD03
~
2D5OD0345
2G5OOO161
26OJSOIm'14.
2G5OOQU7
. CJtvQda...... ..__- . PIt.-~
~~J.IIItBaok~ "'-.b
IUII... -.&ii"1P -~ lb. IIIIIDbea
. anDot OOJI,h.g up;
OIl Boal: 049"" 97..100
. ..,-C" A..... I
"'Cr"k
~ t.-~
--
z.c,o~s ooU.4~
2~CA"oOO ~c,;~
~~o~sooa ~~t.t
"Z..C#'O ~ S 000 So,
~oq5000 ~'3S
~o~5000 ~q
'l..(PO '\c;. 000 &iP5
?-f.pO~Sf)OOSll.'
~OC\~OoO' lPoq,
'2.-~Oca.SOOO G>?".O
2,cpcA5000, (p~4p
~~cASOOO lJ,f:t,z-.
. Z-CP 0'" $ 000 (t,o~ S
. "Z-u, 0 Ot ,"060 .., 0 I
~(p l;) q ~ 0 co" "'Z.- '1
-z...ldO~Sooo ,,43
-z..CDo'\~OoO 1 "''1
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 55 of 197
IE P.muDa2
l
-ze:,oQs;ooo7<6S
-uPt::AS"O~l) ~O 1;
"'Z..C:s cASooO ~24
v.,oClSOOO $40
'Z,.G,oqsoodi~
-z.tpt?qSooo~ .
- .... -. . . .
)RESSING CHECKLIST. PAGE TWO
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 56 of 197
,c.
iecl or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (If application; indicate
lther proposed or existing)
ase Check One; 0 CheckflSt is to be Faxed back
~personallY Pjcl(ed Up
puCANT NAME: JUS t\- Ti2-u-T1:"\-', bf\-V ID Sc-1I.l f!::tJf:>
lONE 1?JI. bO(;,() FAX tf3r. b08'i
gnature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Nal1le approval and is
lbject to ~er review by the Addressing Department
)R STAFF USE ONLY
..N Number (Primary) C::O\c:, e... 'A\\ v:\ c.. ~ ~
:lIio Number
olio Number
olio Number
olio Number
:olio Number
:oflO Number
=olio' Numl?er
lJpdated
Date: 4- -2....~ - \0
Date: 0//28/1 V
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED
c.
c.
. .
FnJlI: DaVidgan Engineering
239 434 8DB4 04112/2010 t8:51
Agenda Item No. 178
~ p.~er9J2010
Page 57 r 197
.
~'
).~~
. -----
. . ;-- .~
el'II IIJlIt. COUNTY IIDVERNMEN'I'
ADDRBISINO DIP""""
WMrft"aU.JDtvlV.R1'
.. NOR'IH HORSESHOE DRIYI
NAPf..E8. PLORIDA. 341M
_ 2IW4oG FAX (2tt) 2BN'I14'
." -,'~ . 1':-" ':.'.",";'-:-',,'-'.'" --." ';-- 'lij-,/""'.'''' ';', - ,- -
, . J i.'" · .. IIr ' ., - . . " , '- '. "J " , , , , " ~ ...'
, ....., .- -.!.' .. ,..-: . .' lit: I . . WI.
Pfe.. cotnl JI. the faIIDlIIIinG end faxtlli18 ~ 2IN52~ or eUbmlt In ~.., the
Addl~ Depaka..1Iri II .. UawlIIddr8li8. f'gm t-.Y AddtIIMlt1Q Dl!llMnMI arqjQ ~
~....... r" . an-3_fDr~...
Hal 81 fteme WII .. to fIffIft PJ'OIIat. Items In boIcI _ in requNd. FOLIO NUIIBERI IItU8T 8!
PftO\IIJED. Forme oIdBr thin 8 morcha WIll reqrBe IIddIUonal r8VIIW IJlId apprMI by .. Add1eM1ng
DepnMrt. ,
...
..
-
PmTION TYPE (IItdIDete _ beIoIr, ~'"" . ___ AItch!4711 aiet:irnst IbrMDh FWllIon GPlJ
. .
8Bl.~PmnIt) ~SDP_~~
!II) (BD8t DDak SltIlnIIon) SDPA (SOP Amendment)
~ ~Pnl' SQPt (tnrA.drIIrmtia~'fD SI.lP)
CU (CondIIanaII Use) SIP _11IIPRMMntnt Plan)
EXP ~ Pn1It) . 8IPl (fnmdmanIII Change to SIP)
FP CAR Plat . ~ SNR"Name ChImge)
a~=~ $,5-;-":;'=
PPL (PIps A PIll VA ~ .
psp (I'nIfmJnIry SUbdIvIsbn PIal) (VegetdWl Removal PemIIt)
PUt) R8mne 0 VRSFP ('I~n Remcw8I & SIe FlJPemlt)
RZ C8WIdwd Rezone) . BI OTHeR PUDA & DRIA.
.-.-- . ~. lI!I
LEQAL DErUar- J~ d 8UbJect propertyar praperlIee (ccpytJf/SngtllydeBQ~. may be IIIIat;/MI)
CITY GAlE ~ CENTE~l1ON 35 TOWNSHIP 49 RANQ~ ~
FOLIO (Pmpettr ID) NUMIIER(s) rlsblMl (8IiBtJh lo, or BBllOG!IID with, 1egaI.~'men ~ one)
SEE ATTACHED UST .
$11'CI:t:1.A'0DRE88 or ADDRESSES (D~ If.ady~
S~ATTACHEDUST
· UJCATIOtf MAP rmIIt be ~ thowJng exact location of projGcIId'e In reIatfon to nearest pubflc mad rJghI-
~ .
· SURVEY (copy · nBBd8d onIyb' unp1sIted properties)
PROPoseD PROJECT NAME (l'epp/1c&b/s)
COY GATE COMMERCE PARK
PROPosED ~I tct::t:l NAMES (6appbbIsJ
SITE DE\IEl.,OPMENT Pf.AN NUMBER (for e.xfstIna~:J only)
SOP_-_ Dl'Mf#_
."J
.' '-
, .-
'. I
--
....
".....vl~
.' -
DOA'PUDIO-
C/7Y GA TE 843 REV:l
COMMERCE CE
ONE, TWo, AND TH NTER PHASES
DATE: 5/7/10 REf
DUE: 6/7/10
fnJIs:Oavidson Enlf.neBrlnl
~ .. BOB4
04/1212018 11:&1
AJlenda Item No. 178
I&8S P..~er 9.2010
Page 58 1 197
sli
."~
. L-t~-
. '
2IOD NORTH HORJI!IHOB DRIVE
IAPLE8, FLORIDA 84111
(2:S8) _1401 FAX ~!5H7M
-
PwoJMt ot....~-- ~rar, or ~~ tn,GOI~ dDaum8nfs(lfIlPlbUorl:
1ndIcGd8...... ..~ II' 8XIIfIna)
- -
L
fIINM a'itCk One: B CflBaIdIIt.. tD be Faed back
Cl PnonaIIY PtclIlId Up
I
APPIJCWITIWlIi: TOCIA tw4JN. DAVIDSON ENGINF;~. INC.
PHONE (239) As.c.tJOBO FAX ~ 4S4o-6OB4
SQnature on ~IlFT'ng ChecId~ does not ctmBIIlut$ Project ancI10r Street Name approval
and Is subject to fuJtt1er review by the AddI$88hig Depeutment. .
--
-.. ~
. ----
-
!I
FOR STAFF use OM.Y
FLIC NUIIIbIt~ ~ ~ ~~cu:.. ~~ <",\0 \ '0 $'S "
folio .........
PolIo Number
FoIID IturnMr
Ap~tsr:J1'1..~ fVl4~
UpdlDd by= :
~-/4-/O
P*:
IF OLDER THAN 8 MONTHS. FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMmaD
"
")'
.', ilI?--
c.
c.
c.
-.
.
-e
F".: Dlvidsan Eng1neer1ng
Agenda Item No. 178
I5S5 p......er 9,2010
~age 59 of 197
239 4S4 8084
04I1212OtO 13:52
02if' Gate Folio t's:
Qtv n....~..-ae Ceaar Phae OM LeD
1-16:
26095OOD086
260PSOOOtQJ
260B$000125
26095000Jm
. 26OB$OOOJ83
26l>>5OOO206
2S09SOOO222
2609S000248
2S095ooo264
26095000280
26'095000303
260PS000)29
2609S000345
2609S000361
2609S0003'14
2609S000381
':oz.-(tcAS 000'3&, Cf-
~oq.sooooL+4'
-z..c.,.0 q $.00 00 z..e
"Z. (poo,5.0000 G, 0
. -rr A. ~ f
"'tr.k
-"\t e". ~
CIt:v Ode lW.-__a"'___ Ph-~
ProvIdfq IDCICded Plat Book 8114 Pt,pff.bccause folio
OIl Boot 49 Pep 97-100' DDIDbera are Dot oomiug up;
~Gtder.mn--CemerPh_nne.. 00DBl~
7..f.pOqsc>oo7~S
-z..{pc:Ji S-oot) <i'o '1J
"UD c:ASool.> ~ z..q.
"Z.!.,oq$OOO '340
~Cctoqsooc::Ji~
"UPoqsooo<6~z:. .
z..G,octs ooU.4"'Z...
'Z. ~ r;. 000 4- c,;CO
7-~oOtsooa 4~4
'z.J,o ~ 5 000 So,
U4oOtSooo ~~
7-f.t:,oC\ S 000 9-ocq
'1..cpoC\c;.oc>o ~5
z,..c...o~$ooo5cg.l
z..u,. 0" !i 000 (po oq..
'2-(e.OG\sooD C>'Z-D
Z,.c".oq$OO{) cP,-\-cp
"Z.-.Cb oct '5000 &fj. z..
z..~ oC\ $0.00 0o<'6b
. "Z-u to> ~ S"oaO 1 0 I
~(Pbq r;ooo 11,...1
"'Z..ldoOtSOOO "143
z..CDoG\~ ooD r ~'1
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 60 of 197
Phone: 239-593-1002
Roger B. Rice
Attorney at Law
9010 Strada Stell Court
Suite 207
Naples, Florida 34109
Facsimile: 239-593-1309
c.
Daniel Trescott
Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council
1926 Victoria Ave.
Fort Myers, Florida 33901
May 4, 2010
Re: City Gate Commerce Center Development Order Amendment
Dear Dan:
Thank you for meeting with us Thursday, April 1, 2010 along with Jim
Beever. As we discussed, City Gate has now applied for an amendment to the City
Gate DR! DO to conform to the City Gate Federal Fish & Wildlife Permit) The City
Gate DR! DO paragraphs to be amended are in Section 4 entitled Vee-etation and
WildlifelWetlands from the 1990 Development Order 90-4, Resolution 90-431. The
changes are primarily to paragraph c entitled Off-site Mitie-ation and paragraph d
entitled Red Cockaded Woodpecker Manaeement Plan.
c.
As we discussed, pursuant to Section 380.06(19)(e)2, this amendment will be
processed by an application for DO amendment through the local government
without the necessity of filing for an NOPC with the Regional Planning Council.
As this process progresses, we will provide your office with updates.
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours~ '
~~~~
~ice
RBRIlaz
cc: John Steinhauer, Esq.
Donald Pickwort~ Esq.
1 The Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Federal Fish and Wildlife Permit dated July I,
2009 issued to CG II, LLC and 850 NWN, LLC is an Incidental Take Pennit authorizing the take of RCW as well as
habitat of RCW and Florida panther within the project issued pursuant to Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended.
c.
DOA-PL201G-843 REV:1
OTY GATE COMMERCE CENTER PHASES
ONE, TWO, AND THREE
DA TE: S/7 /10
DUE: 6/7/10
.
I I I 0 I II CD ~~i ~~I I
@ ~~ i
I! $ ;;; . . ~~~ ~a~ ..
....
~ s~
J I, ijl "' ~
~~ II; 5~"
,~ ON ..;~ f..;~
8iil II -~ i~
15 $-' ~3Jt, IJt ,~ &1 Ii!
~ ~!i5 jc..,
!i fif J):! !Jt .g~
lllJ i Jw :filii .jl
:>j ~l::: WI
1m J 'II )i f~ io ~ .
. J IllN
"'- i J
...
! 'I: ~ l!l ~ g
jll:i c3 l!l
S!,...
iiJt i:!:;~ iJ:;~ li:;~
~ .i . m:<:Jt mCONJt lIi~N!t
Ii; "0 '"' . .J!jl l;;....1 -
!~! gd: .g 11 g~rili
Ol/)l 11:; 1 0 :!
'" i Ii
~ CD
~ -1& . bg:D 8
d~" I!-~.. :~
e .Geo il.;~ ~-
~ !j .s~i!l I/) .
II: " &!t C. i8 g~j
~ liS ~ ~ . -1"'"' -d~
s .g !.t =(1)%
I/) . Cl.!;o
>- 51 a .c
2: ~i~ -.c::! ()~ C
'E ~ 10... :i
~ I/) :88
~ Z N ~
0 :l!
:z:
0
~ ~ !i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ N - ~ In ~ ;0; l:l e l2
~ ~ ... ~ ct to:
N ..; cO :!?
;
00 ! "0
"" t~ .. co ~ ~ II I
I- :~ N 00 .. CD 00 00 .$l
0 .
~ ... .. ~ ... f
,.: 5
lU w w W ~ W W W ~ !
..,
~ is is z is z Z
0 0 0
a;
.
PROPERTY ID NUMBERS
City Gate Commerce Center Phase One OAts 1-16):
2609500086
26095000109
26095000125
26095000167
26095000183
26095000206
26095000222
26095000248
26095000264
26095000280
26095000303
26095000329
26095000345
26095000361
26095000374
26095000387
26095000374
26095000044 TR R-l
26095000028 TR A
26095000060 TR R-2
City Gate Commerce Center Phase Two:
26095000442
26095000468
26095000484
26095000507
26095000523
26095000549
26095000565
26095000581
26095000604
26095000620
26095000646
26095000662
26095000688
26095000701
26095000727
26095000743
26095000769
26095000785
26095000808
26095000824
26095000840
26095000866
26095000882
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 62 of 197
c.
(.
City Gate Commerce
Center Phase Three:
00298160008
DOA-P12.010-843 REV:l
CITY GATE COMMERCE CENTER PHASES
ONE. TWO. AND THREE
DATE: 5/7/10
DUE: 6/7/10
c.
SIGN POSTING INS'{ltUCTIONS
(Section 10.03.00, COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC)
. A zoning sip(s) must be posted by the petitioner or the petitioners agatt on the parcel for a minimum of ~fteen (IS) ca~
days in adYance orb first pub6c hearing and said sign(8) must be DUlin~med by the petitioner or the petitioner's agent tb.rougb
the Board of Count)' Commmdmetrs Hearing. BelOW are general guidelines for ., however tbese guideliDes should not be
constnJed to supercede any nquinlment of the LDC. For specjfie sign requimnents. please refer to Section 10.03.00 of the
LOC.
1. The sigD(s) must be erected in full view of~ pubIie, not more than five (5) feet from the nearest street ~-of-way or
C1ISemcmt
2. The sign(s) must be securoIy affixed by nails, staples, or other means to a wood 1i"ame or to a wood panelllJ1d then fBstened
securely to a post. or ofbar strI1ctDR. The sign may not be affixed to a tree or other foliage.
3. The petitiCJlUl' or the ~s agent must m~fn ~ s~s) in place, and readable Condition 1D1ti11he requested action
has bceu heard ind a ~ doei~OD rendered. If the ~s) is destroyed. lost, or rendered lII1FCadable, the petitioner or the
petitioner's agent must replace the ~
NOTE: A1I"l'ER'l'HE SIGN BAS ",BEEN POSTED. THIS AFFIDAviT OF-POSTING NOTICE SHOULD BE
RETUilNED NO ~TER TIiAN TEN (18) W()1lKING DAYS BEJ.lOBE om RlRST HEARING DATE TO THE
ASSIGNI!ID P~ANNER. '\ ' -
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 63 of 197
........--.
-AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLlJER.
\ b-
BEFOREnmUNDBR.SI~- UTHORITY.PERSONALLY APPEARED \. 1:1) \-n--t+h
WHO ON OA'IH SAYS THA HE HAS POSTED PROPER NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY SBCTIO~ 10.03.00 OF THE
LLIBR COUNTY LAND EVELOPMENT CODE ON TIm PARCEL COVERED IN PETITION NUMBER
- ~- ~ ..} \~ 'gL.\ ~
'JL'
1lJRB OF APPLICANT
:~53D hra-P+-\{d ~ 3bl
STREETORP.O.aOx '
r k~ "F(u.*V\
NAME (TYPBI? OR PRINTED)
(\tL~~ 'F L .?j../J 05 __
, STATE ZIP
L
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COlLIER
The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this ,I
J c.d'1 f( ~ . personalJy known to lQe or who produced
andwbodidldidlllll_lIlllllb. Jl~
0): .~~-~~ ~n
EXPJ&.IM" ,
9<<rIid~;;i;~.1, I
Naine of Notary Public
dayof~~l.Q,by
as ickmtificatioD
,c.
c.
.
'i_
.
-e .'. ',',~~~::
..........-.....--,
-',..-
~;:;-
:::~~
-,j~~:.~,
." "-:;-:: , ~ ~
~'.... '~'''' .... .
: :~~~}.I:,{ ::
.' .~: " - .
c.
c.
c.
--
IDELOTELLE & GUTHRIE, INC.
1220 S. W. 96th Street
Gainesville, Florida 32607
(352) 332-3500
2005050-10.1
CITY GATE
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE
RED-COCKADED WOODPECKER AND
FWRlDA PANTHER
Submitted to:
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
1339 20th Street
Vero Beach, FL 32960
Phone: 772-562-3909
Fax: 772-562-4288
On behalf of:
Citygate Development, LLC
&
CO II, LLC
159 South Main Street
Suite 500
Akron, Ohio 44308
Phone: 330-996-0225
Fax: 330-762-7990
March 15,2006
Revised June 12,2006
Revised August 30,2006
Revised November 2006
Revised Apri12008
ReVised May 2008
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 68 of 197
.
.
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 69 of 197
IDELOTELLE & GUTHRIE, INC.
1220 S. W. 96th Street
Gainesville, Florida 32607
(352) 332-3500
Submitted by:
Roy S. DeLotelle
DeLotelle and Guthrie, Inc.
1220 Southwest 96th Street
Gainesville, Florida 32607
Phone 352-332-3500
Email: RdeloteIle@aol.com
Tom H. Logan
Breedlove, Dennis & Associates, Inc.
1167 Green Hill Trace
Tallahassee, Florida 32317
Phove:850-942-1631
Email: TLo2:an@bda-inc.com
Stephen R. Bittner
Breedlove, Dennis & AsSOCiates, Inc.
3925 S. Francis Road
St Augustine, FL 32092
Phone: 407-252-1784
Email: rbittner@bda-inc.com
Roger B. Rice, Esq.
Roger B. Rice, P.A.
9010 Strada Stell Court, Suite 207
Naples, Florida 34109
Phone: 239-593-1002
Fax: 239-593-1309
&
Jeremy Sterk
Davidson Engineering, Inc.
3530 Kraft Road, Suite #301
Naples, Florida 34105
Phone: 239-434-6060
Fax: 239-434-6084
P:\ADMIN\PR0JECTS\2005050\2008 HCP\2008 REVlSED\ClTY GATE HCP 0523Q8,DOC
(
(
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 70 of 197
TABLE OF CONTENTS
.
LIST OF FIGURES .......................... .......... .............. .......... .................... ....... ....... ....... .......... ......... iv
LIST OF TABLES ........... ................ ........................ ...................................... ................... ............... v
EXECUTIVE SUMMARy....... ................ ............. .............. ..... ........ ................ ........... .................. vi
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND..................................................................................... t
1.1 Project Site and Habitat Plan Area...................................................................................... 1
1.2 Permit Description and Duration ........................................................................................ 1
1.3 Regulatory-Legal Framework for Plan ............................................................................... 5
1.4 Overview lBack.gro1;JDd ............................ ..... ....................... ..:............................................. 6
1.4.1 Red-cockaded Woodpecker ..... ...................... ........ .............. ............ .......... ............6
1.4.2 Florida Panther........... ................................ ............ .......... .... ....... .............. ....... ......7
1.4.3 Eastern Indigo Snake ................................ ....................... ......................................7
1.5 Species Covered by the Permit ......................................................... .............. .................. 12
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING-BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.................................................. 14
2.1
2.2
2.3
Environmental Setting .......... ...................:....... .................. ....................... ............. ........... t 4
Development Environment ................ ....... ........ ..... ............ ....... ............ ........ .......... .......... 14
Vegetation............ .................................. ....................... .................................................... 17
.
2.3. 1 Proj ect Site ..... ............. ..... ...... ............... ................ ........................... .................... 17
2.3.2 Picayune Strand State Forest Mitigation Area..................................................... t 7
2.4 Wildlife .................... ..... ........................ ................. ..... ........ ...................................... ........ 19
2.5 Listed Species.... ....... ............... ............. ............ ...... ...... ..... ........................... .......... .......... 20
2.5.1 Red-cockaded Woodpeckers....... .................................... .................. ...................20
2.5.2 Gopher Tortoise ............... ..... ................ ........... ............ ........... ..... ..... ...................21
2.5.3 Eastern Indigo Snake .... ..... ...... ...... ............ ........... ....... ................ ....... ........ .........24
2.5 .4 Wood Stork ................. ....... ...... ............. ................ ....... ................. ....... ....... .........24
2.5.5 Big Cypress Fox Squirrel................. ..... ............ .............. .............. .......... ............. 25
2.5.6 Florida B lack Bear .............. .... ........... ........... ............ .......... ......... .............. .......... 25
2.5.7 Florida Panther........... ............. ..................... ............. ............................. ..............26
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ACTIVITIES COVERED BY THE PERMIT .................................. 27
3.1 Project Description .................... ............................. ................. ............. ........ .................... 27
3.2 Activities Covered by Penn it .. .................... ......... ............... ......... ...... ................ ............... 28
4.0 POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL IMPACTSrrAKE ASSESSMENT................................................ 29
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 71 of 197
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
(
4.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts........ ............................ ........... ............. ................................... 29
4.1.1 Anticipated TakelRed-cockaded Woodpecker ....................................................29
4.1.2 Anticipated TakelFlorida Panther .........................................................;..............29
4.2 Cumulative Impacts............. .................. ........................... ..... .................... ........... ............ 30
5.0 CONSERV A nON PROGRAM - CONSERV A nON MEASURES IMPLEMENTED OR
PROPOSED TO MINIMIZE AND MITlGA TE FOR RED-COCKADED WOODPECKERS
IMPACTS AND TO PROMOTE THE SURVIVAL AND RECOVERY OF THE FLORIDA
PANTHER ..................................................... ..... .......... .......... ................;....................... ...... ......... 34
5.1 Implemented RCW Mitigation Measures ......................................................................... 34
5.2 Proposed RCW Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... 35
5.3 Implemented Florida Panther Mitigation Measures.......................................................... 35
5.4 Proposed Florida. Panther Mitigation Measures................................................................ 36
5.5 Biological Goals .................... ......... ...... ..................... .;................ ..................................... 36
5.6 Biological Objectives........ ............................ ...................... ...................... ........................ 37
5.7 Assurances for Implementation of Mitigation Measures .................................................. 39
5.8 Adaptive Management Strategy ........;............................................................................... 40
5.9 Eva) uation Criteria ....... ..... ........... ............ ............................. ................ .......... .................. 41
5.10 Monitoring and Reports ....................................................................................................41
5.11 "No Surprises" ............. .................... ............... ........... ........ ..... ........... ............................... 42
(
6.0 FUND !NO ... ............................. ........... ........... ................. ...... .................... .......... ............ .............. 43
7 .0 ALTERNATIVES. .................. ..................... ................ .......... .................................. ........ ...... ........ 46
7.1 No Action Alternative ............ .............................. ............. ........ ......... ............. .................. 46
7.2 Preferred Alternative..................... ...................................................... ...... ........................ 46
7.3 FWC Alternative. .............................. ..... .................. ........... ................. ........ ..... ................ 47
8.0 PLAN IMPLEMENT A nON, CHANGED AND UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES ............ 48
8.1 Changed Circumstances ................ .................. ..... ............ .................. ...................... ......... 48
8.2 Unforeseen Circumstances....... ........... ............................. ......... ............. ........................... 48
8.3 Other Measures as Required by Director .......................................................................... 49
9.0 LITERA TURE CITED .................... ............. ............... ................. ...................... ........................... 50
APPENDIX A STANDARD PROTECTION MEASURES FOR THE EASTERN INDIGO
SNAKE
APPENDIX B LEITER OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN NATIONAL WILDLIFE
FEDERA nON, FLORIDA WILDLIFE FEDERATION, CITYGA TE
DEVELOPMENT LLC, CO II LLC, BARRON COLLIER COMPANY, AND
UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
ii
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 72 of 197
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
APPENDIX C PHOTOGRAPHIC PRESENTATION
APPENDIX D SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT CONSERVATION
AGREEMENT
APPENDIX E LEITER OF CREDIT FOR LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT ON BTIITF
LANDS
APPENDIX F EXCERPT FROM AGREEMENT BETWEEN APPLICANTS AND COLLIER
COUNTY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE WILDLIFE CROSSING ON
COUNTY ROAD 846
APPENDIX G COLLIER COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. 2008-132
Hi
.
.
.
.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
.
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15
Figure 16
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Page 73 of 197
LIST OF FIGURES
(
Location of City Gate Property in Urban Area of Unincorporated Naples, Florida, 2006.2
Aerial View of City Gate and Surrounding Land Uses, 2006 ............................................3
North Belle Meade.......................... ........................................... ..... ..................................... 4
Distribution ofRCW Clusters in North Belle Meade, 2006............................................... 8
Historic and Present RCW Clusters and Cavity Trees in Picayune Strand State Forest..... 9
Locations ofRed-cockaded Woodpecker Populations in North Belle Meade with the
historic and recruitment clusters in North Picayune Strand State Forest.......................... 1 0
North Belle Meade Development ..................................................................................... 11
City Gate and Panther Focus Area.................................................................................... 13
Development in Immediate Area of City Gate .................................................................15
Functional buffer within NBM that panthers appear to have avoided entering (developed
lands that are approximately 2 miles east of City Gate and extend another three quarters
of a mile eastward)...... ............................ .............. ........ .................................................... 16
(
Florida Land Use Cover Classification (FLUCS) Map for City Gate, Florida, 2006....... 18
RCW Population Trends 25 Years in the I-75/County Road 951 Corridor area, Florida,
2006 ...... ........ ................... ............... .................................... .............................................. 22
RCW Cavity Tree Location Map for City Gate................................................................ 23
Proposed Panther Crossing area (CR 846 east ofImmokalee) with Kautz et ai. (2006)
least cost paths analyses................ .......... ............ .... ..... .......................................... ...... ..... 31
Florida Panther Telemetry in Proximity to CR 846 (Immokalee Road) East of
Immokalee, Florida, 2005.......... .................................. ........ ...... .......................................33
Purchased Mitigation Land Parcels in the North Belle Meade and Picayune Strand State
Forest, Florida, 2005. ...... ............................................................ ................. ......... ............ 38
iv
c
Table 1.
Table 2.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Page 74 of 197
LIST OF TABLES
Costs Incurred for the City Gate Commerce Park HCP, Naples, Florida, 2004 to April
2008 .... .... ................................... ....................................................................................... 44
Remaining Costs Projected for the City Gate Commerce Park HCP, Naples, Florida, May
2008 to 2012 .. .......... ............................................. ............................................................45
v
.
.
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Page 75 of 197
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
(
Citygate Development. LLC and CG II, LLC (Applicants) are seeking an Incidental Take Permit OTP)
from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) pursuant to Section 10(aXIXB) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA) as amended. for the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) (RCW) and
the Florida panther (Pumas conc%r coryi). The proposed activity. known as City Gate Commerce Park
(City Gate). is the construction ofa mixed-use. nonresidential. commerciaVindustrial office park complex
in a suburbanlindustrial area on undeveloped lands in Collier County, Florida. The 240-acre site is
located east of the junction of County Road (CR) 951 and Interstate 75 (1-75) near Naples. Florida.
The mitigation activities described in this Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) are designed to mitigate for
RCW habitat impacts associated with the project and cover the following activities: habitat management
on the Picayune Strand State Forest (PSSF), and acquisition and management of other lands. The
proposed project is located on the extreme western edge of the USFWS' Panther Focus Area and Primary
Zone of the Florida panther and is surrounded by residential and commercial development The proposed
construction activities on the City Gate site will have minimal impacts to the panther. The project will
result. however, in increased traffic off-site within the Panther Focus Area and Primary Zone.
Consequently, incidental take authorization for the Florida panther is requested for potential panther
impacts resulting from the increased traffic. The Applicants will implement mitigation measures. which
were agreed upon through earlier collaboration with the USFWS and other parties involved in the HCP
process, as part of the project to promote recovery efforts for the Florida panther. Mitigation measures
include habitat enhancement. construction of a wildlife crossing at a strategic location where Florida
panthers are routinely struck and killed by motor vehicles along CR 846 east of Immokalee, Florida, and a
grant for partial funding of a study to evaluate other priority locations for underpasses to accommodate
Florida panther movement across highways in areas of panther habitat in Collier County.
(
"
The USFWS' Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake will be used by the Applicants
during construction activities to minimize potential effects on this species.
Issuance of the ITP pursuant to this HCP would authorize incidental take of the RCW and Florida panther
for a IS-year period.
The RCW is federally classified as an endangered species and is protected by the ESA and the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-711). The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC)
classify the RCW as a species of special concern under rule 68A-27.005. Florida Administrative Code.
The Florida panther is classified as an endangered species both federally and by the FWC [fonnerly
known as Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (FGFWFC)]. The ITP would authorize the
incidental take of one group of RCWs, which are currently composed of two breeding adults. and progeny
occupying lands owned by the Applicants in exchange for mitigation provided in the HCP.
The City Gate project is a 1988 Development of Regional Impact (DRI). A RCW Management Plan
presented by the FGFWFC in 1990 was adopted for the City Gate property in response to a Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) appeal of the DRI's Planned Unit Development Order. The DCA appeal was
in specific regard to management and mitigation measures proposed for RCWs in the Development
Order. The FGFWFC plan included an on-site habitat Preserve for RCWs as well as other state-listed
endangered and threatened species. Current knowledge of RCW management indicates this FGFWFC
vi
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Page 76 of 197
Management Plan and the on-site Preserve would not meet the long-term needs of RCWs or other
endangered species and would result in the loss of one breeding group and unauthorized take without
appropriate mitigation. The 1990 plan is not consistent with the RCW Recovery Plan (USFWS 2003) or
incidental take permit criteria currently used by the USFWS for RCWs.
.
This HCP supplants the previous FGFWFC Management Plan and provides state-of-the-art mitigation
actions for RCWs. This HCP provides multiple approaches to mitigate for RCWs and the Florida
panther, which provide long-tenn net conservation benefits for these and other listed and non-listed
wildlife species in Collier County, Florida. The HCP was developed in coordination and cooperation
with the USFWS and City Gate representatives. Discussions also were held with Collier County, FWC,
Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, National Wildlife Federation, Florida Wildlife Federation,
Collier Audubon Society, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, and Florida Division of Forestry. Joint and
individual meetings were held with the respective agencies and organizations to seek their evaluation and
input regarding the HCP and proposed mitigation activities.
The HCP provides mitigation measUres for incidental take of RCWs, which include funding management
activities and construction of at least five recruitment clusters each with four recruitment cavities in the
northern portion of the PSSF, and purchase and management of 102 acres of RCW habitat near the PSSF,
one parcel of which is currently occupied by one RCW cluster. The translocation of all RCW subadults
from the City Gate property to the mitigation lands has been carried out for three years and will be
conducted again in the fall of 2008. The translocation of all adult birds will be completed just prior to
nesting season 2009. Commitments for six additional pairs of unrelated subadult RCWs have been
obtained from the USFWS RCW Translocation Cooperative, and three of these pairs will be translocated
to the northern PSSF mitigation site during fall of each year in 2009 and 2011 (12 total birds).
.
The HCP also provides mitigation measures for potential indirect impacts on the panther associated with
increased traffic from the project A wildlife crossing with fencing will be insta,lled in a strategic section
of CR 846 east of Immokalee, Florida, where eight Florida panthers have been struck and killed by motor
vehicles during the past fourteen years. A grant also has been provided as partial funding for a study to
evaluate and identify other priority highways within Collier County, Florida, where installation of wildlife
crossings may be indicated. Acquisition and enhancement (herbiciding and removal of exotic and weedy
plant species) of habitat for RCWs and Florida panthers has been initiated. These mitigation measures
will provide conservation benefits for the Florida panther that will aid in the survival and recovery of the
species.
The PSSF is designated as an essential support population for the South/Central Florida RCW Recovery
Unit. Recovery units are necessary to conserve genetic robustness, demographic character, life history
stages or other important features of RCW metapopulations (USFWS 2003; DeLoteIle et aI. 2004; Costa
and DeLotelle 2006). RCW recovery units are geographic areas delimited according to ecoregions. The
PSSF population recovery is important in the overall recovery of the South/Central unit, thus City Gate's
mitigation success is important to the recovery of the species in this ecoregion and recovery unit.
The initial removal of nuisance plant species has been completed on 324 acres surrounding the existing
five recruitment clusters on the PSSF to enhance habitat for these RCWs. This enhancement included
specific elimination of cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), melaIeuca (Melaleuca quinquinervia), and
Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius). Midstory reduction was also conducted in recruitment cluster
sites to provide habitat structure that RCWs prefer. This enhancement will promote more extensive
vii
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 77 of 197
herbaceous cover, which is used by many upland species. Three annual follow-up treatments have been
conduc~ to ensure eradication of these nuisance plant species. These lands also are in an area that has
been designated by the USFWS as Primary Zone habitat for the Florida panther.
(
Removal of these invasive plant species will reduce existing fuel loads and thereby temperature of the
initial prescribed fire, and make possible the restoration of the natural fire regime to these habitats and
benefit a multitude of plant and animal species, particularly the RCW and the Florida panther, but also the
white-tailed deer (Od()Coileus virginianus), Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), gopher
tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), and other upland fauna. The initial prescribed fire will be conducted as
a mitigation activity of this HCP to ensure timely control of nuisance plant species.
.
RCW mitigation activities also include key land purchases of 102 acres of pine flatwoods that include an
occupied RCW cluster (16 acres), one site for a recruitment cluster (16 acres), part of a recruitment
cluster on the PSSF (4.0 acres) 'and additional foraging habitat (28 acres). These areas are in key locations
for RCW and Florida panther habitat enhancement and are in the process of being restored to optimum
habitat structure. They will also provide excellent habitat for eastern indigo snakes (Drymarchon corais
coupen). Each parcel was reviewed and evaluated as to its relative importance for improving habitat
conditions for these listed species. The 40-acre parcel provides a pine habitat connection between two
recruitment clusters on the PSSF that was initially invaded with melaleuca. All these purchased lands
include old growth pine for nesting habitat and younger pine stands for foraging by RCWs. Radio-
collared panthers as well as tracks and other sign of uncollared panthers have been observed on these and
adjacent parcels. These lands initially contained exotic and weedy species that render them as lower
quality habitat. The habitat enhancement and prescribed fire programs are returning these areas to high
quality habitat within the PSSF. The second enhancement treatment is already in progress. These
purchases and the enhancement of these lands will greatly benefit major fire programs conducted by the
PSSF by allowing burns in these areas and by facilitating more efficient bum coverage of surrounding
PSSF lands. These management actions will provide more optimum habitat conditions for RCWs and
Florida panthers.
(
Construction of a wildlife crossing with fencing is proposed within a section of CR 846 east of
Immokalee, Florida, where eight Florida panthers have been struck and killed by motor vehicles while
attempting to cross that transportation corridor during the past fourteen years. Four of those animals were
females, and two were females of breeding age. Numbers of Florida panthers in the wild currently are the
highest they have been in decades, undoubtedly due to successful recovery efforts. Therefore, the
occurrence of vehicle-related mortalities can only be expected to increase in areas such as CR 846 in the
absence of wildlife crossings. Should the construction of the proposed wildlife crossing prevent the
mortality of just one breeding age female panther that is established on a territory, the expected result
could be her successful production of at least two female kittens that may survive and recruit as breeders
in the population during her reproductive life.
viii
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 78 of 197
1.0
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
.
1.1 Project Site and Habitat Plan Area
City Gate Commerce Park (City Gate) involves the construction of a mixed-use, nonresidential,
commerciallindustrial office park complex in a suburban/industrial area on undeveloped lands in Collier
COWlty, Florida. The City Gate project site encompasses a 240-acre parcel located in the unincorporated
urban area of Naples, Florida. in Section 35, Township 49 South, Range 26 East in Collier County
(Figures 1 and 2). The project site, located east of County Road (CR) 951 and north of Alligator Alley, is
bounded by developed lands on the south, west, and north, while undeveloped lands are to the east. A
large canal (known as the Main Golden Gate Canal) and urban land occurs on the north side. Industrial
projects requiring large land areas, namely a water treatment facility and landfill, are on the west and east
side, respectively.
North Belle Meade (NBM) (Figure 3) is a 15,547-acre area that lies directly to the east of City Gate,
surrounded by Golden Gate Estates on the northwest, north and east and bounded by Interstate 75 (1-75)
along the south boundary. This area is part of a Rural Lands Assessment that was mandated by the
Governor and Florida Cabinet in 1999. The eastern portions ofNBM are the largest Wldeveloped area of
private land in this portion of Collier County. Conservation lands occur to the south of 1-75 (Picayune
Strand State Forest [PSSF]), also 14 miles to the east of the City Gate property (Florida Panther Refuge),
and 14 miles to the northeast (Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary).
Mitigation activities for potential impacts to red-cockaded woodpeckers (Picoides borealis) CRCW)
assoCiated with construction of City Gate are centered in areas of the PSSF in Collier COllnty in the same
general cover types as those found on City Gate. Land purchases for mitigation are located in NBM and
the sOuthern and northweStern areas of the PSSF. The Applicants also propose to implement mitigation
measures as part of the City Gate project that will provide a net conservation benefit for the Florida
panther (Puma conc%r coryl), some of which have been initiated prior to issuance of a permit for the
proposed activity. These mitigation measures were developed through collaborative efforts with the
USFWS, local government, and non-governmental organizations (NGO) that the Applicants conferred
with during the HCP process.
.
1.2 Pennit Description and Duration
The proposed action is the issuance of an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) pursuant to Section lO(a)(l)(B) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 as
amended, for the incidental take of one family group of RCWs and the Florida panther. The ITP is
requested for a 15-year period.
The purpose of the proposed action is to authorize the incidental take of one group of RCWs, most likely
in the fom of habitat modifications, through otherwise lawful construction activities on the project site.
The request for an ITP resulted from the anticipated impacts to the habitat and proposed relocation of the
RCWs that occur on the project site. The taking of RCWs may result from habitat alterations during
construction. The Applicants are requesting coverage for potential take of the Florida panther associated
with increased traffic moving from the project into the Panther Focus Area and the Primary Zone.
1
.
(
\C
=
~
~
'C
~
[i;
:f
13.
1'1
Z
]
e
~
E"
~
~
=
=
;:l
....
~
:!
-<
j
100
~.
~
~
=-
~
-
~
~
~
~
u
....
~
=
oS
-
CII
~
.3
(
.
\0
=
=
M
rr
~
~
"C
=
~
~
=
..
"'0
=
=
=
..
..
=
rJ'.2
"CJ
=
(10
~
-
~
.0
..
u
c...c
=
~
..
>
.
-
(10
..
..
~
<
M
~
..
=
~
..
f;Ioc
.
~ .S:!.
~~ :g<
.~ Z ~ Po. ~
. ~>>~~z
. J:) oS tlO (
~-€8~~
I 0 II') ti
';.=rti' .,
J:)~.9if1
i fi].~ ~
......: ""
~~~8~
E~' -= f
Gf) H'~ ~
.s4.)~Mf1
e-So~~
~ d 0 ~~
o (; A
~~ "Elb
~Jij~ ~
0. ~ 8 .S g
4.). . '"'
U}"''"'o~
U} - ~ r.;::; .~
..... ~
~""'~-g
.sJ~8o'=
~ 8 .6 i 5
e bO S
& ~ .s.a 8-
] ] .~ j ~
..b~e(;~
4.) b'
~';;~iS~
~lj ~~
l3 ~ ~ a'r;;
.....~ ~ "" e
. e: l%l'C e ::
o...Po.g~
~o'C>o (
g~8~]
>.8 a ~ ~
u "C-Bo
't;; >.] 0 ....
:a J:) a ~Po.
4.) g:: . 4.)
~ 0\ .~ ,....:., a
....."O.a~
. ~ ~ = ~
"0 "O~l'3
4.)-'fi
B = tlO~
o .... "0 .c: N
-"08,>""':-
~ ~ o.Q.....
~H~.'
g e"O~'
V')~a........"
<riu.... 4.)
-eU}~""
4.) 4.)
.~ fIj !: - ~
.g!-B.
~ .( 4.) "fc ';j'
~ ..s<<s~
coco ~
~]~]
~....l.,;tlO'E
(;4.)C:
.c: 3'~::S
1:: ~ fIj' ~
o~~ I
Z 4.) 4.) >..~
.;3't;;.o
f'i'C>c'B~
. ~i ~-e'~
"0 a'-
Qc...... ==
o rn 0
~ "~ 0 :a .a (
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 82 of 197
1.3
Regulatory-Legal Framework for Plan
.
The RCW is federally classified as an endangered species and is thereby protected by the ESA and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 V.S.C. 703-711). The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
, Commission (FWC) classify the RCW as a species of special concern (SSC) under Rule 68A-27.004,
Florida Administrative Code. The eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperf) snake is listed as
threatened by both agencies and the Florida panther is classified as an endangered species on both the
federal and state lists. Critical habitat has not been designated for the RCW, eastern indigo snake, or the
Florida panther. However, "The Service considers panther habitat to be all areas required for the panther
to live out its full life-cycle, including areas providing food and shelter and supporting characteristic
movement such as hunting, breeding, dispersal, and territorial behavior" (USFWS letter to Colonel
Robert M. Carpenter, V.S. Army Corps of Engineers dated July 29, 2005). Habitat degradation that is
prohibited by Section 9 is habitat modification or degradation that is significant, that significantly impairs
essential behavioral patterns, arid that results in actual injury to a protected wildlife species.
The Applicants' proposed development activIties fall under the regulatory mechanism authorized under
Section 100a)(1)(B) of the ESA, which allows take ofa listed species that is incidental to, but is not the
purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity. The proposed project must meet 1) the statutory
and regulatory permit issuance criteria under ESA Sections lO(a)(2)(A-B) and 2) USFWS regulatory
issuance criteria pursuant to 50 CFR 1 7.22 (b)( 1-8). These criteria provide that the taking will not
appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of the species in the wild. Such acts may
include significant habitat modification or degradation which indirectly results in the death or injury of
the species in question by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding,
feeding, or sheltering. A Section 100a) permit constitutes an exception to the taking prohibitions of
Section 9.
.
The ITP applicant is required to submit a Habitat Conservation Plan CHCP) under Section 10 of the ESA.
The HCP must identify and ensure the effects of the authorized incidental take will be adequately
minimized and mitigated to the maximum extent practicable. The HCP must specify the impact to the
species or its habitat that is likely to result from the proposed action and the measures that would be taken
to minimize and mitigate such impacts. The HCP must include monitoring measures for ensuring that the
HCP is functioning adequately [see 50 C.F.R. S 17.22(b)(1 )(iii)(B)].
The City Gate HCP was developed in coordination and cooperation between the VSFWS and City Gate
representatives. In addition, discussions were held with Collier County, FWC, Southwest Florida
Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC), Florida Wildlife Federation, National Wildlife Federation, Collier
Audubon Society, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, and Florida Division of Forestry (DOF). Joint and
individual meetings were held with the respective agencies and organizations to evaluate the HCP
approach, species covered, and proposed mitigation. This HCP provides mitigation measures for
incidental take of RCWs and the Florida panther that will provide a net conservation benefit for the
survival and recovery of the RCW and Florida panther. This HCP is being submitted as part of the
application and is a statutory component of the permit application. It estimates the level of incidental take
likely. to occur and specifies how the impacts of the take will be avoided, minimized, and mitigated to the
maximum extent practicable. It also specifies how the adequacy of the HCP will be monitored and
evaluated. Figure 1 shows the area affected by the permit application.
5
.
.
.
.
,'~-..
'-,,"-
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 83 of 197
1.4
(
Overv~w/Background
The entire City Gate property has been surveyed extensively over the last 21 years for listed species, and
specifically for RCW and Florida panther sign. Larger reptiles such as eastern indigo snake and gopher
tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus) were also included in many of these surveys. The results of the surveys
apd other pertinent project site information are presented below.
1.4.1 Red-cockaded Woodpecker
RCWs have been known to use the portion of the City Gate property, east of the 170-foot-wide Florida
Power & Light (FPL) easement, since 1987. A 1987 survey revealed two RCW colonies (now called
clusters), with an estimated six birds per cluster. The property owner at that time submitted the project
for a Development of Regional Impact (DRI). The FWC (fonnerly known as Florida Game and Fresh
Water Fish Commission [FGFWFC]) and the USFWS were involved in the initial DRI review (DRI
#4-8687-73, Collier County). City' Gate Commerce Park was granted a Development Order (DO) (#88-2)
in February 1989. The Department of Community Affairs (DCA), primarily at the urging of these two
agencies, appealed it The Appeal (Case No. 89-1841 DR!) specifically concerned Section 7, entitled
RED-COCKADED WOODPECKER MANAGEMENT PLAN, of the DO. The DCA requested that the
USFWS review an initial draft of an Appeal Resolution and provide comments, which it did. The
USFWS indicated that it found the Appeal Resolution inadequate and indicated that it preferred and
concurred with the mitigation approach proffered at that time by the FGFWFC. Finally, an Appeal
Resolution, which incorporated the FGFWFC approach (hereafter called FGFWFC Plan) was entered into
by the DCA and SWFRPC and approved by the Collier Board of County Commissioners in August 1990.
The recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission, Collier County Staff, and Advisory
Boards were considered in that DO.
(
The FGFWFC Plan set aside on-site habitat areas for RCWs as well as other state-listed endangered and
threatened species. The current HCP and the FGFWFC Plan encompass the same 240 acres covered in
the original DRI. The area considered for preservation in the FGFWFC Plan would be inadequate for
satisfying the long-tenn needs of RCWs or other listed species and would result in the loss of breeding
groups and unauthorized take without appropriate mitigation. In addition, the 1990 on-site Preserve size
requirements were inadequate for the protection or enhancement of RCWs and their habitat. The 1990
FGFWFC Plan would not have been in compliance with the current 2003 RCW Recovery Plan or ITP
criteria currently used by the USFWS for any of these species. Specifically, the final area requirement for
the FGFWFC RCW management unit of 70 acres was less than 75 acres in the RCW Recovery Plan and
would have contained a basal area of about 2,025 square feet of large pine basal area compared to a
requirement 3,000 square feet of pine basal area. Further, the area would have been an island of habitat
surrounded by development, both on site and off site. This HCP supplants the previous FGFWFC Plan
and provides state-of-the-art mitigation actions for RCWs and off-site habitat improvements for both
eastern indigo snake and Primary Zone panther habitat. This HCP provides multiple approaches to
mitigation for RCWs and the Florida panther and provides long-term net conservation benefits to eastern
indigo snakes and other listed and non-listed species in Collier County.
Surveys for RCWs were conducted on the 240 acres owned by City Gate Commerce Park in 1987, 1988,
1989, 1992, 1999,2001,2002, and 2003. More recent data were collected during studies for the HCP
regarding habitat conditions surrounding the on-site group in 2003,2004,2005, and 2006.
6
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 84 of 197
Significant RCW populations in the region occur at (1) Big Cypress National Preserve (BCNP) (55
occupied clusters) in Collier and Monroe counties and (2) Webb Wildlife Management Area (24 occupied
clusters) in Charlotte County (FWC 2003; Jansen personal communication 2004). Five occupied clusters
Occur in NBM in Collier County, and a small population (five occupied clusters) also occurs on the PSSF
(Figures 4 imd 5).
.
Most RCW territories in central and southern Florida are large, often over 200 aCres of pine (Pinus sp.)-
dominated habitat (DeLotelle et aI. 1987; Bowrnanet al. 1997). Thus, even small populations (ten or
more grOUps as defined in the RCW Recovery Plan) may require thousands of acres of medium to old-age
pine forest (20. to greater than 60 years. of age) Tor foraging and nesting habitat Because of these large
land requirements, the age of pines necessary for cavity excavation (DeLotelle and Epting 1988), the
surrounding low RCW population density, limitation on conducting controlled burns, and the extensive
invasion of exotic plant and nuisance plant species, the potential for maintainirig a viable, on-site RCW
group is highly unlikely. The closest, currently viable population (55 groups, Jansen personal
communication 2004) occurs on the BCNP, approximately 40 miles to the east of the City Gate project
site. Although long-distance dispersals have been documented (DiLotelle et aI. 2004), most birds only
disperse a mile or two from their natal cluster (Walters et aI. 1989). Other nearby populations are smaIl
and would not produce a high number of dispersing young as replacement birds. Consequently, there is a
low probability of recruitment of birds to the City Gate site to replace dead or dispersing birds.
The established population of RCWs in PSSF is about six miles to the southeast of the mitigation site and
a little over seven miles from the City Gate birds. The City Gate RCWs are between 2.1 miles and 2.6
miles from the mitigation site clusters. The average distance between the three closest occupied clusters
in NBM and the foallpoint of the mitigation site is 1.9 miles with a range of 1.5 and 2.2 miles (Figure 6).
The two Closets clusters, West Hussey and Number 4, are I mile apart and the furthest two, Collier
County Guster and Number I, are 2.7 miles apart. These average and specific distances are all within
nonn8J dispersal distances for RCWs when dispersing from one territory to the next during breeding
replacement movements and cluster occupancy (WaIters et aI. 1989). The mitigation site clusters and the
NBM clusters are all.connected by pine habitat except for the Interstate 75 corridor. A moderately large
cypress strand runs between the southern population of RCWs and the mitigation site clusters. The
crossing of such habitat corridors generally provides little barriers tei dispersing RCWs (DeLotelle et aI.
2004). .
.
1.4.2 Florida Panther
The project site is located in an urban area just west of the area known as NBM, a generally undeveloped
area of approximately 15,549 acres that is surrounded by urban development on the west, by low-density
residentiaI development on the north and east and bordered on the south by 1-75 (Figure 7). The
western portions ofNBM include both urban and industriaI areas. Panther telemeny data show that Florida
panther use in the general vicinity of NBM has been limited and that no radio-collared Florida panther has
been docwnented on the City Gate site.
1.4.3 Eastern Indigo Snake
No eastern indigo snakes were observed on site during field investigations conducted for this HCP,
gopher tortoise studies, or studies by previous consultants, but the species may occur in association with
7
.
(
\D
=
=
N
...
~
"0
=
~
:?1
~
=
~
=
-=
't
~
Z
=
.-
~
-
~
..
~
=
U
.../
~
'-
~
=
~
.-
..
=
.Q
.-
-
..
~
S
~
~
-
=
t)I)
.-
~
(
..... .
i fl
i ..
I- =
~ liIic
> ~
c.1 0 ~
.....
~ ~ .
.....
~ !r r/}
.0 "0
f
.....
r/}
~
=
=
~
5
..
~
=
..
~
>- ~
~
as ..
(,) f-I
.- ~
Q. ..
~
r:: .
.- U
f1I "0
=
CD .
CD ~ .
a..;,; ~
.- .....
~
=
~ -
u
.- ~
>
as u
0 =:
.....
05 =
.~ ~
~
~ ~
..
~
CD "0
..... =
tII .
::s (J
..
Zf0 -~ ~ - ..
f 0 Q
.....
"2
~ ..
=
<.> 'I')
~
..
pJe^81n08 J8! 00 1.96 =
~
..
liIic
.
.
.
.
(
(
(
---I
- i ~ Ii. i~]
H~i. !J!li I
i 8 ~ ; i ~ f I f i I
~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ I ~ I I !
f B ~ I i I _ j ~ ~ ~
I 0110 ~I[J~D -1
I lilt j Iii \ I 'I ! II'
II' !" ill Ill! I ! [ i I
-=I=.I--ill~I'J~-UlliJ I r!
. '---==tJ~ .11 11 ~_.._.~-~.
-"-r 'TlLL . JJ
" -f;i., _ /- "
__... =..L_, .
%+0
~
.---
-
e
.a
~
.~
C)
~
Q)
"t:J
a:J
l1>
~
.!!
Q)
a:l
.t:
t:=
o
Z
Lt)
~
(J)
o
JL ::>
"0
c
m
..J
>.
~
c:
::J
o
()
!,'\?'- -.
- "\: ':':';:, '.,
.:._J'.~~~~
,"~ \.... ,~"
_.J.
'"
N ,:
::!:
.
-
=
~
a
c..
Cl
-
~
t
~
~
"CJ
=
~
~
~ .
-
-
~
=
-=
-
"'"
Cl
Z
t---
e
=
~
..
r.c
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 89 of 197
gopher tortoise burrows or in other habitat areas. Two gopher tortoise surveys were conducted including
a transect survey to locate aU burrows and to determine their status and a bucket trap survey to estimate
the population level of tortoises on the property. Habitat conditions were generally noted during both
surveys. The population of tortoises was estimated as between five and eight individuals, all located in
mesic scrubby tlatwoods conditions in the west ce~tral portion of the property. Habitat conditions were
moderate because of the lack of fire and presence of exotic species.
(
1.5 Species Covered by the Permit
The ITP is sought to authorize the incidental take of the RCW and Florida panther.
Four RCWs were on site during the fall of2003. These included three resident birds behaving as a family
group, two of which were probably breeders, and a fourth bird thatbehaved as an intruder. All RCWs
occupying cavity trees on the City Gate property in the fall of 2003, including the pair of adults (a male
and female), were captured and banded or their bands checked so they had a combination of U.S.
Geological Survey aluminum and plastic-color bands. The adult male has been banded since 1996 (Hess
personal communication 2003). The young female in the group was observed foraging with the two
adults on all occasions during that fall and winter. She subsequently disappeared prior to the 2004
nesting season. The floater female (intruder), located on the east side of the property, foraged
independently of the resident group during this year. She often departed the area, heading t() the northeast
and east on several mornings of observation (six observations) and foraged independently of other on-site
RCWs at other times (three observations). She was observed chasing and interacting with the resident
female at other times. No other RCWs were seen during these banding activities or observations.
Surveys to the north and east of City Gate revealed no occupied clusters or cavity trees, except for the
birds two miles to the north at the Golf Course ofNBM. The floater female stayed in the territory dwing
the 2004 nesting season, and no eggs were laid that year. The floater female was translocated in 2005.
The resident breeding pair produced two fledglings, a male and female, in 2005, 2006, and 2007. Each of
those years the male subadult was translocated to the PSSF with a female from the Orlando area. Prior to
the fall translocation of the male subadult, the female fledglings were no longer found on the property
either having dispersed or been subjected to predation. Translocation permits were obtained from the
State of Florida to authorize the translocations described above.
(
The project site is located on the extreme western edge of the Panther Focus Area and Primary Zone
(Figure 8). Analysis of the best scientific and commercial data indicate that the project site has not been
occupied by radio-collared panthers, and no sign of panthers (i.e., tracks, scats, or scrapes) have been
observed during field investigations, Further, no critical habitat has been designated' for the Florida
panther. The Applicants are requesting coverage in their ITP application for incidental take of the Florida
panther.
The City Gate area includes habitats that are typically used by eastern indigo snakes (Cox et al. 1994).
No incidental take of indigo snakes is anticipated, however, since the Standard Protection Measures for
the Eastern Indigo Snake outlined in Appendix A will be followed. Although, this species has not been
documented on the project site, the eastern indigo snake is covered under this plan. No eastern indigo
snakes have been observed on site, but they may occur in association with gopher tortoise burrows or in
other habitats.
12
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 90 of 197
city Gate and MERIT Panther Zones
";.'~. "",,1
+N...:,..L
. '.- .}.,
. .,:: :-.
Icity Gate
[0North Belle Meade
fPublic Lands (12/05)
Iprimary Zone
[jSecondary Secondary
. ,:~:"SSl~:;.~;'~~ ",;,;,::
.: : ,'-'; ".;;;.,,'5:;::.,:~;i,'~";,; ~D-Ispersal Zone
;,.;, .,'=;,u,~"-~~'''1;,:~;~~:~~,;r':4:'i t;.:o- ~
,;~i~{~it]t:~'i~~j"'.~,t~~-~H!.-~:,:;i;:dH;/;"~)'.l!~-i'l;;~-;:;\ I>? ~.[~1;
o,~. ,> ~;
- \:".--~r:"h::..:S-~-,_~
Figure 8. City Gate and MERIT Panther Zones.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...,";l" <
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 91 of 197
2.0
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING-BIOLOGIGAL RESOURCES
(
2.1 Environmental Setting
-,
The project site is a 240-acre site on an undeveloped portion of the City Gate Property in the coastal
habitat of the southwestern Florida peninsula. The climate of the area is subtropi~ including higher
-~onal rainfall in the summer and dryer conditions in the fall and winter. Rainfall is in excess of 53
inches per year with more than 74% occurring during the suinmer months. Mean annual temperature is
740F. The topography is flat with poor drainage. The Main Golden Gate Canal has altered the hydrology
Qfthe site. This canal runs along the northern perimeter of the property. A borrow pit and the 1-75 canal
to the south and southeast of the property may also have affected the site hydrology. The canal and
borrow pit have resulted in -drier soils and a shorter hydroperiod, which has stressed the cypress
(Taxodium sp.) trees on site and promoted the invasion of melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquinervia) and
~razilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) in the wetland areas. Grape (Vitis sp.) is abundant qn site,
p'articularly on pine trees. The site formerly included -hydric and m~ic pine flatwoods.
The City Gate property generally has been changed from a site consisting of seasonally wet areas to one
that is persistently dry except for the wet periods. Ground cover has been eliminated in many areas due to
the excessive buildUp of pine straw, leaf litter, and dense shading. Finally, the fire return interval for the
area has been increased, in part duetQ fire suppression, resulting in an increase in midstory vegetation.
The last significant on-site woods fire apparently occurred in 1987. A wildfire of approximately 10 acres
occurred in the cl~r area in early 2006. Fortunately, it only killed one cavity tree and a very few
forilging tr~ before it was extinguished. The fire burned through several patches of exotic species and
near several other cavity trees.
(
~.2 Development Environment
This coastal area of Florida is experiencing rapid population growth. The land development patterns
generally eocomage high-density residential development and accompanying industry and urban sprawl
along the coast (Figure 9). Projected land uses to the east of the project site include undeveloped land
which is zoned for residential, mining, industrial, agriculture, and conservation land, which, except for
conservation uses, negatively impacts RCW habitat, replacing it with open land or land without fire-
maintained pine forest. Subsequently, habitats in the vicinity that may have been occupied by RCWs in
the recent past are now extensively altered and fragmented so that many former RCW habitats are now
yacant (Dryden personal communication 2005).
Kautz et aI. (2006) mapped the City Gate site as suitable habitat for panthers, but its use likely is affected
by surrounding urbanization.
Available data suggest that City Gate does not function as part of a breeding panther territory. The area
also does not function as a movement corridor to any functional habitat nor is it within a least-cost path
likely to be used by dispersing panthers (Kautz et al. 2006). City Gate is isolated from the core panther
habitat by the urban and commercial development that surrounds the site. A functional buffer does exist
within NBM that panthers, female 66 and male 60, appear to have avoided entering (Figure 10).
14
(
.
~
-
CII
~
C
....
U
eo.
Q
CII
e
<
~
-
CII
-
~
~
a
! .
=
....
-
=
~
a
Q.
Q
-
~
t
Q
0\
~
...
=
~
....
~
.
.
.
~
a:l
Z
E
S
... .
Sill.
C ~ ~ ~
~ .5 ~-e?;
.i!IJl1iii~
i~~'i'ii;!.!!
~E~Q."1ii-6--~
!!!E:o.2WcR....
-60-a..S-!!lG)
80 5'i lIlJ ECii
a: S 8 Q.C!) ftI.f::E
CD.... 0 C -l___"'-'
5C!).~."col5
-~i!>:2=co
S_.~2.eQ.a..
f
=
](
....
.a
=
.!I
"=
~
Co.
oS
~
~
~-.
~!
DIlat
.5 !
- l'I.l
~ =
= ~
~ ~
"CJ=
~ e
.- =s
QCo-c
, Q
~ l'I.l
~ -
=s~
-= -
Q "
.... =
- ="
=s ~
~ ~
Q..-
Q..'f
:(
- ...
~....
-= Q
:; ;
=S"CJ
Cl..=
-- ~
=s....
~ ~
~"CJ
= =
Z :
=-
._ =s
-!t"J
..,. .to
~ ..,.
-u
t!Co-c
= Q
.Q~
_ =s
=s ~
= l'I.l
Q~
.- ....
ti e
=M
=
~~
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 94 of 197
No eastern indigo snakes have been observed on site, but they may occur in association with gopher
tortoise burrows or in other habitats on the site. Indigo snakes are relatively secretive by nature and
usually occur in low density; so their visibility is low. The surveys of likely habitat and for tortoises
revealed no indigo snakes.
.
Conservation lands occur further to the east and southeast of City Gate that currently support RCWs and
Florida panthers, or potential RCW and panther habitat.
2.3 Vegetation
Vegetative cover types within City Gate have been classified based on the Florida Land Use Cover and
Forms Classifications System (FLUCFCS) (Florida Department of Transportation 1999) through selective
groundtruthing during site evaluations and aerial photo-interpretation using 1999 Digital Ortho Quarter
Quadrangle aerial data.
2.3.1 Project Site
The dominant community type now in the potential construction area is mesic south Florida slash pine
(Pinus e/liottii var. densa) flatwoods. This community is dominated on site by an overstory of south
Florida slash pine, with scattered melaleuca trees and pond cypress (Taxodium ascend ens). Midstory
species include wax-myrtle (Myrica cerifera), abundant cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), melaleuca trees,
and young slash pine. The ground cover is dominated by saw palmetto (Serenoa repens) and dwarf wax-
myrtle (Myrica pusilla) in areas that were formerly mesic. In areas that were formerly more hydric, pine
needles and other debris cover much of the ground. Grasses are present in only a few areas, and vines of
grape, greenbrier (Smilax sp.), and sumac (Rhus sp.) are present on many pines. Fire has been excluded
from the property, and the midstory height ranges from 8 to 20 feet. South Florida slash pine forests
typically have little midstory vegetation and a groundcover dominated by a rich assemblage of
grasses and sedges under natural fire return intervals. This open forest type is preferred by RCWs (USFWS
2003). Melaleuca trees have invaded the more mesic areas of the forest, generally in the southeastern
comer of the property, and rendered the area undesirable as foraging or roosting habitat for RCWs.
.
The area east of the FPL line is 240 acres in size, and the percentage land cover within the area (Figure II)
is palmetto (Sabal sp.) prairie (11.2%), palmetto prairie disturbed (4.4%), other disturbed (2.6%),
Brazilian pepper (0.6%), pine flatwoods (70.2%), melaleuca trees (10.1%), live oak (Quercus virginiana)
(0.4%), cypress disturbed/drained (0.4%), and cypress/pine/cabbage palm disturbed (0.4%). There are
about 150 acres of relatively suitable foraging habitat that remain in this area. An area in the southeast
that was formerly suitable habitat is now densely vegetated with melaleuca trees and numerous young
pines in the mid story and canopy.
2.3.2 Picayune Strand State Forest Mitigation Area
South Florida slash pine is the only pine species in the mesic and hydric flatwoods of the PSSF. The
mesic slash pine community is primarily located on the northern and western portion of the PSSF
(formerly the south Belle Meade tract) while the hydric pine community occurs throughout the PSSF.
The more upland areas in the area of mitigation are characterized by mesic plant communities and are
rlnmin~tpn hv c1s:1~h ninp in th/>~ nvpNtnrv ur;th ~"'s:ltt_..~ tn ..l.....".. t'"hh<on.. ...<01...... ;n th.. .....;AM-^~. '1'\,... ~h_.h
.
.
.
~z
(
....iI
j~~ (
u
~
E-ir.l.l
ffi~
~:;.,..
r.I.lo
;:l~
~ 0'"
u.g
o b.l)'c
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 96 of 197
layer is often dominated by saw palmetto but also includes a variety of species such as fetterbush (Lyonia
lucida), tarflower (Bejaria racemosa), and rusty lyonia (Lyoniaferruginea). Cabbage palm has invaded
and become a nuisance in many areas because of the past hydrological changes. The ground cover
includes a variety of grasses, composites and other species; however, shading from cabbage palm and
young pines has eliminated ground cover in many areas.
.
Hydric pine flatwoods occur on the wetter sites. TypicaJIy, slash pine occurs in the overstory with
cypress and cabbage palm in the midstory. The shrub layer is dominated by cabbage palm and wax-
myrtle. Except for a few areas, there is no herbaceous layer because of the dense shading. Ground cover.
where present, includes a variety of grasses and sedges. These community types intergrade and form
mosaic patterns in many areas. Exotic species such as Brazilian pepper and melaleuca are prevalent.
The northwestern area of the PSSF contains large areas of both mesic and hydric pine tlatwoods with
smaller areas of prairie, cypreSs forest, and other wetland types. All of these forested and non-forested
communities in the northern portion of the PSSF have been degraded to some extent with the invasion of
melaleuca and the extreme abundance of cabbage palm. This area, however, includes many older pines
suitable for RCW roosting cavities and foraging habitat. This large habitat complex of upland pine forest
and wetlands provides adequate area to expand the local RCW population in the near future and provides
valuable habitat for the Florida panther and eastern indigo snake. This area formerly contained several
occupied clusters of RCWs that were abandoned in recent times probably due to the invasion of exotic
and weedy species and uncontrolled growth of young pines. Y OWlg pines that would be naturally thinned
by frequent natural or prescription fires have overcrowded this portion of the PSSF. Although dryer, the
forested communities ofNBM (north ofI-75) are similaTto this northwest portion of the PSSF.
2.4
Wildlife
.
Wildlife inventories on the City Gate property have been conducted at various times during the
1980s, 199Os, and 2000s. The last survey was completed during the fall of 2003 and the spring of 2004 for
preparation of this HCP. Most wildlife species observed, or expected to occur on site, are those that
typically occur in overgrown pine forest. Ninety-five wildlife species were observed on site, including 59
bird species, 9 mammal species, 16 amphibian species, and 11 reptilian species. The most frequently
sighted species were the northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), palm warbler (Dendroica
palmarwn), red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), and
American robin (Turdus migratorius). Tracks or burrows of several other species were frequently
observed including rabbit (Sylvilagus sp.), field mice (Peromyscus sp.), and nine-banded armadillo
(Dasypus novemcinctus). Several occupied burrows of gopher tortoises were observed. Green anoles
(Anolis carolinensis) were common small reptiles. Oak (Bufo quercicus) and southern toads (Bufo
terrestris) occurred frequently in the upland habitats.
Common predators consist of large snakes such as the eastern coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum
flagellum) and red rat snakes (Elaphe guttata) as well as several mammalian predators, including
domestic cats (Felis catus) and raccoons (Procyon lotor).
19
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 97 of 197
2.5
Listed Species
(
Brief discussions on the biology of listed species that may occur in the area are taken from other studies
in the region and elsewhere and are provided below.
2.6.1 Red-cockaded Woodpeckers
The RCW is listed as a SSC by the FWC and as endangered by the USFWS (Sullivan 2004, 35 Federal
Register [FR] 16047). The RCW is 8.5 inches long with black and white horizontal stripes on its back
and a large unbroken white cheek patch (Jackson 1994). It has a black cap and stripe on each side of the
black cap. Adult males weigh about 1.6 ounces and may be distinguished from females by the presence of
a small tuft of red feathers (cockade) on the sides of the head. Adult females weigh less than males
averaging 1.48 ounces.
Mean group. size dUring nesting is 2.4 birds for other peninsula Florida RCWs and is generally male
biased. Male helpers are more common than female helpers among most other cooperative breeders
(Brown 1987) and for RCWs as well (Ligon 1970; Lennartz et al. 1987; Walters 1989; and DeLotelle et
al. 1995). Peninsula Florida RCW population, however, usually contain a greater percentage of female
helpers than northern populations. Male-biased adult populations may arise from a male-biased fledgling
sex ratio (Gowaty and Lennartz 1985) or from differential juvenile and adult mortality between the sexes.
Dispersing young males and females usually travel a short distance (less than a mile or two) to nearby
clusters with existing cavity trees to compete for breeding positions with resident adults rather than into
unoccupied habitats with no cavity trees (Walters 1989; DeLotelle and Epting 1992). Young females
disperse from the natal territory during the fall to near the spring of the first year. Juvenile. female RCWs
typically suffer a higher mortality rate than young males (Walters 1989). Higher juvenile female
mortality is thought to be a result of earlier and further dispersal distances than juvenile males. Juvenile
males either remain on the natal territory as a helper, or search for a breeding position nearby (Walters
1989; DeLotelle and Epting 1992). Adult females also have higher mortality rates than adult males.
Higher adult female mortality rates may res~t from either increased reproductive demands (Lennartz and
Heckel 1987) or from competitive interactions with philopatric offspring (sons versus mothers) for the
territory when the male parent dies (DeLotelle et al. 1995). Increased mortality in juvenile and adult
females may be sufficient to account for the male bias in adult populations of this cooperative breeder.
(
RCWs defend all-purpose territories throughout the. year, although these activities are reduced during the
late-April to mid-June nesting season (DeLotelle et a1. 1987). These all-purpose territories range from 30
to 509 acres in size and include foraging habitat and cavity tree resources (Hooper et al. 1982; DeLotelle
et at. 1987; Epting et al. 1995; Hardesty et aI. 1997; and Engstrom and Sanders 1997). In south and
central Florida, territories and home ranges (the total area used) are usually larger than those in northern
regions of the species and average 274 acres and 377 acres, respectively (DeLotelle et al' 1995; Bowman
et aI. 1997; also see Patterson and Robertson 1981 and Nesbitt et al. 1983). This is thought to be the
result of lower pine densities and smaller tree sizes in the south. Territorial boundaries are generatly
consistent over the years in stable populations.
Successful nests of the Collier County RCW population produce about 1.25 fledglings (n = 12) compared
to 2.0 fledglings per successful nest in many northern populations (DeLotelle et al. 1995; Bowman et al.
1997; DeLotel1e unpublished data 2004). Eggs and young nestlings suffer high mortality rates (less than
20
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 98 of 197
ten days old) prior to fledging. The mortality is not due to predators, but from starvation in the nest.
However, about 10% of broods in central and south Florida are lost due to weather and snake predation.
Of the factors affecting breeding success, experience (i.e., age) of the breeder appears to be the most
important (DeLotelle and Epting 1992; DeLoteUe et al. 1995). Habitat quality (density and age of pine
trees and abundance of hardwoods) appears to be ofmucb less importance to nesting success.
.
RCWs forage on pine trees for insects, spiders, and other invertebrates. For foraging, they use a variety
of pine species throughout their range. In this region of the state, RCWs spend about 10% of their
foraging time in cypress habitats (usually cypress domes) and the remainder on pines. Females forage
more frequently on the bole (trunk), while males make greater use of the limbs, cones, and twigs. Thus,
males forage higher in the tree compared to females. Both sexes forage primarily on trees greater than 15
years of age and 4 inches or larger in diameter. Larger and older pines are preferred foraging sites,
although foraging may occur on younger pines (10-17 years old).
Approximately 1,568 occupied RCW clusters (tbe area containing the aggregation of cavity trees used by
a single bird or breeding pair of RCWs), including about 1,268 clusters in pine flatwoods and 300 clusters
in sandhill habitats, are estimated to exist in Florida (Wood and Wenner 1983; Costa and Kennedy 1994;
Hovis personal communication 2002). The majority of these clusters occur on the Apalachicola National
Forest and Eglin Air Force Base (1,062 groups). Approximately 500 occupied clusters ofRCWs occur in
the Florida peninsula.
The occurrence of RCWs in the vicinity of State Highway 951 was first evaluated by the FGFWFC in the
late 1980s and included abo~ 27 occupied clusters (Dryden personal communication 2004). Since then
that population has declined (Figure 12) and now accounts for about 8% of the south Florida woodpecker
groups extending from Avon Park to the BCNP (Wood and Wenner 1983; Jansen personal
communication 2004; unpublished data 2004). The population on the PSSF has increased recently as a
result of cavity augmentation and bird translocation (DeLotelle personal observation). Past management
practices in the Naples area using small, on-site Preserves appear to have been a failure as indicated by
the declines observed in the 19905.
.
RCWs were first identified on the City Gate property in June 1987 during the DR! review process.
Surveys conducted in October 1987, October 1988, February 1992, June 1999, and October 1999 found
two RCW groups were using the City Gate property and adjacent lands to the east and northeast until
1999, when only one group was identified. DeLotelle and Guthrie, Inc. documented a single occupied
cluster with one additional floater female nearby in an adjacent cluster during October 2003.
The property now supports two RCWs with 14 cavity trees (Figure 13). The resident pair occupies two of
these cavity trees to the west. Group sizes appeared large with nearly six birds per group in the mid to
late] 980s. This decline in number of groups and group size would appear to be consistent with other
declines observed in the local population during the 1990s (Dryden personal communication 2004).
2.5.2 Gopher Tortoise
The gopher tortoise is listed as a species of special concern by the FWC (Sullivan 2004) and federally
listed in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama (52 FR 25376). This large terrestrial turtle can reach
lengths up to 38 crn and is tan or brown in overall coloration. The gopher tortoise occurs throughout the
southeastern coastal plain in appropriate habitat (Diemer 1992). The gopher tortoise is extant in all 67
21
.
.
cu
CD
...
<(
~
an
(7)
0::
U
~
It)
I'-
I
-
c:
--
en
. "
I:
Q)
....
l-
e
0
--
15
-
::J
a.
0
D..
~
U
~
.
'. , "f'< '
., , . ... "'. ";'.: . \}~, Hi>':-?
. ,> >:;. '. ',' " ":""'" :'
~". ,~. .,e: r",',":' , '.(::
,',: : ':',. "::;'.i;.-:..;':o+,'j:
.::' .' . .....'...,':'
:';.- ':,' >:.':.,>
",r .' ..... '::\:;::.
.', . ,"~.. '\;;:, .':
'::"". .', ,:' .~. "'..".,: .' i " ';:', >~J."
, .:....'.... .'",' '."'\,'cc'," ,"..' ':c. ,;
".-<.:, """";'.-.--r,..'.'.:.,. ..-.'!., "'.", ...,....; ,:. ",C,':, .'
'; -,'::'- .;.y ki:,', " '.,'.' <:. i",: ":'f;;!: .~?;;,:. ,:' ~~c
.. . ....:..,...',,':, -" ",>.' .
,....r...,.",'.'/' . ...,:.;. ".';1:>':,0;,. ",. .;r' _
.'''' ".: :.,.:..,1<.,: -'." "- " ',' :....,;:~~...,; ,'.,",
" , ",'.. ".. d. ['.".' ,., . ..' ,":;":. '. ;_-' ',.. ", "'::'." ...',. '.,
",
. .
. "
'. .....'.'
;'.'" : -";'.~
"-",. ,...-" ":
. .
.,; ,......:. :,:,'",
," /'~.
.:.:. "''',.'....
. ',..,;
....;. :'" .'.:.
.' ",'.',,'};': '.",':.
.: ,.':'.,:;-, .-'.; ':
:,'<;,.,",: :""+:,',
'. :A~;;;m:~%'": ".;
:~-i":;_:~:>';: ;W;~i.{~.::.
.-..,.. <. ;.','. .'.:'~.:.' ,',E....',.,' :" ".
,;;O"'.;,-':"~'.-mL ",.;
.'~~. ;';'", :.. '.'; "::'. ",:...ur;'....
r,::,~.. J,'t" ,..:i~'Hl:ji::<
:'..'.~,'''-:....'.'. . " ii, ::'11F~
"}:;:.:: .~,,;';,::?...;.';i/:, ,-':;:,:::~ "'.:,."\ :' "f:
. "-.-~' . - ,<. .', "':".')', '.' ';;:,,: ",.>.' :>""'" .(, ':
','., , .",.:,' ',-:,':',.i.'-'."::.-',"> "\,",
';"'00' .0' ..';', ':j "',;c.: '.'::. . :''':'':,.'. 't','" ,.' ,';:.' ,..'
:- '.""". ,:":' ~:~:,:'.:, '". c,
". :.:' ." :~:-->' .C,>,' ,.
.i." """.;,.'7" .1':,"0":.'.
,.;"" .: ,:': . Oi ti'~;' :. '. .',.
;y;;..-:' ". ,:.' ....',' ,.;. I" ,:(, . ".:'c ;'.' '~":(!';.):
;,~;.,,::t ..:<..:.L::'..,'....::i_::~:':,:',
'Vi,H,.;",.:~.:.i '".',,:;:", .... ">::,
,':;/" · j?;xi;" '. ,:', "\:'. :/;;/ ;';;';>'.,
ht:v'2X..: r."O':-' .,. ;'.': ;'" ':, ::~ ,/
" :i..'.' "..;..L,'.> '" '..'>,:," ,,' :i.......,
:;'.' .".: f:'--?'};<",'.:( :'::';;i.
','-:,-'- .- ," '.' . "';'''''''. -- . ,.,,":". <"''-',
".0.-::(." :~",:~:.' '::;c .,.::;;.' :-,,-.'.:::','.'
., '.'. '... '1'-..-, .,,';0-'
....... P~!..'. '- :: :).'~,. ':,0'
.-
:-:~
;:c,
'"
.'.,{;
'.
"
--
. f ~
,. '~",;;:';7:.:r~t~i:
.i! '.
,.. ".'" ...':.'.."";'
". ..'.i.C.'.'.,.... __ ,-
.
.'. .0. ..' '"
0 1.0 0
M N N
LO 0
T- ~
sdnoJ~ jO JaqwnN
" .-:,.
',~.
.:-..
I'.'"
:,;;,;'.
'",:.'[.
..'
.' "
LO
.
;?;~
,;,~
l-l't.~~~;-:'
Itl~
:Cif~~;
,
::
("I')
0)
CD
"I:"""""
y;':
-
''',
"/
r-
eo
0)
~
:.'.....::.'
", :
. ...
0
'.".
,.-.
0)
0)
0)
~
~
o
o
N
~
o
o
N
a..
cg
CI)
>
(
=
M
..
GO
'C
.C
oS
liIic
cl
f
-<
"'"
Q
"0
.-
~
~
Q
U
.-(
I()
~
"0
~
Q
~
,0
=
=
o
U
-
I()
l-
I
(
=
.-
f'-l
;..
~
~
;;.
I()
M
f'-l
"0
=
Q,l
a..
E-4
=
Q
.-
-
~
-
=
c:w
Q
~
~
U
~
.
M
.-(
Q,l
a..
=
b1l
f
to
I
lI:
~ 0
<r:
~
z
0
1--1
f-i
<r:
u
0
~
...:l
<
~ ~
~ u
~ ~
E-t E-o
<
0
~ Z
~ ~
1--1 9
::> 0
0
<C
U
~
U
~
Oi
II)
.., lilo >-
I J. i
II)
0
~
0
II:l
~
~
i
II)
::.::
~
~
.. .
to I ...:l
I ~ *'~ <
1- . -
~ .. ~
I . E-o
~ .. lZ)
. I ::J
II> C>
~j Q
Z
7- II) -
II> ~
". oj
II> U
~
t:
:I::
~
Cl
~o
.LN:![N:![SV:![ .LHDn aNY HaM.Od vam01j
.LNV1d .LN:![YU V:![H.L
H3.LVM ^.LNnO~ H:![nno~
~
-s: "-
"<2
UQ"
~i
~ l!
o
~
f'Olj~
- II
f t:l
::I .. ~
.!fI f .-
~f-cU
.
u
Z
-
o
o
~
r::il l'- I
- E-<g~
~ r.:lNt")
::c: ~ t").-..
E-4 E-< <Q ~
:::J fI) &: e
o i5S 0
:g.....z
~ ~~~
r::il o~,
.....:l C\1 r.:l r.:l
.....:l C\12Sz
r_' -<0
....... ell:
3 ~
r::il
o
.
>.
+>
~ 'S:
';;: v <0 >.
al_U+>
Q u o~ 'r;
:I::u<O
Z j;=....~u
r::lu~ _
C-'~<OV<O
r::l v ti.i ,~ "0
....:I > .... ,_
._~ o~
....u<O+>
~~.s!i!
..0.
'"
8
N
t
~~
:>
~
(t96 'H'~) GHVA31nOa: a3mO~
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 101 of 197
counties of Florida; although, numbers are declining, especially in the southern peninsula where their
distribution is limited and fragmented by unsuitable habitat and increasing urbanization. The tortoise
occupies habitats with well-drained loose soil in which to excavate burrows, a low herbaceous ground
cover for forage (e.g., fire-maintained), and open sunlit sites for placing nests. Typical habitats include
sandhill, scrub, dry pine flatwoods, and disturbed habitats. The gopher tortoise digs extensive burrows,
which provides refuge for 300 invertebrate and 60 vertebrate species. Gopher tortoises breed from
mid-May to mid-June. One clutch, averaging six eggs, is produced annually and the incubation period
varies from 80 to 110 days. Gopher tortoises are herbivores, which forage on a variety of grasses,
legumes and fruits. Habitat destruction is the primary threat to the gopher tortoise; however, a respiratory
disease has recently become an important threat, too. Historically, gopher tortoises were hunted for food,
which contributed an important source of mortality.
(
Gopher tortoises were confirmed to occur on the project site during standard surveys that were conducted
in preparation of an application to the FWC for a permit to relocate up to 7 gopher tortoises from the City
Gate property. The population estimate was based upon documentation of 18 active and 9 inactive
burrows on the site. The FWC issued that permit (WR07635) in 2007.
Mitigation activities on the PSSF for RCWs will also greatly benefit gopher tortoises. One recruitment
cluster area, known as ''#3 Old Cluster 'A'" (Figure 6) on the 46-acre PSSF mitigation parcel has been
cleared of midstory and excessive growth of saw palmetto. The area was burned by a 2007 wildfire and
the City Gate gopher tortoises were relocated into this formerly occupied habitat in January 2008.
2.5.3 Eastern Indigo Snake
The eastern indigo snake is listed as threatened by the FWC and as threatened by the USFWS (Sullivan
2004,43 FR 4028). The eastern indigo snake is the longest North American snake, reaching 102 inches
in length. The overall coloration is iridescent black, with a throat varying in color from red to white.
Currently, only Georgia and Florida support eastern indigo snake populations, although there are
historical records for Mississippi, Alabama, and southern South Carolina. Although, occurring in all 67
Florida counties, this snake is local in its distribution occurring only in suitable habitat areas (Moler
1992). This species may be found in a range of habitats (wetlands to uplands) and home ranges can be as
large as 247 acres. It frequently uses the burrows of gopher tortoises as winter shelters although less so in
central and south Florida. Breeding occurs from November to April with eggs (n = 5 - 10) laid in Mayor
June. Eastern indigo snakes feed on a variety of vertebrate species, including the eastern diamondback
rattlesnake (Crotalus adamanteus). The decline of this species is the result of over collection for the pet
trade and habitat degradation and fragmentation. No eastern indigo snakes were observed on the project
site.
(
2.5.4 Wood Stork
The wood stork (Mycteria americana) is listed as endangered by both the FWC and the USFWS (Sullivan
2004, 49 FR 7335). The wood stork is a large wading bird that is primarily white with black primary and
secondary wing feathers and a short black tail. Aerial surveys in 1995 found 5,523 breeding pairs in 33
colonies within Florida, the majority occurring in peninsular Florida. The species has recently bred in
southeastern Georgia and South Carolina, but in reduced numbers as compared to Florida. Wood storks
require relatively calm, open water between 2.5 to 16 inches deep and often gather in areas where fish are
24
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 102 of 197
concentrated because of dry downs. The species nests colonially, and colonies are usually located in
woody vegetation over standing water or on islands surrounded by broad expanses of water. Historically
most colonies occurred in cypress, but since the I 970s most have occurred in areas where water has been
artificially impounded. There has been a recent shift in the timing of colony formation and an increase in
nest failures due to the degradation or loss of early dry season foraging habitat. The reproductive
demography of the species is highly variable and the percentage of successful nests varies considerably
among locations and from year to year, with many or most nests failing when storms, predators, or
inadequate food resources impact sites. The decline of the species has been attributed to the loss of
foraging habitat, and possibly due to organochlorine pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls, and mercury.
No feeding or nesting habitat of wood storks occurs on the project site.
.
2.5.5 Big Cypress Fox Squirrel
The FWC lists the Big Cypress fox squirrel (SciW"US niger avicennia) as a threatened species (Sullivan
2004). The Big Cypress fox squirrel is distinctly smaller than the Sherman's fox squirrel (SciW"US niger
shermam) and varies in color from buff to black (Humphrey 1992). The Big Cypress fox squirrel is a
geographically isolated subspecies of fox squirrel (SciW"US niger) and is restricted to eight counties in
southwestern Florida. An accurate population estimate is not available; however the species occurs at low
densities in the region. Habitat use by Big Cypress fox squirrels is poorly understood. The species
apparently uses cypress swamps, pine flatwoods, tropical hardwood hammocks and other hardwood
forests, as well as, suburban habitats, including golf courses, city parks, and residential areas where some
component of the native vegetation has been preserved. The diet of this subspecies is also poorly known;
however, slash pine cones appear to comprise a major portion of it. Cypress cones, cabbage palm fruits,
acorns, and a variety of exotic vegetation are also consumed. Development of the Naples area, coupled
with increased traffic on 1-75 and State Road 29 has reduced and isolated the population west of the
BCNP. Most fox squirrel populations occurring on golf courses in the Naples region are isolated. Fire is
likely important to the persistence of squirrels as they apparently cannot persist in areas where the
midstory vegetation is overgrown. Although fox squirrels occur in the region, only one fox squirrel was
observed on site in the wetter portion of the pine flatwoods near the east property boundary. Mitigation
for RCWs in the PSSF will also benefit the fox squirrel. Fox squirrels occur in the area of the RCW
mitigation area on the PSSF and should greatly benefit from enhancement and management activities on
the PSSF.
.
2.5.6 Florida Black Bear
The FWC list the Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) as threatened (Sullivan 2004). The
Florida black bear is the largest land mammal in Florida and their pelage is usually entirely black except
for a brown muzzle. Current populations are mainly centered in Apalachicola, Osceola, and Ocala
National Forests, with remnant populations occurring in southern Florida near the BCNP. The total black
bear population is probably close to l,OOO individuals. Black bears use a variety of habitats from
temperate hardwood communities in northwestern Florida to subtropical communities in southern Florida.
The most important habitats include pine flatwoods, hardwood swamps, cypress swamps, cabbage palm
forests, sand pine (pinus clausa) scrub, and mixed hardwood hammocks. Important food plants include
acorns, the heart and fruit of cabbage palm, and the fruits of gallberry (Ilex glabra), bluebeny (Vaccinium
sp.) and saw palmetto. Insects are the most important animal component of the species' diet. Because of
the large home range requirements (approximately I I square miles for females and 65 square miles for
2S
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 103 of 197
males), the Florida black bear is particularly vulnerable to habitat loss. Conversion of forests to other
uses is detrimental to black bear populations. A low reproductive rate makes the bear especially sensitive
to excess mortality. No bears or bear sign were documented on the City Gate property.
(
2.6.7 Florida Panther
The Florida panther, listed as endangered by the FWC and the USFWS (Sullivan 2004, 32 FR 4001), is a
large, slender cat, tawny above and whitish below. Eight female Texas cougars were released into the
population in a highly successful management strategy in 1995 to intergress with resident males, reduce
the physiological affects of inbreeding and restore historical genetic health within the local panther
population (Seal 1994). Florida panther females weigh between 70-99 lbs and males between 110-159
Ibs. Recent estimates place the population at 80-100 adults and subadults (Land and Lacy 2000; McBride
2001,2002,2003) Florida panthers, most occurring in the BCNP, the Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve,
the PSSF, the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, and Everglades National Park. The remainder
occurs on private lands. Although' variable by study, most home ranges average about 155 square miles
and 77 square miles for males and females, respectively (Beier et al. 2003). Panthers in southern Florida
have been found in most cover types including tropical hammocks, pine flatwoods, cabbage palm forests,
mixed swamp, cypress swamps, and oak (Quercus sp.) hammocks. Small mammals (raccoons,
armadillos) are important food sources, as are feral pigs (Sus serola) and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus
virginianus). Deer and wild pigs, two of the primary foods of the panther, are noticeably scarce on the
City Gate property. Although the Florida panther shows considerable flexibility in adapting to human
intrusion and habitat alterations, their large home ranges make the species vulnerable to habitat loss.
Despite this, the primary causes of recent panther deaths have been intraspecific aggression and collisions
with motor vehicles. Erosion of genetic variability due to geographic isolation as well as the small
population size also appears to have contributed to the historical decline of the species. Since the
initiation of a genetic restoration project, which introduced Texas cougars into southern Florida, the
population has grown to its largest size since monitoring was initiated. Thus, the population appears to be
expanding.
(
26
(
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9, 2010
Page 104 of 197
3.0
PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ACTIVITIES COVERED BY THE PERMIT
.
3.1 Project Description
The City Gate project contains 240 acres east of CR 951, the South Collier Regional Water Treatment
Plant and FPL Transmission Line easement These 240 acres will be developed into a mixed-use,
nonresidential, industrial/office park complex. City Gate Planned Unit Development Ordinance and DR!
Development Orders were originally approved in 1988. In 2005, City Gate received from Collier County
a Vested Rights Determination.
The property is north of 1-75 (Alligator Alley) and is bOunded by developed lands on south (a 144 acre
business industrial park known as White Lake Corporate Park) and north (Unit 28 of Golden Gate
Estates). A large canal (known as the Main Golden Gate Canal) is also just north of the property. The
County's landfill is 0.5 mile east of the project
The property will be developed for uses that include Commercial and Industrial Firms associated with
Technological Research, Product Development, Light Manufacturing,.Storage and Distribution as well as
Offices. City Gate will provide building sites in a physical setting that is spacious (the lot minimum size
is two acres), attractive, and free of the nuisance-type characteristics which are typical of industrial
districts of the past.
The Applicants coordinated development of this HCP with the USFWS, Collier County, FWC, SWFRPC,
Florida Wildlife Federation, National Wildlife Federation, Collier Audubon Society, Conservancy of
Southwest Florida, and DOF. The USFWS, public agencies, and private groups recommended that the
Applicants consider implementing certain mitigation measures that would promote the recovery and
survival of the Florida panther. The Applicants have agreed to implement these mitigation measures as
part of this HCP as follows:
.
l. Funding of a study to determine future wildlife crossing locations that will reduce panther
highway mortalities, and habitat management activities that will provide net conservation
benefits for the Florida panther on occupied lands located east of the project site, and
2. Construction of a wildlife crossing within a predetermined section of CR 846 east of
Immokalee.
The Applicants will also acquire lands and implement management activities required for mitigation of
project impacts on RCWs. These include purchase of mitigation lands for the benefit of RCW recovery,
translocation of RCWs from the project site to the PSSF, and interim habitat improvements on the City
Gate site, PSSF, and mitigation lands. The Applicants have voluntarily implemented some aspects of the
mitigation required for project impacts on RCWs and the Florida panther to avoid further habitat
degradation prior to issuance of the ITP. The mitigation actions achieved to date include the following:
purchased 102 acres of mitigation lands at a cost of $1,057,200, performed two habitat treatments on
mitigation properties and on 324 acres of the PSSF for removal of exotics and other nuisance plants,
established fire lines and conducted prescribed burns in PSSF. Four recruitment clusters have already
been established in PSSF and two translocation efforts completed. Midstory vegetation in all recruitment
clusters has been reduced. In addition, exotic species, nuisance species, and dense young pines blocking
27
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 105 of 197
cavity trees have been removed from an area of approximately 250 feet around each of seven cavity trees
(four active and _ artificial) within City Gate. The 102 acres of purchased habitat will be preserved in
perpetuity through easements or other legal instruments to Collier County and/or the state of Florida with
management endowments to assure their perpetual management for wildlife. The Applicants also
provided a grant in the amount of $56.000 to UCF for partial support of a Wildlife Crossing Needs Study
(Smith et aI. 2006).
3.2 Activities Covered by Pennit
All construction and nonconstruction activities within City Gate will be authorized by the ITP. This will
include such activities as exotic species removal and understory thinning before the end of the three-year
translocation period, construction of roads in any permitted areas. and other lawful activities. Extensive
invasion of exotic species has occurred in some portions of the City Gate property and will be removed.
No direct mortalities ofRCWs~ eastern indigo snakes, or panthers are anticipated during this activity.
This HCP, as "part of the ITP, will' provide authorization and coverage for conservation actions that will
mitigate direct project effects on RCWs and indirect impacts on the Florida panther and provide long-
term conservation benefits for RCWs, Florida panther, eastern indigo snakes, and other wildlife.
28
(
(
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 106 of 197
4.0
POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL IMPACTSrrAKE ASSESSMENT
.
4.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts
Development of the City Gate property may result in the take of RCWs and fledglings produced in
subsequent years incidental to carrying out otherwise lawful activities. Habitat alteration associated with
on-site property development may reduce the availability of foraging habitat, roosting sites, and nesting
habitat. Ultimately all fledglings and adults will be translocated to the PSSF. Direct impacts to the
Florida panther are not expected to occur from construction activities at the City Gate project site for
reasons cited in Sections 1.0 and 2.0 in this HCP.
4.1.1 Anticipated TakelRed-cockaded Woodpecker
The USFWS has developed criteria for allowing HCPs to be initiated for the remaining small RCW
populations on private lands in Florida as well as elsewhere (see pages l22-124 USFWS 2003). These
criteria allow for small populations of RCWs to be used to increase or stabilize declining RCW
populations on non-federal public or private lands capable of supporting larger populations (10 or more
groups of RCWs). These individual HCPs are evaluated in the context of the local and region-wide
recovery efforts of the species. The statutory components of Section 10 require performance standards
that minimize impacts to RCWs. The permit issuance will have a net positive effect, including the
. conservation and potential increase of habitat occupied by the species in South Florida.
The proposed action may result in the incidental take of one group of RCWs that is currently comprised
of two adult RCWs and progeny; although, the viability of the RCW population will be improved by the
translocation of their offspring to habitats more suitable for RCWs than the City Gate property. If
fledglings were allowed to remain on site in its present state of midstory overgrowth and, particularly,
with further habitat degradation in the future, the potential health of the anticipated fledglings would be
compromised because of their limited potential to disperse over large distances beyond the study area to
locate a suitable territory of their own. Many birds are apparently lost when dispersing over large
distances. The proposed off-site measures (Le., cluster creation and habitat enhancement) will minimize
many of these direct effects. Conversely, a net conservation benefit for RCWs is actually expected to
result from the issuance of this permit due to implementation of the mitigation activities. Furthermore, by
facilitating this cooperative venture between the USFWS and the southwestern Florida development
community, opportunities for satisfactory settlement of similar RCW issues may be encouraged
elsewhere. Thus, this cooperative effort may lead to increases in RCW populations on lands managed by
state agencies or other private individuals/corporations.
.
4.1.2 Anticipated Take/Florida Panther
There will be a loss of 240 acres of existing habitat on the project site that has been designated by the
USFWS as Panther Focus Area and Primary Zone habitat for the Florida panther. An analysis ofthe best
available scientific and commercial data for the Florida panther shows that panthers have not been
documented on the City Gate project site but that panthers do occur south and east of the project.
Available data suggest that City Gate does not function as part of a breeding panther territory, nor does
the area function as a movement corridor to other habitats. City Gate is isolated from core panther habitat
by the urban and commercial development that immediately and indirectly surrounds the site.
29
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Page 107 of 197
(
The proposed business park is projected to ultimately employ over 4,000 people in commercial businesses
within the park.. Employees traveling to and from work and supplies and products coming into and
leaving park businesses will result in increased traffic on roadways such as CR 951 and 1-75. A portion
of project-related traffic will move easterly into the Panther Focus Area and the panther Primary Zone or
travel adjacent to these designated areas. Postdevelopment traffic from the park site has the potential to
indirectly impact panthers should one of these vehicles strike a panther crossing a roadway.
The Applicants propose to construct a wildlife crossing in an area of strategic importance to panther
conservation as a mitigation measure that will provide long-term, indirect, beneficial effects for the
Florida panther. The wildlife crossing will be constructed along CR 846 east of Immokalee in an area of
high panther activity. Eight Florida panthers have died as a result of collisions with motor vehicles
traveling along that transportation corridor during the past fourteen years. Four of those deaths were of
females, two of which were of breeding age and the other two were juveniles that likely would have
survived as important breeding ind!yiduals within the area population (Figure 14). This transportation
corridor also passes through an area that has recently been placed under conservation easements and
identified in need of a wildlife crossing(s) to benefit conservation of Florida panthers (USFWS 2005).
Kautz et al. (2006) also identified this area as a key movement corridor through least-cost paths analyses.
The installations of wildlife crossings in areas such as this have .proven to substantially reduce the
occurrence of highway related mortality of Florida panthers and other wildlife (Land and Lotz 1996).
The Applicants, as an additional mitigation measure, provided funding to the University of Central
Florida (UCF) to facilitate a study to identify other loctions in Collier County where wildlife crossings
may be needed to reduce roadway mortalities of Florida panthers and other wildlife (Smith et al. 2006).
Therefore, construction of a wildlife crossing in an area of high conservation value for Florida panthers is
anticipated to substantially reduce the occurrence of highway mortality for the species, thus, further
contributing to survival and recovery of the Florida panther. This mitigation should adequately offset all
impacts to panthers from the proposed project.
(
4.2 Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed project on RCWs, the Florida panther,
and eastern indigo snakes, at first glance, would appear to be deleterious when combined with other past,
present, and foreseeable future urban development in the region. Habitat for the existing RCW cluster on
the project site will be lost as the site is converted to a commercial development, and potential panther
vehicle strikes may result indirectly from employee and commercial traffic moving from the post-
development project into the Panther Focus Area and panther Primary Zone The Applicants, however,
are proposing appropriate mitigation measures over a five-year implementation period that will result in
net conservation benefrts for the RCW, Florida panther and eastern indigo snake. One group of RCW s on
the project site with no future for expansion because of surrounding development will be invested through
management action to create up to five (5) new groups on lands that have been purchased and enhanced to
sustain these established new groups. The RCWs will be translocated from the project site to the PSSF
where habitat conditions will be much improved with the purchase of 102 acres of mitigation land in the
immediate vicinity of the PSSF and the management activities proposed for these mitigation properties
and 324 acres of the PSSF. Exotics and other nuisance plants will be removed and these lands burned to
facilitate more optimal habitat conditions for RCWs. The close proximity of the mitigation lands to the
PSSF secures under public ownership foraging habitat and future nesting habitat for RCWs within the
PSSF. .
30
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 108 of 197
-- . - - - -
. - . - . - -,
':Proposed ;Ranther .
-Crossing ,
_J__~ ___ _, _~~~ _ ~__'-~_~__ _~_ __.
'j
t"l~t".';'"
" (',
. tj; I t ~
_I:
I'
-':b~~V"'>
F. .. - l
, ,I
1
',' .)
, Cause of Death
o \Il!hIcle .
FWC Roadldll Stuciy . Least Cost Paths
From a~~ To
.., - FPNWR to OK Slough
. .. - OK S1ou~ to BCNP
... - OK S1<l\91 to BCNP (West)
. .. - OK Slough to FPNWR
Kautz et al. (in press). Least Cost Paths t,;
Dispersal to the North r :.
- . From Big Cypress
- . Fran FPNM
N
+
~:~~.'~~;E;',fl[,:~;_~;~;,;~ ..' ".:.:~'....
Figure 14. Proposed Panther Crossing Area (CR 846 East of Immokalee) with Kautz et al.
(2006) Least Cost Path Analyses.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 109 of 197
Habitat management activities for RCWs on the 102 acres o.f mitigation lands and 324 acres of the PSSF
will also improve foraging conditions for prey species of the Florida panther, which in turn benefits
panthers currently known to occur within these areas. The Applicants have also agreed and begun to
implement mitigation measures recommended by the USFWS and other parties involved in this HCP
application. A wildlife crossing will be constructed in ari area where eight panthers have been killed by
vehicles while attempting to cross the roadway and where other highway mortalities may be anticipated
(Figure 14). Four of these panthers were females, resulting in a potential loss of two female kittens per
female that may have survived and recruited as breeders into the population. Construction of the wildlife
crossing. using a recommended design known to be used by panthers, is anticipated to provide a
substantial cumulative conservation benefit for Florida panthers by allowing female and male panthers to
safely cross CR 846 in a known crossing cotridor (Figure 15). Funding has already been provi.ded for a
study that will further examine the best locations to construct wildlife crossings in Collier County to
alleviate or eliminate panther mortalities. These conServation actions provide a substantial net
conservation benefit and far outweigh the loss of 240 acres of habitat on the City Gate project site, when
considering available data indicate panthers are not using City Gate or could not functionally use the
project site because of surrounding urbanized development, and mitigate the potential for project traffic to
adversely affect the panther at some unknown time in the future.
The same management actions performed on mitigation lands and PSSF for RCWs will also improve
habitat conditions for the eastern indigo snake in the event they presently occur or would occur on these
lands in the future. Securement in perpetuity of 102 acres in the public domain and provision of funding
by the Applicants for management of the mitigation lands and 324 acres of the PSSF also provides
potential net conservation benefit for the eastern indigo snake in a rural setting as compared to the loss of
240 acres of private lands in an area that is becoming more urbanized.
We anticipate that all similar projects will come under USFWS review through section 7 or 10.
32
(
(
(
tn
=
=
M .
...
=
"'CS
.-
...
0
-
~
...
~
~
.=
0
a
!
~
0
....
Ilr.I
~
-
"C
=
0
=
~
~
-
.=
Q
a
a
~
--
\C
~
go
=: .
u
Q
....
.0
....
S
....
~
Q
-
Co.
=
....
~
....
cu
a
~
-
cu
E-c
-
cu
-=
....
=
~
Co.
=
"C
....
-
Q
-
~
lfi
l"'"I
~ .
-
=
~
....
~
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 111 of 197
5.0
CONSERVATION PROGRAM - CONSERVATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTED OR
PROPOSED TO MINIMIZE AND MITIGATE FOR RED-COCKADED WOODPECKERS
IMPACTS AND TO PROMOTE THE SURVIVAL AND RECOVERY OF THE FLORIDA
PANTHER
(
5.1 Implemented RCW Mitigation Measures
The conservation measures described below have been implemented to minimize an4 mitigate for the loss
of RCW habitat on the City Gate project site. These-mitigation measures were achieved prior to permit
issuance to meet objectives of local wildlife experts stated at several informal meetings during.the HCP
process. The Applicants have implemented these mitigation measures under the premise that the
activities should commence as soon as possible before further degradation ofRCW habitat occurred.
1. A total of 324 acres of tlatwoods in the PSSF have been cleared of exotic and nuisance plant
species. The initial treatm~nt for exoti~ and nuisance plant species was in 2004 and there
have been three subsequent annual maintenance treatments. Controlled burns totaling more
than 118 acres have been completed on these lands. The majority of this property was subject
to a wildfire in 2007.
2. A 40-acre parcel and a 46-acre parcel (three different acquisitions) have been purchased and
cleared of exotic and nuisance plant species. Both properties have had initial treatments for
exotic and nuisance plant species as well as subsequent annual maintenance treatments to
prevent re-infestation. These properties were subject to wildfires in 2006 and 2007.
3. Sixteen acres of occupied RCW cluster habitat in North Belle Meade have been purchased
and cleared of exotic vegetation and nuisan~ vegetation, and subsequently received annual
maintenance treatments to prevent re-infestation. Three cavity inserts were installed last year
(2007); two of these have been used by RCWs. Monitoring of the resident RCWs has
occurred over the last five years.
(
4. Five recruitment clusters, each with four cavity inserts, have been placed in the northern
PSSF. Habitats within these clusters have been enhanced by reducing midstory and
groundcover. Palmetto was reduced around all trees containing recruitinent cavities.
Palmetto was cutback over much of the area in one cluster (the southern portion of the 46-
acre purchased parcel) in preparation for prescribed burning to restore habitat for gopher
tortoises and eastern indigo snakes.
5. The female floater at City Gate was paired with an off-site male from a donor population and
translocated to the PSSF in 2004.
6. RCW subadults produced on City Gate were translocated with another bird of the opposite
sex from another donor population in Florida to one of the recruitment clusters in the PSSF in
the fall of2oo5, 2006, and 2007. These translocations were permitted by the FWC.
7. Three pairs of unrelated RCW subadults(six birds) were obtained through the USFWS RCW
Southern Range Translocation Cooperative (SRTC) in November 2007 and translocated to
three of the six recruitment clusters in the north PSSF (FWC Permit No: WX07586).
34
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 112 of 197
.
5.2 Proposed RCW Mitigation Measures
The Applicants propose to implement the following mitigation measures for RCWs following issuance of
the ITP:
l. Each RCW subadult produced during the 2008 nesting season on City Gate will be
translocated with another bird of the opposite sex from another donor population in Florida to
one of the PSSF recruitment clusters during fall 2008.
2. Adult RCWs will be translocated from City Gate to the PSSF prior to the nesting season in
spring 2009.
3. The 40-acre parcel and a 46-acre parcel will be donated to the Board of Trustees of the
Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida (BTIITF) within two y~ of the
issuance of the ITP. Funds for ongoing exotic control and support of fire management,
including implementation and preparation for bums along existing firebreaks, horse trails,
and woods roads, will be provided as an endowment to the Friends of Florida State Forests,
Inc. prior to or simultaneous with the donation of the property.
4. Sixteen acres of cluster habitat in NBM will be donated to Conservation Collier/Collier
County under a Limitation of Development Rights Agreement within two years of issuance of
the ITP. Funds for ongoing exotic plant control and maintenance will be established as an
endowment prior to or simultaneous with the donation of the property.
5. Commitments for six additional pairs of unrelated RCW subadults have been obtained from
the SRTC, and three of these pairs will be translocated to the northern PSSF mitigation site
during fall of each year in 2009 and 2011 (12 total birds).
.
5.3 Implemented Florida Panther Mitigation Measures
The Applicants collaborated with the USFWS and other agencies and NGOs during the development of
this HCP and have agreed to provide mitigation measures that will promote the survival and recovery of
the Florida panther. The Applicants have provided to date the following mitigation measure as part of the
City Gate project:
I. A $56,000 grant was awarded by the Applicants to the University of Central Florida as
partial support for a wildlife crossing needs study in Collier County that is intended to
identify and evaluate other portions of transportation corridors where installation of
wildlife crossings may be warranted. The $l09,OOO study was also funded by the
National Wildlife Federation, Florida Wildlife Federation and Barron Collier
Company (Appendix B). This study was completed and available online at
http://biology.cos.ucf.edu/files/spice_labj)ublication_OI.pdf.
35
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9, 2010
Page 113 of 197
6.4
(
Proposed Florida Panther Mitigation Measures
Proposed measures to mitigate the effects of the project on the Florida panther include:
1. Funds for ongoing support of fire management including implementation and preparation for
burns along existing firebreaks, horse trails, and woods roads will be provided for the 324
acres of tlatwoods in the PSSF as an endowment to the Friends of Florida State Forests, Inc.
within two years of the issuance of the ITP.
2. A wildlife crossing with fencing of recommended design will be constructed along a section
ofCR 846 to reduce the existing occurrence of highway related mortality of Florida panthers.
5.5 Biological Goals
The biological goals of this HCP are as follows:
I. To establish by observation of eggs, nestlings, or fledglings or occupancy for six months
including the breeding season by RCWs of at least one, and preferably more than one
group (a breeding pair plus any offspring of fledglings and helpers) of RCWs in the
recruitment clusters on the northwest side of the PSSF (see USFWS 2003);
2.
To establish habitat conditions on the PSSF and purchased mitigation lands that will
provide the required habitat structure and abundant insect fauna for the benefit of RCWs
(James et al. 2002). Management of these habitats for RCWs will benefit the Florida
panther, eastern indigo snake, gopher tortoise, and other species. Ultimately, many
desirable wildlife species, including other federal trust species, such as migratory birds,
will benefit from these enhancement activities;
(
3. To improve conditions in the south Belle Meade portion of the RCW population by land
purchase that will enable better burning programs by allowing reconfiguration of bum
areas and improved efficiency of effort; and
4. To purchase lands occupied by an off-site RCW group for increased protection of RCW
groups in the NBM and the northern PSSF areas.
5. To identify key areas in Collier County where the installation of wildlife crossings may
further the survival and conservation of Florida panthers.
6. To construct a wildlife crossing with fencing of proven design along a pre-selected
section of CR 846 east of Immokalee for the express purpose of reducing the occurrence
of highway related mortality of Florida panthers in this area of high conservation value
for Florida panthers.
The HCP, through mitigation measures agreed to by the Applicants, will provide funding for the
construction of a wildlife crossing with fencing along CR 864 east of lmmokalee where a high incidence
of highway related mortality of Florida panthers presently occurs. Several habitat corridors that are used
by panthers occur in this area. Crossings through this corridor are fairly frequent as suggested by the
36
(
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 114 of 197
telemetry points and the observed eight panthers that have been struck and killed by motor vehicles in this
area. The mortality of panthers crossing roads has continued to increase in such outlying areas because of
recent panther population expansions from the core of the population further south. Mortality from road
kills has apparently declined in the core of the population where wildlife crossings have successfully been
installed. Mortality of panthers should substantially decline as wildlife crossings are installed in other
outlying areas where panthers routinely cross highways. Radio telemetry data will be analyzed and input
from representatives of the USFWS and FWC will be sought to select the specific location and design for
construction of the wildlife crossing. This action should aid in the further reduction of highway mortality
to panthers and recovery of the species.
.
Habitat restoration includes 324 acres surrounding six recruitment cluster sites in the PSSF where exotic
and other nuisance plant species have been removed (photographic Presentation, Appendix C). The
second annual treatment for exotic and nuisance plant species removal was completed in January 2005.
To date, the southern land purchase area (40 acres total) along Sabal Palm Road has had two treatments
for exotic and nuisance species removal. These cluster sites will be managed for five years under the
HCP to encourage the occupation by RCWs using an endowment fund provided by the Applicants. This
habitat restoration will also benefit other upland species such as eastern indigo snakes and Florida
panthers.
Key land purchases in both the PSSF and the NBM tract totaling 102 acres were made primarily in pine
flatwoods with associated cypress slough and cabbage palm hammock (Figure l6). These parcels often
included well-developed overstory structure, but usually contained exotic and other nuisance plant
species. These parcels included an occupied cluster ofRCWs (16 acres), one site for a recruitment cluster
(12 acres), and part ofa recruitment cluster on the PSSF (40 acres). An additional 46 acres of potential
RCW foraging and panther habitat was also purchased within the PSSF. These areas are in key locations
for RCWs and Florida panthers. Habitat enhancement should restore these parcels relatively quickly to
good habitat structure. They would provide excellent habitat areas for eastern indigo snakes.
.
Each parcel was reviewed and evaluated as to its relative importance for improving habitat conditions for
these listed species. The presence of one RCW cluster was an obvious key for the 16-acre parcel. The
40-acre parcel provides a pine habitat connection between two recruitment clusters on the PSSF and was
initially heavily invaded with melaleuca. The 46-acre parcel provides habitat for gopher tortoises as well
as foraging habitat for other protected species. Each of these purchased lands includes old growth pine
for nesting habitat and younger pine stands for foraging by RCWs. Radio-collared panthers, as well as
tracks and other sign of other panthers, have been documented on these and adjacent parcels. These lands
contained exotic and weedy species that render them as lower quality habitat for prey species and
predators such as Florida panthers and RCWs. The habitat enhancement and prescription fire program
will return these areas to high quality habitats within the PSSF.
The second treatment of exotic and nuisance species removal has been completed. These purchases, after
enhancement will greatly benefit major fire programs conducted by the PSSF by allowing burns in these
areas and by facilitating more efficient burn coverage of surrounding PSSF. These enhancements will
provide more optimum habitat conditions for RCWs, eastern indigo snakes, and Florida panthers.
5.6 Biological Objectives
The Belle Meade Tract within the PSSF was purchased to provide habitat for RCWs in southwestern Florida
(CARL Report 1998). This tract contains one of two populations on publicly owned lands comprising the
37
.
I I I I
~ I
CD 'il l co
- ~ Fl
c:
~ l :I
"'0 ~ I ~ Gl
C Q) <
/' ::J ~ 11 e
.--/'. CD CD Q ~ 0 Gi 8!. 5
.- C) fJ) E b ::;, a: ~
CD ~ E c G .s ~ ~ .21
~ ~ ~ 0.. :!::!
..J 0 III ::::i
~ () 0.. j -
a. '"i' ~ ~ ~ ~ Gl
"ii CD c
ca 0 i "0 'C ! ::;,
0: ai 0 ! fJ) I- 5
:! ... 8- <!' '! ~ J Gl ~
0 ~ it
'(if I ~ ~ ~ "'" 0..
:2 ~ () co c\l !f N ~ 0
.... - u:i N :I:
I I 1IIIblJIO
. f~l~~ ::'._.?~:'
f:!2:7:' "!,'!". .
:,l.:.''-''''.' . t . .
.
~---J
I'
D=J
_ J W._"J I I I I I
-W- ~
1+-
j::-",
II I -
.. ,
"\ ~--'
, \ n. '1
\ FL '(.f '
J ,! Y'.-.~,
..rj~i,'l, ~+'-W )'....~~-~ ~ ~
1"",,--1 ." ,. .I I -'II ,I {.. ~ tO~
I,;,-/:.... I {- '/,<,:,. ,
'-/="\ ..----.---.- t ,." :?: r;
W I I I n' ."n, '\ .' 1"/ ~
) . Ir', I I r.:--'-j ""~I i C_j,,>\/ '9(" -::v """ft
'- ,"\.... 'j" .~~..L.;'\ /,\9' '~?./'>-i ;;::-', /, -,\ l>,0\)~'\.)~ , 'II
1-
,~.......'
";:r
"
i
o
a:
E
Q'j
a..
Q'j
~
C/)
t___
l
J--"""'
::r .
')
r
~
-=
..
...
~
s
..
-
Il- !
~
-
~
-
rJ1
"0
==
CIS
...
-
00
~
==
=
>.
c~
"0
==
CIS
C=]
:g
~
-
-
Cb~
z
~
-=
-
==
..
~
-
~
CJ
...
CIS
~
"0
==
CIS
~
==
~
....
-
CIS
~
..
-
~
"0'
~
~
==
.Cl
CJ
...
=
~
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 116 of 197
Big Cypress metapopulation (FWC 2003). There are approximately 14,690 acres of south Florida slash
pine habitat, as well as other natural communities on the Belle Meade Tract of the PSSF. DeLotelJe and
Guthrie, Inc. has monitored the RCW population at the PSSF for the past eight years under contract with
the DOF. DeLotelle and Guthrie, Inc. implemented a course of action, which increased the
number of RCW groups on public lands, thus enhancing the survivability of this woodpecker population
in peninsular Florida (see Schiegg et al. 2002; Walters et al. 2002). A similar RCW plan has been
developed for the City Gate HCP and includes cluster creation and translocation of hatch-year (HY) birds
from City Gate and translocation of three pairs during alternate years from the RCW Cooperative to the
mitigation site in the PSSF. This will require a time investment of an additional three to five years to
maximize the success.
.
The foraging habitat and potential cavity tree resources were evaluated for preparation of this HCP. The
locations selected for creating recruitment clusters on the PSSF historically supported woodpecker
clusters and are currently beirig managed by the Applicants for the species. The area, however, has
undergone significant degradation from exotic and nuisance species invasion. This is demonstrated by
the fact that there were at least four occupied clusters in this area in 1991 that are now abandoned. The
DOF has approved and supports the augmentation of the RCW population at the PSSF.
HY birds from the City Gate Commerce Park will be moved to five recruitment cluster sites in the more
extensive habitat of the PSSF. Cluster creation and bird translocation will be accomplished by using
established methodologies (see USFWS 2003). The criterion for success is the establishment of at least
one RCW potential breeding group in the created clusters in the PSSF during the five-year mitigation
period (USFWS 2003).
Florida panther habitat can be improved greatly in this area by reestablishing the conditions required for
the support of one of their primary prey species, the white-tailed deer. The ground cover including
herbaceous and other browsing plants can be reestablished in this area by removal of nuisance plant
species and restoration of more open conditions followed by the implementation of the burning program
in this area. These actions should promote the increase of all browsing species in the enhanced area.
.
Construction of the wildlife crossing with fencing along the selected section of CR 846 should
substantially reduce the occurrence of highway related mortality of Florida panthers in that area of the
species current range and likely contribute to an expanding population as a result of increased survival of
females and production of surviving kittens. The wildlife crossing needs study for Collier County will
facilitate the identification of other critical areas where wildlife crossing installation may benefit
conservation of the species.
5.7 Assurances for Implementation of Mitigation Measures
The Applicants are providing the following assurances that the mitigation measures proposed in this HCP
will be achieved:
1. All mitigation lands for RCWs, totaling 102 acres, have been purchased.
2. Fee simple title of 86 acres of the RCW mitigation lands will be transferred to the
BTIITF. The Applicants have agreed to place the 86 acres under a District Conservation
Easement with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD); a copy of a
SFWMD Conservation Easement is shown in Appendix D for reference. The
39
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 117 of 197
conservation easement will terminate upon conveyance of the title for the property to the
BTIITF pursuant to a policy of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection,
Division of State Land, as agent for BTIITF to only accept property without
encumbrances. including conservation easements. A letter of credit in the amount of
$115,381 for long-term management of this has been drafted and is provided in Appendix
E of this HCP.
(
3. The Applicants have provided $56,000 to UCF as partial funding. for a wildlife crossing
study in Collier County as part of their pledge to implement mitigation measures for the
benefit of the Florida panther.
4. A mitigation and monitoring report will be submitted at the time of permit issuance
documenting measures implemented to date.
5. The Applicants have a written agreement with Collier County for the construction of a
wildlife crossing on CR 846, as part of their pledge to implement project mitigation
measures for the benefit of the Florida panther. The agreement for the wildlife crossing
is part ofa larger settlement agreement with the County, which has been recorded in O.R.
Book 3965, Page 2813 et seq. of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Section
10 of the settlement agreement pertains specifically to the wildlife crossing and is
included in Appendix F for reference.
City Gate will ensure that funding is available to meet its obligations to construct a
wildlife crossing of recommended design on CR 846, east of Immokalee, through an
account solely designated for this purpose. The account may be a trust account,
irrevocable letter of credit, insurance or surety bond. The account, letter of credit, surety
or insurance must not be disapproved by the Service, shall be in the amount of no less
than $500,000, and shall be maintained until completion of the wildlife crossing. Funds
from the trust account, letter of credit, insurance or surety bond shall be used if City Gate
is otherwise unable or fails to meet its obligation to construct the wildlife crossing.
(
5.8 Adaptive Management Strategy
Adaptive management provisions of this HCP are designed to reduce risk to the species due to (l)
significant data information gaps, or (2) to changing circumstances requiring a modification of the
planned conservation measures.
The success of the proposed conservation measures relies, to some extent, upon agreer:nents with the
PSSF. The Applicants will ultimately be responsible if those agreements are not met or enforced.
The option has also been included to acquire young RCWs from other donor sources within the state to
increase the reestablishment ofa group on the PSSF, should there be too few resources available from the
project site and SRTC. Additional funding is provided in the cost estimate to allow for replacement of
cavities due to cavity tree mortality and resources for site preparation around such trees as necessary.
Funds will also be provided as an endowment to the Friends of Florida State Forests, Inc. for support of
future habitat enhancement and management activities.
40
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 118 of 197
6.9
Evaluation Criteria
..
Griffith et al. (1989) found that moving animals into the best available habitat and into areas of moderate
population density have a good chance of success. The latter is important to overcome a threshold
population size effect in which social interaction and mating success may be disrupted below certain
population levels. Lewin (1989) suggested that the release of greater than seven pairs of a bird species
increased the probability of successful population expansion and establishment Translocating birds into
high quality habitat within the core of the species' range also appears to contribute to success. Active
management is required for translocation success as is the maintenance of high quality habitat. While
foragi~g habitat for RCWs may. take Years. to develop, their nest and roost cavities can be constructed
artificially, assuming pine trees are available that meet the requirements for cavity insert augmentation
(Allen 1991; Taylor and Hooper 1991). Available data suggest the forest at the PSSF appears to meet the
above criteria.
Translocation of RCWs has been conducted for the past 15 years with increasing success (Costa and
OeLotelle 2006). The Apalachicol,a National Forest often serves as the donor or source population for
translocations in the Southeast United States. Moving young females to single males has been the most
successful strategy, although translocation of young (nonterritorial) males to single females also has been
successful). Young males and females have been translocated simultaneously to create new potential
breeding pairs with increasing frequency and success. The cavities used for translocation of young birds
can be natural or recruitment The translocation of breeding males, for the most part, has been less
successful than moving young birds or older females. Territorial males apparently are reluctant to give up
occupied sites and may return to the original area even after cavity trees and foraging habitat have been
impacted.
Installation of wildlife crossings has been proved as a successful management tool for reducing the
incidence of highway-related mortality of Florida panthers in southwest Florida (Land and Lotz 1996).
Success has been documented by use of movement-sensitive cameras, track observations, reduction in the
occurrence of vehicle-caused mortality in the vicinity of the wildlife crossing, and analysis of telemetry
data relative to panther movements in the vicinity of the wildlife crossing. Use of the wildlife crossing
and a reduction in occurrence of vehicle-related mortality in the vicinity of the wildlife crossing may be
expected and will be evident from available data.
.
5.10 Monitoring and Reports
A mitigation and monitoring report will be submitted at the time of permit issuance documenting
measures implemented to date.
Surveys of each recruitment cluster will be conducted during the reproductive season (April-July), late
summer (August-September) and mid-winter (January-February) for five years following permit issuance.
Each cluster will be resurveyed to determine the number and status (occupied, abandoned, and start-hole
tree) of each cavity tree. Each cavity will be visually inspected to determine if RCWs are using it.
Maintenance may be required on cavities that leak or contain debris from other species. A Treetop II
Nest Peeper will be used to inspect cavities for leaks or use by other species at least once a year. All
cavity trees will be marked with white paint, new identification numbers, and located by Global
Positioning System for entree into the Forest Service database. Any cavities that leak or have otherwise
deteriorated will be replaced. Additional cleanup will be conducted around new replacement cavity trees
as needed.
41
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 119 of 197
(
A census of family groups (breeders, helpers, and offspring) will be conducted, if birds are present.
RCWs wilt be captured, sexed, and identification bandS applied. Groups or single birds will be followed
during daily foraging activities to determine group size; composition, and potential interaction with other
RCW groups.
Monitoring of RCWs on City Gate will be conducted during nesting, late summer, and midwinter until
2009 when all adults on City Gate will be translocated to recipient sites. Reproduction will be evaluated
by examining nest cavities with the aid of a TreeTop n Nest Peeper from April-June. The probe is
attached to a 37-foot extendable pole with a mounted video monitor at the base of the pole for viewing
inside the cavity. The probe will be inserted into the cavity hole to the back of the chamber. Nest checks
will be made to learn the number of eggs, hatching rates, and the number of nestlings. Nestlings will be
extracted with wire loops within a flexible tube and banded at 5-10 days of age. During each inspection
adult group size, participation in nesting activities by individuals, and any other birds present will be
recorded. Groups will be followed as needed to make checks and counts on fledglings. Fledglings will
be censused again in the fall and midwinter prior to translocation. Roosting sites will be located for all
individuals.
A walk-through will be conducted within each managed cluster site to evaluate the success of the initial
exotic and nuisance plant species removal efforts and determine needs for follow-up treatments should
exotic plant species exceed 5% relative occurrence within the cluster site. Monitoring reports on RCWs
will be provided in March for five years and eight months following the last translocation.
The ongoing radiotelemetry studies being conducted by the FWC will provide sufficient data for
evaluation of the habitat enhancement activities and the effectiveness of the installed wildlife crossing for
reducing the occurrence of highway related mortality of Florida panthers in the area of COlmty Road 846
east of lmmokalee. Eight panthers have been killed by motor vehicles in that area during the past
fourteen years, and this statistic is anticipated to increase during the next ten years in the absence of a
wildlife crossing. Therefore, a measurable positive response should be evident during the next five to ten
years in the form of a marked decline in the occurrence of highway related deaths of panthers. The
Applicants will use FWC data to assess the effectiveness of the constructed wildlife crossing for reducing
the occurrence of highway related mortality of panthers at the prescribed site and submit a report of
finding to the USFWS and FWC five years following construction of the wildlife crossing.
(
5.11 "No Surprises"
The "No Surprises" policy establishes a clear commitment from the Federal government to honor its
agreements under an approved HCP for which the Permittee is in good faith implementing the HCP's
terms and conditions (USFWS 1996). The HCP handbook (USFWS 1996) states that the Service will not
require the commitment of additional land or financial compensation beyond the level of mitigation,
which was provided in the HCP.
42
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 120 of 197
6.0
FUNDING
The cost summaries provided in Tables 1 and 2 describe expenses that have already been incurred to date
and costs to be borne by the Applicants, respectively, for implementing the HCP. Specific tasks covered
under these cost estimates include on-site cluster creation activities, land purchase, habitat enhancement,
field studies on the receiving and donor population, bird translocation, monitoring studies, Florida panther
wildlife crossing needs study, habitat enhancement, project coordination, and assistance to Collier County
for development of a plan for RCW protection and management in NBM.
43
.
.
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 121 of 197
Table 1.
Costs Incurred for the City Gate Commerce Park HCP, Naples, Florida, 2004 to April 2008
(
COSTS INCURRED 2004 - 2008
Category
Project Coordination
Report Preparation
Cluster Creation Activities
Scientist & Technician
Cavity Installation
City Gate Cavity Installation
Scientist & Technician
Cavity Installation
Bird Monitoring Studies
City Gate Birds
Receiving Population (Cluster Monitoring)
Translocation Work
Cluster & Habitat Improvements
Key Areas Land Purchase, 102 acres total
Key Areas Land RE Taxes
o Pretreatment for management (exotic removal, establish fire lanes)
o Management implementation (prescribed burning)
Pretreatment for management and management implementation
on 324 acres within the PSSF:
o Pretreatment for management (exotic removal, establish fire lanes)
o Management implementation (prescribed burning)
Contract with UCF for partial support of Wildlife Crossing Needs Study
Administration
Other Direct Costs
Supplies
Materials
Photocopies
Telephone
ShippinglHandling
Transportation
Per Diem
Room
Amount
$26,000
$6,000
$12,000
$7 ,000
$12,000
$5,000
$15,000
$10,000
$12,000
$35,000
$1,057,200
$57,000
$130,000
$] 0,000 (
$225,000
$20,000
$56,000
$10,000
$1,300
$400
$75
$150
$125
$3,500
$2,900
$3,400
$1,717,050
Total Labor and Purchases:
Source: DeLotelle & Guthrie, Inc., 2008
44
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 122 of 197
Table 2.
Remaining Costs Projected for the City Gate Commerce Park HCP, Naples, Florida, May
2008 to 2012
.
COSTS PROJEcrED 2008-2012
Category
Amount
$10,000
$6,000
$2,000
$10,000
$15,000
$6,000
$30,000
$115,000
$l2,000 .
$500,000
$15,000
$11,000
$2,200
$600
$125
$250
$175
$6,000
$4,700
$5,600
$751,650
Report Preparation
Cluster Creation Activities
Bird Monitoring Studies
City Gate Birds
Receiving Population (Cluster Monitoring)
Translocation Work
Cluster and Habitat Management
Prescribed Burning
Management endowment to Friends of Florida State Forests, Inc.
Costs associated with donation of property
Construction of a wildlife crossing of recommended design
(Note: This is a cost estimate pending final siting and design.)
Wildlife crossing assessment and reporting 5 years following installation
Administration
Other Direct Costs
Supplies
Materials
Photocopies
Telephone
ShippinglHandling
Transportation
Per Diem
Room
Total Labor and Purchases:
Source: DeLotelle & Guthrie, Inc., 2008
45
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 123 of 197
7.0
(
ALTERNATIVES
7.1 No Action Alternative
This alternative on 'the part of the USFWS would be to deny the permit. Applicants would likely not
proceed with development of the project because of the legal risk under Section 9 of the ESA.
Construction activity in occupied habitat also carries the risk of direct take, particularly for the RCW.
Given the life history characteristics (see Walter et al. [2002]) and references within] of the RCW and
because the site is easily accessible and surrounded by lands that are or will be developed, the short-term
survival prospects for the RCW group on City Gate is very poor. Although Florida panthers have not
used the area in recent decades, these human impacts will further assure the lack of panther use of the
area. If the pennit is denied, casual use of the site and other potential disruptive influences as well as a
lack of fire would continue to degrade the current condition of the habitat used by these species. An ITP
for otherwise lawful activities is provided under provisions of the ESA, if the project meets the USFWS
issuance criteria outlined.in Title 59, Code of Federal Regulations.
The Applicants could choose to continue management of the on-site habitat area for RCWs. The existing
adult RCWs probably would continue to reproduce for an indetenrtinate number of years. Offspring
might replace the existing adults; however, the recruitment of birds to replace adults will eventually be
disrupted because of the isolation of this single group. As a result, there is a high probability that the
cluster would be abandoned within the next five years (Walters et al. 2002) under a no-action alternative.
Furthermore, the absence of fire will reduce the long-term survival of the RCWs on the property.
Currently the midstory vegetation is higher than is preferred by the species (USFWS 2003). A no-action
alternative will provide no benefits to the species in the long term.
The Florida panther will have little to no immediate change to their current status if the permit is denied
except that continued degradation of habitat wilt occur. Long-term effects of no habitat management will
eventually result in habitat degradation for upland species including the panther. Due to excessive fuel
loads, hot wildfires are likely to occur on the project site thereby eliminating most forested habitat.
(
The l80 acres of pine flatwoods on the City Gate property had been invaded by nuisance native species,
such as wax myrtle and cabbage palm and exotic species such as melaleuca, as of 2000. This condition
will only continue to worsen in the absence of fire management. A lack of prescribed fire has contributed
to the invasion of these species, as well as the development of a significant midstory (see below).
7.2 Preferred Alternative
The proposed action, which is the preferred alternative, is the issuance of a Section 10(aXI)(B) permit by
the USFWS to allow incidental take of RCWs and Florida panther for a IS-year period (see above). This
alternative will provide conservation benefits to RCWs and Florida panthers while accommodating
otherwise normal and lawful land use activity. It consists of the USFWS issuing an ITP that authorizes
implementation of the Applicants' HCP. The HCP provides mitigation measures for incidental take of
RCWs associated with the proposed construction of the project. Mitigation includes construction of
recruitment cavities and translocation of juvenile RCWs for three years from the City Gate site
culminating in the translocation of adult birds at the end of the above period. Additional mitigation
includes land acquisition of 86 acres in the PSSF and a l6-acre tract in the NBM with an existing
population of RCWs (purchase of an offsite cluster), installation of five recruitment clusters and removal
46
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 124 of 197
of exotic and nuisance species from 324 acres of pine flatwoods habitat Highway-related mortality of the
Florida panther will be alleviated or eliminated on CR 846 east of lmmokalee following the construction
of a wildlife crossing with fencing in that important area of the species current raage. Additional areas
needing installation of wildlife crossings will be identified and evaluated through the wildlife crossing
needs study for Collier County.
7.3 FWC Alternative
The project site, under this alternative, will be developed as planned, using the original design
configuration as outlined in the DRI with the accompanying Habitat Management Plan. Habitat
conditions will improve slightly in the managed area. The RCWs will be further isolated from
surrounding RCW groups. There will be no bum program to enhance the ground cover. Other urban
species such as European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) and red-bellied woodpeckers will compete for the
cavities, likely resulting in the eventual loss of on-site RCWs. There would be no conservation measures
implemented for Florida panthers under this alternative.
The Applicants would be exposed to incidental take of the RCW under this alternative. There would be a
long-tenn loss of resources, and mitigation would not be provided. The Applicants could apply for
development approval, but may be exposed to a take situation under provisions of Section 9 of the ESA.
47
.
.
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 125 of 197
8.0
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION, CHANGED AND UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES
(
8.1 Changed Circumstances
Changed circumstances are reasonably foreseeable circumstances, which may occur in the project area or
to the covered species, including hurricanes, flooding, fire, or sudden population decline due to disease or
habitat degradation.
A steep decline in the populations of RCWs and Florida panthers due to disease, food base change,
demographic changes, or catastrophic event will trigger efforts on the part of the USFWS to acknowledge
a change in viability of the species. Adaptive management provisions implemented by Applicants in
response to such events will include consultation with the USFWS to determine if incidental take may
continue. This adaptive man8gement strategy will be necessary if the species is declared to be in a
jeopardy status. Recovery of one or more of the species could warrant a change in their listing status and
also may cause re-initiation of conSultation. ..-
Finally, monitoring the success of restoration in this HCP depends on annual data the Applicants gather.
Should the Applicants stop funding the gathering of data, other options to gather these data would be
agreed upon between the Applicants and the USFWS.
The more likely occurrence will be the loss of the RCW group or one breeder from the City Gate cluster.
If the entire group disappears, no further action is planned. If one breeder disappears, actions could
include moving a young bird from elsewhere to the group. This would however, depend on when the loss
occurred If the breeder disappeared during the last year of the study, then no action would be taken.
Young birds usually fail in their initial breeding attempts in sparse foraging habitats (Leonard et aI. 2004).
These young birds would likely provide more service to restoring a population by being translocated to
the PSSF or elsewhere.
(
\
8.2 Unforeseen Circumstances
Unforeseen and/or changed circumstances may become apparent either to the Permittee, authorized
agents, or to personnel of the USFWS. Unforeseen circumstances are defined, for purposes of this HCP,
as changes in circumstances affecting a species or geographic area covered by the HCP that could not
reasonably have been anticipated by the HCP developers and the USFWS at the time of the HCPs
negotiation and development, and that result in a substantial and adverse change in the status of the
covered species. Changed circumstances are defined as changes in circumstances affecting a species or
geographic area covered by the HCP that can reasonably be anticipated by HCP developers and the
USFWS, and for which planning can be done.
Should either unforeseen or changed circumstances arise, the Permittee and the contact office of the
USFWS shall meet within twenty (20) working days following notice. The USFWS and Permittee shall
together agree upon appropriate and reasonable measures for addressing such circumstances, within the
rule of applicable law, and the Permittee shall implement appropriate and reasonable measures within an
additional thirty (30) working days, unless the USFWS agrees to a longer time period.
48
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 126 of 197
A catastrophic or other unforeseen event will trigger the Service to acknowledge a change in viability of
covered species. The Service will reinitiate consultation on the listed species and resolution of issues
should be agreed upon between the Applicants and the Service.
.
8.3 Other Measures as Required by Director
An Implementing Agreement between Applicants and the Service will not be necessary.
city Gate's financial capability of and commitment to carrying out, after issuance of the ITP, the donation
of the 86 acres (a 40 acre parcel and a 46 acre parcel) of inholdings in the PSSF to the State of Florida
(BTIITF) as well as the funding for the perpetual management of lands with the Friends of the Florida
State Forest, Inc. is clearly evidenced by City Gate's implementation and completion of most of the
mitigation measures prior to the issuance of the ITP. The mitigation lands have been acquired and are
free and clear of financial encumbrances. The lands have had an initial treatment for exotic and nuisance
plant species and at least three. subsequent annual maintenance treatments. The Applicant has
corresponded, regarding the donation and endowment, with the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (the land acquisition agent for the BTIITF), the Friends of the Florida State Forest, Inc., Forest
Management Bureau (DOF). The 86 acres of mitigation lands are within the Optimum Management
Boundary of the PSSF. Further, the donation of the 86 acres and the endowment are both entirely
consistent and compatible with the State's Perspective and Preferences on Mitigation Projects.
The 16-acre parcel in NBM is not included in the donation to the State as the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection as agent for the BTIITF has not agreed to accept conveyance of NBM lands
because the DOF is currently not committed to managing lands north of 1-75. The Applicant, after
issuance of the ITP, will record a Limitation of Development Rights Agreement executed with Collier
County on the 16-acre parcel in NBM. The Limitation of Development Rights Agreement restricts the
development and use of the property in order to promote the protection and conservation of valuable
environmental lands similar to a conservation easement. The agreement runs with the title to the property
and is binding in perpetuity. The Applicants also will offer the donation of the 16-acre parcel to Collier
County as part of the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program (Appendix G). This satisfies the
reasonable assurance requirements with respect to this mitigation property.
.
The Applicants have a written agreement with Collier County for the construction of a wildlife crossing
on CR 846 as part of their pledge to implement mitigation measures for the benefit of the Florida panther.
This agreement has been recorded in O.R. Book 3965, Page 2813 et seq. of the Public Records of Collier
County, Florida. Section 10 of the settlement agreement pertains specifically to the wildlife crossing and
is included in Appendix F for reference. Upon issuance of the ITP, City Gate will ensure that funding is
available to meet its obligations to construct a wildlife crossing of recommended design on CR 846, east
of Immokalee, through an account solely designated for this purpose. The account may be a trust
account, irrevocable letter of credit, insurance, or surety bond. The account, letter of credit, insurance, or
surety bond must not be disapproved by the Service, shall be in the amount of no less than $500,000, and
shall be maintained until completion of the wildlife crossing. Funds from the trust account, letter of
credit, insurance, or surety bond shall be used if City Gate is otherwise unable or fails to meet its
obligation to construct the wildlife crossing.
49
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 127 of 197
9.0
(
LITERATURE CITED
Allen, D. H. 199J. An insert technique for constructing artificial red-cockaded woodpecker cavities.
U.S. Forest Service General Technical Rep. SE-73.
Beier, P., M. R. Vaughan, M. J. Conroy, and H. Quigley, 2003. An analysis of scientific literature related
to the Florida panther. Final Report for Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
Project NGO I-I 05.
Bowman, R., D. L. Leonard, L. M. Richman, and L. K. Backus. 1997. Demography of the red-cockaded
woodpecker at the Avon Park Air Force Range. Report Number F08602-96-DOOI5. Archbold
Biological Station, Lake Placid, Florida, USA.
Brown, J. L. 1987. Helping and communal breeding in birds: ecology and evolution. Princeton
University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
Conservation and Recreation Lands (CARL) Annual Report 1998. Department of Environmental
Protection. Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
Costa, R and R S. DeLotelIe. 2006. Reintroduction of fauna to longleaf pine ecosystem: opportunities and
challenges. Pages 333-374 in S. Jose, E. J. Jokela, and D. L. Miller, editors. The longleaf pine
ecosystem: ecology, silviculture, and restoration. Springer Publishers, New York City, New
York, USA.
Costa, R., and E. T. Kennedy. 1994. Red-cockaded woodpecker translocation 1989~1994: State-of-our-
knowledge. Pages 74-81 in Annual Proceedings of the American Zoo and Aquarium Association.
American Zoo and Association, Wheeling, West Virginia, USA.
(
Cox, J., R. Kautz, M. MacLaughlin, and T. Gilbert 1994. Closing the gaps in Florida's wildlife habitat
conservation system. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida,
USA.
DeLotelle, R. S., R. 1. Epting, D. L. Leonard, Jr., and R. Costa. 2004. Management strategies for
recovery of red-cockaded woodpecker populations: a metapopulation proposal. Pages 77-89 in
R. Costa and S. 1. Daniels, editors. Red-cockaded woodpecker: road to recovery. Hancock House
Publishers, Blaine, Washington, USA.
DeLotelle, R. S., R. 1. Epting, and G. DeMuth. 1995. A 12-year study of red-cockaded woodpeckers in
central Florida. Proceedings Third Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Symposium. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
DeLoteIle, R. S. and R. J. Epting. 1992. Reproduction of the red-cockaded woodpecker in central
Florida. Wilson Bulletin 104:285-294.
DeLotelle. R S., R. 1. Epting, and 1. R. Newman. 1987. Habitat use and territory characteristics of red-
cockaded woodpeckers in central Florida. Wilson Bulletin 99:202-271.
50
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 128 of 197
DeLotelle, R. S. and R. 1. Epting. 1988. Selection of old trees for cavities by red-cockaded woodpeckers.
Wildlife Society Bulletin 16:48-52.
.
Diemer, J. E. 1992. Gopher tortoise. Pages 123-127 in P.E. Moler, editor. Rare and endangered biota of
Florida. Volume 3: Amphibians and Reptiles. University Press of Florida, Gainesville, Florida,
USA.
Engstrom, R. T. and F. J. Sanders. 1997. Red-cockaded woodpecker foraging ecology in an old-growth
longleafpine forest Wilson Bulletin 109:203-217.
Epting, R. J. R. S. DeLotelle, and T. Beaty. 1995. Red-cockaded woodpecker territory and habitat use in
Georgia and Florida. Pages 59-67 in D. L. Kulhavy, R. G. Hooper, and R. Costa, editors. Red-
cockaded woodpecker symposium II: recovery, ecology, and management. Center for Applied
Studies in Forestry, College of Forestry, Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, Texas,
USA.
Florida Department of Transportation. January 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover, and Forms,
Classification System.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2003. Management plan red-cockaded woodpecker
(Picoides borealis). Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
Gowaty, P. A. and M. R. Lennartz. 1985. Sex ratio of nestling and fledgling red-cockaded woodpeckers
(Picoides borealis) favor males. American Naturalist 126:347-353.
Griffith, B., 1. M. Scott, J. W. Carpenter, and C. Reed. 1989. Translocation as a species conservation tool:
status and strategy. Science 245:477-480.
.
Hardesty, J. L., K. E. Gault, and H. F. Percival. 1997. Ecological correlates ofred-cockaded woodpecker
(Picoides borealis) foraging preference, habitat use, and home range, in northwest Florida (Eglin
Air Force Base). Final Report, Research Work Order 88. Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife
Research Unit, Department of Wildlife. Ecology & Conservation, University of Florida,
Gainesville. Florida, USA.
Hooper, R. G., L. G. Niles, R.F. Harlow, and G.W. Wood. 1982. Home ranges of red-cockaded
woodpeckers in coastal South Carolina Auk 99:675-682.
Humphrey, S. R. 1992. Rare and endangered biota of Florida. Volume I: Mammals. Univeristy Press of
Florida, GainesviJIe, Florida, USA.
Jackson, 1. A. 1994. Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis). In A. Poole and F. Gill, editors.
The Birds of North America, Number 85. Academy of Natural Science, Philadelphia, and
America Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C., USA.
James, F. C., C. H. Hess, B. C. Kicklighter, and R. A. Thum. 2002. Ecosystem management and the
niche gestalt of the red-cockaded woodpecker in longleaf pine forests. Ecological Applications
11 :854-870.
51
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 129 of 197
Kautz, R., R. Kawula, T. Hoctor, 1. Comiskey, D. Jansen, D. Jennings, 1. Kasbobm, F. Mazzetti,
R. McBride, L. Richardson, and K. . Root. 2006. How much is enough? Landscape-scale
conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation 130:1l8-133.
(
Land, D. and M. Lotz. 1996. Wildlife crossing designs and use by Florida panthers and other wildlife in
southwest Florida. Pages 323-28 in G. Evink, P. Garrett, D. Zeigler, and J. Berry, editors. Trends
in addressing transportation related wildlife mortality. Publication FL-ER-58-96. Florida
Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
Land, E. D., and R. C. Lacy. 2000. Introgression level achieved through Florida panther genetic
restoration. Endangered Species UPDATE 17(5):99-103.
Lennartz, M. R., and D. G. Heckel. 1987. Population dynamics of a red-cockaded woodpecker population
in Georgia Piedmont lqblolIy pine habitat Pages 48-55 in R. R. Odum, K. A. Riddleberger, and J.
C. Ozier, editors. Proceedings of the third southeastern nongame and endangered wildlife
symposium. Georgia Department. Natural Resources, Game and Fish Division, Athens, Georgia,
USA.
Lennartz, M. R., R. G. Hooper, and R. F. Harlow. 1987. Sociality and cooperative breeding of red-
cockaded woodpeckers (Picoides borealis). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 20:77-88.
Leonard, Jr., D. L., DeLotelle, R. S., and R. J. Epting. 2004. Factors contributing to variation in
fledgling production in central Florida red-cockaded woodpeckers. Pages 593-602 in R. Costa
and S. J. Daniels, editors. Red-cockaded woodpecker: road to recovery. Hancock House
Publishers, Blaine, Washington, USA.
Lewin, R. 1989. Hidden complexities in the risks of extinction. Science 243:1294.
(
Ligon, J. D. 1970. Behavior and Breeding biology of the red-cockaded woodpecker. Auk 87:255-278.
McBride, R. T. 2001. Current panther distribution, population trends, and habitat use: report of field
work, fall 2000 - winter 2001. Report to Florida Panther Subteam of MERIT, United States Fish
and Wildlife Service, South Florida Ecosystem Office, Vero Beach, Florida, USA. [online] URL:
http://www.panther.state.fl.us/newslpdf/rtm2001.pdf
McBride, R. T. 2002. Current panther distribution and conservation implications: highlights of field
work, fall 2001- winter 2002. Report to Florida Panther Subteam of MERIT, United States Fish
and Wildlife Service, South Florida Ecosystem Office, Vero Beach, Florida, USA. [online] URL:
http://www.panther.state.fl.us/newslpdf/rtm2oo2.pdf
McBride, R. T. 2003. Documented panther population and its current distribution. Pages 63-73 in
D. Shindle, M. Cunningham, D. Land, R. McBride, M. Lotz, and R Ferree, editors. Florida
panther genetic restoration annual report 2002-2003. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission, Tallahassee, Florida, USA. [online] URL: http://www.panther.state.fl.usInewslpdfl
FWC2oo2-2003PantherGeneticRestorationAnnualReport.pdf
Moler, P. E. 1992. Indigo snake. Pages 181-l86 in P. E. Moler, editor. Rare and endangered biota of
Florida. Volume 3: Amphibians and Reptiles. University Press of Florida, Gainesville, Florida,
USA.
52
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 130 of 197
.
Nesbitt, S. A., A. E. Jerauld, B. A. Harris, P. J. Skoog, C. B. Brownsmith, and G. L. Evink. 1983.
Response of a male red-cockaded woodpecker to drastic habitat alteration. Pages 101-104 in
D. A. Wood, editor. Proceedings of second red-cockaded woodpecker symposium. Florida
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service.
Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
Patterson, G. A., and W. B. Robertson, Jr. 1981. Distribution and habitat of the red-cockaded
woodpecker in Big Cypress National Preserve. South Florida Research Center Report T-613.
Homestead, Florida, USA.
Seal, U. S. 1994. A plan for genetic restoration and management of the Florida panther (Felis conc%r
COryl). Report to the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, by the Conservation
Breeding Specialist Group, Species Survival Commission, IUCN, Apple Valley, Minnesota,
USA.
Schiegg, K., J. R. Walters, and J. A. Priddy. 2002. The consequences of disrupted dispersal in
fragmented red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis populations. Journal of Animal Ecology
71:710-721.
Smith, D. J, R. F. Noss, and M. B. Main. 2006. East Collier County wildlife movement study: SR 29,
CR 846, and CR 858 wildlife crossing project. Unpublished report. University of Central
Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA.
Sullivan, 1. D. 2004. Florida's endangered species, threatened species, and species of special concern.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Tallahassee, Florida, USA. [online] URL:
http://myfwc.comlimperiledspecieslpdflEndangered- Threatened-Special-Concern-2004.pdf.
.
Taylor W. E. and R. G. Hooper. 1991. A modification of Copeyon's drilling technique for making
artificial red-cockaded woodpecker cavities. General Technical Report SE-73. U.S. Forest
Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Clemson, South Carolina, USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Service.
1996. Habitat Conservation Planning and Incidental Take Permit Processing Handbook. U. S.
Department oflnterior and U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C., USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Recovery plan for the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides
borealis): Second Revision. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005. Biological opinion for Barron Collier Investments. Service
number 4-1-04-PL-6866. South Florida Ecological Services Office, Vero Beach, Florida, USA.
Walters, 1. R., P. D. Doer, and 1. H. Carter III. 1989. The cooperative breeding system of the red-
cockaded woodpecker. Ethnology 78:275-305.
Walters, J. R., R. B. Crowder, and 1. A. Priddy. 2002. Population viability analysis for red-cockaded
woodpeckers using an individual-based model. Ecological Applications 12:249-260.
53
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 131 of 197
Wood, D. A., and A. S. Wenner. 1983. Status of the red-cockaded woodpecker. Pages 159-163 in D. A.
Wood, editor. Red-cockaded woodpecker symposium. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission, Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
54
(
(
(
APPENDIX A
STANDARD PROTECTION MEASURES
FOR THE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 132 of 197
.
.
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 133 of 197
ST ANDARD PROTECTION MEASURES FOR THE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE
(
1. AJJ. eastern indigo snake protectionledUQation plan shall be devel..')ped by the applicant or
requestor for all constructioD personnel to follow. The plan shaH be provided to the
Service for review and approval at least 30 days prior tQ any clearing activities. The
educational materials for the plan may consist ora combination of posters. videos,
pamphlets. and lecture:s (e.g., an observc:r trained to identif)' eastern indigo snakes couid
use the protection/education plan to instrUct construction personnel before any clearing
activities occur). Informational signs should be poSted throughout the construction site
and a.long any proposed access road to contain the following information:
a. a description oftbe eastern indigo snake; rt$ habits. and protection under FederaJ
Law;
b. instructions not to injure, harm, harass or:kill this species;
c. directions to cease eIearing activities and allow the eastern indigo snake sufflCient
time to move away from the site on its own before resuming clearing; and,
d. telephone numbers ofpertinent agencies to be contacted if a dead eastern indigo
snake is encountered. The dead specimen should be thoroughly soaked in water
and then frozen.
2.
If not currently authorized through an Incidental Take Statement in association with a
Biological Op~n, only individuals who have been eitber authorized by a section
1 O{a)(l XA) peimit issnooby the SerVice, of by the State ofFkirida through the florida
Fish Wildlife C.onservatiqil Commission (f\VC) for such acti\it.jeg, are permitted to corne
in contact ~'ith an eastern indigo snake.
(
3. .A.n eastern indigo snake monitoring report must be submitted to the appropriate Florida
Field Office within 60 days of the conclusion of clearing phases. The report should be
submitted \\1tether or not eastern indigo snakes are observed. The report should contain
the following information:
a. any sightings of eastern indigo snakes and
b. other obligations required by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission, as stipulated in the pennit.
Revised February j 2, 2004
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Page 134 of 197
.
APPENDIX B
LETTER OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION,
FLORIDA WILDLIFE FEDERATION, CITYGA TE DEVELOPMENT LLC, .
CG II LLC, BARRON COlliER COMPANY,
AND UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 135 of 197
.
LETTER of AGREEMENT
Between
NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION,
FLORIDA WILDLIFE FEDERATION,
CITYGA TE DeVELOPMENT lLC,
CG II LLC.
BARRON COlLIER COMPANY
and
UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL flORIDA
(
This agreement is entered into by and between the University of Central Florida (hereinafter referred to as
.UCFIt), acting for an on behalf of Its Board of Trustees, and the following entities: National Wildlife
Federation (hereinafter referred to as MNWF"), 1330 W. Peachtree Street, Suite 475, Atlanta, Georgia
30309; Florida Wildlife Federation (hereinafter referred to as "FWF") , 2590 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite
105, Naples, FL 34015; City gate Development LLC (hereinafter referred to as MCitygate") and GG II LLC
(hereinafter referred to as "CG") both located at 159 South Main st, Suite 500, Akron, Ohio 44308; and
Barron Collier Co. (hereinafter referred to as "BCC"), 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida 34015-
all hereinafter referred to collectively as the "Group."
l. The Group hereby retains UCF to undertake the activities set forth in the proposal entiUed: "East
CoUier County Wildlife Movement Study Proposal - SR 29, CR 846. CR 858 Wildlife
Crossing Project,J1 attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. The budget for the
activities as described in Exhibit A is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B.
II.
This Agreement shall be effective as of July 20, 2005 and will terminate upon UCF's successful
completion and delivery of all work identified in Exhibit A. UCF shall deliver the final work product
to each of the other contracting parties by September 20, 2006.
.
Pre-award costs incurred by UCF and the University of Florida (hereinafter referred to as MUF")
from February 2005 through the date of execution of this Agreement associated with the planning
and setting-up this project are allowable.
III. This is a cost reimbursable agreement in the sum not to exceed $109.008. NWF, FWF, Citygate.
GG and BCC shall each make separate payment to UCF as follows: (i) BCC shall pay Ten
Thousand Dollars ($10,000); (ii) NWF shall pay, on behalf of itself and FWF. Forty-Three
Thousand and Eight Dollars ($43,008); (iii) Citigate shall pay Twenty-Eight Thousand Dollars
($28,000) and CG shall pay Twenty-Eight Thousand Dollars ($28,000). Each party's payment
shall be made on or before October 1, 2005. Payment shall be made, and UCF's project #
referenced, to the University of Central Florida and remitted to the attention of Finance and
Accounting, University of Central Florida, 12424 Research Parkway, Suite 300, Orlando, FL
32826-0975.
(
.
CG and Citygate's financial obligation is to be applied to that portion of the study pertaining to
County Road 846 from its intersection with the Immokalee town line to its intersection with the
Collier County-Hendry County line. UCF shall not be required to confirm to the Group
expenditures in accordance with these financial obligations.
'Mthin thirty (30) days after the end of this Agreement, UCF shall furnish to each member of the
Group an accounting of all allowable expenses and fees for which funds are used under this
Agreement. UCF agrees to return any unused funds not allowable under the terms of this
Agreement to the Group members in proportion to each Group member's respective share. With
prior written notice to the Contractual Point of Contact and during normal business hours, UCF
shall permit any of the Group members, at each such member's written request, to have the right
to inspect. audit and reproduce for internal review purposes only all pertinent and non-proprietary
records under this Agreement.
(
-1-
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 136 of 197
UCF agrees to comply with all applicable laws and regulations in performing the services under .
this agreement UCF agrees to cooperate with NWF concerning NWPs reporting requirements to
foundations funding a portion of the services performed under this Agreement.
IV. Group does not require UCF to seek Group's approval for internal UCF budget transfers among
established budget categories in Exhibit B.
V. UCF will be accountable for and hold title to all equipment purchased under this agreement and
will be responsible for employing it for the overall purpose of the project
VI. For purposes of this agreement. the term "Intellectual Property' shall mean individually and
collectively all inventions, improvements and/or discoveries, including, but not limited to mask
works, computer software (both object and source code), data bases, negatives, plates, dyes,
molds, prints, paintings, artwork, sketches, designs. processes, product names and logos.
discoveries, know-how, methods, writings, photographs, etchings, drawings. mechanicals, ideas.
concepts, inventions, prototypes. copyrights, copyrightable works, patents, pending patent
applications, trademarks/service marks, trade secrets or any other work or material or property
(both tangible and intangible).
"Background Intellectual property" shall be defined as including, but not limited to, Intellectual
Property which In existence prior to the effective date of this agreement For the purposes of this
Section, the "making" of inventions shall be governed in accordance with 42 USC 5908 et sea.
Intellectual Property made or created solely by UCF employees, faculty or staff will be solely
owned by UCF. Intellectual Property made or created solely by NWF employees or staff will be
solely CNVned by NWF. Intellectual Property made or created solely by Citygate or CG employees
or staff will be solely owned by Citygate or eG. Intellectual Property made or created solely by
BCC employees or staff will be solely owned by BCC.
Any Intellectual Property developed jointly by technical members of the Group shalf be jointly
owned Intellectual Property developed under this agreement. The parties agree to insure that all
persons who perform any part of the work under this agreement and who may be reasonably
expected to make or create Intellectual Property shall be covered by and subject to the terms of
this agreement related to Intellectual Property and confidentiality.
The parties agree that any existing Background Intellectual Property and/or technologies of a
company, university, inventor and/or investigator existing prior to the effective date of this
agreement shall be its separate property, respectively, and shall not be affected by this
agreement. By entering into the terms of this agreement, no party shall acquire any claims to or
rights in any Background Intellectual Property and/or technologies in existence prior to the
effective date of this agreement.
Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in this agreement, UCF shall retain the right to
practice any invention and discovery developed hereunder for its own academic, non-commercial
research and teaching purposes.
VII
UCF grants to each member of the Group a royalty-free, non-exclusive irrevocable license in
perpetuity to use, reproduce, display, duplicate, present, and distribute copies of UCF's solely
owned Work under this Agreement. This license shall also allow any member of the group to use
or incorporate the Work, or portions thereof, into member's publications and presentations. If any
member of the group uses or incorporates UCF's solely owned Work. or portions thereof, into any
publication and/or presentation, UCF shall be given proper ownership credit. This license shall
apply to an media, including but not limited to electronic and print media. UCF's solely owned
Work under this Agreement means reports, analysis, data and deliverables (collectively, the
"Work"). in any and all media, created pursuant to this Agreement. However, this license shall not
apply to any other Intellectual Property used. created, or developed by UCF. Should the
members of the Group or anyone of them desire to publish or present UCF's solely-owned Work
under this Agreement, they must provide UCF a copy of any proposed publication or presentation
-2-
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 137 of 197
.
at least 20 days before the publication/presentation date. This provision in no way restricts the
Group from informally discussing UCF's solely owned Works in conversations or meetings. In
addition, each Group member agrees that UCF shall have for a period of one-year following the
termination of this contract, the right to first publish/present (whatever occurs first) any Work
under this Agreement to the public. However, any Group member may request a waiver from UCF
of this right to first publish. Such request shall be in writing and in accordance with section XV.
UCF's granting any such request shall not be unreasonably denied and, in any event, such
request shall be granted if UCF fails to provide a response to the requesting Group member within
20 days of receipt of the request.
(
Each member of the Group shall have final editorial authority over the style and appearance of the
member's proposed publication/presentation, but agrees that all publications and presentations
shall contain the following disclaimer: This material is based upon funded in whole or in part by
the National Wildlife Federation, Citygate Development LLC, CG II LLC and Barron Collier
Company. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material
are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Wildlife
Federation, Florida Wildlife Federation, Citygate Development LLC, CG II LLC and Barron Collier
Company. This paragraph shall survive the termination of this Agreement. This paragraph shall
survive the termination of this Agreement ..-.
.
UCF warrants that it will not knowingly violate the Intellectual Property rights of any third party. If
applicable, although not contemplated by the Scope of Work, UCF also acknowledges that it shall
be responsible for securing all required permissions, releases, rights or licenses, from any third
party concerning the use of third party Intellectual Property. Subject to the foregoing: (i) the Group
will receive the Work under this Agreement "as is. without warranty of any kind. either express or
implied (including without Iim~tion implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular
purpose); and (ii) UCF is not liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, s~iaJ or other
damages suffered by any member of the Group as a result of any member's use of the Work
under the Agreement. UCF is not liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, special or other
damages suffered by Group due to Group's use of project results, reports, data, or deliverables.
(
UCF will submit two quarterly reports and a final report. The quarterly report(s) will be due on or
about 12/15/2005 and 0411512006. The final report will be due no later than 0912012006.
VIII. The parties agree that UCF may publish the results of the work in its own form.
IX. Group authorizes UCF to issue an agreement to the University of Florida as set forth in Exhibit A
and B. The University of Florida's Statement of Commitment and budget are attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit C.
X Group and UCFmay terminate this agreement upon thirty (30) days written notification to the
contractual point of contact. In the event of termination, UCF will be reimbursed for all costs
incurred and any non-cancelable obligations properly incurred through the date of termination. In
the event of termination UCF shall provide the Group all Work in progress (including, but not
limited to, gathered data, incomplete materials, incomplete deliverables, and drafts of Work). To
the extent required by law, UCF will keep one archival copy of all written reports analysis, data
and deliverables and written reports analysis, data and deliverables in progress (including, but not
limited to, gathered data. incomplete materials, incomplete deliverables, and drafts of written
reports analysis, data and deliverables).
XI. Should it become necessary to disclose confidential information, the parties will notify each other
in writing in advance of the disclosure and will negotiate good faith with respect to protecting such
confidential information.
.
XII.
UCF assumes any and all risks of personal injury and property damage attributable to the
negligent acts or omissions .of UCF and its officers, employees; servants, and agents thereof
while acting within the scope of their employment by UCF according to applicable law. UCF
-3-
(
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 138 of 197
warrants and represents that it is sett-funded for liability insurance. both public and property, with .
said protection being applicable to officers, employees, servants, and agents while acting within
the scope of their employment by UCF:
XIII. All claims, disputes and/or matters in question between the parties arising out of or relating to this
agreement, or the breach of it will be decided in a court of competent jurisdiction within the
appropriate Court(s) of Orange County, Florida.
XIV. This Agreement may be changed, amended, modified, extended, or terminated by mutual consent
provided that such consent shall be in writing and executed by the parties hereto prior to the time
such change shall take effect.
XV. Contacts:
NWF:
Wesley Woolf
1330 West Peachtree Street, Ste 475
Atlanta, GA 30309
404-876-8733 (ext.226)
woolf@nwf.org
Technical Point of Contact
University of Central Florida:
Dr. Reed Noss
4000 Central Florida Blvd., BL 202C
Orlando. FL 32816
(407) 823-0975
moss@mail.ucf.edu
Citygate:
Roger Rice
5425 Park Central Court
Naples, FL 34109
239-593-1444
rogerrice@earthlink.net.
Contractual Point of Contact
University of Central Florida:
Andrea Miller
12443 Research Parkway. Suite 207
Orlando, Fl 32826
(407) 823-2806
andrea@mail.ucf.edu
BC:
Tom Jones
2600 Golden Gate Parkway
Naples, Florida 34015
239-262-2600
tjones @barroncollier.com
.
CG:
Roger Rice
5425 Park Central Court
Naples. Fl 34109
239-593-1444
rOQerrice<a>.earthlink. net
FWF:
Nancy Payton
2590 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 105
Naples, FL 34015
239-643-4111
fwfnaples@earthlink.net
XVI. This agreement shall supersede all documents or agreements, whether written of verbal, in
respect of the subject matter thereof. This agreement constitutes the entire understanding of the
parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties authorized representatives hereto have executed this agreement on
the dates set forth below:
[signatures on following page]
.
-4-
.
.
.
Nam' . ~~ -1.P-
Tiije: 0 ttept;f"..4", S.Gv..-'pCq:4~~
"'~ ~ue~~..........
.....~'3-Q~
Date
CITYGATE DEVELOPMENT LLC:
/?~~~
c.Gl It L L.C
BARRON COl.LIER CO~:
li!e/(W~
am , .
Title: I/{c( ?,....~I ~..,.L
'1- Uz'o:>
Date
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 139 of 197
UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
ACT'" - FOR AND ON BEHALF OF JTS BOARD OF
TR EES:
(
. ~ncfrea Miller
Contract Manager, Office of Research
'1/2-8/05
Date
FLORIDA WILDUFE FEDERATION:
~~~7~1ULu.- ~
Name:
Title' u ." 0 " ~
. r~~".::t 9 I~or
Date I
eelIL~ 1 " i~l4.afUrJ GJte-eU""'/AMl
~~
Name:
Ti~ ~ "
GJUt. -'~~ Clp~
Date 1--
c;/ -Ce:o 'Z!!..?el:\;;
(
(
-5-
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
ExhilRe~ 140 of 197
E. Collier County Wildlife Movement Study Proposal-
SR 29, CR 846, CR 858 Wildlife Crossing Project
.
Purpose of Study:
To determine candidate sites for wildlife crossing structures to maintain/restore large-scale
functional landscape connectivity for wildlife by monitoring and analyzing wildlife movement
patterns along the SR 29, CR 846 and CR 858 highway corridors adjacent to designated
stevvardship areas.
Fundine: Ae:encv Contact:
Wesley Woolf
Project Manager
National Wildlife Federation .
Southeastern Natural Resource Center
1330 W. Peachtree Street, Suite 475
Atlanta, GA 30309
404-876-8733
Contractine: Ae:encv:
Department of Biology
University of Central Florida
4000 Central Florida Blvd.
Orlando, FL 32816-2368
.
Personnel:
Reed F. Noss, Ph.D., Principal Investigator
Daniel 1. Smith, Ph.D., Co-PI
Martin B. Main, Ph.D., Co-PI
Sumita Singh, M.S., Program Assistant
Field Research Assistant: to be determined
voice: 407-823-0975 email: moss@mail.ucf.edu
voice: 352-213-3833 email: daniel(@mail.ucf.edu
voice: 239-658-3400 email: mbmain@ifas.ufl.edu
voice: 301-518-4481 email: ssingh@mail.ucf.edu
Study Period and Milestones:
Entire Study Period: July 20, 2005 - July 20, 2006 (12 months)
July and August, 2005: Purchase equipment, hire personnel, set-up monitoring stations.
September 6. 2005 - April 30" 2006: Comprehensive monitoring of all sites, 3-4 days weekly
May - July 2006: Analyze data, write reports
July 20, 2006: Submit final report
.
.
.
.
Specific Studv Area:
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Exhibli~e 141 of 197
· CR 846 right-of-way near Okalacoochee Slough in NE Collier County; beginning at
lmmokaIee City Limits and ending at Hendry County Line, and southwest of lmmokalee
in vicinity of Camp Keais Strand;
· CR 858 right-of-way near Okalacoochee Slough and Camp Keais Strand in NE Collier
County;
. SR 29 right-of-way north of Florida Panther NWR and adjacent to habitat stewardship
areas. (See Map A).
(Map A on Next Pa!!'el
2
(
(
(
MAPA
,
COllIER COUNTY RURAL & AGRICULTURAl AAEA ASSESSMENT
STEWAAOSHP OYERlAY MAP
,'"..,
~ . .
:.~~i9.(~
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Exhilff3Ae 142 of 197
.
.
. ;.CJ............~ !5J~,..,"Wc\~
? ~=.~ ::.::j~ ~
1 B1.-...-~uw l!2-
.................-- ==
EZJtllDlI...._CfiO=- D='='"
~
~
~ '::'.-.~~7:'
,......._Ma......NIt ~~...................."..".....
.
3
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
ExhiWaAe 143 of 197
Back2round:
Roads are one of the greatest threats to wildlife worldwide (Noss and Cooperrider 1994,
Trombulak and Frisse1l2000). Wildlife crossing structures are needed at carefully selected
locations along roads in order to allow wildlife to successfully cross highways and maintain
connectivity and gene flow within and among populations (Forman et al. 2003). A number of
studies have discussed methods for determining appropriate locations for crossing structures. For
example, GIS-based habitat models and least-cost path analysis for species of interest, data on
roadkilllocations, radio telemetry, remote camera photos, known migratory paths of animals,
and animal signs such as tracks, can identify useful sites for highway crossing structures (Singer
and Doherty 1985, Foster and Humphrey 1995, Scheick and Jones 1999, Clevenger et al. 2002,
Henke et al. 2002, Lyren and Crooks 2(02). Design of crossing structures can benefit from data
on unsuccessful crossing locations (Le., roadkills), but whenever possible should be combined
with data on successful crossing locations (Le., from radio-tracking or tracking stations) and a
broader look at the landscape context of the crossi!lg, including the adjacent topography,
vegetation, and land use. Concentrations ofroadkHls may represent areas where many
individuals are also crossing successfully, or alternately, may represent only unsuccessful
crossings (for example, where there is a break in a fence). Ro~dkills are typically spatially
aggregated, and often occur closer to vegetation cover and farther from wildlife crossings than
stretches of highway with few roadkills (e.g., Clevenger et al. 2003).
Culverts and other structures not designed for wildlife movement may nevertheLess be used by
wildlife, especially when suitable habitat for the species in question exists on either side of the
highway (Ng et al. 2004). However, poorly designed crossings, such as small or flooded culverts,
are not used by some animals (Beier 1993). For example, in southern California bobcats and
coyotes preferred to cross roads rather than use culverts; however, culvert use increased early in
the night, during heavy traffic, and if they contained less water (Tigas et al. 2002). In Texas, use
of culverts by bobcats was positively related to the openness ratio (width x heightllength) of the
culvert and the amoWlt of vegetation adjacent to the culvert. Fences erected to funnel wildlife
toward culverts did not increase overall use of culverts, but may have increased use of the high-
quality culverts (Cain et al. 2003).
On U.S. Highway 441 across Payne's Prairie in Alachua County, Florida, a year-long study of
wildlife mortality was conducted prior to the construction by FOOT of a barrier wall and
underpass system (ecopassage). This study, which documented significant mortality, especially
for amphibians and reptiles (Smith and Dodd 2003), was followed by a post-construction survey.
A significant reduction in wildlife mortality was attributable to the crossing structure - 65% if
hylid treefrogs are included and 93.5% with hylid tree frogs excluded (Dodd et al. 2004).
Foster and Humphrey (1995) found Florida panthers, bobcats, deer, raccoons, bears, and
alligators, in addition to other species (e.g., wading birds and humans) using underpasses below
1-75 in South Florida that were constructed to mitigate impacts of the highway on panthers.
Studies elsewhere have shown that small and medium-sized mammals and many species of
amphibians and reptiles use concrete culverts and drainage tunnels (Hunt et al. 1987, Brehm
1989, Oexe11989, Norden 1990, Ng et a1. 2004). In Colorado, two major transportation corridors
(1-25 and US-85) were studied to identify species crossing the highways and to better understand
(
(
(
4
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
ExhibiPiige 144 of 197
habitat connectivity needs across those areas (Henke et al. 2002). This study looked at
surrounding public lands and documented movement through existing structures and across the
highway. Using remotely sensed data to identify lynx habitat and model probable lynx dispersal
routes across US-85, the optimal sites for locating crossing structures can be identified.
.
Smith (1999) assessed potential interfaces between major roads and priority ecological
conservation areas for future mitigation (e.g.. lengthening existing bridges and enlarging
culverts. constructing new wildlife underpasses) within the Florida ecological network (Hoctor et
al. 2000). Wildlife movement potential was evaluated between core habitat areas through
corridors and potential barriers at intersections with roads. Wildlife and transportation experts
determined elements that were used to prioritize sites for the location of underpasses: chronic
road-kill sites; known migration/movement routes (including juvenile dispersal. mating season
movements and normal home range activity); identified hot spots of focal species activity;
designated greenways; presence of listed species; identified strategic habitat conservation areas;
existing and proposed conservation lands, riparian corridors; and potential to be included in
proposed road improvement project. Likely travel routes were determined using topographic
gradients, watercourses or riparian corridors, and habitat ecotones. The data reflecting these
elements were assigned base values and multipliers and combhled in an additive manner. which
resulted in a final layer, which reflected the overall environmental impact of each road segment.
The areas identified as highest priority for mitigation were regionally and nationally significant
conservation areas and important riparian corridors.
Despite these promising studies, knowledge of the effectiveness of various designs for wildlife-
crossing structures is extremely limited (Transportation Research Board 2002). Species of
vertebrates differ in their requirements and behavioral preferences for crossings, such that a
given crossing will be permeable to some species but not to others, potentially causing changes
in predator-prey relationships and other community- or ecosystem-level properties (Clevenger
and Waltho 2000, 2005). Techniques to minimize wildlife mortality on highways (for example,
fencing) may conflict with measures to reduce population fragmentation, as the fences or other
barriers constrain animal movements within home ranges or among populations (Cain et al.
2003).
.
Monitoring of crossings needs to be drastically upgraded in order to provide reliable guidance to
transportation planners (Fonnan et al. 2003). Monitoring should encompass existing structures
and structures in the design or construction phase, and should include structures designed as
wildlife crossings as well as culverts, enhanced culverts and other pathways under or over
highways that various species may use. Importantly, monitoring of crossing structures, roadkills,
and successful crossings of highways must encompass multiple species (e.g., amphibians and
reptiles as well as mammals). because different structures and landscape/habitat conditions
promote movement of different taxa (Clevenger and Waltho 2005). Moreover, because crossings
constructed for wildlife will inevitably affect hydrological processes (e.g., stream flow and sheet
flow). especially in low wetland-rich landscapes such as southern Florida, crossings should be
designed to be multi-functional, serving a diverse array of wildlife as well as hydrological and
ecological processes.
.
5
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Exhibit~e 145 of 197
Primary Field Research Activities:
(
Our field activities will include the following procedures:
Monitor for all wildlife road-kill three times per week on I) 7 -mile section of CR 846 from
Immokalee City Limits to Hendry County Line and 2-mile section southwest of lmmokalee in
vicinity of Camp Keais Strand, 2) CR 858 adjacent to Okalacoochee Slough and Camp Keais
habitat stewardship areas, and 3) SR 29 from CR 858 south to refuge boundary (areas in orange
shown in Map B). When encountered as part of the overall route (Map B -line with arrows) for
checking roadkill, large animal road-kills will be recorded outside of these target areas.
Conduct wildlife track monitoring approximately three times weekly from September 2005
through April 2006 on graded paths along the right-of-way at selected locations adjacent to'the
road surface. Path locations have been selected from within the road-kill monitoring areas shown
in Map B and in other areas where corridors of forest or other appropril:!~e habitat intersected the
road sections of interest. TraCK paths will be prepared, as appropriate, beyond mowed
maintenance area and approx. 5' inside of outermost right-of-way boundary or on adjacent
private lands).
Conduct wildlife track monitoring at existing culvertslbridges approximately three times weekly
to determine current use by wildlife, and compare this data to road-kill and track data to assess
capacity of existing structures to facilitate safe movement for certain small wildlife species.
Set up remote infra-red camera stations at selected sites to monitor large animal highway
crossing or approach events. Each photographic station will include an array of multiple cameras
setup from the center of each stewardship corridor radiating outward parallel to the road, and will
be checked once a week.
(
Report and Analvsis:
Analysis of field data will include use of GIS information and results from previous telemetry
and tracking studies conducted by Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and other
agencies. Statistical analyses will include general linear models to associate roadkill and track
densities with environmental and highway use attributes such as adjacent vegetation types,
topography~ hydrology~ physical characteristics of roads and adjacent rights of way, speed limits,
and traffic volumes. We will test effects ofland use/land cover on roadkill and track densities, as
well as photographic captures of animals using one-way analysis of variance (ANOV A) with
replication. Other statistical tests will be employed as appropriate.
A final written report and associated data will be submitted upon completion of the study. The
final report will include:
1. Introductory section including brief literature review and background information on the
study area and critical issues (e.g., panther mortality, anticipated growth in human
population and traffic volume).
(
6
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
ExhibflC)Qe 146 of 197
2. Methods section clearly describing all field methods and statistical tests employed in the .
study.
3. Results section presenting all data (with some in appendices) and results of statistical
analyses.
4. Discussion section summarizing meaning of results and making explicit
recommendations for design of wildlife crossings and associated corridors to minimize
roadkill, reduce movement barrier effects, and optimize functional connectivity for
Florida panthers, black bears, white-tailed deer, river otters, amphibians and reptiles, and
other species of concern.
In addition to the final written report, UCF shall provide quarterly reports of the work conducted
and the progress of the study and research activities.
MAPB
o CotIIity Boundary
II Black. Beeir RoadtJlls
. f'lI!Qtler RoadkiII!>
N~kOI Monitoring N
!yMIP Roads A
N Minor Roads
Water FeIltures
_ QIIcb or cllMl _...~ .
_ lI:ltmwIttent '.f....>.'
_ Ulke Or pond 1 ~ .
_~. ~and. $~mp. bog ~" ;-
_ SlIbmerge(for sunken M
o 1 2 3 Miles 1-_
, . ~
-tII""-
-yo
-
--1 . .
~.
. . 4,.....
'..~. ..--....... ~, .""'"";~. ~..
--Il :-:Ar -') - ,(~'
I 1 \T'," . " '. .. ~ ~ :~ ~ _~
J 1-'",. . " -
1i~~tt:4 .... ~.. " ',' .. " .I~
,lI'j, .t. . ~~. ~' '. -. 0-
,/.'0' L "F ~.. , .........
- ...... rt.-. . ," __ 6\l..\:
~ ,'. .
IrT
,"' ;
. "I~~~~, .~.
. ~~~'~'{."'[-
!..'~'; '~'!~~~:!" ~ .;~.
~/~:t(--v. ~~, ,.>;~.
~~.\o~. !
~~~.. . . .
,
r.<"...
~
rrC~ ...'
.
I", . r JA.\ ~.".
'I.lt ~r.
Irl"r-;:~~
. T., .; '''' ;-' '~Ir:"
'.':~ -- t"]).'. . ,0 :r.
. - ~ -~" - L II,
I. ,~~ ~~r-" ~~
It.. ',."...., ~~ {
. I \'.i:l.J~ tI> ;:r/: '\l' .:..1. ~-
~,/.~ h l' '- ..
,~-~~ ~:j'~: ~ ,....0 ~,~.. ,- "~' ~:~i :;; 'r: tf .
\#. "l' /' . _Il ..' I iJ' ~~~~ -.;" ~ ~ . _ iloJ::.ii ~
1-".=== Jl ,: TI ''I'' .J...7 . ~
1 :7 - fb. ,~w.._ .-~ J\'" I J . ,"'\1 .
1 ....... I-- ;..; . ~,II r_ ':...7',l."r- X UJ ,..:S'.' I
...... " ~'-'--. . l-lC'j- ,\t.....' i -: r..,!'!1::'
JII": i .. 'PI . PI ID."-::: _..J '..
Iii '.... \a:-'?'~ .~- ,:~.!: "~R," . .'
I .] if" -.f~tff ,I;,}: . ~'\.' . ~ d~~~ I~ .~..' ..
o . _ {f . .,~. . \ \ '
,~ 1 N j r " _ ~~1. !'~~ p' .~,',' . ~:~~~." t;' . ::
I~' ~.'.~ ~ ~. '(.iI ."
I~: t G" '~_ _'0_..';' '.;) . !l~ 'f .. .:.. _ .~,\.
. '":~ ,{ ~.~ "-~ '!;'..
: >., O\~~~ TO' r= _rolY.//t.-i: ,. y.~ ..
11_
...
, ..,
I---
-'-~.i{~~ .
&.I~ ;:~d:' ·
'.. ....~ :
" Z
~, .
~
~
.
7
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Exhibfi9fie 147 of 197
Literature Cited
Beier, P. 1993. Detennining minimum habitat areas and habitat corridors for cougars.
Conservation Biology 7:94-108.
(
Brehm, K. 1989. The acceptance of 0.2 m tunnels by amphibians during the migration to the
breeding site. In: Amphibians and Roads, proceedings of the toad tunnel conference, ed. T.E.S.
Langton. ACO Polymer Products, Shefford, England.
Cain, A.T., V.R. Tuovila, D.O. Hewitt, and M.E. Tewes. 2003. Effects ofa highway and
mitigation projects on bobcats in southern Texas. Biological Conservation 114:189-197.
Clevenger, A.P., B. Chruszcz, and K.E. Gunson. 2003. Spatial patterns and factors influencing
small vertebrate fauna road-kill aggregations. Biological Conservation 109: 15-26.
Clevenger, A.P., and N. Waltho. 2000. Factors influencing the effectiveness of wildlife
underpasses in Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada. Conservation Biology 14:47-56.
Clevenger, A.P., and N. Waltho. 2005. Performance indices to identify attributes of highway
crossing structures facilitating movement of large mammals. Biological Conservation 121 :453-
464.
Clevenger, A.P., J. Wierzchowski, B. Chruszcz, and K. Gunson. 2002. GIS-generated, expert-
based models for identifying wildlife habitat linkages and planning mitigation passages.
Conservation Biology 16:503-514.
(
Dexel, R. 1989. Investigations into the protection of migrant amphibians from the threats of road
traffic in the Federal Repbulic of Germany: a summary. In: Amphibians and Roads, proceedings
of the toad tunnel conference, ed. T.E.S Langton. Shefford, England: ACO Polymer Products.
Dodd, C.K., W.J. Barichivich, and L.L. Smith. 2004. Effectiveness of a barrier wall and culverts
in reducing wildlife mortality on a heavily traveled highway in Florida. Biological Conservation
118:619-631.
Fonnan, R.T.T., D. Sperling, J. Bissonette, A. Clevenger, C. Cutshall, V. Dale, L. Fahrig, R
France, C. Goldman, K. Heanue, J. Jones, F. Swimso~ T. TUrrentine, and T. Winter. 2003. Road
ecology: science and solutions. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
Foster, M.L. and S.R. Humphrey. 1995. Use of highway underpasses by Florida panthers and
other wildlife. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23( I ):95-1 00.
Henke, R.J., P. Cawood-Hellmund, and T. Sprunk. 2002. Habitat connectivity study of the 1-25
and U8-85 corridors, Colorado. Proceedings of the International Conference on Ecology and
Transportation. Center for Transportation and the Environment, Raleigh, NC.
(
8
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
ExhibiP~e 148 of 197
Hoctor, T. S., M. H. Carr, P. D. Zwick. 2000. Identifying a linked reserve system using a
regional landscape approach: the Florida ecological network. Conservation Biology 14:984-
1000.
.
Hunt, A., H.J. Dickens, and R. J. Whelan. 1987. Movement of mammals through tunnels under
railway lines. Australian Zoologist 24:89-93.
Lyren, L.M. and K.R. Crooks. 2002. Factors influencing the movement, spatial patterns and
wildlife underpass use of coyotes and bobcats along State Route 71 in Southern California.
Proceedings of the International Conference on Ecology and Transportation. Center for
Transportation and the Environment, Raleigh, NC.
Ng, S.1., J.W. Dole, R.M. Sauvajot, S.P.D. Riley, and T.J. Valone. 2004. Use of highway
undercrossings by wildlife in southern California Biological Conservation 115:499-507.
Norden, M. 1990. Amherst's salamander tunnels. Reptile and Amphibean Magazine. Sept/Oct
1990:38-41.
Noss, R.F., and A. Cooperrider. 1994. Saving Nature's legacy: protecting and restoring
biodiversity. Defenders of Wildlife and Island Press, Washington, D.C.
Scheick, B. and M. Jones. 1999. Locating wildlife underpasses prior to expansion of highway 64
in North Carolina Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Wildlife Ecology and .
Transportation. FL-ER-73-99. Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, pp 247-250.
Singer, F. J. and J.L. Doherty. 1985. Managing mountain goats at a highway crossing. Wildlife
Society Bulletin 13:469-477.
Smith, DJ. 1999. Identification and prioritization of ecological interface zones on state highways
in Florida. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Wildlife Ecology and
Transportation. FL-ER-73-99, Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee. Pp 209-230.
Smith, L.L., and C.K. Dodd. 2003. Wildlife mortality on U.S. Highway 441 across Paynes
Prairie, Alachua County, Florida. Florida Scientist 66: 128-140.
Tigas, L.A., D.H. Van Vuren, and R.M. Sauvajot. 2002. Behavioral responses of bobcats and
coyotes to habitat fragmentation and corridors in an urban environment. Biological Conservation
108:299-306.
Transportation Research Board. 2002. Surface transportation environmental research: a long-
term strategy. Special Report 268. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
.
9
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 149 of 197
. Exhibit B (
Collier Wildlife Cross Project Budget
PI: Dr. Reed Noss
Agency: National Wildlife Federation
Date: 3/312005
Salary, Wages & Benefits Year I
Dr. Noss I summer month $ 11,783
TOTAL FACULTY & STAFF S 11,783
OPS
Dan Smith .3 FTE $ 17,400
Program Assistant .1 FTE $ 4,576
Subtotal OPS $ 21,976
STUDENTS
Subtotal Students $
Subtotal Salaries $ 33,759
Fringe Benefits
Faculty 30.50% $ 3.594
OPS 1.60% $ 352
. Students 0.00% $ (
SUBTOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $ 3,946
Subtotal Faculty&StaffSalaries &
Benefits S 15,377
Subtotal OPS + Benefits $ 22,328
SUBTOTAL ALL
SALARIES&BENEFlTS $ 37,705
Expenses
Computer, data processing, gps unit $ 1,500
Vehicle Maintenace, fuel, etc. S 1,500
Total Materials & Supplies, etc. S 3,000
Total expenses $ 3,000
Travel
See Travel Detail $ 15,000
Subcontract
Subcontract to UF IF AS $ 41,624
Total Subcontracts $ 41,624
Subtotal Expense and Travel $ 59,624
Equipment
Subtotal Equipment $
Direct Cost $ 97,329
. Indirect Costs ]2% $ 11,679
Total Project Cost S 109,008 (
TRAVEL ESTIMATE DETAIL
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 150 of 197
Exhibit B
Travel to Meetings 2 persons going to 2
meetings
Airfare @S300 "2,, 2
Registraton @$3oo x 2 x 2
Lodging for 5 nights @$120/night x 2 x 2
Per diem for 5 days @$21/day x 2 x 2
Local Transportation @$120 x 2 x 2
MisceIlaneous--parkingat airport, mileage, etc.
@$75 x 2 x 2
1200
1200
2400
420
480
300
Total 6.000.00
Travel to field Sites
10000 miles@.29/rni.
Tolls estimate as I 00 trips @$5 each
Overnight lodging for 50 person nights @$70
Per diem for 100 days @$2I1day
2900
500
3500
2100
Total travel
15,000.00
9000
.
.
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
.t-I~1tI!lbN 9,2010
B~W1 of 197
,.,\ " . UNIVERSITY OF
....."..= FLORIDA
(
(utit.te of Food And Agrieultural Sclenees
Southwest Florida Research " Education Center
2636 State Road 29 North
[mmokaJee, FL 34142-9515
Phone (239) 65&.3400
Fax (239).658.3469
SCOPE OF WORK
(Internal UF-IFAS scope of work for proposal submitted by Univ. of Central Florida)
Project Title: E. Collier County Wildlife Movement Study
UF-IFAS Investigator: Martin Main (PI). Associate Professor, SWFREC-Immokalee
UCF Investigator: Reed Noss (PI), Professor, University of Central Florida
UCF Project OffIce Contact: Joan Lind Jarvis. (407) 823-5264; Darvis@mall.ucf.edu
Proposal submitted to: National Witdllfe Federation (through Univ. Central Florida)
. .
University of Florida-IFAS Scooe of Work
UF-IFAS personnel:
Dr. Martin Main (UF Associate Professor) FTE = 2%
Ginger Allen (UF Senior Scientist) FTE = 3%
Specific UF-IFAS Project ResponsibUitles:
- Assist with initial survey site identification. preparation. and deployment of survey
equipment for wildlife and roadklll surveys in southwest Florida.
Purchase A TV and accessories. infrared wildlife cameras for surveys, and film and other
miscellaneous field supplies required for the project.
Hire and supervise one field technician (OPS) to conduct weekly roadkill surveys for 6
months at 32 hourslweek.
Provide project truck for wildlife and road kill surveys (32 hr/week).
Assist with report writing and publication of information in appropriate outlets.
(
(
Equal Opportunlty/AlftrmaUveActlon Institution
~..\\ \i\ UNIVERSITY OF
... ".,.: FLORIDA
Insdtutt or Food And Agricultural Scienees
~uthwest Florida Researeh &. Education Center
2686 State Road 29 Not1h
jnunokalee, FL 34142.9515
,.---- .-.-"---.' .-- ....._-_.~. .._ _~....__a__._____~__._..___.___.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
I?tlbib~ of 197
Phone (239) 658.3400
Fax (239).658-3469
.
BUDGET (Internal UF-IFAS budget on proposal being submitted by Univ. of Central Florida)
Project Title: E. Collier County Wildlife Movement Study
UF-IFAS Investigator: Martin Main (PI), Associate Professor, SWFREC-Immokalee
UCF Investigator: Reed Noss (PI). ProfeSSor. University of Central Florida
UCF Project Office Contact: Joan Lind Jarvis, (407) 823-5264: narvis@mail.ucf.edu
Proposal submitted to: National Wildlife Federation (through Univ. Central Florida)
University of Florida.IfAS Budaet
Personnel
-
Research Assistant, TBA, 0.5 8.000
Fringe @J 8.3 664
I Total Personnel Plus Fringe $ 8,664
-
I Travel
Truvel to field sites. meetings. including per 2,500
diem, etc. ---
-
r--._ Total Travel $2,500
i Equipment and Supplies
Misc. field equipment and supplies (drift 1,500
fences, sand tmnsects) ..---
A TV and_ tracking harrow 5,000
Vehicle Maintenance, Fuel, etc. 5,000
~. Remote-Infra-red Cameras and Security 12.000
Housings (20) .
Film. batteries, office supplies 2,500
Total EQuipment and Supplies $26,000
"--.---- _.
UF.IFAS TOTAL DIRECT COST $37,164
f- .,
.
INDIRECT COST @ 12%
(12% is the IDC allowed by NWF) I $4,460
_.._-
L-lJF-1FAS TOTAL PROJECT COST $41,624
Equal OppottunltylAftlnnative ActIon InslllUtlon
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 153 of 197
.
.
APPENDIX C
PHOTOGRAPHIC PRESENTATION
.
(
(
(
d
o
-.c
t\1
to)
o
~
QJ
~
~
~~i-I
~ ~ 5
~ -~ e
r.n t\1 Q)
= u to)
....-4 '+oc d
U 0 ~
,.=~
~ ~~
~ Q)
OIJ~
UseS
~ 0 Q)
~ ~~
~
to)
-8
t\1
~
o
d
~
~
.
qJ
QJ
~
E-c
,e.
.~
~
u
.
.
=
o
.:2
~
u
o
~
QJ
QJ
4-(
4-4~~
Q) C d
....... . ~ QJ
~ ~ e
,.J u ~
.-4~d
. U 0 ~
~ ~~
~~
U th t
04j
~ ]~
~
u
.s
~
4-(
o
=
~
~
(
.
(
.
(
.
.
.
. .. (
..
....
'.
.~",:
It)
=>
=>
N
.. . ~
; 1:1
.. ,. =-
"""
.:/1 ..:
:;. I
" ..
... r:
:
~
:!
C"Il
"'CI
1:1
e
(i.i
~
=
=
e-
...
~
ci'
~
..
<
-
. ~ (
a
~
Dtl
~
=
~
~
e
~
=>
'I""C
v:5
~
~
i!
=
...
-=
-
...
~
=
..
. .. =-
=
"'CI
~
-
=
..
-
=
=
u
.
(
~ .
=
=
N
to
~
=
a..
.Q
r:
....
!
=
~
.!
S
(I;)
-=
=
f
....
(I;)
~
=
=
5'
..
=.c
I
a..
<
....
=
~
a
~
01)
~
=
~ .
~
~
a..
y
1=
~
QC)
~
QC)
'-
Q
a..
~
=
a..
=
U
....
:l
~
-=
....
=
=
(I;)
~
-=
....
=
..
-=
....
..
~
=
a..
=
=
"t:I
~
-
-
=
a..
....
=
= .
u
. \0 (
=
=
~
t-
CIII
=
..
i
!:5c
..:
!
~
i
~
"'0
=
f!
....
00
~
=
=
~
u
.-
=-.
i
-
-<
....
=
~
a
~
~
~
. =
~ (
~
~
-
u
1
\0
oc
'"
oc
~
.Cl
....
c,..
Q
....
.-
a
.-
~
=
-
~
.=
1:
Q
Z
~
.=
....
=
Q
=
-
=
=
"'0
~
=
e
....
=
Q
U
. (
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 160 of 197
.
APPENDIX D
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT CONSERVATION .
AGREEMENT
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 161 of 197
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
(
DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT
Return recorded document to
South Aorlda Water Management District
3301 Gun Club Road, MSC 4210
West Palm Beach, Florida 33406
THIS DEED OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT is given this
day of , 2008, by Antonio Faaa. as
Trustee under Land Trust Aareement dated 11/13/03 ("Grantor"), whose address
is 7955 Airport Road North. Suite 101. Naoles. Florida 34109 to the South Florida
Water Management District ("Grantee") and joined by Citvaate Develooment.
LLC, a Florida limited lial;>i1ity company and CG II, LLC, a Florida limited liability
company ("Permittee"), whose mailing address is 159S. Main Street. Suite 500,
Akron. Ohio 44308. As used herein, the term "Grantor" shall include any and all
heirs, successors, or assigns of the Grantor, and all .subsequent owners of the
"Property" (as hereinafter defined) and the term "Grantee" shall include any
successor or assignee of Grantee.
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the Permittee desires to construct City Gate Commerce Park
("Project") at a site in Collier County, Florida, which is subject to the regulatory
jurisdiction of South Florida Water Management District ("District"); and
(
WHEREAS, the Permittee is the owner of certain lands situated in Collier
County, Florida, and more specifically described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto
and incorporated herein ("Project Property"); and
WHEREAS, District Permit No. ("Permit")
authorizes certain activities which affect waters in or of the State of Florida; and
WHEREAS, this permit requires that the Permittee preserve, enhance,
restore, and/or mitigate wetlands and/or uplands under the District's jurisdiction;
and
WHEREAS, the Grantor is the owner of certain lands situated in Collier
County, Florida, and more specifically described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto
and incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, the Grantor, in consideration of the consent granted by the
Permit and at the behest of Permittee, is agreeable to granting and securing to
the Grantee a perpetual Conservation Easement as defined in Section 704.06,
Florida Statutes, over the area described in Exhibit "B" (Conservation Easement
Property").
(
Fonn 1190 South Florida Water Management District
1
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 162 of 197
WHEREAS, Permittee joins in this Deed of Conservation Easement; and
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the issuance of the Permit to construct
and operate the permitted activity, and as an inducement to Grantee in issuing
the Permit, together with other good and valuable consideration, the adequacy
and receipt of which are hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby grants, creates,
and establishes a perpetual Conservation Easement for and in favor of the
Grantee upon the property described in Exhibit "B" which shall run with the land
and be binding upon the Grantor, and shall remain in full force and effect forever.
-.
The scope, nature, and character of this Conservation Easement shall be
as follows:
1. Recitals. The recitals hereinabove set forth are true and correct
and are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Conservation
Easement.
2. Puroose. It is the purpose of this Conservation Easement to retain
land or water areas in their natural, vegetative, hydrologic, scenic, open,
agricultural or wooded condition and to retain such areas as suitable habitat for
fish, plants, or wildlife. Those wetland and/or upland areas included in this
Conservation Easement which are to be enhanced or created pursuant to the
Permit shall be retained and maintained as enhanced or created conditions
required by the Permit.
.
To carry out this purpose, the following rights are conveyed to Grantee by
this easement.
a. To enter upon the Property at reasonable times with any
necessary equipment or vehicles to enforce the rights herein granted in a manner
that will not unreasonably interfere with the use and quiet enjoyment of the
Property by Grantor at the time of such entry; and
b. To enjoin any activity on or use of the Property that is
inconsistent with this Conservation Easement and to enforce the restoration of
such areas or features of the Conservation Easement that may be damaged by
any inconsistent activity or use.
3. Prohibited Uses. Except for restoration, creation, enhancement,
maintenance, and monitoring activities; or surface water management
improvements, or other activities described herein that are permitted or required
by the Permit, the following activities are prohibited in or on the Conservation
Easement:
.
Form 1190 South Florida Water Management District
2
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 163 of 197
a. Construction or placing of buildings, roads, signs, billboards
or other advertising, utilities, or other structures on or above the ground;
(
b. Dumping or placing of soil or other substance or material as
landfill, or dumping or placing of ~sh, waste, or unsightly or offensive materials;
c. Removal or destruction of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation,
except for the removal of exotic or nuisance vegetation in accordance with the
District approved maintenance plan;
d. Excavation, dredging, or removal of loam, peat, gravel, soil,
rock, or other material substance in such manner as to affect the surface;
e. Surface use except for purposes that permit the land or
water area to remain in its natural or enhanced condition;
f. Activities detrimental to drainage, flood control, water
conservation, erosion control, soil conservation, or fish and wildlife habitat
preservation including, but not limited to, ditching, diking, and fencing;
g. Acts or uses detrimental to such aforementioned retention of
land or water areas;
h. Acts or uses which are detrimental to the preservation of the
structural integrity or physical appearance of sites or properties having historical,
archaeological, or cultural significance.
(
4. Grantor's Reserved Riahts. Grantor reserves all rights as owner of
the Property, including the right to engage in uses of the Property that are not
prohibited herein and which are not inconsistent with any District rule, criteria,
permit and the intent and purposes of this Conservation Easement.
5. No Dedication. No right of access by the general public to any
portion of the Property is conveyed by this Conservation Easement.
6. . Grantee's Liabilitv. Grantee shall not be responsible for any costs
or liabilities related to the operation, upkeep, or maintenance of the Property.
7. Prooertv Taxes. Grantor shall keep the payment of taxes and
assessments on the Easement Parcel current and shall not allow any lien on the
Easement Parcel superior to this Easement. In the event Grantor fails to
extinguish or obtain a subordination of such lien, in addition to any other remedy,
the Grantee may, but shall not be obligated to, elect to pay the lien on behalf of
the Grantor and Grantor shall reimburse Grantee for the amount paid by the
Grantee, together with Grantee's reasonable attorney's fees and costs, with
interest at the maximum rate allowed by law, no later than thirty days after such
(
Form 1190 South Florida Water Management District
3
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 164 of 197
payment. In the event the Grantor does not so reimburse the Grantee, the debt
owed to Grantee shall constitute a lien against the Easement Parcel which shall
automatically related back to the recording date of this Conservation Easement.
Grantee may foreclose this lien on the Easement Parcel in the manner provided
for mortgage on real property.
.
8. Enforcement. Enforcement of the terms, provisions, and
restrictions of this Conservation Easement shall be at the reasonable discretion
of Grantee, and any forbearance on behalf of Grantee to exercise its rights
hereunder in the event of any breach hereof by Grantor, shall not be deemed or
construed to be a waiver of Grantee's rights hereunder.
9. Assianment. Grantee will hold this Conservation Easement
exclusively for conservation purposes. Grantee will not assign its rights and
obligations under this Conservation Easement except to another organization or
entity qualified to hold such interests under the applicable state laws.
10. Severa b i1itv. If any provision of this Con~ervation Easement or the
application thereof to any person or circumstances is found to be invalid, the
remainder of the provisions of this Conservation Easement shall not be affected
thereby, as long as the purpose of the Conservation Easement is preserved.
11. Terms and Restrictions. Grantor shall insert the terms and
restrictions of this Conservation Easement in any subsequent deed or other legal
instrument by which Grantor divests itself of any interest in the Conservation
Easement.
.
12. Written Notice. All notices, consents, approvals or other
communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed properly
given if sent by United States certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed
to the appropriate party or successor-in-interest.
13. Modifications. This Conservation Easement may be
amended, altered, released or revoked only by written agreement between the
parties hereto or their heirs, assigns, or successors-in-interest, which shall be
filed in the public records in Collier County.
14. Termination. Notwithstanding the provIsIons above, this
Conservation Easement will terminate upon the recording in the Public Records
of Collier County, Florida, of a deed conveying title to the Conservation
Easement Property to the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust
Fund of the State of Florida ("BTIITF") and an Acceptance of Transfer of Title to
Donated Lands by the BTIITF. This provision is pursuant to the policy of the
Department of Environmental Protections Divisions of State Land, as agent for
BTIITF to only accept property without encumbrances, including Conservation
Easements. Grantee acknowledges that it is Permittee and Grantor's intent to
.
Form 1190 South Florida Water Management District
4
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 165 of 197
.
transfer the Property to the BTIITF. Further, Grantee agrees to execute a Notice
of Termination of this Easement or any other document necessary to effectuate a
transfer of the Conservation Easement Property to BTIITF, and to record such
document (at Grantor's expense) in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida.
(
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Antonio Faga, as Trustee under Land Trust
Agreement dated 11/13/03, (Grantor) has hereunto set its authorized hand this
day of ',2008.
Grantor:
ANTONIO FAGA, AS TRUSTEE UNDER LAND
TRUST AGREEMENT DATED 11/13/03
By:
Antonio Faga, Trustee
Signed, sealed, and delivered in our presence as witnesses:
By: By:
Signature Signature
Name: Name:
Print Print
. STATE OF FLORIDA (
COUNTY OF COLLIER
On this day of ,
2008, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared Antonio
Faga, as Tru~tee Under Land Trust Agreement dated 11/13/03. He is [ ]
personally known to me or [ ] has produced a Florida driver's license for
identification.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal.
NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF FLORIDA
Signature
Name:
Printed Name
My commission expires:
.
(
Form 1190 South Florida Water Management District
5
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 166 of 197
Joined by:
CITYGA TE DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
By:
Joseph R. Weber, its Vice President
Signed, sealed, and delivered in our presence as witnesses:
By:
By:
Signature
Signature
Name:
Print
Name:
Print
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
On this day of ,
2008, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared Joseph R.
Weber, who subscribed to the foregoing instrument, as the Vice President of
Citygate Development, LLC, a Florida limited liability company. and
acknowledged that he is the same on behalf of said company and that he was
duly authorized to do so. He is [ J personally known to me or [ ] has produced a
(state) driver's license for identification.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. I hereunto set my hand and official seal.
NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF
Signature
Name:
Printed Name
My commission expires:
Form 1190 South Florida Water Management District
6
.
.
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 167 of 197
And also joined by:
CG II, LLC, a Florida limited liability company
(
By:
Joseph R. Weber. its Vice President
Signed, sealed. and delivered in our presence as witnesses:
By:
By:
Signature
Signature
Name:
Print
Name:
Print
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
On this day of ,
2008, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared Joseph R.
Weber, who subscribed to the foregoing instrument, as the Vice President of CG
II, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, and acknowledged that he is the same
on behalf of said company and that he was duly authorized to do so. He is [ )
personally known to me or [ ) has produced a (state) drivers
license for identification.
(
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal.
NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF
Signature
Name:
Printed Name
My commission expires:
(
Form 1190 South Florida Water Management District
7
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page 168 of 197
Exhibit A
Project Description of Property
Form 1190 South Florida Water Management District
8
.
.
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 169 of 197
Exhibit B
Mitigation Land
Fonn 1190 South Florida Water Management District
9
(
(
(
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 170 of 197
APPENDIX E
LETTER OF CREDIT FOR LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT
ON BTIITF LANDS
.
.
.
.
.
.
STATE OF FLORIDA
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 171 of 197
IRREVOCABLE LEITER OF CREDIT
TO DEMONSTRATE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
(
To:
South Florida Water Management District ("District")
P.O. Box 24680
West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-4680
Dear Sir or Madam,
From:
National City Bank
P.O. Box 5101
23000 MilIcreek Blvd.
Cleveland, OR 44101-0101
We hereby establish our Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. ("Letter of
Credit") in the District's favor at the request and for the account of Citygate
Development, LLC and CG fi, LLC, co-owners of City Gate Commerce Center
("Permittee") whose address is 159 South Main Street, Suite 500, Akron, OH 44308 up
to the aggregate amount of one hundred fifteen thousand, three hundred eighty-one U.S.
dollars $115,381.00, available upon presentation of:
1. Your sight draft, bearing reference to this Letter of Credit No.
and either:
a) a Certificate issued by the South Water Management District in the
fonn of Certificate I attached hereto and made a part hereof; or
b) a Certificate issued by the South Florida Water Management
District in the fonn of Certificate II attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
The issuer of this Letter of Credit has authority to issue letters of credit and the
issuer's letter of credit operations are regulated and examined by a federal or Florida state
agency. This letter of credit is established with a financial institution licensed in Florida.
The District is the sole beneficiary of this Letter of Credit. The original Letter of
Credit shall be retained by the District.
This Letter of Credit may be drawn on to cover the following offsite mitigation
activities of the Permittee, as authorized and required by the District Environmental
Resource Permit number _ (the "permit") as such permit may be amended and
include all plans approved by such permit:
(
(
1
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 172 of 197
This Letter of Credit is effective as of . This date is prior to
the date the activity authorized by the permit commences. This Letter of Credit shall
continue to be effective through , but such expiration date shall be
automatically extended without amendment for additional periods of one year from the
present or future expiration date until notification of final release by the District.
This Letter of Credit cannot be revoked, terminated or cancelled unless, at least
90 days before the cancellation date, the issuer notifies the District of its intent to revoke,
terminate or cancel the Letter of Credit. In the event the District is so notified, any
unused portion of the Letter of Credit shall be available to the District, upon the District's
written request, for 90 days after the receipt of such notice by the District. If the District
notifies Citygate Development, LLC and/or CO II, LLC (Permittee) that it does not
intend to draw upon the Letter of Credit, then within 90 days of receipt by City gate
Development, LLC and/or CO II, LLC (Permittee) of actual or constructive notice of
revocation, termination or cancellation of this Letter of Credit or other actual or
constructive notice of cancellation, Citygate Development, LLC and/or CO IT, LLC
(Permittee) shall provide an alternate financial responsibility mechanism which meets the
requirements of subsections 4.3.7-4.3.7.9, of the Basis of Review for Environmental
Resource Permit Applications.
Whenever this Jetter of credit is drawn on under and in compliance with the terms
of this Letter of Credit, we shall duly honor such draft upon presentation to us, and we
shall tender the draft directly to the District in accordance with your instructions.
We hereby waive notification of amendments to the offsite mitigation plans,
permit, applicable laws, statutes, rules and regulations and agree that no such amendment
shall in any way alleviate us of our obligation under this Letter of Credit.
.
.
Signature(s), Title ofOfficial(s) of Housing Institution
Date
This Letter of Credit is subject to the Uniform Commercial Code.
.
2
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 173 of 197
.
.
APPENDIX F
EXCERPT FROM
AGREEMENT BETWEEN APPLICANTS AND COLLIER COUNTY
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE WilDLIFE CROSSING
ON COUNTY ROAD 846
.
(
(
(
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Page 174 of 197
APPENDIX F
Excerpt from Agreement between Applicants and Collier County
for Construction of the Wildlife Crossing On CR 846
10. In the event City Gate agrees to the construction of a wildlife crossing on CR 846 east of
Jmlnokalee as part of its MCP mitigation, the County wiIJ issue the necessary permits on
a fast-track review basis and will waive permit review fees. The County will support and
assist City Gate in obtaining consents, if any, required from adjoining landowners for the
construction of the crossings and associated fencing; provided however that this
commitment to support and assist shall not be construed to create and obligation or
liability on the County if, in spite of the County's support and assistance, the consents are
not obtained, nor shall the County be required or obligated to expend any monies
rendering any such support or assistance. The properties adjacent to CR 846, east of
Immokalee, are subject to Stewardship Easements (Stewardship Sending Area 3 recorded
at Official Records Book 3551, Page 2284 et seq. and Stewardship Sending Area 4
recorded at Official Records Book 3551, Page 2345 et seq. of the Public Records of
Collier County, Florida) and the County is a Grantee of these easements. The County
acknowledges that construction of a wildlife crossing in this geographic area is consistent
with the intent and purpose of the above-referenced Stewardship Easement.
.
.
.
.
.
APPENDIX G
COLLIER COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. 2008-132
.
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9, 2010
Page 175 of 197
(
(
(
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-..1.J2
A RESOLUTION OF THE COllIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVING A POLICY FOR
ACCEPTANCE OF LAND CONVEYANCES BY THE
CONSERV A nON COllIER LAND ACQUISmON
PROGRAM IN 11:'IE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT
RIGHTS (!DR) PROGRAM FOR THE RURAL FRINGE
MIXED USE DISTRICT (RFMUD) AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Collier CoW1ty (County) has recognized the need to plan for futw'e
growth and bas initiated a long-term program. known as the Conservation Collier Land
Acquisition Program, (Conservation Collier Program) to acquire, protect, restore and
manage environmentally sensitive lands in perpetuity and to provide public open space
for the benefit of present and future generations; and
WHEREAS, the Conservation Collier Program includes identification and
protection of Cowrty's natural resources, including upland and wetland communities,
native plant communities, endemic species, endangered species habitat, water resources,
and aesthetic or other natural features; and
WHEREAS, protected lands include those that provide appropriate natural
resource-based recreational and educational opportunities, protect local water resources,
provide flood control; and
WHEREAS, the Conservation Collier Implementation Ordinance (hereafter
referred to as "Ordinance No. 2002.63, as amended") has described Target Protection
Areas (TPAs) as larger areas of environmentally sensitive land within which are located
specific sites which generally satisfy the initial screening criteria and meet the goals of
the Conservation Collier Program; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2005-49 amended Land Development Code (LDC).
Section 2.03.07 entitled "OVCZ'lay Zoning Districts," states that the County is to provide
Bonus IDR Credits for submission and acceptance by County staff of a Restoration and
Management Plan (RMP) with specific criteria and for conveyance of land in fee simple
to a federal, state or local government agency as a gift.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNfY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION I. Fmdines
It is found and declared that:
(A) The Transfer of Development rights program, as described in LDC Section
2.03.07 provides for the creation of IDR Bonus Credits, which are generated
from RFMUD sending lands. These credits are generated at a rate of I credit for
each TOR credit severed from that RFMUD sending land for which an RMP has
been accepted by the County and I credit for each IDR credit that has been
severed for which land has been conveyed in fee simple to a federal, state of local
government agency as a gift.
(B) The Conservation Collier Program may be offered lands to be conveyed in fee
simple as a gift under the TDR Program.
(C) Lands offered from the RFMUD sending lands have been determined by the IDR
Program to be environmentally sensitive. Sending lands are also one of the
Target Protection Areas identified in Ordinance No. 2002-63, as amended,
therefore are preswned to be environmentally sensitive lands which an: desirable
for conservation purposes.
(D) Lands offered to the Conservation Collier Program must be evaluated and be
consistent with the goals, procedures and criteria of the Conservation Collier
Program.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 176 of 197
.
.
.
.
(E) The location, size, accessibility and quality of conveyed lands are the primary
considerations in accepting such lands for the Conservation Collier Program.
.
SECTION n. Acceptance of land!! offered for convevance under the TOR Proszram:
(A) PotcotiaI conveyances shall go though a separate 'i'ast-track" evaluation process
from other submitted parcels and wiD not be ranked in a regular cycle.
(B) The Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee (CCLAAC) win
coDSider lands proposed for conVeyance under the TOR program even if those
1ancIs bave a resulting conservation easement placed over them pursuant to
requirements of the TOR severance process.
(C) Land owners proposing conveyance must either: I) provide funds to cover all
costs to perform an initial exotic, solid waste and hazardous material removal, by
written agreement with the County, or 2) remove the exotics, solid waste and
hazardous materials themselves (using a licensed contractor approved by the
County) prior to the parcel being conveyed to the County.
(0) Parcels will be evaluated for the need to require a long tenn management
endowment and such funding endowment will be negotiated on an ad hoc basis.
(E) Management Plans must meet both Conservation Collier Program and LDC/fDR
severance requireJl1ents.
(F) Listed species management is a requirement for the Management Plan to be
acceptable under Ordinance No. 2005-49. If management actions require
fundiDg, those will be considered as part of negotiations for a required minimum
funding endowment.
(O)A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) may be required by the
Conserwtion ColUer Program staff. A Phase II ESA will be required when
supported or recommended by the Phase I ESA. Required ESAs must be
provided by the land owner, at no additional cost to the County, prior to the parcel
being cooveyed to the County.
(H) Conservation Collier Program staff will develop a template RMP acceptable to
the County to assist land owners proposing conveyance of their lands under the
IDR Program.
SECTION IlL Effective Date.
This Resolution adopted and made effective this M'Ibdayof /J/QA.,J- 2008, after
motion, second and majority vote favoring same. ·
ATTEST: . .. .
Dwight E: ~ft~ .'l
r........... '.". 4l:;-. I,.
:<..r :/~.~~ '~~~.';i\:
.' .
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA
~b
~~Jt'~~
Assistant County Attorney
.
2
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 177 of 197
(
(
(
/'
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
3-201
1
FEDERAL FISH AND WILDLIFE PERMIT
2. AUTHORITY-STATUTES
16 use 1539(a) (1) (B)
16 use 703-712
REGU~TlONS (Attached)
.
50 CFR ~~ 13, 17, & 21
3. NUMBER
TE145823-0
1. PERMITTEE
4. RENEWABLE
6. MAY COpy
B.
CG II, LLC and 850 NWN, LLC
159 South Main Street #500 <. > : :.;;:c'~:~::':;'::.:~;::,-:,.jo~..
Akron Ohio 44308 ".-,~~'.>'" ;(.' i~;\ [! 'if' p,..~:'''-.:.~~:~;...,
t , : ..,.... - :.. .~. ~ '~~! .~ ~ l:^-,f" ..", ).,.~\.
...; (;. .~::~~~ 'l~~i~~, "~:~;v'-l-':_~" ,,';.: ;;"'f'..t-~~~~~I" i/'l ~'-.,~.~\,
TELEPHONE 330/9%-0225.< /'...~ "'.., ,;">,,,<:'..,.,:,-:~< "';:, ": ;i-~~.:~""""" ,/' oJ ,~.
./:;J '~'s~... ~..f~~}":'Y't'.;~ ';')", ~; ~' $ ....'..':' '1~~~'~~:' l'lt~ ~~, 7/1/2009
.t".J' :"fH, ~ .~.~. ""Jr~" ~:~ ,::. :, :. :.. :i.~ ...~' ;~""' t\..t, 'v ."Ok \;. ~
," 1:. ."C.~~ ~ ~.:;....~... ~ ~; '..: ::- .~' .... ..~.;;:. '1~...,.:!\. IY ,,4f~ r.. 'f~t
8. NAME AND TITLE OF PRINCIPAL OFF,I . -Slft1 /S" .~. "~;" "'.'~. " ~ ;~. .~.., ....oi;-.:. 9. tX~~~'I?;FRMlTYc:~.
Joseph Weber, Vice 0: id~./'~;t!;".. ""':?~"'l:':":'> '~'<:".'''' .:.,gt{ID. >'AN", EDSeis'G)ES-INCfDENTAL TAKE
h"~'.d ,::.,(...r.--'--J"'/.i";'\~l{:ij~ ".of .......:?1i~~., i.\~... ".~
."r' .i'&'. ....... ~;)..;(;.'... .....~..". .....:~'~.r"l. . .;~<"";.{. ....~t!;~:~.'I,......\.., ~ . 'ic rlf :':i:,~
10. LOCATtONWHEREAUTHO ..". NDll.' . I). -"""'''\,~ .. ^'''';~'~<;... ~.'" ~.~'~''I,':!.
PARCEL FOLIO . . . . ~-~Oi9 ." ~~29~)'6'0008'IN"SE~;.~~~T;~~~~iif\r 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST, IN NAPL~ COL((ER CO . ~A. ... ;i~~;:.. . ";~\ ",.".'1- b.
11. CONDITIONS AND AUTHOR~;rION~: ! ~ /' ::-~. -'~~",,,J1:;i rr: ~;,\
A. GENERAL COND~~~{S'EfrtUT(1 . t4DITION~4~~#D IN FEDERAL
REGULATIONS crf:BD IN BOOCK is PERMI1!j.JALL A,~'JVITIES AUTHORIZED
HEREIN MUST BE 4{RRui~i.~~T IN . liED IN ~ ,b~l~l~A TION SUBMITTED.
CONTINUED V ALlQJp;"OR ;~~NEW A, .qm TIJI4EL.1Y C~PLlANCE WITH ALL
APPLICABLE CONDitIONS, 1il(~LUDlNcrTHE ( AND.;;~~.RT#
:,./.... ~~i:.. ~. ~;~'-. _ . it. ~~ ).}~.~(-~7;lt'
THE VALIDITY OF THj~fERMlt}~., ALSQ:@.~l}}IJ.9 .,;..<,8~?iz~t~2~S~~Y A~ q~~LL APP~~FABLE FOREIGN, STATE,
LocAL OR OTHER FED~L LA ~~~<:,:~~:\f.~;t;!~~t::"'i:~,y:,;~"?:/,!,'t~;~!:;!~:;:\;~J;(;~~~?r <~/
V ALlD FOR USE BY PERMitTEE NAt~i'Eq~~\iEi .Y.~: ,. ",;. :. JWlf1 ~t:{12;.' "~;/
>.:..".... .":~~l~;~_.,~., ,.....'.~ ". ....~~,.,....~~;.!, .:11:.;,' ,,<~~/
ACCEPTANCE OF THIS PERMri'S~~Y.,ES ~~f:~[)~~~~!~j: . E AND .!J~tiTHORIZED AGENTS UNDERSTAND AND
AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE TERMS OF'fJ1~S..r'E%'1!!l.~l"t ALI,-,~ECTl!. ."'" T~.~SfeODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS, PARTS
13 AND 17. PERTINENT TO ISSUED PERMlTS;;-SE.t.t\IO~' II QF.TH~ B" ,,.... !$'RED SPECIES ACT OF 1973, AS AMENDED,
PROVIDES FOR CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENAL il~FG)lt'E411;;Y.~;t!J~~Pty WITH PERMIT CONDITIONS.
[X] YES
[X] YES
[) NO
[) NO
6. EFFECTIVE
7. EXPIRES
7/31/2024
.
C.
D.
XX BLOCK 11 OF THIS PERMIT CONSISTS OF ITEMS A - N 8 PAGES TOTAL .
12. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
REPORTS WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE OFFICES APPEARING IN CONDITIONS
II.M AND II.N OF THIS PERMIT.
ISSU~DBY
. ~
. ,
TITLE DATE
DEPUTY REGIONAL DIRECTOR, FWS, \,
SOUTHEAST REGION -z.. ~ 1 \..0
I~~~ LE ; 2:~~~:
'1
i~L::::~.-~:::-"-""------"- .
.
.
.
.
. t,-
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
pageli~' 179 of 197
CO II, LLC and 850 NWN, LLC
159 South Main Street #500
Akron, Ohio 44308
TELEPHONE 3301996-0225
(
TEl45823-O
BIocIc 11:
E. The parcels identified in Block 10 above encompass 240 acres (Project area)
where the Pennittees propose construction of a mixed-use, nonresidential,
commerciallindustriaI office park complex (Project). Status surveys and
biological analysis indicate that the entire Project area provides suitable habitat
for the endangered Florida panther (Puma conc%r COryl) and red-cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis) (RCW). The entire 240 acres of habitat would be
pennanently altered due to Project construction. The Puma concolor coryi and
Picoides borealis on the Project site comprise the "covered species."
...~t'o(~r~:~:::-~.~:~; .~'~W.:--<!~..
The Permittees, and~:a:qfhQ~~alents~f8ii.ri~d to take the covered
species within t~;Pfq1eqt.~~~Qenta1.tcb'~ mo~gi,grading, and other land
alteration and,,~~6ti ^ , -<':. Vigel~ n~. <t~-'onresidential,
commerci~y'~~~u:!jI:' ~ ~~~~~~~t~~}ct~:.'Y.'. ~~~~t~!ffiitteeS~ Habitat
Conservati(j~~rlay:' ~~(f~;condrtiQfl~.~~~tJ:t:~:...." .perrii{t,does not
authori?4~~~..~:~~. .trt.'c.~!-~~"c~es :~iimi,*QUP.J.nl~t.aCti ..ties.
......i;.- ..~i"t;~~.. <.....".,~)~ ,,~..~,!'>'" X' ",,,~ .
F. ~~~:th;;/. et~l~~~~ :.~~~
Prop#~~~~itt ( . . b tr1~~,\ ~!~ -: d Wildlife
serYf~e,.. t.oo... #p:, ter 1. e ho~ alfJ es for the
gener~ nwlfses , R.egulait~: . R)
~13'1\(,e)~\ , .>>JOt/
'p i~\ . _11 ' '1
G. The p\trutre'~~:s~~Um y' .l~owil}~meas : to Wtir~t take of the
coverea:~oeclesYlS. iji . -'.'. ~.~ .',c ..I',' hr' (
u ~ \~'\ .. ~1SlW. I ,fit;!
\. ~. ''',-i......I'o:.,~ ~ H . . -. , ,). ....';!? ,j~. .
1. Th~p.~rm. i~liii~~.~ . ~.:.~~~'. /.~~,f~~re.s 9}~itable habitat
for p8lttbers ID?a~''-1 . .1AA' . d Stat~,f:orest area before the
start ot~^tP.1d ~ieardt'l7'~~"ro~'~ area...:;:;/
5~ .... r-....-'lfc ~ . ~ _. .. ,,?' ..,.
I:,,~:"\.,.. =t7',;,,":"t _, ~ -t:' ,.. .~"t. ~."~ .....~~
2. The Permitte;;~~..~e.pa\~;~e1fgi~;d in the Picayune Strand
~'~~f$'S.."".;J,,^,";-~
State Forest area before the start of ground clearing within the Project
area.
(
3. The Pennittees shall donate to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service approved
entity the parcels acquired in the Picayune Strand State Forest area for
perpetual conservation and management within 2 years of penn it issuance.
4.
The Permittees shall establish a perpetual management endowment for the
Picayune Strand State Forest parcels in the amount of$100,333. The
Permittees shall, in the endowment amount, establish an escrow account,
or provide a letter of credit to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service within 90
days of permit issuance. The Pennittees shall assign the perpetual
(
Continued...
Block 11:
G. 4.
Continued...
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page!tage 180 of 197
co n, LLC and 850 NWN, LLC
159 South Main Street #500
Akron, Ohio 44308
TELEPHONE 330/996-0225
.
TEl 45823-G
(Continued).
management endowment to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service approved
entity within 2 years of permit issuance.
The Pennittees shall restore through invasive plant control and prescribed
fire 324 acresin the PicaYurie Strand State Forest. Initial treatment will
occur before the start of ground clearing within the Project area, and final
treatment will oC~YJ:.:~iir-5:X~.tlf:~J.l!l~t issuance. The period ending
5 y~ fo~?~1~1~~t ~!ce e ~"lGi~~~ the off-site mitigation
penod. .,1>,_'" ,"!; ?""lI'r,. ..~......~ ",' ~_.. /; ~ \~"'"
1/ :s \ ~,."'~:~;P~._~?' '::"'~~~"......... l' .., '<'~
..#.,. r' ;,~~-:;. ~ '.~. ~ .-:'{ .~. ...;;~~~~:f~.t '-'"
Th~.:;' .... . '<':j~:e,,~~l!Sb. ~,fc;i{e*{'~i~~m;~~"~ ; ,ters within the
r~6~~~. . ..~.();~if1e,?icaiUn~~~9.:~e~~t . ,\ before the st~
pfgroP9~~_I:~~With'tl~tee~~r@rea."",The$e.\~~t clusters wIll
f~~~f~,~ms~on an4.xe~@'eera~~:~.!~'~i~r destroyed
. j';:ca:viif pees durin '~~;site.rrnitigaiiOn per~t:t~,;,...~:\\ ,@';~\\
. ~ fl' l; :'G~.,:.;tt i~
,..l. ,.:1 r: . ''''~'''..~. ~~~ ii, ~~~ ~~
7. ;::; "T:hem " WOh-.t1i~,~i'tv tiate site to
~, ~'IJ..~ ~'; . , .,!. ~~)I",
;: ,; oneJ~f th , in the Wea~e Strand
;~ Stafe.iFore ..thin th~'froj/pt area.
;". 'l: ...:-.t-1""1~ ~ r \", . j; k" ........ ! (i
:",~ .....~.~ ',r"'.; __ ~. fil"'\- ::.."7
. ',,'''' ,,~ ~ 'lIS;; It J;;
;~ \The ~~rmittee ,oed lJYili)r,&-'ew group
',from tlk p~.{ ;i",' '~ rey~itm7Pt' cluste',. cr~(~ifi~tiflPicayune
~:~~~~~~~sh&lbe
kno~ as .the~:~~~-SJte:~~ ,.",W. p~.;~:~oerm. 1.~~S shall s~ the
trans'r~~tlon ~f'~~tf-: ~. ;" .,:~9~;~rtY Gate"~,ne to the recrwtment
clusters ~1?h~~ iii't'1m.:ei:cay;Ufi~~~~ Sta~test before the start of
ground cleariug"~~~~r ~,jec~~~;tfmu translocation will occur
by January 31. 20t.q;;in~tVldUal.,04::s~mrt>adult RCWs may be
translocated with unrelai'edsuDadUiiRCWs to a created recruitment
cluster in the Picayune Strand State Forest, or individual on-site subadult
RCWs may be translocated to single bird clusters in the Picayune Strand
population of RCWs, in the event that latter opportunity arises. In the
event of on-site breeder mortality more than three (3) years after the initial
translocation of on-site subaduIts but prior to completion of the on-site
mitigation period, the Permittees may then translocate the remaining
adults.
5.
6.
.
8.
9.
The Permittees shall start the translocation of three (3) pairs of subadult
RCWs in alternate years from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service RCW
Southern Range Translocation Cooperative (SRTC) to the recruitment
.
.
Block 11:
G. 9.
.
.
Continued...
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page~4fi8 181 of 197
CO II, LLC and 850 NWN, LLC
1 S9 South Main Street #500
Akron. Ohio 44308
TELEPHONE330~~225
(
TE145823-O
(Continued).
clusters established in the Picayune Strand State Forest before the start of
ground clearing within the Project area. The second prospective
translocations of three (3) pairs of sub adult RCWs from the SRTC is
scheduled for October 2009-January 2010 and the third and final
translocation of three (3) pairs of subadult RCWs is scheduled for October
201 I-January 2012.
~.~.,~.,..~;~~~~~. :::~~:.::~~"'.~~'" .
The ~ermitt~.~f4i' ~."'i.QF8fe ~h~~"'e~~" from the Project area to
recruItm~t.~s~~bll.s.~" ~e~~yUIl('Slqnd State Forest by
Marc. ~'~."~.~~O...' fa..~.. "~""'tn.~ ~ .. s "~~e{trJ.:f1isrQ..~. . all on-si~
hab' .. 18 _~~dr)J1eiriniijft~ W' ~ }"V ~i<~ needed for
~~:g~t~~Wlt~lhC1ticiltJ):~ffemb:vaJ.', vit~ees and all
1'.' <' :'':'. :~~'- -~-"'~." (" ".,.~,."". . A '"\\
t~. .' l~ltib, UOltat~;., ...'..... .,...~_!"" ~._,~.....,,'\'.~-.,;,'\.,' IJ.
,~ ..~~lt5 . @r.l'~ ~"~ .'~ '\~ -'i'~_~ ., \
11. ;:;.Th~:.I."~;:~':>--~5"""~res~~r;.~bii;i*;.~~.. 1>.. . ~I" V~. . thers that
d is ~,,09f' .SI .' . e ~Qrtl?-~ell:~~. .' ea ~efore
.' ~ :9t~ liJ rq :c...M' ~fi . ~i. sUItable
H cav\1!1es '!f} ~~, a.~
1:: .' -J f,j'."'^.;",11
12. \.' 'Th~~rmi . uireJJ.'f~qJ'lorth Belle
'-'.' Meaa\ area Sefo ithin'Y1~>.ffq;/ct area.
"- 1;.". iJ .O[t~~ 1 i
13. ~f'~e P~~~ . i ffe Sedce approved
~titity th~~ '. . ~ are~,,~'r perpetual
coi\(~rvatiori;:~gefu .'. -b ~~~t iss~ce.
"'~>. '.';'~~.." '..., :- 'If,.W~~';#..., /./
..,,~>... ~'1~~'<':1.4:~~_ .". ..e.....,. ",,-/::,'::--~~fr:~;k~<i'~ .;...:1/"
The Peifii1~~~s,"41~l e's~~petpetfijl, man~~int endowment for the
North Belle'M:~9~)~~1 intJ1e ~fbf.$ti;M7. The Permittees shall.
in the endowm~k~~.<esttm1is\t.1Il1:~r~w account or provide a letter
of credit to the U.S. Fish"'imfWifdiffe Service within 90 days of penn it
issuance. The Permittees shall assign the perpetual management
endowment to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service approved entity within 2
years of permit issuance.
10.
(
\
,
14.
15. The Permittees shall provide grant funding for a wildlife crossing study
within the Panther Focus Area before the start of ground clearing within
the Project area.
16. The Permittees shall construct a panther-friendly wildlife crossing with
fencing on County Road 846 in Collier County, Florida. The final design
and cost estimate will be provided before the start of ground clearing
(
CG II, LLC and 850 NWN, LLC
159 South Main Street #500
Akron, Ohio 44308
TELEPHONE 330/996-0225
Agenda Item No. 176
November 9,2010
Page~~ 182 of 197
.
Block 11:
G. 16. (Continued).
TE 145823-0
H.
Continued...
within the Project area The Permittees shall deposit funds for the costs of
construction of the crossing and fencing in an escrow account or provide a
letter of credit in the same amount within 90 days of permit issuance.
Construction of the crossing and installation of the fencing shall be
completed by April 2011.
17. The Pennittees s~~'f~e~~nitW-.:Bli!igation and monitoring report
before the s, ~'of'~", . ~C.fafing~, 'ii}$~:~oiect area.
,.. ~,.. '::-.., I",.. ~ . '-J A .~,~....
4*I~r 1($# ~~" ~'.~~.\~.,rl'''''-'':-'+~~,( ~"_
The Pd:i(~'iS~~VJd~~n!~;{afu~~lly by March 31 st
of ~ ~r6t1-y~,f.01J<iWiIjg~mnt t~' . ~ ~~ih~"monitoring report
sI#f(~~lyl1\~W~~~!~~~"WIicilif!'~~~lijg:J ,,'~nt, ~~ results of
resUmmon ""., . "I'~ '.! '''''-~<''''Jl ' ' . .,~ ,,~
// ~"~' /! ;';i,i('->;~:{~', __M~~~~i;;._"'''[, "~""".."'c~~>: ,'\.~\~:"~',\~
/,1ie)Jfuirt:~~'~'" ~epoSit $~~timat;tfu~;{$.'~~otS(<i\ an annual
. miti~ioll' i ;. .~~ r. ' 4'. escrow.a~0i.i~~tJ.14M)Q days of
. .p~t i~.' ~}~.. _ . ,. ,,,\?e re1~~ u~qMte
t Pentti ' .." rt. nl!1~tnonitorjng
~.', .r~~, shaU . ~ R1r~location or
0., S~WS fOlf\.., s~ter. if ( ) !.!
': < ~:~ ~; \. ~, ~~7 if.
~ "( t.... ,.... L.
19. \Jbe ~~itt~x~} , the stan " pro '. 'on rA.~' . ..'~ror the
'~tern~~(5J; ';', ,~.; '~cf9J,?~~,;~~:rthin ~~i Project area.
The pe~\es ~d\~jt-s~#J;~ :' . )191jff:~ ,~~ ~;~Odification and
amendmentS'~~_he Pe~~;>~ 'C'., _.,cv.tpiS; ~(may o~ through the
effe~tive ~rm of~!~."P;t9J~~."';~~f.ml~ "..~.. '.' ).,edu~J1ia11 govern the
modIfication and ame1t4@en.t'prp~; y~~.A <':',.<':./
. "'~'""';~~~~~~~..... ...-:,:-~~ .~ ,.. .~. ..~~1r,.~:~~.~.~-..~~~
I. This Permit is based u~~'<ffifPirm1ttees' expected compliance with the
provisions and commitments established in the final Service approved
HCP and the tenns and conditions identified herein. Where a conflict
occurs between the HCP and this Pennit, the Permit shall control.
18.
.
2.
Either the Pennittees or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service may propose
modifications andlor amendments to the HCP or this Permit by providing
written notice. Such notice shall include a statement of the reason for the
proposed modification and an analysis of the environmental effects of
such modification or amendment, including effects on operations under
the HCP and on the covered species. This analysis shall be conducted
jointly by the Permittees and the contact office of the U.S. Fish and
.
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page~e 183 of 197
co II, LLC and 850 NWN, LLC
] 59 South Main Street #500
Akron, Ohio 44308
TELEPHONE 330/996-0225
(
TE 145823-0
Block 11:
H. 2.
(Continued).
I.
Wildlife Service. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the Permittees
will use best efforts to respond to a proposed modification or amendment
within sixty (60) days of receipt of such notice. Provided any such
proposed modification or amendment would not result in any of the
conditions identified in Condition Il.H.3 below, and absent any objection
from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the Permittees, the proposed
modification andl,,9J;;,~1':~wt~.4~!frmined as minor and shall
beco~e effe,~~&i1p'~,~ifapp~J$Y';~~:g.S.. ~ish and Wil?life
ServIce ~;tfu.~~~.'~~~.:;;.l;~f91;~.O on, ~.~ng party objects to a
p~po'~'..,n. .~~rt~J11pl. :,e.~~~~c~~1t,ifi'~~}P~sed in accordance
wt+l.. CO~1iul~'1;,u ':l.,'1....1~u,;';" X' ,~. ~~'~, F~''''
~,,- ~ ~r. . ~~ ""~, ~l$.! J;,".!l :;. .J .;.. ~ ..,.:--~z-.'}t.. \~~'
'If .' ,".<' .,-'.." .iI', ", \ . '.: ' ,. . .:'ft. "I" ~~'\..~ -", 'l.'
~/' ;::n.~' ~ .~ Jl' ...'v....~;..r"... '.,;"<::, ~.'" ';. ".' ...::,....... ._,,~...~ .. \....__~~~.'\'~." '<0. ",
" ~J~ I ~:a.n~'" .. ..,,, ,..~v""~ Q~
3. .~~ ~~~~~~~~i.. v~.S.Fi~h
/11U1di\f1tdhfe . 1~ ~ such molflfi~~ . . . result In
Ii operAfi.oq.~ 'an.' that are..s.i&!!ifie&it '. rent from
d :..th~~a .' :., . HCJt;..thl1 IJ adversely
~ i! .~# th~ . ereritj~l.bm those
\.~.\.'~~ i::'W~:~~ the
\\origiiiD1 H . ~ "J};~:,lp
.,', \t.:' . .d .. >>... 11
4.\~y .~~~~:.. .,~, . it!JZll a;;flca?le legal
r~prreme~r~ulll" . . gered:.Specles Act, the
Na~Elf;.' ~~n',.o:","", ;~~' ,~Fish#Wildlife
Servl~" perm ~ ...Jatl: -.'. 5p,~Pl(.':J . IDld ~ ll;f""
'~:':".' il ""~'~;;:~::~~:;;:~~:'''';' oI-~.~,I'
This permit also cohsti!~dEt~iahP~~s~~~;ln1der 50 CFR ~21.27 for
the take of Picoides bo;ezui~tli~alhn.w.:!~dt'~1iumber specified and subject to
the terms and conditions specified1ierefil: Any such take of Picoides borealis will
not be in violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 as amended (16
U.S.C. ~703.l2).
(
J. Any written correspondence required by this Permit shall include the following
certification from the Permittees:
Under penalty oflaw, I certify that, to the best of my
knowledge, the information submitted is true, accurate, and
complete.
Continued...
(
.~
CO II, LLC and 850 NWN, LLC
159 South Main Street #500
Akron, Ohio 44308
TELEPHONE 330/996-0225
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
PagelJ~~ 184 of 197
.
TE145823.0
Block 11:
K. The Permittees and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledge that even
with the above detailed provisions for mitigating and/or minimizing impacts to
the covered species, changes in circumstances could arise which were not fully
anticipated by this permit and which may result in substantial and adverse change
in the status of the covered species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's policy
regarding changed and unforeseen circumstances is contained in the final "No
SurPrises'; rllIe published on February 23, 1998, (63 Federal Register 8859) and
codified at 50 CPR Part ~ 17.
.~;~;~~~::~~~~~.~':~~~.f-1!~I.~
Unfo:eseen and/or .~,~geif~c~.. tapces trt~ 1i~~apparent eit?er to the
Permittees an.<i ~eir'~~.Jl&~9:~~~(s-onnc'ti~_ e U.S. Fish and
~ildlife Se~~?"" of.erp~6sR i~. ~e~~.tr~j>('~ . ition, unroreseen
clrcumstan~ ~~~~c~~ie~~:~~r~~\~n ~ specIes or
geographj~~a~~red?e.y.~e:ijCP tha(~pl~:~W!_~blY ~e been
~ticip~t~(tp.m~~'d~~e~~ll.an(Wlf~Jl,~:F~~p.,and;~!41~:~;rvice at. the
tIme o~~{i~}t 9\~~e~tlO!i'~aeV.~op~~!.lJ,.mr~at .~\ltlt'~,~~bstantlal
and ~ye'rse' pl1ange In th :as~f~"covered specles.:':Ql~ged$l~umstances
. -':"!J' . '"1''\-:'. '.. v. .",;r ""'J;
are d:rPn~ .~c~ . '.' . ~~ a.~i;s or~~bic area
cov~.. ,. .~.b.~..p1. ".; e ~ ~ bYl1C,peY!I;- ~s and
the U~S. FlS..6 an ed for~ ~ S'fid either
unfo~seefi\1r ch . e\s andfthe'ce!' ct office
, ~. -~... ". : ;..to -1 ~ ~
~e:~#:in~~oi ... . .~t~~'~ow, shall
clrc~ances~,\~~.!!:~::. . . .'Y.~!p,~lfe l:rrvlce ~ the ~rlfii~.s shall
~~~e:~:;;,qW9:~~~ftte l~>,. ~~~~;t~~jtUCh
imPl~ment~pr~:~d. ('<,:.~~~~;;t.; -an ad<j}tronal ~irty (30)
workmg da~:~~less alon.J.J?e ~"~nijtJeJ~~ to b&e U.S. Fish and
W'ldl'&', S . ''4>'' .~ _....;;::;~..~~,:,""~'\......#.~.':J;:.~. ....'.,p.;f
1 he ervlc",.,.... ",":r: .,.~ -"'~",.,..,c"..~...~.:"~~ .i.'......r-'
"';-'''':-..,." ;:~~,r..r-. ~ A F '"-rc!* ..t'>.~~fI---
,." "," . '.h rr l~' ~ i/ r:- ,~; ~~' ." ,..u'.... ...,.
0:- .;:~~...".... ~":J i {'"~ l"'"* .;. ~ ~"1 '.. "_..rV ~~:.#ol'.'
L. Upon locating a dead, iriJiirCd;:~r:sickR~~ne6ror coryi and Picoides borealis
"\k-,l--.,..._...... ...,,~...
or any other threatened or endangered-species, initial notification must be made
immediately to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Law Enforcement Office,
20501 Independence Boulevard, Groveland, Florida 34736 (352/429-1037).
Notification should also be made, by the next work day, to the contact office of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service noted in Condition 11.M. Care should be
taken in handling sick, injured, or dead specimens to ensure effective treatment or
to preserve biological materials for later analysis. In conjunction with the care of
sick or injured threatened or endangered species or preservation of biological
materials from a dead animal, the finder should take responsible steps to ensure
that the site is not unnecessarily disturbed.
.
.
Continued...
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Pagef~ 185 of 197
CO II, LLC and 850 NWN, LLC
159 South Main Street #500
Akron, Ohio 44308
TELEPHONE 330/996-0225
,
~.
TE 145823-0
Block 11:
M. For purposes of receiving reports, and monitoring compliance and administration
of the tenns and conditions of this pennit. the contact office of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service is:
N.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
South Florida Ecological Services Office
1339 20th Street
Vera Beach, Florida 32960-3559
Telephone: 772/562-3909 . _.,,,,,<::;,.;;.;;:';:.:~;:~~:-::-....-;,.,,
~~~.~:~;~.;~:,.;r ~ i 'ir :r~~~'>t~~~,
/,"'#....... .it \~ r~ 1 ~. ~ l"\' .-....: '~,
Report~, ~d ~~;1iP~.'" . f\o~~~f~!p'~~~a~ i~p~~:a~on, modification,
or adml~l~~~n ~!Hl~~~'~~l ~~~~~~~~~~c fonnat, and also
be provld*~y~e~~~~.tqt\ ~ J fl/,,"'.::',~~~~, ':<?:tlt:r'S~
li".""- Y' 1";"; .7-:..:/ ......~<> -. ., " :-.?' _.......... ,','J'~,,~.'~~' ,,"I\..
$ "':J~ ~-'?., ....'C,....-:.t:....~;; I). .. .,~.... ,...,,",-""1"\.."" ":)"::'- "
U S F.~t,; d'~F.d~'c....,,,,, '~''''-,:' "....,.'...,;..-.".'.. .~"'..... '.'.'.
. . l'an wlJ.~ ~.emrce '.. ..,.'-'D.",~:,.,., .. ..."...,...\\~<i\\. .~r 'It"!
" ~~ ~ .:~~-- O'_,i,.,.,i .~....... -... ""{'),""'" ''''l.... -.". ~~
Ecolog{~$~f<q~"lr~"" .-",.~~.~:j;!~......~ . ^ .... ~~. ~~.\: ,'<i/ \\
Attn: I..ricide....~ ....ff-w(~pern:;. "~~cr~'-''''~.' ",...;.... "...~~..:..~.~,:.;.\~". p.l"'-'.!<....,\
,,,. ','''! . '., ... ,t)>. . ", \. ~"...,<;: ~l.
1875f~ntu# Bo 0 '.'" .. .,',..........~~l rfA"~
AtI~t~..~~rgi4 ., "~..."l~~ ~..~. \t
T ele~, pone. :i.4. .04/ '. \ ~ J ,-.;J t ~
.. ,.! ~. "". ' f ~
~: ~ .~ ~ ... ~ J .-'f.'~. .. ~,
. .~ ;;'~) ~ '\( \.q' lH ~;. ~ ~
t~; ..... 4,' ~ Ii ':let. ~ r"~ "1' ~j
~. ~ .. \,~ "11' . . lr.\:-j~ h
',,;, -::~ ._ ,.'" ~t~_... ~
" \ 1 ~.. . ?to. I :/ . .1) ".: ",.if'~ f
.\\ ;~. ,.~~~~t~(r:~. ':: _ ~.;,~~..i~::.,~.r,._;r~1 .' 'm. -:f" .tt'
~. ',.,.~~,~ .. . :,r"'~tt.~'1-..:.ij~~ ~ .tj. l'~ iJ
'\.;~..,....,. "'QS:;:~~. ~lt~ ~! r:,". '~.. "~::" ~7~f~~'*,~'/ f.~1l
v... ""1?~ ~.".v \. .......oJ ,t. ... ~ . .
~:: ~~:'" '-"^;~~;'~:~;~;~::;~,.;,..:f~Jl+~- ~,_/ .r.:~:-;'lP;
....... ".. ;....~ Of'"t",Ar'l.~;l!"..'" .... ~ ~1i I.... #
"~;"~''''''. T ~~~~;.;J ~._. >i ... ....~~ 11 ~\:-~ ......."".\;,:'..
:o"'..."c..... ~., ~ r-.".:.' ~ 1 :L,:. .!~ .-X, ~~...t:; (,;P
.."~;~~~;~~:~.;'~;,~L:.,.,~,~:::::~;;,~:;-;.~ ;""+
END
\
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 186 of 197
DEVELOPMENT ORDER 2010-
RESOLUTION NO. 2010-
.
A RESOLUTION AMENDING DEVELOPMENT ORDER 88-02,
AS AMENDED, TIlE CTIYGATE COMMERCE PARK
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT, PROVIDING FOR
SECTION ONE: AMENDMENT TO REGULATIONS
PERTAINING TO RED COCKADED WOODPECKERS;
SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT; SECTION THREE:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; SECTION FOUR: EFFECT OF
PREVIOUSL Y ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDER,
TRANS MITT AL TO DCA AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of COlUlW.Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, approved
Development Order 88-02 (the "Development Order') on December 13, 1988, which approved a
Development of Regional Impact (DR!) known as Citygate Commerce Park Development Order; and
WHEREAS, as a result of an appeal, a Settlement Agreement between Collier County and the
Department of Community Affairs resulted in Development Order 90-4, Resolution No. 90-431 dated
August 28, 1990 ("1990 DOA"), which amended Section One: Conclusion of Law, Section 4, Vegetation .
and WildlifelWetJands, including paragraphs c and d (which were entitled "Off-Site Mitigation" and
"Red Cockaded Woodpecker Management Plan", respectively) of the Development Order; and
WHEREAS, 850 NWN, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, and CG II, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company, (collectively "O\\.ners") own the DR! property east of the Florida Power & Light
Easement; and
WHEREAS, the Owners, after formal consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service,
applied for the approval of a Habitat Conservation Plan and for a Federal Fish and Wildlife Permit pursuant
to Section 10 of the United States Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (7 U.S.C ~ 136, 16
U.S.C. ~ 1531 et seq.), which, among other things, incorporates the latest Red Cockaded Woodpecker
("RCW'') management methods and mitigation strategies; and
WHEREAS, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service approved the City Gate Habitat
Conservation Plan for the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker and Florida Panther ("City Gate HCP"),
document #2005050-10.1 dated March 15, 2006 as revised through May 2008 and approved on
March 30, 2009; and
.
Underlined text is added; Struck tftfal:lgh text is deleted.
City Gate / DOA-PL20 1 0-843
Rev. 8120/10 Page 1 of9
Agenda Item No. 17B
November 9,2010
Page 187 of 197
WHEREAS, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued to Owners a Federal Fish and Wildlife
Permit TE145823-0, issued July 1,2009 ("City Gate Federal Permit"); and
WHEREAS, the City Gate Federal Permit incorporates the latest RCW mitigation strategies; and
WHEREAS, the RCW mitigation strategies and management methods found in the 1990 DOA vary
from the RCW mitigation strategies and RCW management plan found in the City Gate HCP and City Gate
Federal Pennit; and
WHEREAS, the proposed changes are required to conform to a permit approved by the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service, and these changes do not create any additional regional impacts; and
WHEREAS, Roger B. Rice, of Roger B. Rice, P.A., representing the Owners, petitioned the Board
of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, to amend the Development Order by amending the
1990 DOA; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission held a public hearing on the petition on
, 2010; and
WHEREAS, on , 20 10, the Board of County Commissioners, having considered
application of proposed changes to the Development Order by amending the 1990 DOA, and the record
made at said hearing, and having considered the record of the documentary and oral evidence presented
. to the Collier County Planning Commission; and report and recommendation of the Collier County
Planning Commission; the report and recommendation of the Collier County Planning Staff and Advisory
Boards, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County hereby approves the following Citygate
Commerce Park Development Order amendments.
.
.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
SECfION ONE: AMENDMENT OF DEVELOPMENT ORDER 88-02, AS AMENDED
Conclusions of Law, Section 4 of Development Order 88-2, as amended, "Vegetation and
Wildlife/Wetlands", is hereby amended by deleting subparagraphs b, c, and d in their entirety and
adding a new subparagraph b to read as follows:
4. VEGETATION AND WILDLIFEIWETLANDS:
a. Golden Polypody Ferns and Butterfly Orchids shall be relocated to appropriate
protected areas on-site.
b. 'The 2.47 acres of wetlands preserve shown on the approved Master Development Plan
Underlined text is added; Stmel, through text is deleted.
City Gate 1 DOA-PL20 1 0-843
Rev. 8120/10 Page 2 of9
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 188 of 197
shall be preserved.
e. Off Site MiagatieB .
1. DeveleflmeBt of the }:lFCljeet area loeated west of the po:werline ea5efReRt may
OOmffieB6e immediately, tElgether 'Nitk the t\ve }3Clfeels east of the pO'Nerline easement
BeeeSsary to provide temporary waste'.vater treatment Me dispesel faeiliti6s and
stoffBwater management for the lH'ea ...:est of1:86 pav;erHBe e85em.eRt. The Bfea east
oftbe powerline eesemeBt shall Rat eueeee twel':e (12) aSl'es iB totiH Md shiH I be
in tile 8f'flfflJr:imate leeatieBS sfte\\'ft eft BKhiBit "}..". The eight (g) aeres mere or less to
be ~d for '.vater managemee.t purposes, 'will not require massive elear.ng and a
majority of the matuF-e trees (8"-+ diameter) ':rill be maintained lifttilmitigatiaB is
pr-avic!ed for said property. These aeres e85t efthe powerline easement being
~ shaD lie mitigateEl ,;Ath the first release of aec!itienal aereage seNght
hereunder. Prior to the issuance of construction permits f-or de';elopmem of any
ef1:8e flfojeet are85 Ioeated e85t efthe flewerlme e85emeat eJf8eflt 85 set fertli
above, mitigatiofl for the impacts to OR site Red Cockaded VI oodpeekers and their
BalJitat shaR eeel:H' 85 set ferth herem.
Southwest Florida Regional Planning Coundl (S WFR...DC) is cWTemly
contemplating the establishment of a Regional Mitigation Plan f-ar the off site
mitigtftieR of impaets to Red Cockaded W oodpeek-ers and other listed spooies. If the
Setlt:h'.vest Florida Regional Planning Council adopts such a Regional Mitigation Plan
whieh mitigates the impaets efthe Rea CeeklleeEi Wseclf3eeker €Iff site aRd is
aeeepteEi lly DCA during the pendeney of this Deyelopment Order, Applicant may, at
its sole option, choose to partioipate in said regional mitigatioB plaB 85 te any lleFeS
unmitigated as em altemlltive te fl:trller mitiglltieft under iliis Section. Fur.her, in
the e';ent that Red Cockaded '.V oodpeckers are ramo'led fr-om the list ef flreteetee
speeies of the State af Fleri€ia d~.ng the peBdency of this De~lelopmen.t Order,
Applicant shall have no further obligatioB frem aBe after that time, for
mitigatieB of impacts tEl said species.
2.
.
c. The Red Cockaded Woodpecker Management Plan shall be the Red Cockaded
Woodpecker Management Plan provisions in the City Gate Habitat Conservation
Plan for the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker and Florida Panther (City Gate HCPt
document #2005050-10.1 dated March 15.2006 as revised through May 2008 and
approved on March 30, 2009 by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the
Mitigation for Red Cockaded Woodpecker shall be the mitigation provisions in the
Federal Fish & Wildlife Permit TEI45823-0, issued July 1. 2009 (City Gate
Federal Permit). pursuant to Section 10 of the United States Endangered Species
Act of 1973. as amended (7 U.S.C & 136, 16 U.S.c. & 1531 et seq.).
1. A COpy of this RCW Management Plan shall be filed with the original of this
Resolution in the Records of the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners.
2. Copies of all Monitoring Reports and correspondence with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. regarding the City Gate HCP and City Gate Federal Permit. shall
be provided to Collier County and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning
Council (SWFRPC) as part of the Annual Monitoring Report for the City Gate
Commerce Park DRl.
.
Underlined text is added; Stmek through text is deleted.
City Gate / DOA-PL20 1 0-843
Rev. 8/20110 Page 3 of9
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 189 of 197
3. The City Gate proiect shall be deemed to be in compliance with the RCW
Maruuzement Plan if the City Gate project is in compliance with the reauirements
of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service under the City Gate RCP and the City Gate
Federal Permit. No violation of the RCW Management Plan under this Resolution
may be charged unless the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shall have initiated an
action to suspend or revoke the City Gate Federal Permit for failure to comply
with the RCW Management provisions thereof.
.
The OR site and et! site mitigatiOR fer the Rea Coekaded V/eedpeekelS and their
femgiBg BalJitat is as follevlS:
a. There are aB agreed upon 198 aei'es af suitable Red Ceekaelea
Weedpeeker foraging Habitat aft site (see Exhibit liB ") an6 the :\flfllicant's
off site mitigatieR shaD Be limited to an acre for aere phased off site pur-ehase
and eeRveYaBee ef mitigation property af payment of money as set ferth
ftet:eHn
(i) The I\.pplisant shall aeqWre and COJl'/ey eB a:R llere for aere
885is, suitable Red CaekaGea Vleedpook-er habitat, saBjeet to
conditieBS and eriteria stated in PliftWElflh 5.a.through 5.f.
Saitable habitat sftall Be determined by the Departmea.t af
COmm\illRY .'\ffai:rs vvith RooommendatieDS by the Flarida Game
aM Fresh 'Vater Fish CommissieB.
3.
.
.
(ii)
:\s an altcmative te the ;\pplieam's direct acquisition of mitigation
property as set fertk aereiB, the Applicant shall have the
altemative of paying fer the aeEl1:1isi1:iaR efRed Cockaded
W ood~eelter habitat OR a phased basis pl:H'S1i81lt tel this paragraph.
In the C'/ent SoutB',yest , FIElrilia Regional Planning Couneil, other
ge'/emmee.taI. ageney, state or natiOBaJ eonservatieB erganization
ideatities and obtf.J:tBS or has the right to obtain a large contiguous
aereage fer wildlife proreetion and menagemeat aad whieh meets
the eriteria set forth aereir., :\wlieant shall have the alternative (on
a J3flased basis as set forth herein, or upon a single paymeflt basis)
to pay to said agency or organimtion for its r-eql:l:irea mitigation.
The amount of said payment shall be e'lual to the number of
acres lleiBg m:it:igatecl multiplied by the cost of tHe land eB a per
acre basis.
Florida Game and Fresh W &ter Fish CemmissieB will aetively
aad eXfec!itieusly assist in the location of mitigatieB flFeflerty
which meets the eriteria set forth herein. Said property shall not
he immediately adjacent to development lH''elB:S ar iR areaB
specified in local gov-emment compreaensi'..e fllaM fer \:If~aa
developmem. Said j3Faflcrties skwI be within the Southwest
Florida R.egieBBl Planning Counoil area, but need not be vlithin
Collier COlHlty.
Underlined text is added; g1:Fl:lek ~EH:lgh text is deleted.
City Gate / DOA-PL2010-843
Rev. 8120/10 Page 4 of9
4.
5.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
If flaragraph 3.a(i) is utili~eI, tile propeR}' shall b Page 190 of 197
respoasibility fer t:he.:.l e eeByeyed te the entity \vidi
. . mB:B:agetl area. The prep~' sftaH e e '
lfl ~ts predominantly na.tural and eJusting eonditieft mi~ : r-eser\'~ m perpetuity
~ 11lSlIftl1llc eeBliRHe6 em-. of StIflobIe ae.l G~~~d m''''r&t~ lRan~....ent
eR'/eyflftee mEty eee1:H" in Phases as set ferth h' . H 00 pee (er habItat.
any property, the property sliall be dee d ~ erem. Pnor to the eeliYey8:ftse ef
Community Affairs, \\1ie me . seek theme, . aeeeptable b): 1:8e Department of
ageneies 85 te the aeeeptabili~ fth ad /lee. of app~ef3nate eB.-vireB:lBental
o e propeR}' 10 ~stlOB..
The phase mitigation aflflfeeeft ~ tft .,.
V,Teec!fJeekers and Red Cockade:r w::~eet s Imp~ts .eR R-ed Ceel~ed
the fallev:mg eoBditioll5 and eriteri~ I" eker habitat IS acceptable, sl:lejeet te
a .\II the mitigatioB pfepeft}' hall e .
+^1..1 s e eeBtIgl:lel:l5 aBe there shall be n'n
accepccztl-e lBetliaa for t:he phas e . . . UI;
meteed shall meaB a Ie all . e aeqUl~ItlOn oftke flraf3ert}'. f~eeefltaele
aflplieant on a phased: .) enforceable nght to obtaiB the property by the
asts.
'^At the time of thc apflfe~'al f th .. .
Woodneckers sh^'I Lene~B: 0 r. e m~tigatIaR fll'aflerty, Red eoekac!OO
l' nu tI .nh g er teragmg 8ft tft .. .
property will lie ete " ;.I e mttIgatlOn pr-operty, or the
en:ise !:teemed aeeeptahle by DCA
The mitigation pl'€lf3~' seall e' Ei"
proximity to existing 1 d n e_~e lately adjaeent to or in close
an S 0 ,m~ or managed ll" a I"t:t8H
or ~~ages by a eeaservation organization for th e ~eBey aT ~.:.~eel
or vltthm an area designated fe hI" . . . e p~ot~ction of v,1.ldJife,
'."meR nublie fi .:.1:_ 1.. T fll:l Ie ae~~ilt:IeR 85 wtltllife Rabitat for
t" ~t:I:ttlg rlaS not been OOIm11ittoo.
The mitigatieR property shall be deeded A . .
edjaeeftt wtidtife habitat or to aI th ~ tl e entIty owrnng the eOaagH81:15 or
no cr entity appro"eEl e 'IX; ^ EI A
Soutlr.vest Florida Regional Planning CO\H1cil 8fld n.J . Lan tt ~
preservation in perpetWty 85 e ':RJdlife haBitat. n be seed FeMeted ror
Com'eyanees or payments shall Be for at least 25 .
a eorresponding amount of suitable Red Coekad:~l~e~me~, 'N~re\:lpeB
eftbe pe'''effine' Hoe flee (-er ftabHat east
deYelop~~nt p~:'~~: :l~~~=tive :h~e ~all bc released for
sl:litable Roo C kaQ_;.I, T . eeeur n't1:hm Phase Two I:IBtil all
oe ~ ~ oo~eeker haBitat '.vithin Pha5e Qa has
released. D:'..elopment of\H1suitable Red Cockaded mOO~k ~B I
may eeel:lf SllBl:lkaneel:l5fj...~th e . I ." er tat ends
Cockaded VI oodpeek-er habitat ,~; ~t ef adjo.mmg released Red
1.. .. Hfl eac re~eeti"e Ph l..T I
snwl oeeW' withiB Phase Three (8 ~.r:' ase. 1"10 re eases
parao:mnh 6 h 4"1.. 1.. tage II) HBtil the reqNifemeats of
O--t" croor-navc vccn met Phase =FA (8 I
Ceekadea '''eadpeeker presef'l' . t:B. }fec tage I). shall be the Red
time 85 flro\1EleEl lierei:r The pha: 85 e d~ may lie modified frem time to
hereto. ~ €IS ar-e 6f)leted on EKfliBit ":\" attaehed
.
e.
c.
.
d.
e.
f.
IR the e'/eRt that the R:ea b I a e UT
Citygate site for a peried ef ~': ;~ ~:ap~ekers totally allan~e.n the
eaB agrees to totally FBit:Igate its
.
. Underlined text is added' Str ~ thf
CIty Gate / DOA-PL20 1 0-843 ' U6 \: eugh text is deleted.
Rev. 8/20/]0
Page 5 of9
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 191 of 197
impaets BY &eEJ:1:!ir~xg the FemainEier ef1:ke mi1:igatieB pr-opefty flW'S1:I8Bt te 1his
agreemeRt at that time. UpOR acquisition of tho remainder oftke mMigaOOn
~', the entire remainder of the projeet, inelHamg the 72 ame pFeserve
area, will he availaBle fer de'leIopmeat. In the event that one of the two
purported colonies abandons the site for a period eftv.re years, ~~HeBBt
agFeeS te $'.'6 a qualified biologist Fe analyze the habitat use pattems aDd
Reeds of the remainiBg eelefty l:l5ing a metheaolegy Fe85snaaly aeeeptable to
the Game and Fresh...;ater Fish Ca~sioR. That flomeB ef 1:8e 72 aeres
e\:KsiEte this area SRaIl ee released for development UpoB ae~tieB ef 8ft
ecf1:!al aeFeage ef mitigatiOD property.
There Bfe t\VB Stages to the off site mitigation pfOgmm, Stage I (pha5e I &. II eB:9t of
powerline eoAtaining a total efaflPfElJUmately 168 acres) contains 129.5 aeres ef
sl:litahle Rea Cockaded Woodpeeker hahitat leeated east ef1:8e powerline
easemeBt Bl:lt e1Hsiae efthe Red Coekaded \l.'aeaJleeker preserve Boundary, and
Stage II eOBStitl:ltes the 72 aeres within the Red Coelffiaed W oeaJgeeker preserve
boundary (68.5 aeres ef sl:timele Rea Cock-aded Woodpecker haBitat) sae'Nfl on
MElf3 H attached te this De~leleJlmeat Order. No off site mitigatioB shwllle
allo'tlled for er de-,'elepment occur v,~thin Stage II Hfttil Bftd W1less, all Red
Cockaded W oodpeekers Have aBandoned all cavity trees eD site far 'hvo years or
more 85 demoBStrated by the annual surveys SfJeemea herein except as provided iB
Paragraph 5.f. hereof.
The r~ements for aft'site mitigation are in additioa to Bft)' feE}w.rements of the
City Gate R-ed Caekaded W oodpeeker Managemeat Plan described bela'N.
8. Pflor to issuance of eoB.S1:n:Ie1:iaB peFftlits for roads, ''''iiter ana sewer fer an approved
development Phase of the Citygate J9FElject, a Red Coekaded Woodpecker RCW)
survey l:ltiJizing pre'.iously awr~ved metheaology will be eOaOOeted te iRsure that
RC',Vs flfp/e Ret estalllished nest cavities in the de'lelopmem area. The sl:lr:ey shall
occur ",vithin 60 days of the start of de':elopment activities a:o.d if it is aetermined
that RC\V nest ca'lities have lleea established in the eenst.i:letioR area, appropriate
modifications shaR lie meGe te the RCW Maaagemee.t Plan.
e.
:.
d. Red Ceckadea W oodpcckcr Ma:o.agemeRt Plan.
1. .\aftual RCVl sm'/eys, utilizing the previo1:lfily appreved methodalegy, '...ill be
undertakeB nntil 5 five years after (mal Build out of the Citygate project, with
results of the 8:flI1Ha1 RCW surveys te Be reflorted to Game and Fisk CommissioB
(GFC), U.S. Fish aBEt Wildlife Service (USF\,\'S), S'HFRPC, aRd Cellier CeWlty
\vithiR 39 says ef survey compleaea.
2. PFeJ30sals to moc!ify the Citygate ReW Management Plan, inCOIfl6I'atea aerein
by Feferenee, may lie Slibmitted at any time. StICh proposals shaJI Be sapported
by a el:lI'refl.t su:rvey of on site RC\,\' Resting and fmaging pattems, and St:leB.
aeelttional inf{)rm.at:lofl. 85 is reEJ.wrod to e\<all:I8te the fJf-oposed ManagemeBt PI8B
modifieaticlR. Uflon determiRatiaB tJ~ffH:lgh the annual RCW Sl:lT'Ieys that the
.
Underlined text is added; Stmck through text is deleted.
City Gate / DOA-PUOIO-843
Rev. 8120/10 Page 6 of9
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 192 of 197
OR site eoleBies in aBY area sought te he removed from the RCW preserve have
booB abandened fer at least two years, aBd aB)' required eff site mitigatieB. is
being een6mrently pre'Aded, apprepriate moaifieatieB. to the RCW .
MaBagement PlaB shall Be appro~led aBd shaJI not be considered a sl:!9smmial
de':iatieB. smee the impaets thereof are being mitigated eeacurrent there>:Ath.
3. Mclaleaea and etfler 6*etie vegetatiOfl vA1hiR 1Be RCW preserve area 8ftti eIse,',Bere on
the Citygate site vAY be emdiea1eEl after approval oftae flrepesed removal by the
FGF'HFC, tft\:15 sigBificantly en.'1aReing the EIuality efRCW fomge area en site.
1. EKeessP/c lJfldergr{)\vtR \',iII be eoatrolled by bumiag aRdIer by use ofmeebaBieal
equipmeRt if determiBed by the FGFWFC te Bet etherwise' cORfliet -mtR the
proteetieB. of the RC\V habitat OR site.
S. Pine Wes having a Diameter Bfe85itHeight (DBH)) of~ E>f1BOfe, loeateel.oot<idethe
RCW preserve (pRa5e III) 00t .../ithiB the required yam ana 9t:Jffer 8feaS iB the remainder
of1he site, will be conserved to pl9Vic!e aGaitional RCW fomge areas. Bast efthe
FML easemeat in the 'lieinity oftke RCW ~ areas identified eR tBe M85ter
Plan the minimum. pareel ~ are to be 2 aeres; mimm1:im yard reqairements lH'e
H:aHt 5Q', rear 50', side 2S'; notmerethaa2gJ~ ef1heoorequiFed yaFElsmaylle
c!e>1eteeI to vehieular driyes and parking Sflaees; at lea5t 3~1o of eaeh se>.'eloJlfBeRt site
ImlSt he OO'loted te natmal aBdI<>r insmRe<i ~ areas.
6.
Unreleased lands v\~ 8tage I and Stage II may be ~ fer limited recreational
J'M::HPOse5 S\:lGR as walk\vays, jogging 1fBi!s, aBEl other passiye recreational faeilities, 00 leng
as dkr.....-banee of FJatiye vegetatiOfl is minimal and the aetivities aveiel. aB. area
eB.OOmpassing a 200 feet I'tlEIi\:I5 aro\:IBd eaeft nest tree. Undergpe\:Hi6 utilities aRB smface
c!Fainage s\'Jales may eross the tmrelea5ed laRds wilBiR Stage I provided that they are
installed e1:&5ide of an area conslitubng a 200' mdius aroued eaeh aet:ive Best tree and are
designed to ha~;e m:iftimal impaet UOOerground utilities and ~ eJmiBage S\vales may
ef09S 1he l:IB.released lands \vithin Stage II pte',i6ed that ~, are installed outside of an area
oonstituting a 200' mdius aroood e8ek aet;i'/e Best tree, are designed te have a minimal
impact, and further providOO that sl:llfaoo drainage swale locations be 8j:lflF6yed by the
Department of CommliBity :\ffairs. It is understood there may 00 a ~eB. in femgiBg
tfees wi1hin the 1:If'.released area as a result of these ae1:F:it:ies, But the same shall be
minimized to the mwciml:lffi eJaeat ~ea9le.
.
7. The preserve area shall be posted ,....ith signs ,,>,-,hiOO indieate that it is an RCW
flreserve and that disturbance of the birds is prohibited and1:H1:la-'A'fl:tl.
SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT
A. That the real property which is the subject of the proposed amendment is legally
described as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof.
B. The application is in accordance with Section 380.06(l9)(e)2., Florida Statutes.
Underlined text is added; Struck thremgR text is deleted.
City Gate / DOA-PL2010-843
Rev. 8/20/10 Page 7 of9
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9, 2010
Page 193 of 197
The applicant submitted to the County notice as required by Section 380.06(19)(e)2, which
provides "This Subsection does not require the filing of a notice of proposed change but shall
require an application to the local government to amend the Development Order ...."
C, A review of the impact generated by the proposed changes to the previously
approved development has been conducted by the County's departments.
D. The development is not in an area designated an Area of Critical State concern
pursuant to the provisions of Section 380.06, Florida Statutes, as amended.
E. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development Order fall within
Subsection 380.06(19)(e)2.h, Florida Statutes.
SECTION THREE: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
A. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development Order do not
constitute a substantial deviation pursuant to Section 380.06(19)(e)2.h, Florida Statutes. The
proposed changes are required to conform with federal permits.
. B. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development Order will not
unreasonably interfere with the achievement of the objectives of the adopted State Land
Development Plan applicable to the area.
C. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development Order are
consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Land Development
Regulations adopted pursuant thereto.
D. The proposed changes to the previously approved Development Order are
consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan.
E. The proposed changes do not constitute a substantial deviation pursuant to
Section 380.06(19)(e)1. and Section 380.06(l9)(e)2.h., Florida Statutes, and therefore it is not
subject to the public hearing requirements of 380.06(19)(f)3. and it is not subject to a
determination pursuant to Section 380.06(19)(f)5.
.
Underlined text is added; Stnlek lMeugfi text is deleted.
City Gate 1 DOA-PL2010-843
Rev. 8120110 Page 8 of9
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 194 of 197
SECTION FOUR: EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDER,
TRANSMITTAL TO DCA AND EFFECTIVE DATE
.
A. Except as amended hereby, Development Order 88.02, as previously amended,
shall remain in full force and effect, binding in accordance with the terms on all parties thereto.
B. Copies of this Development Order shall be transmitted immediately upon
execution to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Land and Water Management,
and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council.
C. This Development Order shall take effect as provided by law.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this
Board.
This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote.
Done this _ day of
,2010.
.
A ITEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
By:
FRED W. COYLE, Chairman
, Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
~'rx\,o
q,\tV
Heidi Ashton.Cicko
Assistant County Attorney
CP\IO-CPS-OI033\18
Underlined text is added; 8t:l1:1ck thfl:llIgA text is deleted.
City Gate / DOA-PL2010-843
Rev. 8/20/10 Page 9 of9
.
<.~,,,"?,,.....
r'
.
.
.
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 195 of 197
17C
HOl-E, MONTES'ANO ASSOC.. INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEE"S - LAND SURVEYORS
H.'.lA F i I e No. 85. 23
9/30/86
Shee t 1 0 f 2
LEGAL OESCRI PTION
The North half of Section 35, Township 49 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida LESS the West tOO.OO feet thereof for
right-of-way purposes and LESS the following described parcels:
'A parcel of land being"ij"po"'"(iori"of the" NO'rth.....-e.st-quarter'o"f----
Section 35, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Call ier County,
Florida. Being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the quarter Section corner, common to Sections 34
and 35, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Col I ier County,
Florida, Said quarter corner being marked with a 4d x 4d
concrete monument having a 3-inch brass cap attached to the top
thereof, with a 3/4-inch iron pipe; thence along the Section line
between said Sections 34.and 35, North OOo29'1Sd West, t,382.43
feet to a point on the centerline of the proposed Access Road No.
1 as shown on the State of FloridaOepar:tment of Transpor:tation
Right-of-Way Map for State Road No. 93 (1-75) Sheet 8 of 10;
thence along said centerline of the proposed Access Road No,
North 89031.01. East, 100.00 feet to a point on the East
right-of-way line of a canal, said point also being on the
centerl ine of the proposed access road to the water treatment..._
plant parcel; thence along said East. canalright':cif-way "-iine"
North OQ029'15" West, 50.00 feet to a 4" x 4" concrete monument
marking the Northwest corner of the proposed access road
right-of-way to the water treatment plant p.rcel; and being the
true POINT OF BEGINNINC of the parcel to be herein described;
thence along the North line of said access road right-of-way
North 89031' 01. East, 456,51 feet to a 4" x 4" concrete monL'ment
marking the intersection of said North right-of-way with the West
boundary I ine of the water treatment plant parcel; thence along
sa id West boundary I ine North 000/l7'14" nEast,..-g-9/l, 98 feet to an
iron rod on the Westerly right-of-way of a strip of land 170 feet
in width for a Florida, Power & Light Company (FP&L) right-of-way..
as described in Official Records Book 681, Page 1210, Collier
County Records: thence along said Westerly, FP&L right-of-way
North 31030'28" East, 70.02 feet to an iron rod; thence
continuing along said Westerly FP&L right-of-way South 58030"03"
East, 761.56 feet. to a 4" x 4- concrete monument; thence
contl"nuing along said Westerly FP&L right-of-way South 000117"4-
West, 1,066.70 feet to a qll x qP concrete monument; thence
continuing atong said Westerly FP&L right-or-way South OOo~7'14.
West, 332.74 feet to an iron red marking the intersection of said
Westerly FP&L right-of-way with the South line of the North half
of the South half of the Northwest quarter of Section 35,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier Count.y. Florida: said
point also being the Southeast Corner of the parcel being herein
described; thence along said South line of the North half of the
South half of the Northwest quarter of Section 35, South
89004140. West, 690.82 feet to a qft X qn concrete monument; said
2
.~.....:"':::'-Z;:-,,~,.~,,~~~J:'~~~.il,"'~~
_ .cxlii6it 'iA" ~ '.' """"',
17C
f-'MA ~ile No, BS.23
9/30/B6
Sheet 2 of 2
-point being the Southwest Corner of the parcel being herein
described; thence along the .West boundary I ine of said parcel
North 00047114. East. 653.80 feet to a ~d x 4. concrete monument
marking the intersection of the West boundary of the water
treaunent plant parcel with the South right-of-way of the
proposed access road to the water treatment plant parcel; thence
along said South right-of-way South 89031101- West. 454.18 feet
to a 4. x 48 concrete monument marking the intersection of said
access road South right-of-way with the East right-of-way of a
.cana";" t"hence-aiong said -canal--Eastr)ght';;o'f-"Nay North 00029' 15"
West 100.00 feet to the POINT OF BECINNINC,
AND
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 196 of 197
.
A portion of the North half of Section 35, Township q9 South,
Range 26 East; being described as follows:
Begin on the South line of the North half of said Section 35. at
a point North 8g000'01" East 100.00 feet from the Southwest
COrner of the North half of said Section 35. thence run North
00029'15. West. 1.334.19 feet. thence South 04021108" East.
.296:92-feet.'thenceSouth 02046'25. East;'750.60 feet to-th.----
beginning of a curve concave to the Northeasterly having a radius
of 336.00 feet, thence run Southerly along said curve_240,SB
feet. through a central angle of 41001'29" to the end of said
curve. thence South 43047'54- East, 94,86 feet to the South line
of-the North half of said Section 35, thence South 89000'01----"-._--'
West, 206.27 feet to the POINT OF BECINNINC~ '
AND
A portion of the North half of Section 35. Township qg South.
Range 26 East; being described as fol lows:
Begin on the South line of the North half of said Section 35, at
a point North 89000'01" East. 306.27 feet from the Southwest
COrner of the North half of said Section 35, thence run North
43047'54. West. 94.86 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to
the Northeasterly having a radius of 336.00 feet. thence run
Northwesterly along said curve 240,58 feet through a central
angle of 41001'29U to the end of said curve, thence North
02046'25. West, 750.60 feet, thence North 04021'08" West, 296.92
feet, thence North 00029'15. West, 85.00 feet, thence North
89631'Ol. East, 64,42 feet, thence South 04021'08" East, 378.34
feet, thence South 02046'25. East, 751.56 feet, to the beginning
of a curve concave to the Northeasterly having a radius of 266.00
feet. thence run Southeasterly along said curve 190.46 feet.
through a central angle of 41001129. to the end of said curve.
thence South 43047'54- East, 159.68 feet to the South line of the
North half of said Section 35, thence South 89000'0,. West, 95.40
feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 287.187 acres, more or Jess,
3
HOLE:. MONTES Be ASS'OCIATES. INC.
,. . -.._ :.:4....... .__
. ..
.
"
Agenda Item No. 178
November 9,2010
Page 197 of 197
.
Na~les Dailym~1 · Sunday, Octo~~r ~4, 2010 · 19])
A,.,....._____ ~.::.:.::~." '~'...._:.. __ _____
\
. Legals
Legals
"
.
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION
Notice is hereby given that on Tuesday, November 9, 2010, in the Boardroom. 3rd
Floor. Administration Building. Collier County Government Center, 3301 East Ta-
miami Trail, Naples, Florida, the Board of County Commissioners will consider the
enactment of a Development Order Amendment. The meeting will commence at
9:00 A.M. The title of the proposed Development OrderlResolution is as follows:
A RESOLUTION. AMENDING DEVELOPMENT ORDER 88-02, AS AMENDED, THE CITY-
GATE COMMERCE PARK DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT, PROVIDING FOR
SECTION ONE: AMENDMENT TO REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO RED COCKADED
WOODPECKERS; SECTION TWO: FINDJNGS OF FACT; SECTION THREE: CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW; SECTION FOUR: EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDER,
TRANSMITIAL TO DCA AND PROVIDING AN EffECTIVE DATE.
Petition: DOA-Pl2010-843. 850 NWN, Ltc. CG II, LtC & CityGate Development Inc..
represented by Josh Fruth of Davidson Engineering. Inc., requesting an amendment
to the City Gate DRI Development Order to conform to the City Gate Habitat C0n-
servation Plan and the City Gate Federal Fish and Wildlife Permit. This amendment
is to the City Gate DRI Development Order 90-4 [Collier County Resolution 190-
4311. Section 4 entitled Vegetation and WildlifeJWetlands, in particular paragraph
c entitled Off-site Miti51ation and paragraph d entitled Red Cockaded Woodpecker
Management plan. thIS project is located at the intersection of Collier Boulevard
(CR 951) and City Gate Boulevard North in Section 35, Township 49 East.. Range 26
South., Collier founty, Florida.
Copies of the proposed Resolution are on file with the Clerk to the Board and are
available for inspection. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. '
NOTE: All .~rsons wishi~ to speak on any agenda item must register with the
County administrator prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed. In-
dividual speakers will be limited to 3 minutes on any item. The selection of an indi-
vidual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. If recognized
by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted 10
minutes to speak on an item.
Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the Board agenda
packets must submit said material a minimum of 3 weeks prior to the respective
public hearing. In any case, written materials intended to be considered by the
Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven da~
prior to the public hearing. All . material used in presentations before th~ Board will
become a permanent part of the record.
Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Board will need a record of the
proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to' ensure that a verbatim
record of the proceedings is made. which record includes the testimony and evi-
dence upon which the appeal is based. .
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to par-
ticipate in this proceeding; you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of,
certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Depart-
ment, located at 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Building W. Naples, Florida 34112, (239)
252-8380. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the
County Commissioners' Office. .
.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COWER COUNTY, FLORIDA
FRED COYlE, CHAIRMAN
DWIGHT E. BROCK. CLERK
By: Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk
(SEALJ
OrtohPr]4 7010
No1873151