Loading...
Agenda 12 09 2025 Item 16MPage 7328 of 9661 Page 7329 of 9661 Page 7330 of 9661 Page 7331 of 9661 Page 7332 of 9661 Page 7333 of 9661 Page 7334 of 9661 Page 7335 of 9661 Page 7336 of 9661 Page 7337 of 9661 Page 7338 of 9661 Page 7339 of 9661 Page 7340 of 9661 Page 7341 of 9661 Page 7342 of 9661 Page 7343 of 9661 Page 7344 of 9661 Page 7345 of 9661 Page 7346 of 9661 Page 7347 of 9661 Page 7348 of 9661 Page 7349 of 9661 Page 7350 of 9661 Page 7351 of 9661 Page 7352 of 9661 Page 7353 of 9661 Page 7354 of 9661 Page 7355 of 9661 Page 7356 of 9661 Page 7357 of 9661 Page 7358 of 9661 Page 7359 of 9661 Page 7360 of 9661 Page 7361 of 9661 Page 7362 of 9661 Page 7363 of 9661 Page 7364 of 9661 Page 7365 of 9661 Page 7366 of 9661 Page 7367 of 9661 Page 7368 of 9661 Page 7369 of 9661 Page 7370 of 9661 Page 7371 of 9661 Page 7372 of 9661 Page 7373 of 9661 Page 7374 of 9661 Page 7375 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 16.M.2ID# 2025-3716Executive SummaryRecommendation to approve and authorize the Chair to execute a Work Order with Humiston & Moore Engineers, PA, to provide professional engineering services for the state-required Annual Monitoring of Collier County Beaches and Inlets for 2026 under Contract No. 18-7432-CZ for a lump sum of $161,547.00, and make a finding that this item promotes tourism. (Fund 1105, Project No. 90536)OBJECTIVE: To move forward with the annual required beach and inlet monitoring surveys and reports for Collier County Beaches and Inlets for 2026. CONSIDERATIONS: The Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Section is tasked with the maintenance and monitoring of over thirty (30) miles of coastline, beaches, estuaries, channels, and bays. CZM has specific goals, objectives, and criteria to meet as identified within the Collier County Growth Management Plan Land Development Code, and the Codes of Laws and Ordinances regarding the county’s coastal aquatic resources. In order to meet these goals and objectives, CZM has been charged with a variety of programs including the implementation of beach re-nourishment and dredging projects, as well as any related operations that are required to maintain the health, aesthetics, and safety of the county’s coastal waterways and communities. Humiston & Moore provided a proposal dated August 15, 2025 in the amount of $161,547.00 to perform the monitoring services through a Work Order under library contract 18-7432-CZ. Yearly physical monitoring of the beaches and inlets is required by FDEP permit. Monitoring consists of field survey measurements of the above and below water topography of the beach, generally for its entire length, and to a width from the dune line to over 1000 feet offshore. Results of this report are used to evaluate, recommend, and prioritize annual beach segment renourishment. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: This item was presented to the Coastal Advisory Committee (CAC) on November 13, 2025 (8-0), and will be presented to the Tourist Development Council (TDC) on December 12, 2025. This item is consistent with the Quality of Place Objectives of the County’s Strategic Plan. FISCAL IMPACT: To expedite the required annual monitoring while waiting for the Tourist Development Council (“TDC”) to meet and make a recommendation on the expenditure of funds, funding in the amount of $161,547.00 will be utilized for this expenditure within Transportation Services Fund (1001), Transportation Division Admin (163609). The source of funding is general funds. Following the TDC recommendation as to whether this expenditure promotes tourism, the funding source will be amended to TDC Beach Renourishment Fund (1105), County /Naples Beach Monitoring Project (90536). FDEP cost-share funding will be requested if eligible at a future date to reimburse Collier County for a portion of the completed work. The source of funding is tourist development tax. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This item is consistent with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the County’s Growth Management Plan. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality and requires majory vote for approval. - CMG RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Work Order with Humiston & Moore Engineers, PA, to provide professional engineering services for the state-required Annual Monitoring of Collier County Beaches and Inlets for 2026 under Contract No. 18-7432-CZ for a lump sum of $161,547.00, and make a finding that this item promotes tourism. (Fund 1105, Project No. 90536) PREPARED BY: Andrew Miller, P.E., Coastal Zone Management, Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees, and Program Management Division Page 7376 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 16.M.2ID# 2025-3716ATTACHMENTS: 1. CZM- W.O 2026 Annual Monitoring Page 7377 of 9661 Page 7378 of 9661 Page 7379 of 9661 Page 7380 of 9661 Page 7381 of 9661 Page 7382 of 9661 Page 7383 of 9661 Page 7384 of 9661 Page 7385 of 9661 Page 7386 of 9661 Page 7387 of 9661 Page 7388 of 9661 Page 7389 of 9661 Page 7390 of 9661 Page 7391 of 9661 Page 7392 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.AID# 2025-3636Executive Summary*** This Item has been Continued from the October 28, 2025, Board of County Commissioners Meeting *** This item requires that Commission members provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve a rezone Ordinance to change the zoning from the Commercial Intermediate (C-3) zoning district to the Residential Multi-family-16 (RMF-16) zoning district to allow up to 16 multifamily dwelling units per acre for a total of 28 multifamily dwelling units. The subject 1.86± acre parcel is located on the west side of Tamiami Trail North (US 41) and bordered on the north by 93rd Avenue North and on the south by 92nd Avenue North, in Section 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North Rezone] OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") review staff's findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced petition and render a decision regarding the petition, and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The subject property consists of a single 1.86± acre Commercial Intermediate (C-3) zoned parcel with an auto repair and window tinting shop, a closed Burger King restaurant, and a single-family residence. The petitioner is requesting to rezone the 1.86± acre (C-3) parcel to a Residential Multi-family-16 (RMF-16) zoned parcel to allow for the development of 28 multi-family dwelling units with a maximum density of up to one dwelling unit per approximately .06± acres. For reference, see the Master Plan on page 3 of the Staff Report. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard Petition RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North Rezone, on September 18, 2025, and voted 5-0 to forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval. This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objective to enhance the character of our community. FISCAL IMPACT: The Rezone, by itself, will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. There is no guarantee that the project, at build-out, will maximize its authorized level of development. However, if the Rezone is approved, a portion of the land could be developed, and the new development will result in an impact on Collier County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the CCPC to analyze this petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed Rezone, and the subject petition is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: Petitioner is requesting a rezone from the Commercial Intermediate (C-3) zoning district to the Residential Multi-family-16 (RMF-16) zoning district. The attached staff report and recommendations of the Planning Commission are advisory only and are not binding on you. All testimony given must be under oath. The Petitioner has the burden to prove that the proposed rezone is consistent with all the criteria set forth below, and you may question the Petitioner or staff to satisfy yourself that the necessary criteria have been satisfied. Should you consider denying the rezone, to assure that your decision is not later found to be arbitrary, discriminatory, or unreasonable, the denial must be based upon competent, substantial evidence that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria below. Criteria for Straight Rezones Page 7393 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.AID# 2025-36361. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies, the future land use map, and the elements of the Growth Management Plan?2. Will the proposed rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern? 3. Would the proposed rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts? 4. Are the existing district boundaries illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change? 5. Do changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary? 6. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood? 7. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety? 8. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem? 9. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas? 10. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area? 11. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations? 12. Will the proposed change constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare? 13. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning? Page 7394 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.AID# 2025-363614. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County?15. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. 16. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration that would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. 17. What is the impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, art.II], as amended? 18. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to this rezone request that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare? This item has been approved as to form and legality, and it requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval. Should this item be denied, Florida Statutes section 125.022(3) requires the County to provide written notice to the applicant citing applicable portions of an ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority for the denial. (HFAC) RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve the request for Petition RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North Rezone and the proposed Ordinance. PREPARED BY: Nancy Gundlach, Planner III, AICP, PLA, CSM, GMCDD, Zoning Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. 9271-9295 TTN Rezone Staff Report 8-21-25 2. Attachment A-Proposed Rezone Ordinance 9271-9295 TTN Rezone - 081825 (1) 3. Attachment B-GMP Consistency Review Memo 7-31-25 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North Rezone 4. Attachment C-NIM Documents 6-5-2025 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North Rezone 5. Attachment D-Application 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North Rezone 6. Affidavit of Posting Notice and photos of public hearing signs (PL20240013324) 8-28-25 7. legal ad - agenda ID 25-3636 - Mercato West RZ (PL20240013324)- BCC 10-28-25 8. 10.28.25 BCC- published ad 9. legal ad - agenda ID 25-3636 - Rezone PL202400013324 - 12-9-25 10. legal ad - agenda ID 25-3636 - Rezone PL202400013324 - 12-9-25 Page 7395 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 15, 2025 Page 1 of 11 STAFF REPORTTO:COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT - PLANNING & REGULATION HEARING DATE:SEPTEMBER 18, 2025 SUBJECT: RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH RMF-16 REZONE PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Applicant/Owner: Rachel Development, Inc., a Minnesota Company, authorized to do business in the State of Florida as Rachel Development SWF, Inc., and Vincent RE Development, LLC 4180 Napier Court NE Saint Michael, MN 55376 Agents: Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, VP, and Ellen Summers, AICP Bowman 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34110 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the Comprehensive Zoning Regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from the Commercial Intermediate (C-3) zoning district to the Residential Multi-family-16 (RMF-16) zoning district to allow up to 16 multi-family dwelling units per acre for a total of 28 multi-family dwelling units. Page 7396 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 20, 2025 Page 2 of 11 Location Map Page 7397 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 20, 2025 Page 3 of 11 Master Plan Page 7398 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 20, 2025 Page 4 of 11 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject 1.86± acre parcel is located on the west side of Tamiami Trail North (US 41)and bordered on the north by 93rd Avenue North and on the south by 92nd Avenue North, in Section 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the location map on page 2 of this staff report.) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject property consists of a single 1.86± acre Commercial Intermediate (C-3) zoned parcel with an auto repair and window tinting shop, a closed Burger King restaurant, and a single-family residence. The petitioner is requesting to rezone the 1.86± acre (C-3) parcel to an RMF-16 zoned parcel to allow for the development of 28 multi-family dwelling units with a maximum density of up to one dwelling unit per approximately .06± acres. For reference, see the Master Plan on the preceding page. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: 93rd Avenue North, a local 2-lane road, and then a retail business with a zoning designation of Commercial Intermediate (C-3) South: 92nd Avenue North, a local 2-lane road, and then a retail business with a zoning designation of Commercial Intermediate (C-3) East: Tamiami Trail North (U.S. 41), a 6-lane divided principal arterial road, and then mixed-use retail and residential with a zoning designation of Mercato MPUD West: Single-family residential, with a zoning designation of Residential Multi- family-6 (RMF-6) Page 7399 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 20, 2025 Page 5 of 11 Aerial Map GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed Rezone and has found it consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. For further information, please see Attachment B-Consistency Review Memorandum. Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant’s April 7, 2025, Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using the 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states; “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not Subject Parcel Page 7400 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 20, 2025 Page 6 of 11 approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has a significant impact if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links, the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” Staff finding: According to the TIS provided with this petition, the proposed Mercato West Rezone development will generate a projected total of +/- 33 PM peak hour trips on the adjacent roadway, Tamiami Trail North/US-41. The current C-3 uses could potentially generate +/-61 PM peak hour trips. Therefore, the proposed rezone represents a potential reduction of +/-(28) PM peak hour trips. The proposed +/- 33 PM peak hour trips will occur on the following adjacent roadway network links: Roadway/Link Link Current Peak Hour Peak Direction Volume/Peak Direction Projected P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic (1) 2024 Level of Service (LOS) 2024 Remaining Capacity Tamiami Trail North (US- 41)/100.0 Immokalee Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road 3,410/NB 12/NB D (2) 660 1. Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is April 7, 2025. Traffic Impact Statement provided by the petitioner. 2. Road link is FDOT jurisdiction. Based on the TIS provided by the applicant and the 2024 AUIR, the subject PUD can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental staff evaluated the petition. The property is 1.86 acres; the project is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the CCME. Page 7401 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 20, 2025 Page 7 of 11 Based on the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed rezone consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). ANALYSIS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Subsection 10.02.08. F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as “Rezone Findings”), which establishes the legal bases to support the CCPC’s recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the BCC (Board of Collier County Commissioners), who, in turn, use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading “Rezone Findings.” In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval. Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed this petition. The property has been developed (C-3) and cleared of native vegetation. Therefore, the Master Plan does not show a preserve since no minimum preservation is required. No listed animal species were observed on the property. Environmental staff recommend APPROVAL of the proposed project. This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Utility Review: Utility staff have reviewed and approved the petition. The project lies within the regional potable water service area and the north wastewater service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD). Sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities are available. Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utilities acceptance. Zoning Review: As previously stated, the subject property consists of a single 1.86± acre Commercial Intermediate (C-3) zoned parcel with an auto repair and window tinting shop, a closed Burger King restaurant, and a single-family residence. The petitioner is requesting to rezone the 1.86± acre (C-3) parcel to an RMF-16 zoned parcel to allow for the development of 28 multi-family dwelling units with a maximum density of up to one dwelling unit per approximately .06± acres. The Conceptual Site Plan depicts the proposed multi-family building, along with 10-foot-wide Type D landscape buffers adjacent to the three street right-of-way frontages, and a 15-foot-wide Type B landscape buffer along the adjacent RMF-6 lot, which is occupied by a single-family residence. The proposed commitment to limit the zoned building height to 50 feet is consistent with the current C-3 maximum zoned height of 50 feet. (The maximum RMF-16 building height is 75 feet.) Page 7402 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 20, 2025 Page 8 of 11 The zoning surrounding the subject property is Residential Multi-family (RMF-6), Commercial Intermediate (C-3), and Mixed-Use PUD. However, the existing land use pattern in the vicinity of the subject property is single-family, commercial, and mixed-use. The proposed rezoning to change the subject commercial property to residential multi-family is compatible and complementary to the existing development in the area. The petitioner has committed to the following Conditions of Approval, which have been incorporated into Attachment A-Proposed Rezone Ordinance: 1. The maximum Zoned Building Height shall not exceed 50 feet (50’). 2. The maximum total daily trip generation for the MPUD shall not exceed 33 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. To date, 10 letters of objection and one letter of support have been received. REZONE FINDINGS: LDC Subsection 10.02.08. F. states, “When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners…shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered proposed changes in relation to the following findings when applicable” (The criteria is italicized, Staff’s responses to these criteria are provided in regular font): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies, and the future land use map, and the elements of the GMP. The Comprehensive Planning Department has indicated that the proposed rezone is consistent with all applicable elements of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). 2. The existing land use pattern. As described in the “Surrounding Land Use and Zoning” portion of this report, the neighborhood’s existing land use pattern is characterized by developed commercial to the north, east, and south. To the west is single-family residential. The proposed rezones from (C-3) to (RMF-16) will not create any incompatibility issues. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The proposed RMF-16 is a transitional land use between C-3 and RMF-6. It is not an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. It is also comparable with expected land uses by virtue of its consistency with the FLUE of the GMP. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. Page 7403 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 20, 2025 Page 9 of 11 As shown on the zoning map on page two of this staff report, the existing district boundaries are logically drawn. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed change is not necessary, but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to redevelop a property with a defunct fast food restaurant, auto repair uses, and a single-family home into multi-family residences. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Rezone, with the commitments made by the applicant, can be deemed consistent with the County’s land-use policies upon adoption, as reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. Development in compliance with the proposed rezone should not adversely impact living conditions in the area. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. As noted previously, Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Operational impacts will be addressed at the time of the first development order (SDP or Plat). Additionally, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed development will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore, the project is subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. This development should not significantly reduce light and air to adjacent areas; thus, the development proposed, if approved, should not negatively affect light and air permeation into adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. The proposed rezone from C-3 to RMF-16 will not adversely impact property values in the adjacent area. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Surrounding properties are mostly developed commercial, residential, and mixed-use, as previously noted. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that sound Page 7404 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 20, 2025 Page 10 of 11 application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or development of adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed rezone should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The proposed development complies with the GMP, a public policy statement supporting Zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property can be used in accordance with existing zoning; however, the proposed uses cannot be achieved without rezoning the property. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. The proposed change from C-3 to RMF-16 is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. As previously stated, the proposed RMF-16 rezone is a transition from the existing C-3 to RMF-6. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The petition was reviewed on its merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration that would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the proposed zoning district would require some site alteration, and this project will undergo evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the site development plan approval process and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP, and as defined and implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance. Page 7405 of 9661 RZ-PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone August 20, 2025 Page 11 of 11 The development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning process, and staff have concluded that the developer has provided appropriate commitments so that the impacts to the Level of Service (LOS) will be minimized. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant held the required meeting on June 3, 2025, at 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County Library, located at 2385 Orange Blossom Drive, Naples, Florida. Approximately 50-55 people, along with the applicant and County Staff, attended the meeting. Except for one neighbor, the neighbors were opposed to the proposed multi-family rezone. They are opposed to change, they do not want additional vehicle and pedestrian traffic in their neighborhood, they do not want a tall building on the edge of their neighborhood, and they are concerned about setting a precedent. They are also concerned about increasing property values and property tax increases related to their properties, and they have expressed concerns about providing affordable housing for working people. For further information, see Attachment C–NIM Documents. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney’s Office reviewed this staff report for content and legal sufficiency on August 19, 2025. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning and Zoning Review staff recommend that the CCPC forward Petition RZ- PL20240013324, 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North Rezone, to the BCC with a recommendation of approval. Attachments: Attachment A-Proposed Rezone Ordinance Attachment B-GMP Consistency Review Memorandum Attachment C-NIM Documents Attachment D-Application Page 7406 of 9661 [25-CPS-02607/1965209/1]70 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North PL20240013324 8/18/25 1 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. 2025 - _____ AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE (C-3) ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY-16 (RMF-16) ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW UP TO SIXTEEEN MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR A TOTAL OF 28 MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON 1.86± ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF US 41 (TAMIAMI TRAIL) AND BORDERED ON THE NORTH BY 93RD AVENUE NORTH AND ON THE SOUTH BY 92ND AVENUE NORTH, IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20240013324] WHEREAS, Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP and Ellen Summers, AICP of Bowman and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., on behalf of Rachel Development, Inc. and Vincent RE Development, LLC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, located in Section 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 East is changed from a Commercial Intermediate (C-3) Zoning District to a Residential Multifamily (RMF-16) Zoning District to allow up to 16 multifamily dwelling units per acre for a total of 28 multifamily dwelling units for a 1.86± acre project to be known as 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North Rezone subject to the conditions shown in Exhibit C. Exhibits A, B and C are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The appropriate Page 7407 of 9661 [25-CPS-02607/1965209/1]70 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North PL20240013324 8/18/25 2 of 2 zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this _____ day of __________________ 2025. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: _____________________________ By: _______________________________ , Deputy Clerk Burt L. Saunders, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: _________________________________ Heidi F. Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A – Legal Description Exhibit B – Master Concept Plan Exhibit C – Conditions of Approval Exhibit D – Location Map Page 7408 of 9661 _______ 8-18-25 Exhibit A Legal Description LOT 1 TROUGHT 14, AND LOT 47 TROUGH 50, BLOCK 53, NAPLES PARK UNIT 4, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 7, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINING 1.86 ACRES, MORE OR LESS Page 7409 of 9661 US-41 TAMIAMI TRAIL N92nd AVE N93rd AVE NDRY RETENTIONNEW BOUNDRYZONING: RMF-6ZONING: RMF-615'BUFFERTYPE D10'BUFFERTYPE D15'BUFFERTYPE B10'BUFFERTYPE D30'SETBACKREQUIRED30'SETBACKREQUIRED30'SETBACKREQUIRED30'SETBACKREQUIRED30'9'9'18'18'22'22'18'18'9'9'15'31'56' SETBACK PROVIDED60'31'60'31'24'33'56' SETBACK PROVIDED 16'24'24'156'206'20'30'SETBACKPROVIDED46' SETBACK PROVIDED 46' SETBACK PROVIDED 136'86'136' 156'93rd AVE NDRY RETENTIONDRY RETENTIONDRY RETENTION0SCALE: 1" = 10' 20' 40'20'N9271-9295 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH RMF-16 REZONEMASTER CONCEPT PLANEXHIBIT BJuly 3, 2025xTOTAL LOT AREAS: 1.86 ACxOPEN SPACE REQUIRED (60%): 1.11 ACxOPEN SPACE PROVIDED (62%): 1.13 ACxxxSOD: 0.87 ACxxxPOOL: 0.05 ACxxxPAVERS (POOL AREA): 0.21 ACxTOTAL BLDG UNITS FOOTPRINT: 0.47 AC (20,440 S.F)xPOOL HOUSE: 1,1160 S.F. (0.02 AC)xASPHALT: 0.23 ACxMAXIMUM ALLOWABLE ZONED BUILDING HEIGHT: 50 FTxMAX. DU (28 DU/1.86 ACRE) = 15.05xPARKING REQUIRED = 56 SPACESxPARKING PROVIDED = 60 SPACESxxxRESIDENT PARKING = 56 SPACESxxxVISITOR / DELIVERY = 4 SPACESxCURRENT ZONING: C-3xPROPOSED ZONING: RMF-16xTHE SITE DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY NATIVE VEGETATION;THEREFORE, NO PRESERVATION IS REQUIRED.MERCATO_PROPERTIES_R3.DWGPage 7410 of 9661 EXHIBIT C 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The maximum Zoned Building Height shall not exceed 50 feet (50’). 2. The maximum total daily trip generation for the MPUD shall not exceed 33 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. Page 7411 of 9661 PROJECT SITETAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH8TH ST N91ST AVE N92ND AVE N93RD AVE NSTRADA PLVANDERBILT BEACH RDVANDERBILT BEACH RDGULF PAVILION DRMERCATO DRMERCATO WAY0SCALE: 1" = 60' 120' 240'120'NLOCATION MAPEXHIBIT DApril 24, 2025MERCATO_PROPERTIES_R1.DWGPage 7412 of 9661 Growth Management Community Development DepartmentZoning DivisionCONSISTENCY REVIEW MEMORANDUM To: Nancy Gundlach, Planner III, Zoning From: Stephenne Barter, Planner II, Comprehensive Planning Date: May 30, 2025 Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review PETITION NUMBER: PL20240013324 PETITION NAME: 9271-9295 Tamiami Trail North RMF-16 Rezone (RZ) REQUEST: This petition requests a rezone from its current Commercial-3 zoning to a Residential Multi-Family-16 (RMF-16) District to allow 16 dwelling units per acre. LOCATION: The subject site (±1.86-acre) is located west of U.S. 41 (Tamiami Trail), bounded to the north by 93rd Avenue North and to the south by 92nd Avenue North, in Section 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is located within the Urban designated area (Urban – Urban Mixed-Use District – Urban Residential Subdistrict), as identified on the Future Land Use Map. Page 7413 of 9661 According to the FLUE, “the purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for higher densities in an area with fewer naturalresource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. This Subdistrict comprisesapproximately 93,000 acres and 80% of the Urban Mixed Use District. Maximum eligible residential density shall bedetermined through the Density Rating System but shall not exceed 16 dwelling units per acre except in accordancewith the Transfer of Development Rights Section of the Land Development Code. FLUE: “1 THE DENSITY RATING SYSTEM IS APPLIED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: a. Within the applicable Urban designated areas, the base density of the Subdistrict is allowed, though not an entitlement. Density may be increased using applicable density bonuses. For purposes of calculating the eligible number of dwelling units for the project, the total number of dwelling units may be rounded up by one unit if the dwelling unit total yields a fraction of a unit 0.5 or greater. Acreage used for the calculation of density is exclusive of commercial portions of the project, except within the C-1 through C- 3 Commercial zoning districts, and except within the Commercial Mixed-Use Subdistrict, wherein residential project densities will be calculated on total gross acreage, and except portions of a project for land uses having an established equivalent residential density in the Collier County Land Development Code.” Page 7414 of 9661 Eligible Density:To achieve the 30 multi-family dwelling units the applicant is proposing the use of the Conversion of CommercialZoning Bonus provided for in the FLUE Density Rating System: “a. Conversion of Commercial Zoning Bonus: If aproject includes the conversion of commercial zoning that has been found to be “Consistent By Policy” through the Collier County Zoning Re-evaluation Program (Ordinance No. 90-23), then a bonus of up to 16 dwelling units per acre may be added for every one (1) acre of commercial zoning that is converted to residential zoning. These bonus dwelling units may be distributed over the entire project. The project must be compatible with surrounding land uses.” This site is identified on the Consistent with FLUE by Policy Maps (FLUE 9), part of the FLUM Series, which is deemed “Consistent By Policy”. Using the Conversion of Commercial Zoning Bonus, the site is eligible for a maximum density of 16 dwelling units per acre (DU/A) yielding 30 DUs for this site (16 DU/A x 1.86A = 29.76 DU 30 DU). Relevant FLUE Objectives and policies are stated below (in italics); each policy is followed by staff analysis [in bold]. FLUE Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004, and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). [Comprehensive Planning staff leaves this determination to Zoning staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety to perform the compatibility analysis.] FLUE Objective 7: Promote smart growth policies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, where applicable, and as follows: Page 7415 of 9661 Policy 7.1:The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector andarterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements ofthe Land Development Code. [The site has frontage along US 41/Tamiami Trail, a principal arterial. Theproposed conceptual plan shows direct connections to 92nd Avenue North and 93rd Avenue North. Access to US 41 is controlled by the Florida Department of Transportation.] Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [Given the location and small size of the site, there is no loop road proposed. Staff finds it unnecessary to provide a loop road due to the location and the nature of the proposed project.] Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. [The subject site mostly abuts streets (therefore cannot interconnect) but does abut 2 small parcels, which contain a single-family dwelling unit and a duplex; therefore, interconnection with adjacent neighborhoods or developments is not feasible.] FLUE Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [With regard to walkability, the project benefits from an existing sidewalk along US 41/Tamiami Trail. The proposed development does not include a blend of housing densities, a range of housing prices is not provided, and civic facilities are not provided; it is staff’s opinion that none of these are feasible given the small size of the site. The master plan indicates 62 Page 7416 of 9661 percent open space.] Page 7417 of 9661 CONCLUSION:Based upon the above analysis of proposed uses and densities, Comprehensive Planning staff finds theproposed rezone petition to be consistent with Future Land Use Element. PETITION ON CITYVIEW cc: James Sabo, AICP, Planning Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section Ray Bellows, Planning Manager, Zoning Services Section Page 7418 of 9661 Page 7419 of 9661 Page 7420 of 9661 Page 7421 of 9661 Page 7422 of 9661 Page 7423 of 9661 Page 7424 of 9661 Page 7425 of 9661 Page 7426 of 9661 Page 7427 of 9661 Page 7428 of 9661 Page 7429 of 9661 Page 7430 of 9661 Page 7431 of 9661 Page 7432 of 9661 Page 7433 of 9661 Page 7434 of 9661 Page 7435 of 9661 Page 7436 of 9661 Page 7437 of 9661 Page 7438 of 9661 Page 7439 of 9661 Page 7440 of 9661 Page 7441 of 9661 Page 7442 of 9661 Page 7443 of 9661 Page 7444 of 9661 Page 7445 of 9661 Page 7446 of 9661 Page 7447 of 9661 Page 7448 of 9661 Page 7449 of 9661 Page 7450 of 9661 Page 7451 of 9661 Page 7452 of 9661 Page 7453 of 9661 Page 7454 of 9661 Page 7455 of 9661 Page 7456 of 9661 Page 7457 of 9661 Page 7458 of 9661 Page 7459 of 9661 Page 7460 of 9661 Page 7461 of 9661 Page 7462 of 9661 Page 7463 of 9661 Page 7464 of 9661 Page 7465 of 9661 Page 7466 of 9661 Page 7467 of 9661 Page 7468 of 9661 Page 7469 of 9661 Page 7470 of 9661 Page 7471 of 9661 Page 7472 of 9661 Page 7473 of 9661 Page 7474 of 9661 Page 7475 of 9661 Page 7476 of 9661 Page 7477 of 9661 Page 7478 of 9661 Page 7479 of 9661 Page 7480 of 9661 Page 7481 of 9661 Page 7482 of 9661 Page 7483 of 9661 Page 7484 of 9661 Page 7485 of 9661 Page 7486 of 9661 Page 7487 of 9661 Page 7488 of 9661 Page 7489 of 9661 Page 7490 of 9661 Page 7491 of 9661 Page 7492 of 9661 Page 7493 of 9661 Page 7494 of 9661 Page 7495 of 9661 Page 7496 of 9661 Page 7497 of 9661 Page 7498 of 9661 Page 7499 of 9661 Page 7500 of 9661 Page 7501 of 9661 Page 7502 of 9661 Page 7503 of 9661 Page 7504 of 9661 Page 7505 of 9661 Page 7506 of 9661 Page 7507 of 9661 Page 7508 of 9661 Page 7509 of 9661 Page 7510 of 9661 Page 7511 of 9661 Page 7512 of 9661 Page 7513 of 9661 Page 7514 of 9661 Page 7515 of 9661 Page 7516 of 9661 Page 7517 of 9661 Page 7518 of 9661 Page 7519 of 9661 Page 7520 of 9661 Page 7521 of 9661 Page 7522 of 9661 Page 7523 of 9661 Page 7524 of 9661 Page 7525 of 9661 Page 7526 of 9661 Page 7527 of 9661 Page 7528 of 9661 Page 7529 of 9661 Page 7530 of 9661 Page 7531 of 9661 Page 7532 of 9661 Page 7533 of 9661 Page 7534 of 9661 Page 7535 of 9661 Page 7536 of 9661 Page 7537 of 9661 Page 7538 of 9661 Page 7539 of 9661 Page 7540 of 9661 Page 7541 of 9661 Page 7542 of 9661 Page 7543 of 9661 Page 7544 of 9661 Page 7545 of 9661 Page 7546 of 9661 Page 7547 of 9661 Page 7548 of 9661 Page 7549 of 9661 Page 7550 of 9661 Page 7551 of 9661 Page 7552 of 9661 Page 7553 of 9661 Page 7554 of 9661 Page 7555 of 9661 Page 7556 of 9661 Page 7557 of 9661 Page 7558 of 9661 Page 7559 of 9661 Page 7560 of 9661 Page 7561 of 9661 Page 7562 of 9661 Page 7563 of 9661 Page 7564 of 9661 Page 7565 of 9661 Page 7566 of 9661 Page 7567 of 9661 Page 7568 of 9661 Page 7569 of 9661 Page 7570 of 9661 Page 7571 of 9661 Page 7572 of 9661 Page 7573 of 9661 Page 7574 of 9661 Page 7575 of 9661 Page 7576 of 9661 Page 7577 of 9661 Page 7578 of 9661 Page 7579 of 9661 Page 7580 of 9661 Page 7581 of 9661 Page 7582 of 9661 Page 7583 of 9661 Page 7584 of 9661 Page 7585 of 9661 Page 7586 of 9661 Page 7587 of 9661 Page 7588 of 9661 Page 7589 of 9661 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) at 9:00 A.M. on October 28, 2025, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, third floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL to consider: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE (C-3) ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY-16 (RMF-16) ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW UP TO SIXTEEEN MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR A TOTAL OF 28 MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON 1.86± ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF US 41 (TAMIAMI TRAIL) AND BORDERED ON THE NORTH BY 93RD AVENUE NORTH AND ON THE SOUTH BY 92ND AVENUE NORTH, IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20240013324] Page 7590 of 9661 A copy of the proposed Ordinance is on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three (3) minutes on any item. The selection of any individual 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 ten (10) minutes to speak on an item. Written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record. As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals who would like to participate remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/meeting entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website at www.collier.gov/Calendar-Events-directory after the agenda is posted on the County website. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the public meeting notice. Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user’s risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at 252-8369 or email to Geoffrey.Willig@collier.gov. Any person who decides to appeal any 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 evidence upon which the appeal is based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380, at least two (2) days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BURT L. SAUNDERS, CHAIRMAN CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER Page 7591 of 9661 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) at 9:00 A.M. on October 28, 2025, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, third floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL to consider: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE (C-3) ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY-16 (RMF-16) ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW UP TO SIXTEEEN MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE FOR A TOTAL OF 28 MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON 1.86± ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF US 41 (TAMIAMI TRAIL) AND BORDERED ON THE NORTH BY 93RD AVENUE NORTH AND ON THE SOUTH BY 92ND AVENUE NORTH, IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20240013324] Page 7592 of 9661 A copy of the proposed Ordinance is on file with the Clerk to the Board and is available for inspection. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be limited to three (3) minutes on any item. The selection of any individual 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 ten (10) minutes to speak on an item. Written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in presentations before the Board will become a permanent part of the record. As part of an ongoing initiative to encourage public involvement, the public will have the opportunity to provide public comments remotely, as well as in person, during this proceeding. Individuals who would like to participate remotely should register through the link provided within the specific event/meeting entry on the Calendar of Events on the County website at www.collier.gov/Calendar-Events-directory after the agenda is posted on the County website. Registration should be done in advance of the public meeting, or any deadline specified within the public meeting notice. Individuals who register will receive an email in advance of the public hearing detailing how they can participate remotely in this meeting. Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and is at the user’s risk. The County is not responsible for technical issues. For additional information about the meeting, please call Geoffrey Willig at 252-8369 or email to Geoffrey.Willig@collier.gov. Any person who decides to appeal any 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 evidence upon which the appeal is based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380, at least two (2) days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BURT L. SAUNDERS, CHAIRMAN CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER Page 7593 of 9661 Page 7594 of 9661 Page 7595 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.BID# 2025-4698Executive Summary*** This Item has been Continued to the January 27, 2026, Board of County Commissioners Meeting *** Recommendation to approve a Resolution relating to the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, providing for the Annual Update to the Schedule of Capital Improvement Projects, within the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan based on the 2025 Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities (AUIR), and including updates to the 5-year Schedule of Capital Projects contained within the Capital Improvement Element (for Fiscal Years 2026 – 2030) and the Schedule of Capital Projects contained within the Capital Improvement Element for the Future 5-year period (for Fiscal Years 2031 – 2035), providing for severability, and providing for an effective date. [PL20250000000] OBJECTIVE: CONSIDERATIONS: FISCAL IMPACT: GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: RECOMMENDATION(S): PREPARED BY: Michael Bosi, AICP, Director of Planning ATTACHMENTS: None Page 7596 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.CID# 2025-4281Executive SummaryThis item requires Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, providing for the establishment of a Conditional Use for earthmining with excavation, blasting, and processing of material, pursuant to Sections 2.03.01.a.1.c.1 and 4.08.05 of the Collier County Land Development Code, on property zoned Rural Agricultural District (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), partly within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District (RLSAO), on 3,937.88± acres located between State Road 29 to the east, Camp Keais Road and Immokalee Road to the west and Stockade Road to the northwest, in Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24 and 27, Township 47 south, Range 29 east, Collier County, Florida. [PL20220001634] (This item is a companion to Items 16A23, 16B8, and 17D) OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of Zoning Appeals review staff's findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced petition, render a decision regarding this rezoning petition, and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The subject property is located between State Road 29 to the east, Camp Keais Road and Immokalee Road to the west, and Stockade Road to the northwest, in Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24, and 27, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. The subject property consists of 3,937.88± acres. The purpose of this Conditional Use (CU) application is to permit a commercial excavation mine within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, known as the Silver Strand Mine. The conditional use has two companion petitions. The variance petition (VA-PL2023001067) seeks variances from the LDC landscaping and site design requirements, and the excavation permit (EX-PL20230018067) seeks a new excavation pit for mining and material sales. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard Petition CU-PL20220001634, Silver Strand Mine Conditional Use on October 2, 2025, and voted 4-0 to forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval. One public attendee supported the petition, and no objections have been received. An additional condition of approval requested by staff is that, when the property is developed for non-mining purposes, all required buffers will be installed along all property boundaries. This change was accepted by staff, and this revision was added to the Resolution. As such, this petition will be placed on the Summary Agenda. This item advances the Collier County Strategic Plan Objective within Infrastructure and Asset Management by optimizing the useful life of all public infrastructure and resources through proper planning and preventative maintenance FISCAL IMPACT: The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). On the Stewardship Overlay Map, part of the FLUM series, the site is designated “Open.” Currently, the proposed mine is located in mostly citrus groves, zoned A (Rural Agricultural Zoning District), within a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO) and a Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), as well as the Low residential District of the Immokalee Master Plan. The “A” zoning district allows a conditional use for an extraction or earth mining use (CU #1), as listed in the Land Development Code (LDC) Chapter 2.03.01 A.1.c.1. The FLUE states, in relevant part: “The Agricultural/Rural Land Use Designation is for those areas that are remote from Page 7597 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.CID# 2025-4281the existing development pattern, lack public facilities and services, are environmentally sensitive, or are in agricultural production. Urbanization is not promoted; therefore, most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands.” The proposed earthmining, oil extraction, and related processing are listed as allowable uses in this designation in the FLUE. Based on the above analysis, staff finds the subject petition consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. (See Attachment B)Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant’s March 4, 2024, Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using the 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states; “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” Staff finding: According to the TIS provided with this petition, the proposed Silver Strand Three Mine Operation will generate a projected total of +/- 162 PM peak hour trips on the adjacent roadway, Immokalee Road, and Camp Kaise. The trips generated will occur on the following adjacent roadway network links: Roadway/Link Link Current Peak Hour Peak Direction Volume/Peak Direction Projected P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic (1) 2024 Level of Service (LOS) 2024 Remaining Capacity Immokalee Road/46.0 State Road 29 to Oil Well Rd 900/EB 32 D 67 Immokalee Road/45.0 Oil Well Rd to Wilson Blvd. 3,300/EB 32/EB F (82)2 Camp Kaise Road/61.0 Immokalee Rd to Oil Well Rd 1,000/SB 49/SB C 369 Oil Well Road/122.0 Ave Maria Blvd to SR 29 800/EB 16/EB B 494 1. Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is March 4, 2024; Traffic Impact Statement provided by the petitioner. 2. Existing Deficiency with the Trip Bank is not due to this development. See State Statute 163.3180 provisions Page 7598 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.CID# 2025-4281below:Must allow an applicant to enter into a binding agreement to pay or construct their proportionate fair share.Facilities determined to be deficient with existing, committed, and vested trips plus projected background traffic from any source other than the development shall be removed from the proportionate share calculation.The improvement necessary to correct this type of deficiency is the funding responsibility of the maintaining entity.Applicant must receive a credit for the anticipated road impact fees.The applicant calculated their proportionate share, and it does not exceed the impact fees anticipated to be collected. Based on the TIS provided by the applicant, the 2024 AUIR, the subject Conditional Use can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. As noted above, Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including, but not limited to, any plats and/or site development plans, are sought. There is a companion Developer Agreement to be considered by the Board of County Commissioners for this Conditional Use request. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff have found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site is 3,937.88 acres, primarily citrus groves and row crops. The property does not contain existing native vegetation; therefore, preservation is not required. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: Before you is a recommendation by the Planning Commission for approval of a conditional use authorizing earthmining, with excavation, blasting, and processing of material in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District with a Mobile Home Overlay and partly within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. A conditional use is a use that is permitted in a particular zoning district subject to certain restrictions. All testimony given must be under oath. The attached report and recommendations of the Planning Commission are advisory only and are not binding on you. Petitioner has the burden of demonstrating that the necessary requirements have been met, and you may question Petitioner or staff to satisfy yourself that the necessary criteria have been satisfied. In addition to meeting the necessary criteria, you may place such conditions and safeguards as you deem appropriate to allow the use, provided that there is competent, substantial evidence that these additional conditions and safeguards are necessary to promote the public health, safety, welfare, morals, order, comfort, convenience, appearance, or the general welfare of the neighborhood. As a further condition of approval of the conditional use, you may require that suitable areas for streets, public rights-of-way, schools, parks, and other public facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use, subject to appropriate impact fee credits. Approval or denial of the Petition is by Resolution. Should this item be denied, Florida Statutes section 125.022(3) requires the County to provide written notice to the applicant citing applicable portions of an ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority for the denial. This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval. –HFAC RECOMMENDATION(S): Staff concurs with the recommendation of the CCPC and further recommends that the Board of Zoning Appeals approve the request for Petition CU-PL20220001634, Silver Stand Mine Conditional Use, and approve the proposed Resolution. PREPARED BY: Timothy Finn, AICP, Planner III, Zoning Division Page 7599 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.CID# 2025-4281ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report - Silver Strand Mine Conditional Use PL202200016342. Attachment A - Proposed Resolution revised 11-6-253. Attachment B - FLUE Consistency Memo4. Attachment C - Application-Backup Materials5. Attachment D - Hearing Advertising Signs6. legal ad - agenda IDs 25-4281 & 25-4282 - Silver Strand Mine CU & VA - 12-9-25 BCC Page 7600 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 1 of 11 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: OCTOBER 2, 2025 SUBJECT: CU-PL20220001634 - SILVER STRAND MINE COMPANION ITEMS: VA-PL20230001067- SILVER STRAND MINE & EX- PL20230018067- SILVER STRAND MINE ___________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER/AGENTS: Owner: Silver Strand III LLC 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34104 Agents: Jessica Harrelson, AICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Peninsula Engineering Coleman, Yovanovich & 2640 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 201 Koester, P.A. Naples, FL 34105 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida for the establishment of a Conditional Use for earthmining with excavation, blasting, and processing of material, pursuant to Sections 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 and 4.08.05 of the Collier County Land Development Code, on property zoned Rural Agricultural District (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), partly within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District (RLSAO), on 3,937.88± acres. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located between State Road 29 to the east, Camp Keais Road and Immokalee Road to the west, and Stockade Road to the northwest, in Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24, and 27, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on the following page) Page 7601 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 2 of 11 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject property consists of 3,937.88± acres. The purpose of this Conditional Use (CU) application is to permit a commercial excavation mine within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, known as the Silver Strand Mine. The conditional use has two companion petitions. The variance petition (VA-PL2023001067) seeks variances from the LDC landscaping and site design requirements, and the excavation permit (EX-PL20230018067) seeks a new excavation pit for mining and material sales. Page 7602 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 3 of 11 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding the boundaries of the subject property, which is developed with agriculture and zoned Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) and Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO): North: Developed with Collier County Solid Waste facility with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO), then to the east is residential with a park on Seminole Tribe of Florida lands, with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO), and to the east is vacant land with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO), and then to the east is Garden Walk Village PUD (approved for multi-family at 12 DU/AC) that is currently vacant land East: Single-family residential with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) and undeveloped land with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) directly abuts portions of the property along the east. State Road 29 separates the remainder of the property from the Kaicasa PUD (approved from single-family and multi-family residential dwelling units at 4 DU/AC for Habitat for Humanity), and undeveloped lands with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO). Kaicasa PUD (approved for single and multi-family dwellings at 4 DU/AC for Habitat for Humanity), then to the south is single family residential with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A- MHO), then to the south is vacant land with sparsely developed agricultural lands with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A- MHO-RLSAO) South: Developed agricultural, with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay- Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) West: Immokalee Road and to the south Camp Keais Road (two lane arterials), then developed agricultural, with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) and Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) Intentionally blank Page 7603 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 4 of 11 Aerial (Peninsula Engineering) GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Comprehensive Planning staff have reviewed this request and offered the following comments: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). On the Stewardship Overlay Map, part of the FLUM series, the site is designated “Open.” Currently, the proposed mine is situated primarily within citrus groves, zoned A, Rural Agricultural Zoning District, and is located within a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO) and a Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), as well as the Low Residential District of the Immokalee Master Plan. The “A” zoning district allows a conditional use for an extraction or earth mining use (CU #1), as listed in the Land Development Code (LDC) Chapter 2.03.01 A.1.c.1. The FLUE states, in relevant part: “The Agricultural/Rural Land Use Designation is for those areas that are remote from the existing development pattern, lack public facilities and services, are environmentally sensitive, or are in agricultural production. Urbanization is not promoted; therefore, most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands.” The proposed earth mining, oil extraction, and related processing are listed as allowable uses in this designation in the FLUE. Based on the above analysis, staff finds the subject petition consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. (See Attachment B) Page 7604 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 5 of 11 Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant’s March 4, 2024, Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using the 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states; “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impact if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links, the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” Staff finding: According to the TIS provided with this petition, the proposed Silver Strand Three Mine Operation will generate a projected total of +/- 162 PM peak hour trips on the adjacent roadway, Immokalee Road, and Camp Kaise. The trips generated will occur on the following adjacent roadway network links: Roadway/Link Link Current Peak Hour Peak Direction Volume/Peak Direction Projected P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic (1) 2024 Level of Service (LOS) 2024 Remaining Capacity Immokalee Road/46.0 State Road 29 to Oil Well Rd 900/EB 32 D 67 Immokalee Road/45.0 Oil Well Rd to Wilson Blvd. 3,300/EB 32/EB F (82)2 Camp Kaise Road/61.0 Immokalee Rd to Oil Well Rd 1,000/SB 49/SB C 369 Oil Well Road/122.0 Ave Maria Blvd to SR 29 800/EB 16/EB B 494 1. Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is March 4, 2024; Traffic Impact Statement provided by the petitioner. 2. Existing Deficiency with Trip Bank and is not due to this development. See State Statute 163.3180 provision below. Page 7605 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 6 of 11 Bullet points for applicable Florida Statute 163.3180 ƒ Must allow an applicant to enter into a binding agreement to pay or construct their proportionate fair share. ƒ Facilities determined to be deficient with existing, committed, and vested trips plus projected background traffic from any source other than the development shall be removed from the proportionate share calculation. ƒ The improvement necessary to correct this type of deficiency is the funding responsibility of the maintaining entity. ƒ Applicant must receive a credit for the anticipated road impact fees. ƒ The applicant calculated their proportionate share, and it does not exceed the impact fees anticipated to be collected. Based on the TIS provided by the applicant, the 2024 AUIR, the subject Conditional Use can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. As noted above, Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought, including but not limited to any plats and/or site development plans. There is a companion Developer Agreement to be considered by the Board of County Commissioners for this Conditional Use request. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval. Stormwater Review: The proposed conditional use expansion request is not anticipated to create drainage problems or adverse impacts to surrounding properties in the area. Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage will be addressed through the environmental resource permitting process with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (F.D.E.P.). Additionally, the same Best Management Practices, Erosion Control Measures, and Pollution Prevention Plan associated with the current permitted operation will continue to be used for the proposed expansion. The proposed mining will be subject to Chapter 62-330, Environmental Resource Permitting, and the mandatory reclamation requirements of the F.D.E.P., as outlined in Chapter 62C-39, Florida Administrative Code. In addition, the mining excavation will require an excavation permit from Collier County, consistent with Collier County Excavation Ordinance Section 22-111. Landscape Review: The applicant indicates that the only planned structure is a 1-story scale house. Other mining equipment, such as cranes, excavators, conveyors, and wet plants, that are relocated or reconfigured as needed for mining operations, which changes visibility of these structures over time. Additionally, the proposed mine has been strategically located toward the center of the property, to reduce views from surrounding neighbors and roadways. In the narrative statement, the applicant indicates that justification for no buffer along SR29 is based on a letter of support from Habitat for Humanity representing the residential development on the other side of SR29. Additionally, the study plans for the widening of SR29 obtained and submitted by the applicant indicate the proposed pavement for the widening of the road will likely impact the applicant’s property. While neither of these reasons are typically justification to not include a buffer along a roadway, due to the distance from the roadway and reduced visibility of the mining activities, staff recommends approval of the variance, with the following condition: Page 7606 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 7 of 11 Staff recommend the following text be added to variance #1: 1. When the property is developed for non-mining purposes, all required buffers will be installed along all property boundaries. Utility Review: The project will be served by private well and septic systems, as connections to Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD) services are not required. A portion of the project lies within the regional potable water service area and the north wastewater service area of the CCWSD. Water and wastewater services are available via existing infrastructure along Oil Well Road. Sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities are available. Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utilities acceptance. Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff have reviewed the conditional use petition to address environmental concerns. There are 2.01 acres of wetlands. However, the wetlands are degraded and dominated by invasive exotic vegetation (FLUCCS 618). The property has been historically cleared and maintained clear of native vegetation required to be preserved. The Master Plan does not show a preserve, since no minimum preservation is required. The eastern and southern boundary of the subject property is adjacent to an existing Water Retention Area (WRA). However, no impacts to the WRA will occur as an existing access road will be used to access the quarry lake. The environmental data indicate that the proposed project is located in an area with the potential to contain a variety of protected animal species. Three (3) alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) were observed within agricultural ditches at various locations on-site. Consultation with the Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) will be conducted to reduce and minimize any impact on the alligators. Two (2) caracaras (Caracara cheriway) were observed in the north-central portion of the project. No documented nest was found on-site. Consultation with USFWS and FWCC regarding guidelines and permitting requirements may be required prior to construction. The environmental data indicate that the subject property falls within FWS Primary and Secondary Florida Panther (Felis concolor coryi) habitat. There were no observations of panthers onsite, and the telemetry data indicate Florida panthers are not abundant within the boundary of the proposed project. The property does not contain habitats preferred by the Florida panther. Therefore, consultation with FWS to obtain panther mitigation is unlikely. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) wildlife data indicate the presence of Black Bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) in the area. A black bear management plan will need to be included in the PPL or SDP review. Additionally, the property contains potential habitat for the Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi). Consultation with the US Federal Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) regarding guidelines and permitting requirements will be required before construction. Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff have found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site spans 3,937.88 acres, primarily consisting of citrus groves and row crops. The property does not contain existing native vegetation; therefore, preservation is not required. Historic Preservation Review: Per county GIS historical maps, the land within the proposed Conditional Use and Variance contains areas of historical/archaeological probability areas. As such, the applicant submitted a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey for the Silver Strand Mine that encompassed both the CU and VA petitions. This cultural resource assessment was heard before the Historical/Archaeological Preservation Board (HAPB) at its May 19, 2023, meeting and was approved by a vote of 6-0. HAPB accepted the report and all findings; no conditions were added to this approval. (See Attachment C – Application/Backup Materials) Page 7607 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 8 of 11 STAFF ANALYSIS: When considering a Conditional Use petition, the CCPC must make findings that: 1) approval of the Conditional Use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property of uses in the same district of neighborhood; and 2) all specific requirements for the individual Conditional Use will be met; and 3) satisfactory provisions have been made concerning the following matters, where applicable: 1. Section 2.03.01.A.1.c.1, of the LDC permits conditional uses in the Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) and Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO): The requested use for an earthmining facility is allowed as a conditional use in the Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) and Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO), subject to the standards and procedures established in section 10.08.00, conditional uses procedures, of the LDC. 2. Consistency with the Land Development Code (LDC) and the Growth Management Plan (GMP). This request is consistent with the GMP, and with the conditions proposed by staff, this project will be in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Land Development Code (LDC). 3. Ingress and egress to the property and proposed structures thereon, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. Ingress and egress to the subject property will be limited to a single access point on Camp Keais Road and a potential future interconnect to SR 29, as shown on the master site plan. Based on the TIS provided by the applicant, the 2024 AUIR, the subject Conditional Use can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. As noted above, Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought, including but not limited to any plats and/or site development plans. 4. The effect the Conditional Use would have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic, or odor effects. The excavation operation will have no negative effects on neighboring properties, including noise, glare, economic impact, or odor. Mining activities have been designed to provide significant setbacks from all property boundaries. The property is adjacent to undeveloped land and/or lands used for agricultural purposes along most boundaries. Setbacks and vegetation will sufficiently screen the proposed development from neighboring properties, thereby mitigating potential impacts. 5. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district. If the proposed Conditions of Approval are adopted, the proposed earthmining facility can be found compatible with adjacent properties and other properties in the immediate area. Page 7608 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 9 of 11 Based on the above findings, this conditional use, with the stipulations outlined in this staff report, should be recommended for approval. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) REVIEW: This project requires an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as it falls within the scope of land development project reviews identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, Section 2-1193(m)(4) states that a conditional use of a commercial mine requires EAC approval. The Environmental Planning staff recommends approval of the proposed petition. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a duly noticed and advertised NIM on October 30, 2024, at the Ave Maria Master Association Office, located at 5080 Annunciation Circle, Unit #101, Ave Maria, FL 34142. Three members of the public attended in person, and two people attended via Zoom. The applicant’s agent explained the request for the conditional and companion variance. Jessica Harrelson, the agent, conducted the meeting, introducing the consultant team and staff, and providing an overview of the proposed earthmining application. Ms. Harrelson provided a PowerPoint presentation that reviewed and explained the total site area, location, surrounding land uses, zoning, conceptual site plans, development standards, conditions of approval, variance justifications, and variance developer commitments. The meeting was opened up to attendees. One question was asked regarding the status of the petition with the County in terms of permitting. Ms. Harrelson responded that both the conditional use and variance were found sufficient by staff and will be scheduled for hearings early next year. She further noted that the participant would be notified of the hearing dates, and signs would be posted on the property. No commitments were made. A copy of the NIM summary, PowerPoint presentation, NIM notices, and sign-in sheet are included in the Backup Materials in Attachment C. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney’s Office reviewed the staff report on September 11, 2025. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) approve Petition CU-PL20220001634, subject to the following conditions, including staff’s Landscape Condition: 1. The Silver Strand Mine Conditional Use shall be limited to what is depicted on the Conceptual Site Plan, dated August 2025, and prepared by Peninsula Engineering. 2. Minor changes in the location and siting of buildings, structures, and improvements authorized by this conditional use may be approved administratively at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat. 3. Prior to any vehicular use of the site, the owner shall post two (2) signs along the entry drive, clearly visible to vehicles entering and leaving the site, providing information regarding potential panther presence and notifying drivers of the need to use caution. Sign wording, placement, and size will be subject to review and approval by Collier County Environmental Staff. The owner shall submit and receive approval of the proposed signage plan in conjunction with the first of either the Site Development Page 7609 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 10 of 11 Plan process or other local development orders as may be required, which may allow vehicular use of the site. 4. Evidence of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) accepted mitigation for impacts to panthers, woodstorks, Florida black bear, and other listed species will be required prior to the pre-construction meeting with Staff. 5. A littoral shelf planting area to commence during the reclamation phase of the project shall be shown on the excavation permit for this conditional use and shall meet the current standards of the Land Development Code at the time of submittal of the Commercial Excavation Permit. 6. The owner/petitioner shall obtain a South Florida Water Management District Agricultural Surface Water Management Permit or permit modification for this site, if applicable. 7. The maximum total daily trip generation for the CU shall not exceed 162 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or excavation permit approval, whichever occurs first. The maximum number of one-way trucks per day (maximum one-way loads per day) is 430. 8. Pursuant to Section 125.022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the County for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals for fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. 9. Mining operations are permitted between 6:30 am and 5:00 pm Monday through Friday, and between 7:00 am and 3:00 pm on Saturday. 10. The Owner/Petitioner shall be responsible for all maintenance of the internal haul roadways and the connection to Camp Keais Road for the duration of the mining operation. The area surrounding and between the tire-wash system and the Camp Keais Road access shall be paved consistent with the weigh stations shown on the master plan and/or be a minimum of 22 feet in width and a depth of 1.5 inches of asphalt or asphalt millings with minimum LDC required base. A Dust Control Plan for Silver Strand Mine shall be submitted with the Excavation Permit. The tire wash system shall be installed to wash dust from the wheels and underbody of all haul trucks exiting the facility. This system will direct water under pressure at the wheels and the underside of each vehicle as it passes through. There is no paving required on-site past the tire-wash system, except that required handicapped spaces shall be ADA-compliant. This condition shall also apply to any potential future access on SR 29. 11. Haul trucks will not be permitted to park or stage along public rights-of-way. Applicant may allow haul trucks to stage or park on the project’s internal roadway prior to 6:30 a.m. 12. Upon completion of excavation activities, all buildings, equipment, and berms shall be removed within six months, or used in the reclamation process or for agricultural purposes. 13. The BZA may revoke the approval of this Conditional Use if the Collier County Code Enforcement Board finds that the mine operator has violated or has not fully complied with all conditions of approval including completion of improvements indicated on the Conditional Use Master Plan and the mine operator has failed to remedy the violation or come into compliance within the time period established by the Code Enforcement Board. Page 7610 of 9661 CU-PL20220001634, SILVER STRAND MINE Revised Date: September 17, 2025 Page 11 of 11 14. The mining operations shall be conducted in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida, Collier County Government, and the Federal Government. 15. The lifespan of the mine is 20 years from the date of Conditional Use approval by the Board of County Commissioners. 16. Adequate utility, access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities shall continue to be maintained. 17. Each year, the owner shall provide a report to the Collier County Transportation Management Services Department, which will include the condition of the roadways adjacent to the property entrance(s), accident reports, and average daily and peak hour vehicle trips entering and exiting the earth mine. 18. An approved indigo snake plan is required to be implemented prior to the beginning of any construction, including site clearing. The name and contact information of a qualified biologist who will monitor work shall be supplied to Environmental Services Department staff at the pre-construction meeting or prior to excavation permit approval, whichever is first. 19. An updated listed species survey, less than 6 months old, is required for areas to be excavated prior to the pre-construction meeting with Staff. As required by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Technical Assistance, follow-up pedestrian surveys of each new mining block will be conducted between 60 and 180 days prior to the commencement of any mining-related activity through the life of the project. The applicant shall submit a copy of these surveys to the Director of the Development Review Division. 20. The Owner will install a LDC required buffer within 180 days along any property boundary where an SRA, PUD, rezone, or other residential development has been approved on an adjacent property, unless development on the adjacent property includes the construction of a perimeter berm that is a minimum of 7’ in height, as measured from Finished Floor Elevation of the adjacent site. 21. The Owner will install 200 LF of a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer adjacent to the abutting residential parcel along the eastern property boundary. This buffer will wrap the corner of the subject property line, providing 100 LF on each side. Refer to the conceptual site plan prepared by Peninsula Engineering. 22. The maximum allowable depth of the excavation shall be 58’. Landscaping staff is also requesting additional conditions of approval, see the Landscaping section of the report: 1. When the property is developed for non-mining purposes, all required buffers will be installed along all property boundaries. Attachments: A) Proposed Resolution B) FLUE Consistency Memo C) Application/Backup Materials Page 7611 of 9661 [23-CPS-02335/1965918/1]136 Silver Strand Mine / PL20220001634 9/2/25 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - _____ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CONDITIONAL USE FOR EARTHMINING WITH EXCAVATION, BLASTING, AND PROCESSING OF MATERIAL, PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 AND 4.08.05 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, ON PROPERTY ZONED RURAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT (A) WITH A MOBILE HOME OVERLAY (MHO), PARTLY WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICT (RLSAO), ON 3,937.88± ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN STATE ROAD 29 TO THE EAST, CAMP KEAIS ROAD AND IMMOKALEE ROAD TO THE WEST AND STOCKADE ROAD TO THE NORTHWEST, IN SECTIONS 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24 AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (PL20220001634) WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 67–1246, Laws of Florida, and Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on Collier County the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended) which includes a Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance establishing regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of Conditional Uses; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals (“Board”), being the duly appointed and constituted planning board for the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a Conditional Use to allow earthmining with excavation, blasting, and processing of material within the Rural Agricultural District (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), partly within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District (RLSAO), pursuant to sections 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 and 4.08.05 of the Collier County Land Development Code on the property hereinafter described, and the Collier County Planning Commission has made findings that the granting of the Conditional Use will not adversely affect the public interest and the specific requirements governing the Conditional Use have been met and that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Subsection 10.08.00.D. of the Land Development Code; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in a public meeting assembled and the Board having considered all matters presented. Page 7612 of 9661 [23-CPS-02335/1965918/1]136 Silver Strand Mine / PL20220001634 9/2/25 2 of 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Petition Number CU-PL20220001634 filed by Jessica Harrelson, AICP, of Peninsula Engineering and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., representing Silver Strand III, LLC fka Silver Strand III Partnership, with respect to the property hereinafter described in Exhibit “A”, be and the same is hereby approved for a Conditional Use to allow earthmining with excavation, blasting, and processing of material within the Rural Agricultural District (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), partly within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District (RLSAO), pursuant to sections 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 and 4.08.05 of the Collier County Land Development Code, in accordance with the Conceptual Master Plan described in Exhibit “B” and as set forth in the Conditions of Approval described in Exhibit “C”. Exhibits “A”, “B”, and “C” are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second, and super majority vote of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, this _____ day of _____________, 2025. ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK By: __________________________ , Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: _____________________________ Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: __________________________________ BURT L. SAUNDERS, Chairman Attachments: Exhibit “A” – Legal Description Exhibit “B” – Conceptual Master Plan Exhibit “C” – Conditions of Approval Page 7613 of 9661 ________ 11-6-25 Page | 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PART OF SECTIONS 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24, AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PARCEL 1 ALL OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.941, PG.521, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 2 ALL OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF- WAY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 3 ALL OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LYING SOUTH AND WEST OF ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY AND S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, , LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.17, PG.453, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 4 ALL OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF- WAY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 5 ALL OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 6 ALL OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 AND O.R.4322, PG.1377, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1354, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 7 ALL OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 AND LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1377, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. ALL SAID LANDS BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL (A) COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 1,314.26 TO A POINT HEREINAFTER TO BE KNOWN AS POINT (A); THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°52'34" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15 AND BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; Page 1 of 10 Page 7614 of 9661 EXHIBIT A Page | 2 THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 89°17'35" EAST 1,202.62 FEET TO SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 941, PAGE 521, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES: 1. SOUTH 00°08'45" EAST 1,319.97 FEET; 2. NORTH 89°32'49" EAST 2,030.52 FEET; 3. NORTH 00°06'39" WEST 2,656.84 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE NORTH 89°04'02" EAST 2,035.44 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'49" EAST 2,587.12 FEET TO THE NORTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 14; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'42" EAST 2,331.62 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 29 SOUTH; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 44°58'17" EAST 2,419.10 FEET TO THE NORTH CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 962, PAGE 1289, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES: 1. SOUTH 44°59'18" WEST 730.20 FEET; 2. SOUTH 44°58'03" EAST 680.17 FEET; 3. NORTH 45°00'39" EAST 729.89 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 44°59'05" EAST 4823.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE SOUTH 00°31'11" EAST 2,301.77 FEET TO THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 00°38'38" EAST 2,631.42 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'23" WEST 2,614.52 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'08" WEST 2,613.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°34'23" WEST 2,672.75 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°38'46" WEST 2,671.33 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 00°04'00" WEST 5,379.12 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°06'34" WEST 2,674.38 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°09'03" WEST 2,587.98 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF AN 80-FOOT-WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN AS CAMP KEAIS ROAD, AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1579, PAGE 17323, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE FOLLOWING TEN (10) DESCRIBED COURSES: 1. NORTH 05°51'03" EAST 91.74 FEET; Page 2 of 10 Page 7615 of 9661 Page | 3 2. 403.88 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,787.51 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°06'35" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 02°47'45" EAST 403.69 FEET; 3. NORTH 00°15'32" WEST 4,936.51 FEET; 4. NORTH 00°17'42" WEST 60.69 FEET; 5. 533.72 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 40°14'11" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 19°49'24" EAST 522.82 FEET; 6. NORTH 39°56'29" EAST 543.45 FEET; 7. 584.69 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 20°00'03" EAST 572.96 FEET; 8. NORTH 00°03'36" EAST 600.00 FEET; 9. 848.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 540.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89°59'58" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 44°56'23" WEST 763.68 FEET; 10. ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 89°56'24" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 164.71 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF A 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4322, PAGE 1347, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) DESCRIBED COURSES: 1. NORTH 00°15'34" WEST 2,601.35 FEET; 2. NORTH 00°07'26" WEST 3,944.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 3,914.91 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. ALONG WITH PARCEL (B) COMMENCING AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT (A); THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 3,945.17 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22 SOUTH 00°15'34" EAST 2,681.53 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°44'26" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE AFOREMENTIONED CAMP KEAIS ROAD AND BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG THE WEST BOUNDARY OF CAMP KEAIS ROAD FOR THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) DESCRIBED COURSES: 1. SOUTH 89°56'24" EAST 164.27 FEET; 2. 722.57 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 460.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°00'00" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 44°56'24" EAST 650.54 FEET; 3. SOUTH 00°03'36" WEST 600.00 FEET; 4. 529.01 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 20°00'03" WEST 518.39 FEET; 5. SOUTH 39°56'29" WEST 543.45 FEET; Page 3 of 10 Page 7616 of 9661 Page | 4 6. 151.51 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°20'04" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 34°46'27" WEST 151.31 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 00°17'33" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,088.76 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 22.97 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. NET AREA: 3937.88 ACRES MORE OR LESS Page 4 of 10 Page 7617 of 9661 C5L14N0°17'33"W 2088.76C7C6L15L10C2L11C3L12C4L13N0°15'34"W 2601.35N0°07'26"W 3944.99N89°17'35"E1202.62L6L7L8L9C1N0°15'32"W 4936.51PARCEL 1(SEC. 15)PARCEL 2(SEC. 14)PARCEL 3(SEC. 13)PARCEL 4(SEC. 24)PARCEL 5(SEC. 23)PARCEL 6PARCEL 6(SEC.22)PARCEL 7(SEC. 27)27 2634 3522 2327 2623 2426 2524 1925 3014 1323 2415 1422 239 1016 1510 1115 1412 713 182128 27SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 3SHEET 3SHEET 5SHEET 4SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 5SHEET 2SHEET 3P.O.C.NORTHWEST CORNER OFSECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.P.O.B.(PARCEL A)L2W. LINESEC. 15(B.O.B.) L1POINT (A)11 1214 1328 2733 3413 1824 1916 1521 22STOCKADE RD.RANCH ONE RD.CAMP KEAIS RD.IMMOKALEERD.STATE RD. 29 S.P.O.B.(PARCEL B)L5L4L3O.R.962,PG.1289(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)O.R.941PG.521O.R.2493PG.2779O.R.941PG.521O.R.4322PG.1377O.R.1579PG.1732O.R.4322PG.1377O.R.1579PG.1732L16(D) 100'O.R.4322PG.1347S0°08'45"E 1319.97N89°32'49"E 2030.52N0°06'39"W 2656.84N89°04'02"E 2035.44N89°38'49"E 2587.12N89°38'42"E 2331.62S44°58'17"E 2419.10S44°59'05"E 2800.04S44°59'05"E 2023.22S0°31'11"E 2301.77S0°38'38"E 2631.42S89°44'23"W 2614.52S89°44'08"W 2613.84S89°34'23"W 2672.75S89°38'46"W 2671.33S0°04'00"W 5379.12S89°06'34"W 2674.38S89°09'03"W 2587.98OVERALL 4823.26LINE TABLELINE #L1L2L3L4L5L6L7L8LENGTH1314.26150.003945.172681.53150.00730.20680.17729.89BEARINGS0°07'26"EN89°52'34"ES0°07'26"ES0°15'34"EN89°44'26"ES44°59'18"WS44°58'03"EN45°00'39"ECURVE TABLECURVE #C1C2C3C4C5C6C7LENGTH403.88533.72584.69848.23722.57529.01151.51RADIUS3787.51760.00840.00540.00460.00760.00840.00DELTA6°06'35"40°14'11"39°52'53"89°59'58"90°00'00"39°52'53"10°20'04"CHORD BEARINGN2°47'45"EN19°49'24"EN20°00'03"EN44°56'23"WS44°56'24"ES20°00'03"WS34°46'27"WCHORD LENGTH403.69522.82572.96763.68650.54518.39151.31LINE TABLELINE #L9L10L11L12L13L14L15L16LENGTH91.7460.69543.45600.00164.71164.27600.00543.45BEARINGN5°51'03"EN0°17'42"WN39°56'29"EN0°03'36"EN89°56'24"WS89°56'24"ES0°03'36"WS39°56'29"WOFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:08:52 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 1000'N.T.S.P-023/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg1PENINSULA ENGINEERING6GENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.LEGEND:A.E. = ACCESS EASEMENTBM = BENCHMARKC/L = CENTERLINEC.C.R. = LABINS CERTIFIED CORNER RECORD FILE NUMBERC.U.E. = COUNTY UTILITY EASEMENTD.E. = DRAINAGE EASEMENTEL. & ELEV. = ELEVATIONF.P.L. = FLORIDA POWER & LIGHTO.R. = OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOKP.B. = PLAT BOOKPG. = PAGEP.U.E. = PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTR.O.W. = RIGHT-OF-WAYP = PLAT, M = MEASURED, C = CALCULATED, D = DEED(S.I.P.)SET 5/8" IRON PIN & CAP STAMPED LB-8479(F.I.P.) FOUND IRON PIN & CAP STAMPED AS SHOWN(F.C.M.) FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT(F.N.D.) FOUND PK NAIL & DISK STAMPED(PK) = PARKER KYLON NAILMAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24,AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEY OF PART OF SECTIONS 13,14, 15, 22, 23, 24, AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.PREPARED FOR: PENINSULA ENGINEERINGPENINSULA ENGINEERING2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAYNAPLES, FLORIDA 34105PHONE: 239.403.6700 FAX: 239.261.1797EMAIL: INFO@PEN-ENG.COMWEBSITE: WWW.PEN-ENG.COM_____________________________________________LANCE T MILLERPROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER, #LS5627NOVEMBER 27TH, 2023DATECERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION #LB- 8479NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND THEORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OR DIGITAL SEAL OF AFLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER.NO OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY MAY RELY UPON THISEXHIBIT.THIS EXHIBIT IS ONLY FOR THE LANDS AS DESCRIBED.IT IS NOT A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE, ZONING,EASEMENTS OR FREEDOM OF ENCUMBRANCES.SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPLEGAL DESCRIPTIONPARCEL 1ALL OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS THOSE LANDSDESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.941, PG.521, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 2ALL OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY, COLLIERCOUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 3ALL OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LYING SOUTH AND WEST OF ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY AND S.R.29RIGHT-OF-WAY, , LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.17, PG.453, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 4ALL OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY, COLLIERCOUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 5ALL OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 6ALL OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD ASDESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 AND O.R.4322, PG.1377, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSELANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1354, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 7ALL OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 ANDLESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1377, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAALL SAID LANDS BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:PARCEL (A)COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 1,314.26 TO A POINT HEREINAFTER TO BE KNOWN AS POINT (A);THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°52'34" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THENORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15 AND BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING;THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 89°17'35" EAST 1,202.62 FEET TO SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THENORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15;THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 941, PAGE 521, OF THE PUBLICRECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 00°08'45" EAST 1,319.97 FEET;2. NORTH 89°32'49" EAST 2,030.52 FEET;3. NORTH 00°06'39" WEST 2,656.84 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 15;THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE NORTH 89°04'02" EAST 2,035.44 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH,RANGE 29 EAST;THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'49" EAST 2,587.12 FEET TO THE NORTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 14;THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'42" EAST 2,331.62 FEET TO A POINT ON THESOUTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 29 SOUTH;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 44°58'17" EAST 2,419.10 FEET TO THE NORTH CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND ASDESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 962, PAGE 1289, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 44°59'18" WEST 730.20 FEET;2. SOUTH 44°58'03" EAST 680.17 FEET;3. NORTH 45°00'39" EAST 729.89 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 44°59'05" EAST 4823.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE SOUTH 00°31'11" EAST 2,301.77 FEET TO THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 00°38'38" EAST 2,631.42 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTCORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'23" WEST 2,614.52 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'08" WEST 2,613.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTCORNER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°34'23" WEST 2,672.75 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°38'46" WEST 2,671.33 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTCORNER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 00°04'00" WEST 5,379.12 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°06'34" WEST 2,674.38 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°09'03" WEST 2,587.98 FEET TO A POINT ON THEEAST LINE OF AN 80-FOOT-WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN AS CAMP KEAIS ROAD, AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1579, PAGE17323, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE FOLLOWING TEN (10) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. NORTH 05°51'03" EAST 91.74 FEET;2. 403.88 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,787.51 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 06°06'35" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 02°47'45" EAST 403.69 FEET;3. NORTH 00°15'32" WEST 4,936.51 FEET;4. NORTH 00°17'42" WEST 60.69 FEET;5. 533.72 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 40°14'11" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 19°49'24" EAST 522.82 FEET;6. NORTH 39°56'29" EAST 543.45 FEET;7. 584.69 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 20°00'03" EAST 572.96 FEET;8. NORTH 00°03'36" EAST 600.00 FEET;9. 848.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 540.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 89°59'58" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 44°56'23" WEST 763.68 FEET; 10. ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 89°56'24" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 164.71 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF A 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4322, PAGE 1347, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. NORTH 00°15'34" WEST 2,601.35 FEET;2. NORTH 00°07'26" WEST 3,944.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.CONTAINING: 3,914.91 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.ALONG WITHPARCEL (B)COMMENCING AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT (A);THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 3,945.17 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNEROF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22 SOUTH 00°15'34" EAST 2,681.53 FEET;THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°44'26" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE AFOREMENTIONED CAMP KEAIS ROAD AND BEINGTHE POINT OF BEGINNING;THENCE ALONG THE WEST BOUNDARY OF CAMP KEAIS ROAD FOR THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 89°56'24" EAST 164.27 FEET;2. 722.57 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 460.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 90°00'00" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 44°56'24" EAST 650.54 FEET;3. SOUTH 00°03'36" WEST 600.00 FEET;4. 529.01 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 20°00'03" WEST 518.39 FEET;5. SOUTH 39°56'29" WEST 543.45 FEET;6. 151.51 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 10°20'04" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 34°46'27" WEST 151.31 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTLINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND;THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 00°17'33" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,088.76 FEET TO THEPOINT OF BEGINNING.CONTAINING: 22.97 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.NET AREA: 3937.88 ACRES MORE OR LESSSCALE:1" = 1000'0SCALE IN FEET20001000SURVEYORS NOTES:xA SURVEY OF THE DESCRIBED LANDS WASCONDUCTED BY AMS ENGINEERING &ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. ON OCTOBER 1ST, 2003,INDICATING FOUND MONUMENTATION ALONGSAID BOUNDARY. UPON OUR RECOVERY OF SAIDBOUNDARY THERE ARE NUMEROUSDISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE MEASUREDDISTANCES NOTED ON THE AMS SURVEY ANDTHE EXISTING FOUND MONUMENTATION. THESEDISCREPANCIES INCLUDE RECOVERED ORIGINALCOLLIER MONUMENTS AND MONUMENTSRECORDED AS CERTIFIED CORNER WITH LABINS.xAN (AMS) MEASURED DISTANCE IS NOTED ON ALLLEGS OF THE BOUNDARY THAT HAVE ADISCREPANCY EXCEEDING 0.20' FROM THEEXISTING RECOVERED BOUNDARY CORNERS.(SEE SHEETS 2, 3, 4, & 5 FOR THESE NOTES)Page 5 of 10Page 7618 of 9661 N0°07'26"W 3944.99N89°17'35"E1202.62(M) N0°06'39"W 2656.84(D) S4°09'26"E 2651.27N89°04'02"E 2035.44 N. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 15(M) N89°38'49"E 2587.12 N. LINE OF THE N.W. 1/4 SEC. 14(AMS) 2586.52 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 3COLLIER COUNTYO.R.941, PG.521(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)BCP LLLPN.W. 1/4 OF THEN.W. 1/4 OF SEC. 15,O.R.2493, PG.2779(NOT PART OF THISSURVEY)COLLIER COUNTYO.R.941, PG.521(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)SEMINOLE TRIBEO.R.1479, PG.976BCP LLLPO.R.2493, PG.2779IMMOKALEE ROAD (100' R.O.W.)S89°52'34"W 150.00N0°07'26"W 1314.26FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT ATEAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OFIMMOKALEE ROAD 0.03' WEST.SETFOUNDFOUNDFOUNDFOUNDIRON PINFOUNDE. LINE SEC.15, T.47S., R.29E.W. LINE SEC.14, T.47S., R.29E.UNPLATTED(SEC. 15)UNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 14)POINT AP.O.C.NORTHWEST CORNER OFSECTION 15 TOWNSHIP 47SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAFOUND IRON RODIN CENTERLINE OFIMMOKALEE ROAD30' ACCESS EASEMENT (O.R.941, PG.521) (STOCKADE ROAD)END OFEASEMENTC.C.R.116015CONCRETEMONUMENTS0°37'10"W 2704.00S0°11'26"E 2628.83N89°25'08"E 2661.33N89°59'43"E 2696.54C.C.R.115724L.B.7917S89°51'19"W 5237.38 S. LINE SEC. 15S89°48'30"W150.00C.C.R.083010NAIL(D) N85°00'00"E 676.83(M) N89°06'25"E 676.70S0°05'22"E 1320.65N. 1/4 CORNER SEC. 15FOUNDFOUNDIRON PIN X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 659.2'83.5'132.5'132.3'83.7'671.7'75.7'63.7'FARMBUILDINGS15 1422 23SETN0°07'26"W 5259.44(D) 100'O.R.4322PG.134710 1115 14(M) S89°18'51"W 751.14STAMPEDCECOVERHEAD UTILITY LINES(M) N89°32'49"E 2030.52(D) S85°26'40"W 2030.60(D) N4°09'04"W 1320.73(M) S0°08'45"E 1319.97OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:34 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-023/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg2PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPSCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET300600GENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 6 of 10Page 7619 of 9661 L6L7L8SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 3SHEET 3SHEET 2SHEET 3FOUNDSETFOUNDSETFOUNDPIN & CAPSTAMPED AMSFOUNDFOUNDPIN & CAPNO I.D.13 1824 1914 1323 2412 713 18C.C.R.116412C.C.R.115811PIN & CAPL.B.7917C.C.R.115722C.C.R.115723PIN & CAPL.B.7917C.C.R.116411UNPLATTED(N.E. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 13)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 13)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 13)(AMS) 2328.84(C&M) N89°38'42"E 2331.62 N. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 14(AMS) 2421.88(C&M) S44°58'17"E 2419.10S.W. R.O.W. LINES44°59'05"E 2800.04S.W. R.O.W. LINES44°59'05"E 2023.22S.W. R.O. W. LINEO.R.962, PG.1289(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)OVERHEADUTILITY LINESS89°38'10"W242.07S2°15'49"E254.08S2°15'49"E 2430.13S1°31'37"E329.67S89°01'23"W315.26S89°01'23"W 2253.76N89°01'23"E 2569.02N1°36'55"W 2360.58S1°36'55"E298.69S89°33'32"W287.00N89°33'32"E 2312.62S89°59'43"W 2696.54N0°57'05"W 2655.96N89°25'14"E 2634.91N0°57'18"W 2693.16S2°15'36"E 2684.10C.C.R.115721FOUNDOVERHEAD UTILITY LINESSTATE RD. 29 S.11 1214 13MONITORING WELLSLINE TABLELINE #L6L7L8LENGTH730.20680.17729.89BEARINGS44°59'18"WS44°58'03"EN45°00'39"EOFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:44 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg3PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 7 of 10Page 7620 of 9661 (AMS) 2306.51(M) S0°31'11"E 2301.77 E. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2617.95(M) S0°38'38"E 2631.42 E. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2647.52(M) S89°44'23"W 2614.52 S. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2643.02(M) S89°44'08"W 2613.84 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2673.51(M) S89°34'23"W 2672.75 S. LINE. OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 23SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 5SHEET 4S89°22'16"W80.09S89°03'11"W79.9424 1925 3023 2426 25C.C.R. 116415WITNESS PIN L.B.7917WITNESS PIN L.B.7917L.B.7917C.C.R. 116416N89°26'24"E 2591.61N0°08'59"W 2612.76S89°19'18"W 2591.67N0°08'37"W 2617.81S0°20'51"W 2599.23S0°21'10"W 2599.67L.B.7917COLLIER MONUMENTCOLLIER MONUMENTUNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(N.E. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(SEC. 25)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)UNPLATTED(SEC. 26)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)UNPLATTED(SEC. 23)S.R. 29 S.OVERHEADUTILITY LINESL.B.7917OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:54 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg4PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 8 of 10Page 7621 of 9661 C5L14N0°17'33"W 2088.76C7C6L15L10C2L11C3L12C4L13N0°15'34"W 2601.35(AMS) 2670.60(M) S89°38'46"W 2671.33 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 23SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 5SHEET 4SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 5(D) 100.0'O.R.4322PG.1347(D) 100.0'IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R.846)22 2327 26CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE)O.R.4322, PG.1377WIDTH VARIES150' WIDTHO.R.4322, PG.1377CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE) (O.R.1579, PG.1732)O.R.4322,PG.1354LANDSINCLUDED INSURVEYUNPLATTED(SEC. 23)UNPLATTED(SEC. 22)UNPLATTED(SEC. 26)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)S89°41'38"W 5261.34S89°41'38"W 80.00S89°41'38"W 39.68W. LINE SEC. 22N0°15'34"W 5249.84N89°56'38"W 100.19N89°55'57"W 100.18N0°14'18"E 2635.38N0°37'25"W 2599.57N0°18'18"W 60.85CURVE TABLECURVE #C2C3C4C5C6C7LENGTH533.72584.69848.23722.57529.01151.51RADIUS760.00840.00540.00460.00760.00840.00DELTA40°14'11"39°52'53"89°59'58"90°00'00"39°52'53"10°20'04"CHORD BEARINGN19°49'24"EN20°00'03"EN44°56'23"WS44°56'24"ES20°00'03"WS34°46'27"WCHORD LENGTH522.82572.96763.68650.54518.39151.31LINE TABLELINE #L10L11L12L13L14L15L16LENGTH60.69543.45600.00164.71164.27600.00543.45BEARINGN0°17'42"WN39°56'29"EN0°03'36"EN89°56'24"WS89°56'24"ES0°03'36"WS39°56'29"WL16SETFOUND IRON ROD0.45' S.E.FOUND IRON ROD0.65' N.E.L.B.69030.65' N.E.C.C.R.83011S.W. COR. SEC.22,T.47S., R.29E.SETL.B.2022L.B.2022L.B.2022IRON PINL.B.2022SETL.B.2022IRON PINL.B.2022COLLIER MONUMENTIRON PINTT X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X CAMP KEAIS RD.IMMOKALEE RD.OVERHEADUTILITYLINESUNPAVED RD.POST ANDWIRE FENCEASPHALTROAD ANDAPRONASPHALTROAD ANDAPRONO.R.4998PG.865O.R.4998PG.865GAS VALVEVAULTSWEST LINE SEC.2280' R.O.W.O.R.1579, PG.1732200'O.R.4322PG.1354OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:02:04 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg5PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.DETAIL SCALE: 1" = 200'SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 9 of 10Page 7622 of 9661 S0°04'00"W 5379.12 E. LINE SEC. 27S89°06'34"W 2674.38 S. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 27S89°09'03"W 2587.98 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 27L9C1N0°15'32"W 4936.51SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE) (O.R.1579, PG.1732)120' WIDEO.R.4322, PG.1377S0°15'41"E 5431.65 W. LINE SEC. 271" IRON PIPES.W. COR. SEC.27PIN & CAPSTAMPED AIMCONC.MONUMENTRANCH ONE RD.(60' WIDE) (O.R.1376, PG.51)2833 34L.B.2022SETL.B.2022UNPLATTED(SEC. 27)UNPLATTED(SEC. 34)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)S89°09'03"W88.1627 2634 35LINE TABLELINE #L9LENGTH91.74BEARINGN5°51'03"ECURVE TABLECURVE #C1LENGTH403.88RADIUS3787.51DELTA6°06'35"CHORD BEARINGN2°47'45"ECHORD LENGTH403.69OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:02:14 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg6PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 10 of 10Page 7623 of 9661 ZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: RESIDENTIALZONING: GARDEN WALK VILLAGE PUDLAND USE: UNDEVELOPEDZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: COLLIER COUNTY SOLID &HAZARDOUS WASTEZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALZONING: A-MHO RLSAOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALCAMP KEAIS RDIMMOKALEE RDIMMOKALEE RDS.R. 29ZONING: A-MHO RLSAOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALINTERNAL ACCESS DRIVE(TYP)PIT OFFICES AND SCALEHOUSE(SEE SHEET 03)POTENTIAL FUTURE PITOFFICES AND SCALEHOUSE(SEE SHEET 03)ZONING: A-MHOLAND USE:RESIDENTIALZONING: A-MHOLAND USE:UNDEVELOPEDWRAWRAWRAINGRESS/EGRESS TOCAMP KEAIS RDPOTENTIAL FUTURECONNECTION TO SR29200± LF 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFERSUBJECT TOCONDITION #21QUARRY LAKEAREA = 204.1 (AC)OUTDOOR STORAGE/ EQUIPMENT/MININGOPERATIONSTIRE WASHCODE - REQUIRED BUFFER,SUBJECT TO CONDITION #20CODE - REQUIRED BUFFER,SUBJECT TO CONDITION #20805± LF 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFER(SEE NOTE #3)1,228± LF 10' TYPE 'A'LANDSCAPE BUFFER(SEE NOTE #3)••••••CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 8/11/2025 1:36:53 PM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:38:58 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-1.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINECONCEPTUAL SITEPLANSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251' = 3000'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-1.dwgX17-101 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1' = 3000'LEGEND:PROPERTY BOUNDARYW.R.A.LAKE (QUARRYEXCAVATION AREA)EXTERNAL ACCESSPROJECT BOUNDARYPage 7624 of 9661 EXHIBIT B • • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:49:17 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:02 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-2.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINENOTESSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 2025N/AP-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-2.dwgX17-202 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SITE DATA:TOTAL SITE AREA: 3,937.88 ACRESCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: AGRICULTURALFUTURE LAND USE: AGRICULTURAL RURAL MIXED-USE DISTRICT RLSAO (SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY) URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT-LOW RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT (NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY)GENERAL NOTES:1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND SUBJECT TOMODIFICATIONS.2. RETAINED NATIVE VEGETATION MAY BE USED TO SATISFYLANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTIC VEGETATIONREMOVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 4.06.02 AND4.06.05.E.1. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITH NATIVE PLANTMATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC 3.05.07.3. EXISTING VEGETATION TO BE RETAINED SATISFIES BUFFERREQUIREMENTS. SHOULD THE EXISTING VEGETATION BEREMOVED OR DESTROYED, SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WILL BEPROVIDED AS NECESSARY TO MEET BUFFER REQUIREMENTS.PRESERVE:PER LDC SECTION 3.05.07.B.2, THE SITE DOES NOT REQUIRE A PRESERVE AREA.OPEN SPACE:*MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED = 30%Page 7625 of 9661 SCALE (BY OTHERS)FUTURE SCALEHOUSE (650± SF)PROPOSED PITOFFICES ANDSCALE HOUSEDUMP TRUCK STACKINGAPPROX. 5,000± LFTO CAMP KEAIS RD• • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:49:08 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:08 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-3.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINEPIT OFFICE ANDSCALE HOUSESILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 100'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-3.dwgX17-303 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE:1" = 100'ZONINGCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: VACANT / AGRICULTURALBUILDING SETBACKSMIN. FRONT AND REAR YARDS: 50'MIN. SIDE YARD: 30'EXCAVATION: 50'PARKING CALCULATIONSL.D.C. 4.05.04OFFICE/SCALEHOUSE: 1 PER 300 SFHANDICAPPED: 1 SPACE PER 25REGULAR SPACES1 PER 300 SF @ 650 SF = 3 REQUIRED PARKING SPACESPROVIDED: 4 PARKING SPACES(INCLUDES 1 ADA SPACES)PROJECTBOUNDARY(TYP)Page 7626 of 9661 PROJECT BOUNDARY(TYP)PROPOSED LAKE(QUARRY EXCAVATION AREA)(AREA = 204.1 AC.)OUTDOOR STORAGE / EQUIPMENT /MINING OPERATIONSEXCAVATIONLIMITS (TYP)INTERNALACCESS DRIVEWRAWRA••••••CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:55:53 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:13 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-4.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINEEXCAVATION AREASILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 600'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-4.dwgX17-404 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1" = 600'ZONINGCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: VACANT / AGRICULTURALBUILDING SETBACKSMIN. SIDE, REAR AND ABUTTING PROPERTY LINES: 50'MIN. FROM ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL: 100'MIN. FROM PRIVATE ACCESS ESMT: 50'MIN. SIDE YARD: 30'EXCAVATION: 50'Page 7627 of 9661 TIRE WASH(BY OTHERS)PROPOSED 30'±PAVEMENTPROJECT BOUNDARY(TYP)CAMP KEAIS ROADPROPERTY BOUNDARY(TYP)300'±NOTE:FINAL COMPONENTS ANDCONFIGURATION OF TIRE WASH TO BEDETERMINED BY THE MINE OPERATOR.EXISTING COUNTY(PUBLIC) R.O.W.383'±• • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:51:38 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:19 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-5.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINETIRE WASHSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 100'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-5.dwgX17-505 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1" = 100'Page 7628 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 August 18, 2025 1 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 SILVER STRAND MINE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Silver Strand Mine Conditional Use shall be limited to what is depicted on the Conceptual Site Plan, dated August 2025, and prepared by Peninsula Engineering. 2. Minor changes in the location and siting of buildings, structures, and improvements authorized by this conditional use may be approved administratively at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat. 3. Prior to any vehicular use of the site, the owner shall post two (2) signs along the entry drive, clearly visible to vehicles entering and leaving the site, providing information regarding potential panther presence and notifying drivers of the need to use caution. Sign wording, placement and size will be subject to review and approval by Collier County Environmental Staff. The owner shall submit, and receive approval of, the proposed signage plan in conjunction with the first to occur of either the Site Development Plan process or other local development order as may be required which may allow vehicular use of the site. 4. Evidence of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) accepted mitigation for impacts to panthers, woodstorks, Florida black bear and other listed species will be required prior to the pre-construction meeting with Staff. 5. A littoral shelf planting area to commence during the reclamation phase of the project shall be shown on the excavation permit for this conditional use and shall meet the current standards of the Land Development Code at the time of submittal of the Commercial Excavation Permit. 6. The owner/petitioner shall obtain a South Florida Water Management District Agricultural Surface Water Management Permit or permit modification for this site, if applicable. 7. The maximum total daily trip generation for the CU shall not exceed 162 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or excavation permit approval, whichever occurs first. The maximum number of one-way trucks per day (maximum one-way loads per day) is 430. 8. Pursuant to Section 125.022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the County for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals for fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. Page 7629 of 9661 EXHIBIT C Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 August 18, 2025 2 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 9. Mining operations are permitted between 6:30 am and 5:00 pm Monday through Friday, and between 7:00 am and 3:00 pm on Saturday. 10. The Owner/Petitioner shall be responsible for all maintenance of the internal haul roadways and the connection to Camp Keais Road for the duration of the mining operation. The area surrounding and between the tire-wash system and the Camp Keais Road access shall be paved consistent with the weigh stations shown on the master plan and/or be a minimum of 22 feet in width and a depth of 1.5 inches of asphalt or asphalt millings with minimum LDC required base. A Dust Control Plan, for Silver Strand Mine shall be submitted with the Excavation Permit. The tire wash system shall be installed to wash dust from the wheels and underbody of all haul trucks exiting the facility. This system will direct water under pressure at the wheels and the underside of each vehicle as it passes through. There is no paving required on-site past the tire-wash system, except that required handicapped spaces shall be ADA- compliant. This condition shall also apply to any potential future access on SR 29. 11. Haul trucks will not be permitted to park or stage along public rights-of-way. Applicant may allow haul trucks to stage or park on the project’s internal roadway prior to 6:30 a.m. 12. Upon completion of excavation activities, all buildings, equipment, and berms shall be removed within six months, or used in the reclamation process or for agricultural purposes. 13. The BZA may revoke the approval of this Conditional Use if the Collier County Code Enforcement Board finds that the mine operator has violated or has not fully complied with all conditions of approval including completion of improvements indicated on the Conditional Use Master Plan and the mine operator has failed to remedy the violation or come into compliance within the time period established by the Code Enforcement Board. 14. The mining operations shall be conducted in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida, Collier County Government, and the Federal Government. 15. The lifespan of the mine is 20 years from the date of Conditional Use approval by the Board of County Commissioners. 16. Adequate utility, access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities shall continue to be maintained. 17. Each year, the owner shall provide a report to the Collier County Transportation Management Services Department, which will include the condition of the roadways adjacent to the property entrance(s), accident reports, and average daily and peak hour vehicle trips entering and exiting the earth mine. Page 7630 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 August 18, 2025 3 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 18. An approved indigo snake plan is required to be implemented prior to the beginning of any construction, including site clearing. The name and contact information of a qualified biologist who will monitor work shall be supplied to Environmental Services Department staff at the pre-construction meeting or prior to excavation permit approval, whichever is first. 19. An updated listed species survey, less than 6 months old, is required for areas to be excavated prior to the pre-construction meeting with Staff. As required by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Technical Assistance, follow-up pedestrian surveys of each new mining block will be conducted between 60 and 180 days prior to the commencement of any mining-related activity through the life of the project. The applicant shall submit a copy of these surveys to the Development Review Division Director. 20. The Owner will install a LDC required buffer within 180 days along any property boundary where an SRA, PUD, rezone, or other residential development has been approved on an adjacent property, unless development on the adjacent property includes the construction of a perimeter berm that is a minimum of 7’ in height, as measured from Finished Floor Elevation of the adjacent site. 21. The Owner will install 200 LF of a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer adjacent to the abutting residential parcel along the eastern property boundary. This buffer will wrap the corner of the subject property line, providing 100 LF on each side. Refer to the conceptual site plan prepared by Peninsula Engineering. 22. The maximum allowable depth of the excavation shall be 58’. Page 7631 of 9661 23. When the property is developed for non-mining purposes, all required buffers will be installed along all property boundaries. with CCPC condition Growth Management Community Development Department Zoning Division—Comprehensive Planning Section CONSISTENCY REVIEW MEMORANDUM To: Tim Finn, Planner III, Zoning From: Parker Klopf, Planner III, Comprehensive Planning Date: SEPTEMBER 18, 2025 Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review PETITION NUMBER: PL20220001634 PETITION NAME: Silver Strand Mine Conditional Use REQUEST: The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a Conditional Use for earth mining with excavation, blasting, and processing of material on property zoned Rural Agricultural District (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), partly within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District (RLSAO), on 3,937.88± acres.. LOCATION: The subject property is located between State Road 29 to the east, Camp Keais Road and Immokalee Road to the west and Stockade Road to the northwest, in Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24, and 27, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is located in mainly within the Agricultural/Rural designation as well as the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) and a portion of the property is located within the Low Residential District of the Immokalee Master Plan. The purpose of the Low Residential subdistrict is to provide for low density residential development and supporting uses. The Agricultural/Rural Land Use Designation is for those areas that are remote from the existing development pattern, lack public facilities and services, are environmentally sensitive or are in agricultural production. Urbanization is not promoted; therefore, most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. According to the proposed excavation plan provided by the applicant, there will be no excavation activities happening on areas designated as Low Residential by the Immokalee Master Plan. Furthermore, The proposed earth mining operation is listed as an allowable use in the Agricultural/Rural designation in the FLUE and since the mining operations are limited to the Agricultural/ Rural Designated areas it is the determination of Comprehensive Planning Staff that the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the Future Land Use Plan. Page 7632 of 9661 Relevant FLUE Objectives and policies are stated below (in italics); each policy is followed by staff analysis [in bold]. FLUE Policy 5.4: All applications and petitions for proposed development shall be consistent with this Growth Management Plan, as determined by the Board of County Commissioners. As stated above all mining operations are to take place on Agricultural/ Rural designation and there will be no encroachment of the mining operations into Low Residential designated lands CONCLUSION: The proposed Conditional Use for an earth mining operation is a permitted use within the Agricultural/ Rural designation and all mining operations are limited to Agricultural/ Rural designated areas. Therefore, the proposed Conditional Use proposal has been deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element. Page 7633 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 1 of 12 APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: CONDITIONAL USE LDC Section 10.08.00 & Code of Laws section 2-83 – 2-90 Chapter 3 C.1 of the Administrative Code PETITION NO (PL) PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED A CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): ______________________________________________________ Name of Applicant if different than owner: __________________________________________ Address: ____________________________City: _____________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: ____________________ Fax: ___________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Name of Agent(s): _____________________________________________________________ Firm: _________________________________________________________________________ Address: ____________________________City: _____________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: __________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. To be completed by staff ^ƚĂƚĞ͗&>/W͗ϯϰϭϬϯ EĂŵĞŽĨŐĞŶƚ͗ZŝĐŚĂƌĚzŽǀĂŶŽǀŝĐŚ͕ƐƋ͘ &ŝƌŵ͗ŽůĞŵĂŶ͕zŽǀĂŶŽǀŝĐŚΘ<ŽĞƐƚĞƌ͕W͘͘ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ϰϬϬϭdĂŵŝĂŵŝdƌĂŝůE͕͘^ƵŝƚĞϯϬϬŝƚLJ͗EĂƉůĞƐ dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ͗Ϯϯϵ͘ϰϯϱ͘ϯϱϯϱ ŵĂŝů͗ƌLJŽǀĂŶŽǀŝĐŚΛĐLJŬůĂǁĨŝƌŵ͘ĐŽŵ Silver Strand III Partnership 2640 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 201 Naples FL 34104 239.262.2600 DGenson@barroncollier.com; NCasalanguida@barroncollier.com Jessica Harrelson, AICP Peninsula Engineering 2640 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 201 Naples FL 34105 239.403.6751 jharrelson@pen-eng.com Page 7634 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 2 of 12 ASSOCIATIONS Required: List all registered Home Owner Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner’s website at http://www.colliergov.net/Index.aspx?page=774. Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ PROPERTY INFORMATION On separate page, provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: x If the request involves changes to more than one zoning district, the applicant shall include separate legal description for property involved in each district; x The applicant shall submit 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; and x 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. Property I.D. Number: ____________________________ Plat Book: _______ Page #: _______ Section/Township/Range: _______ /_______ /_______ Subdivision: __________________________________________Lot: ________ Block: ________ Metes & Bounds Description: _____________________________________________________ Size of Property: _____ft. X ______ ft. = _______ Total Sq. Ft. Acres: _____________ Address/ General Location of Subject Property: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ N/A 00138160003, 00138360007, 00138120001, 00137640003, 00138200002, 00137280007, 00137560002 13,14,15,22,23,24 27 47 29 See Survey for Legal Description varies varies 171,534,052.8 3,937.88 East of Immokalee Road, West of SR 29 Page 7635 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 3 of 12 ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Zoning Land Use N S E W If the owner of the subject property owns contiguous property please provide a detailed legal description of the entire contiguous property: (If space is inadequate, attach on a separate page) Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: __________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: ________________________________________________ CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST DETAIL Type of Conditional Use: This application is requesting a conditional use as allowed, pursuant to LDC section 2.03.00, of the _______________________ zoning district for _______________________ (type of use). Present Use of the Property: __________________________________________ A-MHO/A-PU Undeveloped, CC Landfill, & Residential A-MHO-RLSAO Agricultural Lands/Undeveloped A-MHO-RLSAO/A-MHO/Kaicasa PUD Undeveloped/Residential/SR 29/Undeveloped A-MHO-RSLAO/ A-MHO Immokalee Rd, Agricultural/Undeveloped A-MHO & A-MHO-RSLAO Earth Mining Agricultural/ Undeveloped Page 7636 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 4 of 12 EVALUATION CRITERIA Pursuant to LDC section 10.08.00 and Chapter 3 C.1 of the Administrative Code, staff’s recommendation to the reviewing body shall be based upon a finding that the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and that the specific requirements governing the individual conditional use, if any, have been met. Further, satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning the following matters, where applicable. On a separate page, provide a narrative statement describing a request for a conditional use and a detailed response to the criteria listed below. Specify how and why the request is consistent with each of the criteria. a.Describe how the project is consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan. Include information on how the request is consistent with the applicable section or portions of the Future Land Use Element. b.Describe the existing or planned means of ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. c.Describe the effect the conditional use will have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic impact, and odor. d.Describe the site’s and the proposed use’s compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district. e.Please provide any additional information which you may feel is relevant to this request. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions; however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? No Yes (If yes please provide copies.) N/A Page 7637 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 5 of 12 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): ___________________________________________________________ Address: ______________________________City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: __________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Address of Subject Property (If available): ___________________________________________ City: ________________ State: __________ ZIP: ___________ LEGAL DESCRIPTION Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: _______________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: _________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _____________________________________________________ TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System Provide Name: ____________________ d. Package Treatment Plant (GPD Capacity): ___________________ e. Septic System TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System PROVIDE NAME_______________ d. Private System (Well) Total Population to be served: ____________________________________________________ Peak and Average Daily Demands: A. Water-Peak: _______ Average Daily: ________ B. Sewer-Peak: _______ Average Daily: ________ Silver Strand III Partnership 2640 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 201 Naples FL 34105 239.403.6700 dgenson@barroncollier.com Naples FL 34105 13,14,15 22,23,24, 27 47 29 00138160003, 00138360007, 00138120001, 00137640003, 00138200002, 00137280007, 00137560002 See Survey for Legal Description X X 5 (employees) 137 105 336 75 Page 7638 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 6 of 12 If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date service is expected to be required: ____________________________________________ Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of Collier County’s utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. Page 7639 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 7 of 12 RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer at their 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 F.S. §695. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the assigned Principal Planner, Zoning Services Department, within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must 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. Page 7640 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 7 of 12 RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer at their 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 F.S. §695. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the assigned Principal Planner, Zoning Services Department, within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must 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. Page 7641 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 8 of 12 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: A Conditional Use to be heard by the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals A Minor Conditional Use to be heard by the Office of the Hearing Examiner Chapter 3 C.1. of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting, and at time of application submittal. At time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. Requirements for Review # Of Copies Required Not Required Completed Application (download current form from County website) 1 Cover letter briefly explaining the project 1 Pre-Application Notes 1 Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 1 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Warranty Deed(s) 1 Boundary Survey 1 Conceptual Site Plan 24” X 36” plus (one 8 ½ X 11 copy) Plans showing proposed location for utilities, if required Plans for screening and buffering the use with reference as to type, dimensions, and character, if required Plans showing the proposed landscaping and provisions for trees protected by County regulations, if required Plans showing the proposed signs and lighting, including type, dimensions, and character, if required Architectural Rendering of Proposed Structure(s), if applicable 1 Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial. 1 Statement of utility provisions (with all required attachments & sketches) 1 Environmental Data Requirements, pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 1 Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) at time of public hearings. Coordinate with project planner at time of public hearing. Listed Species Survey; less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous surveys. 1 Traffic Impact Study (TIS) or waiver 1 Historical and Archeological Survey, or waiver 1 Electronic copy of all documents and plans * Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. 1 * If located in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area, include an additional set of each submittal requirement ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Page 7642 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 9 of 12 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: x Following the completion of the review process by County review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager. x Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required. Planners: Indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following additional reviewers: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or EMS: Artie Bay Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson GMD Graphics City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams Immokalee Water/Sewer District: Other: School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Communication Towers: Mosquito Control Collier County Airport Authority Naples Airport Authority Commercial Mining: Impact Fees Immokalee CRA Page 7643 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 10 of 12 FEE REQUIREMENTS All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 (to be credited towards the application fee if the application is filed within 9 months of pre-application meeting) Conditional Use Application Fee: $4,000.00 o When filed with Rezone Petition: $1,500.00 o Additional fee for 5th and subsequent reviews: 20% of original fee Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $300.00 Environmental Data Requirements-EIS Packet (submittal determined at pre-application meeting): $2,500.00 Listed or Protected Species survey review fee (when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00 Transportation Fee, if required: o Methodology Review Fee: $500.00 o Minor Study Review Fee: $750.00 o Major Study Review Fee: $1,500.00 Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the Hearing Examiner or CCPC: $1,125.00 Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the BZA, if required: $500.00 Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Agent/Owner Name (please print) [ y [ [ [ dž dž [ dž Jessica Harrelson, AICP 12/4/2023 Page 7644 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 11 of 12 Public Participation Requirements LDC Section 10.03.06 B. or C. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code Notice for Minor Conditional Use Petitions Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Requirements: Applicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the Hearing Examiner’s receipt of the staff report and application materials in accordance with the applicable sections of the Administrative Code. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing. Newspaper Advertisements: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum: x Date, time, and location of the hearing; x Description of the proposed land uses; and x 2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. Sign: A sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing date. Public Hearing for Minor Conditional Use Petitions Hearing Examiner: The Hearing Examiner shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. See Chapter 9 of the Administrative Code for the Office of the Hearing Examiner procedures. Notice for Conditional Use Petitions Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Requirements: Applicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the advertised public hearing. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. Page 7645 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 12 of 12 Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing. Newspaper Advertisements: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum: x Date, time, and location of the hearing; x Description of the proposed land uses; and x 2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. Sign: A sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing date. Public Hearing for Conditional Use Petitions Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC): The EAC shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing, if required. Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC): The CCPC shall hold at least 1 public hearing. Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA): The BZA shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. Page 7646 of 9661 %BWJE(FOTPO 1SFTJEFOUPG%FWFMPQNFOU Page 7647 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest: Name and Address % of Ownership b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each: Name and Address % of Ownership c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest: Name and Address % of Ownership Page 7648 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 2 of 3 d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners: Name and Address % of Ownership e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: ___________ f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust: Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired _______________ Leased: Term of lease ____________ years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Page 7649 of 9661 Silver Strand III Partnership 100% (See Attached Information) 8/20/1990 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3 Date of option: _________________________ Date option terminates: __________________, or Anticipated closing date: ________________ AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest-holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition’s final public hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Agent/Owner Name (please print) Page 7650 of 9661 Jessica Harrelson, AICP, Agent 4/5/2023 OWNERSHIP DETAIL 08/26/16SILVER STRAND III PARTNERSHIP GP Juliet C. Sproul FamilyInheritance Trust 26.228571% GP Barron G. Collier Lifetime Irrevocable Trust 26.228571% GP Michael Wells Gable 6.557143% GP Robert Blakeslee Gable 6.557143% GP Phyllis G. Alden Lifetime Irrevocable Trust 17.214286% GP Mathilde V. Currence 6.421429% GP Christopher D. Villere 4.371429% GP Lamar G. Villere 6.421429% Page 7651 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 1 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 SILVER STRAND MINE PROJECT NARRATIVE & EVALULATION CRITERIA Request The purpose of this conditional use is to permit a commercial excavation mine within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, known as the Silver Strand Mine. Pursuant to LDC Section 10.08.00, granting the conditional use request will not adversely affect the public and satisfactory provisions and arrangements have been made for the following matters: x Consistency with the Land Development Code x Consistency with the Growth Management Plan x Ingress and egress to the property, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control and access in case of fire or catastrophe. x Effects on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects x Compatibility with adjacent properties Note, a companion Variance has been submitted requesting to eliminate code required perimeter landscape buffers (VA-PL20230001067). Location: The project involves seven (7) separate parcels, collectively consisting of 3,937.88-acres, located in eastern Collier County within portions of Sections 13,14, 15, 22, 23, 24, and 27, Township 47 South and Range 29 East, (the “property”). The proposed earthmining activities have been strategically located to occur internal to the property to eliminate impacts on adjacent land uses. Refer to the Location Map prepared by Peninsula Engineering. Zoning & Future Land Use: The subject property is zoned Rural Agricultural Zoning District and Mobile Home Overlay. The majority of the property is also within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO). The County’s Urban Designation Line bisects the subject property; consequently, the property is within two future land use designations. The northernmost portion of the property is Urban Mixed-Use District- Low Residential Subdistrict, per the Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Map, and the southern portion is designated Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. Refer to the Zoning and Future Land Use Exhibits, prepared by Peninsula Engineering. Page 7652 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 2 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 LOCATION MAP Page 7653 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 3 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 ZONING EXHIBIT #1 Page 7654 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 4 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 ZONING EXHIBIT #2 Page 7655 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 5 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 FUTURE LAND USE EXHIBIT Page 7656 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 6 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 EVALUATION CRITERIA a. Describe how the project is consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan. Include information on how the request is consistent with the applicable section or portions of the Future Land Use Element. Response: The proposed mining activities are located within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District and Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO), and Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay (RLSAO), designated as Open Lands. Per LDC Section 2.03.01.A.1.c.1, earthmining is a permitted conditional use within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District. In addition, per LDC Section 4.08.05, Baseline Standards of the RLSAO are applied since the property is not an SSA or SRA. The request for an earthmining operation is consistent with the LDC. The County’s Urban Designation Line bisects the project; consequently, a portion of the project is designated Urban Mixed-Use District- Low Residential Subdistrict, per the Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Map, and the remaining of the project is designated Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. The County’s Growth Management Plan does not limit what is allowed per the current zoning; therefore, the request is consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the GMP. The conceptual site plan and application materials identify all required elements for a conditional use, as required by the LDC and Growth Management Plan. b. Describe the existing or planned means of ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. Response: The proposed development will have one direct access connection to Camp Keais Road and a potential future interconnect to SR29. Internal accessways have been designed to provide sufficient traffic flow and vehicular circulation. The development has further been designed to allow for stacking and staging of haul trucks on-site, eliminating truck staging within the public rights-of-way. c. Describe the effect the conditional use will have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic impact, and odor. Response: The subject property has historically been used for agricultural purposes and will continue to be used for agricultural purposes outside of the proposed earthmining activities. The excavation operation will have no negative effects on neighboring properties, including noise, glare, economic impact or odor. Mining activities have been designed to provide significant setbacks from all property boundaries. The property is adjacent to undeveloped land and/or lands used for agricultural purposes along most boundaries. Setbacks and vegetation will sufficiently screen the proposed development from neighboring properties to mitigate potential impacts. Page 7657 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 7 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 d. Describe the site’s and the proposed use’s compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district. Response: The proposed earthmining use has been designed to be compatible with surrounding land uses. The property is adjacent to undeveloped land and/or lands used for agricultural purposes along most boundaries. Other surrounding uses include the Immokalee Landfill to the north and residential along a slight portion of the eastern boundary and also a slight portion of the northern boundary (Seminole Trible of Florida). Significant setbacks, existing native vegetation, including WRAs and wetlands will sufficiently screen the proposed development from neighboring properties and uses to mitigate any potential impacts. A 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer will be provided adjacent to a residential use along the eastern boundary and code-required buffers will be installed within 180 days along any property boundary where an SRA, PUD or development zoned RMF-6 or greater in density is approved on adjacent property. Conditions of Approval, which include hours of operation and maximum total daily trip generation, have been incorporated to further address compatibility. e. Please provide any additional information which you may feel is relevant to this request. Response: The subject property has historically been used for agricultural purposes and the proposed use has been designed to be compatible with surrounding land uses. The earth mining activities have been strategically located internal to the property, which provides significant setbacks from all property boundaries, reducing potential impacts on adjacent properties and rights-of-way. Proximity to surrounding uses, setbacks, existing/proposed vegetation and conditions of approval address compatibility with the surrounding area. Best management practices will also be applied to minimize adverse impacts on adjacent Water Retention Areas (WRA), per the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. The site has been designed to be compatible with adjacent uses. FUTURE LAND USE POLICIES Policy 5.6 New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). Response: The proposed development will be compatible and complementary to surrounding land uses. The development will comply with design standards established for the Agricultural Zoning District. Proposed mining activities have been strategically located internally to the property to eliminate potential impacts on surrounding land uses and rights-of-way. Significant setbacks, vegetation, including WRAs and wetlands, along with the proposed conditions of approval address compatibility with the surrounding land uses. Page 7658 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 8 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Policy 7.1 The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. Response: The proposed development will have one direct access connection to Camp Keais and a potential future connection to SR29. Policy 7.2 The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. Response: A private, internal accessway has been designed to allow the staging/stacking of haul trucks to prevent congestion along Camp Keais Road and SR 29, and has also been designed to allow for internal vehicular circulation. Policy 7.3 All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. Response: Interconnections with adjoining neighborhoods, or other developments, is not feasible due to the proposed use, adjacent uses and proximity to those uses. Policy 7.4 The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. Response: Not applicable. The request is for an excavation mining operation. Page 7659 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 9 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 RLSAO GROUP 5 POLICIES 'ƌŽƵƉϱവWŽůŝĐŝĞƐƚŚĂƚƉƌŽƚĞĐƚǁĂƚĞƌƋƵĂůŝƚLJĂŶĚƋƵĂŶƚŝƚLJĂŶĚƚŚĞŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĂůǁĂƚĞƌƌĞŐŝŵĞĂŶĚprotect listed animal and plant species and their habitats on land that is not voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area program. Policy 5.1: To protect water quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural water regime in areas mapped as FSAs and designated Restoration Areas as shown on the Overlay Map prior to the time that they are designated as SSAs under the Stewardship Credit Program. Residential Uses, General Conditional Uses, Earth Mining and Processing Uses, and Recreational Uses (layers 1-4) as listed in the Matrix shall be eliminated. Conditional use essential services and governmental essential services, except those necessary to serve permitted uses or for public safety, shall not be allowed in FSAs. Infrastructure necessary to serve permitted uses may be exempt from this restriction, provided that designs seek to minimize the extent of impacts to any such areas. Where practicable, directional-drilling techniques and/or previously cleared or disturbed areas shall be utilized for oil or gas extraction in FSAs in order to minimize impacts to native habitats. Asphaltic and concrete batch making plants shall be prohibited in areas mapped as HSAs. The opportunity to voluntarily participate in the Stewardship Credit Program, as well as the right to sell conservation easements or a free or lesser interest in the land, shall constitute compensation for the loss of these rights. Response: The project does not contain any lands mapped as FSA or HSA. Policy 5.2: To protect water quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural water regime and to protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats in areas mapped as FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs on the Overlay Map that are within the ACSC, all ACSC regulatory standards shall apply, including those that strictly limit non-agricultural clearing. Response: The project does not contain any lands within the ACSC. Policy 5.3: To protect water quality and quantity and maintenance of the natural water regime and to protect listed animal and plant species and their habitats in areas mapped as FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs on the Overlay Map that are not within the ACSC, if a property owner proposes to utilize such land for a non-agricultural purpose under the Baseline Standards referenced in Policy 1.5 and does not elect to use the Overlay, these Group 5 Policies, shall be incorporated into the LDC, and shall supersede any comparable existing County regulations that would otherwise apply. These regulations shall only apply to non-agricultural use of land prior to its inclusion in the Overlay system. Page 7660 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 10 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Response: The portion of the subject property within the RLSAO is designated as Open Lands and is subject to Baseline Standards. Earth mining is a permitted conditional use within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, per LDC Section 2.03.01.A.1.c. Policy 5.4: Collier County will coordinate with appropriate State and Federal agencies concerning the provision of wildlife crossings at locations determined to be appropriate. A map of these potential crossing locations will be initiated by (12 months of the adoption of this Ordinance), updated periodically, and shall be incorporated into community, cultural and historical, and transportation planning for the RLSA, including all SRAs described in Group 4 Policies. Response: The applicant will work with appropriate Local, State and Federal agencies concerning the provision of mitigation efforts, as appropriate and/or if necessary. Policy 5.5: For those lands that are not voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship program, non-agricultural development, excluding individual single-family residences, shall be directed away from the listed species and species of special local concern (SSLC), as defined by Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission, and their habitats by complying with the following guidelines and standards. 1. A wildlife survey shall be required for all parcels when listed species or SSLC are known to inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site or where listed species or SSLC are directly utilizing the site. The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) guidelines. The County shall notify the FFWCC and USFWS of the existence of any listed species or SSLC that may be discovered. Response: A wildlife survey has been conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) guidelines. 2. Wildlife habitat management plans for listed species or SSLC and for those protected species identified below shall be submitted for County approval. A plan shall be required for all projects where the wildlife survey indicates listed species or SSLC are utilizing the site, or the site is capable of supporting wildlife and can be anticipated to be occupied by listed species or SSLC. These plans shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. a. Management plans shall incorporate proper techniques to protect listed species or SSLC and their habitats from negative impacts of proposed development. The most current and completed data and local, state and federal guidelines and regulations shall be utilized to prepare the required management plans. Provisions such as fencing, walls, or other obstructions shall be provided ot minimize development impacts to the wildlife and to facilitate and encourage wildlife to use wildlife corridors. Appropriate roadway Page 7661 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 11 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 crossings, underpasses and signage shall be used where roads must cross wildlife corridors. Mitigation for impacting listed species or SSLC habitat shall be considered in the management plans, as appropriate. i. The County shall consider any other techniques recommended by the USFWS and FFWCC, subject to the provision of paragraph 3 of this policy. Response: Acknowledged. ii. When listed species or SSLC are utilizing a site or indicate by evidence, such as denning, foraging, or other indications, as minimum of 40% of native vegetation on-site shall be retained, with the exception of clearing for agricultural purposes. The County shall also consider the recommendation of other agencies, subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 of this policy. Response: Acknowledged. b. Management plans shall include provisions for minimizing human and wildlife interactions. Low intensity land uses (e.g. parks, passive recreational areas, golf courses) and vegetation preservation requirements, including agriculture, shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas and areas dominated by human activities. Consideration shall be given to the most current Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission guidelines and regulations on techniques to reduce human wildlife conflict. The management plans shall also require the dissemination of information to local residents, businesses and governmental services about the presence of wildlife and practices (such as appropriate waste disposal methods) that enable responsible coexistence with wildlife, while minimizing opportunities for negative interactions, such as appropriate waste disposal practices. Response: A Human-Wildlife Coexistence Plan may be prepared and submitted for the development, if necessary. c. The Management Plans shall contain a monitoring program for developments greater than 10 acres. Response: There is no on-site preserve; therefore, a monitoring program is not applicable. 3. The County shall, consistent with applicable policies of this Overlay, consider and utilize recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and recommendations from the US Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing development orders on property containing listed species. It is recognized that these agency recommendations, on a case-by-case basis, may change the requirements contained within these wildlife protection policies and any such change shall be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan. Response: Acknowledged. Page 7662 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 12 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Policy 5.6: For those lands that are not voluntarily included in the Rural Lands Stewardship program, Collier County shall direct non-agricultural land uses away from high functioning wetlands by limiting direct impacts within wetlands. A direct impact is hereby defined as the dredging or filling of a wetland or adversely changing the hydroperiod of a wetland. This Policy shall be implemented as follows: 1. There are two (2) major wetlands systems within the RLSA, Camp Keais Strand and the Okaloacoochee Slough. These two systems have been mapped and are designated as FSA’s. Policy 5.1 prohibits certain uses within the FSA’s, thus preserving and protecting the wetlands functions within those wetland systems. Response: The subject property does not contain or abut lands mapped as FSA. 2. The other significant wetlands within the RLSA are WRA’s as described in Policy 3.3. These areas are protected by existing SFWMD Environmental Resource Permits for each area. Response: Acknowledged. Best practices will be applied to minimize adverse impact on adjacent WRAs. Best practices include appropriate setbacks and open space from these lands. WRA’s will not be impacted by the proposed earth mining operation. 3. FSAs, HSAs and WRAs, as provided in Policy 5.3, and the ACSC have stringent site clearing and alteration limitations, nonpermeable surface limitations, and requirements addressing surface water flows which protect wetland functions within the wetlands in those areas. Other wetlands within the RLSA are isolated or seasonal wetlands. These wetlands will be protected based upon the wetland functionality assessment described below, and the final permitting requirements of the South Florida Water Management District. a. The County shall apply the vegetation retention, open space and site preservation requirements specified within this Overlay to preserve an appropriate amount of native vegetation on site. Wetlands shall be preserved as part of this vegetation requirement according to the following criteria: i. The acreage requirements specified within this Overlay shall be met by preserving wetlands with the highest wetland functionality scores. Wetland functionality assessment scores shall be those described in paragraph (b) of this Policy. The vegetative preservation requirements imposed by Policies 5.3 and 5.5 shall first be met through preservation of wetlands having a functionality assessment score of 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method score of 0.7, or greater. The County shall apply specific criteria in the LDC to be used to determine those instances in which wetlands with a WRAP functionality assessment score of 0.65 or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method score of 0.7, or greater must be preserved in excess of the preservation required by Policy 5.3. Response: Acknowledged. The excavation area does not contain or impact native vegetation; therefore, no preserve is required. Page 7663 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 13 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 ii. Wetlands and contiguous upland buffers that are utilized by listed species or SSLC or serving as corridors for the movement of listed species or SSLC shall be preserved on site. Wetland flowway functions through the project shall be maintained. Response: Acknowledged. iii. Proposed development shall demonstrate that ground water table drawdowns or diversions will not adversely change the hydroperiod of preserved wetlands on or offsite. Detention and control elevations shall be set to protect surrounding wetlands and be consistent with surrounding land and project control elevations and water tables. In order to meet these requirements, projects shall be designed in accordance with Sections 4.2.2.4, 6.11 and 6.12 of SFWMD’s Basis of Review, January 2001, as amended. Upland vegetative communities may be utilized to meet the vegetative, open space and site preservation requirements of this Overlay when the wetland functional assessment score is less than 0.65. Response: Acknowledged. b. In order to assess the values and functions of wetlands at the time of project review, applicants shall rate functionality of wetlands using the South Florida Water Management District’s Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP), as described in Technical Publication Reg-001, dated August 1999, as amended, and or the Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method, identified as F.A.C. Chapter 62-345. The applicant shall submit to County staff agency- accepted WRAP scores, or Uniform Wetlands Mitigation Assessment scores. County staff shall review this functionality assessment as part of the County’s Environmental Data provisions and shall use the results to direct incompatible land uses away from the highest functioning wetlands according to the requirements found in paragraph 3 above. Response: Acknowledged. c. All direct impacts shall be mitigated for pursuant to the requirements of paragraph (f) of this Policy. Response: Acknowledged. d. Single family residences shall follow the requirements contained within Policy 6.2.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Response: Acknowledged. e. The County shall separate preserved wetlands from other land uses with appropriate buffering requirements. The County shall require a minimum 50-foot vegetated upland buffer abutting a natural water body, and for other wetlands a minimum 25-foot vegetated upland buffer abutting the wetland. A Page 7664 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 14 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 structural buffer may be used in conjunction with a vegetative buffer that would reduce the vegetative buffer width by 50%. A structural buffer shall be required abutting wetlands where direct impacts are allows. Wetland buffers shall conform to the following standards: i. The buffer shall be measured landward from the approved jurisdictional line. Response: Acknowledged. ii. The buffer zone shall consist of preserved native vegetation. Where native vegetation does not exist, native vegetation compatible with the existing soils and expected hydrologic conditions shall be planted. Response: Acknowledged. iii. The buffer shall be maintained free of Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. Response: Acknowledged. iv. The following land uses are considered to be compatible with wetland functions and are allowed within the buffer: (1) Passive recreational areas, boardwalks and recreational shelters; (2) Pervious nature trails; (3) Water management structures; (4) Mitigation areas; (5) Any other conservation and related open space activity or use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses. Response: Acknowledged. v. A structural buffer may consist of a stem-wall, berm, or vegetative hedge with suitable fencing. Response: Acknowledged. f. Mitigation shall be required for direct impacts to wetland in order to result in no net loss of wetland functions. Mitigation Requirements: i. “No net loss of wetland functions” shall mean that the wetland functional score of the proposed mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland functional score of the impacted wetlands. Priority shall be given to mitigation within FSA’s and HSA’s. Page 7665 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 15 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Response: Acknowledged. ii. Loss of storage or conveyance volume resulting from direct impacts to wetlands shall be compensated for by providing an equal amount of storage or conveyance capacity on site and within or abutting the impacted wetland. Response: Acknowledged. iii. Protection shall be provided for preserved or created wetland or upland vegetative communities offered as mitigation by placing a conservation easement over the land in perpetuity, providing for initial exotic plant removal (Class I invasive exotic plants defined by the Florida Exotic Plan Council) and continuing exotic plant maintenance, or by appropriate ownership transfer to a state or federal agency along with sufficient funding for perpetual management activities. Response: Acknowledged. iv. Exotics removal or maintenance may be considered acceptable mitigation. Response: Acknowledged. v. Prior to issuance of any final development order that authorizes site alteration, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with paragraphs (f) i, ii, and iii of this Policy and SFWMD standards. If agency permits have not provided mitigation consistent with this Policy, Collier County will require mitigation exceeding that of the jurisdictional agencies. Response: Acknowledged. g. Wetland preservation, buffer areas, and mitigation areas shall be identified or platted as separate tracts. In the case of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), these areas shall also be depicted on the PUD Master Plan. These areas shall be maintained free from trash and debris and from Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council. Land uses allowed in these areas shall be limited to those listed above (3.e.iv.) and shall not include any other activities that are detrimental to drainage, flood, control, water conservation, erosion control or fish and wildlife habitat conservation and preservation. Response: Acknowledged. Page 7666 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 16 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 4. All landowners shall be encouraged to consider participating in any programs that provide incentives, funding or other assistance in facilitating wetland habitat restoration on private lands, including, but not limited to, federal farm bill agricultural conservation programs, private or public grants, tax incentives, easements, and fee or less than fee sale to conservation programs. Response: Acknowledged. Policy 5.7 Any development not participating in the RLS Program shall be compatible with surrounding land uses. Within one year of the effective date of this Policy, LDC regulations shall be implemented for outdoor lighting to protect the nighttime environment, conserve energy and enhance safety and security. Response: Acknowledged. CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT CCME Policy 6.1.1 For the County’s Urban Designated Area, Estates Designated Area, Conservation Designated Area, and Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, Rural-Industrial District and Rural-Settlement Area District as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved through the application of the following minimum preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria, unless the development occurs within the Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC) where the ACSC standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element shall apply. Notwithstanding the ACSC requirements, this Policy shall apply to all non-agricultural development except for single-family dwelling units situated on individual parcels that are not located within a watershed management conservation area identified in a Watershed Management Plan developed pursuant to Policies supporting Objective 2.1 of this Element. For properties not previously within the Coastal High Hazard Area but now within the Coastal High Hazard Area due to adoption of a revised Coastal High Hazard Area boundary in 2013, the native vegetation preservation and retention standards of the Non-Coastal High Hazard Area shall continue to apply. (Reference the Coastal High Hazard Area Comparison Map in the Future Land Use Element.) Response: No native habitat exists on site, so per LDC guidance, no native habitat is proposed to be preserved. Therefore, the project is consistent with CCME Policy 6.1.1. CCME Objective 7.1 Direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their habitats. (The County relies on the listing process of State and Federal agencies to identify species that require special protection because of their endangered, threatened, or species of special concern status. Listed animal species are those species that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has designated as endangered, threatened, or species of Page 7667 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 September 12, 2024 17 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 special concern, in accordance with Rules 68A-27.003, 68A-27.004, and 68A-27.005, F.A.C. and those species designated by various federal agencies as Endangered and Threatened species published in 50 CFR 17.) Response: Potential impact to state listed species will be addressed through consultation with FWC, and potential impact to federal listed species will be addressed through Technical Assistance with FWS, the proposed project is consistent with CCME Policy 7.1. Page 7668 of 9661 ¯010.5MilesSILVER STRAND MINEEAST OF IMMOKALEE RD, WEST OF SR 29LOCATION MAPC:\Users\jharrelson\Desktop\NAPLES BOAT YARD\2024-08-26-Location-Map.mxdDate Saved: 9/12/2024 PROJECT:NOTES:EXHIBIT DESC:2600 Golden Gate ParkwayNaples, FL 34105CLIENT:LOCATION:SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2024)LegendSilver Strand Parternship Property BoundaryExcavation Area: +/-204-acresUrban BoundaryWRAIngress/EgressSILVER STRAND III PARTNERSHIPHaul RoadHaul RoadHaul RoadPontential FutureSR 29 ConnectionOne-StoryScalehousePotential FutureOne-Story ScalehouseIngress/EgressPotential Future Haul RoadSR29SR29Immokalee RDURBAN DESIGNATION LINEURBAN DESIGNATION LINECamp Keais DEquipment & StagingStockade RDPage 7669 of 9661 ZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: RESIDENTIALZONING: GARDEN WALK VILLAGE PUDLAND USE: UNDEVELOPEDZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: COLLIER COUNTY SOLID &HAZARDOUS WASTEZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALZONING: A-MHO RLSAOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALCAMP KEAIS RDIMMOKALEE RDIMMOKALEE RDS.R. 29ZONING: A-MHO RLSAOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALINTERNAL ACCESS DRIVE(TYP)PIT OFFICES AND SCALEHOUSE(SEE SHEET 03)POTENTIAL FUTURE PITOFFICES AND SCALEHOUSE(SEE SHEET 03)ZONING: A-MHOLAND USE:RESIDENTIALZONING: A-MHOLAND USE:UNDEVELOPEDWRAWRAWRAINGRESS/EGRESS TOCAMP KEAIS RDPOTENTIAL FUTURECONNECTION TO SR29200± LF 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFERSUBJECT TOCONDITION #21QUARRY LAKEAREA = 204.1 (AC)OUTDOOR STORAGE/ EQUIPMENT/MININGOPERATIONSTIRE WASHCODE - REQUIRED BUFFER,SUBJECT TO CONDITION #20CODE - REQUIRED BUFFER,SUBJECT TO CONDITION #20805± LF 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFER(SEE NOTE #3)1,228± LF 10' TYPE 'A'LANDSCAPE BUFFER(SEE NOTE #3)••••••CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 8/11/2025 1:36:53 PM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:38:58 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-1.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINECONCEPTUAL SITEPLANSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251' = 3000'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-1.dwgX17-101 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1' = 3000'LEGEND:PROPERTY BOUNDARYW.R.A.LAKE (QUARRYEXCAVATION AREA)EXTERNAL ACCESSPROJECT BOUNDARYPage 7670 of 9661 • • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:49:17 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:02 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-2.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINENOTESSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 2025N/AP-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-2.dwgX17-202 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SITE DATA:TOTAL SITE AREA: 3,937.88 ACRESCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: AGRICULTURALFUTURE LAND USE: AGRICULTURAL RURAL MIXED-USE DISTRICT RLSAO (SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY) URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT-LOW RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT (NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY)GENERAL NOTES:1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND SUBJECT TOMODIFICATIONS.2. RETAINED NATIVE VEGETATION MAY BE USED TO SATISFYLANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTIC VEGETATIONREMOVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 4.06.02 AND4.06.05.E.1. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITH NATIVE PLANTMATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC 3.05.07.3. EXISTING VEGETATION TO BE RETAINED SATISFIES BUFFERREQUIREMENTS. SHOULD THE EXISTING VEGETATION BEREMOVED OR DESTROYED, SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WILL BEPROVIDED AS NECESSARY TO MEET BUFFER REQUIREMENTS.PRESERVE:PER LDC SECTION 3.05.07.B.2, THE SITE DOES NOT REQUIRE A PRESERVE AREA.OPEN SPACE:*MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED = 30%Page 7671 of 9661 SCALE (BY OTHERS)FUTURE SCALEHOUSE (650± SF)PROPOSED PITOFFICES ANDSCALE HOUSEDUMP TRUCK STACKINGAPPROX. 5,000± LFTO CAMP KEAIS RD• • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:49:08 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:08 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-3.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINEPIT OFFICE ANDSCALE HOUSESILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 100'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-3.dwgX17-303 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE:1" = 100'ZONINGCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: VACANT / AGRICULTURALBUILDING SETBACKSMIN. FRONT AND REAR YARDS: 50'MIN. SIDE YARD: 30'EXCAVATION: 50'PARKING CALCULATIONSL.D.C. 4.05.04OFFICE/SCALEHOUSE: 1 PER 300 SFHANDICAPPED: 1 SPACE PER 25REGULAR SPACES1 PER 300 SF @ 650 SF = 3 REQUIRED PARKING SPACESPROVIDED: 4 PARKING SPACES(INCLUDES 1 ADA SPACES)PROJECTBOUNDARY(TYP)Page 7672 of 9661 PROJECT BOUNDARY(TYP)PROPOSED LAKE(QUARRY EXCAVATION AREA)(AREA = 204.1 AC.)OUTDOOR STORAGE / EQUIPMENT /MINING OPERATIONSEXCAVATIONLIMITS (TYP)INTERNALACCESS DRIVEWRAWRA••••••CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:55:53 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:13 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-4.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINEEXCAVATION AREASILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 600'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-4.dwgX17-404 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1" = 600'ZONINGCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: VACANT / AGRICULTURALBUILDING SETBACKSMIN. SIDE, REAR AND ABUTTING PROPERTY LINES: 50'MIN. FROM ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL: 100'MIN. FROM PRIVATE ACCESS ESMT: 50'MIN. SIDE YARD: 30'EXCAVATION: 50'Page 7673 of 9661 TIRE WASH(BY OTHERS)PROPOSED 30'±PAVEMENTPROJECT BOUNDARY(TYP)CAMP KEAIS ROADPROPERTY BOUNDARY(TYP)300'±NOTE:FINAL COMPONENTS ANDCONFIGURATION OF TIRE WASH TO BEDETERMINED BY THE MINE OPERATOR.EXISTING COUNTY(PUBLIC) R.O.W.383'±• • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:51:38 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:19 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-5.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINETIRE WASHSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 100'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-5.dwgX17-505 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1" = 100'Page 7674 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 August 18, 2025 1 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 SILVER STRAND MINE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Silver Strand Mine Conditional Use shall be limited to what is depicted on the Conceptual Site Plan, dated August 2025, and prepared by Peninsula Engineering. 2. Minor changes in the location and siting of buildings, structures, and improvements authorized by this conditional use may be approved administratively at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat. 3. Prior to any vehicular use of the site, the owner shall post two (2) signs along the entry drive, clearly visible to vehicles entering and leaving the site, providing information regarding potential panther presence and notifying drivers of the need to use caution. Sign wording, placement and size will be subject to review and approval by Collier County Environmental Staff. The owner shall submit, and receive approval of, the proposed signage plan in conjunction with the first to occur of either the Site Development Plan process or other local development order as may be required which may allow vehicular use of the site. 4. Evidence of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) accepted mitigation for impacts to panthers, woodstorks, Florida black bear and other listed species will be required prior to the pre-construction meeting with Staff. 5. A littoral shelf planting area to commence during the reclamation phase of the project shall be shown on the excavation permit for this conditional use and shall meet the current standards of the Land Development Code at the time of submittal of the Commercial Excavation Permit. 6. The owner/petitioner shall obtain a South Florida Water Management District Agricultural Surface Water Management Permit or permit modification for this site, if applicable. 7. The maximum total daily trip generation for the CU shall not exceed 162 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or excavation permit approval, whichever occurs first. The maximum number of one-way trucks per day (maximum one-way loads per day) is 430. 8. Pursuant to Section 125.022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the County for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals for fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. Page 7675 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 August 18, 2025 2 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 9. Mining operations are permitted between 6:30 am and 5:00 pm Monday through Friday, and between 7:00 am and 3:00 pm on Saturday. 10. The Owner/Petitioner shall be responsible for all maintenance of the internal haul roadways and the connection to Camp Keais Road for the duration of the mining operation. The area surrounding and between the tire-wash system and the Camp Keais Road access shall be paved consistent with the weigh stations shown on the master plan and/or be a minimum of 22 feet in width and a depth of 1.5 inches of asphalt or asphalt millings with minimum LDC required base. A Dust Control Plan, for Silver Strand Mine shall be submitted with the Excavation Permit. The tire wash system shall be installed to wash dust from the wheels and underbody of all haul trucks exiting the facility. This system will direct water under pressure at the wheels and the underside of each vehicle as it passes through. There is no paving required on-site past the tire-wash system, except that required handicapped spaces shall be ADA- compliant. This condition shall also apply to any potential future access on SR 29. 11. Haul trucks will not be permitted to park or stage along public rights-of-way. Applicant may allow haul trucks to stage or park on the project’s internal roadway prior to 6:30 a.m. 12. Upon completion of excavation activities, all buildings, equipment, and berms shall be removed within six months, or used in the reclamation process or for agricultural purposes. 13. The BZA may revoke the approval of this Conditional Use if the Collier County Code Enforcement Board finds that the mine operator has violated or has not fully complied with all conditions of approval including completion of improvements indicated on the Conditional Use Master Plan and the mine operator has failed to remedy the violation or come into compliance within the time period established by the Code Enforcement Board. 14. The mining operations shall be conducted in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida, Collier County Government, and the Federal Government. 15. The lifespan of the mine is 20 years from the date of Conditional Use approval by the Board of County Commissioners. 16. Adequate utility, access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities shall continue to be maintained. 17. Each year, the owner shall provide a report to the Collier County Transportation Management Services Department, which will include the condition of the roadways adjacent to the property entrance(s), accident reports, and average daily and peak hour vehicle trips entering and exiting the earth mine. Page 7676 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine CU-PL20220001634 August 18, 2025 3 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 18. An approved indigo snake plan is required to be implemented prior to the beginning of any construction, including site clearing. The name and contact information of a qualified biologist who will monitor work shall be supplied to Environmental Services Department staff at the pre-construction meeting or prior to excavation permit approval, whichever is first. 19. An updated listed species survey, less than 6 months old, is required for areas to be excavated prior to the pre-construction meeting with Staff. As required by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Technical Assistance, follow-up pedestrian surveys of each new mining block will be conducted between 60 and 180 days prior to the commencement of any mining-related activity through the life of the project. The applicant shall submit a copy of these surveys to the Development Review Division Director. 20. The Owner will install a LDC required buffer within 180 days along any property boundary where an SRA, PUD, rezone, or other residential development has been approved on an adjacent property, unless development on the adjacent property includes the construction of a perimeter berm that is a minimum of 7’ in height, as measured from Finished Floor Elevation of the adjacent site. 21. The Owner will install 200 LF of a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer adjacent to the abutting residential parcel along the eastern property boundary. This buffer will wrap the corner of the subject property line, providing 100 LF on each side. Refer to the conceptual site plan prepared by Peninsula Engineering. 22. The maximum allowable depth of the excavation shall be 58’. Page 7677 of 9661 Page 7678 of 9661 Page 7679 of 9661 Page 7680 of 9661 Page 7681 of 9661 Page 7682 of 9661 Page 7683 of 9661 Page 7684 of 9661 C5L14N0°17'33"W 2088.76C7C6L15L10C2L11C3L12C4L13N0°15'34"W 2601.35N0°07'26"W 3944.99N89°17'35"E1202.62L6L7L8L9C1N0°15'32"W 4936.51PARCEL 1(SEC. 15)PARCEL 2(SEC. 14)PARCEL 3(SEC. 13)PARCEL 4(SEC. 24)PARCEL 5(SEC. 23)PARCEL 6PARCEL 6(SEC.22)PARCEL 7(SEC. 27)27 2634 3522 2327 2623 2426 2524 1925 3014 1323 2415 1422 239 1016 1510 1115 1412 713 182128 27SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 3SHEET 3SHEET 5SHEET 4SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 5SHEET 2SHEET 3P.O.C.NORTHWEST CORNER OFSECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.P.O.B.(PARCEL A)L2W. LINESEC. 15(B.O.B.) L1POINT (A)11 1214 1328 2733 3413 1824 1916 1521 22STOCKADE RD.RANCH ONE RD.CAMP KEAIS RD.IMMOKALEERD.STATE RD. 29 S.P.O.B.(PARCEL B)L5L4L3O.R.962,PG.1289(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)O.R.941PG.521O.R.2493PG.2779O.R.941PG.521O.R.4322PG.1377O.R.1579PG.1732O.R.4322PG.1377O.R.1579PG.1732L16(D) 100'O.R.4322PG.1347S0°08'45"E 1319.97N89°32'49"E 2030.52N0°06'39"W 2656.84N89°04'02"E 2035.44N89°38'49"E 2587.12N89°38'42"E 2331.62S44°58'17"E 2419.10S44°59'05"E 2800.04S44°59'05"E 2023.22S0°31'11"E 2301.77S0°38'38"E 2631.42S89°44'23"W 2614.52S89°44'08"W 2613.84S89°34'23"W 2672.75S89°38'46"W 2671.33S0°04'00"W 5379.12S89°06'34"W 2674.38S89°09'03"W 2587.98OVERALL 4823.26LINE TABLELINE #L1L2L3L4L5L6L7L8LENGTH1314.26150.003945.172681.53150.00730.20680.17729.89BEARINGS0°07'26"EN89°52'34"ES0°07'26"ES0°15'34"EN89°44'26"ES44°59'18"WS44°58'03"EN45°00'39"ECURVE TABLECURVE #C1C2C3C4C5C6C7LENGTH403.88533.72584.69848.23722.57529.01151.51RADIUS3787.51760.00840.00540.00460.00760.00840.00DELTA6°06'35"40°14'11"39°52'53"89°59'58"90°00'00"39°52'53"10°20'04"CHORD BEARINGN2°47'45"EN19°49'24"EN20°00'03"EN44°56'23"WS44°56'24"ES20°00'03"WS34°46'27"WCHORD LENGTH403.69522.82572.96763.68650.54518.39151.31LINE TABLELINE #L9L10L11L12L13L14L15L16LENGTH91.7460.69543.45600.00164.71164.27600.00543.45BEARINGN5°51'03"EN0°17'42"WN39°56'29"EN0°03'36"EN89°56'24"WS89°56'24"ES0°03'36"WS39°56'29"WOFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:08:52 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 1000'N.T.S.P-023/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg1PENINSULA ENGINEERING6GENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.LEGEND:A.E. = ACCESS EASEMENTBM = BENCHMARKC/L = CENTERLINEC.C.R. = LABINS CERTIFIED CORNER RECORD FILE NUMBERC.U.E. = COUNTY UTILITY EASEMENTD.E. = DRAINAGE EASEMENTEL. & ELEV. = ELEVATIONF.P.L. = FLORIDA POWER & LIGHTO.R. = OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOKP.B. = PLAT BOOKPG. = PAGEP.U.E. = PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTR.O.W. = RIGHT-OF-WAYP = PLAT, M = MEASURED, C = CALCULATED, D = DEED(S.I.P.)SET 5/8" IRON PIN & CAP STAMPED LB-8479(F.I.P.) FOUND IRON PIN & CAP STAMPED AS SHOWN(F.C.M.) FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT(F.N.D.) FOUND PK NAIL & DISK STAMPED(PK) = PARKER KYLON NAILMAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24,AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEY OF PART OF SECTIONS 13,14, 15, 22, 23, 24, AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.PREPARED FOR: PENINSULA ENGINEERINGPENINSULA ENGINEERING2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAYNAPLES, FLORIDA 34105PHONE: 239.403.6700 FAX: 239.261.1797EMAIL: INFO@PEN-ENG.COMWEBSITE: WWW.PEN-ENG.COM_____________________________________________LANCE T MILLERPROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER, #LS5627NOVEMBER 27TH, 2023DATECERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION #LB- 8479NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND THEORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OR DIGITAL SEAL OF AFLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER.NO OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY MAY RELY UPON THISEXHIBIT.THIS EXHIBIT IS ONLY FOR THE LANDS AS DESCRIBED.IT IS NOT A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE, ZONING,EASEMENTS OR FREEDOM OF ENCUMBRANCES.SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPLEGAL DESCRIPTIONPARCEL 1ALL OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS THOSE LANDSDESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.941, PG.521, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 2ALL OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY, COLLIERCOUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 3ALL OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LYING SOUTH AND WEST OF ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY AND S.R.29RIGHT-OF-WAY, , LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.17, PG.453, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 4ALL OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY, COLLIERCOUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 5ALL OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 6ALL OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD ASDESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 AND O.R.4322, PG.1377, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSELANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1354, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 7ALL OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 ANDLESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1377, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAALL SAID LANDS BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:PARCEL (A)COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 1,314.26 TO A POINT HEREINAFTER TO BE KNOWN AS POINT (A);THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°52'34" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THENORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15 AND BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING;THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 89°17'35" EAST 1,202.62 FEET TO SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THENORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15;THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 941, PAGE 521, OF THE PUBLICRECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 00°08'45" EAST 1,319.97 FEET;2. NORTH 89°32'49" EAST 2,030.52 FEET;3. NORTH 00°06'39" WEST 2,656.84 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 15;THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE NORTH 89°04'02" EAST 2,035.44 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH,RANGE 29 EAST;THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'49" EAST 2,587.12 FEET TO THE NORTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 14;THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'42" EAST 2,331.62 FEET TO A POINT ON THESOUTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 29 SOUTH;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 44°58'17" EAST 2,419.10 FEET TO THE NORTH CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND ASDESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 962, PAGE 1289, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 44°59'18" WEST 730.20 FEET;2. SOUTH 44°58'03" EAST 680.17 FEET;3. NORTH 45°00'39" EAST 729.89 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 44°59'05" EAST 4823.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE SOUTH 00°31'11" EAST 2,301.77 FEET TO THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 00°38'38" EAST 2,631.42 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTCORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'23" WEST 2,614.52 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'08" WEST 2,613.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTCORNER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°34'23" WEST 2,672.75 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°38'46" WEST 2,671.33 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTCORNER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 00°04'00" WEST 5,379.12 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°06'34" WEST 2,674.38 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°09'03" WEST 2,587.98 FEET TO A POINT ON THEEAST LINE OF AN 80-FOOT-WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN AS CAMP KEAIS ROAD, AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1579, PAGE17323, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE FOLLOWING TEN (10) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. NORTH 05°51'03" EAST 91.74 FEET;2. 403.88 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,787.51 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 06°06'35" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 02°47'45" EAST 403.69 FEET;3. NORTH 00°15'32" WEST 4,936.51 FEET;4. NORTH 00°17'42" WEST 60.69 FEET;5. 533.72 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 40°14'11" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 19°49'24" EAST 522.82 FEET;6. NORTH 39°56'29" EAST 543.45 FEET;7. 584.69 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 20°00'03" EAST 572.96 FEET;8. NORTH 00°03'36" EAST 600.00 FEET;9. 848.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 540.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 89°59'58" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 44°56'23" WEST 763.68 FEET; 10. ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 89°56'24" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 164.71 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF A 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4322, PAGE 1347, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. NORTH 00°15'34" WEST 2,601.35 FEET;2. NORTH 00°07'26" WEST 3,944.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.CONTAINING: 3,914.91 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.ALONG WITHPARCEL (B)COMMENCING AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT (A);THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 3,945.17 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNEROF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22 SOUTH 00°15'34" EAST 2,681.53 FEET;THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°44'26" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE AFOREMENTIONED CAMP KEAIS ROAD AND BEINGTHE POINT OF BEGINNING;THENCE ALONG THE WEST BOUNDARY OF CAMP KEAIS ROAD FOR THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 89°56'24" EAST 164.27 FEET;2. 722.57 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 460.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 90°00'00" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 44°56'24" EAST 650.54 FEET;3. SOUTH 00°03'36" WEST 600.00 FEET;4. 529.01 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 20°00'03" WEST 518.39 FEET;5. SOUTH 39°56'29" WEST 543.45 FEET;6. 151.51 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 10°20'04" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 34°46'27" WEST 151.31 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTLINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND;THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 00°17'33" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,088.76 FEET TO THEPOINT OF BEGINNING.CONTAINING: 22.97 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.NET AREA: 3937.88 ACRES MORE OR LESSSCALE:1" = 1000'0SCALE IN FEET20001000SURVEYORS NOTES:xA SURVEY OF THE DESCRIBED LANDS WASCONDUCTED BY AMS ENGINEERING &ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. ON OCTOBER 1ST, 2003,INDICATING FOUND MONUMENTATION ALONGSAID BOUNDARY. UPON OUR RECOVERY OF SAIDBOUNDARY THERE ARE NUMEROUSDISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE MEASUREDDISTANCES NOTED ON THE AMS SURVEY ANDTHE EXISTING FOUND MONUMENTATION. THESEDISCREPANCIES INCLUDE RECOVERED ORIGINALCOLLIER MONUMENTS AND MONUMENTSRECORDED AS CERTIFIED CORNER WITH LABINS.xAN (AMS) MEASURED DISTANCE IS NOTED ON ALLLEGS OF THE BOUNDARY THAT HAVE ADISCREPANCY EXCEEDING 0.20' FROM THEEXISTING RECOVERED BOUNDARY CORNERS.(SEE SHEETS 2, 3, 4, & 5 FOR THESE NOTES)Page 7685 of 9661 N0°07'26"W 3944.99N89°17'35"E1202.62(M) N0°06'39"W 2656.84(D) S4°09'26"E 2651.27N89°04'02"E 2035.44 N. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 15(M) N89°38'49"E 2587.12 N. LINE OF THE N.W. 1/4 SEC. 14(AMS) 2586.52 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 3COLLIER COUNTYO.R.941, PG.521(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)BCP LLLPN.W. 1/4 OF THEN.W. 1/4 OF SEC. 15,O.R.2493, PG.2779(NOT PART OF THISSURVEY)COLLIER COUNTYO.R.941, PG.521(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)SEMINOLE TRIBEO.R.1479, PG.976BCP LLLPO.R.2493, PG.2779IMMOKALEE ROAD (100' R.O.W.)S89°52'34"W 150.00N0°07'26"W 1314.26FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT ATEAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OFIMMOKALEE ROAD 0.03' WEST.SETFOUNDFOUNDFOUNDFOUNDIRON PINFOUNDE. LINE SEC.15, T.47S., R.29E.W. LINE SEC.14, T.47S., R.29E.UNPLATTED(SEC. 15)UNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 14)POINT AP.O.C.NORTHWEST CORNER OFSECTION 15 TOWNSHIP 47SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAFOUND IRON RODIN CENTERLINE OFIMMOKALEE ROAD30' ACCESS EASEMENT (O.R.941, PG.521) (STOCKADE ROAD)END OFEASEMENTC.C.R.116015CONCRETEMONUMENTS0°37'10"W 2704.00S0°11'26"E 2628.83N89°25'08"E 2661.33N89°59'43"E 2696.54C.C.R.115724L.B.7917S89°51'19"W 5237.38 S. LINE SEC. 15S89°48'30"W150.00C.C.R.083010NAIL(D) N85°00'00"E 676.83(M) N89°06'25"E 676.70S0°05'22"E 1320.65N. 1/4 CORNER SEC. 15FOUNDFOUNDIRON PIN X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 659.2'83.5'132.5'132.3'83.7'671.7'75.7'63.7'FARMBUILDINGS15 1422 23SETN0°07'26"W 5259.44(D) 100'O.R.4322PG.134710 1115 14(M) S89°18'51"W 751.14STAMPEDCECOVERHEAD UTILITY LINES(M) N89°32'49"E 2030.52(D) S85°26'40"W 2030.60(D) N4°09'04"W 1320.73(M) S0°08'45"E 1319.97OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:34 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-023/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg2PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPSCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET300600GENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 7686 of 9661 L6L7L8SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 3SHEET 3SHEET 2SHEET 3FOUNDSETFOUNDSETFOUNDPIN & CAPSTAMPED AMSFOUNDFOUNDPIN & CAPNO I.D.13 1824 1914 1323 2412 713 18C.C.R.116412C.C.R.115811PIN & CAPL.B.7917C.C.R.115722C.C.R.115723PIN & CAPL.B.7917C.C.R.116411UNPLATTED(N.E. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 13)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 13)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 13)(AMS) 2328.84(C&M) N89°38'42"E 2331.62 N. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 14(AMS) 2421.88(C&M) S44°58'17"E 2419.10S.W. R.O.W. LINES44°59'05"E 2800.04S.W. R.O.W. LINES44°59'05"E 2023.22S.W. R.O. W. LINEO.R.962, PG.1289(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)OVERHEADUTILITY LINESS89°38'10"W242.07S2°15'49"E254.08S2°15'49"E 2430.13S1°31'37"E329.67S89°01'23"W315.26S89°01'23"W 2253.76N89°01'23"E 2569.02N1°36'55"W 2360.58S1°36'55"E298.69S89°33'32"W287.00N89°33'32"E 2312.62S89°59'43"W 2696.54N0°57'05"W 2655.96N89°25'14"E 2634.91N0°57'18"W 2693.16S2°15'36"E 2684.10C.C.R.115721FOUNDOVERHEAD UTILITY LINESSTATE RD. 29 S.11 1214 13MONITORING WELLSLINE TABLELINE #L6L7L8LENGTH730.20680.17729.89BEARINGS44°59'18"WS44°58'03"EN45°00'39"EOFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:44 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg3PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 7687 of 9661 (AMS) 2306.51(M) S0°31'11"E 2301.77 E. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2617.95(M) S0°38'38"E 2631.42 E. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2647.52(M) S89°44'23"W 2614.52 S. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2643.02(M) S89°44'08"W 2613.84 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2673.51(M) S89°34'23"W 2672.75 S. LINE. OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 23SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 5SHEET 4S89°22'16"W80.09S89°03'11"W79.9424 1925 3023 2426 25C.C.R. 116415WITNESS PIN L.B.7917WITNESS PIN L.B.7917L.B.7917C.C.R. 116416N89°26'24"E 2591.61N0°08'59"W 2612.76S89°19'18"W 2591.67N0°08'37"W 2617.81S0°20'51"W 2599.23S0°21'10"W 2599.67L.B.7917COLLIER MONUMENTCOLLIER MONUMENTUNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(N.E. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(SEC. 25)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)UNPLATTED(SEC. 26)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)UNPLATTED(SEC. 23)S.R. 29 S.OVERHEADUTILITY LINESL.B.7917OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:54 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg4PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 7688 of 9661 C5L14N0°17'33"W 2088.76C7C6L15L10C2L11C3L12C4L13N0°15'34"W 2601.35(AMS) 2670.60(M) S89°38'46"W 2671.33 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 23SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 5SHEET 4SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 5(D) 100.0'O.R.4322PG.1347(D) 100.0'IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R.846)22 2327 26CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE)O.R.4322, PG.1377WIDTH VARIES150' WIDTHO.R.4322, PG.1377CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE) (O.R.1579, PG.1732)O.R.4322,PG.1354LANDSINCLUDED INSURVEYUNPLATTED(SEC. 23)UNPLATTED(SEC. 22)UNPLATTED(SEC. 26)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)S89°41'38"W 5261.34S89°41'38"W 80.00S89°41'38"W 39.68W. LINE SEC. 22N0°15'34"W 5249.84N89°56'38"W 100.19N89°55'57"W 100.18N0°14'18"E 2635.38N0°37'25"W 2599.57N0°18'18"W 60.85CURVE TABLECURVE #C2C3C4C5C6C7LENGTH533.72584.69848.23722.57529.01151.51RADIUS760.00840.00540.00460.00760.00840.00DELTA40°14'11"39°52'53"89°59'58"90°00'00"39°52'53"10°20'04"CHORD BEARINGN19°49'24"EN20°00'03"EN44°56'23"WS44°56'24"ES20°00'03"WS34°46'27"WCHORD LENGTH522.82572.96763.68650.54518.39151.31LINE TABLELINE #L10L11L12L13L14L15L16LENGTH60.69543.45600.00164.71164.27600.00543.45BEARINGN0°17'42"WN39°56'29"EN0°03'36"EN89°56'24"WS89°56'24"ES0°03'36"WS39°56'29"WL16SETFOUND IRON ROD0.45' S.E.FOUND IRON ROD0.65' N.E.L.B.69030.65' N.E.C.C.R.83011S.W. COR. SEC.22,T.47S., R.29E.SETL.B.2022L.B.2022L.B.2022IRON PINL.B.2022SETL.B.2022IRON PINL.B.2022COLLIER MONUMENTIRON PINTT X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X CAMP KEAIS RD.IMMOKALEE RD.OVERHEADUTILITYLINESUNPAVED RD.POST ANDWIRE FENCEASPHALTROAD ANDAPRONASPHALTROAD ANDAPRONO.R.4998PG.865O.R.4998PG.865GAS VALVEVAULTSWEST LINE SEC.2280' R.O.W.O.R.1579, PG.1732200'O.R.4322PG.1354OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:02:04 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg5PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.DETAIL SCALE: 1" = 200'SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 7689 of 9661 S0°04'00"W 5379.12 E. LINE SEC. 27S89°06'34"W 2674.38 S. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 27S89°09'03"W 2587.98 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 27L9C1N0°15'32"W 4936.51SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE) (O.R.1579, PG.1732)120' WIDEO.R.4322, PG.1377S0°15'41"E 5431.65 W. LINE SEC. 271" IRON PIPES.W. COR. SEC.27PIN & CAPSTAMPED AIMCONC.MONUMENTRANCH ONE RD.(60' WIDE) (O.R.1376, PG.51)2833 34L.B.2022SETL.B.2022UNPLATTED(SEC. 27)UNPLATTED(SEC. 34)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)S89°09'03"W88.1627 2634 35LINE TABLELINE #L9LENGTH91.74BEARINGN5°51'03"ECURVE TABLECURVE #C1LENGTH403.88RADIUS3787.51DELTA6°06'35"CHORD BEARINGN2°47'45"ECHORD LENGTH403.69OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:02:14 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg6PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 7690 of 9661 ”ƒˆˆ‹… ’ƒ…––ƒ–‡‡– ‹Ž˜‡”–”ƒ† ‘†‹–‹‘ƒŽ•‡ Collier County, Florida 03/04/2024 Prepared for: Prepared by: Peninsula Engineering 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34105 Phone: 239-403-6700 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee* – $500.00 Fee Collier County Transportation Review Fee* – Minor Study – $750.00 Fee Note – *to be collected at time of first submittal. Page 7691 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 2 –ƒ–‡‡–‘ˆ‡”–‹ˆ‹…ƒ–‹‘ I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, PTOE, PE FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 Page 7692 of 9661 PRINTED COPIES OF THIS DOCUMENT ARE NOT CONSIDERED SIGNED AND SEALED AND THE SIGNATURE MUST BE VERIFIED ON ANY ELECTRONIC COPIES. Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 3 Table of Contents Project Description .......................................................................................................................... 4 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................... 5 Trip Distribution and Assignment ................................................................................................... 6 Background Traffic ........................................................................................................................ 11 Existing and Future Roadway Network ......................................................................................... 12 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis ............................................................ 14 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis ...................................................................................................... 17 Improvement Analysis .................................................................................................................. 18 Mitigation of Impact ..................................................................................................................... 18 Appendices Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan .......................................................................................... 19 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) ................................................... 21 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ................................................................................... 28 Appendix D: Project Access Turning Movements ........................................................................ 30 Page 7693 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 4 Project Description The Silver Strand III Mine is located to the east of Immokalee Road and west of SR 29 and lies within Sections 14, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, in Collier County, Florida. Refer to Figure 1 – Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan. Figure 1 – Project Location Map The Silver Strand III is a commercial excavation operation. This Traffic Impact Statement is in support of the Conditional Use application for the operation. The land is currently citrus groves and zoned agriculture. The mine is expected to produce a maximum of 6,000 CY per average weekday. The mining operation will be operating from 6:30 am to 5:00 pm Monday through Friday and operating from 7 am to 3 pm on Saturday. The mine will have a minimum lifespan of 12 years and a maximum lifespan of 20 years. The development program is illustrated in the Table 1. Page 7694 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 5 Table 1 Development Program Land Use ITE Land Use Code Volume per Day Truck Volume Planning Horizon Commercial Excavation N/A* 6,000 cubic yards 14 cubic yards 2027 Note(s): *N/A = Not Available. The project has two proposed configuration options to connect to the area roadway network. Option 1 is a full movement connection to Camp Keais Rd. Option 2 has the same connection as option 1, but will also provide a full movement connection to SR 29. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on September 13, 2022, via email (ref. Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting)). Trip Generation The operations of this mine will perform in such a way that the maximum allowed volume of material exported off the site on an average weekday is 6,000 cubic yards (CY). The hauling trucks expected to remove the material from the property will be 14 CY. The average daily two-way trips are based on the number of trucks needed to remove the maximum amount of fill. The mining operation is expected to generate 860 daily two-way trips. Over an 11 hour workday, the project will generate 39 enter and 39 exit trips for both the AM and PM peak hours. No reductions for internal capture or pass-by trips have been considered in this TIS. Based on Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition, Exhibit 15-11, a factor of 1.9 will be applied to the trip generation to account for the passenger car equivalents of trucks. A 10% adjustment factor was applied to account for any visitor or vendor trips to the site. A summary of the project trip generation calculations for the proposed CU is illustrated in Table 2, below. Detailed calculations can be found in Appendix C – Trip Generation Calculations. Page 7695 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 6 Table 2 Proposed Project Trip Generation — Average Weekday Land Use Factor Daily Two-Way Volume AM Peak Hour* PM Peak Hour* Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Mine 860 39 39 78 39 39 78 Passenger Car Equivalents for Trucks (ET) 1.9 1,634 74 74 148 74 74 148 10% Adjustment Factor 1.10 1,797 81 81 162 81 81 162 Note(s): *Peak Hour Volume = Daily Traffic/ 11 hours. Directional distribution assumption is 50%/50% In agreement with the Collier County TIS guidelines, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net new total trips) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2022 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for the adjacent roadway network is PM peak hour and the peak direction for Immokalee Road is northbound. Trip Distribution and Assignment The traffic generated by the proposed project is assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and engineering judgement. Option 1 and option 2 will be analyzed separately through the report. Two different distributions are provided for each option. The site-generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3A for option 1 and Table 3B for option 2. Trip distribution is graphically depicted in Figure 2A and 2B – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour. Page 7696 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 7 Table 3A Proposed CU – Traffic Distribution for PM Peak Hour (Option 1) Roadway Link Collier County Link No. Roadway Link Location Distribution of Project Traffic PM Peak Hour Project Vol.* Enter Exit Immokalee Rd 46.0 SR 29 to Camp Keais Rd 20% SB – 16 NB – 16 Immokalee Rd 46.0 Camp Keais Rd to Oil Well Rd 40% EB – 32 WB – 32 Immokalee Rd 45.0 Wilson Blvd to Oil Well Rd 40% EB – 32 WB – 32 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Immokalee Rd to Project Access 60% SB – 49 NB – 49 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 40% NB – 32 SB – 32 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to Ave Maria Blvd 20% EB – 16 WB – 16 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to SR 29 20% WB – 16 EB – 16 Note(s): *Peak hour, peak direction traffic volumes are underlined and bold to be used in Roadway Link Level of Service calculations. Page 7697 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 8 Table 3B Proposed CU – Traffic Distribution for PM Peak Hour (Option 2) Roadway Link Collier County Link No. Roadway Link Location Distribution of Project Traffic PM Peak Hour Project Vol.* Enter Exit Immokalee Rd 46.0 SR 29 to Camp Keais Rd 10% SB – 8 NB – 8 Immokalee Rd 46.0 Camp Keais Rd to Oil Well Rd 30% EB – 25 WB – 25 Immokalee Rd 45.0 Wilson Blvd to Oil Well Rd 30% EB – 25 WB – 25 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Immokalee Rd to Project Access 40% SB – 33 NB – 33 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 20% NB – 16 SB – 16 SR 29 83.0 CR 29A South to Project Access 20% SB – 16 NB – 16 SR 29 83.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 20% NB – 16 SB – 16 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to Ave Maria Blvd 10% EB – 8 WB – 8 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to SR 29 10% WB – 8 EB – 8 Note(s): *Peak hour, peak direction traffic volumes are underlined and bold to be used in Roadway Link Level of Service calculations. Page 7698 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 9 Figure 2A – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour (Option 1) Page 7699 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 10 Figure 2B – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour (Option 2) Page 7700 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 11 Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates are estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance of a minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical growth rate from peak hour peak direction volume (estimated from 2008 through 2023), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2023 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) volume plus the trip bank volume. The higher of the two determinations is to be used in the Roadway Link Level of Service analysis. Table 4A and 4B, Background Traffic without Project illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the build-out year 2027. Table 4A Background Traffic without Project (2023 - 2027) (Option 1) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2023 AUIR Pk Hr, Pk Dir Background Traffic Volume (trips/hr) Projected Traffic Annual Growth Rate (%/yr)* Growth Factor 2027 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank 2027 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Trip Bank*** Immokalee Rd 46.0 SR 29 to Camp Keais Rd 580 4.0% 1.1699 679 249 829 Immokalee Rd 46.0 Camp Keais Rd to Oil Well Rd 580 4.0% 1.1699 679 249 829 Immokalee Rd 45.0 Wilson Blvd to Oil Well Rd 2,370 2.67% 1.1112 2,634 516 2,886 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Immokalee Rd to Project Access 330 2.0% 1.0824 357 211 541 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 330 2.0% 1.0824 357 211 541 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to Ave Maria Blvd 240 2.0% 1.0824 260 177 417 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to SR 29 240 2.0% 1.0824 260 177 417 Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate – based on peak hour, peak direction volume (from 2008 through 2023), or 2% minimum. **Growth Factor = (1 + Annual Growth Rate)4. 2027 Projected Volume = 2023 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2027 Projected Volume = 2023 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. The projected 2027 Peak Hour – Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which is underlined and bold as applicable. Page 7701 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 12 Table 4B Background Traffic without Project (2023 - 2027) (Option 2) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2023 AUIR Pk Hr, Pk Dir Background Traffic Volume (trips/hr) Projected Traffic Annual Growth Rate (%/yr)* Growth Factor 2027 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank 2027 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Trip Bank*** Immokalee Rd 46.0 SR 29 to Camp Keais Rd 580 4.0% 1.1699 679 249 829 Immokalee Rd 46.0 Camp Keais Rd to Oil Well Rd 580 4.0% 1.1699 679 249 829 Immokalee Rd 45.0 Wilson Blvd to Oil Well Rd 2,370 2.67% 1.1112 2,634 516 2,886 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Immokalee Rd to Project Access 330 2.0% 1.0824 357 211 541 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 330 2.0% 1.0824 357 211 541 SR 29 83.0 CR 29A South to Project Access 530 2.0% 1.0824 574 118 648 SR 29 83.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 530 2.0% 1.0824 574 118 648 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to Ave Maria Blvd 240 2.0% 1.0824 260 177 417 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to SR 29 240 2.0% 1.0824 260 177 417 Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate – based on peak hour, peak direction volume (from 2008 through 2023), or 2% minimum. **Growth Factor = (1 + Annual Growth Rate)4. 2027 Projected Volume = 2023 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2027 Projected Volume = 2023 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. The projected 2027 Peak Hour – Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which is underlined and bold as applicable. Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the Collier County 2023 AUIR, and the project roadway conditions are based on the FDOT Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five-year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement program (CIP) are committed improvements. No such improvements have been identified for the subject roadways. Page 7702 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 13 The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5A and 5B, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 5A Existing and Future Roadway Conditions (Option 1) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2023 Roadway Condition 2023 Min. Standard LOS 2023 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume 2027 Roadway Condition 2027 Min. Standard LOS 2027 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Immokalee Rd 46.0 SR 29 to Camp Keais Rd 2U D 900 2U D 900 Immokalee Rd 46.0 Camp Keais Rd to Oil Well Rd 2U D 900 2U D 900 Immokalee Rd 45.0 Wilson Blvd to Oil Well Rd 6D E 3,300 6D E 3,300 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Immokalee Rd to Project Access 2U D 1,000 2U D 1,000 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 2U D 1,000 2U D 1,000 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to Ave Maria Blvd 2U D 800 2U D 800 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to SR 29 2U D 800 2U D 800 Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D = 4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service. Page 7703 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 14 Table 5B Existing and Future Roadway Conditions (Option 2) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2023 Roadway Condition 2023 Min. Standard LOS 2023 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume 2027 Roadway Condition 2027 Min. Standard LOS 2027 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Immokalee Rd 46.0 SR 29 to Camp Keais Rd 2U D 900 2U D 900 Immokalee Rd 46.0 Camp Keais Rd to Oil Well Rd 2U D 900 2U D 900 Immokalee Rd 45.0 Wilson Blvd to Oil Well Rd 6D E 3,300 6D E 3,300 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Immokalee Rd to Project Access 2U D 1,000 2U D 1,000 Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 2U D 1,000 2U D 1,000 SR 29 83.0 CR 29A South to Project Access 2U D 900 2U D 900 SR 29 83.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 2U D 900 2U D 900 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to Ave Maria Blvd 2U D 800 2U D 800 Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to SR 29 2U D 800 2U D 800 Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D = 4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service. Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project, which are evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future horizon year 2027. In agreement with Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) Section 6.02.02 requirements, a project is considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link directly accessed by the project and for the link adjacent to the link directly accessed by the project; 3% for other subsequent links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. Based on these criteria, this project does not create any significant impacts to the area roadway network. The analyzed link is not projected to exceed the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2027 build-out conditions. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service illustrates the LOS traffic impacts of the project to the area roadway network. Page 7704 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 15 The analyzed roadway segments are not located within the Collier County’s Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). In addition, the proposed development is not situated within the County’s designated Transportation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA). The TCEA’s and TCMA’s designations are provided in Policy 5.4 and 5.6 of the Transportation Element – Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). Table 6A Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS) – With Project in the Year 2027 (Option 1) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2027 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Roadway Link, Peak Dir, Peak Hr (Project Vol Added)* 2027 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Volume w/Project** % Vol Capacity Impact by Project Min LOS exceeded without Project? Yes/No Min LOS exceeded with Project? Yes/No Immokalee Rd 46.0 SR 29 to Camp Keais Rd 900 16 845 1.8% No No Immokalee Rd 46.0 Camp Keais Rd to Oil Well Rd 900 32 861 3.6% No No Immokalee Rd 45.0 Wilson Blvd to Oil Well Rd 3,300 32 2,918 1.0% No No Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Immokalee Rd to Project Access 1,000 49 590 4.9% No No Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 1,000 32 573 3.2% No No Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to Ave Maria Blvd 800 16 433 2.0% No No Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to SR 29 800 16 433 2.0% No No Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report. **2027 Projected Volume = 2027 background (refer to Table 4) + Project Volume added. Page 7705 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 16 Table 6B Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS) – With Project in the Year 2027 (Option 2) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2027 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Roadway Link, Peak Dir, Peak Hr (Project Vol Added)* 2027 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Volume w/Project** % Vol Capacity Impact by Project Min LOS exceeded without Project? Yes/No Min LOS exceeded with Project? Yes/No Immokalee Rd 46.0 SR 29 to Camp Keais Rd 900 8 837 0.9% No No Immokalee Rd 46.0 Camp Keais Rd to Oil Well Rd 900 25 854 2.8% No No Immokalee Rd 45.0 Wilson Blvd to Oil Well Rd 3,300 25 2,911 0.8% No No Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Immokalee Rd to Project Access 1,000 33 574 3.3% No No Camp Keais Rd 61.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 1,000 16 557 1.6% No No SR 29 83.0 CR 29A South to Project Access 900 16 664 1.8% No No SR 29 83.0 Project Access to Oil Well Rd 900 16 664 1.8% No No Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to Ave Maria Blvd 800 8 425 1.0% No No Oil Well Rd 122.0 Camp Keais Rd to SR 29 800 8 425 1.0% No No Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report. **2027 Projected Volume = 2027 background (refer to Table 4) + Project Volume added. As illustrated in Collier County LDC Chapter 6.02.02 – M. 2, once traffic from a development has been shown to be less than significant on any segment using Collier County TIS significance criterion, the development’s impacts are not required to be analyzed further on any additional segments. Page 7706 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 17 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Camp Keais Road is a 2-lane, undivided roadway under Collier County jurisdiction with a posted speed limit of 55 mph. SR 29 is a 2-lane, undivided roadway under FDOT jurisdiction with a posted speed limit of 55 mph. The project access on Camp Keais Rd and SR 29 were evaluated for turn lane warrants based on the Collier County Construction Standards Handbook: (a) two-lane roadways – 40vph for right-turn lane/20vph for left-turn lane; (b) multi-lane divided roadways – right turn lanes shall always be provided; and (c) when new median openings are permitted, they shall always include left-turn lanes. Turn lane lengths required at build-out conditions are analyzed based on the number of turning vehicles in an average one-minute period for right-turning movements, and two-minute period for left-turning movements, within the peak hour traffic. The minimum queue length is 25 feet, and the queue/vehicle is 25 feet. Because the turning vehicles are primarily trucks, 30 feet will be used for the queue/vehicle. Option 1 provides a full movement access onto Camp Keias Rd. Option 2 provides a full movement access on Camp Keais Rd and SR 29. Project access turning movements as percentage and during the AM and PM peak hours can be found in Appendix D: Project Access Turning Movements. Option 1 – Project Access at Camp Keais Rd The project is expected to generate 49 vph inbound left-turning movements during the PM peak hour, which does meet the 20 vph threshold. According to the Florida Design Manual (FDM), Chapter 212, Exhibit 212-1, for a design speed of 55 mph – Rural Conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 350 ft (which includes taper). With a queue of 60 ft, the turn lane should be at least 410 ft to accommodate projected traffic. The project is expected to generate 32 vph inbound right-turning movements during the PM peak hour, which does not meet the 40 vph threshold. A right turn lane is not warranted. As an alternative concept, a roundabout offers feasible means of access for the project as well. The roundabout would replace the access on Camp Keais Rd. Option 2 – Project Access at Camp Keais Rd and SR 29 For Camp Keais Road, the project is expected to generate 33 vph inbound left-turning movements during the PM peak hour, which does meet the 20 vph threshold. According to the Florida Design Manual (FDM), Chapter 212, Exhibit 212-1, for a design speed of 55 mph – Rural Conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 350 ft (which includes taper). With a queue of 60 ft, the turn lane should be at least 410 ft to accommodate projected traffic. The project at Camp Keais Rd is expected to generate 16 vph inbound right-turning movements during the PM peak hour, which does not meet the 40 vph threshold. A right turn lane is not warranted. For SR 29, the project is expected to generate 16 vph inbound left-turning movements during the PM peak hour. According to FDOT Multimodal Access Management Guidebook 2023, Figure 78, for a three- leg intersection, a left turn lane is warranted. According to the Florida Design Manual (FDM), Chapter Page 7707 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 18 212, Exhibit 212-1, for a design speed of 55 mph – Rural Conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 350 ft (which includes taper). With a queue of 30 ft, the turn lane should be at least 380 ft to accommodate projected traffic. The project is expected to generate 16 vph inbound right-turning movements during the PM peak hour. According to FDOT Multimodal Access Management Guidebook 2023, facilities with a high volume of buses, buses trucks, or trailers exceeding 2 or 3 per hour should provide a dedicated right turn lane. Based on the project generating 16 vph right turn movements and majority of the project traffic being trucks, a right turn lane is recommended at this location. According to the Florida Design Manual (FDM), Chapter 212, Exhibit 212-1, for a design speed of 55 mph – Rural Conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 350 ft (which includes taper). With a queue of 30 ft, the turn lane should be at least 380 ft to accommodate projected traffic. As an alternative concept, a roundabout offers feasible means of access for the project as well. The roundabout would replace the access on Camp Keais Rd. Improvement Analysis Based on the results illustrated within this traffic analysis, the proposed project is not a significant and adverse traffic generator for the roadway network at this location. Based upon the results of the turn lane analysis, a left turn lane is warranted at the site access on Camp Keais Rd for both option 1 and option 2. A left and right turn lane is warranted at the access on SR 29 for option 2. Alternatively, a roundabout is suggested as a means of accessing the site from Camp Keais Rd. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project, as applicable. Page 7708 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 19 Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan Page 7709 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 20 Page 7710 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 21 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) Page 7711 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 22 Page 7712 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 23 Page 7713 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 24 Page 7714 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 25 Page 7715 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 26 Page 7716 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 27 Page 7717 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 28 Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations Page 7718 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 29 Page 7719 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 30 Appendix D: Project Access Turning Movements Page 7720 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 31 Option 1: Project Turning Movements Page 7721 of 9661 Silver Strand III – Conditional Use – TIS – March 2024 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 32 Option 2: Project Turning Movements Page 7722 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine Environmental Data PREPARED BY: PENINSULA ENGINEERING 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 April 2023 Revised December 2023 Revised September 2024 _ BRUCE LAYMAN, SPWS Page 7723 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 2 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports TABLE OF CONTENTS1.INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................32.PROJECT METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................................32.1.Listed Wildlife Survey....................................................................................................................32.2.ListedPlant Survey........................................................................................................................4 2.3.Habitat/WetlandMapping............................................................................................................4 3.SURVEY RESULTS...................................................................................................................................4 3.1.Listed Wildlife Species Observed/IdentifiedOn Site.....................................................................4 3.2.Listed Wildlife Species Not Observed On-Site But With Potential to Occur On Site....................4 3.3.Listed Plant Species Observed On Site..........................................................................................6 3.4.Habitat/Wetland Mapping –Native Preserve...............................................................................6 4.SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................................6 5.REFERENCES CITED................................................................................................................................7 TABLES Table 1 - Listed Species and VegetationSurvey Details..............................................................................10 Table 2 - Listed Plant and WildlifeSpecies Observed.................................................................................10 Table 3 - Non-listed Wildlife Species Observed..........................................................................................10 Table 4 - Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Faunal Species...........................11 Table 5 - Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Floral Species...........................11 Table 6 - Existing Vegetative Associations and Land Uses........................................................................11 APPENDICES Appendix A - Existing Vegetation Association & Land Use Descriptions FIGURES Figure 1 - Existing Conditions Figure 2 – Bear Incident Location Map Figure 3 – Panther Habitat and Telemetry Map Page 7724 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 3 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports 1.INTRODUCTIONPeninsula Engineering (PE) entered into an agreement to provide environmental services associated with a 378.92-acre parcel known as the Silver Strand Mine (the Mine). The project includes the proposed mine, a weigh station, water management, and two potential access roads – one to Camp Keais Road and one to SR 29. The Environmental Data author credentials include undergraduate and graduate degrees in the environmental sciences and full-time employment as an Environmental Consultant/Ecologist in Lee and Collier Counties since 1992. The fill pit is located in Sections 13 and 14; Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. It is recently fallow citrus grove being converted to row crop agriculture and long- fallow date palm plantation; and it is bordered on the north, south, and west by abandoned citrus grove that is in various stages of being converted to row-crop agriculture, and on the east by agricultural water retention area (WRA). The two entry roads traverse abandoned citrus grove and active row-crop agriculture. The protected species survey was conducted, and the results summarized herein, to support local, state, and federal environmental permitting. 2.PROJECTMETHODOLOGY Bruce Layman, PE Ecologist, conducted a listed species survey consistent with Collier County Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Objective 7.1 and its implementing policies and with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission standards on the subject property. The dates, times and weather conditions are summarized in Table 1. The following information describes the methodologies employed. 2.1.Listed WildlifeSurvey Prior to conducting the listed species surveys, color aerial imagery was reviewed to anticipate which habitats may be present. Various publications and databases were also reviewed to identify listed plant and wildlife species that are regionally present and that could occur and those habitat types. Based on the habitat types identified on site, and the noted data sources, a preliminary list of state and federal listed flora and fauna that could occur on the project site was conceptualized to help focus survey effort. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s (FWC)Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species (FWC, 2021) was used to determine the “listed” state and federal status designation of wildlife species. The field survey consisted of one ecologist performing parallel meandering transects with spacing based on habitat type and visibility limits. Due to the agricultural and historically-managed nature of the whole property, transects were conducted with aid of an all-terrain vehicle. Transects are illustrated on Figure 1 entitled Existing Conditions. The field observer was equipped with a compass, GPS, color aerial, binoculars, and a field notebook. While conducting the transects, the ecologist periodically stopped, looked for wildlife, signs of wildlife, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. Due to habitats present (or, conversely, absence of natural habitats) and likelihood of occurrence (not to the exclusion of other potential listed species), the ecologist specifically surveyed for the potential presence of trees containing cavities that could be used by the Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus; FBB) for roosting. The approximate location of observed listed wildlife species and their numbers were mapped on an aerial and recorded in a field notebook. The locations of fixed resources, such as gopher tortoise burrows or cavity trees were recorded using hand-held GPS and flagged with high- visibility survey ribbon. Non-listed wildlife species were recorded daily. Page 7725 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 4 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports 2.2.Listed PlantSurveyOver the course of conducting the survey for listed wildlife, the PE ecologist searched for plants listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture (FDA) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)and those species defined by Collier County as rare and less rare. The state and federal agencies have categorized the various plant species based upon their relative abundance in natural communities. Those categorizations include “Endangered”, “Threatened”, and “Commercially Exploited”. The protection afforded plants listed solely by FDA entails restrictions on harvesting or destroying plants found on private lands of another, or public lands, without permission and/or a permit from FDA. Unless the sale of plants is involved, there are no restrictions for landowners to impact such plants. These provisions are found in Section 581.185, FDA under State law. Rare and less rare species are protected in accordance with Collier County LDC Section 3.04.03. 2.3.Habitat/WetlandMapping The habitat and wetland survey included the preparation of a Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) map delineating the major vegetation communities and land uses present on the project site. A FLUCCS Map for the project site is provided as Figure 1 entitled Existing Conditions. The methods and class descriptions found in the FLUCCS manual (FDOT, 1999) were followed when delineating and assigning areas to an appropriate FLUCCS category (class) or “codes”. Preliminary wetland limits were mapped using the standard state and federal wetland delineation methodologies and direct field observations and aerial photo interpretation. Color aerial photos were used in the field to map the vegetative communities on the site. Wet season high water (WSHW) elevation was not estimated due to the lack of reliable water level indicators due to active agricultural water management practices. 3.SURVEYRESULTS 3.1.ListedWildlifeSpeciesObserved/Identified On Site Since the project falls within the federalAudubon’s crested caracara (Polyborus plancus audubonii) consultation area, and since caracaras are known to be regionally present in Eastern Collier County, the applicant conducted caracara nesting-season surveys in January of 2023 and 2024 - following FWS guidelines. The survey results will be coordinated with FWS to assure there is no net adverse impact on the species. The American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) is listed as Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance with the American crocodile. Alligators were observed within the agricultural ditches on site. The FWC will be consulted during state environmental permitting to minimize potential impacts to the species. No other state or federal listed wildlife species were observed on site during the listed species survey. The project site contains no FWS-designated listed species critical habitat. All non-listed wildlife species, either directly observed or audibly detected on site, are listed in Table 3. 3.2.Listed Wildlife Species Not Observed But With Potential to Occur OnSite The following is a discussion of listed wildlife species that were not observed during either survey, but which are considered to have potential to occur due to the presence of suitable habitat, confirmed sightings in the region, or the parcel’s being located within the consultation area for a given species. Species with greater than near zero potential to occur on site are summarized in Table 4. Page 7726 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 5 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports The site contains two wetlands and there are internal water management ditches associated with the orange grove and row-crop agriculture within which listed wading birds have the potential to opportunistically forage. Given the lack of natural shrubby or forested habitats within the project limits, on-site nesting by listed wading birds is unlikely. No listed wading bird rookeries are known to be located adjacent to the property.The Florida panther (Felis concolor coryi) is listed as Endangered by FWS and the site falls within the panther consultation area. The vast majority of the project is mapped by FWS as Secondary Panther habitat, and a small portion of the eastern edge of the project is Primary Panther Habitat (refer to Figure 3). No panther telemetry points fall within the project limits. Potential impacts to the species will be addressed through consultation with FWS. The Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus; FBB) is listed as Endangered by FWS and the site falls within the FWS consultation area for this species. There is relatively little known about the life- history needs of the species; however, it has been suggested in the literature that roosts may be a limiting resource for this bat. Additionally, given that the FBB is known to travel great distances to forage, there is potential for the species to commute or forage over the parcel. Since the project proposes to primarily convert fallow orange grove, row-crop, and tree nursery to open water, it is anticipated that the conversion will generate greater foraging opportunity for the bonneted bat. Also, during the listed species survey, the ecologist specifically searched for trees with cavities that could potentially be used as roosts by the FBB. The defunct on-site ornamental palm tree nursery contained both living and dead palms. None of the living palms were observed to contain cavities. Some dead palms were observed to contain cavities; however, it appeared that once the palms die, they quickly lose their fronds, deteriorate and become hollow, wither, and topple – providing little opportunity for cavities created by woodpecker species in the dead trunks to meaningfully persist and become potential roost sites for the bonneted bat. During the environmental permitting process, the FWS 2019 Consultation Key for the Florida Bonneted Bat will be followed to make an appropriate affect determination, and FWS will be consulted to minimize potential impacts on the species. The Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) is listed as Endangered by FWS. Indigo snakes inhabit pine forests, hardwood hammocks, scrub and other uplands. They also rely heavily on a variety of wetland habitats for feeding and temperature regulation needs. Though no indigo snakes were observed on site, it is often assumed by FWS that there may be potential for the species to be present. Adhering to the FWS standard Eastern Indigo Snake Protection Precautions may be proposed during environmental permitting as a means to minimize the potential adverse effect on the species. Though the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is not state or federally listed, it is protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. No eagle nest was observed on site. Per the Audubon EagleWatch Program website, https://cbop.audubon.org/conservation/about-eaglewatch- program, the nearest known eagle nest (nest CO021) is located approximately two miles northeast of the parcel. The site is located well beyond the protection zones of thatnest. Regional bear incident data from FWC (Figure 2) suggest that bears (Ursus americanus floridanus) may not frequent the region; however, bears are known to occur in the region based upon personal experience by the report author. Though the black bear is no longer listed as protected, the FWC may suggest conservation measures, during the state environmental permitting process, to minimize potential adverse effects on thespecies. Page 7727 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 6 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports 3.3.ListedPlantSpeciesObservedOn SiteNo species of listed plants (listed as Endangered per the FDA list; and identified as “less rare” by Collier County LDC) were observed on site during the field survey. Given the intensely managed nature of the property, none are anticipated to occur on site. No plant species listed by FWS were observed during the field survey. The listed plant species observed, and their state and federal listing status, are provided in Table 2.3.4.Habitat/Wetland Mapping – NativePreserve The project site is composed entirely of orange grove (some of it recently converted to row-crop agriculture and some of it converted to improved pasture) and palm tree nursery. Both on-site wetlands, described below and illustrated in the attached Existing Conditions figure, contain greater than 75% exotic vegetation. Therefore, there are no native vegetation communities located on site and no indigenous preserve is required or proposed. The FLUCCSs code along with a brief descriptions and acreages are provided in Table 6, and a detailed description of the FLUCCS code is provided in AppendixA. Based upon current field conditions, and application of state/federal wetland delineation methodology, it is anticipated that there are two wetlands located on site. Both are anticipated to be jurisdictional to the state and one of them is anticipated to be federally jurisdictional. This has not been verified by either the South Florida Water Management District or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Verification will take place during the respective environmental permit reviews. 4.SUMMARY Results of the survey reflect the presence of Audubon’s Crested caracaras and American alligators; and the project site contains potential foraging habitat for the bonneted bat, and both primary and secondary panther habitat. Potential impacts to the Audubon’s crested caracara, Florida bonneted bat, and Florida panther will be addressed through consultation with FWS to minimize potential adverse effects on these species. Potential impactsto the alligator,or state-listed wading birds, will be addressed with FWC during state environmental permitting. If, during the environmental permitting process, it is determined that there is potential for the Eastern indigo snake to occur on site, the FWS standard Eastern Indigo Snake Protection Precautions may be considered. Similarly, though not listed by either FWC or FWS, measures to protect the black bear may be considered during local and state environmental permitting. Since potential impact to state listed species will be addressed through consultation with FWC, and potential impact to federal listed species will be addressed through consultation with FWS, the proposed project is consistent with CCME Policy 7.1. No native habitat exists on site, so per LDC guidance, no native habitat is proposed to be preserved. Therefore, the project is consistent with CCME Policy 6.1.1. Page 7728 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 7 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports 5.REFERENCESCITEDFlorida Department of Transportation. 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. Procedure No. 550-010-001-a. Third Edition. Tallahassee, Florida.Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2021. Florida’s Endangered and ThreatenedSpecies, Official List. Tallahassee, Florida. Page 7729 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 9 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports TABLES Page 7730 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 10 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Table 1: Listed Species and Vegetation Survey DetailsEcologistDateTime of Day Weather Field HoursBruce Layman 03/20/23 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 a.m. 55°, mostly cloudy, wind NW at 5 mph 8.0Bruce Layman 08/21/23 1:00 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. 86°, mostly cloudy, wind E at 5-10 mph 2.5Bruce Layman 10/20/23 9:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. 72°, clear, calm 2.0 Bruce Layman 8/9/2024 10:00 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. 89°, mostly cloudy, wind SW at 4mph 2.5 Total Hours 15.0 Table 2: Listed Plant and Wildlife Species Observed Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Where Observed By FLUCCS FWC Status FWS Status FDA Status PLANTS None WILDLIFE Audubon’s Crested caracara Polyborus plancus audubonii 221, 241 T T N/A American alligator Alligator mississippiensis 221 T(S/A)T(S/A)N/A FDA = Florida Department of Agriculture andConsumerServices FWC = Florida Fish and Wildlife ConservationCommission FWS = United States Fish &WildlifeService E = Endangered T(S/A) = Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance with the American crocodile. NL = Not Listed N/A = Not Applicable Table 3: Non-listed Wildlife Species Observed Common Name Scientific Name BIRDS Ground dove Columbina passerine Mourning dove Zenaida macroura American Kestrel **Falco sparverius Swallow tailed kite Elanoides forticatus Marsh hawk Circus cyaneus Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus Black vulture Coragyps atratus Turkey vulture Cathertes aura Limpkin Aramus guarauna Turvey Meleagris gallopavo Great blue heron Ardea herodias Great egret Ardea alba Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus White ibis Eudocimus albus Cattle egret Bubulcus ibis AMPHIBIANS & REPTILES Black racer Coluber constrictor Brown anole Anolis sagrei MAMMALS Black bear Ursus americanus Eastern cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus White-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus Page 7731 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 11 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Table 4: Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Faunal SpeciesCommon Name Scientific Name Status (FWC/FWS)Estimated Occurrence*Habitat by FLUCCSProbablePossibleUnlikelyBIRDSLittle blue heron Egretta caerulea T/NL X Ag. ditchesSoutheastern American kestrel Falco sparverius paulus T/NL X Tricolored heron Egretta tricolor T/NL X Ag. ditches Wood stork Mycteria americana T/T X Ag. ditches Roseate spoonbill Platalea ajaja T/NL X Ag. ditches MAMMALS Florida bonneted bat Eumops floridanus E/E X All Florida panther Puma concolor coryi E/E X All REPTILES Eastern indigo snake Drymarchon corais couperi T/T X All FWC = Florida Fish and Wildlife ConservationCommission FWS = UnitedStatesFishandWildlifeService T =Threatened E =Endangered NL = Notlisted * Probable Occurrence = >50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Possible Occurrence = <50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Unlikely Occurrence = <5% estimated chance of occurrence on site. ** Both migratory (non-listed) and non-migratory (listed) species present. So, subspecies identification indeterminant. Table 5: Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Floral Species Common Name Scientific Name Status (FDA/FWS) Estimated Occurrence*Habitat by FLUCCSProbablePossibleUnlikely N/A FWS = UnitedStatesFishandWildlifeService FDA = Food and Drug Administration E =Endangered CE = Commercially Exploited NL = Notlisted * Probable Occurrence = >50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Possible Occurrence = <50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Unlikely Occurrence = <5% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Table 6: Existing Vegetative Associations and Land Uses FLUCCS CODE FLUCCS DESCRIPTION Acres 214 Row crop 200.16 224 Abandoned groves 43.95 241 Tree nursery 108.05 500 Water 0.34 618E4 Willow and Elderberry, Exotics 75%<2.01 740 Disturbed lands 22.52 8145 Graded and drained 1.89 TOTAL 378.92 Page 7732 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 12 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports APPENDIX A Existing Vegetative Association & Land Use Descriptions Page 7733 of 9661 13 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalDataExisting Vegetative Association & Land Use Detailed DescriptionsRow Crops – (FLUCCS 214) – This is active row-crop agriculture including fields, internal unpaved roads, and water management ditches and dikes.Abandoned Grove (FLUCCS 224) –This is recently-abandoned citrus grove. Nearly all citrus trees aredead. Tree rows and grove infrastructure remain in unmaintained condition. Groundcover includes bahia grass (Paspalum notatum), smutgrass (Sporobolus indicus), crowsfoot grass (Dactyloctunium aegyptium), beggars tick (Bidens pilosa), elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum), Caesarweed (Urena lobata), and other ruderal pioneering species. Some regions have started the conversion to improved pasture or row-crop agriculture with the dead trees being removed and furrows graded. Tree Nursery (FLUCCS 241) – This land use represents a long-defunct date palm and queen palm nursery. Trees and infrastructure remain in unmaintained condition. Water (FLUCCS 500)– This is a small unvegetated water body within surrounding row-crop agricultural fields. Willow and Elderberry, Exotics 75%< (FLUCCS 618E4)– These two areas are willow (Salix caroliniana) and exotic dominated wetlands surrounded by row-crop agriculture and palm nursery. The wetland within the palm nursery has hydrologic connection via ditch and pipe to the agricultural Water Retention Area to the east, whereas the wetland within the row-crop agriculture is hydrologically isolated. Exotics include Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes), and primrose willow (Ludwigia peruviana) coverage exceeds 75%. Disturbed Lands (FLUCCS 740) –These are large blocks of land within or proximal to the tree nursery where trees were harvested and not replenished, or where orange trees were removed and the land has not yet been brought into crop production. In either case, the areas lack shrub and canopy coverage. Groundcover ranges from bare soil to being vegetated with herbaceous species including Caesarweed, smutgrass, broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), Mexican clover (Richardia grandiflora), beggars tick, elephant grass, and other ruderal species. Graded and Drained (FLUCCS 8145) – These are internal primary farm roads. Page 7734 of 9661 14 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData FIGURE 1 Existing Conditions Page 7735 of 9661 15 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData Page 7736 of 9661 16 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData Page 7737 of 9661 17 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData Page 7738 of 9661 18 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData FIGURE 2 Bear Incident Location Map Page 7739 of 9661 19 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData Page 7740 of 9661 20 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData FIGURE 3 Panther Habitat and Telemetry Map Page 7741 of 9661 21 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData Page 7742 of 9661 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239 271 2650 MEMORANDUMTo: John English, PE, Peninsula Engineering From: Kim Arnold, PG Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Date: September 17, 2024 Subject: Silver Strand III Excavation Depth Assessment Peninsula Engineering contracted with Kimley-Horn and Associates (Kimley-Horn) to provide an assessment of the proposed excavation depth at the Silver Strand III Excavation project site located in Section 14, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County. The assessment specifically considers whether excavating a proposed mine lake to a depth of 59 feet would have a detrimental impact on groundwater quality, per Section 22-112(3) of the Collier County Land Development Code (CCLDC). Under this scope of services, Kimley-Horn reviewed lithologic descriptions, water level data, water quality data, peer-reviewed literature, and regulatory records, performed lake mixing calculations, and prepared this technical memorandum (TM). Background The Silver Strand III Excavation project proposes construction of a mine lake up to 59 feet deep. The applicant is designing the excavation for permitting through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) as a non-phosphate mine. The project site has no ponds or other significant surface water features currently, and uses wells reported open to the Lower Tamiami and Water Table aquifers for agricultural irrigation under South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) water use permit 11-00263-W. The existing agricultural irrigation wells will be plugged and abandoned when the site is developed. Other water users in the area, such as agricultural operations, rely on wells reported open to the Lower Tamiami aquifer, with lesser use of the Water Table and Sandstone aquifers, for water supply. The Lower Tamiami aquifer, where present, underlies the Water Table aquifer, separated by a low permeability semi-confining layer. In areas where the semi-confining layer is minimal or absent, the lithologic strata function as a single unconfined (AKA Surficial) aquifer. Due to extensive use of the groundwater source, potentiometric heads in the Lower Tamiami aquifer vary seasonally, with lowest levels typically coinciding with the height of the dry season and/or the peak of agricultural growing seasons. Potentiometric heads in the Lower Tamiami aquifer can be lower than those of the Water Table aquifer by greater than ten (10) feet. Regionally, the clay confining layer separating the Water Table and Lower Tamiami aquifers becomes thinner and shallower from south to north and is absent completely in parts of Immokalee and southern Page 7743 of 9661 Page 2 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 Lee County, where the unconfined Surficial aquifer can extent over 200 feet in depth. The confininglayer may also be thin or absent locally in areas where it typically occurs. Extreme seasonal low waterlevels in surface water bodies often characterize areas where the confining layer is locally absent.A previous assessment prepared by Kimley-Horn reviewed available lithologic and water level data forthe site and concluded that the Surficial aquifer extends to over 100 feet deep at the Silver Strand III Excavation project site. No significant confining layer exists within the proposed excavation depth, and the Surficial aquifer functions as a single hydrologic unit to a depth of 100 feet or greater at the project site. SITE HISTORY The Silver Strand III Excavation project site has been permitted for agricultural irrigation withdrawals through the SFWMD since 1984 under permit 11-00263-W, although agricultural irrigation may pre- date water use permitting by the State of Florida. The earliest permits authorized withdrawals from the Water Table and Lower Tamiami aquifers. The permit lists cased depths for Water Table aquifer wells ranging from 18 to approximately 60 feet bls, and total depths ranging from approximately 18 to 75 feet bls. The proposed Lower Tamiami aquifer wells have respective cased and total depths of 140 and 200 feet bls, below the proposed 100-foot excavation depth. These aquifer designation depths appear to best characterize the hydrogeology of the Silver Strand III Excavation project site. The Silver Strand III site received surface water management system permit 11-00261-S from the SFWMD in 1984 for construction and operation of a proposed and existing surface water management system serving 1,266 acres of agricultural lands using retention/detention and dispersion areas with discharge to the Barron River and Fakahatchee Strand basin via weir and surface water pumps conveying water to a cypress head and existing ditch. The staff report notes 1,173 acres of existing small vegetable fields that were ditched and diked. A retention/detention area borders the proposed excavation to the east. This basin discharges to a dispersion area that drains under SR-29 and into the Barron River. Agricultural lands with the Silver Strand III grove/farm surround the project site to the north, west and south and drain as described above. Lands to the east include a large, vegetated retention/detention area. This basin discharges to a dispersion area that drains under SR-29, to the east of the retention/detention area, and into the Barron River. No deep-water bodies exist on or in the vicinity of the project site. The closest active Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) mining permit is issued to the Stewart Sand Mine (MMR_228414), located 6.6 miles northwest of the Silver Strand III project site. The FDEP permit authorizes the Stewart Sand Mine to excavate to -49 feet NGVD, or approximately 85 feet below grade. See Figure 1 for a map of the site and surrounding properties. Page 7744 of 9661 Page 3 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 Proposed Excavation DepthLITHOLOGYBarron Collier Partnership contracted with YPC Consulting Group in 2022 to perform a preliminarygeotechnical exploration of the site called the Silver Strand III Fill Pit. YPC advanced 46 standard penetration test (SPT) borings to approximately 30 feet bls, seven (7) SPT borings to approximately 60 feet bls, six (6) borings to approximately 65 feet, and two (2) SPT borings to approximately 100 feet bls. Boring locations generally formed a grid across the site. Many of the borings throughout the site have poorly graded sand to silty sand overlying a weathered/fractured limestone layer occurring between 20 to 30 feet bls. The limestone layer is approximately 10 to 15 feet thick and followed by poorly graded sand to silty sand to termination depth. Other borings, primarily in the eastern half of the project site have a shallower, thinner limestone layer occurring between approximately 8 to 15 feet bls. This limestone layer may be 2-3 feet to 10 feet thick, in general. In some borings a second, deeper limestone layer, as described above, exists below the shallow limestone interval, separated by poorly graded silty sand 20-25 feet thick. In these borings, the deeper limestone layer generally begins around 40 feet bls. The lithologic data collected onsite is consistent with data reported from other wells in the area, as provided in the SFWMD’s DBHydro database. Given the predominantly sandy nature of the lithology, the Silver Strand III Excavation proposes use of a dredge to extract the material. DEPTH CALCULATION Section 22-112(3) of CCLDC prescribes a maximum excavation depth for commercial excavations of 20 feet, unless otherwise supported by the “fetch formula” or a “comparative water quality study that depths in excess of 20 feet will not, because of aquifer conditions or relative location to coastal saline waters, have a detrimental effect on the groundwater resources in the surrounding area.” The “fetch formula” described in the CCLDC is as follows: 𝐷𝑒𝑝𝑡ℎ=5𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡+ 0.015 × 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑐ℎ Where, 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑐ℎ=𝐴+𝐵 2 And A is the average length parallel to the long axis of the excavation and B is the average width of the excavation as measured at right angles to the long axis. The Silver Strand III Excavation has an average length parallel to the long axis (A) of 3,300 feet and an average length at right angles to the long axis (B) of 2,675 feet. Based on the “fetch formula” from the CCLDC, the resultant maximum excavation depth would be: (3,300 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡+ 2,675 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡) 2 × 0.015 + 5 𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡=50𝑓𝑒𝑒𝑡 Page 7745 of 9661 Page 4 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 The Silver Strand III Excavation requests a maximum excavation depth of 59 feet, 9 feet beyond thedepth provided by the “fetch formula” based on a demonstration of no “detrimental effect on thegroundwater resources,” pursuant to Section 22-112(3)a of the CCLDC.Water Level and Water Quality Data United States Geological Survey (USGS) well C-966, a Surficial aquifer system well located 2.7 miles southeast of the project site, has reported data from 1984 through 2023, including water quality data for selected intervals. This well has cased and total depths of 30 to 40 feet, respectively. Surficial aquifer well LUC-3 has a reported depth of 15 feet and is located approximately 0.65 miles southwest of the Silver Strand III Excavation. LUC-3 has reported water level and water quality data from 1998 to 2024 for selected intervals. Water level data from C-966 and LUC-3 display similar behavior, indicating both wells monitor the Surficial aquifer. WATER LEVEL DATA To assess the degree of hydraulic connection between the shallow and deeper zones of the Surficial aquifer at the project site, Peninsula Engineering implemented a water level monitoring program. Existing, deeper Surficial aquifer agricultural irrigation wells were equipped with data logging pressure transducers, as were shallow piezometers constructed next to the irrigation wells. A barometric pressure gauge was used to remove atmospheric influence from the well transducer data. LiDAR data was used to estimate ground level elevations at the well sites. Peninsula Engineering installed datalogging pressure transducers at J-32, located on the project site, which has collected data from August 2023 through January 2024. Well J-32 has reported cased and total depths of 80 and 100 feet bls, respectively, and is classified as Lower Tamiami on the water use permit. The piezometer installed near J-32 has a total depth of approximately 5 feet bls. See Figures 2 and 3, respectively, for a location map of monitoring sites and plot of water level data along with rainfall from the Immokalee rain gauge, as reported through the SFWMD’s DBHydro site (DB key VN084). See Table 1 for monitoring well details. Well # Natural Grade (ft. NAVD) Total Depth (ft. bls) Cased Depth (ft. bls)Latitude Longitude J-32 shallow 23.64 6 Screened 26Û 23' 09.62" 81Û 23' 05.48" J-32 Deep 23.90 100 80 26Û 23' 09.57" 81Û 23' 06.93" LUC-3 25.58 15 26Û 22' 44.6" 81Û 24' 18.8" C-966 19.90 40 30 26Û 21' 38" 81Û 20' 41" Table 1: Monitoring well details. Page 7746 of 9661 Page 5 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 Water elevations and trends in both the shallow and deep wells closely resemble each other and appearinfluenced primarily by rainfall. These wells exhibit a smaller rage in water level, of 5 to 6 feet, withlowest water level occurring in April and May during periods of little to no rainfall. Water levels in bothdeep and shallow zones increase immediately following significant rainfall events and exhibit a risingtrend during periods of frequent rainfall. If the deeper zone was semi-confined, its response to rainfall events would lag those of the shallow well. The water elevation data indicate both the shallow and the deeper zones are hydraulically connected to each other and to the surface hydrology, being driven by rainfall and with an overall lack of confinement between the two zones. The hydraulic connection between the deep and shallow zones of the Surficial aquifer at the project site supports a proposed excavation depth up to 100 feet deep without breaching confining layers between distinct aquifers. Water level data collected at the Silver Strand III Excavation onsite wells also resembles data collected at C-966 and LUC-3, particularly LUC-3, the closer of the two USGS wells with respect to the Silver Strand III Excavation project site. The observed data similarities suggest that wells C-966, LUC-3, and J-32 deep and shallow wells all monitor hydrological conditions within the same Surficial aquifer. Water level data collected from onsite wells and offsite USGS-maintained monitoring wells indicate a thick Surficial aquifer sequence extending to at least 100 feet deep at the project site with good hydraulic connection throughout. WATER QUALITY DATA The USGS has sampled wells C-966 and LUC-3 for extended suites of water quality parameters. Most parameters sampled from the two wells show good agreement, in general, with the exceptions of dissolved oxygen, percent dissolved oxygen saturation, ammonia, Ortho phosphorous, sulfate, potassium, iron and total nitrogen. LUC-3, the shallower well, has significantly higher levels of the noted parameters. For example, LUC-3 has an average dissolved oxygen saturation percentage of 12.2%, whereas C-966 has a percentage of 0% at the depth sampled. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), “Oxygen enters water by direct absorption from the atmosphere, which is enhanced by turbulence.” Factors such as temperature, water movement (e.g., turbulence) and surface area influence oxygen solubility in water bodies. Oxygen has low solubility in water even with significant surface contact. Groundwater, being present in the soil pore space, typically several feet below land surface, has limited surface contact with the atmosphere. Consequently, in groundwater, oxygen levels can decrease rapidly with depth due to limited diffusion from the surface. Fick's law governs the diffusion of oxygen in groundwater. The equation is typically expressed as: 𝐽=−𝐷𝑑𝐶 𝑑𝑥 Where J is the flux of oxygen (mass per unit area per time), D is the diffusion coefficient of oxygen in water (a constant depending on temperature), and dC/dx is the concentration gradient of oxygen in the groundwater. In addition to the slow diffusion rate of oxygen, biological processes also consume oxygen present in groundwater as part of natural bacterially mediated metabolic processes. The rate at which bacteria Page 7747 of 9661 Page 6 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 present in groundwater can consume oxygen can easily exceed the rate at which oxygen can diffusefrom the atmosphere or more highly oxygenated zones of the aquifer. The data collected from USGSwell show the oxygen flux in groundwater has decreased to near zero by a depth of approximately 40feet.Nutrients and other constituents, such as potassium, can also decrease with depth in groundwater. Comparison of the groundwater chemistry at monitoring wells LUC-3 and C-966 show such trends. A publication by the USGS (2010) notes, “Nitrate concentrations were significantly higher in well- oxygenated (or “oxic”) groundwater regardless of land use and nitrogen sources.” Nutrient concentrations decrease with low oxygen in groundwater because when oxygen levels are low (i.e., reducing conditions), the bacteria that typically break down organic matter and release nutrients as byproducts change and can become less active, leading to a reduced availability of nutrients in the water column. This process is known as denitrification, where nitrate is converted to nitrogen gas under low oxygen conditions. Bacteria that require oxygen to decompose organic matter release nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus back into the water as part of their metabolic process. When oxygen levels are low, bacteria using anaerobic processes, like denitrification, dominate. Denitrification converts nitrate to gaseous nitrogen, which escapes into the atmosphere, effectively removing nitrogen species from the water. Under highly reducing conditions, bacterial communities using ferric hydroxide, sulfate or even glucose act as the electron donors in the absence of oxygen, resulting in generation of gases such as hydrogen sulfide and methane characteristic of anoxic groundwater conditions commonly associated with confined aquifers. The decrease in nitrogen compounds and sulfate measured in C- 966 at a 40-foot depth, compared to concentrations measured in LUC-3 at a 15-foot depth, suggest metabolic processes employing denitrification and even sulfate reduction become prevalent at depth under anoxic, reducing conditions (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). Under certain redox (reduction-oxidation) conditions, various nutrient species, including by-products of bacterial metabolic processes, can adhere and adsorb to soil and sediment particles. Under low velocity conditions common in the lower intervals of deep lakes, absent of wind shear and high-energy biological activity, particles can settle to the lake bottom and effectively become sequestered (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). When oxygenated water is introduced into otherwise anoxic groundwater, the increase in dissolved oxygen content can lead to changes in redox potential, impacting the solubility and stability of various minerals, promoting aerobic microbial activity, and potentially influencing the oxidation state of dissolved elements like iron and manganese. Oxidation can lead to the precipitation of minerals like iron oxides, potentially impacting groundwater quality and aquifer characteristics. For example, when oxygenated water is introduced into an aquifer via an aquifer storage and recovery system, it can trigger redox reactions that can lead to the mobilization and dissolution of certain metals like arsenic, potentially altering the water quality and raising concerns about its safety for use (Arthur, 2002). Water level data from USGS-maintained monitoring wells indicate oxygen levels decline with depth within the Surficial aquifer near the project site. under natural conditions. Changing the oxygen concentration within an aquifer can change the water chemistry. Page 7748 of 9661 Page 7 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 Lake Mixing CalculationsWEDDERBURN NUMBERThe Wedderburn number (Wn) is a dimensionless parameter that measures the balance between windstress and buoyancy force in a lake. It can be used to estimate upwelling and predict if a lake will stratify. When Wn is much less than 1, wind stress is greater than buoyancy force, and upwelling is likely to occur. When Wn is much greater than 1, buoyancy force is greater than wind stress, and there is strong vertical stratification (Thompson, 1980). The Wedderburn number is given by the equation: 𝑊𝑛=(𝑔𝛥𝜌 ℎଶ ) 𝜌𝑢∗௪ଶ 𝐿 Where: ǻȡ is the density difference across the thermocline. h is the thickness of the surface mixed layer u*w is the water friction velocity computed from shear stress from wind. L is the length of the lake in the direction of the wind ȡ is the density of water g is gravitational acceleration The thickness of the surface mixed later is approximated using the empirical relationship (Wells and Troy, 2022): 𝑍௠௜௫௘ௗ =4√𝐹𝑒𝑡𝑐ℎ Based on the proposed dimensions of the Silver Strand III Excavation, this results in an approximate mixed layer thickness of 4.20 meters or 13.8 feet. Using the approximate mixed layer thickness of 4.20 meters and weather data from Weather Spark and Weather Underground, the Wedderburn number was calculated for annual average, average summer, and average winter conditions, as shown in Table 2. Condition Annual Average Summer Average Winter Average Wn (dimensionless) 6.05 14.22 6.59 Table 2: Wedderburn numbers. The Wedderburn numbers shown in Table 2 indicate the excavation lake will remain stratified to some degree year-round, with the greatest stratification occurring in summer, as is characteristic of most freshwater lakes. Page 7749 of 9661 Page 8 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 LAKE MIXING MODELKimley-Horn used the one-dimensional freshwater lake mixing model FLake as another method toestimate the predicted mixing depth of the Silver Strand III Excavation lake. FLake (Mironov,2008) isa 1-D thermodynamic lake model developed for NWP purposes. It is a bulk model capable of predictingthe vertical temperature structure and mixing conditions in lakes, given the meteorological conditions at the atmosphere interface (incoming radiation, air temperature and humidity, and wind speed) (Bernus et. al. 2021). The following parameters were input into the FLake a lake mixing model: solar radiation (watts per meter squared, W/m2), air temperature (°C), air humidity (millibars, mb), wind speed (meters per second, m/s), and cloudiness (true = 1/false = 0). The weather parameters were taken from the weather station located at Page Field Airport in Fort Myers FL, and the solar radiation was taken from the National Solar Radiation Database (NSRDB) supplied by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The Flake model run uses input parameters for the period from September 1, 2021, through August 31, 2023. The model requires approximately six months following the start of a simulation to stabilize. Erratic results observed early in the run time are likely a result of numerical instability in the model rather than real physical processes in the lake. The results for the second year of the two-year model run are shown and discussed below in Figures 2 through 6. Figure 2: Mixing depth (feet) from FLake model. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 110192837465564738291100109118127136145154163172181190199208217226235244253262271280289298307316325334343352361Depth of Mixed Layer (feet) Days from Start of Model Run Mixed Layer Depth Page 7750 of 9661 Page 9 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 Figure 2 depicts the predicted mixing depth generated by the FLake model. Mixing depths range fromless than 1 foot to 47 feet. Of note, the first part of the period coincides with Hurricane Ian and producesthe greatest mixing depth, as expected. However, the extremes are not indicative of average conditions.The average mixing depth for the period shown is 9.9 feet, which agrees well with the mixing depth of13.8 feet calculated using the empirical equation of 𝑍௠௜௫௘ௗ =4√𝐹𝑒𝑡𝑐ℎ The mixing depths predicted by the FLake also supports the Wedderburn numbers that suggest average stratified lake conditions. Figure 3: Convective mixing parameter from FLake model. The convective mixing parameter, shown in Figure 3, represents the intensity of convective mixing in the lake, which is driven by temperature gradients. Convection occurs when warmer, less dense water overlies cooler, denser water, causing the water to overturn and mix. This is also referred to as the Deardorff Velocity which is roughly the updraft speed in convective thermals. 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 1112131415161718191101111121131141151161171181191201211221231241251261271281291301311321331341351361Feet/secondDays from Start of Model Run Convective Mixing Parameter Page 7751 of 9661 Page 10 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 Figure 4: Light attenuation coefficient from FLake model Figure 4 shows the measure of how light dissipates with depth in water. The coefficient represents the rate at which light is absorbed or scattered as it penetrates the water column. It depends on factors like water clarity, presence of suspended particles, and dissolved organic matter. A higher value indicates less light penetration, affecting photosynthesis and heat distribution in the lake. 4 9 14 19 24 29 34 110192837465564738291100109118127136145154163172181190199208217226235244253262271280289298307316325334343352361W/m2Days from Start of Model Run Light Attenuation Coefficient in Water Page 7752 of 9661 Page 11 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 Figure 5: Friction velocity of water FLake model Figure 5 shows the friction created by the wind across the lake water surface, creating a measure of turbulence within the water itself, which helps to understand the internal mixing and energy dissipation within the lake. 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.0120.014 1112131415161718191101111121131141151161171181191201211221231241251261271281291301311321331341351361Velocity (ft/s) Days from Start of Model Run Friction Velocity of Water Page 7753 of 9661 Page 12 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 Figure 6: Sensible and latent heat flux from FLake model As shown in Figure 6, sensible and latent are both described in terms of positive and negative factors. Positive latent heat flux refers to water condensing onto the surface and negative latent heat flux is water evaporation from the surface. Positive sensible heat flux is heat flowing from the atmosphere to the surface and negative is the heat flowing from the surface to the atmosphere. The FLake model runs indicate a lake with the fetch and depth of the proposed Silver Strand III Excavation will not mix below a depth of ten (10) feet most of the time, with the exception of extreme weather events. Discussion The data and analyses provided in previous sections of this memorandum indicate the proposed mine lake will likely be a warm weather monomictic lake that experiences stratification at depths greater than 15 feet, on average. Lithologic and water level data indicate the Surficial aquifer extends to 100 feet or deeper at the Silver Strand III Excavation project site, with no local or regional confinement present. The proposed excavation depth of 59 feet will be wholly within the unconfined portion of the Surficial aquifer. -250 -50 150 350 550 750 1112131415161718191101111121131141151161171181191201211221231241251261271281291301311321331341351361Heat Flux (W/m2)Days from Start of Model Run Sensible and Latent Heat Flux Sensible Latent Page 7754 of 9661 Page 13 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 Water quality data from USGS monitoring wells open to shallow and deep portions of the Surficialaquifer suggest that the aquifer becomes anoxic at depth, due to the inability of atmospheric oxygen toeffectively diffuse to depths shallower than 40 feet bls. As discussed in the Water Quality Data section,the shallow portion of the Surficial aquifer up to a depth of at least 15 feet is characterized by thepresence of oxygen and associated redox conditions and biological processes. However, by 40 feet bls, the groundwater becomes anoxic, and reducing conditions and accompanying biological processes likely dominate. The Silver Strand III Excavation lake mixing depths and stratification potential described in the Lake Mixing Calculations section should support preservation of the existing Surficial aquifer geochemistry by contributing to oxic conditions in the shallow portion of the aquifer to depths of approximately 15 feet, and progressively anoxic conditions below that depth. Data from USGS monitoring wells indicate a transition from oxic to anoxic conditions between depths of 15 to 40 feet. The “fetch calculations” provided in the CCLDC allow an excavation depth up to 50 feet, by which point groundwater quality data indicate anoxic conditions. Excavating the lake an additional 9 feet beyond what the CCLDC “fetch calculation” provides will not adversely impact groundwater quality, given that the aquifer displays anoxic conditions by a depth of 40 feet. The proposed mine lake design should preserve the natural redox conditions that currently characterize the Surficial aquifer. Other excavations exist in Collier County with depths exceeding the “fetch calculation.” As mentioned in the Site History section, the Stewart Sand Mine is located 6.6 miles northwest of the Silver Strand III project site and permitted for excavation depth up to 85 feet. The “fetch calculation” provided a maximum excavation depth for the Stewart Sand Mine of 50 feet. Like the proposed Silver Strand III Excavation, the Stewart Sand Mine uses a dredging operation for excavation. The Collier County staff report for approval of the Stewart Sand Mine rezoning request dated August 6, 2003, reads as follows: There is at least one older excavation in Collier County, Crown Pointe, that violates the fetch formula by a considerable amount…the maximum allowable depth should be 27.5 feet…The report shows a maximum depth in some areas of 51 feet of water. There have been no water quality complaints that staff is aware of at the large Crown Pointe lake… Staff has contacted representatives of local and state agencies that might have insight into the negative side of fetch formula violations and has, so far, found no agency representative that opposes deep pits on general principle. The standard reply seems to be that the worst case scenario is an anoxic…condition at the deeper levels, but that such a condition may be common or normal, or at best, not harmful to the lake or the aquifer. The Silver Strand III Excavation proposes to exceed the “fetch calculation” depth by a much lesser amount that the Stewart Sand Mine: 9 feet compared to 35 feet. The analyses presented in this memorandum concur with the stated opinions of local and state agencies in the Stewart Sand Mine staff report quoted above, namely, “the worst case scenario is an anoxic…condition at the deeper levels, but that such a condition may be common or normal, or at best, not harmful to the lake or the aquifer.” Page 7755 of 9661 Page 7756 of 9661 Page 15 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 ReferencesAmerican Meteorological Society. (2024). Glossary of Meteorology.https://glossary.ametsoc.org/wiki/Welcome Arthur, J., A. Dabous, and J. Cowart (2002). “Mobilization of arsenic and other trace elements during aquifer storage and recovery, southwest Florida,” In George R. Aiken and Eve L. Kuniansky, editors, 2002, U.S. Geological Survey Artificial Recharge Workshop Proceedings, Sacramento, California, April 2-4, 2002: USGS Open-File Report 02-89. Bernus, A., Ottlé, C., & Raoult, N. (2021). “Variance based sensitivity analysis of FLake lake model for global land surface modeling,”Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 126, e2019JD031928. Collier County (2003). “Environmental Advisory Council Staff Report Meeting of August 6, 2003,” Petition No. CU-2002-AR-3537. Environmental Protection Agency, Dissolved Oxygen:https://www.epa.gov/caddis/dissolved-oxygen. Geddes, E., E. Richardson, and A. Dodd (2015).Hydrogeologic Unit Mapping Update for the Lower West Coast Water Supply Planning Area, South Florida Water Management District Technical Publication WS-35. Fetter, C.W. (1994).Applied Hydrogeology, third edition, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ; pp. 691. FLake Model.http://www.flake.igb-berlin.de/ Florida Department of Environmental Protection Oculus Permitting Files for MMR_204775 (Big Island Pit)https://depedms.dep.state.fl.us/Oculus/servlet/search. Freeze, A. and J. Cherry (1979).Groundwater, from The Groundwater Project:https://fc79.gw- project.org. Mironov, D. (2008). Parameterization of lakes in numerical weather prediction. In Description of a lake model (Technical Report No. 11). Deutscher Wetterdienst. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA, 2024). Page Field Weather Station Data. https://forecast.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KFMY.html National Renewable Energy Laboratory (2024). NSRDB: National Solar Radiation Database. Immokalee, Florida.https://nsrdb.nrel.gov/ South Florida Water Management District DBHYDRO:DBHYDRO Browser (sfwmd.gov) Page 7757 of 9661 Page 16 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 South Florida Water Management District ePermtting Files for 11-00263-W and 11-00261-S (SilverStrand III):https://my.sfwmd.gov/ePermitting/PopulateLOVs.do?flag=1.Thompson, R., (1980). “Response of a numerical model of a stratified lake to wind stress,” in:Proceedings of the second international symposium stratified flows, IAHR, 1980 Trondheim, Norway. United States Geological Survey National Water Information System:Water Resources of the United States—National Water Information System (NWIS) Mapper (usgs.gov). United States Geological Survey (2010). “Nutrients in Nation’s Streams and Groundwater: National Findings and Implications,” Fact Sheet 2010–3078. Weather Spark (2024). Climate and Average Weather Year Round in Immokalee: https://weatherspark.com/y/17584/Average-Weather-in-Immokalee-Florida-United-States-Year- Round#:~:text=In%20Immokalee%2C%20the%20summers%20are,or%20above%2094%C2%B0 F. Weather Underground (2024). Immokalee, FL Weather History: https://www.wunderground.com/history/monthly/us/fl/immokalee/KIMM/date/2018-12 Wells, M., and C. Troy (2022). “Surface Mixed Layers in Lakes,” in Encyclopedia of Inland Waters, pp. 546-561, Elsevier. YPC Consulting Group (2022). “Geotechnical Exploration Services Report Conducted for Silver Strand III Fill Pit Off State Road 29, Ave Maria, Collier County, Florida,” prepared for Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP, YPC Project No. 21GY304. YPC Consulting Group (2024). “Geotechnical Exploration Services Report Conducted for Silver Strand III Fill Pit Off State Road 29, Ave Maria, Collier County, Florida,” prepared for Barron Collier Partnership, LLLP, YPC Project No. 21GY304. Page 7758 of 9661 Z0DUNHW5G(&RXQW \5RDG  RFNDGH 5G$LUSRUW5G(0DLQ 6W 6 W D W H 5 R D G  6Immokalee Reservation ,PPRNDOHH5G&DPS.HDLV 5G 5DQF K 5G 'XSUHH *UDGH&RXQW\5RDG  6 W D W H 5 RD G6WK $Y H1( 5 DQF K 5G 6 W D W H 5 RD G  66W D W H 5RD G   6 6XPPHUODQG 6ZDPS 5DQFK 56WDWH5RDG+ark 6,/9(5 675$1',,, /8& & - 6WDWHRI)ORULGD0D[DU8QLYHUVLW\RI6RXWK)ORULGD)'(3(VUL7RP7RP*DUPLQ6DIH*UDSK *HR7HFKQRORJLHV,QF0(7,1$6$86*6(3$13686&HQVXV%XUHDX86'$86):6 0200120)eet(.?)70B:DWHU8WLOLWLHV?3URMHFWV?3HQLQVXOD(QJLQHHULQJ?B6LOYHU6WUDQG,,,([FDYDWLRQ?)LJXUHV?)LJXUHDSU[$0NLPDUQROG1 )I*URE No.RE9ISIONS DATE BY SIL9ER STRAND III E;CA9ATION SITE MAP 248144016 .+A AS S+OWN .+A .+A PRO-ECT C+EC.ED BY SCALE DESI*NED BY SEPTEMBER 2024 DATE .+ADRAWN BY SIL9ER STRAND III E;CA9ATION PREPARED )OR PENINSULA EN*INEERIN* )ORT MYERS )LORIDA ‹202 .IMLEY-+ORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 114 BROADWAY SUITE 01 )ORT MYERS )L 901 Phone: 29-21-260 )A;: 941-9-42 WWW..IMLEY-+ORN.COM RE*ISTRY No. 106 Page 7759 of 9661 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239 271 2650 MEMORANDUMTo: Josh Fruth, PE, Peninsula Engineering From: Kim Arnold, PG Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Date: April 22, 2024 Subject: Silver Strand III Confining Layer Assessment Peninsula Engineering contracted with Kimley-Horn and Associates (Kimley-Horn) to provide an assessment of the confining layer at the Silver Strand III Excavation project site located in Section 14, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County. The assessment specifically considers whether excavating a proposed mine lake to a depth of 100 feet would breach any confining/semi-confining layers at the site, potentially resulting in lower water table levels post-construction. Under this scope of services, Kimley-Horn reviewed lithologic descriptions, water level data and regulatory records, and prepared this technical memorandum (TM). Background The Silver Strand III Excavation project proposes construction of a mine lake up to 100 feet deep. The applicant is designing the excavation for permitting through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) as a non-phosphate mine. The project site has no ponds or other significant surface water features currently, and uses wells reported open to the Lower Tamiami and Water Table aquifers for agricultural irrigation under South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) water use permit 11-00263-W. The existing agricultural irrigation wells will be plugged and abandoned when the site is developed. Other water users in the area, such as agricultural operations, rely on wells reported open to the Lower Tamiami aquifer, with lesser use of the Water Table and Sandstone aquifers, for water supply. The Lower Tamiami aquifer, where present, underlies the Water Table aquifer, separated by a low permeability semi-confining layer. In areas where the semi-confining layer is minimal or absent, the lithologic strata act as a single unconfined (AKA Surficial) aquifer. Due to extensive use of the groundwater source, potentiometric heads in the Lower Tamiami aquifer vary seasonally, with lowest levels typically coinciding with the height of the dry season and/or the peak of agricultural growing seasons. Potentiometric heads in the Lower Tamiami aquifer can be lower than those of the Water Table aquifer by greater than ten (10) feet. Regionally, the clay confining layer separating the Water Table and Lower Tamiami aquifers becomes thinner and shallower from south to north and is absent completely in parts of Immokalee and southern Lee County, where the unconfined Surficial aquifer can extent over 200 feet in depth. The confining Page 7760 of 9661 Page 2 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 layer may also be thin or absent locally in areas where it typically occurs. Extreme seasonal low waterlevels in surface water bodies often characterize areas where the confining layer is locally absent.Lithologic descriptions from wells included in the SFWMD’s Hydrogeologic Unit Mapping Update for theLower West Coast Water Supply Planning Area (WS-35; Geddes et al., 2015), indicate the Silver StrandIII project site is located near a transitional area where confinement between the Water Table and Lower Tamiami aquifers present to the south of the site diminishes, along with the Tamiami limestone, and becomes absent in the Immokalee area. Well W-15535, located approximately 2.8 miles southeast of the project site, reports the Lower Tamiami aquifer occurring from 85 to 130 feet bls, separated from the Water Table aquifer by the Tamiami confining layer from 55 to 85 feet bls. However, Well C2055, located 2 miles north-northeast of the project site, reports the complete absence of the Lower Tamiami aquifer, with the top of the Sandstone aquifer occurring at 130 feet bls. The SFWMD has designated Well C2055 as a “Golden Spike” well, or well with a high level of confidence in the lithologic description. SITE HISTORY The Silver Strand III Excavation project site has been permitted for agricultural irrigation withdrawals through the SFWMD since 1984 under application 12063-A (permit 11-00263-W), although agricultural irrigation may pre-date water use permitting by the State of Florida. The 1986 permit application speaks to revisions to the permit boundary and the proposed transition from existing row crops to citrus grove. Historical withdrawals from the Water Table aquifer serving the row crops were expected to decrease over time as citrus grove served by Lower Tamiami aquifer withdrawals replaced row crop cultivation. The earliest permits authorized withdrawals from the Water Table and Lower Tamiami aquifers. The permit lists cased depths for Water Table aquifer wells ranging from 18 to approximately 60 feet bls, and total depths ranging from approximately 18 to 75 feet bls. The proposed Lower Tamiami aquifer wells have respective cased and total depths of 140 and 200 feet bls, below the proposed 100-foot excavation depth. The 2008 permit renewal and modification reflect the shift to citrus production with primary withdrawals from the Lower Tamiami aquifer. The staff report for this application (060227-35) states the Water Table aquifer is 55 feet thick based on the lithologic log from well W-2042 described in SFWMD Technical Publication 88-12. The staff report defines the top of the Lower Tamiami aquifer as 85 feet bls based on the same lithologic log. The permit generally categorizes the wells based on the 55 feet bls top of aquifer depth for the Lower Tamiami, although some wells listed on the permit, J-31 for example, have production intervals than span this break point and are classified as Water Table aquifer. The Silver Strand III water use permit illustrates the fact that, historically, the SFWMD and water users in northern Collier and southern Hendry Counties have faced challenges classifying different production zones within the Surficial Aquifer System as distinct aquifers. Wells with similar construction details within short distances of each other may be classified as open to different aquifers depending on who drilled and permitted the wells. However, over larger sites that may span several sections, aquifer depths and the presence of confining layers can change significantly, which may lead to inconsistencies Page 7761 of 9661 Page 3 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 and confusion in aquifer nomenclature both temporally and geographically, even within the same wateruse permit.The Silver Strand III site received surface water management system permit 11-00261-S from theSFWMD in 1984 for construction and operation of a proposed and existing surface water management system serving 1,266 acres of agricultural lands using retention/detention and dispersion areas with discharge to the Barron River and Fakahatchee Strand basin via weir and surface water pumps conveying water to a cypress head and existing ditch. The staff report notes 1,173 acres of existing small vegetable fields that were ditched and diked. The water use permit authorized flood/seepage irrigation of these fields, which would help maintain water table levels in the area. A retention/detention area borders the proposed excavation to the east. This basin discharges to a dispersion area that drains under SR-29 and into the Barron River. Agricultural lands with the Silver Strand III grove/farm surround the project site to the north, west and south and drain as described above. Lands to the east include a large, vegetated retention/detention area. This basin discharges to a dispersion area that drains under SR-29, to the east of the retention/detention area, and into the Barron River. No deep-water bodies exist on or in the vicinity of the project site. The closest active Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) mining permit is issued to the Stewart Sand Mine (MMR_228414), located 6.6 miles northwest of the Silver Strand III project site. The FDEP permit authorizes the Stewart Sand Mine to excavate to -49 feet NGVD, or approximately 85 feet below grade. See Figure 1 for a map of the site and surrounding properties. Site Lithology Barron Collier Partnership contracted with YPC Consulting Group in 2022 to perform a preliminary geotechnical exploration of the site called the Silver Strand III Fill Pit. YPC advanced 23 standard penetration test (SPT) borings to approximately 30 feet bls, seven (7) SPT borings to approximately 60 feet bls, and two (2) SPT borings to approximately 100 feet bls. Boring locations generally formed a grid across the site. Many of the borings throughout the site (SB-1, 2, 4, 9, 10, 12, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 31 and 32) have poorly graded sand to silty sand overlying a weathered/fractured limestone layer occurring between 20 to 30 feet bls. The limestone layer is approximately 10 to 15 feet thick and followed by poorly graded sand to silty sand to termination depth. Other borings, primarily in the eastern half of the project site (SB-3, 7,8, 13, 17, 22, 23, 27, 28, 29) have a shallower, thinner limestone layer occurring between approximately 8 to 15 feet bls. This limestone layer may be 2-3 feet to 10 feet thick, in general. In some borings (SB- Page 7762 of 9661 Page 4 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 3, 17, 22 and 29) a second, deeper limestone layer, as described above, exists below the shallowlimestone interval, separated by poorly graded silty sand 20-25 feet thick. In these borings, the deeperlimestone layer generally begins around 40 feet bls.None of the boring descriptions reviewed included mention of clay or an obvious confining layer. Only the silty sands in SB-19, 20 and 32 have a measured percentage of fines passing the #200 sieve (the size designation for silt) in excess of 30%. SB-20 does have a percent passing of nearly 50%, so this interval may act as a leaky confining layer given the abundance of silt and clay minerals. In all these cases, the interval with high fines content terminates above 20 feet bls. None of the deeper borings show the presence of a similar layer at greater depths. Deeper layers analyzed for a grain size distribution report percent passing the #200 sieve at 20% or less. The description of groundwater modeling in the 1989 Silver Strand III water use permit modification, which assumes a 45-foot-thick Water Table aquifer and 80 feet of confinement separating the Water Table and Lower Tamiami aquifers, appears consistent with the borings taken at the project site. The model set-up assumes no confinement above 45 feet bls, which is generally where the lower-most limestone layer observed in the YPC borings terminates. The model set-up does assume the silty sands below the lower limestone layer act as a confining layer separating the Water Table and Lower Tamiami aquifers. Measurement of water levels in these zones and aquifer performance testing would be needed for a definitive determination. The model construction described above puts the top of the Lower Tamiami aquifer at 125 feet bls, below the proposed 100-foot excavation depth. Therefore, the modeling assessment used in SFWMD permitting aligns with lithologic conditions observed at the Silver Strand III project site. The lithology observed at the project site is consistent with the transitional nature of the Surficial aquifer in the area. As discussed above, confinement between the Water Table and Lower Tamiami aquifers present to the south of the site diminishes, along with the Tamiami limestone, and becomes absent in the Immokalee area. Well W-15535, located approximately 2.8 miles southeast of the project site, reports a distinct Lower Tamiami aquifer beginning at 85 feet bls. However, Well C2055, located 2 miles north-northeast of the project site reports the complete absence of the Lower Tamiami aquifer, with the Sandstone aquifer directly underlying a thick Surficial aquifer sequence. Soil borings taken at the Silver Strand III site appear more characteristic of the lithology reported at well C2055, which would support the proposed excavation depth of 100 feet. Water Level Data No active, publicly accessible monitoring wells appear to exist on the project site or within 2 miles of the site. The closest USGS monitoring well is C-298, located slightly greater than 2 miles north of the Silver Strand III site. C-298 is reported as open to the Sandstone aquifer with cased and total depths of 254 and 303 feet bls, respectively. This well has reported data from 1981 through 2023. Well C-966, a Surficial aquifer system well with located 2.7 miles southeast of the project site has reported data Page 7763 of 9661 Page 5 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 from 1984 through 2023. This well has cased and total depths of 30 to 40 feet, respectively. Nearly 5miles to the northwest in Immokalee, Surficial aquifer well C-1078, with respective cased and totaldepths of 38 and 45 feet bls, has a period of record from 1986 to 2023. Finally, a cluster of Surficial,Lower Tamiami and Sandstone aquifer monitoring wells is located 5.45 miles west of the project site.All these wells have reported water levels from 1986 through 2023. Surficial aquifer well C-981 has respective cased and total depths of 40 and 60 feet bls, while Lower Tamiami aquifer well C-982 has respective cased and total depths of 150 and 160 feet bls, and Sandstone aquifer well C-1079 has respective cased and total depths of 298 and 390 feet bls. While all these wells are located too far away to make definite statements about aquifer designations at the Silver Strand III project site, Lower Tamiami aquifer well C-982 (150-160 feet bls) exhibits an aquifer response consistent with that of a confined aquifer. Water level variations are more extreme than those in the unconfined Surficial aquifer and may drop up to 15-20 feet bls during the January/February period, which corresponds to the winter growing season. Agricultural operations in the region use the Lower Tamiami aquifer, and the Surficial/Water Table aquifer to a lesser extent, for irrigation supply, so the lowest water level periods coincide with the peak of the growing season rather than the typical minimum for systems driven primarily by rainfall, which occurs in May/June. Unconfined Surficial aquifer wells, such as C-966 and C-981, have a much smaller rage in water level, typically 5 to 6 feet, with lowest water level occurring in April or May. Agricultural operations in the area have used the Surficial aquifer for irrigation both historically and currently, to some extent, so the hydrographs for the USGS monitoring wells do show some evidence of this use, particularly in the period of record for the 1990s and early 2000s, which shows greater variations in water levels and annual lows that may occur any time from September to March. Surficial aquifer well C-1078 appears to exhibit hybrid behavior of unconfined and confined aquifer responses, with water level variations more extreme than those of C-966 and C-981 but not as great as those of Lower Tamiami aquifer well C-982. Peaks and lows observed at C-1078 generally coincide with those of C-982. Well C-1078, located in western Immokalee, may monitor a leaky confined zone within the Surficial aquifer, which might also have some degree of connection with the Lower Tamiami aquifer. In and north of Immokalee, where use of the Sandstone aquifer increases, the Sandstone aquifer exhibits similar trends to the Lower Tamiami aquifer, indicative of a confined aquifer. During the early part of the period of record, water levels in the Sandstone aquifer showed limited variability, with lows at the end of the dry season, which suggests limited use of the source. As use of the source for agricultural irrigation increased, annual ranges in water level also increased, starting in the late 1980s/early 1990s. Near the end of the period of record, peaks and lows in the Sandstone aquifer generally correspond with those of the Lower Tamiami aquifer. Aquifer nomenclature used in SFWMD permits in this area is not consistent among listed cased and total depths (e.g., nearby wells with similar cased and total depths may be classified as open to different aquifers), but generally, Surficial/Water Table aquifer wells have depths less than 100 feet, Lower Tamiami wells have production intervals within the 100 to 200-foot range, and Sandstone aquifer wells have depths within the 200 to 300-foot range. Page 7764 of 9661 Page 6 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 ONSITE WATER LEVEL DATA COLLECTIONTo assess the degree of hydraulic connection between the shallow and deeper zones of the Surficialaquifer at the project site, Peninsula Engineering implemented a water level monitoring program.Existing, deeper Surficial aquifer agricultural irrigation wells, typically classified as Lower Tamiamiaquifer on the water use permit, were equipped with data logging pressure transducers, as were shallow piezometers constructed next to the irrigation wells. A barometric pressure gauge was used to remove atmospheric influence from the well transducer data. LiDAR data was used to estimate ground level elevations at the well sites. Peninsula Engineering installed datalogging pressure transducers at J-32, located on the project site, which has collected data from August 2023 through present. An earlier data collection attempt at the similar J-2 site (located southeast of the project site) failed when a farmer put irrigation well J-2 into service without notice and pulled the pressure transducer from the well. Well J-32 has reported cased and total depths of 80 and 100 feet bls, respectively, and is classified as Lower Tamiami on the water use permit. The piezometer installed near J-32 has a total depth of approximately 5 feet bls. See Figures 2 and 3, respectively, for a location map of monitoring sites and plot of water level data along with rainfall from the Immokalee rain gauge, as reported through the SFWMD’s DBHydro site (DB key VN084). See Table 1 for monitoring well details. Well # TOC (ft. NAVD) Sensor zero (ft. NAVD) TOC to Natural Grade (ft.) Natural Grade (ft. NAVD) Natural Grade to sensor zero Latitude Longitude J-32 shallow 26.35 19.23 2.63 23.64 4.41 26Û 23' 09.62" 81Û 23' 05.48" J-32 Deep 24.49 13.35 0.60 23.90 10.55 26Û 23' 09.57" 81Û 23' 06.93" J-2 shallow 24.59 17.38 2.29 22.30 4.92 26Û 22' 56.17" 81Û 22' 28.61" J-2 deep 22.38 -8.26 0.08 22.30 30.56 26Û 22' 56.17" 81Û 22' 28.61" Table 1: Monitoring well details. Water elevations and trends in both the shallow and deep wells closely resemble each other and appear influenced primarily by rainfall.Neither of the wells exhibit obvious effects of irrigation pumpage or other withdrawals. These wells exhibit a smaller rage in water level, of 5 to 6 feet, with lowest water level occurring in April and May during periods of little to no rainfall. Water levels in both deep and shallow zones increase immediately following significant rainfall events and exhibit a rising trend during periods of frequent rainfall. If the deeper zone was semi-confined, its response to rainfall events would lag those of the shallow well. The water elevation data indicate both the shallow and the deeper zones are hydraulically connected to each other and to the surface hydrology, being driven by rainfall and with an overall lack of confinement between the two zones. The hydraulic connection between the deep and Page 7765 of 9661 Page 7 kimley-horn.com 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-271-2650 shallow zones of the Surficial aquifer at the project site supports a proposed excavation depth up to100 feet deep without breaching confining layers between distinct aquifers.Conclusions and RecommendationsIt appears little to no confinement exists across the Silver Strand III project site to within 100 feet bls. Multiple data sets reviewed in this assessment indicate no significant confinement within the Surficial aquifer in the area of the proposed excavation. Lithologic logs from borings taken on-site and “Golden Spike” wells published by the SFWMD show no clay or silt confining layers between producing zones up to 100 feet bls. Water level data collected at the project site supports the observed lack of confinement in the borings. Over extended periods of time, water levels in wells open to shallow and deep zones of the Surficial aquifer display nearly identical trends and behavior characteristic of an unconfined aquifer. Hydrogeologic information published by the SFWMD shows the Lower Tamiami aquifer absent entirely in the Immokalee area, with surficial sediments extending over 100 feet bls before the next aquifer is encountered. The SFWMD’s descriptions for the Immokalee “Golden Spike” well resemble conditions encountered at the Silver Strand III site. The combination of geotechnical borings to 100 feet bls, existing wells approximately 100 feet deep used to monitor water levels, and lithologic descriptions from nearby wells published by the SFWMD, along with 30 additional borings between 30 to 60 feet deep, provides a reasonable distribution of coverage across the project site. Lithology at the site generally consists of poorly graded sand to silty sand overlying a weathered/fractured limestone layer occurring between 20 to 30 feet bls approximately 10 to 15 feet thick and followed by poorly graded sand to silty sand. Some locations, primarily in the eastern half of the project site have a shallower, thinner limestone layer occurring between approximately 8 to 15 feet bls and 2 to 10 feet thick. In some of these locations, a second, deeper limestone layer begins around 40 feet bls, separated from the shallower layer by poorly graded silty sand. None of the boring descriptions reviewed included mention of clay or an obvious confining layer. Only the silty sands in SB-19, 20 and 32 have a measured percentage of fines passing the #200 sieve in excess of 30%. In all of these cases, the interval with high fines content terminates above 20 feet bls. Water level data collected at the project site from August 2023 to January 2024 show elevations and trends in co-located shallow and deep Surficial aquifer wells that closely resemble each other and appear influenced primarily by rainfall. The wells exhibit a smaller rage in water level, 5 to 6 feet, with lowest water levels occurring in April and May during periods of little to no rainfall, characteristic of unconfined aquifer behavior. Water levels in both deep and shallow zones increase immediately following significant rainfall events and exhibit a rising trend during periods of frequent rainfall. If the deeper zone was semi-confined, its response to rainfall events would lag those of the shallow well. The water elevation data indicate both the shallow and the deeper zones are hydraulically connected and driven by rainfall with an overall lack of confinement between the two zones up to 100 feet deep. Due to the lack of any significant confining layer within 100 feet of land surface and the noted behavior of water levels in the Surficial aquifer measured at the site, excavation of a mine lake to a depth of 100 feet at the Silver Strand III project site should not breach any confining layers or alter water levels long term. Page 7766 of 9661 Page 7767 of 9661 SILVER STRAND III COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Scale: As Noted Project No.: 248144002 February 2024 Figure 1 AERIAL MAP © 2021 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 Phone: 239 271 2650 www.kimley-horn.com CA 00000696 K:\FTM_WaterUtilities\Projects\Ave Maria\SS III Confining Layer\SilverStrandIII2.mxd - 2/1/2024 11:47:41 AM - Kim.ArnoldSilver Strand III Mine Silver Strand III Grove/Farm SR 29SR 29Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community, Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community I0 950 1,900Feet Page 7768 of 9661 SILVER STRAND III COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Scale: As Noted Project No.: 248144002 February 2024 Figure 2 AERIAL MAP © 2021 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 1514 Broadway, Suite 301, Fort Myers, FL 33901 Phone: 239 271 2650 www.kimley-horn.com CA 00000696 K:\FTM_WaterUtilities\Projects\Ave Maria\SS III Confining Layer\SilverStrandIIIFig2.mxd - 2/1/2024 12:00:49 PM - Kim.ArnoldSilver Strand III Mine !. J-32 Deep & Shallow Deep: Cased depth: 80 ft bls Total depth: 100 ft bls J-2 Deep & Shallow Deep: Cased depth: 60 ft bls Total depth: 95 ft bls !. SR 29SR 29 Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community, Source: Esri, Maxar, Earthstar Geographics, and the GIS User Community I0370740Feet Page 7769 of 9661 00.511.522.533.5415.0016.0017.0018.0019.0020.0021.0022.0023.0024.0025.00Water Elevation(feetNAVD)DateFigure 3: Silver Strand III Well J-32Rainfall--ImmokaleeJ-32 ShallowJ-32 DeepJ-32 Land SurfacePage 7770 of 9661 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY FOR THE SILVER STRAND MINE PROPERTY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Performed for: Peninsula Engineering 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, Florida 34105 Prepared by: Florida’s First Choice in Cultural Resource Management Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 (941) 379-6206 January 2023 Page 7771 of 9661 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY FOR THE SILVER STRAND MINE PROPERTY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Performed for: Peninsula Engineering 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, Florida 34105 Conducted by: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 Marion Almy - Project Manager Elizabeth A. Horvath - Project Archaeologist Justin Winkler – Archaeologist January 2023 Page 7772 of 9661 i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) of the 275.79-acre Silver Strand Mine property in Collier County for Peninsula Engineering. The Area of Potential Effects (APE) is located between Immokalee Road and State Road 29. This CRAS was completed in January 2023 as due diligence in anticipation of permitting requirements. The project will involve construction of a mine. The purpose of this investigation was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the project APE and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part § 800.16(d), the APE is the “geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.” Based on the scale and nature of the activities, the project has a limited potential for any indirect (visual or audible) or cumulative effects outside the immediate footprint of construction. Therefore, because of the project type and location of the proposed work, the archaeological and historical APE are limited to the footprint of the property. All work was carried out in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-655, as amended), as implemented by 36 CFR 800 (Protection of Historic Properties, effective August 2004), as well as Chapters 267 and 373, Florida Statutes, Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code, and Florida’s Coastal Management Program. All work was performed in accordance with the standards and guidelines contained in the Florida Division of Historical Resources’ (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual: Module 3 (FDHR 2003). The Principal Investigators meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (48 Federal Register 44716) for archaeology, history, architecture, architectural history, or historic architecture. Background research and a review of the Florida Master Site File (FMSF) and the NRHP indicated that there are three previously recorded archaeological sites within two miles of the APE; none is within the APE. There is a moderate to low potential for the occurrence of aboriginal archaeological sites based upon the environmental setting. There is a low potential for historic archaeological sites, although evidence of the timber, naval stores, and agricultural industries may be uncovered. The investigations consisted of surface reconnaissance combined with systematic and judgmental subsurface testing. All one-hundred-sixty-nine shovel tests were negative; no archaeological sites were identified. Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, indicated that no historic resources are located within the APE. A review of the historic aerial photos, United States Geological Survey quadrangle map, and the Collier County Property Appraiser’s data suggested no potential for historic resources within the APE. This was confirmed by the field investigations. Given the results of background research and field survey, including the excavation of 169 shovel tests, no archaeological sites or historic resources were discovered. As such, there are no cultural resources that are listed, eligible for listing, or that appear potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP within the APE. Therefore, it is the professional opinion of ACI that the proposed undertaking will result in no historic properties affected. Page 7773 of 9661 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ......................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Project Location and Setting ..................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Physiography and Geology ....................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Soils and Vegetation .................................................................................................. 2-3 2.4 Paleoenvironmental Considerations .......................................................................... 2-5 3.0 CULTURE HISTORY ......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Paleoindian ................................................................................................................ 3-2 3.2 Archaic ...................................................................................................................... 3-2 3.3 Glades ........................................................................................................................ 3-4 3.4 Caloosahatchee .......................................................................................................... 3-5 3.5 Colonialism ............................................................................................................... 3-7 3.6 Territorial and Statehood ........................................................................................... 3-8 3.7 Civil War and Aftermath ......................................................................................... 3-12 3.8 Twentieth Century ................................................................................................... 3-14 3.9 APE Specifics .......................................................................................................... 3-18 4.0 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODS ..................................................... 4-1 4.1 Archaeological Considerations .................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Historical Considerations .......................................................................................... 4-5 4.3 Field Methodology .................................................................................................... 4-6 4.4 Inadvertent/Unanticipated Discoveries ..................................................................... 4-6 4.5 Laboratory Methods/Curation ................................................................................... 4-7 5.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Archaeological .......................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Historical ................................................................................................................... 5-5 5.3 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 5-5 6.0 REFERENCES CITED ....................................................................................................... 6-1 APPENDIX Survey Log Page 7774 of 9661 iii LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure Figure 1.1. Location of the Silver Strand Mine APE. .................................................................. 1-2 Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the APE. ............................................................................ 2-2 Figure 2.2. Soil type distribution within the APE. ....................................................................... 2-6 Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. ............................................................................... 3-1 Figure 3.2. 1839 Mackay and Blake map showing the APE. ...................................................... 3-9 Figure 3.3. 1856 Ives map showing the APE. ........................................................................... 3-11 Figure 3.4. 1874 plat showing the APE. .................................................................................... 3-13 Figure 3.5. 1954 Copeland map showing the APE. ................................................................... 3-16 Figure 3.6. 1954 Collier County soil map showing the APE. .................................................... 3-16 Figure 3.7. 1958 quad map showing the APE. .......................................................................... 3-17 Figure 3.8. 1940 and 1980 aerial photographs showing the APE. ............................................. 3-19 Figure 4.1. Location of the previously recorded archaeological sites near the APE. .................. 4-2 Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests in the western portion of the APE. ............................... 5-3 Figure 5.2. Location of the shovel tests in the eastern portion of the APE.................................. 5-4 Table Table 2.1. Soil types within the APE. ........................................................................................ 2-5 Table 4.1. CRAS projects conducted proximate to the APE. ..................................................... 4-3 Table 4.2. Distribution of sites by water type and distance. ....................................................... 4-4 Table 4.3. Distribution of sites by drainage and soil types. ........................................................ 4-4 Photo Photo 2.1. Palm silviculture. ....................................................................................................... 2-1 Photo 2.2. Citrus grove. .............................................................................................................. 2-3 Photo 2.3. Cleared citrus grove................................................................................................... 2-3 Photo 2.4. Unidentified row crops. ............................................................................................. 2-4 Photo 2.5. Drainage canal in the eastern portion of the APE. .................................................... 2-4 Photo 5.1. Shovel test in the palm plantation. ............................................................................ 5-1 Photo 5.2. Shovel test in the cleared citrus grove. ...................................................................... 5-2 Photo 5.3. Stratigraphy in the area of row crops. ....................................................................... 5-2 Photo 5.4. Stratigraphy in the active citrus groves. .................................................................... 5-2 Page 7775 of 9661 ACI 1-1 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 1.0 INTRODUCTION Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) of the 275.79-acre Silver Strand Mine property in Collier County for Peninsula Engineering. The Area of Potential Effects (APE) is located between Immokalee Road and State Road (SR) 29 (Figure 1.1). This CRAS was completed in January 2023 as due diligence in anticipation of permitting requirements. The project will involve construction of a mine. The purpose of this investigation was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the project APE and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part § 800.16(d), the APE is the “geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.” Based on the scale and nature of the activities, the project has a limited potential for any indirect (visual or audible) or cumulative effects outside the immediate footprint of construction. Therefore, because of the project type and location of the proposed work, the archaeological and historical APE are limited to the footprint of the property. All work was carried out in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-655, as amended), as implemented by 36 CFR 800 (Protection of Historic Properties, effective August 2004), as well as Chapters 267 and 373, Florida Statutes (FS), Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code, and Florida’s Coastal Management Program. All work was performed in accordance with the standards and guidelines contained in the Florida Division of Historical Resources’ (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual: Module 3 (FDHR 2003). The Principal Investigators meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (48 Federal Register 44716) for archaeology, history, architecture, architectural history, or historic architecture. Background research preceded the field investigations. Such research provides and informed set of expectation as to the types and locations of resources expected within the APE. In addition, the data can be used to assess the significance of any sites discovered. Page 7776 of 9661 ACI 1-2 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Figure 1.1. Location of the Silver Strand Mine APE. Page 7777 of 9661 ACI 2-1 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Environmental factors such as geology, topography, relative elevation, soils, vegetation, and water are important in determining where archaeological sites are likely to be located. These variables influenced what types of resources were available in a given area, which in turn influenced decisions regarding settlement location and land-use patterns. Because of the influence of these environmental factors upon the inhabitants, a discussion of the environment is included. 2.1 Project Location and Setting The 275.79-acre APE is located in Sections 13-15 of Township 47 South, Range 29 East (United States [U.S.] Geological Survey [USGS] Immokalee 2013) (Figure 2.1). The APE is located between Immokalee Road and SR 29, about one mile south of the Immokalee Reservation. Over 50% of the APE consists of active and abandoned citrus groves. The remaining areas far to the east consist of repurposed grove now occupied by Sago, Royal, and Fan palm sylviculture and a smaller central area immediately east of the farm buildings contains plowed farm rows of unidentified cultivars (Photos 2.1-2.4). There are also numerous drainage canals through the APE (Photo 2.5). Photo 2.1. Palm silviculture. 2.2 Physiography and Geology According to White (1970), Collier County is included in the southern, or distal, physiographic zone, and more specifically, the APE is within the Immokalee Rise physiographic zone. It sits at an elevation of 20-25 feet [ft] above mean sea level (amsl). The APE is underlain by the Tamiami formation, which is surficially evidenced by shelly sand and clay (Lane 1981; Scott 2001; Scott et al. 2001). Page 7778 of 9661 ACI 2-2 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the APE. Page 7779 of 9661 ACI 2-3 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Photo 2.2. Citrus grove. Photo 2.3. Cleared citrus grove. 2.3 Soils and Vegetation According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the APE is primarily situated within Immokalee-Oldsmar-Basinger soil association; the eastern end falls within the Holopaw-Wabasso- Winder association. The former consists of nearly level, poorly drained, sandy soils on flatwoods and in sloughs. The natural vegetation consists of saw palmetto and some areas of scattered South Florida slash pine, waxmyrtle, and gallberry. The sloughs support scattered areas of slash pine, scrub cypress, cabbage palm, saw palmetto, waxmyrtle, sand cordgrass, pineland threeawn, panicums, and chalky bluestem. Page 7780 of 9661 ACI 2-4 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Photo 2.4. Unidentified row crops. Photo 2.5. Drainage canal in the eastern portion of the APE. The Holopaw-Wabasso-Webster association is characterized by nearly level, poorly and very poorly drained, sandy soils with a loamy subsoil. They occur of the flatwoods, sloughs, and in small, closed depressions. The flatwoods vegetation consists of saw palmetto and some areas of scattered South Florida slash pine, gallberry, and waxmyrtle. The sloughs support scattered areas of South Florida slash pine, scrub cypress, cabbage palm, saw palmetto, waxmyrtle, sand cordgrass, pineland threeawn, panicums, and chalky bluestem. The native vegetation inf the closed depressions include pickerelweed, St. Johnswort, and maidencane. Table 2.1 provides a list of the soils within the APE and their locations are depicted on Figure 2.2 (USDA 2021). Page 7781 of 9661 ACI 2-5 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Table 2.1. Soil types within the APE. Soil type, % slopes Drainage Setting Basinger fine sand, 0-2% Poor Sloughs and poorly defined drainageways Chobee, Winder and Gator soils, frequently ponded (fp), 0-1% Very poor Depressions and marshes Cypress Lake fine sand, 0-2% Poor Flatwoods Ft. Drum-Malabar, high, association Poor Ridges along sloughs Holopaw-Okeelanta, fp, 0-1% Very poor Depressions and marshes Holopaw fine sand, 0-2% Poor Sloughs and poorly defined drainageways Malabar fine sand, 0-2% Poor Sloughs and poorly defined drainageways Oldsmar fine sand, 0-2% Poor Flatwoods Wabasso fine sand, 0-2% Poor Flatwoods The soils support different vegetative regimes, which in turn provide habitats for the local animal population. The Natural Vegetation of Florida map indicates that the APE is in pine flatwoods (Davis 1980). Soils have variable suitability for openland, woodland, and wetland habitats. The habitat for openland wildlife consists of cropland, pasture, meadows, and areas that are overgrown with grasses, herbs, shrubs, and vines. These areas produce grain and seed crops, grasses, and legumes, and wild herbaceous plants. The wildlife attracted to these areas include bobwhite quail, dove, sandhill crane, meadowlark, field sparrow, and cottontail. Cypress Lake, Malabar, Holopaw, and Oldsmar sands are rated fair for openlands. Woodland wildlife habitat includes area of deciduous plants or coniferous plants or both and associated grasses, legumes, and wild herbaceous plants. Wildlife attracted to these areas include turkey, barred owls, thrushes, woodpeckers, squirrels, gray fox, racoon, and white-tailed deer. Ft. Drum, Holopaw, Oldsmar, and Wabasso sands are rated fair for woodlands. The habitat for wetland wildlife includes areas of open, marshy, or swampy, shallow water areas. Wildlife in these areas include ducks, egrets, herons, shore birds, ibis, otter, and alligators (Liudahl et al. 1998: Table 6). Chobee, Winder and Gator soils and Holopaw-Okeelanta soils are well suited to wetlands; Basinger, Cypress Lake, Malabar-high, Holopaw, and Malabar soils are rated fair. Soils not mentioned above are rate poor or very poor for that habitat. 2.4 Paleoenvironmental Considerations The early environment of the region was different from that seen today. Sea levels were lower, the climate was arid, and fresh water was scarce. An understanding of human ecology during the earliest periods of human occupation in Florida cannot be based on observations of the modern environment because of changes in water availability, botanical communities, and faunal resources. Aboriginal inhabitants would have developed cultural adaptations in response to the environmental changes taking place, which were then reflected in settlement patterns, site types, artifact forms, and subsistence economies. Due to arid conditions between 16,500 and 12,500 years ago, the perched water aquifer and potable water supplies were absent. Palynological studies conducted in Florida and Georgia suggest that between 13,000 and 5000 years ago, this area was covered with an upland vegetation community of scrub oak and prairie (Watts 1969, 1971, 1975). However, the environment was not static. Evidence recovered from the inundated Page-Ladson Site in north Florida has clearly demonstrated that there were two periods of low water tables and dry climatic conditions and two episodes of elevated water tables and wet conditions (Dunbar 2006b). Page 7782 of 9661 ACI 2-6 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Figure 2.2. Soil type distribution within the APE. Page 7783 of 9661 ACI 2-7 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 By 5000 years ago, a climatic event marking a brief return to Pleistocene climatic conditions induced a change toward more open vegetation. Southern pine forests replaced the oak savannahs. Extensive marshes and swamps developed along the coasts and subtropical hardwood forests became established along the southern tip of Florida (Delcourt and Delcourt 1981). Northern Florida saw an increase in oak species, grasses, and sedges (Carbone 1983). In south central Florida, pollen cores were dominated by wax myrtle and pine. The assemblage suggests that by this time, a forest dominated by longleaf pine along with cypress swamps and bayheads were present (Watts 1971, 1975). About 5000 years ago, surface water was plentiful in karst terrains and the level of the Floridan aquifer rose to five feet above present levels. With the establishment of warmer winters and cooler summers than in the preceding early Holocene, the fire-adapted pine communities prevailed. These depend on the high summer precipitation caused by the thunderstorms and the accompanying lightning strikes to spark the fires (Watts et al. 1996; Watts and Hansen 1994). The increased precipitation also resulted in the formation of the large swamp systems such as the Okefenokee and Everglades (Gleason and Stone 1994). After this time, modern floral, climatic, and environmental conditions began to be established. Page 7784 of 9661 ACI 3-1 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 3.0 CULTURE HISTORY A discussion of the culture history the region provides a framework within which the local archaeological and historic record can be examined. Archaeological and historic sites are not individual entities but are the remains of once dynamic cultural systems. As a result, they cannot be adequately examined or interpreted without reference to other sites and resources in the area. In general, the culture history of an area (i.e., an archaeological region) outlines the sequence of archaeological cultures through time. These cultures are defined largely in geographical terms but also reflect shared environmental and cultural factors. The project area is situated at the interface of the Caloosahatchee and Glades archaeological regions (Carr and Beriault 1984; Griffin 2002) (Figure 3.1). It should be noted that this regional assignment is one of several competing interpretations for the area, and Griffin (2002) supplies an excellent discussion of alterative groupings. Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. The area is better understood after the introduction of pottery (ca. 500 Before Common Era [BCE]). Prior to this, regional characteristics of native populations are not easily identified, as malleable materials such as textiles and basketry, which lend themselves to cultural expression, are typically destroyed by environmental processes. With the arrival of pottery, the clay provided both a means of cultural expression and an archaeologically durable artifact. Thus, the use of pottery as a marker of cultural diversity probably post-dates the inception of distinct Florida cultures by many centuries. The local history of the region is divided into four broad periods named with reference to the prevailing governmental powers or historical trends. The first period, Colonialism, occurred during the exploration and control of Florida by the Spanish and British from around 1513 until 1821. At that time, Florida became a territory of the U.S. and 21 years later became a State (Territorial and Statehood). The Civil War and Aftermath (1861-1899) period covers the Civil War, the period of Reconstruction Page 7785 of 9661 ACI 3-2 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 following the war, and the late 1800s, when the transportation systems were dramatically increased and development throughout the state expanded. The Twentieth Century period has subperiods based on important historic events such as the World Wars, the Boom of the 1920s, and the Depression. Each of these periods evidenced differential development and utilization of the region, thus effecting the historic archeological site distribution. 3.1 Paleoindian The Paleoindian stage is the earliest known cultural manifestation in Florida, dating from roughly 16,250-11,700 calibrated years before present (cal yr BP) (Anderson et al. 2019:258). Archaeological evidence for Paleoindians consists primarily of scattered finds of diagnostic lanceolate- shaped projectile points. The Florida peninsula at that time was quite different than today. In general, During this time, the climate of South Florida was much drier than today. Sea level was 260-425 ft lower than present, and the coast extended approximately 100 miles seaward on the Gulf coast. With lower sea levels, today’s well-watered inland environments were arid uplands (Milanich 1994). Lake Okeechobee, the Caloosahatchee, Myakka, and Peace Rivers, the Big Cypress, and the Everglades were probably dry. Because of drier global conditions and little or no surface water available for evaporation, Florida’s rainfall was much lower than at present (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980). Potable water was obtainable at sinkholes where the lower water table could be reached. Plant and animal life were also more diverse around the oases that were frequented by both people and game animals (Milanich 1994; Widmer 1988). Thus, the prevailing environmental conditions were largely uninviting to human habitation during the Paleoindian period (Griffin 2002). Given the inhospitable climate, it is not surprising that the population was sparse and Paleoindian sites are uncommon in south Florida. Exceptions include two sites to the north in Sarasota County, Little Salt Springs (Clausen et al. 1979) and Warm Mineral Springs (Clausen et al. 1975a, 1975b; Cockrell and Murphy 1978) and one site to the southeast, Cutler Fossil Site, in Dade County (Carr 1986). Archaeologists hypothesize that this period was characterized by small groups utilizing a hunting and gathering mode of subsistence. Dunbar (2006a:540) suggests that Paleoindians identified and migrated to “unexploited resource-rich areas” of food. Permanent sources of water, scarce during this time, were very important in settlement selection as well (Daniel and Wisenbaker 1987). This settlement model, often referred to as the Oasis Hypothesis (Milanich 1994:41), has a high correlation with geologic features in southern Florida such as deep sink holes like those noted in Sarasota and Dade counties. Sites of this period are most readily identified based on distinctive lanceolate shaped stone projectile points including those of the Simpson and Suwannee types (Bullen 1975). The tool assemblage also included items manufactured of bone, wood, and very likely leather, as well as plant fibers (Clausen et al. 1979). 3.2 Archaic The succeeding Archaic period is divided into three temporal periods: Early Archaic (ca. 7000 to 5000 BCE), Middle Archaic (ca. 5000 to 2000 BCE), and the Late Archaic (ca. 2000 to 500 BCE). According to Widmer (1988), the extreme aridity of the south Florida region during the Early Archaic period may have led to the abandonment of the area. Sites of the Early Archaic and Middle Archaic are not common in southern Florida. James Pepe confirmed the location of three Early Archaic and 13 Middle Archaic sites in the 13-county Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Project (CERP) area (Janus Research 2008). Initially, the settlement patterns and tools of the Early Archaic were similar to those of the preceding Paleoindian period, but through time, more wetland habitats began to emerge. Page 7786 of 9661 ACI 3-3 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 During the Archaic, marked environmental changes occurred that had profound influence upon human settlement and subsistence practices. Humans adapted to this changing environment and regional differences are reflected in the archaeological record (Russo 1994a, 1994b; Sassaman 2008). Among the landscape alterations were rises in sea and water table levels that resulted in the creation of more available surface water. It was during this period that Lake Okeechobee, the Everglades, the Big Cypress Swamp, and the Caloosahatchee and Peace Rivers formed. In addition hydrological changes, this period is characterized by the spread of mesic forests and the beginnings of modern vegetation communities including pine forests and cypress swamps (Griffin 2002; Widmer 1988). Two Early Archaic horizons, the Bolen and the Kirk, have been identified (Janus Research 2008). The main diagnostic markers for the Bolen Early Archaic are side-notched projectile points such as the Bolen and Greenbriar types (Austin 1997; Bullen 1975) as well as Kirk Corner-Notched (Farr 2006). Other stone artifacts include adzes, Edgefield scrapers, end scrapers, spokeshaves with graver spurs, side scrapers, and Waller knives (Purdy 1981). In southern Florida, the archaeological record for the Middle Archaic is better known than the Early Archaic. Among the material culture inventory are several varieties of stemmed, broad blade projectile points including those of the Newnan, Levy, Marion, and Putnam types (Bullen 1975). At sites where preservation is good, such as sinkholes and ponds, an elaborate bone tool assemblage is recognized along with shell tools and complicated weaving (Beriault et al. 1981; Wheeler 1994). In addition, artifacts have been found in the surrounding upland areas, such as the upland palmetto and pine flatwoods surrounding the Bay West Site (Beriault et al. 1981). Along the coast, excavations on both Horr’s Island in Collier County and Useppa Island in Lee County (Milanich et al. 1984; Russo 1991) have uncovered pre-ceramic shell middens that date to the Middle Archaic period. The Horr’s Island shell ring is accompanied by at least three ceremonial mounds. Large architectural features such as these were designed to divide, separate, and elevate above other physical positions within the settlement as a reflection and reinforcement of the social segmentation within society (Russo 2008:21). Mortuary sites, characterized by interments in shallow ponds and sloughs, as discovered at the Little Salt Springs Site in Sarasota County (Clausen et al. 1979) and the Bay West Site in Collier County (Beriault et al. 1981), are also distinctive of the Middle Archaic. The beginning of the Late (or Ceramic) Archaic period is similar to the Middle Archaic but includes the addition of pottery. The earliest pottery in the south Florida region is fiber-tempered (Orange Plain and Orange Incised), as represented at sites on Key Marco (Cockrell 1970; Widmer 1974). Projectile points of the Late Archaic are primarily stemmed and corner-notched, and include the Culbreath, Clay, and Lafayette types (Bullen 1975). Other Late Archaic lithic tools included hafted scrapers and ovate and triangular-shaped knives (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980) Essentially modern environmental conditions were reached by the beginning of the Late Archaic period, when freshwater resources were available throughout southern Florida. Sea levels continued to rise slightly during the post Archaic periods, inundating small knolls located along the edge of the Everglades in the process (Carr et al. 1991:125-126; Wheeler 2004:49). The emergence of stable coastal environments led to greater estuarine richness, which permitted larger human populations and regionalization of cultures as people adapted to specific habitats (Milanich 1994:83). The South Florida Native Americans increased their reliance on marine resources in coastal areas and expanded hunting, fishing, and plant collection throughout the interior (Carr 2002:195). Until recently, variations of Bullen’s chronology for the Late Archaic Orange culture in northeastern Florida were generally used for the Late Archaic in southern Florida. Fiber-tempered pottery, the earliest known for all of North America, was considered a marker for the ceramic portion of the Late Archaic. The use of this standard fiber-tempered sequence for the Late Archaic in southern Page 7787 of 9661 ACI 3-4 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Florida has come into question. Based on his research in southwestern Florida, Widmer (1988:68) hypothesized that the earliest Late Archaic sites included “untempered chalky pottery and limestone-tempered pottery as well as the usual fiber-tempered Orange pottery.” Austin (1997:136) stated that the “identification of a true Orange Horizon in south Florida is debatable.” Instead, what is more common is the presence of “semi-fiber tempered” pottery in the basal levels of middens, “often in association with thick St. Johns Plain or sand tempered plain sherds, and overlying either culturally sterile sands, or sparse scatters of lithic artifacts” (Austin 1996, 1997). Both Widmer and Austin agreed that semi-fiber tempered components at sites throughout southern Florida are “ephemeral” and soon replaced in the archaeological record by components consisting exclusively of sand-tempered pottery (Austin 1997:136; Widmer 1988:72-73). Importantly, it is now becoming clear that many of the ubiquitous faunal bone middens located in the interior wetlands of southern Florida date to the Late Archaic, despite the fact that many of them lack pottery. Such sites are difficult to date because, not only do they often lack chronologically diagnostic artifacts, most of the faunal bone at the sites lacks collagen, which is the datable material in bone samples. Nonetheless, ongoing research by the National Park Service in the Big Cypress National Preserve and Everglades National Park has yielded dense aceramic faunal bone middens yielding radiocarbon dates between 2800 and 1500 BCE (Schwadron 2006). 3.3 Glades The termination of the Late or Ceramic Archaic corresponds to a time of environmental change. The maturing of productive estuarine systems was accompanied by cultural changes leading to the establishment of what John Goggin originally defined as the “Glades Tradition” (Griffin 2002:148). The Glades Tradition was characterized by “the exploitation of the food resources of the tropical coastal waters, with secondary dependence on game and some use of wild plant foods. Agriculture was apparently not practiced, but pottery was extensively used” (Goggin 1949:28). Unlike much of peninsular Florida, the region does not contain deposits of chert, and as such, stone artifacts are rare. Instead of stone, shell and bone were used as raw materials for tools (Milanich 1994:302). Most information concerning the post-500 BCE aboriginal populations is derived from coastal sites where the subsistence patterns are typified by the extensive exploitation of fish and shellfish, wild plants, and inland game, like deer. Inland sites show a greater reliance on interior wetland resources. Known inland sites often consist of sand burial mounds and shell and dirt middens along major water courses, and small dirt middens containing animal bone and pottery in oak/palm hammocks, or palm tree islands associated with freshwater marshes (Griffin 2002). These islands of dry ground provided space for settlements (Carr 2002). Glades I - Beginning around 500 BCE, fiber-tempered and semi fiber-tempered pottery of the Late Archaic period was replaced by sand-tempered pottery (Glades Plain). This change in tempering agent marks the beginning the Glades cultural tradition. For 700 years, sand-tempered plain pottery dominated the assemblage, but from 200 CE (Common Era) and lasting until 800 CE, Gordon’s Pass Incised, Sanibel Incised, and an, as of yet unclassified decorated pottery type, were the predominant decorated types (Carr and Beriault 1984; Griffin 2002). The tremendous increase in Glades I sites within the Big Cypress indicates a dramatic increase in the usage of the area during this time (Widmer 1988), and the geographic extent of the Glades I diagnostics indicates a considerable degree of interchange and interaction (Griffin 2002:154). Glades II - The Glades II era (800 to 1200 CE) is marked by a tremendous diversity in decorated ceramic types. Goggin (n.d.) described the decorations as being “neatly and cleanly cut and Page 7788 of 9661 ACI 3-5 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 apparently made with swift cutting strokes while the clay is partially dry.” Glades IIa (750-900 CE) is identified by the presence of Key Largo Incised, Opa Locka Incised, and Miami Incised. During Glades IIb (900-1100 CE), Key Largo Incised remained the primary decorated ware. The number of sites increased, and the period would appear to be one of “relative stability in technology and subsistence” (Griffin 2002:158). From ca. 1100 to 1200 CE there is conspicuous absence of decorated pottery, and the number of sites drops dramatically (Griffin 2002:158). This cultural hiatus has been correlated to the NeoAtlantic warm period and associated with high sea levels (Fairbridge 1984; Gleason et al. 1984). Glades III - The Glades III era begins with the reintroduction of decorated ceramics; however, the motifs and techniques are noticeably different from previous styles. Glades IIIa (1200-1400 CE) is identified by the appearance of Surfside Incised, St. Johns Check Stamped, and Safety Harbor wares. There is also an accompanying increase in bone ornaments. Then again, ca. 1400 CE, ceramic decoration ceases with the exception of tooled rim types (Griffin 2002:159). Griffin hypothesizes that this ceramic style might have been associated with increasing Calusa influence in the area (Griffin 2002:159). Whereas the earlier cultural periods of the Glades area are defined exclusively by the archaeological record, historical documents provide greater information, including tribal names, for the peoples of the terminal Glades III period. Much of the early historical ethnographic information is derived from the account of Hernando d’Escalante Fontaneda, a Spanish captive of the Calusa (True 1944). During his 17-year captivity, Fontaneda learned of the political structure, economy, social hierarchy, and religion of the south Florida Indians. 3.4 Caloosahatchee The termination of the Late or Ceramic Archaic corresponds to a time of environmental change. The maturing of productive estuarine systems was accompanied by cultural changes leading to the establishment of what John Goggin defined as the “Glades Tradition” (Griffin 1988:133). It was characterized by “the exploitation of the food resources of the tropical coastal waters, with secondary dependence on game and some use of wild plant foods. Agriculture was apparently never practiced, but pottery was extensively used” (Goggin 1949:28). Unlike much of peninsular Florida, the region does not contain deposits of chert, and as such stone artifacts are rare. Instead of stone, shell and bone were used as raw materials for tools (Milanich 1994:302). Most information concerning the post-500 BCE aboriginal populations is derived from coastal sites where the subsistence patterns are typified by the extensive exploitation of fish and shellfish, wild plants, and inland game, like deer. Although Widmer postulated environmental stability for the Calusa, this was far from the truth based upon the recent environmental reconstructions (Walker 2013; Widmer 1988). Inland sites show a greater, if not exclusive reliance on interior resources. Known inland sites often consist of sand burial mounds and shell and dirt middens along major water courses, and small dirt middens containing animal bone and ceramic sherds in oak/palm hammocks, or palm tree islands associated with freshwater marshes (Griffin 1988). These islands of dry ground provided space for settlements (Carr 2002). The settlement pattern of the Caloosahatchee people at this time consisted of large villages (25 ac with about 400 people), small villages (9 ac / 50 people), and fishing hamlets and/or collection stations (2.5 ac, temporary, task specific site) (Widmer 1988). The larger sites are located in the coastal areas, whereas most of the interior sites are seen as short-term hunting stations occupied by special task groups from the permanent coastal villages (Widmer 1988:226). Page 7789 of 9661 ACI 3-6 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Caloosahatchee I, ca. 500 BCE to 500 CE, is characterized by thick, sand-tempered plain sherds with rounded lips, some St. Johns Plain ceramics, the appearance of Pineland Plain ceramics (tempered with sponge spicules and medium to fine quartz sand), and the absence of Belle Glade ceramics (Marquardt 1999:85). Based on the faunal analysis from Useppa Island and Pineland, fish was the primary meat source with whelks and conchs being the primary shellfish food. Botanical materials utilized include chenopod, panic grass, talinum, mallow, red mangrove, waxmyrtle, pine, buttonwood, and seagrape (Marquardt 1999:87). Data on burial customs for this time are unknown; on Pineland, the use of burial mounds began around 1000 CE (Marquardt and Walker 2013). Small discrete shell middens located along the coast may have represented clustered habitation areas for extended kin groups or lineages, and through time, the lower lying areas were filled in to make a larger elongated shell work (Schober 2014). A dramatic increase of Belle Glade ceramics marks the Caloosahatchee II period (500-1200 CE). Cordell (1992) has divided the Caloosahatchee II period into IIA and IIB based on the appearance of Belle Glade Red ceramics at about 800 CE. In addition, the IIA and IIB time ranges roughly correlate with two contrasting climate/sea-level episodes (Walker 2013). These changes in ceramics may also indicate the resurgence of ceremonial mound use, a characteristic of the period. Shell from other locales at these large ceremonial centers (e.g., Mound Key, Pineland) and villages sites (Estero) were used to increase the size of many of the shell mounds. Burials occurred in sand mounds and in natural sand ridges with both primary flexed and secondary bundle burials. The number of shell middens or village sites increased (Milanich 1994:319) and evidence of ranked societies appears (Widmer 1988:93). However, Schober notes there was an apparent abandonment of many sites in inland bays and on barrier islands (Schober 2014). The Wightman Site has three non-mortuary ceremonial mounds connected by shell causeways (Fradkin 1976). In addition, the large Pineland Canal appears to have been constructed at this time (Luer 1989a, 1989b). It is possible that the large Pineland complex served as the center of Calusa society at this time (cf. Milanich 1995:44). During this time, it had been postulated that sea levels were higher than during the Caloosahatchee I period, or that the coastal area was under greater influence from nearby ocean inlets. This is based on the higher diversity of faunal remains and the increased number higher salinity-based food stuffs (Walker 1992). The number of shell midden or village sites increased, and shell tools (hafted shell hammers and cutting edged tools) became more diverse (Marquardt 1992:429; Milanich 1994:319). The Caloosahatchee III period (1200 to 1350 CE) is identified by the appearance of St. Johns Check Stamped and Pinellas Plain ceramics (Cordell 1992). Belle Glade Plain ceramics continue to be the dominant type, with sand tempered plain and Pineland Plain also occurring. Marquardt (1992:430) notes that no obvious changes in the settlement and subsistence patterns based upon the archaeological evidence even though this is the beginning of the Little Ice Age (Marquardt 2013). The accumulation and/or build-up of midden-mounds continued in a constricted spatial pattern, as in the IB period (Marquardt and Walker 2012). Sand burial mounds continued to be utilized, often containing Englewood and Safety Harbor vessels. A number of mounds from this period have had radially placed extended burials within the mounds (Luer and Almy 1987). The Caloosahatchee IV period (1400-1513 CE) is characterized by the appearance of numerous trade wares from the adjoining regions (Widmer 1988:86). These types include Glades Tooled and pottery of the Safety Harbor series. There was also a decrease in popularity of Belle Glade Plain ceramics (Milanich 1994:321). Sand tempered plain pottery, with square and flattened lips, is the most common (Cordell 1992:168). There is also an increase in Pineland Plain ceramics. Around 1400 CE, the use of incising on ceramics in the Glades and Caloosahatchee regions ceased and the ceramic assemblages of the two areas were very homogeneous (Marquardt 1992:431). Some have suggested that this represents an expansion of the Calusa within this area (Griffin 1988; McGregor 1974). Large Page 7790 of 9661 ACI 3-7 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 villages sites continued to accumulate midden-mounds and the dead were interred in sand burial mounds (Marquardt 2013). 3.5 Colonialism The cultural traditions of the native Floridians changed as a result of European expansion into America. The initial events, authorized by the Spanish crown in the 1500s, ushered in devastating European contact. After Ponce de Leon’s landing near St. Augustine and circumnavigation of the peninsula in 1513, official Spanish explorations were confined to the west coast of Florida until 1565. Florida’s east coast, lacking deep-water harbors like Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor, was left to a few shipwrecked sailors from treasure ships, which, by 1551, sailed through the Straits of Florida on their way to Spain. When the first Europeans arrived in coastal southwest Florida in the 16th century, they encountered the Calusa, a powerful, complex society ruled by a paramount chief. The principal town of the Calusa is thought to have been on Mound Key in Estero Bay. Documents suggest that the Calusa chief ruled over 50 towns, from which he exacted tribute (Widmer 1988). Between 1513 and 1558, Spain launched several expeditions of exploration and ultimately failed, colonization of La Florida. Archaeological evidence of contact can be found in the form of European trade goods such as glass beads, bells, and trinkets recovered from village sites. Prior to the settlement of St. Augustine in 1565, European contact with the indigenous peoples was sporadic and brief; however, the repercussions were devastating. The southeastern Native American population of 1500 has been estimated at 1.5 to 2 million (Dobyns 1983). Following exposure to Old World diseases such as bubonic plague, dysentery, influenza, and smallpox, epidemics to which they had no immunity, the Native American population was reduced by as much as 90% (Ramenofsky 1987). The social consequences of such a swift and merciless depopulation were staggering. Within 87 years of Ponce de Leon’s landing, the Mississippian cultures of the Southeast were collapsed (Smith 1987). In 1708, the Spanish government reported that three hundred refugees were all that remained of the original Florida population (Mulroy 1993). Along the Gulf Coast between Charlotte Harbor and Tampa Bay, Spanish and Cuban fisherfolk established communities, or “ranchos,” with the earliest being at Useppa Island and San Carlos Bay (Hammond 1973; Palov 1999). There is growing archaeological evidence that the surviving Native Americans of the region were assimilated into these mixed communities (Almy 2001; Hann 1991; Neill 1968; Palov 1999). These west coast ranchos supplied dried fish to Cuban and northern markets until the mid-1830s, when the Seminole Indian Wars and customs control closed the fisheries. During the two centuries following the settlement of St. Augustine, the Spanish widened their Florida holdings to include the settlement at Pensacola and a garrison at Saint Marks. With the English to the north and the French to the west, the Spanish colony of La Florida was extremely fragile. In the early 1700s, Spain invited some of the Lower Creek Indians, displaced by British settlements, into La Florida to provide a hostile buffer against the British (Mulroy 1993). What formed as a border population evolved as other bands of Lower Creek extraction moved into the peninsula. This first migration formed a confederation, which included Cowkeeper and his Alachua band, the Apalachicolas, and the Mikasukis (Mulroy 1993). The Treaty of Paris (1763) reallocated the British, French, and Spanish holdings in America. As a result, Florida was ceded to the English. After this, bands of Upper Creek, Muskogee speakers, began moving into Florida, increasing the Native American population to around two thousand by 1790 (Mulroy 1993). Although cultural distinctions existed between the various Native American groups entering Florida, Europeans collectively called them Seminoles: Page 7791 of 9661 ACI 3-8 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 The word Seminole means runaway or broken off. Hence Seminole is a distinctive appellation, applicable to all the Indians in the Territory of Florida, as all of them run away, or broke off, from the Creek or Nuiscoge [Muskogee] nation (U.S. Congress 1837). The Seminoles formed, at various times, loose confederacies for mutual protection against the new American Nation to the north (Tebeau 1980:72). The Seminoles were joined by escaped slaves from South Carolina and Georgia (Porter 1996). The loss of slave labor, particularly in light of the abolitionists’ movement in the northeast, coupled with the anxiety of having a free and hostile slave population immediately to the south, caused great concern among plantation owners. This historically underestimated nuance of the Seminole Wars prompted General Thomas S. Jesup to say, “This you may be assured is a negro and not an Indian War” (Knetsch 2003:104). Following the Treaty of Paris (1763), the ensuing decades witnessed the American Revolution during which British loyalists immigrated to Florida. Following the Revolution, the second Treaty of Paris (1783) returned Florida to Spain; however, Spanish influence was nominal during this second period of ownership. For the next 36 years, Spain, from the vantage of Florida, watched with growing concern as the infant American Nation to the north gained momentum. When the U.S. acquired the Louisiana Purchase from France in 1803, Spain was hemmed in. When the Seminoles began cross-border raids from Spanish Florida into the United States, General Andrew Jackson was commission to defend the nation. His orders permitted him to cross the international border to pursue Seminoles, but he was to respect Spanish authority. General Jackson’s subsequent actions belie either tacit instructions or a personal agenda, as he killed hundreds of indigenous people and runaway slaves, took control of several Spanish garrisons and towns, confiscated the Spanish royal archives, named an American as governor of the area, and announced that the Spanish economic laws would be replaced by the revenue laws of the U.S. (Tebeau 1980). This aggression understandably strained relations between the U.S. and Spain. Spain, who had more pressing concerns with its Central and South American colonies, ceded Florida to the U.S. in the Adams-Onis Treaty of 1819 in exchange for the territory west of the Sabine River. 3.6 Territorial and Statehood In 1821, Andrew Jackson, named provisional governor of the Territory of Florida, divided the territory into St. Johns and Escambia Counties. At that time, St. Johns County encompassed all of Florida lying east of the Suwannee River, and Escambia County included the land lying to the west. In the first territorial census in 1825, some 317 persons reportedly lived in South Florida; by 1830 that number had risen to 517 (Tebeau 1980:134). Although what became known as the First Seminole War (the cross-border hostilities between the U.S. and the Seminoles) was fought in north Florida, the Treaty of Moultrie Creek in 1823, at the end of the war, was to affect the settlement of south Florida. In exchange for occupancy of a four- million-acre reservation south of Ocala and north of Charlotte Harbor, the Seminoles relinquished their claim to the remainder of the peninsula (Covington 1958; Mahon 1985). The treaty satisfied neither the Seminoles nor the settlers. The inadequacy of the reservation, the desperate situation of the Seminoles, and the demand of would-be settlers for their removal, produced another conflict. By 1835, the Second Seminole War was underway, initiated with the Seminole attack on Major Dade’s company in route to Fort King. Although much of the Second Seminole War occurred in central Florida, as the Seminoles fled southward into the Big Cypress and Everglades, U.S. forces pursued Page 7792 of 9661 ACI 3-9 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 them. In October 1840, U.S. Secretary of War Joel Poinsett advised commander Armistead that the construction of fixed post installations should be discontinued, and temporary depots should be adopted (Knetsch 2003). This new strategy was a direct response to the guerilla-like warfare utilized by the Seminoles and the abandonment of set piece warfare. Because of this directive, the landscape of south Florida was dotted with depots and only slightly more substantial “forts.” The forts of south Florida very rarely approximated the size and permanency of forts such as Brooke, King, and Mellon. The Mackay and Blake map from this time shows no features near the APE (Mackay and Blake 1839) (Figure 3.2). Geo-referencing maps from this time is a difficult proposition, thus the following figures show the approximate location of the APE. Figure 3.2. 1839 Mackay and Blake map showing the APE. The federal government ended the Second Seminole War in 1842 by withdrawing troops from Florida. At the war’s end, some of the battle-weary Seminoles were persuaded to emigrate to the Oklahoma Indian Reservation where the federal government had set aside land for them. After much political deliberation over the fate of black Seminoles (Knetsch 2003:126), approximately 500 black Seminoles were allowed to accompany the “red Seminoles” west (Porter 1996). Those Seminoles who wished to remain in Florida were allowed to do so, but the reservation boundary was redrawn, reducing Seminole lands to south and west of Lake Istokpoga in Highlands County. To limit contact between the Seminoles and Cuban fishermen, the offshore islands were excluded from the territory (Covington 1982:3). The government considered these two and one half million acres “a temporary hunting and planting reserve” (Covington 1982:3) and continued to pressure the remaining Seminoles to leave by “sending a delegation of their tribe, which have emigrated West, to visit their brethren in Florida, and explain to them the advantages of rejoining their tribe” (U.S. Congress 1850). In 1845, the Union admitted the State of Florida with Tallahassee as the state capital and survey and exploration of the Big Cypress and Okeechobee areas was intensified. Tension mounted as the Seminoles watched with growing alarm the passage of military patrols and survey parties, and Page 7793 of 9661 ACI 3-10 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 complaints were made to Indian Agent Captain Casey that such activities made hostilities inevitable (Covington 1982:30). Patrols typically found little remaining of previous military installations; however, navigation and location was always in doubt given the limited cartography and featureless swamps. One officer lamented that “The maps represent the shape of the Big Cypress so differently in this portion of it and also the course of the creek Okholoakooche [Okaloacoochee Slough] from what I found that I felt doubts if I had yet reached the right place.” On January 22, 1855, Lt. George Hartsuff, appointed topographical engineer and main surveyor, began exploration of the Big Cypress and Everglades. During this time, he helped establish Forts Simon Drum and Shackleford. When the rainy season of June 1855 set in, survey was suspended, and Hartsuff began work on his field notes and maps. In a sketch furnished to the War Department, he showed the exact location of many Indian villages and noted that he had been into the chief haunt of the Indians that contained most of their villages, gardens, and cattle pens (Covington 1982:35). Sampson Forrester, a Black Seminole, provided the following account of the Seminole existence in the swamps: Within the swamp are many pine-islands, upon which the villages are located. They are susceptible of cultivation; and between them is a cypress swamp, the water from two to three feet deep. The Indians rely principally upon their crops, which, though small, add much to their comfort. Corn, pumpkins, beans, wild potatoes, and cabbage palmetto, afford subsistence. The scarcity of powder deprives them partially of game; though bears and turkey are frequently killed with arrows. Discharging a rifle was forbidden, as in a country so flat and wet the reverberation is in abundance; but there they apprehend discovery. A few ponies, cattle, hogs, and chickens are owned by the chief (Tampa Tribune 1955). On December 7, 1855, Lieutenant Hartsuff again set out for the Big Cypress with orders to make reconnaissance and take note of any Indian fields and settlements (Covington 1982:1). Within a few days, the company found the charred ashes of Forts Simon Drum and Shackelford, which had been abandoned during the rainy season. Every Indian village entered was found to be deserted, and when leaving Billy Bowlegs’ village on December 18, 1855, artillerymen took bunches of planted bananas. Later, in the day, the company received orders to return to Fort Myers and they began the trip westward. They camped for the evening in a small grove south of present-day Immokalee; 30 Seminole warriors led by Billy Bowlegs ambushed them at 5:00 AM (Covington 1982:1). In what was perhaps the result of misunderstood aggression, and tragically ill-timed orders (had they only left a day earlier), the Third, and final, Seminole War began. For the following two and a half years, hit and miss skirmishes extended from the Big Cypress and Everglades to Darby in Pasco County and New Smyrna Beach in Volusia County. Through this period, U.S. military strategy ranged from using a poorly disciplined militia, to aggressive campaigns, to truce offerings. After several previous betrayals, the Seminoles did not respond to the latter tactic. By the summer of 1857, the focus was on Billy Bowlegs in the Big Cypress. This effort was greatly aided by the use of shallow draft boats (Covington 1982). When found, villages were burned, fields were destroyed, horses and cattle were slaughtered, and Seminoles captured. As Seminole warriors were occupied hunting or scouting, captured villagers were typically women and children, the wounded, and the elderly. On November 19, 1857, Captain William Cone’s company discovered an occupied village. Two Seminole guards were killed and five women, thirteen children, and a wounded warrior were taken prisoner (Covington 1982:72). Page 7794 of 9661 ACI 3-11 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 During the Seminole War, the U.S. Army Engineers surveyed the region south of the Caloosahatchee River. The Ives map depicts numerous forts and trails in this part of the State, with Ft. Simon Drum to the northeast and Ft. Doane to the southwest (Figure 3.3.) (Ives 1856). Figure 3.3. 1856 Ives map showing the APE. After years of running, struggling to provide for his people, and mounting attacks, when possible, Billy Bowlegs finally surrendered to federal forces at Fort Myers. On May 4, 1858, the ship Grey Cloud departed Fort Myers for Egmont Key with 38 warriors and 85 women and children. An additional 45 captives were boarded at Egmont, and the ship set sail for New Orleans where they would depart for Oklahoma. Although some Seminoles remained in the Big Cypress and the Everglades, the U.S. government did not deem it worthy to pursue them. This half-starved and battle-weary population was left to eke out an existence in the south Florida swamps (Covington 1982). As settlers moved into the Big Cypress region, cattle ranching served as one of the major economic activities. Mavericks left by early Spanish explorers such as DeSoto and Narvaéz provided the stock for the herds raised by the mid-eighteenth century “Cowkeeper” Seminoles. As the Seminoles were pushed further south during the Seminole Wars and their cattle were either sold or left to roam, settlers captured or bought the cattle. By the late 1850s, the cattle industry of southwestern Florida was developing on a significant scale. By 1860, cattle owners from all over Florida drove their herds to Fort Brooke (Tampa) and Punta Rassa for shipment to Cuba, at a considerable profit. During this period, Jacob Summerlin became the first cattle baron of southwest Florida. Known as the “King of the Crackers,” his herds ranged from Ft. Meade to Ft. Myers (Covington 1957). Page 7795 of 9661 ACI 3-12 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 3.7 Civil War and Aftermath In 1861, Florida followed South Carolina’s lead and seceded from the Union as a prelude to the Civil War. Florida had much at stake in this war as evidenced in a report released from Tallahassee in June of 1861. It listed the value of land in Florida at $35,127,721 and the value of the slaves at $29,024,513 (Dunn 1989:59). Although the Union blockaded the coast of Florida during the war, the interior of the state saw very little military action. Florida became one of the major contributors of beef to the Confederate government (Shofner 1995:72). Summerlin originally had a contract with the Confederate government to market thousands of head a year at eight dollars per head. However, by driving his cattle to Punta Rassa and shipping them to Cuba, he received 25 dollars per head (Grismer 1946:83). In an attempt to limit the supply of beef transported to the Confederate government, Union troops stationed at Ft. Myers conducted several raids into the Peace River Valley to seize cattle and destroy ranches. In response, Confederate supporters formed the Cattle Guard Battalion, consisting of nine companies under the command of Colonel Charles J. Mannerlyn (Akerman 1976). The cattle owners and the farmers in the state lived simply. The typical home was a log cabin without windows or chinking, and settlers’ diets consisted largely of fried pork, corn bread, sweet potatoes, and hominy. The lack of railway transport to other states, the federal embargo, and the enclaves of Union supporters and Union troops holding key areas such as Jacksonville and Ft. Myers prevented an influx of finished materials. As a result, settlement remained limited until after the Civil War. Immediately following the war, the South underwent a period of “Reconstruction” to prepare the Confederate States for readmission to the Union. The program was administered by the U.S. Congress, and on July 25, 1868, Florida officially returned to the Union. After the war ended, southerners who faced reconstruction and rebuilding saw Florida as a frontier full of opportunity and welcome. In southwest Florida, settlers first arrived by ones or twos, drifting through the area. Many of the early arrivals, however, were apparently “squatters” (Tebeau 1966:167). In most of the early settlements, development followed the earlier pattern with few settlers, one or two stores, and a lack of available overland transportation. In the 1870s, while the region was still part of Monroe County, settlement of Collier County evolved slowly and in isolated pockets. Immokalee, Everglades City, Chokoloskee, Marco, Caxambas, Goodland, and Naples served as the early centers for settlement (Tebeau 1966:96). These first permanent pioneers were farmers; the hunters and fisherfolk who had preceded them established only temporary camps. As the land was largely impassable, their market was Key West, a growing city which produced almost none of its own food (Tebeau 1966). The Homestead Act, created by Congress in 1862, allowed settlers to obtain title to 160 acres by residing on and working the land. The property had to first be surveyed by the government. It was not until the 1870s that W.L. Apthorp and T.S. Stearns surveyed Township 47 South, Range 29 East (Apthorp 1872; Stearns 1874). No historic features were identified within or proximate to the APE (Figure 3.4) (Apthorp and Stearns 1874). Stearns described the Sections lines along the APE as 2nd and 3rd rate prairie with scattered pine and ponds or 3rd rate pine and prairie (Stearns 1874:410-411, 420- 421, 430-431). By the early 1880s, the State of Florida faced a fiscal crisis involving title to public lands. By act of Congress in 1850, the federal government turned over to the states for drainage and reclamation all “swamp and overflow land.” Florida received approximately 10,000,000 acres. To manage that land and the 5,000,000 acres the state had received on entering the Union, the state legislature in 1851 created the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund. In 1855, the legislature established the actual fund (the Florida Internal Improvement Fund), in which state lands were to be held. The fund became mired in debt after the Civil War and under state law no land could be sold until the debt was Page 7796 of 9661 ACI 3-13 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 cleared. In 1881, the Trustees started searching for a buyer capable of purchasing enough acreage to pay off the fund’s debt and permit the sale of the remaining millions of acres that it controlled. Figure 3.4. 1874 plat showing the APE. In 1881, Hamilton Disston, a member of a prominent Pennsylvania saw manufacturing family entered into an agreement with the State of Florida to purchase four million acres of swamp and overflowed land for one million dollars. In exchange, he promised to drain and improve the land. This transaction, which became known as the Disston Purchase, enabled the distribution of large land subsidies to railroad companies, inducing them to begin extensive construction programs for new lines throughout the state. The purchase, although technically legal, was extremely generous with the designation “swamp and overflow land.” Grismer (1946) estimates that at least half of the acreage was “high and dry.” Disston and the railroad companies, in turn, sold smaller parcels of land to developers and private investors (Tebeau and Carson 1965:252). Sections 13-15 were deeded to the Carrabelle, Tallahassee, and Georgia Railroad in 1894 (State of Florida n.d.:269). By the late 1880s, squatters were sufficient in numbers to protest when “their land” became the property of Hamilton Disston. Squatters could have purchased the land on which they had taken up residence and constructed improvements, for such a provision was made in the Disston contracts. But the early settlers believed they should each be permitted to homestead 160 acres of high and dry land. They had not been able to do so because the land was designated “swamp and overflowed” and title to it had been transferred to the state (Tebeau 1966:167). Disston’s purchase included what is now Naples, and he formed the Florida Land and Improvement Company. In 1886, Charles Adams bought a parcel from Disston which formed the basis Page 7797 of 9661 ACI 3-14 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 for the Naples Town Improvement Company of Tallahassee. When John Williams and Walter Haldeman, both from Kentucky, decided “Naples” was the perfect place to develop a city, they bought the controlling interest in the Naples Town Improvement Company. They reorganized it, gave it new direction, and renamed it the Naples Company. With Haldeman directing the work, the company was ready, by December 1887, to embark into a new period of full-scale town building and improvement including a hotel, churches, and shops. The name “Naples” is attributed to numerous Florida developers’ sales schemes to romanticize the Florida peninsula into a pleasant “Italian” seaside resort. Unfortunately, the only activity for the next few years was on paper - the buying and selling of land; little construction took place (Jamro and Lanterman 1985). In 1887, the land, which today is Collier County, became part of the newly created Lee County. It was named for Barron Gift Collier, a Memphis born businessman who promoted the region’s development. When Billy Bowlegs departed for Oklahoma, Old Tiger Tail became the de facto leader of the remaining Seminoles. He lived at the headwaters of the Okaloacoochee Slough and his holdings included cattle, agricultural fields, and Corn Dance Grounds (West 1990). In 1891, under the direction of Amelia S. Quinton, the Women’s National Indian Association resolved to establish a mission near Immokalee (then known as Allen’s Place) (West 1990). Dr. J.E. Brecht and his wife were hired as missionaries, and the mission consisted of a residence, a schoolhouse, barn, and fenced land. It was as this time that Allen’s Place became known as Immokalee (Mikasuki for “home”). A lumber mill was established in 1892 to provide the Native Americans with employment and industrial training, although it burned down the following year (FPS 1986:62). In 1893, the Episcopal Dioceses established a mission for the Seminoles and the federal government established an agency there. The Episcopal Indian Mission held its first service in 1896, though established for the Indians, white settlers made use of the church until 1924 (Tebeau 1966). In 1896, trader Bill Brown established a post on the western rim of the Everglades. Over time, the missionary activities shifted from Immokalee to Brown’s Landing where the Glade Cross Mission was established. As a result, when the Big Cypress Reservation boundaries were drawn, they included the Glade Cross Mission, but Immokalee was excluded. When the reservation was created, Bill Brown’s son, Frank, who grew up amongst the Seminoles, was appointed the Agent for the reservation (Brown 1989). 3.8 Twentieth Century From 1899 until 1914, the Naples Company struggled but the town slowly grew. In 1914, E. W. Crayton, an Ohio real estate developer with a successful record of accomplishment in St. Petersburg, purchased the controlling interest in the company and renamed it the Naples Improvement Company. His direction is credited with leading Naples into the future. In 1925, Naples was incorporated and by 1927, reached by two railroad lines (Dean 1991). In 1911, successful New York City advertiser, Barron Gift Collier, visited Useppa Island. Collier was captivated, “Frankly, I was fascinated with Florida and swept off my feet by what I saw and felt. It was a wonderland with a magic climate, set in a frame of golden sunshine” (Collier County Museum 2010). Over the next decade, Collier amassed over one million acres in southwest Florida and his property stretched from the Ten Thousand Islands to Useppa Island, and from the coast to the Big Cypress and the Everglades (Clement n.d.). Collier was the largest landholder in the state and created a luxury resort, the Useppa Inn, which was visited by corporate giants, presidents, movie stars, authors, and sports celebrities. To facilitate development, Collier made a pledge to the Florida State Legislature to complete the Tamiami Trail from Tampa to Miami (Naples Daily News 1976). The roadway was finished in 1928 and as traffic increased, southwest Florida’s tourist industry was born (Scupholm 1997). The construction of the Tamiami Trail had a tremendous effect on Seminole settlement patterns. The roadway interrupted traditional canoe routes and as a result, Seminoles were forced to use the Page 7798 of 9661 ACI 3-15 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Tamiami Canal, which was created during road construction. Many Seminole families moved closer to the Tamiami Canal to facilitate canoe transportation (Carr 2002). On July 7, 1923, the state legislature created Collier County and named Everglades City as county seat. Collier became the second largest county in Florida with a land area of 2032 square miles. At the time of its creation, the county consisted of pine and cypress land and extensive swampland. The towns within the county, Immokalee, Naples, Marco, Caxambas, Chokoloskee, Deep Lake, and Everglades City, were all small settlements separated by almost inaccessible terrain. Barron Collier was instrumental in bringing modern communications, roadways, and railroads to his namesake county (Collier County Museum 2010). His promotions eventually opened up the area’s enormous agricultural and resort potential, but the Great Depression halted growth. The number of residents in 1925 of 1256 grew to only 2883 by 1930 (Tebeau 1966:212). By the mid-1930s, federal programs, implemented by the Roosevelt administration, started employing large numbers of construction workers, helping to revive the economy of the state. The programs were instrumental in the construction of parks, bridges, and public buildings. However, Collier County’s economy and population remained at a virtual standstill until the end of WWII when a new wave of national prosperity sent thousands of people to Florida (Dean 1991). Improvements in transportation included the 1921 Atlantic Coast Line (ACL) Railway Company’s extension south from LaBelle to Immokalee. The town took on new importance and became a center for inland activity in Collier County (Tebeau 1966). While Barron Collier was promoting the Tamiami Trail, he and his supporters were also trying to open a direct highway route from Immokalee to the county seat of Everglades City. By 1923, an unimproved road from LaBelle through Immokalee, terminating at Deep Lake, was depicted on a Florida State Map (Kendrick 1964). This road was completed between Immokalee and Everglades City in the early 1920s (FPS 1986). Collier County induced the ACL to continue its line south to Everglades City around 1927. The two projects linked the town with outer areas of the county and the Tamiami Trail. With the arrival of the railroad and road Immokalee became a center for ranching, farming, and lumbering (Tebeau 1966). In 1923, Collier County had one of the largest stands of virgin cypress and pine timber in the country (Tebeau 1966). Roads leading into the Everglades were completed in the 1920s, enabling logging companies to exploit the region’s cypress (Klinkenberg 1994). From the 1920s to the late 1950s, steam powered mills cut cypress board, which was valued for its durability and imperviousness to water. “Swamp Loggers” would fell the trees and oxen and mules would pull the downed trees to temporary tram railways where they were loaded for transport to the nearby mills. Logging activities in the Big Cypress Swamp and Fakahatchee Strand were prevalent in the 1940s in response to wartime needs (U.S. Fish and Wildlife n.d.). The cypress was used in the construction of P.T. boats, and, later, was shipped to Europe to supply the post-war rebuilding efforts (Klinkenberg 1994). Two of the companies with logging operations in the area were the Lee Tidewater Cypress Company and the C. J. Jones Logging Company. The logging industry required the construction of rail lines traversed by steam locomotives, which resulted in the establishment of a number of sawmills and lumber towns within the region. The largest of these towns was Jerome, located off of present-day State Road 29, north of US 41 (Tamiami Trail) (Klinkenberg 1994). Two mills, one at Naples and the other at Bonita Springs, reached into the timber lands from the west coast (Tebeau 1966:252). However, as a result of heavy lumbering activities from the 1940s to 1957, much of the forest was cleared (FDEP n.d.; Tebeau 1966; U.S. Fish and Wildlife n.d.). Trails were depicted within the APE on the 1947 Copeland map and 1954 Collier County soils map; nothing was depicted within the APE on the 1958 USGS Immokalee quadrangle map (Figures 3.5 - 3.7) (Copeland 1947; Leighty et al. 1954; USGS 1958). When the cypress supply was exhausted, logging establishments became ghost towns, and the rail lines were abandoned, leaving only remnant segments of trails and ditches. Page 7799 of 9661 ACI 3-16 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Figure 3.5. 1954 Copeland map showing the APE. Figure 3.6. 1954 Collier County soil map showing the APE. Page 7800 of 9661 ACI 3-17 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Figure 3.7. 1958 quad map showing the APE. In 1943, the first commercial oil well in Florida was drilled in Sunniland. The Humble Oil and Refining Company (now Exxon) struck crude, finally proving that there is oil in Florida. Sunniland remained the state’s only commercial oil field until 1964. In the 1950s, thousands of acres of cheap farmland opened up due to the extensive drainage projects. At approximately this time, the agricultural thrust in Collier County began with approximately 640 cultivated acres near Ochopee-Copeland. By the early 1970s, citrus, watermelons, tomatoes, bell peppers, and cucumbers were the largest producing crops in the area. Other vegetable crops included squash, cantaloupes, potatoes, melons, cabbage, lettuce, eggplant, corn, beans, and okra (Naples Daily News 1973). Like many Florida communities, World War II changed the face of Naples and later added to its growth. Largely, the post-World War II development of Collier County is similar to that of the rest of America: increasing numbers of automobiles and asphalt, an interstate highway system, suburban sprawl, and strip development along major state highways. The county, like most of Florida, experienced a population boom in the 1950s. Florida’s population increased from 1,897,414 in 1940 to 1950 in 2,771,305. Collier County’s population grew from 5082 in 1940 to 6488 in 1950 (Forstall 1995). After the war, car ownership increased, making the American public more mobile, making vacations more inexpensive and easier. Many who had served at Florida’s military bases during World War II also returned with their families to live. As veterans returned, the trend in new housing focused on the development of small tract homes in new subdivisions. The agricultural growth of the county led to an influx of migrant workers into the area. In 1966, Collier County began its first effort to house these workers. The Farm Workers Village, located along SR 29, was a 491-unit apartment complex operated by the county Housing Authority, it provided Page 7801 of 9661 ACI 3-18 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 affordable housing to the workers as well as daycare, postal services, a convenience store, laundromat, and educational facilities (Naples Daily News 1991). The number of permanent Collier County residents grew rapidly from 6,488 in 1950 to 85,000 by 1980. In 1967, SR 84 (Alligator Alley) or the Everglades Parkway was built. In 1970, FDOT appointed an advisory panel to evaluate possible routes across south Florida for the proposed I-75. The plans were prepared by 1972 and the Interstate was built thereafter, utilizing existing lanes from Alligator Alley for eastbound traffic. Two westbound lanes were built on the vacant strip of land between Alligator Alley and the canal (Duever et al. 1985). From 1980 to 1990, Collier County experienced a 77% percent increase in population and between 1990 and 2000, the population increased 65%. The population continued to increase in the county, albeit at a slower rate of 19.7% from 2010 to 2019 with an estimate of 384,902 individuals (USCB 2021). Collier County has roughly 25,000 businesses employing 168,000 workers. Tourism and hospitality jobs are the dominant sector. However, a wide variety of new industries have been moving into the county, including Arthrex (medical device manufacturing) and Summit Orthopedic Technologies, which moved its headquarters from Connecticut to Naples. Business development, expansion, and attraction are critical goals for economic growth. At the same time, Collier County also focuses on attainable housing for workers, and workforce development training centers, including the Center for Manufacturing Excellence, which opened its doors in 2019 to upskill workers for the growing workforce demands in manufacturing operations (Chamber 2020). 3.9 APE Specifics A review of the aerial photos available from the Publication of Archival and Museum Materials (PALMM) revealed that in 1940, the area was undeveloped pine flatwoods, savannahs, and wetlands with a scattering of trails (USDA 1940) (Figure 3.8). By 1953, there were more trails and some of the land in the east half had been cleared for agricultural fields (USDA 1953). The 1980 aerial shows the west portion of the APE still undeveloped, and that Immokalee Road had been constructed (USDA 1980). Page 7802 of 9661 ACI 3-19 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Figure 3.8. 1940 and 1980 aerial photographs showing the APE. Page 7803 of 9661 ACI 4-1 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 4.0 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODS A review of archaeological and historical literature, records, and other documents and data pertaining to the project area was conducted. The focus of this research was to ascertain the types of cultural resources known in the project area and vicinity, their temporal/cultural affiliations, site location information, and other relevant data. This included a review of sites listed in the NRHP, the Florida Master Site File (FMSF), CRAS reports, published books and articles, aerial photographs, unpublished manuscripts, and maps. In addition to the NRHP and FMSF, other information relevant to the historical research was obtained from the files of ACI. The FMSF data in this report were obtained in October 2022, which was the most recent edition. However, according to FMSF staff, input may be a month or more behind receipt of reports and site files. No individuals with knowledge of historic or prehistoric activities specific to the APE were encountered during this project; thus, no informant interviews were conducted. 4.1 Archaeological Considerations Background research indicated that only three archaeological sites have been recorded within two miles of the APE; none is in the APE (Figure 4.1). These include two 2nd and 3rd Seminole war facilities and one midden. 8CR01076 is the Camp Near Depot 1 and 8CR01077 is Depot 1. These were recorded by William Hammond based on archival materials (Hammond 2008). These have not been field verified nor have they been evaluated by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) in terms of listing in the NRHP. 8CR01396 (Immokalee #2) has been classified as a Glades period midden, with evidence of 20th century utilization. It was recorded during the survey of the Immokalee 4-H Property Trust Application (Keyte and Mahoney 2015). It has been determined potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP. There have been a number of CRAS projects conducted proximate to the APE and these are listed in Table 4.1. Based on these data, and other regional site location predictive models (ACI 1992, 1999, 2014a, 2014b; Austin 1987a; Bellomo and Fuhrmeister 1991; Carr 1988; Dickel 1991; Smith 2008) informed expectations concerning the types of sites likely to occur within the project APE, as well as their probable environmental settings, was generated. As archaeologists have long realized, aboriginal populations did not select their habitation sites and activity areas in a random fashion. Rather, many environmental factors had a direct influence upon site location selection, including soil drainage, distance to water, topography, and proximity to resources. It should be noted that the settlement pattern noted below cannot be applied to sites of the Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods, which precede the onset of modern environmental conditions. The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Project (CERP) study area includes Collier County. Based on this report, the pine flatwoods are generally considered to have a low probability for archaeological sites except when situated on slightly higher lands near water sources such as bayheads, will, and cypress ponds. In areas of low relief, tree islands have a high archaeological potential (Smith 2008:35-47). Analysis of the April 2020 data for the 32 aboriginal archaeological sites, with known locations in the Immokalee Rise physiographic region of Collier County that is outside of National Park Service (NPS) lands, was conducted. The NPS lands were not included, as there is not a modern soil survey for those areas. Historic archaeological sites and aboriginal archaeological sites that were plotted “per vague verbal description” were deleted from this analysis. Although this is a small sample size, it can give us clues as to which areas were preferred. Page 7804 of 9661 ACI 4-2 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Figure 4.1. Location of the previously recorded archaeological sites near the APE. Page 7805 of 9661 ACI 4-3 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Table 4.1. CRAS projects conducted proximate to the APE. FMSF Manuscript # / Reference Title # of Newly Recorded Resources # of Previously Recorded Resources 1108 / FPS 1986 Historical/Architectural Survey of Collier County, Florida 120 0 1279 / Austin 1987b Cultural Resource Assessment of a Proposed Thirty Acre Seminole Housing Project in Collier County, Florida 0 0 4140 / ACI 1995c Cultural Resources Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Two Miles and One Bridge) Collier County, Florida 1 0 4141 / ACI 1995a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Six Miles Exclusive of Three Bridges) Collier County, Florida 0 0 4409 / ACI 1995b Cultural Resource Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Three Bridges) Collier County, Florida 3 0 7991 / Pracht 2001 Proposed Cellular Tower Site: Immokalee 0 10 13161 / Janus Research 2003 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Concrete Manufacturing Facility Property Collier County, Florida 0 0 12443 / Pepe 2005 Letter Report for the Reconnaissance Survey and Desktop Analysis of the Immokalee Seminole Indian Reservation Master Plan: Administration Building, Church, Cluster One, and Pre-School, Collier County, Florida 0 0 12898 / Janus Research 2006 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Serenoa DRI Project Area, Collier County 0 0 13020 / Pepe 2006 Letter Report for the Reconnaissance Survey and Desktop Analysis of the Proposed Immokalee Commercial Development on the Immokalee Seminole Indian Reservation, Collier County, Florida 0 0 13136 / ACI 2006 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Silver Strand Business Park Property Collier County, Florida 0 0 14027 / ACI 2007 An Addendum to the Cultural Resource Predictive Model Collier Enterprises, LTD. The Tradeport DRI, Collier County, Florida 1 0 23218 / ACI 2016 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Tocala- Sunniland 3D Seismic Survey Project Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida 46 1 25332 / Janus Research 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey for the State Road 29 Project Development & Environmental Study from Oil Well Road (County Road 858) to State Road 82, Collier County, Florida 44 2 27289 / ACI 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Eleven Bridge Replacements, Collier and Hendry County, Florida 10 0 Page 7806 of 9661 ACI 4-4 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Proximity to water is an important site location feature. Over 96% of the sites are located within 100 m of a water source, and only one of the sites greater than 200 m from a water source (Table 4.2). Ninety percent of the sites are proximate to a wetland or swamp, while three sites are associated with a lake. Table 4.2. Distribution of sites by water type and distance. Type ”P ”P ”P Total Cnt % Cnt % Cnt % Cnt % Lake 3 9.38% 0.00% 0.00% 3 9.38% Swamp/wetland 28 87.50% 0.00% 1 3.13% 29 90.63% Total 31 96.88% 0 0.00% 1 3.13% 32 100.00% Soil types and their drainage characteristics can also be used to assess the likelihood for aboriginal site occurrence (Almy 1978). There are 45 soil types within this study area, of which 36 have recorded archaeological sites (Table 4.3). Those soils within the APE are shaded in orange on the table. Many of the sites occurred on more than one soil type. This analysis only includes the four types covering the greatest acreage for each site, which totaled 41 soil type occurrences. The column “1”, indicates that this soil type had the greatest area of the site, and so on down the line, so that the “4” column had the smallest site acreage. However, this analysis may not prove an accurate representation of the site distribution. While we know the percentage of sites on the various soil types, we do not have an accurate assessment as to how much of each soil type has been surveyed for archaeological sites. Table 4.3. Distribution of sites by drainage and soil types. DRAINAGE/Soil Type, % slopes % of Area 1 2 3 4 Total % of Sites difference MODERATELY WELL DRAINED Pomello fine sand, 0-2% 0.95% 1 0 1 2.44% 1.49% Total 0.95% 1 0 1 2.44% 1.49% POORLY DRAINED Basinger fine sand, 0-2% 5.79% 0 0.00% -5.79% Boca fine sand, 0-2% (Cypress Lake) 1.52% 2 2 4.88% 3.35% Ft. Drum and Malabar, high, fine sands 1.34% 0 0.00% -1.34% Hallandale and Boca fine sands 0.06% 0 0.00% -0.06% Hallandale fine sand, 0-2% 0.04% 0 0.00% -0.04% Hilolo, Jupiter, and Margate fine sands 0.80% 6 6 14.63% 13.83% Holopaw fine sand, 0-2% 4.44% 2 2 4.88% 0.44% Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum (ls) 0.25% 0 0.00% -0.25% Immokalee fine sand, 0-2% 19.19% 1 1 2.44% -16.75% Malabar fine sand, 0-2% 4.50% 4 4 9.76% 5.26% Myakka fine sand, 0-2% 1.44% 0 0.00% -1.44% Oldsmar fine sand, 0-2% 12.71% 0 0.00% -12.71% Oldsmar fine sand, ls 0.99% 1 1 2.44% 1.45% Pennsuco silt loam 0.06% 0 0.00% -0.06% Pineda and Riviera fine sands 3.67% 2 1 1 4 9.76% 6.08% Pineda fine sand, ls 0.23% 0 0.00% -0.23% Riviera fine sand, ls 0.65% 0 0.00% -0.65% Riviera, ls-Copeland fine sands 1.02% 1 1 2.44% 1.42% Tuscawilla fine sand 4.30% 2 2 4 9.76% 5.45% Wabasso fine sand, 0-2% 5.40% 2 2 4.88% -0.52% Total 68.41% 22 4 1 0 27 65.85% -2.55% VERY POORLY DRAINED Page 7807 of 9661 ACI 4-5 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 DRAINAGE/Soil Type, % slopes % of Area 1 2 3 4 Total % of Sites difference Boca, Riviera, ls, and Copeland fine sands, depressional (depr) 7.11% 3 1 4 9.76% 2.64% Chobee, ls, and Dania mucks, depr 0.21% 0 0.00% -0.21% Chobee, Winder, and Gator soils, depr 6.94% 1 1 2 4.88% -2.06% Holopaw and Okeelanta soils, depr 1.19% 0 0.00% -1.19% Winder, Riviera, ls, and Chobee soils, depr 13.13% 2 2 4 9.76% -3.38% Total 28.59% 6 4 0 0 10 24.39% -4.20% OTHER Urban land 0.01% 0 0.00% -0.01% Urban land-Holopaw-Basinger complex 0.01% 0 0.00% -0.01% Urban land-Immokalee-Oldsmar, ls, complex 0.95% 0 0.00% -0.95% Urban land-Matlacha-Boca complex 0.02% 0 0.00% -0.02% Water 1.07% 3 3 7.32% 6.25% Total 2.05% 3 0 0 3 7.32% 5.27% Grand Total 100.00% 32 8 1 0 41 100.00% 0.00% This portion of Collier County is damp and soggy as evidenced by the fact that 68% of the soils are poorly drained and another 29% of the soils are very poorly drained. The moderately well drained soils do not even make up 1% of the area. Water and urban land underlie the remaining portion (2%) of the study area. Those soils that have a higher percentage of sites as compared to area (2% or greater) are marked in red on the table, while those that seem less likely to be used (-2% or less) are marked in blue. There are six preferred soil types; in order of preference are: Hilolo, Jupiter, and Margate fine sands; Pineda and Riviera fine sands; Tuscawilla fine sand; Malabar fine sand 0-2% slopes; Boca fine sand, 0-2% slopes; and Boca, Riviera, limestone substratum, and Copeland sands, depressional. The last soil type may have been chosen as a water hole as opposed as a camping area. There are three soils that appear to have been avoided. In order of avoidance, they area Immokalee fine sand, 0-2% slopes; Oldsmar fine sand, 0-2% slopes; and Basinger fine sand, 0-2% slopes. Based on the environmental setting, the project APE was considered to have a moderate to low probability for aboriginal archaeological site occurrence. Cypress Lake and Malabar sands have a positive correlation with sites, and water sources are available within the APE. The CERP survey strategy includes examination of pre-development aerials to locate possible tree islands and water sources. The 1940 aerial photos was examined, and several areas were considered to have a higher probability than others, including areas of denser tree cover (Smith 2008; USDA 1940). There was low potential for historic sites, although evidence of timber, naval stores, and agricultural activities may be encountered. 4.2 Historical Considerations Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, indicated that no historic resources are located within the APE. A review of the USDA historic aerial photographs, USGS quadrangle map, and the Collier County Property Appraiser’s data suggested no potential for historic resources within the APE (Skinner 2022; USDA 1940, 1953, 1980; USGS 1958). Page 7808 of 9661 ACI 4-6 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 4.3 Field Methodology The FDHR’s Module Three, Guidelines for Use by Historic Professionals, indicates that the first stage of archaeological field survey is a reconnaissance of the project area to “ground truth,” or ascertain the validity of the predictive model (FDHR 2003). During this part of the survey, the researcher assesses whether the initial predictive model needs adjustment based on disturbance or conditions such as constructed features (i.e., parking lots, buildings, etc.), underground utilities, landscape alterations (i.e., ditches and swales, mined land, dredged and filled land, agricultural fields), or other constraints that may affect the archaeological potential. Additionally, these Guidelines indicate that non-systematic “judgmental” testing may be appropriate in urbanized environments where pavement, utilities, and constructed features make systematic testing unfeasible; in geographically restricted areas such as proposed pond sites; or within project areas that have limited high and moderate probability zones, but where a larger subsurface testing sample may be desired. While predictive models are useful in determining preliminary testing strategies in a broad context, it is understood that testing intervals may be altered due to conditions encountered by the field crew at the time of survey. A reasonable and good faith effort was made to identify the historic properties within the project APE (cf., Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d.). Archaeological field survey methods consisted of surface reconnaissance combined with systematic and judgmental subsurface testing. Shovel tests were placed at 25 m intervals in what appeared to be tree islands and 50 m intervals along transects spaced 25 m apart in larger locales with trees. Testing was conducted at 50 m intervals along the wetlands margins. The remainder of the APE was tested at 100 m intervals or judgmentally. Shovel tests were circular and measured approximately 50 centimeters (cm) in diameter by at least 1 m in depth unless precluded by water. All soil removed from the shovel tests was screened through a 0.64 cm mesh hardware cloth to maximize the recovery of artifacts. The location of all tests was recorded using a Trimble Juno 5D device with TerraSync. Following the recording of relevant data such as stratigraphic profile, all shovel tests were refilled. Historic/architectural field methodology consisted of a field survey of the APE to determine and verify the location of all buildings and other historic resources (i.e., bridges, roads, cemeteries) that are 50 years of age or older (constructed in or prior to 1972), and to establish if any such resources could be determined eligible for listing in the NRHP. For each property, photographs would have been taken, and information needed for the completion of FMSF forms gathered. In addition to architectural descriptions, each historic resource would have been reviewed to assess style, historic context, condition, and potential NRHP eligibility. Also, informant interviews would have been conducted, if possible, with knowledgeable persons to obtain site-specific building construction dates and/or possible associations with individuals or events significant to local or regional history. 4.4 Inadvertent/Unanticipated Discoveries Occasionally, archaeological deposits, subsurface features or unmarked human remains are encountered during the course of development, even though the project area may have previously received a thorough and professionally adequate cultural resources assessment. Such events are rare, but they do occur. In the event that human remains are encountered during the course of development, the procedures outlined in Chapter 872, FS must be followed. It was anticipated that human remains might be encountered within the APE, and the field crew was prepared to follow Chapter 872, FS. In the event such discoveries are made during the development process, all activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery will be suspended, and a professional archaeologist will be contacted to evaluate the importance of the discovery. The area will be examined by the archaeologist, Page 7809 of 9661 ACI 4-7 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 who, in consultation with staff of the Florida SHPO, will determine if the discovery is significant or potentially significant. In the event the discovery is found to be not significant, the work may immediately resume. If, on the other hand, the discovery is found to be significant or potentially significant, then development activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery will continue to be suspended until such time as a mitigation plan, acceptable to SHPO, is developed and implemented. Development activities may then resume within the discovery area, but only when conducted in accordance with the guidelines and conditions of the approved mitigation plan. 4.5 Laboratory Methods/Curation No cultural materials were recovered; thus, no laboratory methods were utilized. All project related material (including field notes, maps, and photographs) will be stored at ACI in Sarasota (P22223), unless the client requests otherwise. Page 7810 of 9661 ACI 5-1 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 5.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Archaeological Archaeological field survey included surface reconnaissance and the excavation of 169 shovel tests (Figures 5.1 – 5.2). Shovel tests were placed at 25-meter (m) intervals in what appeared to be tree islands and 50 m intervals along transects spaced 25 m apart in larger locales with trees. Testing was conducted at 50 m intervals along the wetlands margins. The remainder of the APE was tested at 100 m intervals or judgmentally. None of the shovel tests produced cultural materials, nor were any discovered on the surface. Many of the shovel tests were terminated at shallow depths due to clay. As per 36 CFR 800.4(b)(1), a reasonable and good faith effort was made to identify the historic properties within the APE (cf., Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d.). The soil stratigraphy across the APE included the following: x Palm sylviculture: 0-50 cmbs grayish-brown gravelly sand; gray clay at 40-50 cmbs (Photo 5.1) x Cleared citrus rows: 0-30 cmbs light gray sand; 30-60 cmbs gray sand; 60-80 cmbs lt gray sand; 80-100 cmbs pale brown sand (Photo 5.2) x Plowed farm rows: 0-100 cmbs mixed, alternating layers of pale brown, brown, grayish-brown, dark gray, gray, and light gray sand (Photo 5.3) x Active citrus rows: 0-40 cmbs grayish-brown sand; 40-60 cmbs dark gray sand; 60-80 cmbs grayish-brown sand; 80-100 cmbs light gray sand (Photo 5.4) Photo 5.1. Shovel test in the palm plantation. Page 7811 of 9661 ACI 5-2 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Photo 5.2. Shovel test in the cleared citrus grove. Photo 5.3. Stratigraphy in the area of row crops. Photo 5.4. Stratigraphy in the active citrus groves. Page 7812 of 9661 ACI 5-3 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests in the western portion of the APE. Page 7813 of 9661 ACI 5-4 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Figure 5.2. Location of the shovel tests in the eastern portion of the APE. Page 7814 of 9661 ACI 5-5 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 5.2 Historical Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, indicated that no historic resources are located within the APE. Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, indicated that no historic resources are located within the APE. A review of the USDA historic aerial photographs, USGS quadrangle map, and the Collier County Property Appraiser’s data suggested no potential for historic resources within the APE (Skinner 2022; USDA 1940, 1953, 1980; USGS 1958). The absence of historic resources was confirmed by the field investigations. 5.3 Conclusions Given the results of background research and field survey, including the excavation of 169 shovel tests, no archaeological sites or historic resources were discovered. As such, there are no cultural resources that are listed, determined eligible for listing, or that appear potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP within the APE. Therefore, it is the professional opinion of ACI that the proposed undertaking will result in no historic properties affected. Page 7815 of 9661 ACI 6-1 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 6.0 REFERENCES CITED ACI (Archaeological Consultants, Inc.) 1992 Mapping of Areas of Historical/Archaeological Probability in Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 3160. 1995a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Six Miles Exclusive of Three Bridges) Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 4141. 1995b Cultural Resource Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Three Bridges) Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 4409. 1995c Cultural Resource Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Two Miles and One Bridge) Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 4140. 1999 1999 Update Historic/Archaeological Probability Maps and Data Sheets for Collier County Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2006 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Silver Strand Business Park Property, Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 13136. 2007 An Addendum to the Cultural Resource Predictive Model, Collier Enterprises, Ltd., Parcels 7, 8, 9, and the Tradeport DRI, Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 14027. 2014a Cultural Resources Avoidance Model Nobles Grade 3D Seismic Survey Big Cypress National Preserve Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2014b Cultural Resources Predictive Model Tellus 3D Seismic Survey Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2016 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Tocala-Sunniland 3D Seismic Survey Project Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 23218. 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Eleven Bridge Replacements, Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 27289. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d. Meeting the "Reasonable and Good Faith" Identification Standard in Section 106 Review. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C. https://www.achp.gov/digital-library-section-106-landing/meeting-reasonable-and-good- faith-identification-standard Akerman, Joe A. 1976 Florida Cowman: A History of Florida Cattle Raising. Florida Cattlemen's Association, Kissimmee. 4th edition. Almy, Maranda M. 2001 The Cuban Fishing Ranchos of Southwest Florida 1600-1850s. Honor's thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Almy, Marion M. 1978 The Archaeological Potential of Soil Survey Reports. The Florida Anthropologist 31(3):75-91. Page 7816 of 9661 ACI 6-2 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Anderson, David G., David Echeverry, D. Shane Miller, Andrew A. White, Stephen J. Yerka, Eric Kansa, Sarah Whitcher Kansa, Christopher R. Moore, Kelsey Noak Myers, Joshua J. Well, Thaddeus G. Bissett, and Ashley M. Smallwood 2019 Paleoindian Settlement in the Southeastern United States: The Role of Large Databases. In New Directions in the Search for the First Floridians. Edited by David K. Thulman and Ervan G. Garrison, pp. 241-275. University of Florida Press, Gainesville. Apthorp, W.L. 1872 Field Notes. Volume 220. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Apthorp, W.L. and T.S. Stearns 1874 Plat. Township 47 South, Range 29 East. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Austin, Robert J. 1987a An Archaeological Site Inventory and Zone Management Plan for Lee County, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 1561. 1987b Cultural Resource Assessment of a Proposed Thirty Acre Seminole Housing Project in Collier County, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 1279. 1996 Prehistoric Chert Procurement and Mobility Strategies on the Lake Wales Ridge. The Florida Anthropologist 49(4):211-223. 1997 The Economics of Lithic-Resource Use in South-Central Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Bellomo, Randy V. and Charles Fuhrmeister 1991 1992 Update of an Archaeological and Zone Management Plan for Lee County, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 3145. Beriault, John G., Robert Carr, Jerry Stipp, Richard Johnson, and Jack Meeder 1981 The Archaeological Salvage of the Bay West Site, Collier County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 34(2):39-58. Brown, Percy 1989 A Family of Early Settlers of Immokalee. The Timepiece 16(1):3-9. Bullen, Ripley P. 1975 A Guide to the Identification of Florida Projectile Points. Kendall Books, Gainesville. Carbone, Victor 1983 Late Quaternary Environment in Florida and the Southeast. The Florida Anthropologist 36(1-2):3-17. Carr, Robert 1988 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County, Florida. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Miami. MS# 2544. Carr, Robert S. 1986 Preliminary Report on Excavations at the Cutler Ridge Fossil Site (8DA2001) in Southern Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 39(3, Part 2):231-232. Page 7817 of 9661 ACI 6-3 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Carr, Robert S. 2002 The Archaeology of Everglades Tree Islands. In Tree Islands of the Everglades. Edited by Fred H. Sklar and Arnold Van der Valk. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands. Carr, Robert S. and John G. Beriault 1984 Prehistoric Man in Southern Florida. In Environments of South Florida, Past and Present. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 1-14. Miami Geological Society Memoir 2, Miami. Carr, Robert S., Patricia Fay, and Jane S. Day 1991 Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Crane Point Hammock, Marathon, Monroe County. AHC Technical Report 24. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Davie. Chamber, Greater Naples 2020 Collier County Economic Development - A Year in Review. The Greater Naples Chamber, Naples. Clausen, Carl J., H. K. Brooks, and A. B. Wesolowsky 1975a The Early Man Site at Warm Mineral Springs, Florida. Journal of Field Archaeology 2(3):191-213. 1975b Florida Spring Confirmed as 10,000 Year Old Early Man Site. Florida Anthropological Society Publications 7 Clausen, Carl J., A. D. Cohen, Cesare Emiliani, J. A. Holman, and J. J. Stipp 1979 Little Salt Spring, Florida: A Unique Underwater Site. Science 203(4381):609-614. Clement, Gail n.d. Barron Gift Collier. Everglades Digital Library, Florida International University, http://everglades.fiu.edu/reclaim/bios/collier.htm Cockrell, W. A. 1970 Glades I and Pre-Glades Settlement and Subsistence Patterns on Marco Island. MS Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Cockrell, W. A. and Larry E. Murphy 1978 Pleistocene Man in Florida. Archaeology of Eastern North America 6:1-13. Collier County Museum 2010 One Man's Vision: Barron Gift Collier. Collier County Museum, Naples. http://colliermuseums.com/history/barron_collier.php Copeland, Graham D. 1947 Map of Collier County Florida. Collier County Board of County Commissioners, Naples. Cordell, Ann S. 1992 Technological Investigations of Pottery Variability in Southwest Florida. In Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 105-190. Monograph 1. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. Page 7818 of 9661 ACI 6-4 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Covington, James W. 1957 The Story of Southwestern Florida. Lewis Historical Publishing Company, Inc., New York. 1958 Exploring the Ten Thousand Islands: 1838. Tequesta 18:7-13. 1982 The Billy Bowlegs War 1855-1858: The Final Stand of the Seminoles Against the Whites. The Mickler House Publishers, Chuluota. Daniel, I. Randolph and Michael Wisenbaker 1987 Harney Flats: A Florida Paleo-Indian Site. Baywood Publishing Co., Inc., Farmingdale. Davis, John H. 1980 General Map of Natural Vegetation of Florida. Circular S-178. Agriculture Experiment Station, University of Florida, Gainesville. Dean, Virginia 1991 Naples on the Gulf: An Illustrated History. Windsor Publications, Inc., Chatsworth. Delcourt, Paul A. and Hazel R. Delcourt 1981 Vegetation Maps for Eastern North America: 40,000 yr B.P. to the Present. In Geobotony II. Edited by R. C. Romans, pp. 123-165. Plenum Publishing Corp., New York. Dickel, David N. 1991 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County, Florida. AHC Technical Report 38. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Davie. MS# 2934. Dobyns, Henry F. 1983 Their Numbers Become Thinned. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. Duever, Michael J., John E. Carlson, John F. Meeder, Linda C. Duever, Lance H. Gunderson, Lawrence A. Riopelle, Taylor R. Alexander, Ronald L. Myers, and Daniel P. Spangler 1985 The Big Cypress National Preserve. Research Report 8. National Audubon Society, New York. Dunbar, James S. 2006a Paleoindian Archaeology. In First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Edited by S. David Webb. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 2006b Pleistocene-Early Holocene Climate Change: Chronostratigraphy and Geoclimate of the Southeast US. In First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Edited by S. David Webb, pp. 103-155. Springer, The Netherlands. Dunn, Hampton 1989 Back Home: A History of Citrus County, Florida. Citrus County Historical Society, Inverness. 2nd edition. Fairbridge, Rhodes W. 1984 The Holocene Sea Level Record in South Florida. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past II. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 427-436. Miami Geological Society, Coral Gables. Page 7819 of 9661 ACI 6-5 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Farr, Grayal Earle 2006 A Reevaluation of Bullen's Typology for Preceramic Projectile Points. MA thesis, Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee. FDEP (Florida Department of Environmental Protection) n.d. Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee. FDHR (Florida Division of Historical Resources) 2003 Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual. Florida Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee. Forstall, Richard L. 1995 Population of Counties by Decennial Census. www.census.gov/population/cencounts/fl190090.txt. FPS (Florida Preservation Services) 1986 Historic/Architectural Survey of Collier County, Florida. Florida Preservation Services, St. Augustine. MS# 1108. Fradkin, Arlene 1976 The Wightman Site: A Study of Prehistoric Cultural and Environment on Sanibel Island. MA Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Gleason, Patrick J., Arthur D. Cohen, William Smith, H. Kelly Brooks, Peter A. Stone, Robert Goodrick, and William Spackman, Jr. 1984 The Environmental Significance of Holocene Sediments from the Everglades and Saline Tidal Plain. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past II. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 297-351. Miami Geological Society, Coral Gables. Gleason, Patrick J. and P. Stone 1994 Age, Origin and Landscape Evolution of the Everglades Peatland. In Everglades: The Ecosystem and Its Restoration. Edited by S. M. Davis and J. C. Ogden, pp. 149-197. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach. Goggin, John M. 1949 Cultural Traditions in Florida Prehistory. In The Florida Indian and His Neighbors. Edited by John W. Griffin, pp. 13-44. Inter-American Center, Winter Park. Griffin, John W. 1988 The Archeology of Everglades National Park: A Synthesis. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee. 2002 Archaeology of the Everglades. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Grismer, Karl H. 1946 The Story of Sarasota. Florida Grower Press, Tampa. Hammond, E. A. 1973 The Spanish Fisheries of Charlotte Harbor. Florida Historical Quarterly 51(4):355-380. Page 7820 of 9661 ACI 6-6 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Hammond, James 2008 A Final Report on the Army Forts South of the Caloosahatchee River during the 2nd and 3rd Seminole Wars. Privately printed, Naples. MS# 15576. Hann, John H. 1991 Missions to Calusa. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Ives, Lieut. J. C. 1856 Map of the Peninsula of Florida South of Tampa Bay. Top Engineers, Sarasota. http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~crackerbarrel/Ives.html http://files.mapoftheweek.net/2009/09/18/1856%20Ives%20MilitaryMap.pdf. Jamro, Ron and Gerald L. Lanterman 1985 The Founding of Naples. Friends of Collier County Museum, Naples. Janus Research 2003 Historic Resources Survey and Evaluation for Central Park Village FLA-3-9 in Tampa, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 9218. 2006 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Serenoa DRI project Area, Collier County. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 12898. 2008 South Florida Archaeological Context. South Florida Water Management District. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey for the State Road 29 Project Development & Environment Study from Oil Well Road (County Road 858) to State Road 82, Collier County, FL. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 25332. Kendrick, Baynard 1964 Florida Trails to Turnpikes 1914-1964. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Keyte, Shawn and Maureen Mahoney 2015 A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey and Assessment of the Immokalee 4-H Property Trust Application Project, Immokalee, Florida. Tribal Historic Preservation Office, Seminole Tribe of Florida, Clewiston. MS# 22719. Klinkenberg, Jeff 1994 "Swamp Loggers." The St. Petersburg Times, September 18. Knetsch, Joe 2003 Florida's Seminole Wars 1817-1858. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, SC. Lane, Ed 1981 Environmental Geology Series: Miami Sheet. Map Series 101. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Geology, Tallahassee. Leighty, Ralph G., M.B Marco, G.A Swenson, R.E. Caldwell, J.R. Henderson, Olaf C. Olson, and G.C. Willson, Jr. 1954 Soil Survey (Detailed-Reconnaissance) of Collier County, Florida. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Page 7821 of 9661 ACI 6-7 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Liudahl, Kenneth, David J. Belz, Lawrence Carey, Robert W. Drew, Steve Fisher, and Robert Pate 1998 Soil Survey of Collier County Area, Florida. USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Luer, George M. 1989a Calusa Canals in Southwestern Florida: Routes of Tribute and Exchange. The Florida Anthropologist 42(2):89-130. 1989b Further Research on the Pine Island Canal and Associated Sites, Lee County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 42(3):241-247. Luer, George M. and Marion M. Almy 1987 The Laurel Mound (8SO98) and Radial Burials with Comments on the Safety Harbor Period. The Florida Anthropologist 40(4):301-320. Mackay, John and J. E. Blake 1839 Map of the Seat of War in Florida.https://digital.lib.usf.edu/?u15.246 Mahon, John K. 1985 History of the Second Seminole War 1835-1842. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Revised edition. Marquardt, William H. 1992 Calusa Culture and Environment: What Have We Learned? In Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 423-436. Monograph 1. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. 1999 Useppa Island in the Archaic and Caloosahatchee Periods. In The Archaeology of Useppa Island. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 77-98. Monograph 3. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. 2013 The Pineland Site Complex: Theoretical and Cultural Contexts. In The Archaeology of Pineland: A Coastal Southwest Florida Site Complex, A.D. 50-1710. Edited by William H. Marquardt and Karen J. Walker, pp. 1-22. Monograph 4. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. Marquardt, William H. and Karen J. Walker 2012 Southwest Florida during the Mississippi Period. In Late Prehistoric Florida: Archaeology at the Edge of the Mississippian World. Edited by Keith Ashley and Nancy Marie White, pp. 29-61. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. 2013 The Pineland Site Complex: An Environmental and Cultural History. In The Archaeology of Pineland: A Coastal Southwest Florida Site Complex, A.D. 50-1710. Edited by William H. Marquardt and Karen J. Walker, pp. 793-920. Monograph 4. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. McGregor, A. James 1974 A Ceramic Chronology for the Biscayne Region of Southeast Florida. MA Thesis, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton. Milanich, Jerald T. 1994 Archaeology of Precolumbian Florida. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. 1995 Florida Indians and the Invasion from Europe. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Page 7822 of 9661 ACI 6-8 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Milanich, Jerald T., Jeffery Chapman, Ann S. Cordell, Stephen H. Hale, and Rochelle A. Marrinan 1984 Prehistoric Development of Calusa Society in Southwest Florida: Excavations on Useppa Island. In Perspectives on Gulf Coast Prehistory. Edited by Dave D. Davis, pp. 258-314. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Milanich, Jerald T. and Charles H. Fairbanks 1980 Florida Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. Mulroy, Kevin 1993 Freedom on the Border: The Seminole Maroons in Florida, the Indian Territory, Coahuila, and Texas. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock. Naples Daily News 1973 "Big Farming Major Cog in County Economy." Naples Daily News, March 6. 1976 "The Collier Story." Naples Daily News, July 4. 1991 "Farm Workers Village Celebrates 25 Years." Naples Daily News, September 24. Neill, Wilfred T. 1968 An Indian and Spanish Site on Tampa Bay, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 21(4):106-116. Palov, Maria Z. 1999 Useppa's Cuban Fishing Community. In The Archaeology of Useppa Island. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 149-169. Monograph 3. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. Pepe, James 2005 Letter report for the Reconnaissance Survey and Desktop Analysis of the Immokalee Seminole Indian Reservation Master Plan: Administration Building, Church, Cluster One, and Pre-School, Collier County, Florida. Seminole Tribe of Florida, Clewiston. MS# 12443. 2006 Letter report for the Reconnaissance Survey and Desktop Analysis of the Proposed Immokalee Commercial Development on the Immokalee Seminole Indian Reservation, Collier County, Florida. Seminole Tribe of Florida, Clewiston. MS# 13020. Porter, Kenneth W. 1996 The Black Seminoles. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Pracht, Jodi B. 2001 Proposed Cellular Tower Site: Immokalee. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 7991. Purdy, Barbara A. 1981 Florida's Prehistoric Stone Tool Technology. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Ramenofsky, Ann F. 1987 Vectors of Death: The Archaeology of European Contact. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Russo, Michael 1991 Archaic Sedentism on the Florida Coast: A Case Study from Horr's Island. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Page 7823 of 9661 ACI 6-9 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Russo, Michael 1994a A Brief Introduction to the Study of Archaic Mounds in the Southeast. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):89-92. 1994b Why We Don't Believe in Archaic Ceremonial Mounds and Why We Should: The Case from Florida. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):93-108. 2008 Late Archaic Shell Rings and Society in the Southeast U.S. The SAA Archaeological Record 8(5):18-22. Sassaman, Kenneth E. 2008 The New Archaic, It Ain't What It Used to Be. The SAA Archaeological Record 8 (5): 6- 8. Schober, Theresa 2014 Deconstructing and Reconstructing Caloosahatchee Shell Mound Building. In New Histories of Pre-Columbian Florida. Edited by Neill J. Wallis and Asa A. Randall, pp. 38-61. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Schwadron, Margo 2006 Everglades Tree Islands Prehistory: Archaeological Evidence for Regional Holocene Variability and Early Human Settlement. Antiquity 80(310). Scott, Thomas M. 2001 Text to Accompany the Geologic Map of Florida. Open File Report 80. Florida Geological Survey, Tallahassee. Scott, Thomas M., Kenneth M. Campbell, Frank R. Rupert, Jonathan D. Arthur, Thomas M. Missimer, Jacqueline M. Lloyd, J. William Yon, and Joel G. Duncan 2001 Geologic Map of the State of Florida. Map Series 146. Florida Geological Survey, Tallahassee. Scupholm, Carrie 1997 The Tamiami Trail: Connecting the East and West Coasts of the Sunshine State. The Society for Commercial Archeology Journal 15(2):20-24. Shofner, Jerrell H. 1995 History of Brevard County. Brevard County Historical Commission, Stuart. Skinner, Abe 2022 Records Search. Collier County Property Appraiser, Naples. http://www.collierappraiser.com/ Smith, Greg C. 2008 Cultural Resources Overview and Survey Strategy: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. New South Associates, Stone Mountain, GA. Smith, Marvin T. 1987 Archaeology of Aboriginal Culture Change in the Interior Southeast: Depopulation during the Early Historic Period. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. State of Florida n.d. Tract Book. Volume 25. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Page 7824 of 9661 ACI 6-10 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Stearns, T.S. 1874 Field Notes. Volume 225. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Tampa Tribune 1955 "Pioneer Florida." Tampa Tribune, January 2. Tebeau, Charlton W. 1966 Florida's Last Frontier: The History of Collier County. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables. 1980 A History of Florida. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables. Revised Edition. Tebeau, Charlton W. and Ruby Leach Carson, Eds. 1965 Florida -- From Indian Trail to Space Age. Southern Publishing Co., Delray Beach. True, David O., Ed. 1944 Memoir of D. Escalante Fontaneda Respecting Florida. University of Miami and South Florida Historical Society, Miami. U.S. Congress 1837 Report from the Secretary of War in Compliance with Resolution of the Senate of the 14th and 18th Instant, Transmitting Copies of Correspondence Relative to the Campaign in Florida. 24th Congress, 2nd Session, May 21, Washington, D.C. 1850 Hostilities Committed by the Seminole Indians in Florida during the Past Year. 31st Congress, 1st Session, Washington, D.C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife n.d. History. Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Naples. http://www.fws.gov/refuges/profiles/index.cfm?id=41545 USCB (United States Census Bureau) 2021 Florida Quick Facts. http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/00 USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) 1940 Aerial Photograph: 4-15-1940, CJF-9-11. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 1953 Aerial Photograph: 1-1-53, DSM-2L-189. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 1980 Aerial Photographs: 1-2-80, 12021-178-164, 211. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 2021 Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Florida - October 2021. USDA, NRCS, Fort Worth, TX. USGS (United States Geological Survey) 1958 Immokalee, Fla. 1987 PR 1973. 2013 Immokalee, Fla. USA_Topo_Maps. Walker, Karen J. 1992 The Zooarchaeology of Charlotte Harbor's Prehistoric Maritime Adaptations: Spatial and Temporal Perspectives. In Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 265-366. Monograph 1. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. Page 7825 of 9661 ACI 6-11 January 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine P22223 Walker, Karen J. 2013 The Pineland Site Complex: Environmental Contexts. In The Archaeology of Pineland: A Coastal Southwest Florida Site Complex, A.D. 50-1710. Edited by William H. Marquardt and Karen J. Walker, pp. 23-52. Monograph 4. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. Watts, William A. 1969 A Pollen Diagram from Mud Lake, Marion County, North-Central Florida. Geological Society of America Bulletin 80(4):631-642. 1971 Post Glacial and Interglacial Vegetational History of Southern Georgia and Central Florida. Ecology 51:676-690. 1975 A Late Quaternary Record of Vegetation from Lake Annie, South-Central Florida. Geology 3(6):344-346. Watts, William A., Eric C. Grimm, and T. C. Hussey 1996 Mid-Holocene Forest History of Florida and the Coastal Plain of Georgia and South Carolina. In Archaeology of the Mid-Holocene Southeast. Edited by Kenneth E. Sassaman and David G. Anderson, pp. 28-38. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Watts, William A. and Barbara C. S. Hansen 1994 Pre-Holocene and Holocene Pollen Records of Vegetation History for the Florida Peninsula and their Climatic Implications. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 109:163-176. West, Patsy 1990 History of Post-War Seminole Settlement in the Big Cypress. The Florida Anthropologist 43(4):240-248. Wheeler, Ryan J. 1994 Early Florida Decorated Bone Artifacts: Style and Aesthetics from Paleo-Indian Through Archaic. The Florida Anthropologist 47(1):47-60. 2004 Southern Florida Sites Associated with the Tequesta and Their Ancestors: National Historic Landmark/National Register of Historic Places Theme Study. FDHR, Tallahassee. White, William A. 1970 Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula. Geological Bulletin 51. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Geology, Tallahassee. Widmer, Randolph J. 1974 A Survey and Assessment of the Archaeological Resources on Marco Island, Collier County, Florida. Miscellaneous Project Report Series 19. FDHR, Tallahassee. MS# 265. 1988 The Evolution of the Calusa. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Page 7826 of 9661 APPENDIX Survey Log Page 7827 of 9661 Florida Master Site File / Div. of Historical Resources / R.A. Gray Bldg / 500 S Bronough St., Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 HR6E066R0, effective 05/2016 Rule 1A-46.001, F.A.C. Phone 850.245.6440, Fax 850.245.6439, Email: SiteFile@dos.myflorida.com Page 1 Ent D (FMSF only) __________ Survey Log Sheet Survey # (FMSF only) ___________ Florida Master Site File Version 5.0 /1 Consult Guide to the Survey Log Sheet for detailed instructions. Manuscript Information Survey Project (name and project phase) Report Title (exactly as on title page) Report Authors (as on title page) 1._______________________________ 3. _____________________________ 2._______________________________ 4. _____________________________ Publication Year __________ Number of Pages in Report (GRQot include site forms) ___________ Publication Information (Give series, number in series, publisher and city. For article or chapter, cite page numbers. Use the style of American Antiquity.) Supervisors of Fieldwork (even if same as author) Names _____________________________________________________ Affiliation of Fieldworkers: Organization _____________________________________ City ______________________ Key Words/Phrases (Don’t use county name, or common words like archaeology, structure, survey, architecture, etc.) 1. ___________________ 3.___________________ 5. ___________________ 7.____________________ 2. ___________________ 4.___________________ 6. ___________________ 8.____________________ Survey Sponsors (corporation, government unit, organization, or person funding fieldwork) Name. ____________________________________ Organization. ______________________________________ Address/Phone/E-mail. __________________________________________________________________________ Recorder of Log Sheet _________________________________________ Date Log Sheet Completed ___________ Is this survey or project a continuation of a previous project? q No q Yes: Previous survey #s (FMSF only) _______________ Project Area Mapping Counties (select every county in which field survey was done; attach additional sheet if necessary) 1. ___________________________ 3. ____________________________ 5. ___________________________ 2. ___________________________ 4. ____________________________ 6. ___________________________ USGS 1:24,000 Map Names/Year of Latest Revision (attach additional sheet if necessary) 1.Name ____________________________ Year_____4.Name _____________________________ Year_____ 2.Name ____________________________ Year_____5.Name _____________________________ Year_____ 3.Name ____________________________ Year_____6.Name _____________________________ Year_____ Field Dates and Project Area Description Fieldwork Dates: Start _________B End _B________ Total Area Surveyed (fill in one) _____BB_hectares BB______acres Number of Distinct Tracts or Areas Surveyed _________ If Corridor (fill in one for each) Width: ___B___meters ___B___feet Length: __B____kilometers ____B__miles CRAS Silver Strand Mine, CR Co. - Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Silver Strand Mine Property, Collier County, Florida ACI 2023 55 ACI (2023) Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Silver Strand Mine Property, Collier County, Florida. Conducted for Peninsula Engineering by ACI, Sarasota. P22223 Horvath, Elizabeth A. Archaeological Consultants Inc Sarasota Peninsula Engineering 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34105 Horvath, Elizabeth A. 1-31-2023 Collier IMMOKALEE 2013 1-16-2023 1-27-2023 275.79 1 Page 7828 of 9661 Florida Master Site File / Div. of Historical Resources / R.A. Gray Bldg / 500 S Bronough St., Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 HR6E066R0, effective 05/2016 Rule 1A-46.001, F.A.C. Phone 850.245.6440, Fax 850.245.6439, Email: SiteFile@dos.myflorida.com Page 2 Survey Log Sheet Survey #__________ Research and Field Methods Types of Survey (select all that apply): archaeological architectural historical/archival underwater damage assessment monitoring report other(describe):. _________________________ Scope/Intensity/Procedures Preliminary Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Florida Archives (Gray Building)q library research- local public q local property or tax records q other historic maps q Florida Photo Archives (Gray Building)q library-special collection q newspaper files q soils maps or dataq Site File property search q Public Lands Survey (maps at DEP) q literature search q windshield survey q Site File survey search q local informant(s)q Sanborn Insurance maps q aerial photography q other (describe):. ______________________________________________________________________________ Archaeological Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Check here if NO archaeological methods were used. q surface collection, controlled q shovel test-other screen size q surface collection, uncontrolled q water screen q shovel test-1/4”screen q posthole tests q shovel test-1/8” screen q auger tests q shovel test 1/16”screen q coring q shovel test-unscreened q test excavation (at least 1x2 m) q block excavation (at least 2x2 m) q soil resistivity q magnetometer q side scan sonar q JURXQGSHQHWUDWLQJUDGDU *35 q /,'$5 q other (describe):. _______________________________________________________________________________ Historical/Architectural Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Check here if NO historical/architectural methods were used. q building permits q demolition permits q neighbor interview q subdivision maps q commercial permits q occupant interview q tax records q interior documentation q ZLQGVKLHOGVXUYH\ q local property records q occupation permits q unknown q other (describe):. _______________________________________________________________________________ Survey Results Resource Significance Evaluated? q Yes q No Count of Previously Recorded Resources____________ Count of Newly Recorded Resources____________ List Previously Recorded Site ID#s with Site File Forms Completed (attach additional pages if necessary) List Newly Recorded Site ID#s (attach additional pages if necessary) Site Forms Used: q Site File Paper Forms q Site File PDF Forms REQUIRED: Attach Map of Survey or Project Area Boundary SHPO USE ONLY SHPO USE ONLY SHPO USE ONLY Origin of Report: 872 Public Lands UW 1A32 # Academic Contract Avocational Grant Project # Compliance Review: CRAT # Type of Document: Archaeological Survey Historical/Architectural Survey Marine Survey Cell Tower CRAS Monitoring Report Overview Excavation Report Multi-Site Excavation Report Structure Detailed Report Library, Hist. or Archival Doc MPS MRA TG Other: Document Destination: ________________________BB____ Plotability: ___________________________________________ /,'$5RWKHUUHPRWHVHQVLQJ SHGHVWULDQVXUYH\ XQNQRZQ PHWDOGHWHFWRU RWKHUUHPRWHVHQVLQJ 'HVNWRS$QDO\VLV background research, surface reconnaissance; systematic & judgmental subsurface testing (25, 50, 100 m) N=169, all negative; 50 cm diameter, 1 m deep, 1/4" screen; historic resources reconnaissance 00 NA NA Plottable Projects Page 7829 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine Property Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Sections 13-15 USGS Immokalee Collier County, Florida Page 7830 of 9661 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY FOR THE SILVER STRAND MINE ACCESS ROADS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Performed for: Peninsula Engineering 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, Florida 34105 Prepared by: Florida’s First Choice in Cultural Resource Management Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 (941) 379-6206 November 2023 Page 7831 of 9661 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY FOR THE SILVER STRAND MINE ACCESS ROADS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Performed for: Peninsula Engineering 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, Florida 34105 Conducted by: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 Marion Almy - Project Manager Elizabeth A. Horvath - Project Archaeologist Justin Aiken – Archaeologist Madeline Westrom-Simons –Architectural Historian November 2023 Page 7832 of 9661 i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) of 5.8 miles of access roads and water retention facilities for the Silver Strand Mine in Collier County for Peninsula Engineering. The Area of Potential Effects (APE) is between Immokalee Road and State Road 29. This CRAS was completed in November 2023 as due diligence in anticipation of permitting requirements. The purpose of this investigation was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the project APE and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part § 800.16(d), the APE is the “geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.” Based on the scale and nature of the activities, the project has a limited potential for any indirect (visual or audible) or cumulative effects outside the immediate footprint of construction. Therefore, because of the project type and location of the proposed work, the archaeological and historical APE are limited to the footprint of the property. All work was carried out in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-655, as amended), as implemented by 36 CFR 800 (Protection of Historic Properties, effective August 2004), as well as Chapters 267 and 373, Florida Statutes, Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code, and Florida’s Coastal Management Program. All work was performed in accordance with the standards and guidelines contained in the Florida Division of Historical Resources’ (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual: Module 3 (FDHR 2003). The Principal Investigators meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (48 Federal Register 44716) for archaeology, history, architecture, architectural history, or historic architecture. Background research and a review of the Florida Master Site File (FMSF) and the NRHP indicated that there are three previously recorded archaeological sites within two miles of the APE; none are within the APE. There is a moderate to low potential for the occurrence of aboriginal archaeological sites based upon the environmental setting. There is a low potential for historic archaeological sites. Although evidence of the timber, naval stores, and agricultural industries may be uncovered. The investigations consisted of surface reconnaissance combined with systematic subsurface testing. All 97 shovel tests were negative; no archaeological sites were identified. Historic background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP databases, indicated that one historic resource (8CR01309) was previously recorded within the APE. This includes SR 29 (8CR01309), which was constructed during the mid-1920s. The resource was documented in 2018 and subsequently determined ineligible for listing in the NRHP by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). Due to its recent documentation and ineligibility, an updated FMSF form was not completed. A review of relevant historic United States Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle maps, historic aerial photographs, and the Collier County property appraiser’s website data revealed the potential for three new historic resources 50 years of age or older (built in or prior to 1974) within the APE (Florida Department of Transportation [FDOT] 1973; Google 2023; Skinner 2023; United States Department of Agriculture [USDA] 1940, 1953, 1980; USGS 1958a, 1958b). While the field survey was carried out in November 2023, the date of construction will not occur until 2024; therefore, resources found to be 49 years of age or older (constructed in 1974 or earlier) were taken into consideration. Of the anticipated historic resources, the condition of one railroad grade was found to have deteriorated beyond the point at which it merits recording in the FMSF database. The second and third anticipated resources, including a canal and culvert, were found to be non-historic. Page 7833 of 9661 ii Given the results of background research and field survey, including the excavation of 97 shovel tests, no archaeological sites were discovered. As a result of the historical/architectural field survey no new historic resources were identified within the APE and the FMSF form for one ineligible resource was not updated. Thus, there are no cultural resources that are listed, eligible for listing, or that appear potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP within the APE. Therefore, it is the professional opinion of ACI that the proposed undertaking will result in no historic properties affected. Page 7834 of 9661 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ......................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Project Location and Setting ..................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Physiography and Geology ....................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Soils and Vegetation .................................................................................................. 2-4 2.4 Paleoenvironmental Considerations .......................................................................... 2-6 3.0 CULTURE HISTORY ......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Paleoindian ................................................................................................................ 3-2 3.2 Archaic ...................................................................................................................... 3-2 3.3 Glades ........................................................................................................................ 3-4 3.4 Caloosahatchee .......................................................................................................... 3-5 3.5 Colonialism ............................................................................................................... 3-7 3.6 Territorial and Statehood ........................................................................................... 3-8 3.7 Civil War and Aftermath ......................................................................................... 3-11 3.8 Twentieth Century ................................................................................................... 3-14 3.9 APE Specifics .......................................................................................................... 3-18 4.0 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODS ..................................................... 4-1 4.1 Archaeological Considerations .................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Historical Considerations .......................................................................................... 4-5 4.3 Field Methodology .................................................................................................... 4-6 4.4 Procedures to Manage Unexpected Discoveries ....................................................... 4-7 4.5 Laboratory Methods/Curation ................................................................................... 4-7 5.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Archaeological .......................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Historical ................................................................................................................... 5-5 5.3 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 5-7 6.0 REFERENCES CITED ....................................................................................................... 6-1 APPENDIX Survey Log Page 7835 of 9661 iv LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND PHOTOGRAPHS Figure Figure 1.1. Location of the Silver Strand Mine Access Roads APE. ............................................... 1-2 Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the APE. ................................................................................. 2-2 Figure 2.2. Soil type distribution within the APE. ........................................................................... 2-5 Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. .................................................................................... 3-1 Figure 3.2. 1839 Mackay and Blake map showing the APE. ........................................................... 3-9 Figure 3.3. 1856 Ives map showing the APE. ................................................................................ 3-11 Figure 3.4. 1874 plats showing the APE. ....................................................................................... 3-13 Figure 3.5. 1954 Copeland map showing the APE. ........................................................................ 3-16 Figure 3.6. 1954 Collier County soil map showing the APE. ........................................................ 3-16 Figure 3.7. 1958 quad map showing the APE. ............................................................................... 3-17 Figure 3.8. 1940 and 1980 aerial photographs showing the APE. .................................................. 3-19 Figure 4.1. Location of the previously recorded cultural resources near the APE. .......................... 4-2 Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests in the western portion of the APE. .................................... 5-2 Figure 5.2. Location of the shovel tests in the central portion of the APE. ...................................... 5-3 Figure 5.3. Location of the shovel tests in the eastern portion of the APE. ..................................... 5-4 Table Table 2.1. Soil types within the APE. ............................................................................................. 2-4 Table 4.1. CRAS projects conducted proximate to the APE. .......................................................... 4-3 Table 4.2. Distribution of sites by water type and distance. ............................................................ 4-4 Table 4.3. Drainage and soil types. ................................................................................................. 4-4 Photo Photo 2.1. Western APE, facing north. ............................................................................................ 2-1 Photo 2.2. Eastern agricultural fields, facing west. ......................................................................... 2-3 Photo 2.3. Drainage canal in the eastern APE, facing north. ........................................................... 2-3 Photo 2.4. Drainage canal in the western APE, facing south. ......................................................... 2-3 Photo 5.1. Stratigraphy in the western APE. ................................................................................... 5-1 Photo 5.2. Stratigraphy in the central APE. ..................................................................................... 5-5 Photo 5.3. Stratigraphy in the eastern AP, facing north . ................................................................ 5-5 Photo 5.4. Looking southeast along powerline corridor, the railroad was previously located to the left. ............................................................................................................................ 5-6 Photo 5.5. Looking west at the current access road from SR 29, the railroad was previously located between the SR 29 and the powerlines. ............................................................. 5-6 Page 7836 of 9661 ACI 1-1 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A 1.0 INTRODUCTION Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) of 5.8 miles of access roads and water retention facilities for the Silver Strand Mine in Collier County for Peninsula Engineering. The Area of Potential Effects (APE) is between Immokalee Road and State Road 29 (Figure 1.1). This CRAS was completed in November 2023 as due diligence in anticipation of permitting requirements. The purpose of this investigation was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the project APE and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As defined in 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part § 800.16(d), the APE is the “geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.” Based on the scale and nature of the activities, the project has a limited potential for any indirect (visual or audible) or cumulative effects outside the immediate footprint of construction. Therefore, because of the project type and location of the proposed work, the archaeological and historical APE are limited to the footprint of the property. All work was carried out in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89-655, as amended), as implemented by 36 CFR 800 (Protection of Historic Properties, effective August 2004), as well as Chapters 267 and 373, Florida Statutes, Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code, and Florida’s Coastal Management Program. All work was performed in accordance with the standards and guidelines contained in the Florida Division of Historical Resources’ (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual: Module 3 (FDHR 2003). The Principal Investigators meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (48 Federal Register 44716) for archaeology, history, architecture, architectural history, or historic architecture. Background research preceded the field investigations. Such research provides an informed set of expectation as to the types and locations of resources expected within the APE. In addition, the data can be used to assess the significance of any sites discovered. Page 7837 of 9661 ACI 1-2 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 1.1. Location of the Silver Strand Mine Access Roads APE. Page 7838 of 9661 ACI 2-1 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Environmental factors such as geology, topography, relative elevation, soils, vegetation, and water are important in determining where archaeological sites are likely to be located. These variables influenced what types of resources were available in a given area, which in turn influenced decisions regarding settlement location and land-use patterns. Because of the influence of these environmental factors upon the inhabitants, a discussion of the environment is included. 2.1 Project Location and Setting The 59.6-acre APE is located in Sections 14-15, 22-24, and 27 of Township 47 South, Range 29 East and Section 19 in Township 47 South, Range 30 East (United States [U.S.] Geological Survey [USGS] Immokalee and Immokalee SW 2013a, 2013b) (Figure 2.1). The APE is located between Immokalee Road and SR 29, about one mile south of the Immokalee Reservation. The APE consists of dead and dying citrus groves with drainage ditches between every two rows and large drainage canals. The eastern portion of the APE is active agricultural fields (Photos 2.1-2.4). Photo 2.1. Western APE, facing north. 2.2 Physiography and Geology According to White (1970), Collier County is included in the southern, or distal, physiographic zone, and more specifically, the APE is within the Immokalee Rise physiographic zone. It sits at an elevation of 20-25 feet [ft] above mean sea level. The APE is underlain by the Tamiami formation, which is surficially evidenced by shelly sand and clay (Lane 1981; Scott 2001; Scott et al. 2001). Page 7839 of 9661 ACI 2-2 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the APE. Page 7840 of 9661 ACI 2-3 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Photo 2.2. Eastern agricultural fields, facing west. Photo 2.3. Drainage canal in the eastern APE, facing north. Photo 2.4. Drainage canal in the western APE, facing south. Page 7841 of 9661 ACI 2-4 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A 2.3 Soils and Vegetation According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the APE is within Immokalee-Oldsmar-Basinger soil association and the Holopaw-Wabasso-Winder association. The former consists of nearly level, poorly drained, sandy soils on flatwoods and in sloughs. The natural vegetation consists of saw palmetto and some areas of scattered South Florida slash pine, waxmyrtle, and gallberry. The sloughs support scattered areas of slash pine, scrub cypress, cabbage palm, saw palmetto, waxmyrtle, sand cordgrass, pineland threeawn, panicum, and chalky bluestem. The Holopaw-Wabasso-Webster association is characterized by nearly level, poorly and very poorly drained, sandy soils with a loamy subsoil. They occur of the flatwoods, sloughs, and in small, closed depressions. The flatwoods vegetation consists of saw palmetto and some areas of scattered South Florida slash pine, gallberry, and waxmyrtle. The sloughs support scattered areas of South Florida slash pine, scrub cypress, cabbage palm, saw palmetto, waxmyrtle, sand cordgrass, pineland threeawn, panicum, and chalky bluestem. The native vegetation inf the closed depressions include pickerelweed, St. Johnswort, and maidencane. Table 2.1 provides a list of the soils within the APE and their locations are depicted on Figure 2.2 (USDA 2021). Table 2.1. Soil types within the APE. Soil type, % slopes Drainage Setting Chobee, Winder and Gator soils, frequently ponded (fp), 0-1% Very poor Depressions and marshes Cypress Lake fine sand, 0-2% Poor Flatwoods Ft. Drum-Malabar, high, association Poor Ridges along sloughs Holopaw-Okeelanta, fp, 0-1% Very poor Depressions and marshes Holopaw fine sand, 0-2% Poor Sloughs and poorly defined drainageways Immokalee fine sand Poor Flatwoods Malabar fine sand, 0-2% Poor Sloughs and poorly defined drainageways Oldsmar fine sand, 0-2% Poor Flatwoods Pineda-Riviera fine sands association Poor Sloughs and poorly defined drainageways Wabasso fine sand, 0-2% Poor Flatwoods Winder, Riviera, limestone substratum, and Chobee soils, frequently ponded, 0- 1% slopes Very poor Marshes The soils support different vegetative regimes, which in turn provide habitats for the local animal population. The Natural Vegetation of Florida map indicates that the APE is in pine flatwoods (Davis 1980). Soils have variable suitability for openland, woodland, and wetland habitats. The habitat for openland wildlife consists of cropland, pasture, meadows, and areas that are overgrown with grasses, herbs, shrubs, and vines. These areas produce grain and seed crops, grasses, legumes, and wild herbaceous plants. The wildlife attracted to these areas include bobwhite quail, dove, sandhill crane, meadowlark, field sparrow, and cottontail. Cypress Lake, Immokalee, Malabar-high, Pineda, Riviera, Holopaw, and Oldsmar sands are rated fair for openlands. Woodland wildlife habitat includes area of deciduous plants or coniferous plants or both and associated grasses, legumes, and wild herbaceous plants. Wildlife attracted to these areas include turkey, barred owls, thrushes, woodpeckers, squirrels, gray fox, racoon, and white-tailed deer. Ft. Drum, Holopaw, Oldsmar, Riviera, and Wabasso sands are rated fair for woodlands. The habitat for wetland wildlife includes areas of open, marshy, or swampy, shallow water areas. Wildlife in these areas include ducks, egrets, herons, shore birds, ibis, otter, and alligators (Liudahl et al. 1998: Table 6). Chobee, Winder and Gator soils; Winder, Riviera limestone substratum, and Chobee soils; and Holopaw-Okeelanta soils are well suited to wetlands; Pineda, Riviera, Malabar, Holopaw, Malabar-high, Immokalee, and Cypress Lake are rated fair. Soils not mentioned above are rated poor or very poor for that habitat. Page 7842 of 9661 ACI 2-5 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 2.2. Soil type distribution within the APE. Page 7843 of 9661 ACI 2-6 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A 2.4 Paleoenvironmental Considerations The early environment of the region was different from that seen today. Sea levels were lower, the climate was arid, and fresh water was scarce. An understanding of human ecology during the earliest periods of human occupation in Florida cannot be based on observations of the modern environment because of changes in water availability, botanical communities, and faunal resources. Aboriginal inhabitants would have developed cultural adaptations in response to the environmental changes taking place, which were then reflected in settlement patterns, site types, artifact forms, and subsistence economies. Due to arid conditions between 16,500 and 12,500 years ago, the perched water aquifer and potable water supplies were absent. Palynological studies conducted in Florida and Georgia suggest that between 13,000 and 5000 years ago, this area was covered with an upland vegetation community of scrub oak and prairie (Watts 1969, 1971, 1975). However, the environment was not static. Evidence recovered from the inundated Page-Ladson Site in north Florida has clearly demonstrated that there were two periods of low water tables and dry climatic conditions and two episodes of elevated water tables and wet conditions (Dunbar 2006b). By 5000 years ago, a climatic event marking a brief return to Pleistocene climatic conditions induced a change toward more open vegetation. Southern pine forests replaced the oak savannahs. Extensive marshes and swamps developed along the coasts and subtropical hardwood forests became established along the southern tip of Florida (Delcourt and Delcourt 1981). Northern Florida saw an increase in oak species, grasses, and sedges (Carbone 1983). In south central Florida, pollen cores were dominated by wax myrtle and pine. The assemblage suggests that by this time, a forest dominated by longleaf pine along with cypress swamps and bayheads were present (Watts 1971, 1975). About 5000 years ago, surface water was plentiful in karst terrains and the level of the Floridan aquifer rose to five feet above present levels. With the establishment of warmer winters and cooler summers than in the preceding early Holocene, the fire-adapted pine communities prevailed. These depend on the high summer precipitation caused by the thunderstorms and the accompanying lightning strikes to spark the fires (Watts et al. 1996; Watts and Hansen 1994). The increased precipitation also resulted in the formation of the large swamp systems such as the Okefenokee and Everglades (Gleason and Stone 1994). After this time, modern floral, climatic, and environmental conditions began to be established. Page 7844 of 9661 ACI 3-1 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A 3.0 CULTURE HISTORY A discussion of the culture history of the region provides a framework within which the local archaeological and historic record can be examined. Archaeological and historic sites are not individual entities but are the remains of once dynamic cultural systems. As a result, they cannot be adequately examined or interpreted without reference to other sites and resources in the area. In general, the culture history of an area (i.e., an archaeological region) outlines the sequence of archaeological cultures through time. These cultures are defined largely in geographical terms but also reflect shared environmental and cultural factors. The project area is situated at the interface of the Caloosahatchee and Glades archaeological regions (Carr and Beriault 1984; Griffin 2002) (Figure 3.1). It should be noted that this regional assignment is one of several competing interpretations for the area, and Griffin (2002) supplies an excellent discussion of alterative groupings. Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. The area is better understood after the introduction of pottery (circa [ca.] 500 Before Common Era [BCE]). Prior to this, regional characteristics of native populations are not easily identified, as malleable materials such as textiles and basketry, which lend themselves to cultural expression, are typically destroyed by environmental processes. With the arrival of pottery, the clay provided both a means of cultural expression and an archaeologically durable artifact. Thus, the use of pottery as a marker of cultural diversity probably post-dates the inception of distinct Florida cultures by many centuries. The local history of the region is divided into four broad periods named with reference to the prevailing governmental powers or historical trends. The first period, Colonialism, occurred during the exploration and control of Florida by the Spanish and British from around 1513 until 1821. At that time, Florida became a territory of the U.S. and 21 years later became a State (Territorial and Statehood). Page 7845 of 9661 ACI 3-2 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A The Civil War and Aftermath (1861-1899) period covers the Civil War, the period of Reconstruction following the war, and the late 1800s, when the transportation systems were dramatically increased and development throughout the state expanded. The Twentieth Century period has subperiods based on important historic events such as the World Wars, the Boom of the 1920s, and the Depression. Each of these periods evidenced differential development and utilization of the region, thus affecting the historic archeological site distribution. 3.1 Paleoindian The Paleoindian stage is the earliest known cultural manifestation in Florida, dating from ca. 14,300-9750 BCE (Anderson et al. 2019:258). Archaeological evidence for Paleoindians consists primarily of scattered finds of diagnostic lanceolate-shaped projectile points. The Florida peninsula at that time was quite different than today. In general, During this time, the climate of South Florida was much drier than today. The sea level was 260-425 ft lower than present, and the coast extended approximately 100 miles seaward on the Gulf coast. With lower sea levels, today’s well-watered inland environments were arid uplands (Milanich 1994). Lake Okeechobee, the Caloosahatchee, Myakka, and Peace Rivers, the Big Cypress, and the Everglades were probably dry. Because of drier global conditions and little or no surface water available for evaporation, Florida’s rainfall was much lower than at present (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980). Potable water was obtainable at sinkholes where the lower water table could be reached. Plant and animal life were also more diverse around the oases that were frequented by both people and game animals (Milanich 1994; Widmer 1988). Thus, the prevailing environmental conditions were largely uninviting to human habitation during the Paleoindian period (Griffin 2002). Given the inhospitable climate, it is not surprising that the population was sparse and Paleoindian sites are uncommon in south Florida. Exceptions include two sites to the north in Sarasota County, Little Salt Springs (Clausen et al. 1979) and Warm Mineral Springs (Clausen et al. 1975a, 1975b; Cockrell and Murphy 1978) and one site to the southeast, Cutler Fossil Site, in Dade County (Carr 1986). Archaeologists hypothesize that this period was characterized by small groups utilizing a hunting and gathering mode of subsistence. Dunbar (2006a:540) suggests that Paleoindians identified and migrated to “unexploited resource-rich areas” of food. Permanent sources of water, scarce during this time, were very important in settlement selection as well (Daniel and Wisenbaker 1987). This settlement model, often referred to as the Oasis Hypothesis (Milanich 1994:41), has a high correlation with geologic features in southern Florida such as deep sink holes like those noted in Sarasota and Dade counties. Sites of this period are most readily identified based on distinctive lanceolate shaped stone projectile points including those of the Simpson and Suwannee types (Bullen 1975). The tool assemblage also included items manufactured of bone, wood, and very likely leather, as well as plant fibers (Clausen et al. 1979). 3.2 Archaic The succeeding Archaic period is divided into three temporal periods: Early Archaic (ca. 7000 to 5000 BCE), Middle Archaic (ca. 5000 to 2000 BCE), and the Late Archaic (ca. 2000 to 500 BCE). According to Widmer (1988), the extreme aridity of the south Florida region during the Early Archaic period may have led to the abandonment of the area. Sites of the Early Archaic and Middle Archaic are not common in southern Florida. James Pepe confirmed the location of three Early Archaic and 13 Middle Archaic sites in the 13-county Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Project (CERP) area (Janus Research 2008). Initially, the settlement patterns and tools of the Early Archaic were similar to those of the preceding Paleoindian period, but through time, more wetland habitats began to emerge. Page 7846 of 9661 ACI 3-3 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A During the Archaic, marked environmental changes occurred that had profound influence upon human settlement and subsistence practices. Humans adapted to this changing environment and regional differences are reflected in the archaeological record (Russo 1994a, 1994b; Sassaman 2008). Among the landscape alterations were rises in sea and water table levels that resulted in the creation of more available surface water. It was during this period that Lake Okeechobee, the Everglades, the Big Cypress Swamp, and the Caloosahatchee and Peace Rivers formed. In addition to the hydrological changes, this period is characterized by the spread of mesic forests and the beginnings of modern vegetation communities including pine forests and cypress swamps (Griffin 2002; Widmer 1988). Two Early Archaic horizons, the Bolen and the Kirk, have been identified (Janus Research 2008). The main diagnostic markers for the Bolen Early Archaic are side-notched projectile points such as the Bolen and Greenbriar types (Austin 1997; Bullen 1975) as well as Kirk Corner-Notched (Farr 2006). Other stone artifacts include adzes, Edgefield scrapers, end scrapers, spokeshaves with graver spurs, side scrapers, and Waller knives (Purdy 1981). In southern Florida, the archaeological record for the Middle Archaic is better known than the Early Archaic. Among the material culture inventory are several varieties of stemmed, broad blade projectile points including those of the Newnan, Levy, Marion, and Putnam types (Bullen 1975). At sites where preservation is good, such as sinkholes and ponds, an elaborate bone tool assemblage is recognized along with shell tools and complicated weaving (Beriault et al. 1981; Wheeler 1994). In addition, artifacts have been found in the surrounding upland areas, such as the upland palmetto and pine flatwoods surrounding the Bay West Site (Beriault et al. 1981). Along the coast, excavations on both Horr’s Island in Collier County and Useppa Island in Lee County (Milanich et al. 1984; Russo 1991) have uncovered pre-ceramic shell middens that date to the Middle Archaic period. The Horr’s Island shell ring is accompanied by at least three ceremonial mounds. Large architectural features such as these were designed to divide, separate, and elevate above other physical positions within the settlement as a reflection and reinforcement of the social segmentation within society (Russo 2008:21). Mortuary sites, characterized by interments in shallow ponds and sloughs, as discovered at the Little Salt Springs Site in Sarasota County (Clausen et al. 1979) and the Bay West Site in Collier County (Beriault et al. 1981), are also distinctive of the Middle Archaic. The beginning of the Late (or Ceramic) Archaic period is similar to the Middle Archaic but includes the addition of pottery. The earliest pottery in the south Florida region is fiber-tempered (Orange Plain and Orange Incised), as represented at sites on Key Marco (Cockrell 1970; Widmer 1974). Projectile points of the Late Archaic are primarily stemmed and corner-notched, and include the Culbreath, Clay, and Lafayette types (Bullen 1975). Other Late Archaic lithic tools included hafted scrapers and ovate and triangular-shaped knives (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980) Essentially modern environmental conditions were reached by the beginning of the Late Archaic period, when freshwater resources were available throughout southern Florida. Sea levels continued to rise slightly during the post Archaic periods, inundating small knolls located along the edge of the Everglades in the process (Carr et al. 1991:125-126; Wheeler 2004:49). The emergence of stable coastal environments led to greater estuarine richness, which permitted larger human populations and regionalization of cultures as people adapted to specific habitats (Milanich 1994:83). The South Florida Native Americans increased their reliance on marine resources in coastal areas and expanded hunting, fishing, and plant collection throughout the interior (Carr 2002:195). Until recently, variations of Bullen’s chronology for the Late Archaic Orange culture in northeastern Florida were generally used for the Late Archaic in southern Florida. Fiber-tempered pottery, the earliest known for all of North America, was considered a marker for the ceramic portion of the Late Archaic. The use of this standard fiber-tempered sequence for the Late Archaic in southern Page 7847 of 9661 ACI 3-4 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Florida has come into question. Based on his research in southwestern Florida, Widmer (1988:68) hypothesized that the earliest Late Archaic sites included “untempered chalky pottery and limestone-tempered pottery as well as the usual fiber-tempered Orange pottery.” Austin (1997:136) stated that the “identification of a true Orange Horizon in south Florida is debatable.” Instead, what is more common is the presence of “semi-fiber tempered” pottery in the basal levels of middens, “often in association with thick St. Johns Plain or sand tempered plain sherds, and overlying either culturally sterile sands, or sparse scatters of lithic artifacts” (Austin 1996, 1997). Both Widmer and Austin agreed that semi-fiber tempered components at sites throughout southern Florida are “ephemeral” and soon replaced in the archaeological record by components consisting exclusively of sand-tempered pottery (Austin 1997:136; Widmer 1988:72-73). Importantly, it is now becoming clear that many of the ubiquitous faunal bone middens located in the interior wetlands of southern Florida date to the Late Archaic, despite the fact that many of them lack pottery. Such sites are difficult to date because, not only do they often lack chronologically diagnostic artifacts, most of the faunal bone at the sites lacks collagen, which is the datable material in bone samples. Nonetheless, ongoing research by the National Park Service in the Big Cypress National Preserve and Everglades National Park has yielded dense aceramic faunal bone middens yielding radiocarbon dates between 2800 and 1500 BCE (Schwadron 2006). 3.3 Glades The termination of the Late or Ceramic Archaic corresponds to a time of environmental change. The maturing of productive estuarine systems was accompanied by cultural changes leading to the establishment of what John Goggin originally defined as the “Glades Tradition” (Griffin 2002:148). The Glades Tradition was characterized by “the exploitation of the food resources of the tropical coastal waters, with secondary dependence on game and some use of wild plant foods. Agriculture was apparently not practiced, but pottery was extensively used” (Goggin 1949:28). Unlike much of peninsular Florida, the region does not contain deposits of chert, and as such, stone artifacts are rare. Instead of stone, shell and bone were used as raw materials for tools (Milanich 1994:302). Most information concerning the post-500 BCE aboriginal populations is derived from coastal sites where the subsistence patterns are typified by the extensive exploitation of fish and shellfish, wild plants, and inland game, like deer. Inland sites show a greater reliance on interior wetland resources. Known inland sites often consist of sand burial mounds and shell and dirt middens along major water courses, and small dirt middens containing animal bone and pottery in oak/palm hammocks, or palm tree islands associated with freshwater marshes (Griffin 2002). These islands of dry ground provided space for settlements (Carr 2002). Glades I - Beginning around 500 BCE, fiber-tempered and semi fiber-tempered pottery of the Late Archaic period was replaced by sand-tempered pottery (Glades Plain). This change in tempering agent marks the beginning of the Glades cultural tradition. For 700 years, sand-tempered plain pottery dominated the assemblage, but from 200 CE (Common Era) and lasting until 800 CE, Gordon’s Pass Incised, Sanibel Incised, and an, as of yet unclassified decorated pottery type, were the predominant decorated types (Carr and Beriault 1984; Griffin 2002). The tremendous increase in Glades I sites within the Big Cypress indicates a dramatic increase in the usage of the area during this time (Widmer 1988), and the geographic extent of the Glades I diagnostics indicates a considerable degree of interchange and interaction (Griffin 2002:154). Glades II - The Glades II era (ca. 800 to 1200 CE) is marked by a tremendous diversity in decorated ceramic types. Goggin (n.d.) described the decorations as being “neatly and cleanly cut and apparently made with swift cutting strokes while the clay is partially dry.” Glades IIa (750-900 CE) is Page 7848 of 9661 ACI 3-5 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A identified by the presence of Key Largo Incised, Opa Locka Incised, and Miami Incised. During Glades IIb (ca. 900-1100 CE), Key Largo Incised remained the primary decorated ware. The number of sites increased, and the period would appear to be one of “relative stability in technology and subsistence” (Griffin 2002:158). From ca. 1100 to 1200 CE there is a conspicuous absence of decorated pottery, and the number of sites drops dramatically (Griffin 2002:158). This cultural hiatus has been correlated to the NeoAtlantic warm period and associated with high sea levels (Fairbridge 1984; Gleason et al. 1984). Glades III - The Glades III era begins with the reintroduction of decorated ceramics; however, the motifs and techniques are noticeably different from previous styles. Glades IIIa (ca. 1200-1400 CE) is identified by the appearance of Surfside Incised, St. Johns Check Stamped, and Safety Harbor wares. There is also an accompanying increase in bone ornaments. Then again, ca. 1400 CE, ceramic decoration ceases with the exception of tooled rim types (Griffin 2002:159). Griffin hypothesizes that this ceramic style might have been associated with increasing Calusa influence in the area (Griffin 2002:159). Whereas the earlier cultural periods of the Glades area are defined exclusively by the archaeological record, historical documents provide greater information, including tribal names, for the peoples of the terminal Glades III period. Much of the early historical ethnographic information is derived from the account of Hernando d’Escalante Fontaneda, a Spanish captive of the Calusa (True 1944). During his 17-year captivity, Fontaneda learned of the political structure, economy, social hierarchy, and religion of the south Florida Indians. 3.4 Caloosahatchee The termination of the Late or Ceramic Archaic corresponds to a time of environmental change. The maturing of productive estuarine systems was accompanied by cultural changes leading to the establishment of what John Goggin defined as the “Glades Tradition” (Griffin 1988:133). It was characterized by “the exploitation of the food resources of the tropical coastal waters, with secondary dependence on game and some use of wild plant foods. Agriculture was apparently never practiced, but pottery was extensively used” (Goggin 1949:28). Unlike much of peninsular Florida, the region does not contain deposits of chert, and as such stone artifacts are rare. Instead of stone, shell and bone were used as raw materials for tools (Milanich 1994:302). Most information concerning the post-500 BCE aboriginal populations is derived from coastal sites where the subsistence patterns are typified by the extensive exploitation of fish and shellfish, wild plants, and inland game, like deer. Although Widmer postulated environmental stability for the Calusa, this was far from the truth based upon the recent environmental reconstructions (Walker 2013; Widmer 1988). Inland sites show a greater, if not exclusive reliance on interior resources. Known inland sites often consist of sand burial mounds and shell and dirt middens along major water courses, and small dirt middens containing animal bone and ceramic sherds in oak/palm hammocks, or palm tree islands associated with freshwater marshes (Griffin 1988). These islands of dry ground provided space for settlements (Carr 2002). The settlement pattern of the Caloosahatchee people at this time consisted of large villages (25 ac with about 400 people), small villages (9 ac / 50 people), and fishing hamlets and/or collection stations (2.5 ac, temporary, task specific site) (Widmer 1988). The larger sites are located in the coastal areas, whereas most of the interior sites are seen as short-term hunting stations occupied by special task groups from the permanent coastal villages (Widmer 1988:226). Caloosahatchee I, ca. 500 BCE to 500 CE, is characterized by thick, sand-tempered plain sherds with rounded lips, some St. Johns Plain ceramics, the appearance of Pineland Plain ceramics (tempered Page 7849 of 9661 ACI 3-6 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A with sponge spicules and medium to fine quartz sand), and the absence of Belle Glade ceramics (Marquardt 1999:85). Based on the faunal analysis from Useppa Island and Pineland, fish was the primary meat source with whelks and conchs being the primary shellfish food. Botanical materials utilized include chenopod, panic grass, talinum, mallow, red mangrove, waxmyrtle, pine, buttonwood, and seagrape (Marquardt 1999:87). Data on burial customs for this time are unknown; on Pineland, the use of burial mounds began around 1000 CE (Marquardt and Walker 2013). Small discrete shell middens located along the coast may have represented clustered habitation areas for extended kin groups or lineages, and through time, the lower lying areas were filled in to make a larger elongated shell work (Schober 2014). A dramatic increase of Belle Glade ceramics marks the Caloosahatchee II period (ca. 500-1200 CE). Cordell (1992) has divided the Caloosahatchee II period into IIA and IIB based on the appearance of Belle Glade Red ceramics at about 800 CE. In addition, the IIA and IIB time ranges roughly correlate with two contrasting climate/sea-level episodes (Walker 2013). These changes in ceramics may also indicate the resurgence of ceremonial mound use, a characteristic of the period. Shell from other locales at these large ceremonial centers (e.g., Mound Key, Pineland) and villages sites (Estero) were used to increase the size of many of the shell mounds. Burials occurred in sand mounds and in natural sand ridges with both primary flexed and secondary bundle burials. The number of shell middens or village sites increased (Milanich 1994:319) and evidence of ranked societies appears (Widmer 1988:93). However, Schober notes there was an apparent abandonment of many sites in inland bays and on barrier islands (Schober 2014). The Wightman Site has three non-mortuary ceremonial mounds connected by shell causeways (Fradkin 1976). In addition, the large Pineland Canal appears to have been constructed at this time (Luer 1989a, 1989b). It is possible that the large Pineland complex served as the center of Calusa society at this time (cf. Milanich 1995:44). During this time, it had been postulated that sea levels were higher than during the Caloosahatchee I period, or that the coastal area was under greater influence from nearby ocean inlets. This is based on the higher diversity of faunal remains and the increased number higher salinity-based food stuffs (Walker 1992). The number of shell midden or village sites increased, and shell tools (hafted shell hammers and cutting edged tools) became more diverse (Marquardt 1992:429; Milanich 1994:319). The Caloosahatchee III period (ca. 1200 to 1350 CE) is identified by the appearance of St. Johns Check Stamped and Pinellas Plain ceramics (Cordell 1992). Belle Glade Plain ceramics continue to be the dominant type, with sand tempered plain and Pineland Plain also occurring. Marquardt (1992:430) notes that no obvious changes in the settlement and subsistence patterns based upon the archaeological evidence even though this is the beginning of the Little Ice Age (Marquardt 2013). The accumulation and/or build-up of midden-mounds continued in a constricted spatial pattern, as in the IB period (Marquardt and Walker 2012). Sand burial mounds continued to be utilized, often containing Englewood and Safety Harbor vessels. A number of mounds from this period have had radially placed extended burials within the mounds (Luer and Almy 1987). The Caloosahatchee IV period (ca. 1400-1513 CE) is characterized by the appearance of numerous trade wares from the adjoining regions (Widmer 1988:86). These types include Glades Tooled and pottery of the Safety Harbor series. There was also a decrease in popularity of Belle Glade Plain ceramics (Milanich 1994:321). Sand tempered plain pottery, with square and flattened lips, is the most common (Cordell 1992:168). There is also an increase in Pineland Plain ceramics. Around 1400 CE, the use of incising on ceramics in the Glades and Caloosahatchee regions ceased and the ceramic assemblages of the two areas were very homogeneous (Marquardt 1992:431). Some have suggested that this represents an expansion of the Calusa within this area (Griffin 1988; McGregor 1974). Large villages sites continued to accumulate midden-mounds and the dead were interred in sand burial mounds (Marquardt 2013). Page 7850 of 9661 ACI 3-7 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A 3.5 Colonialism The cultural traditions of the native Floridians changed as a result of European expansion into America. The initial events, authorized by the Spanish crown in the 1500s, ushered in devastating European contact. After Ponce de Leon’s landing near St. Augustine and circumnavigation of the peninsula in 1513, official Spanish explorations were confined to the west coast of Florida until 1565. Florida’s east coast, lacking deep-water harbors like Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor, was left to a few shipwrecked sailors from treasure ships, which, by 1551, sailed through the Straits of Florida on their way to Spain. When the first Europeans arrived in coastal southwest Florida in the 16th century, they encountered the Calusa, a powerful, complex society ruled by a paramount chief. The principal town of the Calusa is thought to have been on Mound Key in Estero Bay. Documents suggest that the Calusa chief ruled over 50 towns, from which he exacted tribute (Widmer 1988). Between 1513 and 1558, Spain launched several expeditions of exploration and ultimately failed, colonization of La Florida. Archaeological evidence of contact can be found in the form of European trade goods such as glass beads, bells, and trinkets recovered from village sites. Prior to the settlement of St. Augustine in 1565, European contact with the indigenous peoples was sporadic and brief; however, the repercussions were devastating. The southeastern Native American population of 1500 has been estimated at 1.5 to 2 million (Dobyns 1983). Following exposure to Old World diseases such as bubonic plague, dysentery, influenza, and smallpox, epidemics to which they had no immunity, the Native American population was reduced by as much as 90% (Ramenofsky 1987). The social consequences of such a swift and merciless depopulation were staggering. Within 87 years of Ponce de Leon’s landing, the Mississippian cultures of the Southeast were collapsed (Smith 1987). In 1708, the Spanish government reported that three hundred refugees were all that remained of the original Florida population (Mulroy 1993). Along the Gulf Coast between Charlotte Harbor and Tampa Bay, Spanish and Cuban fisherfolk established communities, or “ranchos,” with the earliest being at Useppa Island and San Carlos Bay (Hammond 1973; Palov 1999). There is growing archaeological evidence that the surviving Native Americans of the region were assimilated into these mixed communities (Almy 2001; Hann 1991; Neill 1968; Palov 1999). These west coast ranchos supplied dried fish to Cuban and northern markets until the mid-1830s, when the Seminole Indian Wars and customs control closed the fisheries. During the two centuries following the settlement of St. Augustine, the Spanish widened their Florida holdings to include the settlement at Pensacola and a garrison at Saint Marks. With the English to the north and the French to the west, the Spanish colony of La Florida was extremely fragile. In the early 1700s, Spain invited some of the Lower Creek Indians, displaced by British settlements, into La Florida to provide a hostile buffer against the British (Mulroy 1993). What formed as a border population evolved as other bands of Lower Creek extraction moved into the peninsula. This first migration formed a confederation, which included Cowkeeper and his Alachua band, the Apalachicolas, and the Mikasukis (Mulroy 1993). The Treaty of Paris (1763) reallocated the British, French, and Spanish holdings in America. As a result, Florida was ceded to the English. After this, bands of Upper Creek, Muskogee speakers, began moving into Florida, increasing the Native American population to around two thousand by 1790 (Mulroy 1993). Although cultural distinctions existed between the various Native American groups entering Florida, Europeans collectively called them Seminoles: The word Seminole means runaway or broken off. Hence Seminole is a distinctive appellation, applicable to all the Indians in the Territory of Florida, as all of them run Page 7851 of 9661 ACI 3-8 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A away, or broke off, from the Creek or Nuiscoge [Muskogee] nation (U.S. Congress 1837). The Seminoles formed, at various times, loose confederacies for mutual protection against the new American Nation to the north (Tebeau 1980:72). The Seminoles were joined by escaped slaves from South Carolina and Georgia (Porter 1996). The loss of slave labor, particularly in light of the abolitionists’ movement in the northeast, coupled with the anxiety of having a free and hostile slave population immediately to the south, caused great concern among plantation owners. This historically underestimated nuance of the Seminole Wars prompted General Thomas S. Jesup to say, “This you may be assured is a negro and not an Indian War” (Knetsch 2003:104). Following the Treaty of Paris (1763), the ensuing decades witnessed the American Revolution during which British loyalists immigrated to Florida. Following the Revolution, the second Treaty of Paris (1783) returned Florida to Spain; however, Spanish influence was nominal during this second period of ownership. For the next 36 years, Spain, from the vantage of Florida, watched with growing concern as the infant American Nation to the north gained momentum. When the U.S. acquired the Louisiana Purchase from France in 1803, Spain was hemmed in. When the Seminoles began cross-border raids from Spanish Florida into the United States, General Andrew Jackson was commission to defend the nation. His orders permitted him to cross the international border to pursue Seminoles, but he was to respect Spanish authority. General Jackson’s subsequent actions belie either tacit instructions or a personal agenda, as he killed hundreds of indigenous people and runaway slaves, took control of several Spanish garrisons and towns, confiscated the Spanish royal archives, named an American as governor of the area, and announced that the Spanish economic laws would be replaced by the revenue laws of the U.S. (Tebeau 1980). This aggression understandably strained relations between the U.S. and Spain. Spain, who had more pressing concerns with its Central and South American colonies, ceded Florida to the U.S. in the Adams-Onis Treaty of 1819 in exchange for the territory west of the Sabine River. 3.6 Territorial and Statehood In 1821, Andrew Jackson, named provisional governor of the Territory of Florida, divided the territory into St. Johns and Escambia Counties. At that time, St. Johns County encompassed all of Florida lying east of the Suwannee River, and Escambia County included the land lying to the west. In the first territorial census in 1825, some 317 persons reportedly lived in South Florida; by 1830 that number had risen to 517 (Tebeau 1980:134). Although what became known as the First Seminole War (the cross-border hostilities between the U.S. and the Seminoles) was fought in north Florida, the Treaty of Moultrie Creek in 1823, at the end of the war, was to affect the settlement of south Florida. In exchange for occupancy of a four- million-acre reservation south of Ocala and north of Charlotte Harbor, the Seminoles relinquished their claim to the remainder of the peninsula (Covington 1958; Mahon 1985). The treaty satisfied neither the Seminoles nor the settlers. The inadequacy of the reservation, the desperate situation of the Seminoles, and the demand of would-be settlers for their removal, produced another conflict. By 1835, the Second Seminole War was underway, initiated with the Seminole attack on Major Dade’s company in route to Fort King. Although much of the Second Seminole War occurred in central Florida, as the Seminoles fled southward into the Big Cypress and Everglades, U.S. forces pursued them. In October 1840, U.S. Secretary of War Joel Poinsett advised commander Armistead that the construction of fixed post installations should be discontinued, and temporary depots should be adopted (Knetsch 2003). This new strategy was a direct response to the guerilla-like warfare utilized by the Page 7852 of 9661 ACI 3-9 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Seminoles and the abandonment of set piece warfare. Because of this directive, the landscape of south Florida was dotted with depots and only slightly more substantial “forts.” The forts of south Florida very rarely approximated the size and permanency of forts such as Brooke, King, and Mellon. The Mackay and Blake map from this time shows no features near the APE (Mackay and Blake 1839) (Figure 3.2). Geo-referencing maps from this time is a difficult proposition, thus the following figures show the approximate location of the APE. Figure 3.2. 1839 Mackay and Blake map showing the APE. The federal government ended the Second Seminole War in 1842 by withdrawing troops from Florida. At the war’s end, some of the battle-weary Seminoles were persuaded to emigrate to the Oklahoma Indian Reservation where the federal government had set aside land for them. After much political deliberation over the fate of black Seminoles (Knetsch 2003:126), approximately 500 black Seminoles were allowed to accompany the “red Seminoles” west (Porter 1996). Those Seminoles who wished to remain in Florida were allowed to do so, but the reservation boundary was redrawn, reducing Seminole lands to south and west of Lake Istokpoga in Highlands County. To limit contact between the Seminoles and Cuban fisherfolk, the offshore islands were excluded from the territory (Covington 1982:3). The government considered these two and one half million acres “a temporary hunting and planting reserve” (Covington 1982:3) and continued to pressure the remaining Seminoles to leave by “sending a delegation of their tribe, which have emigrated West, to visit their brethren in Florida, and explain to them the advantages of rejoining their tribe” (U.S. Congress 1850). In 1845, the Union admitted the State of Florida with Tallahassee as the state capital and survey and exploration of the Big Cypress and Okeechobee areas was intensified. Tension mounted as the Seminoles watched with growing alarm the passage of military patrols and survey parties, and complaints were made to Indian Agent Captain Casey that such activities made hostilities inevitable (Covington 1982:30). Patrols typically found little remaining of previous military installations; however, navigation and location was always in doubt given the limited cartography and featureless Page 7853 of 9661 ACI 3-10 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A swamps. One officer lamented that “The maps represent the shape of the Big Cypress so differently in this portion of it and also the course of the creek Okholoakooche [Okaloacoochee Slough] from what I found that I felt doubts if I had yet reached the right place.” On January 22, 1855, Lt. George Hartsuff, appointed topographical engineer and main surveyor, began exploration of the Big Cypress and Everglades. During this time, he helped establish Forts Simon Drum and Shackleford. When the rainy season of June 1855 set in, survey was suspended, and Hartsuff began work on his field notes and maps. In a sketch furnished to the War Department, he showed the exact location of many Indian villages and noted that he had been into the chief haunt of the Indians that contained most of their villages, gardens, and cattle pens (Covington 1982:35). Sampson Forrester, a Black Seminole, provided the following account of the Seminole existence in the swamps: Within the swamp are many pine-islands, upon which the villages are located. They are susceptible of cultivation; and between them is a cypress swamp, the water from two to three feet deep. The Indians rely principally upon their crops, which, though small, add much to their comfort. Corn, pumpkins, beans, wild potatoes, and cabbage palmetto, afford subsistence. The scarcity of powder deprives them partially of game; though bears and turkey are frequently killed with arrows. Discharging a rifle was forbidden, as in a country so flat and wet the reverberation is in abundance; but there they apprehend discovery. A few ponies, cattle, hogs, and chickens are owned by the chief (Tampa Tribune 1955). On December 7, 1855, Lieutenant Hartsuff again set out for the Big Cypress with orders to make reconnaissance and take note of any Indian fields and settlements (Covington 1982:1). Within a few days, the company found the charred ashes of Forts Simon Drum and Shackelford, which had been abandoned during the rainy season. Every Indian village entered was found to be deserted, and when leaving Billy Bowlegs’ village on December 18, 1855, artillerymen took bunches of planted bananas. Later, in the day, the company received orders to return to Fort Myers and they began the trip westward. They camped for the evening in a small grove south of present-day Immokalee; 30 Seminole warriors led by Billy Bowlegs ambushed them at 5:00 AM (Covington 1982:1). In what was perhaps the result of misunderstood aggression, and tragically ill-timed orders (had they only left a day earlier), the Third, and final, Seminole War began. For the following two and a half years, hit and miss skirmishes extended from the Big Cypress and Everglades to Darby in Pasco County and New Smyrna Beach in Volusia County. Through this period, U.S. military strategy ranged from using a poorly disciplined militia, to aggressive campaigns, to truce offerings. After several previous betrayals, the Seminoles did not respond to the latter tactic. By the summer of 1857, the focus was on Billy Bowlegs in the Big Cypress. This effort was greatly aided by the use of shallow draft boats (Covington 1982). When found, villages were burned, fields were destroyed, horses and cattle were slaughtered, and Seminoles captured. As Seminole warriors were occupied hunting or scouting, captured villagers were typically women and children, the wounded, and the elderly. On November 19, 1857, Captain William Cone’s company discovered an occupied village. Two Seminole guards were killed and five women, thirteen children, and a wounded warrior were taken prisoner (Covington 1982:72). During the Seminole War, the U.S. Army Engineers surveyed the region south of the Caloosahatchee River. The Ives map depicts numerous forts and trails in this part of the State, with Ft. Simon Drum to the northeast and Ft. Doane to the southwest (Figure 3.3.) (Ives 1856). Page 7854 of 9661 ACI 3-11 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 3.3. 1856 Ives map showing the APE. After years of running, struggling to provide for his people, and mounting attacks, when possible, Billy Bowlegs finally surrendered to federal forces at Fort Myers. On May 4, 1858, the ship Grey Cloud departed Fort Myers for Egmont Key with 38 warriors and 85 women and children. An additional 45 captives were boarded at Egmont, and the ship set sail for New Orleans where they would depart for Oklahoma. Although some Seminoles remained in the Big Cypress and the Everglades, the U.S. government did not deem it worthy to pursue them. This half-starved and battle-weary population was left to eke out an existence in the south Florida swamps (Covington 1982). As settlers moved into the Big Cypress region, cattle ranching served as one of the major economic activities. Mavericks left by early Spanish explorers such as DeSoto and Narvaéz provided the stock for the herds raised by the mid-eighteenth century “Cowkeeper” Seminoles. As the Seminoles were pushed further south during the Seminole Wars and their cattle were either sold or left to roam, settlers captured or bought the cattle. By the late 1850s, the cattle industry of southwestern Florida was developing on a significant scale. By 1860, cattle owners from all over Florida drove their herds to Fort Brooke (Tampa) and Punta Rassa for shipment to Cuba, at a considerable profit. During this period, Jacob Summerlin became the first cattle baron of southwest Florida. Known as the “King of the Crackers,” his herds ranged from Ft. Meade to Ft. Myers (Covington 1957). 3.7 Civil War and Aftermath In 1861, Florida followed South Carolina’s lead and seceded from the Union as a prelude to the Civil War. Florida had much at stake in this war as evidenced in a report released from Tallahassee in June of 1861. It listed the value of land in Florida at $35,127,721 and the value of the slaves at $29,024,513 (Dunn 1989:59). Although the Union blockaded the coast of Florida during the war, the interior of the state saw very little military action. Florida became one of the major contributors of beef Page 7855 of 9661 ACI 3-12 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A to the Confederate government (Shofner 1995:72). Summerlin originally had a contract with the Confederate government to market thousands of head a year at eight dollars per head. However, by driving his cattle to Punta Rassa and shipping them to Cuba, he received 25 dollars per head (Grismer 1946:83). In an attempt to limit the supply of beef transported to the Confederate government, Union troops stationed at Ft. Myers conducted several raids into the Peace River Valley to seize cattle and destroy ranches. In response, Confederate supporters formed the Cattle Guard Battalion, consisting of nine companies under the command of Colonel Charles J. Mannerlyn (Akerman 1976). The cattle owners and the farmers in the state lived simply. The typical home was a log cabin without windows or chinking, and settlers’ diets consisted largely of fried pork, corn bread, sweet potatoes, and hominy. The lack of railway transport to other states, the federal embargo, and the enclaves of Union supporters and Union troops holding key areas such as Jacksonville and Ft. Myers prevented an influx of finished materials. As a result, settlement remained limited until after the Civil War. Immediately following the war, the South underwent a period of “Reconstruction” to prepare the Confederate States for readmission to the Union. The program was administered by the U.S. Congress, and on July 25, 1868, Florida officially returned to the Union. After the war ended, southerners who faced reconstruction and rebuilding saw Florida as a frontier full of opportunity and welcome. In southwest Florida, settlers first arrived by ones or twos, drifting through the area. Many of the early arrivals, however, were apparently “squatters” (Tebeau 1966:167). In most of the early settlements, development followed the earlier pattern with few settlers, one or two stores, and a lack of available overland transportation. In the 1870s, while the region was still part of Monroe County, the settlement of Collier County evolved slowly and in isolated pockets. Immokalee, Everglades City, Chokoloskee, Marco, Caxambas, Goodland, and Naples served as the early centers for settlement (Tebeau 1966:96). These first permanent pioneers were farmers; the hunters and fisherfolk who had preceded them established only temporary camps. As the land was largely impassable, their market was Key West, a growing city which produced almost none of its own food (Tebeau 1966). The Homestead Act, created by Congress in 1862, allowed settlers to obtain title to 160 acres by residing on and working the land. The property had to first be surveyed by the government. It was not until the 1870s that W.L. Apthorp and T.S. Stearns surveyed Township 47 South, Ranges 29 and 30 East (Apthorp 1872; Stearns 1874). No historic features were identified within or proximate to the APE (Figure 3.4) (Apthorp and Stearns 1874a, 1874b). Stearns described the Sections lines near the APE as 2nd and 3rd rate prairie with scattered pine and ponds or 3rd rate pine and prairie (Stearns 1874:409-410, 418-421, 429). By the early 1880s, the State of Florida faced a fiscal crisis involving title to public lands. By act of Congress in 1850, the federal government turned over to the states for drainage and reclamation all “swamp and overflow land.” Florida received approximately 10,000,000 acres. To manage that land and the 5,000,000 acres the state had received on entering the Union, the state legislature in 1851 created the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund. In 1855, the legislature established the actual fund (the Florida Internal Improvement Fund), in which state lands were to be held. The fund became mired in debt after the Civil War and under state law no land could be sold until the debt was cleared. In 1881, the Trustees started searching for a buyer capable of purchasing enough acreage to pay off the fund’s debt and permit the sale of the remaining millions of acres that it controlled. Page 7856 of 9661 ACI 3-13 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 3.4. 1874 plats showing the APE. In 1881, Hamilton Disston, a member of a prominent Pennsylvania saw manufacturing family entered into an agreement with the State of Florida to purchase four million acres of swamp and overflowed land for one million dollars. In exchange, he promised to drain and improve the land. This transaction, which became known as the Disston Purchase, enabled the distribution of large land subsidies to railroad companies, inducing them to begin extensive construction programs for new lines throughout the state. The purchase, although technically legal, was extremely generous with the designation “swamp and overflow land.” Grismer (1946) estimates that at least half of the acreage was “high and dry.” Disston and the railroad companies, in turn, sold smaller parcels of land to developers and private investors (Tebeau and Carson 1965:252). The APE within Sections 14, 15, 23, and 27 were deeded to the Carrabelle, Tallahassee, and Georgia Railroad in 1894 (State of Florida n.d.-a:269). The remainder of the APE was deeded to the Plant Investment Company in 1886 and 1888 (State of Florida n.d.-b:160, n.d.-a:269) By the late 1880s, squatters were sufficient in numbers to protest when “their land” became the property of Hamilton Disston. Squatters could have purchased the land on which they had taken up residence and constructed improvements, for such a provision was made in the Disston contracts. But the early settlers believed they should each be permitted to homestead 160 acres of high and dry land. They had not been able to do so because the land was designated “swamp and overflowed” and title to it had been transferred to the state (Tebeau 1966:167). Disston’s purchase included what is now Naples, and he formed the Florida Land and Improvement Company. In 1886, Charles Adams bought a parcel from Disston which formed the basis for the Naples Town Improvement Company of Tallahassee. When John Williams and Walter Page 7857 of 9661 ACI 3-14 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Haldeman, both from Kentucky, decided “Naples” was the perfect place to develop a city, they bought the controlling interest in the Naples Town Improvement Company. They reorganized it, gave it a new direction, and renamed it the Naples Company. With Haldeman directing the work, the company was ready, by December 1887, to embark on a new period of full-scale town building and improvement including a hotel, churches, and shops. The name “Naples” is attributed to numerous Florida developers’ sales schemes to romanticize the Florida peninsula into a pleasant “Italian” seaside resort. Unfortunately, the only activity for the next few years was on paper - the buying and selling of land; little construction took place (Jamro and Lanterman 1985). In 1887, the land, which today is Collier County, became part of the newly created Lee County. It was named for Barron Gift Collier, a Memphis born businessman who promoted the region’s development. When Billy Bowlegs departed for Oklahoma, Old Tiger Tail became the de facto leader of the remaining Seminoles. He lived at the headwaters of the Okaloacoochee Slough, and his holdings included cattle, agricultural fields, and Corn Dance Grounds (West 1990). In 1891, under the direction of Amelia S. Quinton, the Women’s National Indian Association resolved to establish a mission near Immokalee (then known as Allen’s Place) (West 1990). Dr. J.E. Brecht and his wife were hired as missionaries, and the mission consisted of a residence, a schoolhouse, barn, and fenced land. It was at this time that Allen’s Place became known as Immokalee (Mikasuki for “home”). A lumber mill was established in 1892 to provide the Native Americans with employment and industrial training, although it burned down the following year (FPS 1986:62). In 1893, the Episcopal Dioceses established a mission for the Seminoles and the federal government established an agency there. The Episcopal Indian Mission held its first service in 1896, though established for the Indians, white settlers made use of the church until 1924 (Tebeau 1966). In 1896, trader Bill Brown established a post on the western rim of the Everglades. Over time, the missionary activities shifted from Immokalee to Brown’s Landing where the Glade Cross Mission was established. As a result, when the Big Cypress Reservation boundaries were drawn, they included the Glade Cross Mission, but Immokalee was excluded. When the reservation was created, Bill Brown’s son, Frank, who grew up amongst the Seminoles, was appointed the Agent for the reservation (Brown 1989). 3.8 Twentieth Century From 1899 until 1914, the Naples Company struggled but the town slowly grew. In 1914, E. W. Crayton, an Ohio real estate developer with a successful record of accomplishment in St. Petersburg, purchased the controlling interest in the company and renamed it the Naples Improvement Company. His direction is credited with leading Naples into the future. In 1925, Naples was incorporated and by 1927, reached by two railroad lines (Dean 1991). In 1911, successful New York City advertiser, Barron Gift Collier, visited Useppa Island. Collier was captivated, “Frankly, I was fascinated with Florida and swept off my feet by what I saw and felt. It was a wonderland with a magic climate, set in a frame of golden sunshine” (Collier County Museum 2010). Over the next decade, Collier amassed over one million acres in southwest Florida and his property stretched from the Ten Thousand Islands to Useppa Island, and from the coast to the Big Cypress and the Everglades (Clement n.d.). Collier was the largest landholder in the state and created a luxury resort, the Useppa Inn, which was visited by corporate giants, presidents, movie stars, authors, and sports celebrities. To facilitate development, Collier made a pledge to the Florida State Legislature to complete the Tamiami Trail from Tampa to Miami (Naples Daily News 1976). The roadway was finished in 1928 and as traffic increased, southwest Florida’s tourist industry was born (Scupholm 1997). The construction of the Tamiami Trail had a tremendous effect on Seminole settlement patterns. The roadway interrupted traditional canoe routes and as a result, Seminoles were forced to use the Tamiami Canal, which was created during road construction. Many Seminole families moved closer to the Tamiami Canal to facilitate canoe transportation (Carr 2002). Page 7858 of 9661 ACI 3-15 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A On July 7, 1923, the state legislature created Collier County and named Everglades City as county seat. Collier became the second largest county in Florida with a land area of 2032 square miles. At the time of its creation, the county consisted of pine and cypress land and extensive swampland. The towns within the county, Immokalee, Naples, Marco, Caxambas, Chokoloskee, Deep Lake, and Everglades City, were all small settlements separated by almost inaccessible terrain. Barron Collier was instrumental in bringing modern communications, roadways, and railroads to his namesake county (Collier County Museum 2010). His promotions eventually opened up the area’s enormous agricultural and resort potential, but the Great Depression halted growth. The number of residents in 1925 of 1256 grew to only 2883 by 1930 (Tebeau 1966:212). By the mid-1930s, federal programs, implemented by the Roosevelt administration, started employing large numbers of construction workers, helping to revive the economy of the state. The programs were instrumental in the construction of parks, bridges, and public buildings. Two of these projects included the Federal Writers’ Project that developed a Guide to Florida and the Veterans’ Graves Registration Project (FWP 1939; WPA 1941). The latter discovered no cemeteries within Sections within which the APE lies (WPA 1941: Volume 9). However, Collier County’s economy and population remained at a virtual standstill until the end of WWII when a new wave of national prosperity sent thousands of people to Florida (Dean 1991). Improvements in transportation included the 1921 Atlantic Coast Line (ACL) Railway Company’s extension south from LaBelle to Immokalee. The town took on new importance and became a center for inland activity in Collier County (Tebeau 1966). While Barron Collier was promoting the Tamiami Trail, he and his supporters were also trying to open a direct highway route from Immokalee to the county seat of Everglades City. By 1923, an unimproved road from LaBelle through Immokalee, terminating at Deep Lake, was depicted on a Florida State Map (Kendrick 1964). This road was completed between Immokalee and Everglades City in the early 1920s (FPS 1986). Collier County induced the ACL to continue its line south to Everglades City around 1927. The two projects linked the town with outer areas of the county and the Tamiami Trail. With the arrival of the railroad and road Immokalee became a center for ranching, farming, and lumbering (Tebeau 1966). In 1923, Collier County had one of the largest stands of virgin cypress and pine timber in the country (Tebeau 1966). Roads leading into the Everglades were completed in the 1920s, enabling logging companies to exploit the region’s cypress (Klinkenberg 1994). From the 1920s to the late 1950s, steam powered mills cut cypress board, which was valued for its durability and imperviousness to water. “Swamp Loggers” would fell the trees and oxen and mules would pull the downed trees to temporary tram railways where they were loaded for transport to the nearby mills. Logging activities in the Big Cypress Swamp and Fakahatchee Strand were prevalent in the 1940s in response to wartime needs (U.S. Fish and Wildlife n.d.). The cypress was used in the construction of P.T. boats, and, later, was shipped to Europe to supply the post-war rebuilding efforts (Klinkenberg 1994). Two of the companies with logging operations in the area were the Lee Tidewater Cypress Company and the C. J. Jones Logging Company. The logging industry required the construction of rail lines traversed by steam locomotives, which resulted in the establishment of a number of sawmills and lumber towns within the region. The largest of these towns was Jerome, located off of present-day State Road 29, north of US 41 (Tamiami Trail) (Klinkenberg 1994). Two mills, one at Naples and the other at Bonita Springs, reached into the timber lands from the west coast (Tebeau 1966:252). However, as a result of heavy lumbering activities from the 1940s to 1957, much of the forest was cleared (FDEP n.d.; Tebeau 1966; U.S. Fish and Wildlife n.d.). When the cypress supply was exhausted, logging establishments became ghost towns, and the rail lines were abandoned, leaving only remnant segments of trails and ditches. Page 7859 of 9661 ACI 3-16 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Trails and roads were depicted within the APE on the 1947 Copeland map and 1954 Collier County soils map; just the roads were depicted within the APE on the 1958 USGS Immokalee and Immokalee SW quadrangle maps (Figures 3.5-3.7) (Copeland 1947; Leighty et al. 1954; USGS 1958b). Figure 3.5. 1954 Copeland map showing the APE. Figure 3.6. 1954 Collier County soil map showing the APE. Page 7860 of 9661 ACI 3-17 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 3.7. 1958 quad map showing the APE. In 1943, the first commercial oil well in Florida was drilled in Sunniland. The Humble Oil and Refining Company (now Exxon) struck crude, finally proving that there is oil in Florida. Sunniland remained the state’s only commercial oil field until 1964. In the 1950s, thousands of acres of cheap farmland opened up due to the extensive drainage projects. At approximately this time, the agricultural thrust in Collier County began with approximately 640 cultivated acres near Ochopee-Copeland. By the early 1970s, citrus, watermelons, tomatoes, bell peppers, and cucumbers were the largest producing crops in the area. Other vegetable crops included squash, cantaloupes, potatoes, melons, cabbage, lettuce, eggplant, corn, beans, and okra (Naples Daily News 1973). Like many Florida communities, World War II changed the face of Naples and later added to its growth. Largely, the post-World War II development of Collier County is similar to that of the rest of America: increasing numbers of automobiles and asphalt, an interstate highway system, suburban sprawl, and strip development along major state highways. The county, like most of Florida, experienced a population boom in the 1950s. Florida’s population increased from 1,897,414 in 1940 to 1950 in 2,771,305. Collier County’s population grew from 5082 in 1940 to 6488 in 1950 (Forstall 1995). After the war, car ownership increased, making the American public more mobile, making vacations more inexpensive and easier. Many who had served at Florida’s military bases during World War II also returned with their families to live. As veterans returned, the trend in new housing focused on the development of small tract homes in new subdivisions. The agricultural growth of the county led to an influx of migrant workers into the area. In 1966, Collier County began its first effort to house these workers. The Farm Workers Village, located along SR 29, was a 491-unit apartment complex operated by the county Housing Authority, it provided Page 7861 of 9661 ACI 3-18 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A affordable housing to the workers as well as daycare, postal services, a convenience store, laundromat, and educational facilities (Naples Daily News 1991). The number of permanent Collier County residents grew rapidly from 6,488 in 1950 to 85,000 by 1980. In 1967, SR 84 (Alligator Alley) or the Everglades Parkway was built. In 1970, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) appointed an advisory panel to evaluate possible routes across south Florida for the proposed I-75. The plans were prepared by 1972 and the Interstate was built thereafter, utilizing existing lanes from Alligator Alley for eastbound traffic. Two westbound lanes were built on the vacant strip of land between Alligator Alley and the canal (Duever et al. 1985). From 1980 to 1990, Collier County experienced a 77% percent increase in population and between 1990 and 2000, the population increased 65%. The population continued to increase in the county, albeit at a slower rate of 19.7% from 2010 to 2019 with an estimate of 384,902 individuals (USCB 2021). Collier County has roughly 25,000 businesses employing 168,000 workers. Tourism and hospitality jobs are the dominant sector. However, a wide variety of new industries have been moving into the county, including Arthrex (medical device manufacturing) and Summit Orthopedic Technologies, which moved its headquarters from Connecticut to Naples. Business development, expansion, and attraction are critical goals for economic growth. At the same time, Collier County also focuses on attainable housing for workers, and workforce development training centers, including the Center for Manufacturing Excellence, which opened its doors in 2019 to upskill workers for the growing workforce demands in manufacturing operations (Chamber 2020). 3.9 APE Specifics A review of the aerial photos available from the Publication of Archival and Museum Materials (PALMM) revealed that in 1940, the area was undeveloped pine flatwoods, prairies, and wetlands with a scattering of trails (USDA 1940) (Figure 3.8). By 1953, there were more trails and some of the land had been cleared for agricultural fields (USDA 1953). The 1958 USGS quadrangle map shows the presence of a railroad line immediately south of SR 29; however, the resource is not visible in the 1953 aerial image (USDA 1953; USGS 1958a, 1958b). In 1973, a majority of the APE had been converted for agricultural use and included a network of drainage ditches and several access roads (FDOT 1973). The 1980 aerial shows the APE as agricultural fields or pastures, except in the swamps and marshes, which remained in their natural setting (USDA 1980). During the early 1990s, the agricultural fields within the APE were reorganized, destroying the historic drainage ditches and all but one access road (Google 2023). Page 7862 of 9661 ACI 3-19 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 3.8. 1940 and 1980 aerial photographs showing the APE. Page 7863 of 9661 ACI 4-1 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A 4.0 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODS A review of archaeological and historical literature, records and other documents and data pertaining to the project area was conducted. The focus of this research was to ascertain the types of cultural resources known in the project area and vicinity, their temporal/cultural affiliations, site location information, and other relevant data. This included a review of sites listed in the NRHP, the Florida Master Site File (FMSF), CRAS reports, published books and articles, aerial photographs, unpublished manuscripts, and maps. In addition to the NRHP and FMSF, other information relevant to the historical research was obtained from the files of ACI. The FMSF data in this report were obtained in October 2023, which was the most recent edition. However, according to FMSF staff, input may be a month or more behind receipt of reports and site files. No individuals with knowledge of historic or prehistoric activities specific to the APE were encountered during this project; thus, no informant interviews were conducted. 4.1 Archaeological Considerations Background research indicated that only three archaeological sites have been recorded within two miles of the APE; none is in the APE (Figure 4.1). These include two 2nd and 3rd Seminole war facilities and one midden. 8CR01076 is the Camp Near Depot 1 and 8CR01077 is Depot 1. These were recorded by William Hammond based on archival materials (Hammond 2008). These have not been field verified nor have they been evaluated by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) in terms of listing in the NRHP.8CR01396 (Immokalee #2) has been classified as a Glades period midden, with evidence of 20th century utilization. It was recorded during the survey of the Immokalee 4-H Property Trust Application (Keyte and Mahoney 2015). It has been determined potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP. There have been a number of CRAS projects conducted proximate to the APE and these are listed in Table 4.1. Based on these data, and other regional site location predictive models (ACI 1992, 1999, 2014a, 2014b; Austin 1987a; Bellomo and Fuhrmeister 1991; Carr 1988; Dickel 1991; Smith 2008) and informed expectations concerning the types of sites likely to occur within the project APE, as well as their probable environmental settings, was generated. As archaeologists have long realized, aboriginal populations did not select their habitation sites and activity areas in a random fashion. Rather, many environmental factors had a direct influence upon site location selection, including soil drainage, distance to water, topography, and proximity to resources. It should be noted that the settlement pattern noted below cannot be applied to sites of the Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods, which precede the onset of modern environmental conditions. The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Project (CERP) study area includes Collier County. The pine flatwoods are generally considered to have a low probability for archaeological sites except when situated on slightly higher lands near water sources such as bayheads, willow, and cypress ponds. In areas of low relief, tree islands have a high archaeological potential (Smith 2008:35-47). Analysis of the April 2020 data for the 32 aboriginal archaeological sites, with known locations in the Immokalee Rise physiographic region of Collier County that is outside of National Park Service (NPS) lands, was conducted. The NPS lands were not included as there is not a modern soil survey for that area. Historic archaeological sites and aboriginal archaeological sites that were plotted “per vague verbal description” were deleted from this analysis. Although this is a small sample size, it can give us clues as to which areas were preferred. Page 7864 of 9661 ACI 4-2 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 4.1. Location of the previously recorded cultural resources near the APE. Page 7865 of 9661 ACI 4-3 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Table 4.1. CRAS projects conducted proximate to the APE. FMSF Manuscript # / Reference Title # of Newly Recorded Resources # of Previously Recorded Resources 1108 / FPS 1986 Historical/Architectural Survey of Collier County, Florida 120 0 1279 / Austin 1987b Cultural Resource Assessment of a Proposed Thirty Acre Seminole Housing Project in Collier County, Florida 0 0 4140 / ACI 1995c Cultural Resources Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Two Miles and One Bridge) Collier County, Florida 1 0 4141 / ACI 1995a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Six Miles Exclusive of Three Bridges) Collier County, Florida 0 0 4409 / ACI 1995b Cultural Resource Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Three Bridges) Collier County, Florida 3 0 12443 / Pepe 2005 Letter Report for the Reconnaissance Survey and Desktop Analysis of the Immokalee Seminole Indian Reservation Master Plan: Administration Building, Church, Cluster One, and Pre-School, Collier County, Florida 0 0 12898 / Janus Research 2006 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Serenoa DRI Project Area, Collier County 0 0 13136 / ACI 2006 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Silver Strand Business Park Property Collier County, Florida 0 0 13161 / Janus Research 2003 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Concrete Manufacturing Facility Property Collier County, Florida 0 0 14027 / ACI 2007 An Addendum to the Cultural Resource Predictive Model Collier Enterprises, LTD. The Tradeport DRI, Collier County, Florida 1 0 23218 / ACI 2016 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Tocala- Sunniland 3D Seismic Survey Project Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida 46 1 27289 / ACI 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Eleven Bridge Replacements, Collier and Hendry County, Florida 10 0 ACI 2023 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Silver Strand Mine Property, Collier County, Florida 0 0 Proximity to water is an important site location feature. Over 96% of the sites are located within 100 meters (m) of a water source, and only one of the sites greater than 200 m from a water source (Table 4.2). Ninety percent of the sites are proximate to a wetland or swamp, while three sites are associated with a lake. Page 7866 of 9661 ACI 4-4 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Table 4.2. Distribution of sites by water type and distance. Type ”P ”P ”P Total Cnt % Cnt % Cnt % Cnt % Lake 3 9.38% 0.00% 0.00% 3 9.38% Swamp/wetland 28 87.50% 0.00% 1 3.13% 29 90.63% Total 31 96.88% 0 0.00% 1 3.13% 32 100.00% Soil types and their drainage characteristics can also be used to assess the likelihood for aboriginal site occurrence (Almy 1978). There are 45 soil types within this study area; of which 36 have recorded archaeological sites (Table 4.3). Those soils within the APE are shaded in orange on the table. Many of the sites occurred on more than one soil type. This analysis only includes the four types covering the greatest acreage for each site, which totaled 41 soil type occurrences. Column “1”, indicates that this soil type had the greatest area of the site, and so on down the line, so that column “4” had the smallest site acreage. However, this analysis may not prove an accurate representation of the site distribution. While we know the percentage of sites on the various soil types, we do not have an accurate assessment as to how much of each soil type has been surveyed for archaeological sites. Table 4.3. Drainage and soil types. DRAINAGE/Soil Type, % slopes % of Area 1 2 3 4 Total % of Sites difference MODERATELY WELL DRAINED Pomello fine sand, 0-2% 0.95% 1 0 1 2.44% 1.49% Total 0.95% 1 0 1 2.44% 1.49% POORLY DRAINED Basinger fine sand, 0-2% 5.79% 0 0.00% -5.79% Boca fine sand, 0-2% (Cypress Lake) 1.52% 2 2 4.88% 3.35% Ft. Drum and Malabar, high, fine sands 1.34% 0 0.00% -1.34% Hallandale and Boca fine sands 0.06% 0 0.00% -0.06% Hallandale fine sand, 0-2% 0.04% 0 0.00% -0.04% Hilolo, Jupiter, and Margate fine sands 0.80% 6 6 14.63% 13.83% Holopaw fine sand, 0-2% 4.44% 2 2 4.88% 0.44% Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum (ls) 0.25% 0 0.00% -0.25% Immokalee fine sand, 0-2% 19.19% 1 1 2.44% -16.75% Malabar fine sand, 0-2% 4.50% 4 4 9.76% 5.26% Myakka fine sand, 0-2% 1.44% 0 0.00% -1.44% Oldsmar fine sand, 0-2% 12.71% 0 0.00% -12.71% Oldsmar fine sand, ls 0.99% 1 1 2.44% 1.45% Pennsuco silt loam 0.06% 0 0.00% -0.06% Pineda and Riviera fine sands 3.67% 2 1 1 4 9.76% 6.08% Pineda fine sand, ls 0.23% 0 0.00% -0.23% Riviera fine sand, ls 0.65% 0 0.00% -0.65% Riviera, ls-Copeland fine sands 1.02% 1 1 2.44% 1.42% Tuscawilla fine sand 4.30% 2 2 4 9.76% 5.45% Wabasso fine sand, 0-2% 5.40% 2 2 4.88% -0.52% Total 68.41% 22 4 1 0 27 65.85% -2.55% VERY POORLY DRAINED Boca, Riviera, ls, and Copeland fine sands, depressional (depr) 7.11% 3 1 4 9.76% 2.64% Chobee, ls, and Dania mucks, depr 0.21% 0 0.00% -0.21% Chobee, Winder, and Gator soils, depr 6.94% 1 1 2 4.88% -2.06% Holopaw and Okeelanta soils, depr 1.19% 0 0.00% -1.19% Page 7867 of 9661 ACI 4-5 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A DRAINAGE/Soil Type, % slopes % of Area 1 2 3 4 Total % of Sites difference Winder, Riviera, ls, and Chobee soils, depr 13.13% 2 2 4 9.76% -3.38% Total 28.59% 6 4 0 0 10 24.39% -4.20% OTHER Urban land 0.01% 0 0.00% -0.01% Urban land-Holopaw-Basinger complex 0.01% 0 0.00% -0.01% Urban land-Immokalee-Oldsmar, ls, complex 0.95% 0 0.00% -0.95% Urban land-Matlacha-Boca complex 0.02% 0 0.00% -0.02% Water 1.07% 3 3 7.32% 6.25% Total 2.05% 3 0 0 3 7.32% 5.27% Grand Total 100.00% 32 8 1 0 41 100.00% 0.00% This portion of Collier County is damp and soggy as evidenced by the fact that 68% of the soils are poorly drained and another 29% of the soils are very poorly drained. The moderately well drained soils do not even make up 1% of the area. Water and urban land underlie the remaining portion (2%) of the study area. The soils that have a higher percentage of sites as compared to area (2% or greater) are marked in red on the table, while those that seem less likely to be used (-2% or less) are marked in blue. There are six preferred soil types; in order of preference are: Hilolo, Jupiter, and Margate fine sands; Pineda and Riviera fine sands; Tuscawilla fine sand; Malabar fine sand 0-2% slopes; Boca fine sand, 0-2% slopes; and Boca, Riviera, limestone substratum, and Copeland sands, depressional. The last soil type may have been chosen as a water hole as opposed as a camping area. There are three soils that appear to have been avoided. In order of avoidance, they area Immokalee fine sand, 0-2% slopes; Oldsmar fine sand, 0-2% slopes; and Basinger fine sand, 0-2% slopes. Based on the environmental setting, the project APE was considered to have a moderate to low probability for aboriginal archaeological site occurrence. Cypress Lake, Malabar, and Pineda-Riviera sands have a positive correlation with sites, and water sources are available within the APE. The CERP survey strategy includes examination of pre-development aerials to locate possible tree islands and water sources. The 1940 aerial photos were examined, and a couple of areas were considered to have a higher probability than others, including areas of denser tree cover (Smith 2008; USDA 1940). There is low potential for historic sites, although evidence of timber, naval stores, and agricultural activities may be encountered. 4.2 Historical Considerations A review of the FMSF and NRHP databases revealed that one historic resource (8CR01309) has been previously recorded within the APE. This is a segment of the previously recorded SR 29 (8CR01309), which is located along the eastern boundary of the APE (Figure 4.1). According to the FMSF form, the segment of roadway within the project boundary was constructed during the mid-1920s of shell rock and ran between Immokalee and Everglades City. An approximately 10.28-mile segment of the road was previously recorded within the APE during Cultural Resource Assessment Survey for the State Road 29 Project Development & Environmental Study from Oil Well Road (County Road 858) to State Road 82, Collier County, FL conducted by Janus Research in 2018 (Janus 2018; Survey No. 25332). The linear resource was determined ineligible for listing in the NRHP by the SHPO. ACI planned to conduct a visual reconnaissance of the resource to determine if there were any significant changes and if the planned development would have an effect, and then update the FMSF form, if necessary. Page 7868 of 9661 ACI 4-6 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A An unpaved access road runs approximately 680-ft east-west across the eastern-central portion of the APE. Although it was constructed prior to 1974, it does not merit recording in the FMSF database per the Historic Roads and Trails MPS (Johnson 2002). The road was used exclusively for private access to an agricultural field and has been significantly altered since the time of its construction. This resource was not part of a major transportation throughfare or a significant representation of engineering trends, nor is it a uniquely designed community development feature. Appropriate research, including a review of historic aerial images and quad maps, was conducted to confirm the unexceptional nature of this road and no information of significance was identified as a result. A review of relevant historic USGS quadrangle maps, historic aerial photographs, and the Collier County property appraiser’s website data revealed the potential for three new historic resources (built in or prior to 1974) within the APE (FDOT 1973; Google 2023; Skinner 2023; USDA 1940, 1953, 1980; USGS 1958a, 1958b). While the field survey was carried out in November 2023, the date of construction will not occur until 2024; therefore, resources found to be 49 years of age or older (constructed in 1974 or earlier) were taken into consideration. Additionally, a review of the Veteran’s Grave Registration compiled in 1940-1941, did not record any graves or cemeteries in the section where the Study Area is located (Work Progress Administration [WPA] 1941). One undocumented historic road is located within 150-ft of the western APE boundary. A complete survey of this resource falls beyond the current scope of work; therefore, the resource was not recorded or evaluated. 4.3 Field Methodology The FDHR’s Module Three, Guidelines for Use by Historic Professionals, indicates that the first stage of archaeological field survey is a reconnaissance of the project area to “ground truth,” or ascertain the validity of the predictive model (FDHR 2003). During this part of the survey, the researcher assesses whether the initial predictive model needs adjustment based on disturbance or conditions such as constructed features (i.e., parking lots, buildings, etc.), underground utilities, landscape alterations (i.e., ditches and swales, mined land, dredged and filled land, agricultural fields), or other constraints that may affect the archaeological potential. Additionally, these Guidelines indicate that non-systematic “judgmental” testing may be appropriate in urbanized environments where pavement, utilities, and constructed features make systematic testing unfeasible; in geographically restricted areas such as proposed pond sites; or within project areas that have limited high and moderate probability zones, but where a larger subsurface testing sample may be desired. While predictive models are useful in determining preliminary testing strategies in a broad context, it is understood that testing intervals may be altered due to conditions encountered by the field crew at the time of survey. A reasonable and good faith effort was made to identify the historic properties within the project APE (cf., Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d.). Archaeological field survey methods consisted of surface reconnaissance combined with systematic and judgmental subsurface testing. Shovel tests were placed at 25 m intervals in what appeared to be tree islands and in areas of predictive soils near water. Testing was conducted at 50 m intervals near water in average soils. Testing was conducted at 100 m intervals in the average soils further away from water. Testing within the Immokalee and Oldsmar sands was conducted at 200 m intervals due to the very low probability for sites within these soil types. Shovel tests were circular and measured approximately 50 centimeters (cm) in diameter by at least 1 m in depth unless precluded by water. All soil removed from the shovel tests was screened through a 0.64 cm mesh hardware cloth to maximize the recovery of artifacts. The location of all tests was recorded using the ESRI data collection application, Field Maps, on an Android device. Following the recording of relevant data such as stratigraphic profile, all shovel tests were refilled. Page 7869 of 9661 ACI 4-7 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Historical/architectural field methodology consisted of a field survey of the APE to determine and verify the location of all buildings and other historic resources (i.e., bridges, roads, cemeteries) that are 49 years of age or older (constructed in or prior to 1974), and to establish if any such resources could be determined eligible for listing in the NRHP. Because the date of construction will not occur until 2024, the cutoff date of 1974 was used to ensure all historic resources were accounted for prior to beginning of construction. The field survey focused on the assessment of existing conditions for all previously recorded historic resources located within the project APE, and the presence of unrecorded historic resources within the project area. For each property, photographs were taken, and information needed for the completion of FMSF forms was gathered. In addition to architectural descriptions, each historic resource was reviewed to assess style, historic context, condition, and potential NRHP eligibility. Also, informant interviews would have been conducted, if possible, with knowledgeable persons to obtain site-specific building construction dates and/or possible associations with individuals or events significant to local or regional history. 4.4 Procedures to Manage Unexpected Discoveries Occasionally, archaeological deposits, subsurface features or unmarked human remains are encountered during development, even though the project area may have previously received a thorough and professionally adequate cultural resources assessment. Such events are rare, but they do occur. In the event pre-contact or historic period artifacts, such as pottery or ceramics, projectile points, shell or bone tools, dugout canoes, metal implements, historic building materials, or any other physical remains that could be associated with Native American, early European, or American settlement are encountered or observed during development activities at any time within the project site, the permitted project shall cease all activities involving subsurface disturbance in the immediate vicinity of the discovery and a professional archaeologist will be contacted to evaluate the importance of the discovery. The area will be examined by the archaeologist, who, in consultation with the staff of the Florida SHPO, will determine if the discovery is significant or potentially significant. In the event the discovery is found to be not significant, the work may immediately resume. If, on the other hand, the discovery is found to be significant or potentially significant, then development activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery will continue to be suspended until a mitigation plan, acceptable to the SHPO, is developed and implemented. Development activities may then resume within the discovery area, but only when conducted in accordance with the guidelines and conditions of the approved mitigation plan. If human remains are encountered during development, the procedures outlined in Chapter 872.05 FS must be followed, all activities in the vicinity of the discovery must cease and the local Medical Examiner and State Archaeologist should be notified. 4.5 Laboratory Methods/Curation No cultural materials were recovered; thus, no laboratory methods were utilized. All project related material (including field notes, maps, and photographs) will be stored at ACI in Sarasota (P22223A), unless the client requests otherwise. Page 7870 of 9661 ACI 5-1 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A 5.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Archaeological Archaeological field survey included surface reconnaissance and the excavation of 97 shovel tests (Figures 5.1-5.3). Shovel tests were placed at 25 m intervals in what appeared to be tree islands and in areas of predictive soils near water. Testing was conducted at 50 m intervals near water in average soils. Testing was conducted at 100 m intervals in the average soils further away from water. Testing within the Immokalee and Oldsmar sands was conducted at 200 m intervals due to the very low probability for sites within these soil types. None of the shovel tests produced cultural materials, nor were any discovered on the surface. Many of the shovel tests were terminated at shallow depths due to clay. As per 36 CFR 800.4(b)(1), a reasonable and good faith effort was made to identify the historic properties within the APE (cf., Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d.). The soil stratigraphy across the APE was variable and included the following: x Western APE: 0-30 cm dark gray sand with limestone and shell, 30-80 cm brown sand, and 80-100 cm dark brown sand with water intrusion (Photo 5.1) x Central APE: 0-40 cm gray sand and 40-100 cm brown sand, with water intrusion at 90 cm (Photo 5.2) x Eastern APE: 0-10 cm gray sand, 10-100 cm light gray sand (Photo 5.3) Photo 5.1. Stratigraphy in the western APE. Page 7871 of 9661 ACI 5-2 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests in the western portion of the APE. Page 7872 of 9661 ACI 5-3 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 5.2. Location of the shovel tests in the central portion of the APE. Page 7873 of 9661 ACI 5-4 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Figure 5.3. Location of the shovel tests in the eastern portion of the APE. Page 7874 of 9661 ACI 5-5 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Photo 5.2. Stratigraphy in the central APE. Photo 5.3. Stratigraphy in the eastern AP, facing north . 5.2 Historical Background research revealed that one historic resource (8CR01309) was previously recorded within the APE. This includes SR 29 (8CR01309), which was constructed during the mid-1920s. The resource was documented in 2018 and subsequently determined ineligible for listing in the NRHP by the SHPO (Janus 2018; Survey No. 25332). A visual reconnaissance did not note any changes from the previous survey and the planned development will have no effect; therefore, due to its recent documentation and ineligibility, an updated FMSF form was not completed. A review of historic aerials suggested the potential presence of a segment of an undocumented historic railroad grade located immediately south of SR 29, within the APE. However, the visual assessment found no rails, ties, or ballast remain. In addition, the grade has lost nearly all visible elevation (Photos 5.4 and 5.5). Thus, Page 7875 of 9661 ACI 5-6 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A the condition of the grade has deteriorated beyond the point at which it merits recording in the FMSF database. Appropriate research, including a review of historic aerial images and quadrangle maps, was conducted to confirm the unexceptional nature of this grade and no information of significance was identified as a result. The second and third anticipated resources, including a canal and culvert, were found to be non-historic. No significant historic resources were found during the course of this investigation; as a result, no informant interviews were conducted. A reasonable and good faith effort was made per the regulations laid out in 36 CFR § 800.4(b)(1) (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d.) to survey all areas of the APE. Photo 5.4. Looking southeast along powerline corridor, the railroad was previously located to the left. Note very little elevation change where palms are, and no berm is visible. Photo 5.5. Looking west at the current access road from SR 29, the railroad was previously located between the SR 29 and the powerlines. Note no elevation change, and no visible berm. Page 7876 of 9661 ACI 5-7 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A 5.3 Conclusions Given the results of background research and field survey, including the excavation of 97 shovel tests, no archaeological sites were discovered. As a result of the historical/architectural field survey no new historic resources were identified within the APE and one ineligible resource was not updated. Thus, there are no cultural resources that are listed, eligible for listing, or that appear potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP within the APE. Therefore, it is the professional opinion of ACI that the proposed undertaking will result in no historic properties affected. Page 7877 of 9661 ACI 6-1 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A 6.0 REFERENCES CITED ACI (Archaeological Consultants, Inc.) 1992 Mapping of Areas of Historical/Archaeological Probability in Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 3160. 1995a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Six Miles Exclusive of Three Bridges) Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 4141. 1995b Cultural Resource Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Three Bridges) Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 4409. 1995c Cultural Resource Assessment Survey SR 29, from 1.5 Miles North of Oil Well Road to South of CR 846 (Two Miles and One Bridge) Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 4140. 1999 1999 Update Historic/Archaeological Probability Maps and Data Sheets for Collier County Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2006 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Silver Strand Business Park Property, Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 13136. 2007 An Addendum to the Cultural Resource Predictive Model, Collier Enterprises, Ltd., Parcels 7, 8, 9, and the Tradeport DRI, Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 14027. 2014a Cultural Resources Avoidance Model Nobles Grade 3D Seismic Survey Big Cypress National Preserve Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2014b Cultural Resources Predictive Model Tellus 3D Seismic Survey Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2016 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Tocala-Sunniland 3D Seismic Survey Project Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 23218. 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Eleven Bridge Replacements, Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 27289. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d. Meeting the "Reasonable and Good Faith" Identification Standard in Section 106 Review. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C. https://www.achp.gov/digital-library-section-106-landing/meeting-reasonable-and-good- faith-identification-standard Akerman, Joe A. 1976 Florida Cowman: A History of Florida Cattle Raising. Florida Cattlemen's Association, Kissimmee. 4th edition. Almy, Maranda M. 2001 The Cuban Fishing Ranchos of Southwest Florida 1600-1850s. Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Almy, Marion M. 1978 The Archaeological Potential of Soil Survey Reports. The Florida Anthropologist 31(3):75-91. Page 7878 of 9661 ACI 6-2 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Anderson, David G., David Echeverry, D. Shane Miller, Andrew A. White, Stephen J. Yerka, Eric Kansa, Sarah Whitcher Kansa, Christopher R. Moore, Kelsey Noak Myers, Joshua J. Well, Thaddeus G. Bissett, and Ashley M. Smallwood 2019 Paleoindian Settlement in the Southeastern United States: The Role of Large Databases. In New Directions in the Search for the First Floridians. Edited by David K. Thulman and Ervan G. Garrison, pp. 241-275. University of Florida Press, Gainesville. Apthorp, W.L. 1872 Field Notes. Volume 220. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Apthorp, W.L. and T.S. Stearns 1874a Plat. Township 47 South, Range 29 East. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. 1874b Plat. Township 47 South, Range 30 East. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Austin, Robert J. 1987a An Archaeological Site Inventory and Zone Management Plan for Lee County, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 1561. 1987b Cultural Resource Assessment of a Proposed Thirty Acre Seminole Housing Project in Collier County, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 1279. 1996 Prehistoric Chert Procurement and Mobility Strategies on the Lake Wales Ridge. The Florida Anthropologist 49(4):211-223. 1997 The Economics of Lithic-Resource Use in South-Central Florida. Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Bellomo, Randy V. and Charles Fuhrmeister 1991 1992 Update of an Archaeological and Zone Management Plan for Lee County, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 3145. Beriault, John G., Robert Carr, Jerry Stipp, Richard Johnson, and Jack Meeder 1981 The Archaeological Salvage of the Bay West Site, Collier County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 34(2):39-58. Brown, Percy 1989 A Family of Early Settlers of Immokalee. The Timepiece 16(1):3-9. Bullen, Ripley P. 1975 A Guide to the Identification of Florida Projectile Points. Kendall Books, Gainesville. Carbone, Victor 1983 Late Quaternary Environment in Florida and the Southeast. The Florida Anthropologist 36(1-2):3-17. Carr, Robert S. 1988 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County, Florida. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Miami. MS# 2544. 1986 Preliminary Report on Excavations at the Cutler Ridge Fossil Site (8DA2001) in Southern Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 39(3, Part 2):231-232. 2002 The Archaeology of Everglades Tree Islands. In Tree Islands of the Everglades. Edited by Fred H. Sklar and Arnold Van der Valk. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands. Page 7879 of 9661 ACI 6-3 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Carr, Robert S. and John G. Beriault 1984 Prehistoric Man in Southern Florida. In Environments of South Florida, Past and Present. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 1-14. Miami Geological Society Memoir 2, Miami. Carr, Robert S., Patricia Fay, and Jane S. Day 1991 Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Crane Point Hammock, Marathon, Monroe County. AHC Technical Report 24. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Davie. Chamber, Greater Naples 2020 Collier County Economic Development - A Year in Review. The Greater Naples Chamber, Naples. Clausen, Carl J., H. K. Brooks, and A. B. Wesolowsky 1975a The Early Man Site at Warm Mineral Springs, Florida. Journal of Field Archaeology 2(3):191-213. 1975b Florida Spring Confirmed as 10,000 Year Old Early Man Site. Florida Anthropological Society Publications 7 Clausen, Carl J., A. D. Cohen, Cesare Emiliani, J. A. Holman, and J. J. Stipp 1979 Little Salt Spring, Florida: A Unique Underwater Site. Science 203(4381):609-614. Clement, Gail n.d. Barron Gift Collier. Everglades Digital Library, Florida International University, http://everglades.fiu.edu/reclaim/bios/collier.htm Cockrell, W. A. 1970 Glades I and Pre-Glades Settlement and Subsistence Patterns on Marco Island. Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Cockrell, W. A. and Larry E. Murphy 1978 Pleistocene Man in Florida. Archaeology of Eastern North America 6:1-13. Collier County Museum 2010 One Man's Vision: Barron Gift Collier. Collier County Museum, Naples. http://colliermuseums.com/history/barron_collier.php Copeland, Graham D. 1947 Map of Collier County Florida. Collier County Board of County Commissioners, Naples. Cordell, Ann S. 1992 Technological Investigations of Pottery Variability in Southwest Florida. In Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 105-190. Monograph 1. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. Covington, James W. 1957 The Story of Southwestern Florida. Lewis Historical Publishing Company, Inc., New York. 1958 Exploring the Ten Thousand Islands: 1838. Tequesta 18:7-13. Page 7880 of 9661 ACI 6-4 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Covington, James W. 1982 The Billy Bowlegs War 1855-1858: The Final Stand of the Seminoles Against the Whites. The Mickler House Publishers, Chuluota. Daniel, I. Randolph and Michael Wisenbaker 1987 Harney Flats: A Florida Paleo-Indian Site. Baywood Publishing Co., Inc., Farmingdale. Davis, John H. 1980 General Map of Natural Vegetation of Florida. Circular S-178. Agriculture Experiment Station, University of Florida, Gainesville. Dean, Virginia 1991 Naples on the Gulf: An Illustrated History. Windsor Publications, Inc., Chatsworth. Delcourt, Paul A. and Hazel R. Delcourt 1981 Vegetation Maps for Eastern North America: 40,000 yr B.P. to the Present. In Geobotony II. Edited by R. C. Romans, pp. 123-165. Plenum Publishing Corp., New York. Dickel, David N. 1991 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County, Florida. AHC Technical Report 38. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Davie. MS# 2934. Dobyns, Henry F. 1983 Their Numbers Become Thinned. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. Duever, Michael J., John E. Carlson, John F. Meeder, Linda C. Duever, Lance H. Gunderson, Lawrence A. Riopelle, Taylor R. Alexander, Ronald L. Myers, and Daniel P. Spangler 1985 The Big Cypress National Preserve. Research Report 8. National Audubon Society, New York. Dunbar, James S. 2006a Paleoindian Archaeology. In First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Edited by S. David Webb. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 2006b Pleistocene-Early Holocene Climate Change: Chronostratigraphy and Geoclimate of the Southeast US. In First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Edited by S. David Webb, pp. 103-155. Springer, The Netherlands. Dunn, Hampton 1989 Back Home: A History of Citrus County, Florida. Citrus County Historical Society, Inverness. 2nd edition. Fairbridge, Rhodes W. 1984 The Holocene Sea Level Record in South Florida. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past II. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 427-436. Miami Geological Society, Coral Gables. Farr, Grayal Earle 2006 A Reevaluation of Bullen's Typology for Preceramic Projectile Points. Master of Arts, Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Page 7881 of 9661 ACI 6-5 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A FDEP (Florida Department of Environmental Protection) n.d. Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee. FDHR (Florida Division of Historical Resources) 2003 Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual. Florida Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee. FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) 1973 Aerial Photograph. 2-8-1973, PD-11-37-12-31. Aerial Photo Look Up System (APLUS). Aerial Photography Archive, Tallahassee. Forstall, Richard L. 1995 Population of Counties by Decennial Census. www.census.gov/population/cencounts/fl190090.txt. FPS (Florida Preservation Services) 1986 Historic/Architectural Survey of Collier County, Florida. Florida Preservation Services, St. Augustine. MS# 1108. Fradkin, Arlene 1976 The Wightman Site: A Study of Prehistoric Cultural and Environment on Sanibel Island. Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. FWP (Federal Writers’ Project) 1939 Florida: A Guide to the Southernmost State. Federal Writers' Project. Oxford University Press, New York. Gleason, Patrick J., Arthur D. Cohen, William Smith, H. Kelly Brooks, Peter A. Stone, Robert Goodrick, and William Spackman, Jr. 1984 The Environmental Significance of Holocene Sediments from the Everglades and Saline Tidal Plain. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past II. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 297-351. Miami Geological Society, Coral Gables. Gleason, Patrick J. and P. Stone 1994 Age, Origin and Landscape Evolution of the Everglades Peatland. In Everglades: The Ecosystem and Its Restoration. Edited by S. M. Davis and J. C. Ogden, pp. 149-197. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach. Goggin, John M. 1949 Cultural Traditions in Florida Prehistory. In The Florida Indian and His Neighbors. Edited by John W. Griffin, pp. 13-44. Inter-American Center, Winter Park. Google 2023 Google Earth Imagery. Griffin, John W. 1988 The Archeology of Everglades National Park: A Synthesis. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee. 2002 Archaeology of the Everglades. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Page 7882 of 9661 ACI 6-6 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Grismer, Karl H. 1946 The Story of Sarasota. Florida Grower Press, Tampa. Hammond, E. A. 1973 The Spanish Fisheries of Charlotte Harbor. Florida Historical Quarterly 51(4):355-380. Hammond, James 2008 A Final Report on the Army Forts South of the Caloosahatchee River during the 2nd and 3rd Seminole Wars. Privately printed, Naples. MS# 15576. Hann, John H. 1991 Missions to Calusa. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Ives, Lieut. J. C. 1856 Map of the Peninsula of Florida South of Tampa Bay. Top Engineers, Sarasota. http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~crackerbarrel/Ives.html http://files.mapoftheweek.net/2009/09/18/1856%20Ives%20MilitaryMap.pdf. Jamro, Ron and Gerald L. Lanterman 1985 The Founding of Naples. Friends of Collier County Museum, Naples. Janus Research 2003 Historic Resources Survey and Evaluation for Central Park Village FLA-3-9 in Tampa, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 9218. 2006 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Serenoa DRI project Area, Collier County. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 12898. 2008 South Florida Archaeological Context. South Florida Water Management District. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey for the State Road 29 Project Development & Environment Study from Oil Well Road (County Road 858) to State Road 82, Collier County, FL. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 25332. Johnson, Sidney 2002 Florida's Historic Roads and Trails National Register Multiple Property Nomination Form., DeLand, FL. MS# 25314. Kendrick, Baynard 1964 Florida Trails to Turnpikes 1914-1964. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Keyte, Shawn and Maureen Mahoney 2015 A Phase I Cultural Resources Survey and Assessment of the Immokalee 4-H Property Trust Application Project, Immokalee, Florida. Tribal Historic Preservation Office, Seminole Tribe of Florida, Clewiston. MS# 22719. Klinkenberg, Jeff 1994 "Swamp Loggers." The St. Petersburg Times, September 18. Knetsch, Joe 2003 Florida's Seminole Wars 1817-1858. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, SC. Page 7883 of 9661 ACI 6-7 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Lane, Ed 1981 Environmental Geology Series: Miami Sheet. Map Series 101. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Geology, Tallahassee. Leighty, Ralph G., M.B Marco, G.A Swenson, R.E. Caldwell, J.R. Henderson, Olaf C. Olson, and G.C. Willson, Jr. 1954 Soil Survey (Detailed-Reconnaissance) of Collier County, Florida. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Liudahl, Kenneth, David J. Belz, Lawrence Carey, Robert W. Drew, Steve Fisher, and Robert Pate 1998 Soil Survey of Collier County Area, Florida. USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Luer, George M. 1989a Calusa Canals in Southwestern Florida: Routes of Tribute and Exchange. The Florida Anthropologist 42(2):89-130. 1989b Further Research on the Pine Island Canal and Associated Sites, Lee County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 42(3):241-247. Luer, George M. and Marion M. Almy 1987 The Laurel Mound (8SO98) and Radial Burials with Comments on the Safety Harbor Period. The Florida Anthropologist 40(4):301-320. Mackay, John and J. E. Blake 1839 Map of the Seat of War in Florida.https://digital.lib.usf.edu/?u15.246 Mahon, John K. 1985 History of the Second Seminole War 1835-1842. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Revised edition. Marquardt, William H. 1992 Calusa Culture and Environment: What Have We Learned? In Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 423-436. Monograph 1. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. 1999 Useppa Island in the Archaic and Caloosahatchee Periods. In The Archaeology of Useppa Island. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 77-98. Monograph 3. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. 2013 The Pineland Site Complex: Theoretical and Cultural Contexts. In The Archaeology of Pineland: A Coastal Southwest Florida Site Complex, A.D. 50-1710. Edited by William H. Marquardt and Karen J. Walker, pp. 1-22. Monograph 4. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. Marquardt, William H. and Karen J. Walker 2012 Southwest Florida during the Mississippi Period. In Late Prehistoric Florida: Archaeology at the Edge of the Mississippian World. Edited by Keith Ashley and Nancy Marie White, pp. 29-61. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. 2013 The Pineland Site Complex: An Environmental and Cultural History. In The Archaeology of Pineland: A Coastal Southwest Florida Site Complex, A.D. 50-1710. Edited by William H. Marquardt and Karen J. Walker, pp. 793-920. Monograph 4. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. Page 7884 of 9661 ACI 6-8 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A McGregor, A. James 1974 A Ceramic Chronology for the Biscayne Region of Southeast Florida. Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton. Milanich, Jerald T. 1994 Archaeology of Precolumbian Florida. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. 1995 Florida Indians and the Invasion from Europe. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Milanich, Jerald T., Jeffery Chapman, Ann S. Cordell, Stephen H. Hale, and Rochelle A. Marrinan 1984 Prehistoric Development of Calusa Society in Southwest Florida: Excavations on Useppa Island. In Perspectives on Gulf Coast Prehistory. Edited by Dave D. Davis, pp. 258-314. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Milanich, Jerald T. and Charles H. Fairbanks 1980 Florida Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. Mulroy, Kevin 1993 Freedom on the Border: The Seminole Maroons in Florida, the Indian Territory, Coahuila, and Texas. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock. Naples Daily News 1973 "Big Farming Major Cog in County Economy." Naples Daily News, March 6. 1976 "The Collier Story." Naples Daily News, July 4. 1991 "Farm Workers Village Celebrates 25 Years." Naples Daily News, September 24. Neill, Wilfred T. 1968 An Indian and Spanish Site on Tampa Bay, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 21(4):106-116. Palov, Maria Z. 1999 Useppa's Cuban Fishing Community. In The Archaeology of Useppa Island. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 149-169. Monograph 3. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. Pepe, James 2005 Letter report for the Reconnaissance Survey and Desktop Analysis of the Immokalee Seminole Indian Reservation Master Plan: Administration Building, Church, Cluster One, and Pre-School, Collier County, Florida. Seminole Tribe of Florida, Clewiston. MS# 12443. Porter, Kenneth W. 1996 The Black Seminoles. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Purdy, Barbara A. 1981 Florida's Prehistoric Stone Tool Technology. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Ramenofsky, Ann F. 1987 Vectors of Death: The Archaeology of European Contact. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Page 7885 of 9661 ACI 6-9 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Russo, Michael 1991 Archaic Sedentism on the Florida Coast: A Case Study from Horr's Island. Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. 1994a A Brief Introduction to the Study of Archaic Mounds in the Southeast. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):89-92. 1994b Why We Don't Believe in Archaic Ceremonial Mounds and Why We Should: The Case from Florida. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):93-108. 2008 Late Archaic Shell Rings and Society in the Southeast U.S. The SAA Archaeological Record 8(5):18-22. Sassaman, Kenneth E. 2008 The New Archaic, It Ain't What It Used to Be. The SAA Archaeological Record 8(5):6-8. Schober, Theresa 2014 Deconstructing and Reconstructing Caloosahatchee Shell Mound Building. In New Histories of Pre-Columbian Florida. Edited by Neill J. Wallis and Asa A. Randall, pp. 38-61. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Schwadron, Margo 2006 Everglades Tree Islands Prehistory: Archaeological Evidence for Regional Holocene Variability and Early Human Settlement. Antiquity 80(310). Scott, Thomas M. 2001 Text to Accompany the Geologic Map of Florida. Open File Report 80. Florida Geological Survey, Tallahassee. Scott, Thomas M., Kenneth M. Campbell, Frank R. Rupert, Jonathan D. Arthur, Thomas M. Missimer, Jacqueline M. Lloyd, J. William Yon, and Joel G. Duncan 2001 Geologic Map of the State of Florida. Map Series 146. Florida Geological Survey, Tallahassee. Scupholm, Carrie 1997 The Tamiami Trail: Connecting the East and West Coasts of the Sunshine State. The Society for Commercial Archeology Journal 15(2):20-24. Shofner, Jerrell H. 1995 History of Brevard County. Brevard County Historical Commission, Stuart. Skinner, Abe 2023 Records Search. Collier County Property Appraiser, Naples. http://www.collierappraiser.com/ Smith, Greg C. 2008 Cultural Resources Overview and Survey Strategy: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. New South Associates, Stone Mountain, GA. Smith, Marvin T. 1987 Archaeology of Aboriginal Culture Change in the Interior Southeast: Depopulation during the Early Historic Period. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Page 7886 of 9661 ACI 6-10 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A State of Florida n.d.-a Tract Book. Volume 25. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. n.d.-b Tract Book. Volume 26. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Stearns, T.S. 1874 Field Notes. Volume 225. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Tampa Tribune 1955 "Pioneer Florida." Tampa Tribune, January 2. Tebeau, Charlton W. 1966 Florida's Last Frontier: The History of Collier County. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables. 1980 A History of Florida. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables. Revised Edition. Tebeau, Charlton W. and Ruby Leach Carson, Eds. 1965 Florida -- From Indian Trail to Space Age. Southern Publishing Co., Delray Beach. True, David O., Ed. 1944 Memoir of D. Escalante Fontaneda Respecting Florida. University of Miami and South Florida Historical Society, Miami. U.S. Congress 1837 Report from the Secretary of War in Compliance with Resolution of the Senate of the 14th and 18th Instant, Transmitting Copies of Correspondence Relative to the Campaign in Florida. 24th Congress, 2nd Session, May 21, Washington, D.C. 1850 Hostilities Committed by the Seminole Indians in Florida during the Past Year. 31st Congress, 1st Session, Washington, D.C. U.S. Fish and Wildlife n.d. History. Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Naples. http://www.fws.gov/refuges/profiles/index.cfm?id=41545 USCB (United States Census Bureau) 2021 Florida Quick Facts. http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/00 USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) 1940 Aerial Photograph: 4-15-1940, CJF-9-11. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 1953 Aerial Photograph: 1-1-1953, DSM-2L-189. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 1980 Aerial Photographs: 1-2-1980, 12021-178-164, 211. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 2021 Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Florida - October 2021. USDA, NRCS, Fort Worth, TX. USGS (United States Geological Survey) 1958a Immokalee SW, Fla. PR 1973, 1984. 1958b Immokalee, Fla. 1987 PR 1973. 2013a Immokalee SW, Fla. USA_Topo_Maps. 2013b Immokalee, Fla. USA_Topo_Maps. Page 7887 of 9661 ACI 6-11 November 2023 CRAS Silver Strand Mine Access Roads P22223A Walker, Karen J. 1992 The Zooarchaeology of Charlotte Harbor's Prehistoric Maritime Adaptations: Spatial and Temporal Perspectives. In Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 265-366. Monograph 1. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville. 2013 The Pineland Site Complex: Environmental Contexts. In The Archaeology of Pineland: A Coastal Southwest Florida Site Complex, A.D. 50-1710. Edited by William H. Marquardt and Karen J. Walker, pp. 23-52. Monograph 4. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville. Watts, William A. 1969 A Pollen Diagram from Mud Lake, Marion County, North-Central Florida. Geological Society of America Bulletin 80(4):631-642. 1971 Post Glacial and Interglacial Vegetational History of Southern Georgia and Central Florida. Ecology 51:676-690. 1975 A Late Quaternary Record of Vegetation from Lake Annie, South-Central Florida. Geology 3(6):344-346. Watts, William A., Eric C. Grimm, and T. C. Hussey 1996 Mid-Holocene Forest History of Florida and the Coastal Plain of Georgia and South Carolina. In Archaeology of the Mid-Holocene Southeast. Edited by Kenneth E. Sassaman and David G. Anderson, pp. 28-38. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Watts, William A. and Barbara C. S. Hansen 1994 Pre-Holocene and Holocene Pollen Records of Vegetation History for the Florida Peninsula and their Climatic Implications. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 109:163-176. West, Patsy 1990 History of Post-War Seminole Settlement in the Big Cypress. The Florida Anthropologist 43(4):240-248. Wheeler, Ryan J. 1994 Early Florida Decorated Bone Artifacts: Style and Aesthetics from Paleo-Indian Through Archaic. The Florida Anthropologist 47(1):47-60. 2004 Southern Florida Sites Associated with the Tequesta and Their Ancestors: National Historic Landmark/National Register of historic Places Theme Study. FDHR, Tallahassee. White, William A. 1970 Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula. Geological Bulletin 51. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Geology, Tallahassee. Widmer, Randolph J. 1974 A Survey and Assessment of the Archaeological Resources on Marco Island, Collier County, Florida. Miscellaneous Project Report Series 19. FDHR, Tallahassee. MS# 265. 1988 The Evolution of the Calusa. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. WPA (Works Progress Administration) 1941 Veterans’ Graves Registration Project. Special Archives Publication Number 36. State Arsenal, St. Augustine. Page 7888 of 9661 APPENDIX Survey Log Page 7889 of 9661 Florida Master Site File / Div. of Historical Resources / R.A. Gray Bldg / 500 S Bronough St., Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 HR6E066R0, effective 05/2016 Rule 1A-46.001, F.A.C. Phone 850.245.6440, Fax 850.245.6439, Email: SiteFile@dos.myflorida.com Page 1 Ent D (FMSF only) __________ Survey Log Sheet Survey # (FMSF only) ___________ Florida Master Site File Version 5.0 /1 Consult Guide to the Survey Log Sheet for detailed instructions. Manuscript Information Survey Project (name and project phase) Report Title (exactly as on title page) Report Authors (as on title page) 1._______________________________ 3. _____________________________ 2._______________________________ 4. _____________________________ Publication Year __________ Number of Pages in Report (GRQot include site forms) ___________ Publication Information (Give series, number in series, publisher and city. For article or chapter, cite page numbers. Use the style of American Antiquity.) Supervisors of Fieldwork (even if same as author) Names _____________________________________________________ Affiliation of Fieldworkers: Organization _____________________________________ City ______________________ Key Words/Phrases (Don’t use county name, or common words like archaeology, structure, survey, architecture, etc.) 1. ___________________ 3.___________________ 5. ___________________ 7.____________________ 2. ___________________ 4.___________________ 6. ___________________ 8.____________________ Survey Sponsors (corporation, government unit, organization, or person funding fieldwork) Name. ____________________________________ Organization. ______________________________________ Address/Phone/E-mail. __________________________________________________________________________ Recorder of Log Sheet _________________________________________ Date Log Sheet Completed ___________ Is this survey or project a continuation of a previous project? q No q Yes: Previous survey #s (FMSF only) _______________ Project Area Mapping Counties (select every county in which field survey was done; attach additional sheet if necessary) 1. ___________________________ 3. ____________________________ 5. ___________________________ 2. ___________________________ 4. ____________________________ 6. ___________________________ USGS 1:24,000 Map Names/Year of Latest Revision (attach additional sheet if necessary) 1.Name ____________________________ Year_____4.Name _____________________________ Year_____ 2.Name ____________________________ Year_____5.Name _____________________________ Year_____ 3.Name ____________________________ Year_____6.Name _____________________________ Year_____ Field Dates and Project Area Description Fieldwork Dates: Start _________B End _B________ Total Area Surveyed (fill in one) _____BB_hectares BB______acres Number of Distinct Tracts or Areas Surveyed _________ If Corridor (fill in one for each) Width: ___B___meters ___B___feet Length: __B____kilometers ____B__miles CRAS Silver Strand Mine, CR Co. - Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Silver Strand Mine Access Roads, Collier County, Florida ACI 2023 58 ACI (2023), Sarasota. P22223A Horvath, Elizabeth A. Archaeological Consultants Inc Sarasota Peninsula Engineering 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34105 Horvath, Elizabeth A. 11-13-2023 Collier IMMOKALEE 2013 IMMOKALEE SW 2013 11-6-2023 11-10-2023 59.60 1 Page 7890 of 9661 Florida Master Site File / Div. of Historical Resources / R.A. Gray Bldg / 500 S Bronough St., Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 HR6E066R0, effective 05/2016 Rule 1A-46.001, F.A.C. Phone 850.245.6440, Fax 850.245.6439, Email: SiteFile@dos.myflorida.com Page 2 Survey Log Sheet Survey #__________ Research and Field Methods Types of Survey (select all that apply): archaeological architectural historical/archival underwater damage assessment monitoring report other(describe):. _________________________ Scope/Intensity/Procedures Preliminary Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Florida Archives (Gray Building)q library research- local public q local property or tax records q other historic maps q Florida Photo Archives (Gray Building)q library-special collection q newspaper files q soils maps or dataq Site File property search q Public Lands Survey (maps at DEP) q literature search q windshield survey q Site File survey search q local informant(s)q Sanborn Insurance maps q aerial photography q other (describe):. ______________________________________________________________________________ Archaeological Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Check here if NO archaeological methods were used. q surface collection, controlled q shovel test-other screen size q surface collection, uncontrolled q water screen q shovel test-1/4”screen q posthole tests q shovel test-1/8” screen q auger tests q shovel test 1/16”screen q coring q shovel test-unscreened q test excavation (at least 1x2 m) q block excavation (at least 2x2 m) q soil resistivity q magnetometer q side scan sonar q JURXQGSHQHWUDWLQJUDGDU *35 q /,'$5 q other (describe):. _______________________________________________________________________________ Historical/Architectural Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Check here if NO historical/architectural methods were used. q building permits q demolition permits q neighbor interview q subdivision maps q commercial permits q occupant interview q tax records q interior documentation q ZLQGVKLHOGVXUYH\ q local property records q occupation permits q unknown q other (describe):. _______________________________________________________________________________ Survey Results Resource Significance Evaluated? q Yes q No Count of Previously Recorded Resources____________ Count of Newly Recorded Resources____________ List Previously Recorded Site ID#s with Site File Forms Completed (attach additional pages if necessary) List Newly Recorded Site ID#s (attach additional pages if necessary) Site Forms Used: q Site File Paper Forms q Site File PDF Forms REQUIRED: Attach Map of Survey or Project Area Boundary SHPO USE ONLY SHPO USE ONLY SHPO USE ONLY Origin of Report: 872 Public Lands UW 1A32 # Academic Contract Avocational Grant Project # Compliance Review: CRAT # Type of Document: Archaeological Survey Historical/Architectural Survey Marine Survey Cell Tower CRAS Monitoring Report Overview Excavation Report Multi-Site Excavation Report Structure Detailed Report Library, Hist. or Archival Doc MPS MRA TG Other: Document Destination: ________________________BB____ Plotability: ___________________________________________ /,'$5RWKHUUHPRWHVHQVLQJ SHGHVWULDQVXUYH\ XQNQRZQ PHWDOGHWHFWRU RWKHUUHPRWHVHQVLQJ 'HVNWRS$QDO\VLV background research, surface reconnaissance; systematic subsurface testing (25, 50, 100, 200 m) N=97, all negative; 50 cm diameter, 1 m deep, 1/4" screen; historic resources reconnaissance 00 NA NA Plottable Projects Page 7891 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine Access Roads Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Sections 13-15, 22-24, 27; and Township 47 South, Range 30 East, Section 19 USGS Immokalee, Immokalee NE, and Immokalee SW. Collier County, Florida Page 7892 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 5 of 12 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): ___________________________________________________________ Address: ______________________________City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: __________________ E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________ Address of Subject Property (If available): ___________________________________________ City: ________________ State: __________ ZIP: ___________ LEGAL DESCRIPTION Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: _______________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: _________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _____________________________________________________ TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System Provide Name: ____________________ d. Package Treatment Plant (GPD Capacity): ___________________ e. Septic System TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System PROVIDE NAME_______________ d. Private System (Well) Total Population to be served: ____________________________________________________ Peak and Average Daily Demands: A. Water-Peak: _______ Average Daily: ________ B. Sewer-Peak: _______ Average Daily: ________ Page 7893 of 9661 Silver Strand III Partnership 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples FL 34105 239.403.6700 dgenson@barroncollier.com Naples FL 34105 13,14,15,23,24 47 29 00137280007, 00137280007,00137640003 See Sketch and Legal X X 5 137 105 336 75 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 6 of 12 If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date service is expected to be required: ____________________________________________ Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of Collier County’s utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. Page 7894 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 5/08/2018 Page 7 of 12 RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer at their 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 F.S. §695. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the assigned Principal Planner, Zoning Services Department, within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must 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. Page 7895 of 9661 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Memorandum Date: November 5, 2024 To: Sean Sammon, Collier County Planning & Zoning Division From: Jessica Harrelson, AICP RE: Silver Strand Mine Conditional Use-PL20220001634 & Variance-PL20230001067 NIM Summary A NIM was held on Wednesday, October 30th, 2024, at the Ave Maria Master Association Office, located at 5080 Annunciation Circle, Unit #101, Ave Maria, FL, 34142. Those listed below, associated with the project, were in attendance: 1. Jessica Harrelson, AICP – Peninsula Engineering 2. Bruce Layman – Peninsula Engineering 3. Ciprian Malaescu – Trebilcock Consulting Solutions 4. Nick Kouloheras – Barron Collier Companies 5. Sean Sammons – Collier County Growth Management Three (3) members of the public attended the meeting in person, and two (2) individuals participated via Zoom. Only one question was asked by a Zoom participant: “What is the status of where you are with the County in terms of permitting?” Jessica responded that the Conditional Use and Variance were found sufficient by Staff and will be scheduled for hearings, targeted for early next year. Jessica further noted the participant would be notified of the dates and signs would be posted on the property as well. End Memo. Page 7896 of 9661 SSILVERR STRANDD MINECONDITIONALL USEE && VARIANCECU-PL20220001634 & VA-PL20230001067 NEIGHBORHOODD INFORMATIONN MEETINGOctoberr 30,, 2024Page 7897 of 9661 PProjectt TeamAPPLICANT:Silver Strand III PartnershipCONSULTANTT TEAM:Coleman,, Yovanovich,, Koester•Richard Yovanovich, Esq.Peninsulaa Engineering•Jessica Harrelson, AICPTrebilcockk Consultingg Solutions•Norman Trebilcock, AICP, PTOE, PEEarthh Techh Environmental•Jeremy SterkPage 7898 of 9661 LLocationn MapPage 7899 of 9661 SSurroundingg Landd UsesCollier County Solid WastePage 7900 of 9661 SSurroundingg Landd UsesSeminole Tribe of Florida(Residential/Park)Page 7901 of 9661 SSurroundingg Landd UsesCommon Ownership(Barron Collier Partnership)Common Ownership(Barron Collier Partnership)Page 7902 of 9661 SSurroundingg Landd UsesResidential-“Kaicasa”(Habitat for Humanity)Page 7903 of 9661 SSurroundingg Landd UsesSingle-FamilyResidentialPage 7904 of 9661 ZZoning// Requests•ZONING: Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, & Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay•CONDITIONAL USE (CU):requesting to permit earth mining on the subject propertyoPermitted Conditional Use within the Agricultural Zoning District oDigging, processing, and hauling of raw materials off-site (fill/sand).oNo concreteoNo asphalt•VARIANCE (VA):to eliminate code-required perimeter landscape buffersPage 7905 of 9661 CConceptuall Sitee Plan±204-acPage 7906 of 9661 Developmentt StandardsAgricultural Zoning DistrictoCollier County LDC requires a 50’ setback from all property boundaries•Project exceeds required setback along every boundaryoMaximum Zoned Building Height of Structures – 35’ (Per the Land Development Code)•Project only proposes single-story maintenance/office buildingsPage 7907 of 9661 CConditionss off ApprovaloHours of Operation for Mining Activities•Monday-Friday: 6:30 am-5:00 pm •Saturday: 7:00 am-3:00 pmoMaximum Average of Haul Trucks •430 one-way trucks per dayoStaging of Haul Trucks Will Occur On-Site •Staging of Haul Trucks in Public Rights-of-Way is ProhibitedoDust Control Management PlanPage 7908 of 9661 PROXIMITYY MAPP –– VARIANCEE JUSTIFICATIONSoProximity from adjacent rights-of-way and surrounding land uses.oSurrounded by agricultural uses along most property boundaries.oCommon Ownership along a portion of the northern property boundary.oExisting vegetation provides sufficient screening and/or meets buffer requirements.oAgricultural uses will continue to occur on the property outside of the mining area.Page 7909 of 9661 EExistingg VegetationPage 7910 of 9661 Northeastt ViewPage 7911 of 9661 Northwestt ViewPage 7912 of 9661 Stockadee Road// Koowachobeee TrailPage 7913 of 9661 East/Northeastt ViewshedPage 7914 of 9661 DDeveloperr Commitments-- Variance•The Applicant will install 200 LF of a 20’ Type ‘C’ bufferadjacent to the abutting residential parcel along theeastern property boundary. xThe Applicant will install a code-required buffer within 180days along any property boundary where development hasbeen approved on an adjacent property.Page 7915 of 9661 QQUESTIONSPage 7916 of 9661 Page 7917 of 9661 Page 7918 of 9661 Page 7919 of 9661 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETINGPETITIONS: CU-PL20220001634 – SILVER STRAND MINE CONDITIONAL USEVA-PL20230001067 – SILVER STRAND MINE VARIANCE A neighborhood information meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, October 30th, 2024, beginning at 5:30 pm, to discuss the referenced zoning petitions and will be held at the Ave Maria Master Association Office, 5080 Annunciation Circle, Unit #101, Ave Maria, FL 34142. The purpose and intent of this Neighborhood Information Meeting is to provide the public with notice of the impending zoning applications and to foster communication between the applicant and the public. The expectation is that all attendees will conduct themselves in such a manner that their presence will not interfere with the orderly progress of the meeting. The Applicant, Silver Strand III Partnership, has submitted a formal application to Collier County seeking approval of a Conditional Use (CU) in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home OverlayandRural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay to allow for a commercial excavation mine. A companion Variance (VA) application has also been submitted, seeking to eliminate code-required perimeter landscape buffers. The project involves seven (7) separate parcels, collectively consisting of 3,937.88 acres, located in eastern Collier County within portions of Sections 13,14, 15, 22, 23, 24, and 27, Township 47 South and Range 29 East, (the “property”). If you have questions or would like to register to participate in the meeting remotely, please contact the individual below. Jessica Harrelson, AICP Peninsula Engineering Phone: 239.403.6751 Email: jharrelson@pen-eng.com Please note, remote participation is provided as a courtesy. The applicant and Peninsula Engineering are not responsible for any technical issues. Project information can be found on our website: www.pen-eng.com/planning-projects or by using the QR code below: Page 7920 of 9661 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 LOCATION MAP Page 7921 of 9661 1NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME6 LEGAL1 LEGAL2 LEGAL3 LEGAL4 FOLIOBARRON COLLIER P'SHIP LLLP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY # 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 11 47 29 ALL, LESS NW1/4 OF SW1/4 OF NW1/4 + RR R/W + LESS N1/2 OF NE1/4 + LESS E1/2 OF NE1/4 OF NW1/4 + LESS 00136880000BARRON COLLIER P'SHIP LLLP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY # 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 11 47 29 COM AT SE CNR SEC 11, S 89 DEG W 244.64 FT, N 45 DEG W 281 FT & POB, S 89 DEG W 843.01 FT, N 45 DEG W 942.83FT 00137160509BARRON COLLIER P'SHIP LLLP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY # 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 15 47 29 NW1/4 OF NW 1/4 LESS OR 339 PG 390-391 35.12 AC OR 975 PG 674, LESS OR 4322 PG 1361 00137760103CDC INVESTMENT PROPERTIES LLC 999 VANDERBILT BEACH RD #507NAPLES, FL 34108---0 13 47 29 ALL LYING N & ELY OF SR 29 LESS REFERENCED PARCEL 8 DESC IN OR 2153 PG 1901 00137520000COLLIER CNTY COLLIER CNTY SOLID & HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT DIVISION 3339 TAMAMI TR E, STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0 15 47 29 COMM NW CNR SEC 15, N 85 DEG E 2707.30FT TO POB, N 85 DEG E 676.83FT, S 4 DEG E 2657.21FT, S 85 DEG W 00137760006COLLIER CNTY COLLIER CNTY SOLID & HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT DIVISION 3339 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0 15 47 29 NE1/4 OF NW1/4 + N 60FT OF NW1/4 OF NW1/4, LESS THE PORTION DESC AS FOLLOWS: COM NW COR OF SEC 15, TH 00137680005COLLIER CNTY TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY 2885 HORSESHOE DRIVE SNAPLES, FL 34104---0 15 47 29 A 100FT WIDE STRIP OF LAND AS DESC IN OR 4322 PG 1361 REFERENCED AS "PARCEL 7" 00137760200COLLIER CNTY TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY 2885 HORSESHOE DRIVE SNAPLES, FL 34104---0 15 47 29 A 100FT STRIP OF LAND AS DESC IN OR 4322 PG 1351 REFERENCED AS "PARCEL 6" 00137760307COLLIER CNTY TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY 2885 HORSESHOE DRIVE SNAPLES, FL 34104---0 22 47 29 A 100FT WIDE STRIP OF LAND AS DESC IN OR 4322 PG 135200138120506COLLIER CNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY1800 FARM WORKER WAYIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---5544 11 47 29 S1/2 OF SE1\4 LYING E OF SR 29 18.82AC00137160101COLLIER LAND HOLDINGS LTD 999 VANDERBILT BEACH RD #507NAPLES, FL 34108---0 18 47 30 ALL, LESS A PORTION AS DESC IN OR 5533 PG 125700139640001COLLIER LAND HOLDINGS LTD 999 VANDERBILT BEACH RD #507NAPLES, FL 34108---0 19 47 30 ALL LYING NELY OF SR 29, LESS THAT PORTION AS DESC IN OR 5533 PG 1257 00139771103CRAPSE, OTIS & ANITA HAROLD AND LAISA CRAPSE 2525 STATE ROAD 29 SIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---9734 13 47 29 DESC IN OR 163 PG 119, COMM NW CNR OF SEC, S 100.39FT TO C/L OF ACL RR, S 44 DEG E 2175.26FT, S 45 DEG 00137400007CRAPSE, RALPH D 2525 STATE ROAD 29 SIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---9734 13 47 29 COM NW COR, S 100.39FT, SE 2175.26FT ALG CENT LI OF R R R/W, SW 100FT, SE 680FT TO POB, SW 170FT, NW 00137320006FERVIL, MAKENDY JESULA FERVIL JOSEPH 2357 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3552659921041GONZALEZ, ALYSSA R 2342 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 2952659920929HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT C-152659920026HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT C-252659920042HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT C-352659920068HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT FD-152659920084HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT L-152659920181HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT L-252659920204HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT P-352659920301HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT P-452659920327HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT R-152659920343HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3152659920961HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3852659921106HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4152659921164HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4252659921180HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4352659921203HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4452659921229HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4552659921245HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4652659921261HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4752659921287HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4852659921300HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4952659921326HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5052659921342HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5152659921368HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5252659921384HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5352659921407HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5452659921423HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5552659921449HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5652659921465HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5752659921481HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5852659921504HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5952659921520HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6052659921546HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6152659921562HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6252659921588HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6352659921601HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6452659921627HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6552659921643HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6652659921669HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6752659921685HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6852659921708HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6952659921724HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7052659921740HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7152659921766HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7252659921782HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7352659921805HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7452659921821HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7552659921847HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7652659921863HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7752659921889HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7852659921902HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7952659921928HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8052659921944HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8152659921960HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8252659921986HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8352659922008HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8452659922024HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8552659922040HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8652659922066HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8752659922082HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8852659922105HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8952659922121HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9052659922147HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9152659922163HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9252659922189HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9352659922202HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9452659922228HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9552659922244HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9652659922260HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9752659922286HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9852659922309HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9952659922325HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10052659922341HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10152659922367HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10252659922383HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10352659922406HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10452659922422HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10552659922448HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10652659922464HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10752659922480HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10852659922503HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10952659922529HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11052659922545HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11152659922561HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11252659922587HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11352659922600HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11452659922626HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11552659922642Notice: This data belongs to the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office (CCPA). Therefore, the recipient agrees not to represent this data to anyone as other than CCPA provided data. The recipient may not transfer this data to others without consent from the CCPA.Petition: PL20220001634 | Buffer: 1000 | Date: 8/22/24 | Site Location: 00138160003 & othersCopy of POList_1000Page 7922 of 9661 2HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11652659922668HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11752659922684HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11852659922707HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11952659922723HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 12052659922749HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 12152659922765HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 12252659922781HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 12352659922804LARA-AGUILAR, RAFAEL JULIA ANN AGUILAR 2341 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3952659921122LOUISSAINT, ROCHEMELA 2337 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4052659921148MALDONADO JR, GUADALUPE 2360 BAHAY LOOPIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 152659920369MC SWAIN, CARROLL 2491 STATE RD S 29IMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 13 47 29 COM NW COR, S 100.39FT, SE 2175.26FT ALG C/L OF RR R/W, SW 100FT TO POB, SW 730FT, SE 390FT NE 00137360008MULLINS, JOY L 2475 STATE ROAD 29 SIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---9734 13 47 29 COMM NW CNR OF SEC, S 100.39FT TO C/L OF A C L R/R, S 44DEG E 2175.26FT, S 45DEG W 100FT TO POB, S 44DEG 00137440009RIA, JEAN SONY GIBONNE RIA SAINT ELOI 2353 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3652659921067RIA, SHERLY 2338 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3052659920945RIOS, JOSE ANTONIO SALAZAR MA A SOTO GUEVARA 2349 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3752659921083SERENOA INVESTMENTS LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY 3RD FLNAPLES, FL 34105---0 16 47 29 ALL THAT PORTION OF SEC 16 DESC 1N OR 1685 PG 1617 628.71 AC 00137800005SERENOA INVESTMENTS LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY 3RD FLNAPLES, FL 34105---0 21 47 29 ALL LYING W OF 29 & N OF OR 1685 PG 162800138080002SHACKLETON, JN NIXON MARIE M SHACKLETON OLIVER 2326 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3252659920987SILVER STRAND III LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 13 47 29 ALL LYING S & W OF SR 29 LESS RR ROW & LESS DB 17 PG 453, DB 39 PG 304 00137280007SILVER STRAND III LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 15 47 29 ALL LESS NE1/4 OF NW1/4 & LESS N 60FT OF NW1/4 OF NW1/4, LESS OR 941 PG 521 & OR 1033 PG 1742 LESS NW 1/4 OF 00137640003SILVER STRAND III LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 22 47 29 ALL LESS CAMP KEAIS RD & LESS LANDS LYING W OF CAMP KEAIS RD OR 1560 PG 397 OR 1560 PG 404 OR 1560 PG 411, 00138120001SILVER STRAND III LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 23 47 29 ALL00138160003SILVER STRAND III LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 24 47 29 ALL00138200002SILVER STRAND III PARTNERSHIP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 14 47 29 ALL EXC ACL RR R/W + SR 2900137560002STRICKLAND JR, WILLIE H JUSTIN KYLE STRICKLAND PO BOX 5240IMMOKALEE, FL 34143---0 19 47 30 PORTION LYING SLY OF SR 29 AS DESC IN OR 4337 PG 72700139771200U S A TRUST SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLA % DEPT OF INTERIOR BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS WASHINGTON, DC 20510---1 10 47 29 ALL, LESS SE1/4 OFNE1/4 & RR R/W, LESS SE1/4 OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4 AND W1/2 OF SE 1/4 OF SW1/4 564.45 AC OR 00136680006USA % BRIAN COLEMAN, CHIEF LAND RESOURCES PROGRAM OFFICE NATIONAL PARK SERVICES 2975 HORSESHOE DR S, STE 800 NAPLES, FL 34104---0 15 47 29 COMM NW1/4 CNR SEC, E 443FT, S 36DEG E 73.53 FT TO POB, N 88DEG E 665.05FT, S 33DEG W 347.30FT, S 34DEG E 00137720004Copy of POList_1000Page 7923 of 9661 Page 7924 of 9661 Page 7925 of 9661 Page 7926 of 9661 Page 7927 of 9661 Page 7928 of 9661 Page 7929 of 9661 Page 7930 of 9661 Page 7931 of 9661 Page 7932 of 9661 Page 7933 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.DID# 2025-4282Executive SummaryThis item requires Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, relating to an earthmining operation approving four variances from the Collier County Land Development Code relating to landscape buffers, paving, outdoor screening and foundation plantings on approximately 3,937.88± acres zoned Rural Agricultural District (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), partly within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), located between State Road 29 to the east, Camp Keais Road and Immokalee Road to the west, and Stockade Road to the northwest, in Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24 and 27, Township 47 south, Range 29 east, Collier County, Florida. [PL20230001067] (This item is a companion to Items 16A23, 16B8, and 17C) OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of Zoning Appeals review staff's findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced petition, render a decision regarding this rezoning petition, and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The subject property is located between State Road 29 to the east, Camp Keais Road and Immokalee Road to the west, and Stockade Road to the northwest, in Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24, and 27, Township 47 south, Range 29 east, Collier County, Florida. The subject property consists of 3,937.88± acres. The purpose of this Variance (VA) application is to seek variances related to landscaping and site design requirements for a proposed commercial excavation mine within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, known as the Silver Strand Mine. This variance is a companion to the Conditional Use petition, CU-PL20220001634, to permit a commercial excavation mine, and the excavation permit (EX- PL20230018067) seeks a new excavation pit for mining and material sales. The literal interpretation of the Land Development Code imposes burdensome and unnecessary site design and landscaping requirements on the proposed mining project. The Variance petition seeks the following variance requests: 1. Variance #1 seeks relief from LDC section 4.06.02.C. which requires commercial excavations on property zoned Rural Agricultural District (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), partly within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay Zoning District (RLSAO), to provide a 20’ Type “C” buffer adjacent to residential development, a 10’ Type “A” buffer adjacent to agricultural uses, and a 20’ Type “D” buffer adjacent to rights- of-way, to instead allow no buffers other than those identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. 2. Variance # 2 seeks relief from Section 4.05.02. B.1 of the Land Development Code that requires parking lots and parking spaces to be surfaced with asphalt, bituminous, concrete, or dustless material, and driveways, handicapped spaces, and access aisles to be paved, instead of requiring paving on-site past the tire wash, as identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. 3. Variance # 3 seeks relief from Section 4.06.05 C. of the Land Development Code that requires building foundation plantings, to instead eliminate building foundation plantings for the scale house/office, as identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. 4. Variance # 4 seeks relief from Section 4.02.12 of the Land Development Code that requires outdoor storage Page 7934 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.DID# 2025-4282areas, including but not limited to manufactured products, raw or finished materials, or vehicles other than vehicles intended for sale, be screened with a fence or equivalent landscaping or combination thereof, not less than 7 feet in height, to instead eliminate the screening requirement surrounding the proposed “Outdoor Storage/Equipment/Mining/Operations” area identified on the Conceptual Site Plan.COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard Petition VA-PL20230001067, Silver Strand Mine Variance, on October 2, 2025, and voted 4-0 to forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval. One public attendee supported the petition, and no objections have been received. An additional condition of approval requested by staff is that, when the property is developed for non-mining purposes, all required buffers will be installed along all property boundaries. This change was accepted by staff, and this revision was added to the Resolution. As such, this petition will be placed on the Summary Agenda. This item advances the Collier County Strategic Plan Objective within Infrastructure and Asset Management by optimizing the useful life of all public infrastructure and resources through proper planning and preventative maintenance FISCAL IMPACT: The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). On the Stewardship Overlay Map, part of the FLUM series, the site is designated "Open." Currently, the proposed mine is located in mostly citrus groves, zoned A (Rural Agricultural Zoning District), within a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO) and a Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), as well as the Low Residential District of the Immokalee Master Plan. The GMP does not address individual variance requests but rather addresses the larger issue of actual use. As previously noted, the petitioner requests variances relating to landscape buffers, paving, outdoor screening, and foundation plantings. The subject use is consistent with the FLUM of the GMP. The requested Variance does not have any impact on this property's consistency with the County's GMP. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: Petitioner is requesting four Variances from the Land Development Code. The granting of such a Variance is permitted under LDC §9.04.02. The attached staff report and recommendations of the Planning Commission are advisory only and are not binding on you. All testimony given must be under oath. The Petitioner has the burden to prove that the proposed Variance is consistent with all the criteria set forth below, and you may question the Petitioner or staff to satisfy yourself that the necessary criteria have been satisfied. LDC Section 10.09.00 F. requires that “Upon consideration of the Planning Commission’s report, findings and recommendations, and upon consideration of the standards and guidelines set forth [below], the Board of Zoning Appeals shall approve, by resolution, or deny a petition for a variance.” Should you consider denying the Variance, to ensure that your decision is not later found to be arbitrary, discriminatory, or unreasonable, the denial must be based upon competent, substantial evidence that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria below. In granting any Variance, the Board of Zoning Appeals may prescribe the following: 1. Appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with the zoning code or other applicable county ordinances. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the Variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of the zoning code. 2. A reasonable time limit within which the action for which the Variance is required shall be begun or completed or both. Criteria for Variances Page 7935 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.DID# 2025-42821. There are special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size, and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved.2. There are special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant, such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the Variance request.3. A literal interpretation of the provisions of the LDC work unnecessarily and causes undue hardship on the applicant or creates practical difficulties for the applicant.4. The Variance, if granted, will be the minimum Variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure and which promotes standards of health, safety, or welfare.5. Granting the Variance requested will not confer on the Petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. 6. Granting the Variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the LDC and not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 7. There are natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation, such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc. 8. Granting the Variance will be consistent with the GMP. This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for Board approval. Should this item be denied, Florida Statutes section 125.022(5) requires the County to provide written notice to the applicant citing applicable portions of an ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority for the denial. -HFAC RECOMMENDATION(S): Staff concurs with the recommendation of the CCPC and further recommends that the Board of Zoning Appeals approve the request for Petition VA-PL20230001067, Silver Stand Mine Variance, and approve the proposed Resolution. PREPARED BY: Timothy Finn, AICP, Planner III, Zoning Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report - Silver Strand Variance PL20230001067 2. Attachment A - Proposed Resolution revised 11-6-25 3. Attachment B - Application-Backup Materials 4. Attachment C - Hearing Advertising Signs 5. legal ad - agenda IDs 25-4281 & 25-4282 - Silver Strand Mine CU & VA - 12-9-25 BCC Page 7936 of 9661 VA-PL20230001067 (Silver Strand Mine) Page 1 of 10 Revised: September 17, 2025 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION- ZONING SERVICES SECTION HEARING DATE: OCTOBER 2, 2025 SUBJECT: VA-PL20230001067 - SILVER STRAND MINE COMPANION ITEMS: CU-PL20220001634 - SILVER STRAND MINE & EX- PL20230018067 - SILVER STRAND MINE ______________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER/AGENTS: Owner: Silver Strand III LLC 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34105 Agents: Jessica Harrelson, AICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Peninsula Engineering Coleman, Yovanovich & 2640 Golden Gate Parkway, Suite 201 Koester, P.A. Naples, FL 34105 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an earthmining operation approving four variances from the Collier County Land Development Code relating to landscape buffers, paving, outdoor screening, and foundation plantings on approximately 3,937.88± acres zoned Rural Agricultural District (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), partly within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located between State Road 29 to the east, Camp Keais Road and Immokalee Road to the west, and Stockade Road to the northwest, in Sections 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24, and 27, Township 47 south, Range 29 east, Collier County, Florida (See location map below) Page 7937 of 9661 VA-PL20230001067 (Silver Strand Mine) Page 2 of 10 Revised: September 17, 2025 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject property consists of 3,937.88± acres. The purpose of this Variance (VA) application is to seek variances related to landscaping and site design requirements for a proposed commercial excavation mine within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, known as the Silver Strand Mine. This variance is a companion to the Conditional Use petition, CU-PL20220001634, to permit a commercial excavation mine, and the excavation permit (EX-PL20230018067) seeks a new excavation pit for mining and material sales. Page 7938 of 9661 VA-PL20230001067 (Silver Strand Mine) Page 3 of 10 Revised: September 17, 2025 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding the boundaries of the subject property, which is developed with agriculture and zoned Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) and Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO): North: Developed with Collier County Solid Waste facility with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO), then to the east is residential with a park on Seminole Tribe of Florida lands, with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO), and to the east is vacant land with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO), and then to the east is Garden Walk Village PUD (approved for multi-family at 12 DU/AC) that is currently vacant land East: Single-family residential with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural- Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) and undeveloped land with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) directly abuts portions of the property along the east. State Road 29 separates the remainder of the property from the Kaicasa PUD (approved from single-family and multi-family residential dwelling units at 4 DU/AC for Habitat for Humanity), and undeveloped lands with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO). Kaicasa PUD (approved for single and multi- family dwellings at 4 DU/AC for Habitat for Humanity), then to the south is single family residential with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO), then to the south is vacant land with sparsely developed agricultural lands with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) South: Developed agricultural, with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural- Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) West: Immokalee Road and to the south Camp Keais Road (two lane arterials), then developed agricultural, with a current zoning designation of Rural Agricultural- Mobile Home Overlay-Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) and Rural Agricultural-Mobile Home Overlay (A-MHO) Intentionally blank Page 7939 of 9661 VA-PL20230001067 (Silver Strand Mine) Page 4 of 10 Revised: September 17, 2025 Aerial (Peninsula Engineering) GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). On the Stewardship Overlay Map, part of the FLUM series, the site is designated “Open.” Currently, the proposed mine is situated primarily within citrus groves, zoned A, Rural Agricultural Zoning District, and is located within a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO) and a Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), as well as the Low Residential District of the Immokalee Master Plan. The GMP does not address individual variance requests but deals with the larger issue of the actual use. As previously noted, the petitioner requests variances relating to landscape buffers, paving, outdoor screening, and foundation plantings. The subject use is consistent with the FLUM of the GMP. The requested Variance does not have any impact on this property's consistency with the County's GMP. STAFF ANALYSIS: The subject property consists of 3,937.88± acres. The purpose of this Variance (VA) application is to seek variances related to landscaping and site design requirements for a proposed commercial excavation mine within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, known as the Silver Strand Mine. This variance is a companion to the Conditional Use petition, CU-PL20220001634, to permit a commercial excavation mine and the excavation permit (EX- PL20230018067) that seeks a new excavation pit for mining and material sales. The literal interpretation of the Land Development Code requires certain site design and landscaping requirements that are burdensome and unnecessary for the proposed mining project. The Variance petition seeks the following variance requests: Page 7940 of 9661 VA-PL20230001067 (Silver Strand Mine) Page 5 of 10 Revised: September 17, 2025 Proposed Variance #1: (Buffer Requirements) Variance # 1 seeks relief from Section 4.06.02.C (Table 2.4) of the Collier County Land Development Code - “Buffer Requirements”, that requires commercial excavations to provide a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer adjacent to residential development, a 10’ Type ‘A’ buffer adjacent to agricultural uses, and a 20’ Type ‘D’ buffer adjacent to rights-of-way, whereas the Applicant is requesting to allow no buffers other than those identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. Petitioner Developer Commitments: x The Owner will install an LDC required buffer within 180 days along any property boundary where an SRA, PUD, rezone, or other residential development has been approved on an adjacent property, unless development on the adjacent property includes the construction of a perimeter berm that is a minimum of 7’ in height, as Measured from Finished Floor Elevation of the adjacent site. (Condition #20, within the companion Conditional Use.) x The Owner will install 200 LF of a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer adjacent to the abutting residential parcel along the eastern property boundary. This buffer will wrap the corner of the subject property line, providing 100 LF on each side. Refer to the conceptual site plan prepared by Peninsula Engineering. (Condition #21, within the companion Conditional Use.) x Existing vegetation will be retained along the northern property line, where the site is adjacent to residential uses and a public park. Should the existing vegetation be removed or destroyed, supplemental plantings will be provided as necessary to meet buffer requirements. (Note #3 on the Conceptual Site Plan.) Petitioner Justifications: x The excavation mine and ancillary uses have been strategically located internally to the property to provide significant setbacks from all boundaries, which mitigate impacts to adjacent properties and rights-of-way. x The property consists of several Water Retention Areas (WRAs) and other heavily vegetated areas and wetlands, which the proposed development will not impact. These areas of vegetation screen the earth mining activities from adjacent uses and rights-of-way x The site has historically been used for agricultural purposes and will continue to be used for agricultural purposes outside of the proposed earthmining activities. x The excavation mine’s hours of operation are limited to mostly daylight hours, including 6:30 am-5 pm, Monday-Friday, and 7 am-3 pm, Saturdays; thus, eliminating potential impacts from headlight glare on neighboring properties. x The scale house is the only planned structure associated with the excavation mine. This structure is located about a mile from Camp Keais Road and will be a one-story construction trailer; thus, it will have no negative impacts on adjacent properties or rights-of-way. x Posted speed limits along Camp Keais Rd, Immokalee Rd, and SR 29, together with the distance of mining activities from these rights-of-way, mitigate impact to viewsheds. x A letter of support has been received from Habitat for Humanity, representing the Kaicasa residential development across SR 29 from the subject property. The Kaicasa RPUD is buffered from the site by SR 29, and an existing 20’ Type ‘D’ landscape buffer and preserve on the Kaicasa site. Page 7941 of 9661 VA-PL20230001067 (Silver Strand Mine) Page 6 of 10 Revised: September 17, 2025 x If a separate lot were created of just the conditional use area, the proposed mining and ancillary uses would be adjacent to agricultural zoning/uses under the same ownership. x The property is mostly adjacent to agriculturally zoned properties. Earth mining activities have no negative impacts on lands used for agricultural purposes. The County’s Land Development Code does not consider the large tracts of land needed for earth mining and agricultural activities, and the compatibility between these uses. Surrounding land uses and zoning include: North o A-MHO: Undeveloped lands o A-PU: The Immokalee landfill o A-MHO: Residential development o A-MHO: Undeveloped lands under common ownership South o A-MHO-RLSAO: Agricultural uses/ row crops East o A-MHO-RLSAO: Agricultural uses/ row crops and pockets of wetlands o A-MHO: Residential o SR 29 / Undeveloped lands beyond West o Immokalee Road/ undeveloped agricultural lands beyond Staff recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommend APPROVAL of this variance Proposed Variance #2: (Paving) Variance # 2 seeks relief from Section 4.05.02. B.1 of the Land Development Code that requires parking lots and parking spaces to be surfaced with asphalt, bituminous, concrete, or dustless material, and driveways, handicapped spaces, and access aisles to be paved, whereas the Applicant is requesting that no paving be required on-site past the tire wash, as identified on the site plan. Petitioner Developer Commitments: x Handicapped spaces will comply with ADA requirements. This is included in Condition #10, within the companion Conditional Use. x A Dust Control Plan has been submitted with the Excavation Permit, as required by Condition #10 within the companion Conditional Use. x The area surrounding and between the tire wash and the right-of-way will be paved to LDC minimum requirements, as noted in Condition #10 within the companion Conditional Use. Petitioner Justifications: x The Silver Strand Mine will not be open to the general public. The internal access way will be used by haul trucks to move excavated materials. Page 7942 of 9661 VA-PL20230001067 (Silver Strand Mine) Page 7 of 10 Revised: September 17, 2025 x Not paving the internal haul route is consistent with other mining projects in Collier County; refer to images provided of other mining projects. Staff recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommend APPROVAL of this variance. Proposed Variance #3: (Building Foundation Plantings) Variance # 3 seeks relief from Section 4.06.05 C. of the Land Development Code that requires building foundation plantings, whereas the Applicant is requesting to eliminate building foundation plantings for the scale house/office, as identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. Petitioner Justifications: x The Silver Strand Mine will not be open to the general public. x The scale house is located about a mile from the Camp Keais right-of-way; therefore, this request has no visual impact on neighboring properties or vehicles. x The scale house is a proposed construction trailer and not a permanent building/structure. It will be removed from the site after completion of earth mining activities. Staff recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommend APPROVAL of this variance Proposed Variance #4: (Screening for Outdoor Storage/Equipment/Mining/Operations) Variance # 4 seeks relief from Section 4.02.12 of the Land Development Code that requires outdoor storage areas, including but not limited to manufactured products, raw or finished materials, or vehicles other than vehicles intended for sale, be screened with a fence or equivalent landscaping or combination thereof, not less than 7 feet in height, whereas the Applicant is requesting to eliminate this requirement surrounding the proposed “Outdoor Storage/Equipment/Mining/Operations” area identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. Petitioner Justifications: x The “Outdoor Storage/Equipment/Mining/Operations” area is screened by a heavily vegetated WRA. x The location of these outdoor uses were strategically located internal to the site, to not have negative impacts on adjacent properties. x Adding a 7-foot-high berm, landscaping, wall, or combination thereof around this area would interfere with day-to-day activities and routine work, as it would isolate this area from the excavation activities. Unrestricted access to this area is needed to perform daily operations. Staff recommendation: Zoning and Development Review staff recommend APPROVAL of this variance Stormwater Review: The proposed variance is not anticipated to create stormwater issues or adverse impacts to surrounding properties in the area. Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage will be addressed through the environmental resource permitting process with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (F.D.E.P.). Additionally, the same Best Management Practices, Erosion Control Measures, and Pollution Prevention Plan associated with the current permitted operation will continue to be used for the proposed expansion. The proposed mining will be subject to Chapter 62- 330 Environmental Resource Permitting and mandatory reclamation requirements of F.D.E.P. Chapter Page 7943 of 9661 VA-PL20230001067 (Silver Strand Mine) Page 8 of 10 Revised: September 17, 2025 62C-39, Florida Administrative Code. In addition, the mining excavation will require an excavation permit from Collier County consistent with Collier County Excavation Ordinance Sec 22-111. Landscape Review: The applicant indicates that the only planned structure is a 1-story scale house. Other mining equipment, such as cranes, excavators, conveyors, and wet plants, that are relocated or reconfigured as needed for mining operations, which changes visibility of these structures over time. Additionally, the proposed mine has been strategically located toward the center of the property, to reduce views from surrounding neighbors and roadways. In the narrative statement, the applicant indicates that justification for no buffer along SR29 is based on a letter of support from Habitat for Humanity representing the residential development on the other side of SR29. Additionally, the study plans for the widening of SR29 obtained and submitted by the applicant indicate the proposed pavement for the widening of the road will likely impact the applicant’s property. While neither of these reasons are typically justification to not include a buffer along a roadway, due to the distance from the roadway and reduced visibility of the mining activities, staff recommends approval of the variance, with the following condition: Staff recommend the following text be added to variance #1: 1. When the property is developed for non-mining purposes, all required buffers will be installed along all property boundaries. Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff have reviewed the conditional use petition to address environmental concerns. There are 2.01 acres of wetlands. However, the wetlands are degraded and dominated by invasive exotic vegetation (FLUCCS 618). The property has been historically cleared and maintained clear of native vegetation required to be preserved. The Master Plan does not show a preserve, since no minimum preservation is required. The eastern and southern boundary of the subject property is adjacent to an existing Water Retention Area (WRA). However, no impacts to the WRA will occur as an existing access road will be used to access the quarry lake. The environmental data indicates the proposed project is in an area that has the potential to contain a variety of protected animal species. Three (3) alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) were observed within agricultural ditches at various locations on-site. Consultation with the Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) will be conducted to reduce and minimize any impact on the alligators. Two (2) caracaras (Caracara cheriway) were observed in the north-central portion of the project. No documented nest was found on-site. Consultation with USFWS and FWCC regarding guidelines and permitting requirements may be required prior to construction. The environmental data indicate that the subject property falls within FWS Primary and Secondary Florida Panther (Felis concolor coryi) habitat. There were no observations of panthers onsite, and the telemetry data indicate Florida panthers are not abundant within the boundary of the proposed project. The property does not contain habitats preferred by the Florida panther. Therefore, consultation with FWS to obtain panther mitigation is unlikely. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) wildlife data indicates the presence of Black Bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) in the area. A black bear management plan will need to be included in the PPL or SDP review. Additionally, the property contains potential habitat for the Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi). Consultation with the US Federal Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) regarding guidelines and permitting requirements will be required before construction. Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff have found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site Page 7944 of 9661 VA-PL20230001067 (Silver Strand Mine) Page 9 of 10 Revised: September 17, 2025 comprises 3,937.88± acres, primarily consisting of citrus groves and row crops. The property does not contain existing native vegetation; therefore, preservation is not required. The decision to grant a variance is based on the criteria in LDC Section 9.04.03.A–H (in bold font below). Staff have analyzed this petition relative to these provisions and offers the following responses: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size, and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved? The proposed development is located within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. The property is mostly surrounded by undeveloped, agricultural lands. The mining and ancillary uses have been strategically located to eliminate impacts on neighboring properties and rights-of-way. b. Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which are the subject of the Variance request? There are no special conditions or circumstances, such as pre-existing conditions relative to the subject property. c. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant? Yes, the code requires certain site design and landscaping requirements, which are unnecessary due to the proximity of the mining activities to adjacent zoning/land uses. These code requirements would result in the installation of several miles of unnecessary landscape buffers and other landscaping requirements, and unnecessary internal paving. The provisions of the code create an undue hardship and create practical difficulties for the applicant’s desire to use a very small area of their land for mining activities. The proposed excavation mine has been strategically located not to have negative impacts on adjacent properties and rights-of-way. d. Will the Variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure and which promotes standards of health, safety, and welfare? Granting this variance will be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of land. The requests have no negative impact on public health, safety, or welfare. The requests do not negatively impact the surrounding neighborhood. Granting this variance is needed to make the project feasible and successful. e. Will granting the Variance confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? No, granting this variance request will not confer any special privilege to other lands, buildings, or structures within the same zoning district. f. Will granting the Variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? Page 7945 of 9661 VA-PL20230001067 (Silver Strand Mine) Page 10 of 10 Revised: September 17, 2025 The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the zoning codes and will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood. g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation, such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? The subject property contains heavily vegetated Water Retention Areas (WRAs), as well as other pockets of vegetation and wetlands throughout the site. The proposed mine will not impact these vegetated areas and will provide screening of the proposed development. Most of the subject property is surrounded by a wide expanse of undeveloped land and/or agricultural uses. The mining and ancillary uses have been located internally to the property to eliminate impacts on neighboring properties and rights-of-way. h. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the GMP? Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) REVIEW: This project does require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project meets the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, Section 2-1193(m)(4), a conditional use of a commercial mine requires EAC approval. The Environmental Planning staff recommends approval of the proposed petition. COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW: The staff report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s office on September 11, 2025. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an earthmining operation approving four variances from the Collier County Land Development Code relating to landscape buffers, paving, outdoor screening, and foundation plantings on approximately 3,937.88± acres zoned Rural Agricultural District (A) with a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), partly within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO Landscaping staff are also requesting that additional text be added to Variance #1, see Landscaping section of the report: 1. When the property is developed for non-mining purposes, all required buffers will be installed along all property boundaries. Attachments: A) Proposed Resolution B) Application-Backup Materials C) Hearing Advertising Signs Page 7946 of 9661  >&36@ 6LOYHU6WUDQG0LQH9DULDQFH 3/  RI   5(62/87,2112BBBB$5(62/87,212)7+(%2$5'2)=21,1*$33($/62) &2//,(5 &2817< )/25,'$ 5(/$7,1* 72 $1($57+0,1,1* 23(5$7,21 $33529,1* )2859$5,$1&(6 )520 7+( &2//,(5 &2817< /$1''(9(/230(17 &2'( 5(/$7,1* 72 /$1'6&$3(%8))(56 3$9,1* 287'225 6&5((1,1* $1' )281'$7,21 3/$17,1*6 21 $3352;,0$7(/< “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³9DULDQFHV´   9DULDQFH  VHHNV UHOLHI IURP /'& VHFWLRQ & ZKLFK UHTXLUHV FRPPHUFLDO H[FDYDWLRQVRQSURSHUW\]RQHG5XUDO$JULFXOWXUDO'LVWULFW $ ZLWKD0RELOH+RPH 2YHUOD\ 0+2  SDUWO\ ZLWKLQJWKH 5XUDO/DQGV 6WHZDUGVKLS $UHD2YHUOD\ =RQLQJ 'LVWULFW 5/6$2  WR SURYLGH D ¶ 7\SH ³&´ EXIIHU DGMDFHQW WRUHVLGHQWLDO GHYHORSPHQWD¶7\SH³$´EXIIHUDGMDFHQWWRDJULFXOWXUDOXVHVDQGD¶7\SH³'´ EXIIHUDGMDFHQWWRULJKWVRIZD\WRLQVWHDGDOORZQREXIIHUVRWKHUWKDQWKRVHLGHQWLILHG RQWKH&RQFHSWXDO6LWH3ODQ  9DULDQFHVHHNVUHOLHIIURP6HFWLRQ%RIWKH/DQG'HYHORSPHQW&RGHWKDW UHTXLUHV SDUNLQJ ORWV DQG SDUNLQJ VSDFHV WR EH VXUIDFHG ZLWK DVSKDOW ELWXPLQRXV FRQFUHWHRUGXVWOHVVPDWHULDODQGGULYHZD\VKDQGLFDSSHGVSDFHVDQGDFFHVVDLVOHVWR EHSDYHGWRLQVWHDGQRWUHTXLUHSDYLQJRQVLWHSDVWWKHWLUHZDVKDVLGHQWLILHGRQWKH &RQFHSWXDO6LWH3ODQ  Page 7947 of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³2XWGRRU6WRUDJH(TXLSPHQW0LQLQJ2SHUDWLRQV´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¶ 7\SH ³&´ EXIIHU DGMDFHQW WRUHVLGHQWLDO GHYHORSPHQWD¶7\SH³$´EXIIHUDGMDFHQWWRDJULFXOWXUDOXVHVDQGD¶7\SH³'´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age 7948 of 9661 >&36@ 6LOYHU6WUDQG0LQH9DULDQFH 3/  RI 9DULDQFHVHHNVUHOLHIIURP6HFWLRQRIWKH/DQG'HYHORSPHQW&RGHWKDWUHTXLUHVRXWGRRUVWRUDJHDUHDVLQFOXGLQJEXWQRWOLPLWHGWRPDQXIDFWXUHGSURGXFWVUDZRUILQLVKHGPDWHULDOVRUYHKLFOHVRWKHUWKDQYHKLFOHVLQWHQGHGIRUVDOHEHVFUHHQHGZLWKDIHQFHRUHTXLYDOHQWODQGVFDSLQJRUFRPELQDWLRQWKHUHRIQRWOHVVWKDQIHHWLQKHLJKW WR LQVWHDG HOLPLQDWH WKH VFUHHQLQJ UHTXLUHPHQW VXUURXQGLQJ WKH SURSRVHG³2XWGRRU6WRUDJH(TXLSPHQW0LQLQJ2SHUDWLRQV´DUHDLGHQWLILHGRQWKH&RQFHSWXDO6LWH3ODQLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWKWKH&RQFHSWXDO6LWH3ODQDWWDFKHGKHUHWRDV([KLELW%RQ“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age 7949 of 9661 BBBBBBBBB 11-6-26 Page | 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PART OF SECTIONS 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24, AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PARCEL 1 ALL OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.941, PG.521, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 2 ALL OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF- WAY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 3 ALL OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LYING SOUTH AND WEST OF ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY AND S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, , LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.17, PG.453, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 4 ALL OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF- WAY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 5 ALL OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 6 ALL OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 AND O.R.4322, PG.1377, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1354, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 7 ALL OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 AND LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1377, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. ALL SAID LANDS BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL (A) COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 1,314.26 TO A POINT HEREINAFTER TO BE KNOWN AS POINT (A); THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°52'34" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15 AND BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXHIBIT A Page 1 of 10 Page 7950 of 9661 Page | 2 THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 89°17'35" EAST 1,202.62 FEET TO SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 941, PAGE 521, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES: 1. SOUTH 00°08'45" EAST 1,319.97 FEET; 2. NORTH 89°32'49" EAST 2,030.52 FEET; 3. NORTH 00°06'39" WEST 2,656.84 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE NORTH 89°04'02" EAST 2,035.44 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'49" EAST 2,587.12 FEET TO THE NORTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 14; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'42" EAST 2,331.62 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 29 SOUTH; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 44°58'17" EAST 2,419.10 FEET TO THE NORTH CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 962, PAGE 1289, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES: 1. SOUTH 44°59'18" WEST 730.20 FEET; 2. SOUTH 44°58'03" EAST 680.17 FEET; 3. NORTH 45°00'39" EAST 729.89 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 44°59'05" EAST 4823.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE SOUTH 00°31'11" EAST 2,301.77 FEET TO THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 00°38'38" EAST 2,631.42 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'23" WEST 2,614.52 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'08" WEST 2,613.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°34'23" WEST 2,672.75 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°38'46" WEST 2,671.33 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 00°04'00" WEST 5,379.12 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°06'34" WEST 2,674.38 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°09'03" WEST 2,587.98 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF AN 80-FOOT-WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN AS CAMP KEAIS ROAD, AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1579, PAGE 17323, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE FOLLOWING TEN (10) DESCRIBED COURSES: 1. NORTH 05°51'03" EAST 91.74 FEET; EXHIBIT A Page 2 of 10 Page 7951 of 9661 Page | 3 2. 403.88 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,787.51 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°06'35" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 02°47'45" EAST 403.69 FEET; 3. NORTH 00°15'32" WEST 4,936.51 FEET; 4. NORTH 00°17'42" WEST 60.69 FEET; 5. 533.72 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 40°14'11" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 19°49'24" EAST 522.82 FEET; 6. NORTH 39°56'29" EAST 543.45 FEET; 7. 584.69 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 20°00'03" EAST 572.96 FEET; 8. NORTH 00°03'36" EAST 600.00 FEET; 9. 848.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 540.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89°59'58" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 44°56'23" WEST 763.68 FEET; 10. ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 89°56'24" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 164.71 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF A 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4322, PAGE 1347, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) DESCRIBED COURSES: 1. NORTH 00°15'34" WEST 2,601.35 FEET; 2. NORTH 00°07'26" WEST 3,944.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 3,914.91 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. ALONG WITH PARCEL (B) COMMENCING AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT (A); THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 3,945.17 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22 SOUTH 00°15'34" EAST 2,681.53 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°44'26" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE AFOREMENTIONED CAMP KEAIS ROAD AND BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG THE WEST BOUNDARY OF CAMP KEAIS ROAD FOR THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) DESCRIBED COURSES: 1. SOUTH 89°56'24" EAST 164.27 FEET; 2. 722.57 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 460.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°00'00" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 44°56'24" EAST 650.54 FEET; 3. SOUTH 00°03'36" WEST 600.00 FEET; 4. 529.01 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 20°00'03" WEST 518.39 FEET; 5. SOUTH 39°56'29" WEST 543.45 FEET; EXHIBIT A Page 3 of 10 Page 7952 of 9661 Page | 4 6. 151.51 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 10°20'04" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 34°46'27" WEST 151.31 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND; THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 00°17'33" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,088.76 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 22.97 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. NET AREA: 3937.88 ACRES MORE OR LESS EXHIBIT A Page 4 of 10 Page 7953 of 9661 C5L14N0°17'33"W 2088.76C7C6L15L10C2L11C3L12C4L13N0°15'34"W 2601.35N0°07'26"W 3944.99N89°17'35"E1202.62L6L7L8L9C1N0°15'32"W 4936.51PARCEL 1(SEC. 15)PARCEL 2(SEC. 14)PARCEL 3(SEC. 13)PARCEL 4(SEC. 24)PARCEL 5(SEC. 23)PARCEL 6PARCEL 6(SEC.22)PARCEL 7(SEC. 27)27 2634 3522 2327 2623 2426 2524 1925 3014 1323 2415 1422 239 1016 1510 1115 1412 713 182128 27SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 3SHEET 3SHEET 5SHEET 4SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 5SHEET 2SHEET 3P.O.C.NORTHWEST CORNER OFSECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.P.O.B.(PARCEL A)L2W. LINESEC. 15(B.O.B.) L1POINT (A)11 1214 1328 2733 3413 1824 1916 1521 22STOCKADE RD.RANCH ONE RD.CAMP KEAIS RD.IMMOKALEERD.STATE RD. 29 S.P.O.B.(PARCEL B)L5L4L3O.R.962,PG.1289(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)O.R.941PG.521O.R.2493PG.2779O.R.941PG.521O.R.4322PG.1377O.R.1579PG.1732O.R.4322PG.1377O.R.1579PG.1732L16(D) 100'O.R.4322PG.1347S0°08'45"E 1319.97N89°32'49"E 2030.52N0°06'39"W 2656.84N89°04'02"E 2035.44N89°38'49"E 2587.12N89°38'42"E 2331.62S44°58'17"E 2419.10S44°59'05"E 2800.04S44°59'05"E 2023.22S0°31'11"E 2301.77S0°38'38"E 2631.42S89°44'23"W 2614.52S89°44'08"W 2613.84S89°34'23"W 2672.75S89°38'46"W 2671.33S0°04'00"W 5379.12S89°06'34"W 2674.38S89°09'03"W 2587.98OVERALL 4823.26LINE TABLELINE #L1L2L3L4L5L6L7L8LENGTH1314.26150.003945.172681.53150.00730.20680.17729.89BEARINGS0°07'26"EN89°52'34"ES0°07'26"ES0°15'34"EN89°44'26"ES44°59'18"WS44°58'03"EN45°00'39"ECURVE TABLECURVE #C1C2C3C4C5C6C7LENGTH403.88533.72584.69848.23722.57529.01151.51RADIUS3787.51760.00840.00540.00460.00760.00840.00DELTA6°06'35"40°14'11"39°52'53"89°59'58"90°00'00"39°52'53"10°20'04"CHORD BEARINGN2°47'45"EN19°49'24"EN20°00'03"EN44°56'23"WS44°56'24"ES20°00'03"WS34°46'27"WCHORD LENGTH403.69522.82572.96763.68650.54518.39151.31LINE TABLELINE #L9L10L11L12L13L14L15L16LENGTH91.7460.69543.45600.00164.71164.27600.00543.45BEARINGN5°51'03"EN0°17'42"WN39°56'29"EN0°03'36"EN89°56'24"WS89°56'24"ES0°03'36"WS39°56'29"WOFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:08:52 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 1000'N.T.S.P-023/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg1PENINSULA ENGINEERING6GENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.LEGEND:A.E. = ACCESS EASEMENTBM = BENCHMARKC/L = CENTERLINEC.C.R. = LABINS CERTIFIED CORNER RECORD FILE NUMBERC.U.E. = COUNTY UTILITY EASEMENTD.E. = DRAINAGE EASEMENTEL. & ELEV. = ELEVATIONF.P.L. = FLORIDA POWER & LIGHTO.R. = OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOKP.B. = PLAT BOOKPG. = PAGEP.U.E. = PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTR.O.W. = RIGHT-OF-WAYP = PLAT, M = MEASURED, C = CALCULATED, D = DEED(S.I.P.)SET 5/8" IRON PIN & CAP STAMPED LB-8479(F.I.P.) FOUND IRON PIN & CAP STAMPED AS SHOWN(F.C.M.) FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT(F.N.D.) FOUND PK NAIL & DISK STAMPED(PK) = PARKER KYLON NAILMAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24,AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEY OF PART OF SECTIONS 13,14, 15, 22, 23, 24, AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.PREPARED FOR: PENINSULA ENGINEERINGPENINSULA ENGINEERING2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAYNAPLES, FLORIDA 34105PHONE: 239.403.6700 FAX: 239.261.1797EMAIL: INFO@PEN-ENG.COMWEBSITE: WWW.PEN-ENG.COM_____________________________________________LANCE T MILLERPROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER, #LS5627NOVEMBER 27TH, 2023DATECERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION #LB- 8479NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND THEORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OR DIGITAL SEAL OF AFLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER.NO OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY MAY RELY UPON THISEXHIBIT.THIS EXHIBIT IS ONLY FOR THE LANDS AS DESCRIBED.IT IS NOT A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE, ZONING,EASEMENTS OR FREEDOM OF ENCUMBRANCES.SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPLEGAL DESCRIPTIONPARCEL 1ALL OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS THOSE LANDSDESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.941, PG.521, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 2ALL OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY, COLLIERCOUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 3ALL OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LYING SOUTH AND WEST OF ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY AND S.R.29RIGHT-OF-WAY, , LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.17, PG.453, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 4ALL OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY, COLLIERCOUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 5ALL OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 6ALL OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD ASDESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 AND O.R.4322, PG.1377, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSELANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1354, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 7ALL OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 ANDLESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1377, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAALL SAID LANDS BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:PARCEL (A)COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 1,314.26 TO A POINT HEREINAFTER TO BE KNOWN AS POINT (A);THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°52'34" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THENORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15 AND BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING;THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 89°17'35" EAST 1,202.62 FEET TO SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THENORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15;THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 941, PAGE 521, OF THE PUBLICRECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 00°08'45" EAST 1,319.97 FEET;2. NORTH 89°32'49" EAST 2,030.52 FEET;3. NORTH 00°06'39" WEST 2,656.84 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 15;THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE NORTH 89°04'02" EAST 2,035.44 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH,RANGE 29 EAST;THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'49" EAST 2,587.12 FEET TO THE NORTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 14;THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'42" EAST 2,331.62 FEET TO A POINT ON THESOUTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 29 SOUTH;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 44°58'17" EAST 2,419.10 FEET TO THE NORTH CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND ASDESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 962, PAGE 1289, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 44°59'18" WEST 730.20 FEET;2. SOUTH 44°58'03" EAST 680.17 FEET;3. NORTH 45°00'39" EAST 729.89 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 44°59'05" EAST 4823.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE SOUTH 00°31'11" EAST 2,301.77 FEET TO THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 00°38'38" EAST 2,631.42 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTCORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'23" WEST 2,614.52 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'08" WEST 2,613.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTCORNER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°34'23" WEST 2,672.75 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°38'46" WEST 2,671.33 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTCORNER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 00°04'00" WEST 5,379.12 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°06'34" WEST 2,674.38 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°09'03" WEST 2,587.98 FEET TO A POINT ON THEEAST LINE OF AN 80-FOOT-WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN AS CAMP KEAIS ROAD, AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1579, PAGE17323, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE FOLLOWING TEN (10) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. NORTH 05°51'03" EAST 91.74 FEET;2. 403.88 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,787.51 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 06°06'35" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 02°47'45" EAST 403.69 FEET;3. NORTH 00°15'32" WEST 4,936.51 FEET;4. NORTH 00°17'42" WEST 60.69 FEET;5. 533.72 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 40°14'11" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 19°49'24" EAST 522.82 FEET;6. NORTH 39°56'29" EAST 543.45 FEET;7. 584.69 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 20°00'03" EAST 572.96 FEET;8. NORTH 00°03'36" EAST 600.00 FEET;9. 848.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 540.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 89°59'58" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 44°56'23" WEST 763.68 FEET; 10. ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 89°56'24" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 164.71 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF A 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4322, PAGE 1347, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. NORTH 00°15'34" WEST 2,601.35 FEET;2. NORTH 00°07'26" WEST 3,944.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.CONTAINING: 3,914.91 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.ALONG WITHPARCEL (B)COMMENCING AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT (A);THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 3,945.17 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNEROF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22 SOUTH 00°15'34" EAST 2,681.53 FEET;THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°44'26" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE AFOREMENTIONED CAMP KEAIS ROAD AND BEINGTHE POINT OF BEGINNING;THENCE ALONG THE WEST BOUNDARY OF CAMP KEAIS ROAD FOR THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 89°56'24" EAST 164.27 FEET;2. 722.57 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 460.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 90°00'00" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 44°56'24" EAST 650.54 FEET;3. SOUTH 00°03'36" WEST 600.00 FEET;4. 529.01 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 20°00'03" WEST 518.39 FEET;5. SOUTH 39°56'29" WEST 543.45 FEET;6. 151.51 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 10°20'04" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 34°46'27" WEST 151.31 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTLINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND;THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 00°17'33" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,088.76 FEET TO THEPOINT OF BEGINNING.CONTAINING: 22.97 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.NET AREA: 3937.88 ACRES MORE OR LESSSCALE:1" = 1000'0SCALE IN FEET20001000SURVEYORS NOTES:xA SURVEY OF THE DESCRIBED LANDS WASCONDUCTED BY AMS ENGINEERING &ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. ON OCTOBER 1ST, 2003,INDICATING FOUND MONUMENTATION ALONGSAID BOUNDARY. UPON OUR RECOVERY OF SAIDBOUNDARY THERE ARE NUMEROUSDISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE MEASUREDDISTANCES NOTED ON THE AMS SURVEY ANDTHE EXISTING FOUND MONUMENTATION. THESEDISCREPANCIES INCLUDE RECOVERED ORIGINALCOLLIER MONUMENTS AND MONUMENTSRECORDED AS CERTIFIED CORNER WITH LABINS.xAN (AMS) MEASURED DISTANCE IS NOTED ON ALLLEGS OF THE BOUNDARY THAT HAVE ADISCREPANCY EXCEEDING 0.20' FROM THEEXISTING RECOVERED BOUNDARY CORNERS.(SEE SHEETS 2, 3, 4, & 5 FOR THESE NOTES)EXHIBIT APage 5 of 10Page 7954 of 9661 N0°07'26"W 3944.99N89°17'35"E1202.62(M) N0°06'39"W 2656.84(D) S4°09'26"E 2651.27N89°04'02"E 2035.44 N. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 15(M) N89°38'49"E 2587.12 N. LINE OF THE N.W. 1/4 SEC. 14(AMS) 2586.52 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 3COLLIER COUNTYO.R.941, PG.521(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)BCP LLLPN.W. 1/4 OF THEN.W. 1/4 OF SEC. 15,O.R.2493, PG.2779(NOT PART OF THISSURVEY)COLLIER COUNTYO.R.941, PG.521(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)SEMINOLE TRIBEO.R.1479, PG.976BCP LLLPO.R.2493, PG.2779IMMOKALEE ROAD (100' R.O.W.)S89°52'34"W 150.00N0°07'26"W 1314.26FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT ATEAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OFIMMOKALEE ROAD 0.03' WEST.SETFOUNDFOUNDFOUNDFOUNDIRON PINFOUNDE. LINE SEC.15, T.47S., R.29E.W. LINE SEC.14, T.47S., R.29E.UNPLATTED(SEC. 15)UNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 14)POINT AP.O.C.NORTHWEST CORNER OFSECTION 15 TOWNSHIP 47SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAFOUND IRON RODIN CENTERLINE OFIMMOKALEE ROAD30' ACCESS EASEMENT (O.R.941, PG.521) (STOCKADE ROAD)END OFEASEMENTC.C.R.116015CONCRETEMONUMENTS0°37'10"W 2704.00S0°11'26"E 2628.83N89°25'08"E 2661.33N89°59'43"E 2696.54C.C.R.115724L.B.7917S89°51'19"W 5237.38 S. LINE SEC. 15S89°48'30"W150.00C.C.R.083010NAIL(D) N85°00'00"E 676.83(M) N89°06'25"E 676.70S0°05'22"E 1320.65N. 1/4 CORNER SEC. 15FOUNDFOUNDIRON PIN X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 659.2'83.5'132.5'132.3'83.7'671.7'75.7'63.7'FARMBUILDINGS15 1422 23SETN0°07'26"W 5259.44(D) 100'O.R.4322PG.134710 1115 14(M) S89°18'51"W 751.14STAMPEDCECOVERHEAD UTILITY LINES(M) N89°32'49"E 2030.52(D) S85°26'40"W 2030.60(D) N4°09'04"W 1320.73(M) S0°08'45"E 1319.97OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:34 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-023/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg2PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPSCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET300600GENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.EXHIBIT APage 6 of 10Page 7955 of 9661 L6L7L8SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 3SHEET 3SHEET 2SHEET 3FOUNDSETFOUNDSETFOUNDPIN & CAPSTAMPED AMSFOUNDFOUNDPIN & CAPNO I.D.13 1824 1914 1323 2412 713 18C.C.R.116412C.C.R.115811PIN & CAPL.B.7917C.C.R.115722C.C.R.115723PIN & CAPL.B.7917C.C.R.116411UNPLATTED(N.E. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 13)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 13)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 13)(AMS) 2328.84(C&M) N89°38'42"E 2331.62 N. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 14(AMS) 2421.88(C&M) S44°58'17"E 2419.10S.W. R.O.W. LINES44°59'05"E 2800.04S.W. R.O.W. LINES44°59'05"E 2023.22S.W. R.O. W. LINEO.R.962, PG.1289(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)OVERHEADUTILITY LINESS89°38'10"W242.07S2°15'49"E254.08S2°15'49"E 2430.13S1°31'37"E329.67S89°01'23"W315.26S89°01'23"W 2253.76N89°01'23"E 2569.02N1°36'55"W 2360.58S1°36'55"E298.69S89°33'32"W287.00N89°33'32"E 2312.62S89°59'43"W 2696.54N0°57'05"W 2655.96N89°25'14"E 2634.91N0°57'18"W 2693.16S2°15'36"E 2684.10C.C.R.115721FOUNDOVERHEAD UTILITY LINESSTATE RD. 29 S.11 1214 13MONITORING WELLSLINE TABLELINE #L6L7L8LENGTH730.20680.17729.89BEARINGS44°59'18"WS44°58'03"EN45°00'39"EOFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:44 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg3PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.EXHIBIT APage 7 of 10Page 7956 of 9661 (AMS) 2306.51(M) S0°31'11"E 2301.77 E. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2617.95(M) S0°38'38"E 2631.42 E. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2647.52(M) S89°44'23"W 2614.52 S. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2643.02(M) S89°44'08"W 2613.84 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2673.51(M) S89°34'23"W 2672.75 S. LINE. OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 23SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 5SHEET 4S89°22'16"W80.09S89°03'11"W79.9424 1925 3023 2426 25C.C.R. 116415WITNESS PIN L.B.7917WITNESS PIN L.B.7917L.B.7917C.C.R. 116416N89°26'24"E 2591.61N0°08'59"W 2612.76S89°19'18"W 2591.67N0°08'37"W 2617.81S0°20'51"W 2599.23S0°21'10"W 2599.67L.B.7917COLLIER MONUMENTCOLLIER MONUMENTUNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(N.E. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(SEC. 25)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)UNPLATTED(SEC. 26)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)UNPLATTED(SEC. 23)S.R. 29 S.OVERHEADUTILITY LINESL.B.7917OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:54 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg4PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.EXHIBIT APage 8 of 10Page 7957 of 9661 C5L14N0°17'33"W 2088.76C7C6L15L10C2L11C3L12C4L13N0°15'34"W 2601.35(AMS) 2670.60(M) S89°38'46"W 2671.33 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 23SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 5SHEET 4SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 5(D) 100.0'O.R.4322PG.1347(D) 100.0'IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R.846)22 2327 26CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE)O.R.4322, PG.1377WIDTH VARIES150' WIDTHO.R.4322, PG.1377CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE) (O.R.1579, PG.1732)O.R.4322,PG.1354LANDSINCLUDED INSURVEYUNPLATTED(SEC. 23)UNPLATTED(SEC. 22)UNPLATTED(SEC. 26)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)S89°41'38"W 5261.34S89°41'38"W 80.00S89°41'38"W 39.68W. LINE SEC. 22N0°15'34"W 5249.84N89°56'38"W 100.19N89°55'57"W 100.18N0°14'18"E 2635.38N0°37'25"W 2599.57N0°18'18"W 60.85CURVE TABLECURVE #C2C3C4C5C6C7LENGTH533.72584.69848.23722.57529.01151.51RADIUS760.00840.00540.00460.00760.00840.00DELTA40°14'11"39°52'53"89°59'58"90°00'00"39°52'53"10°20'04"CHORD BEARINGN19°49'24"EN20°00'03"EN44°56'23"WS44°56'24"ES20°00'03"WS34°46'27"WCHORD LENGTH522.82572.96763.68650.54518.39151.31LINE TABLELINE #L10L11L12L13L14L15L16LENGTH60.69543.45600.00164.71164.27600.00543.45BEARINGN0°17'42"WN39°56'29"EN0°03'36"EN89°56'24"WS89°56'24"ES0°03'36"WS39°56'29"WL16SETFOUND IRON ROD0.45' S.E.FOUND IRON ROD0.65' N.E.L.B.69030.65' N.E.C.C.R.83011S.W. COR. SEC.22,T.47S., R.29E.SETL.B.2022L.B.2022L.B.2022IRON PINL.B.2022SETL.B.2022IRON PINL.B.2022COLLIER MONUMENTIRON PINTT X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X CAMP KEAIS RD.IMMOKALEE RD.OVERHEADUTILITYLINESUNPAVED RD.POST ANDWIRE FENCEASPHALTROAD ANDAPRONASPHALTROAD ANDAPRONO.R.4998PG.865O.R.4998PG.865GAS VALVEVAULTSWEST LINE SEC.2280' R.O.W.O.R.1579, PG.1732200'O.R.4322PG.1354OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:02:04 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg5PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.DETAIL SCALE: 1" = 200'SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.EXHIBIT APage 9 of 10Page 7958 of 9661 S0°04'00"W 5379.12 E. LINE SEC. 27S89°06'34"W 2674.38 S. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 27S89°09'03"W 2587.98 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 27L9C1N0°15'32"W 4936.51SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE) (O.R.1579, PG.1732)120' WIDEO.R.4322, PG.1377S0°15'41"E 5431.65 W. LINE SEC. 271" IRON PIPES.W. COR. SEC.27PIN & CAPSTAMPED AIMCONC.MONUMENTRANCH ONE RD.(60' WIDE) (O.R.1376, PG.51)2833 34L.B.2022SETL.B.2022UNPLATTED(SEC. 27)UNPLATTED(SEC. 34)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)S89°09'03"W88.1627 2634 35LINE TABLELINE #L9LENGTH91.74BEARINGN5°51'03"ECURVE TABLECURVE #C1LENGTH403.88RADIUS3787.51DELTA6°06'35"CHORD BEARINGN2°47'45"ECHORD LENGTH403.69OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:02:14 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg6PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.EXHIBIT APage 10 of 10Page 7959 of 9661 ZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: RESIDENTIALZONING: GARDEN WALK VILLAGE PUDLAND USE: UNDEVELOPEDZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: COLLIER COUNTY SOLID &HAZARDOUS WASTEZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALZONING: A-MHO RLSAOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALCAMP KEAIS RDIMMOKALEE RDIMMOKALEE RDS.R. 29ZONING: A-MHO RLSAOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALINTERNAL ACCESS DRIVE(TYP)PIT OFFICES AND SCALEHOUSE(SEE SHEET 03)POTENTIAL FUTURE PITOFFICES AND SCALEHOUSE(SEE SHEET 03)ZONING: A-MHOLAND USE:RESIDENTIALZONING: A-MHOLAND USE:UNDEVELOPEDWRAWRAWRAINGRESS/EGRESS TOCAMP KEAIS RDPOTENTIAL FUTURECONNECTION TO SR29200± LF 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFERSUBJECT TOCONDITION #21QUARRY LAKEAREA = 204.1 (AC)OUTDOOR STORAGE/ EQUIPMENT/MININGOPERATIONSTIRE WASHCODE - REQUIRED BUFFER,SUBJECT TO CONDITION #20CODE - REQUIRED BUFFER,SUBJECT TO CONDITION #20805± LF 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFER(SEE NOTE #3)1,228± LF 10' TYPE 'A'LANDSCAPE BUFFER(SEE NOTE #3)••••••CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 8/11/2025 1:36:53 PM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:38:58 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-1.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINECONCEPTUAL SITEPLANSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251' = 3000'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-1.dwgX17-101 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1' = 3000'LEGEND:PROPERTY BOUNDARYW.R.A.LAKE (QUARRYEXCAVATION AREA)EXTERNAL ACCESSPROJECT BOUNDARYPage 7960 of 9661EXHIBIT Bpage 1 of 6 • • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:49:17 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:02 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-2.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINENOTESSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 2025N/AP-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-2.dwgX17-202 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SITE DATA:TOTAL SITE AREA: 3,937.88 ACRESCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: AGRICULTURALFUTURE LAND USE: AGRICULTURAL RURAL MIXED-USE DISTRICT RLSAO (SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY) URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT-LOW RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT (NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY)GENERAL NOTES:1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND SUBJECT TOMODIFICATIONS.2. RETAINED NATIVE VEGETATION MAY BE USED TO SATISFYLANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTIC VEGETATIONREMOVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 4.06.02 AND4.06.05.E.1. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITH NATIVE PLANTMATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC 3.05.07.3. EXISTING VEGETATION TO BE RETAINED SATISFIES BUFFERREQUIREMENTS. SHOULD THE EXISTING VEGETATION BEREMOVED OR DESTROYED, SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WILL BEPROVIDED AS NECESSARY TO MEET BUFFER REQUIREMENTS.PRESERVE:PER LDC SECTION 3.05.07.B.2, THE SITE DOES NOT REQUIRE A PRESERVE AREA.OPEN SPACE:*MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED = 30%Page 7961 of 9661EXHIBIT Bpage 2 of 6 SCALE (BY OTHERS)FUTURE SCALEHOUSE (650± SF)PROPOSED PITOFFICES ANDSCALE HOUSEDUMP TRUCK STACKINGAPPROX. 5,000± LFTO CAMP KEAIS RD• • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:49:08 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:08 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-3.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINEPIT OFFICE ANDSCALE HOUSESILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 100'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-3.dwgX17-303 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE:1" = 100'ZONINGCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: VACANT / AGRICULTURALBUILDING SETBACKSMIN. FRONT AND REAR YARDS: 50'MIN. SIDE YARD: 30'EXCAVATION: 50'PARKING CALCULATIONSL.D.C. 4.05.04OFFICE/SCALEHOUSE: 1 PER 300 SFHANDICAPPED: 1 SPACE PER 25REGULAR SPACES1 PER 300 SF @ 650 SF = 3 REQUIRED PARKING SPACESPROVIDED: 4 PARKING SPACES(INCLUDES 1 ADA SPACES)PROJECTBOUNDARY(TYP)Page 7962 of 9661EXHIBIT Bpage 3 of 6 PROJECT BOUNDARY(TYP)PROPOSED LAKE(QUARRY EXCAVATION AREA)(AREA = 204.1 AC.)OUTDOOR STORAGE / EQUIPMENT /MINING OPERATIONSEXCAVATIONLIMITS (TYP)INTERNALACCESS DRIVEWRAWRA••••••CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:55:53 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:13 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-4.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINEEXCAVATION AREASILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 600'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-4.dwgX17-404 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1" = 600'ZONINGCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: VACANT / AGRICULTURALBUILDING SETBACKSMIN. SIDE, REAR AND ABUTTING PROPERTY LINES: 50'MIN. FROM ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL: 100'MIN. FROM PRIVATE ACCESS ESMT: 50'MIN. SIDE YARD: 30'EXCAVATION: 50'Page 7963 of 9661EXHIBIT Bpage 4 of 6 TIRE WASH(BY OTHERS)PROPOSED 30'±PAVEMENTPROJECT BOUNDARY(TYP)CAMP KEAIS ROADPROPERTY BOUNDARY(TYP)300'±NOTE:FINAL COMPONENTS ANDCONFIGURATION OF TIRE WASH TO BEDETERMINED BY THE MINE OPERATOR.EXISTING COUNTY(PUBLIC) R.O.W.383'±• • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:51:38 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:19 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-5.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINETIRE WASHSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 100'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-5.dwgX17-505 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1" = 100'Page 7964 of 9661EXHIBIT Bpage 5 of 6 CONDITIONS 20 AND 21 Page 7965 of 9661 EXHIBIT B CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN EXHIBIT B page 6 of 6 K>>/ZKhEdz'KsZEDEd ϮϴϬϬEKZd,,KZ^^,KZ/s'ZKtd,DE'DEdWZdDEd EW>^͕&>KZ/ϯϰϭϬϰǁǁǁ͘ĐŽůůŝĞƌŐŽǀ͘ŶĞƚ ;ϮϯϵͿ ϮϱϮͲϮϰϬϬ&y͗;ϮϯϵͿϮϱϮͲϲϯϱϴ ϰͬϮϳͬϮϬϭϴWĂŐĞϭŽĨϲ sZ/EWd/d/KEWW>/d/KEsĂƌŝĂŶĐĞĨƌŽŵ^ĞƚďĂĐŬƐZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĨŽƌĂWĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌŽŶŝŶŐŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ>ƐĞĐƚŝŽŶϵ͘Ϭϰ͘ϬϬΘŽĚĞŽĨ>ĂǁƐƐĞĐƚŝŽŶϮͲϴϯʹϮͲϵϬ ŚĂƉƚĞƌϯ:͘ŽĨƚŚĞĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝǀĞŽĚĞ WZK:dEhDZ WZK:dED dWZK^^ WW>/EdKEdd/E&KZDd/KE EĂŵĞŽĨWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJKǁŶĞƌ;ƐͿ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ EĂŵĞŽĨƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚŝĨĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚƚŚĂŶŽǁŶĞƌ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺŝƚLJ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ/W͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺĞůů͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ&Ădž͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ͲDĂŝůĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ EĂŵĞŽĨŐĞŶƚ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ &ŝƌŵ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺŝƚLJ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ/W͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺ dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺĞůů͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ&Ădž͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ͲDĂŝůĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ tZd,dK>>/ZKhEdz,^>Kz/^dZ'h>d/KE^͘'h/zKhZ^>&KZ/E'>zE E^hZd,dzKhZ/EKDW>/Et/d,d,^Z'h>d/KE^͘ dŽďĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚďLJƐƚĂĨĨ ^ŝůǀĞƌ^ƚƌĂŶĚ///WĂƌƚŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ ϮϲϰϬ'ŽůĚĞŶ'ĂƚĞWŬǁLJ͕^ƵŝƚĞϮϬϭ EĂƉůĞƐ &>ϯϰϭϬϱ Ϯϯϵ͘ϰϬϯ͘ϲϳϬϬ 'ĞŶƐŽŶΛďĂƌƌŽŶĐŽůůŝĞƌ͘ĐŽŵ͖EĂƐĂůĂŶŐƵŝĚĂΛďĂƌƌŽŶĐŽůůŝĞƌ͘ĐŽŵ :ĞƐƐŝĐĂ,ĂƌƌĞůƐŽŶ͕/W WĞŶŝŶƐƵůĂŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ ϮϲϰϬ'ŽůĚĞŶ'ĂƚĞWŬǁLJ͕^ƵŝƚĞϮϬϭ EĂƉůĞƐ &>ϯϰϭϬϱ Ϯϯϵ͘ϰϬϯ͘ϲϳϱϭ ũŚĂƌƌĞůƐŽŶΛƉĞŶͲĞŶŐ͘ĐŽŵ E EĂŵĞŽĨŐĞŶƚ͗ZŝĐŚĂƌĚzŽǀĂŶŽǀŝĐŚ͕ƐƋ͘ &ŝƌŵ͗ŽůĞŵĂŶ͕zŽǀĂŶŽǀŝĐŚΘ<ŽĞƐƚĞƌ͕W͘͘ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ϰϬϬϭdĂŵŝĂŵŝdƌĂŝůE͕͘^ƵŝƚĞϯϬϬŝƚLJ͗EĂƉůĞƐ^ƚĂƚĞ͗&>/W͗ϯϰϭϬϯ dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ͗Ϯϯϵ͘ϰϯϱ͘ϯϱϯϱ ŵĂŝů͗ƌLJŽǀĂŶŽǀŝĐŚΛĐLJŬůĂǁĨŝƌŵ͘ĐŽŵ Page 7966 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 4/27/2018 Page 2 of 6 PROPERTY INFORMATION Provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page) Property I.D. Number: ____________________ Section/Township/Range: / / Subdivision: _____________________________________ Unit: _____Lot: Block: Metes & Bounds Description: __________________________________ Total Acreage: ______ Address/ General Location of Subject Property: ______________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Zoning Land Use N S E W Minimum Yard Requirements for Subject Property: Front: Corner Lot: Yes No Side: Waterfront Lot: Yes No Rear: Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must 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. 00138160003, 00138360007, 00138120001, 00137640003, 00138200002, 00137280007, 00137560002 13, 14, 15,22,2 3,24 & 27 47 29 3,937.88 East of Immokalee & Camp Keais Rds and West of SR 29 A-MHO/A-PU Undeveloped, CC Landfill, & Residential A-MHO-RLSAO Agricultural Lands/Undeveloped A-MHO-RSLAO/A-MHO/Kaicasa PUD SR 29/ Future Residential/Undeveloped A-MHO-RSLAO/A-MHO Camp Keais Rd & Immokalee Rd/ Agricultural Lands/Undeveloped 50' 30' 50' Page 7967 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 4/27/2018 Page 3 of 6 ASSOCIATIONS Complete the following for all registered Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner’s website at http://www.colliergov.net/Index.aspx?page=774. Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: _____ NATURE OF PETITION On a separate sheet, attached to the application, please provide the following: 1. A detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front setback from 25 ft. to 18 ft.; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (include building permit number(s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc. 2. For projects authorized under LDC Section 9.04.02, provide a detailed description of site alterations, including any dredging and filling. 3. Pursuant to LDC section 9.04.00, staff shall be guided in their recommendation to the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner shall be guided in the determination to approve or deny a variance petition by the criteria (a-h) listed below. Please address the following criteria: a) Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved. N/A Page 7968 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 4/27/2018 Page 4 of 6 b) Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. c) Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. d) Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety or welfare. e) Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. f) Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. g) Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. h) Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? 4. Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? Yes No If yes, please provide copies. Page 7969 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 4/27/2018 Page 5 of 6 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: Variance Chapter 3 J. of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW # OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Completed Application (download current form from County website) Pre-Application Meeting Notes 1 Project Narrative Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Conceptual Site Plan 24” x 36” and one 8 ½ ” x 11” copy Survey of property showing the encroachment (measured in feet) 2 Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 2 Deeds/Legal’s 3 Location map 1 Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial 5 Historical Survey or waiver request 1 Environmental Data Requirements or exemption justification 3 Once the first set of review comments are posted, provide the assigned planner the Property Owner Advisory Letter and Certification 1 Electronic copy of all documents and plans *Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. 1 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: x Following the completion of the review process by County review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager. x Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required. ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Page 7970 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 4/27/2018 Page 6 of 6 Planners: Indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following reviewers: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Historical Review City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Immokalee Water/Sewer District Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Ryan Parks and Recreation: David Berra Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or EMS: Artie Bay School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Other: FEE REQUIREMENTS Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 Variance Petition: o Residential- $2,000.00 o Non-Residential- $5,000.00 o 5th and Subsequent Review- 20% of original fee Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the Office of the Hearing Examiner: $1,125.00 After The Fact Zoning/Land Use Petitions: 2x the normal petition fee Listed Species Survey (if EIS is not required): $1,000.00 Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and the permit fee shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department Zoning Division ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 __________________________________ ____________________ Applicant Signature Date __________________________________ Printed Name dž dž dž dž dž Jessica Harrelson, AICP 12/1/2023 Page 7971 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine VA-PL20230001067 August 18, 2025 1 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 SILVER STRAND MINE VARIANCE PROJECT NARRATIVE AND DETAILS OF REQUEST This petition seeks to request a Variance, related to landscaping and site design requirements, for a proposed commercial excavation mining operation. The proposed development is within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. The project involves seven (7) separate parcels, collectively consisting of 3,937.88 acres, located in eastern Collier County within portions of Sections 13,14, 15, 22, 23, 24, and 27, Township 47 South and Range 29 East (the “property”). The mining is proposed within a small area of the overall property and is located internally to the site. Zoning & Future Land Use: The property is zoned Rural Agricultural Zoning District and Mobile Home Overlay, and most of the property is also within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO). The County’s Urban Designation Line bisects the property; consequently, the property is within two future land use designations. The northernmost portion of the property is Urban Mixed-Use District- Low Residential Subdistrict, per the Immokalee Area Master Plan Future Land Map, and the southern portion is designated Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. Refer to the Zoning and Future Land Use Exhibits, prepared by Peninsula Engineering. Requests, Commitments, and Justifications 1. Section 4.06.02.C (Table 2.4) of the Collier County Land Development Code - “Buffer Requirements”, requires commercial excavations to provide a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer adjacent to residential development, a 10’ Type ‘A’ buffer adjacent to agricultural uses, and a 20’ Type ‘D’ buffer adjacent to rights-of-way, whereas the Applicant is requesting to allow no buffers other than those identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. Developer Commitments: • The Owner will install an LDC required buffer within 180 days along any property boundary where an SRA, PUD, rezone, or other residential development has been approved on an adjacent property, unless development on the adjacent property includes the construction of a perimeter berm that is a minimum of 7’ in height, as measured from Finished Floor Elevation of the adjacent site. (Condition #20, within the companion Conditional Use.) • The Owner will install 200 LF of a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer adjacent to the abutting residential parcel along the eastern property boundary. This buffer will wrap the corner of the subject property line, providing 100 LF on each side. Refer to the conceptual site plan prepared by Peninsula Engineering. (Condition #21, within the companion Conditional Use.) Page 7972 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine VA-PL20230001067 August 18, 2025 2 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 • Existing vegetation will be retained along the northern property line, where the site is adjacent to residential uses and a public park. Should the existing vegetation be removed or destroyed, supplemental plantings will be provided as necessary to meet buffer requirements. (Note #3 on the Conceptual Site Plan.) Justifications: • The excavation mine, and ancillary uses, have been strategically located internal to the property to provide significant setbacks from all boundaries, which mitigate impacts to adjacent properties and rights-of-way. • The property consists of several Water Retention Areas (WRAs) and other heavily vegetated areas and wetlands, which will not be impacted by the proposed development. These areas of vegetation screen the earth mining activities from adjacent uses and rights-of-way. • The site has historically been used for agricultural purposes and will continue to be used for agricultural purposes outside of the proposed earthmining activities. • The excavation mine’s hours of operation are limited to mostly daylight hours, including 6:30 am-5 pm, Monday-Friday, and 7 am-3 pm, Saturdays; thus, eliminating potential impacts from headlight glare on neighboring properties. • The scale house is the only planned structure associated with the excavation mine. This structure is located about a mile from Camp Keais Road and will be a one-story construction trailer; thus, it will have no negative impacts on adjacent properties or rights-of-way. • Posted speed limits along Camp Keais Rd, Immokalee Rd, and SR 29, together with the distance of mining activities from these rights-of-way, mitigate impact to viewsheds. x A letter of support has been received from Habitat for Humanity, representing the Kaicasa residential development across SR 29 from the subject property. The Kaicasa RPUD is buffered from the site by SR 29, and an existing 20’ Type ‘D’ landscape buffer and preserve on the Kaicasa site. x If a separate lot were created of just the conditional use area, the proposed mining and ancillary uses would be adjacent to agricultural zoning/uses under the same ownership. x The property is mostly adjacent to agriculturally zoned properties. Earth mining activities have no negative impacts on lands used for agricultural purposes. The County’s Land Development Code does not consider the large tracts of land needed for earth mining and agricultural activities, and the compatibility between these uses. Surrounding land uses and zoning include: North o A-MHO: Undeveloped lands o A-PU: The Immokalee landfill o A-MHO: Residential development o A-MHO: Undeveloped lands under common ownership South o A-MHO-RLSAO: Agricultural uses/ row crops East o A-MHO-RLSAO: Agricultural uses/ row crops and pockets of wetlands o A-MHO: Residential o SR 29 / Undeveloped lands beyond Page 7973 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine VA-PL20230001067 August 18, 2025 3 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 West o Immokalee Road/ undeveloped agricultural lands beyond 2. Section 4.05.02. B.1 of the Land Development Code requires parking lots and parking spaces to be surfaced with asphalt, bituminous, concrete, or dustless material, and driveways, handicapped spaces, and access aisles to be paved, whereas the Applicant is requesting that no paving be required on-site past the tire wash, as identified on the site plan. Developer Commitments: x Handicapped spaces will comply with ADA requirements. This is included in Condition #10, within the companion Conditional Use. x A Dust Control Plan has been submitted with the Excavation Permit, as required by Condition #10 within the companion Conditional Use. x The area surrounding and between the tire wash and the right-of-way will be paved to LDC minimum requirements, as noted in Condition #10 within the companion Conditional Use. Justifications: x The Silver Strand Mine will not be open to the general public. The internal access way will be used by haul trucks to move excavated materials. x Not paving the internal haul route is consistent with other mining projects in Collier County; refer to images provided of other mining projects. 3. Section 4.06.05 C. of the Land Development Code requires building foundation plantings, whereas the Applicant is requesting to eliminate building foundation plantings for the scale house/office, as identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. Justifications: x The Silver Strand Mine will not be open to the general public. x The scale house is located about a mile from the Camp Keais right-of-way; therefore, this request has no visual impact on neighboring properties or vehicles. x The scale house is a proposed construction trailer and not a permanent building/structure. It will be removed from the site after completion of earth mining activities. 4. Section 4.02.12 of the Land Development Code requires that outdoor storage areas, including but not limited to manufactured products, raw or finished materials, or vehicles other than vehicles intended for sale, be screened with a fence or equivalent landscaping or combination thereof, not less than 7 feet in height, whereas the Applicant is requesting to eliminate this requirement surrounding the proposed “Outdoor Storage/Equipment/Mining/Operations” area identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. Justifications: x The “Outdoor Storage/Equipment/Mining/Operations” area is screened by a heavily vegetated WRA. Page 7974 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine VA-PL20230001067 August 18, 2025 4 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 x The location of these outdoor uses were strategically located internal to the site, to not have negative impacts on adjacent properties. x Adding a 7-foot-high berm, landscaping, wall, or combination thereof around this area would interfere with day-to-day activities and routine work, as it would isolate this area from the excavation activities. Unrestricted access to this area is needed to perform daily operations. Nature of Petition 1. A detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e., reduce front setback from 25 ft. to 18 ft.; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (include building permit number(s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc. Response: The literal interpretation of the Land Development Code requires certain site design and landscaping requirements that are burdensome and unnecessary for the proposed mining project. The Variance seeks the following: 1. Section 4.06.02.C (Table 2.4) of the Collier County Land Development Code - “Buffer Requirements”, requires commercial excavations to provide a 20’ Type ‘C’ buffer adjacent to residential development, a 10’ Type ‘A’ buffer adjacent to agricultural uses, and a 20’ Type ‘D’ buffer adjacent to rights-of-way, whereas the Applicant is requesting to allow no buffers other than those identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. 2. Section 4.05.02. B.1 of the Land Development Code requires parking lots and parking spaces to be surfaced with asphalt, bituminous, concrete, or dustless material, and driveways, handicapped spaces, and access aisles to be paved, whereas the Applicant is requesting that no paving be required on-site past the tire wash, as identified on the site plan. 3. Section 4.06.05 C. of the Land Development Code requires building foundation plantings, whereas the Applicant is requesting to eliminate building foundation plantings for the scale house/office, as identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. 4. Section 4.02.12 of the Land Development Code requires that outdoor storage areas, including but not limited to manufactured products, raw or finished materials, or vehicles other than vehicles intended for sale, be screened with a fence or equivalent landscaping or combination thereof, not less than 7 feet in height, whereas the Applicant is requesting to eliminate this requirement surrounding the proposed “Outdoor Storage/Equipment/Mining/Operations” area identified on the Conceptual Site Plan. 2. For projects authorized under LDC Section 9.04.02, provide a detailed description of site alterations, including any dredging and filling. Page 7975 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine VA-PL20230001067 August 18, 2025 5 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Response: A commercial excavation mine is planned on a portion of the subject property, with a minimum lifespan of 12 years and a maximum lifespan of 20 years, from the date of Conditional Use approval by the Board of County Commissioners. The mining operation will include dredging. 3. Pursuant to LDC section 9.04.00, staff shall be guided in their recommendation to the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner shall be guided in the determination to approve or deny a variance petition by the criteria (a-h) listed below. Please address the following criteria: a) Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved. Response: The proposed development is located within the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, and Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay. The property is mostly surrounded by undeveloped, agricultural lands. The mining and ancillary uses have been strategically located to eliminate impacts on neighboring properties and rights-of-way. b) Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. Response: There are no special conditions or circumstances, such as pre-existing conditions relative to the subject property. c) Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. Response: Yes, the code requires certain site design and landscaping requirements, which are unnecessary due to the proximity of the mining activities to adjacent zoning/land uses. These code requirements would result in the installation of several miles of unnecessary landscape buffers and other landscaping requirements, and unnecessary internal paving. The provisions of the code create an undue hardship and create practical difficulties for the applicant’s desire to use a very small area of their land for mining activities. The proposed excavation mine has been strategically located to not have negative impacts on adjacent properties and rights-of-way. d) Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety, or welfare. Response: Granting this variance will be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of land. The requests have no negative impact on public health safety or welfare. The requests do not negatively impact the surrounding neighborhood. Granting this variance is needed to make the project feasible and successful. Page 7976 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine VA-PL20230001067 August 18, 2025 6 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 e) Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. Response: No, granting this variance request will not confer any special privilege to other lands, buildings, or structures within the same zoning district. f) Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Response: The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the zoning codes and will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood. g) Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. Response: The subject property contains heavily vegetated Water Retention Areas (WRAs), as well as other pockets of vegetation and wetlands throughout the site. These vegetated areas will not be impacted by the proposed mine and provide screening of the proposed development. Most of the subject property is surrounded by a wide expanse of undeveloped land and/or agricultural uses. The mining and ancillary uses have been located internal to the property to eliminate impacts on neighboring properties and rights-of-way. h) Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? Response: The granting of the variance is consistent with the Growth Management Plan. Page 7977 of 9661 %BWJE(FOTPO 1SFTJEFOUPG%FWFMPQNFOU PL20230001067 Page 7978 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest: Name and Address % of Ownership b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each: Name and Address % of Ownership c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest: Name and Address % of Ownership Page 7979 of 9661 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 2 of 3 d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners: Name and Address % of Ownership e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: ___________ f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust: Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired _______________ Leased: Term of lease ____________ years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Page 7980 of 9661 Silver Strand III Partnership 100% (See Attached Information) 8/20/1990 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3 Date of option: _________________________ Date option terminates: __________________, or Anticipated closing date: ________________ AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest-holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition’s final public hearing. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Agent/Owner Name (please print) Page 7981 of 9661 Jessica Harrelson, AICP, Agent 4/5/2023 OWNERSHIP DETAIL 08/26/16SILVER STRAND III PARTNERSHIP GP Juliet C. Sproul FamilyInheritance Trust 26.228571% GP Barron G. Collier Lifetime Irrevocable Trust 26.228571% GP Michael Wells Gable 6.557143% GP Robert Blakeslee Gable 6.557143% GP Phyllis G. Alden Lifetime Irrevocable Trust 17.214286% GP Mathilde V. Currence 6.421429% GP Christopher D. Villere 4.371429% GP Lamar G. Villere 6.421429% Page 7982 of 9661 ¯010.5MilesSILVER STRAND MINEEAST OF IMMOKALEE RD, WEST OF SR 29LOCATION MAPC:\Users\jharrelson\Desktop\NAPLES BOAT YARD\2024-08-26-Location-Map.mxdDate Saved: 9/12/2024 PROJECT:NOTES:EXHIBIT DESC:2600 Golden Gate ParkwayNaples, FL 34105CLIENT:LOCATION:SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2024)LegendSilver Strand Parternship Property BoundaryExcavation Area: +/-204-acresUrban BoundaryWRAIngress/EgressSILVER STRAND III PARTNERSHIPHaul RoadHaul RoadHaul RoadPontential FutureSR 29 ConnectionOne-StoryScalehousePotential FutureOne-Story ScalehouseIngress/EgressPotential Future Haul RoadSR29SR29Immokalee RDURBAN DESIGNATION LINEURBAN DESIGNATION LINECamp Keais DEquipment & StagingStockade RDPage 7983 of 9661 ZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: RESIDENTIALZONING: GARDEN WALK VILLAGE PUDLAND USE: UNDEVELOPEDZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: COLLIER COUNTY SOLID &HAZARDOUS WASTEZONING: A-MHOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALZONING: A-MHO RLSAOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALCAMP KEAIS RDIMMOKALEE RDIMMOKALEE RDS.R. 29ZONING: A-MHO RLSAOLAND USE: AGRICULTURALINTERNAL ACCESS DRIVE(TYP)PIT OFFICES AND SCALEHOUSE(SEE SHEET 03)POTENTIAL FUTURE PITOFFICES AND SCALEHOUSE(SEE SHEET 03)ZONING: A-MHOLAND USE:RESIDENTIALZONING: A-MHOLAND USE:UNDEVELOPEDWRAWRAWRAINGRESS/EGRESS TOCAMP KEAIS RDPOTENTIAL FUTURECONNECTION TO SR29200± LF 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFERSUBJECT TOCONDITION #21QUARRY LAKEAREA = 204.1 (AC)OUTDOOR STORAGE/ EQUIPMENT/MININGOPERATIONSTIRE WASHCODE - REQUIRED BUFFER,SUBJECT TO CONDITION #20CODE - REQUIRED BUFFER,SUBJECT TO CONDITION #20805± LF 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFER(SEE NOTE #3)1,228± LF 10' TYPE 'A'LANDSCAPE BUFFER(SEE NOTE #3)••••••CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 8/11/2025 1:36:53 PM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:38:58 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-1.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINECONCEPTUAL SITEPLANSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251' = 3000'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-1.dwgX17-101 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1' = 3000'LEGEND:PROPERTY BOUNDARYW.R.A.LAKE (QUARRYEXCAVATION AREA)EXTERNAL ACCESSPROJECT BOUNDARYPage 7984 of 9661 • • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:49:17 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:02 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-2.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINENOTESSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 2025N/AP-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-2.dwgX17-202 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SITE DATA:TOTAL SITE AREA: 3,937.88 ACRESCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: AGRICULTURALFUTURE LAND USE: AGRICULTURAL RURAL MIXED-USE DISTRICT RLSAO (SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY) URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT-LOW RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT (NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY)GENERAL NOTES:1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND SUBJECT TOMODIFICATIONS.2. RETAINED NATIVE VEGETATION MAY BE USED TO SATISFYLANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTIC VEGETATIONREMOVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 4.06.02 AND4.06.05.E.1. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITH NATIVE PLANTMATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDC 3.05.07.3. EXISTING VEGETATION TO BE RETAINED SATISFIES BUFFERREQUIREMENTS. SHOULD THE EXISTING VEGETATION BEREMOVED OR DESTROYED, SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WILL BEPROVIDED AS NECESSARY TO MEET BUFFER REQUIREMENTS.PRESERVE:PER LDC SECTION 3.05.07.B.2, THE SITE DOES NOT REQUIRE A PRESERVE AREA.OPEN SPACE:*MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED = 30%Page 7985 of 9661 SCALE (BY OTHERS)FUTURE SCALEHOUSE (650± SF)PROPOSED PITOFFICES ANDSCALE HOUSEDUMP TRUCK STACKINGAPPROX. 5,000± LFTO CAMP KEAIS RD• • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:49:08 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:08 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-3.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINEPIT OFFICE ANDSCALE HOUSESILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 100'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-3.dwgX17-303 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE:1" = 100'ZONINGCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: VACANT / AGRICULTURALBUILDING SETBACKSMIN. FRONT AND REAR YARDS: 50'MIN. SIDE YARD: 30'EXCAVATION: 50'PARKING CALCULATIONSL.D.C. 4.05.04OFFICE/SCALEHOUSE: 1 PER 300 SFHANDICAPPED: 1 SPACE PER 25REGULAR SPACES1 PER 300 SF @ 650 SF = 3 REQUIRED PARKING SPACESPROVIDED: 4 PARKING SPACES(INCLUDES 1 ADA SPACES)PROJECTBOUNDARY(TYP)Page 7986 of 9661 PROJECT BOUNDARY(TYP)PROPOSED LAKE(QUARRY EXCAVATION AREA)(AREA = 204.1 AC.)OUTDOOR STORAGE / EQUIPMENT /MINING OPERATIONSEXCAVATIONLIMITS (TYP)INTERNALACCESS DRIVEWRAWRA••••••CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:55:53 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:13 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-4.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINEEXCAVATION AREASILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 600'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-4.dwgX17-404 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1" = 600'ZONINGCURRENT ZONING: A-MHO-RLSAO AND A-MHOCURRENT LAND USE: VACANT / AGRICULTURALBUILDING SETBACKSMIN. SIDE, REAR AND ABUTTING PROPERTY LINES: 50'MIN. FROM ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL: 100'MIN. FROM PRIVATE ACCESS ESMT: 50'MIN. SIDE YARD: 30'EXCAVATION: 50'Page 7987 of 9661 TIRE WASH(BY OTHERS)PROPOSED 30'±PAVEMENTPROJECT BOUNDARY(TYP)CAMP KEAIS ROADPROPERTY BOUNDARY(TYP)300'±NOTE:FINAL COMPONENTS ANDCONFIGURATION OF TIRE WASH TO BEDETERMINED BY THE MINE OPERATOR.EXISTING COUNTY(PUBLIC) R.O.W.383'±• • • • • • CLIENT:TITLE:PROJECT:Sheet Number: ofFile Name:Project Number:Drawing Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC: RGE:TWP:[Save Date: 7/21/2025 11:51:38 AM] [By: AAvila] [Plot Date: 8/11/2025 1:39:19 PM] [By: Alejandro Avila] [Original Size: 8.5X11] [Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Drawings-Civil\C00-Exhibits\X17-ConditionalUse\Sheet_Files\P-SS03-001-001-X17-5.dwg]Sheet ID:Florida Engineering C.A #28275Florida Landscape C.A #LC26000632SILVER STRANDMINETIRE WASHSILVER STRAND III, LLC.JOHN ENGLISH, P.E.JASON LIGHTELLAUGUST 20251" = 100'P-SS03-001-001P-SS03-001-001-X17-5.dwgX17-505 0514, 15 47S 29EREVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105SCALE: 1" = 100'Page 7988 of 9661 1" = 2000'WRA1" = 2000'S.R.29PROPOSED 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFER(100 LF)1" = 100'PROPOSED 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFER(100 LF)15 SOUTHERNRED CEDARSSINGLE ROW10' HT, 15' OC18 SLASH PINE 'DENSA'STAGGERED ROW6', 10', 14' HTS @ 12'-15' OC6 FT WALL, FENCE,HEDGE, OR BERMScale: 1" = 10'SECTIOND-11820222426PROP PROJECT SITEEXISTING RESIDENTIALPROPOSED 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFER⅊1820222426161628283030323234343636EXISTING GRADE1820222426283018202224262830PROP PROJECT SITEEXISTING RESIDENTIALPROPOSED 20' TYPE 'C'LANDSCAPE BUFFER⅊32323434363638381616Scale: 1" = 10'SECTIOND-2EXISTING GRADE00#### ##### ##### ##### #####Bar Scale: 1" = #####DATUM NOTE:ALL ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NAVD 88(NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988).PROJECT:TITLE:CLIENT:PROFESSIONAL SEALS:File Name:Project Number:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:City:B11EDCACounty:[Save Date: 12/6/2023 10:57:53 AM] [Saved By: DStivers] [Plot Date: 12/6/2023 10:59:59 AM] [Plotted By: David Stivers] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\002_SilverStrand_III_Excavation Plan\Drawings-Civil\Exhibits\X01\P-SS03-001-002-X01A_Landscaping.dwg]2233445566PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER:FLORIDA LICENSE NUMBER:SEC: RGE:TWP:Florida Engineering Certificate of Authorization #28275Florida Landscape Certificate of Authorization #LC26000632Sheet ID:Sheet Number:ofNOTES:SILVERSTRAND MINESECTION D-1 AND D-2SILVER STRAND IIIPARTNERSHIPCARL THRUSHMAN, P.E.8649914, 15 47S 29EIMMOKALEE COLLIERJOSHUA FRUTHDAVID J. STIVERSDECEMBER 20231" = 2000'N.T.S.P-SS03-001-002P-SS03-001-002-X01A_Landscaping.dwgX01A11• • • • • • Pen-Eng.com2600 Golden Gate PkwyNaples, FL 34105REVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:D-14D-24LEGENDSILVER STRAND MINE (PROJECT BOUNDARY)SILVER STRAND MINE PROPERTY BOUNDARYPage 7989 of 9661 Silver Strand Mine Environmental Data PREPARED BY: PENINSULA ENGINEERING 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 April 2023 Revised December 2023 _ BRUCE LAYMAN, SPWS Page 7990 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 2 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports TABLE OF CONTENTS1.INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................32.PROJECT METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................................32.1.Listed Wildlife Survey....................................................................................................................32.2.ListedPlant Survey........................................................................................................................4 2.3.Habitat/WetlandMapping............................................................................................................4 3.SURVEY RESULTS...................................................................................................................................4 3.1.Listed Wildlife Species Observed/IdentifiedOn Site.....................................................................4 3.2.Listed Wildlife Species Not Observed On-Site But With Potential to Occur On Site....................5 3.3.Listed Plant Species Observed On Site..........................................................................................6 3.4.Habitat/Wetland Mapping –Native Preserve...............................................................................6 4.SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................................6 5.REFERENCES CITED................................................................................................................................7 TABLES Table 1 - Listed Species and VegetationSurvey Details..............................................................................10 Table 2 - Listed Plant and WildlifeSpecies Observed.................................................................................10 Table 3 - Non-listed Wildlife Species Observed..........................................................................................10 Table 4 - Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Faunal Species...........................11 Table 5 - Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Floral Species...........................11 Table 6 - Existing Vegetative Associations and Land Uses........................................................................11 APPENDICES Appendix A - Existing Vegetation Association & Land Use Descriptions FIGURES Figure 1 - Existing Conditions Figure 2 – Bear Incident Location Map Figure 3 – Panther Habitat and Telemetry Map Page 7991 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 3 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports 1.INTRODUCTIONPeninsula Engineering (PE) entered into an agreement to provide environmental services associated with a 272.03-acre parcel known as the Silver Strand Mine (the Mine). The project includes the proposed mine, a weigh station, water management, and two potential access roads – one to Camp Keais Road and one to SR 29. The Environmental Data author credentials include undergraduate and graduate degrees in the environmental sciences and full-time employment as an Environmental Consultant/Ecologist in Lee and Collier Counties since 1992. The fill pit is located in Sections 13 and 14; Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. It is recently fallow citrus grove being converted to row crop agriculture and long- fallow date palm plantation; and it is bordered on the north, south, and west by abandoned citrus grove that is in various stages of being converted to row-crop agriculture, and on the east by agricultural water retention area (WRA). The two entry roads traverse abandoned citrus grove and active row-crop agriculture. The protected species survey was conducted, and the results summarized herein, to support local, state, and federal environmental permitting. 2.PROJECTMETHODOLOGY Bruce Layman, PE Ecologist, conducted a listed species survey consistent with Collier County Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Objective 7.1 and its implementing policies and with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission standards on the subject property. The dates, times and weather conditions are summarized in Table 1. The following information describes the methodologies employed. 2.1.Listed WildlifeSurvey Prior to conducting the listed species surveys, color aerial imagery was reviewed to anticipate which habitats may be present. Various publications and databases were also reviewed to identify listed plant and wildlife species that are regionally present and that could occur and those habitat types. Based on the habitat types identified on site, and the noted data sources, a preliminary list of state and federal listed flora and fauna that could occur on the project site was conceptualized to help focus survey effort. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s (FWC)Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species (FWC, 2021) was used to determine the “listed” state and federal status designation of wildlife species. The field survey consisted of one ecologist performing parallel meandering transects with spacing based on habitat type and visibility limits. Due to the agricultural and historically-managed nature of the whole property, transects were conducted with aid of an all-terrain vehicle. Transects are illustrated on Figure 1 entitled Existing Conditions. The field observer was equipped with a compass, GPS, color aerial, binoculars, and a field notebook. While conducting the transects, the ecologist periodically stopped, looked for wildlife, signs of wildlife, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. Due to habitats present (or, conversely, absence of natural habitats) and likelihood of occurrence (not to the exclusion of other potential listed species), the ecologist specifically surveyed for the potential presence of trees containing cavities that could be used by the Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus; FBB) for roosting. The approximate location of observed listed wildlife species and their numbers were mapped on an aerial and recorded in a field notebook. The locations of fixed resources, such as gopher tortoise burrows or cavity trees were recorded using hand-held GPS and flagged with high- visibility survey ribbon. Non-listed wildlife species were recorded daily. Page 7992 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 4 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports 2.2.Listed PlantSurveyOver the course of conducting the survey for listed wildlife, the PE ecologist searched for plants listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture (FDA) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)and those species defined by Collier County as rare and less rare. The state and federal agencies have categorized the various plant species based upon their relative abundance in natural communities. Those categorizations include “Endangered”, “Threatened”, and “Commercially Exploited”. The protection afforded plants listed solely by FDA entails restrictions on harvesting or destroying plants found on private lands of another, or public lands, without permission and/or a permit from FDA. Unless the sale of plants is involved, there are no restrictions for landowners to impact such plants. These provisions are found in Section 581.185, FDA under State law. Rare and less rare species are protected in accordance with Collier County LDC Section 3.04.03. 2.3.Habitat/WetlandMapping The habitat and wetland survey included the preparation of a Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) map delineating the major vegetation communities and land uses present on the project site. A FLUCCS Map for the project site is provided as Figure 1 entitled Existing Conditions. The methods and class descriptions found in the FLUCCS manual (FDOT, 1999) were followed when delineating and assigning areas to an appropriate FLUCCS category (class) or “codes”. Preliminary wetland limits were mapped using the standard state and federal wetland delineation methodologies and direct field observations and aerial photo interpretation. Color aerial photos were used in the field to map the vegetative communities on the site. Wet season high water (WSHW) elevation was not estimated due to the lack of wetlands and natural unmanaged surface waters, and the lack of signs of above-ground standing water. 3.SURVEYRESULTS 3.1.ListedWildlifeSpeciesObserved/Identified On Site Since the project falls within the federalAudubon’s crested caracara (Polyborus plancus audubonii) consultation area, and since caracaras are known to be regionally present in Eastern Collier County, the applicant initiated a caracara nesting-season surveyin January 2023-following FWS guidelines. The survey results will be coordinated with FWS, through Technical Assistance, to assure there is no net adverse impact on the species. The American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) is listed as Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance with the American crocodile. Alligators were observed within the agricultural ditches on site. The FWC will be consulted during state environmental permitting to minimize potential impacts to the species. No other state or federal listed wildlife species were observed on site during the listed species survey. The project site contains no FWS-designated listed species critical habitat. All non-listed wildlife species, either directly observed or audibly detected on site, are listed in Table 3. Page 7993 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 5 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports 3.2.Listed Wildlife Species Not Observed But With Potential to Occur OnSiteThe following is a discussion of listed wildlife species that were not observed during either survey, but which are considered to have potential to occur due to the presence of suitable habitat, confirmed sightings in the region, or the parcel’s being located within the consultation area for a given species. Species with greater than near zero potential to occur on site are summarized in Table 4.The site lacks wetlands; however, there are internal water management ditches associated with the orange grove and row-crop agriculture within which listed wading birds have the potential to opportunistically forage. Given the lack of natural shrubby or forested habitats within the project limits, on-site nesting by listed wading birds is unlikely. No listed wading bird rookeries are known to be located adjacent to the property. The Florida panther (Felis concolor coryi) is listed as Endangered by FWS and the site falls within the panther consultation area. The vast majority of the project is mapped by FWS as Secondary Panther habitat, and a small portion of the eastern edge of the project is Primary Panther Habitat (refer to Figure 3). No panther telemetry points fall within the project limits. Potential impacts to the species will be addressed through Technical Assistance from FWS. The Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus; FBB) is listed as Endangered by FWS and the site falls within the FWS consultation area for this species. There is relatively little known about the life- history needs of the species; however, it has been suggested in the literature that roosts may be a limiting resource for this bat. Additionally, given that the FBB is known to travel great distances to forage, there is potential for the species to commute or forage over the parcel. Since the project proposes to primarily convert fallow orange grove, row-crop, and tree nursery to open water, it is anticipated that the conversion will generate greater foraging opportunity for the bonneted bat. Also, during the listed species survey, the ecologist specifically searched for trees with cavities that could potentially be used as roosts by the FBB. The defunct on-site ornamental palm tree nursery contained both living and dead palms. None of the living palms were observed to contain cavities. Some dead palms were observed to contain cavities; however, it appeared that once the palms die, they quickly lose their fronds, deteriorate and become hollow, wither, and topple – providing little opportunity for cavities created by woodpecker species in the dead trunks to meaningfully persist and become potential roost sites for the bonneted bat. During the environmental permitting process, the FWS 2019 Consultation Key for the Florida Bonneted Bat will be followed to make an appropriate affect determination, and FWS will be consulted to minimize potential impacts on the species. The Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) is listed as Endangered by FWS. Indigo snakes inhabit pine forests, hardwood hammocks, scrub and other uplands. They also rely heavily on a variety of wetland habitats for feeding and temperature regulation needs. Though no indigo snakes were observed on site, it is often assumed by FWS that there may be potential for the species to be present. Adhering to the FWS standard Eastern Indigo Snake Protection Precautions may be proposed during environmental permitting as a means to minimize the potential adverse effect on the species. Though the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is not state or federally listed, it is protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. No eagle nest was observed on site. Per the Audubon EagleWatch Program website, https://cbop.audubon.org/conservation/about-eaglewatch- program, the nearest known eagle nest (nest CO021) is located approximately two miles northeast of the parcel. The site is located well beyond the protection zones of thatnest. Page 7994 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 6 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Regional bear incident data from FWC (Figure 2) suggest that bears (Ursus americanus floridanus) may not frequent the region; however, bears are known to occur in the region based upon personal experience by the report author. Though the black bear is no longer listed as protected, the FWC may suggest conservation measures, during the state environmental permitting process, to minimize potential adverse effects on thespecies.3.3.ListedPlantSpeciesObservedOn Site No species of listed plants (listed as Endangered per the FDA list; and identified as “less rare” by Collier County LDC) were observed on site during the field survey. Given the intensely managed nature of the property, none are anticipated to occur on site. No plant species listed by FWS were observed during the field survey. The listed plant species observed, and their state and federal listing status, are provided in Table 2. 3.4.Habitat/Wetland Mapping – NativePreserve The project site is composed entirely of orange grove (some of it abandoned and fallow, and some in the process of being converted to improved pasture) and palm tree nursery. There are no native vegetation communities located on site. The FLUCCS code along with a brief description and acreage are provided in Table 6 and a detailed description of the FLUCCS code is provided in AppendixA. Based upon current field conditions, and application of state/federal wetland delineation methodology, it is anticipated that there are no wetlands or surface waters on site. This has not been verified by either the South Florida Water Management District or the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (under the State 404 Program). Verification will take place during the respective environmental permit reviews. 4.SUMMARY Results of the survey reflect the presence of Audubon’s Crested caracaras and American alligators; and the project site contains potential foraging habitat for the bonneted bat, and both primary and secondary panther habitat. Potential impacts to the Audubon’s crested caracara, Florida bonneted bat, and Florida panther will be addressed through Technical Assistance with FWS to minimize potential adverse effects on these species. Potential impactsto the alligator,or listed wading birds, will be addressed with FWC during state environmental permitting. If, during the environmental permitting process, it is determined that there is potential for the Eastern indigo snake to occur on site, the FWS standard Eastern Indigo Snake Protection Precautions may be considered. Similarly, though not listed by either FWC or FWS, measures to protect the black bear may be considered during state environmental permitting if warranted by FWC. Since potential impact to state listed species will be addressed through consultation with FWC, and potential impact to federal listed species will be addressed through Technical Assistance with FWS, the proposed project is consistent with CCME Policy 7.1. No native habitat exists on site, so per LDC guidance, no native habitat is proposed to be preserved. Therefore, the project is consistent with CCME Policy 6.1.1. Page 7995 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 7 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports 5.REFERENCESCITEDFlorida Department of Transportation. 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. Procedure No. 550-010-001-a. Third Edition. Tallahassee, Florida.Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2021. Florida’s Endangered and ThreatenedSpecies, Official List. Tallahassee, Florida. Page 7996 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 9 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports TABLES Page 7997 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 10 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Table 1: Listed Species and Vegetation Survey DetailsEcologistDateTime of Day Weather Field HoursBruce Layman 03/20/23 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 a.m. 55°, mostly cloudy, wind NW at 5 mph 8.0Bruce Layman 08/21/23 1:00 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. 86°, mostly cloudy, wind E at 5-10 mph 2.5Bruce Layman 10/20/23 9:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. 72°, clear, calm 2.0 Total Hours 12.5 Table 2: Listed Plant and Wildlife Species Observed Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Where Observed By FLUCCS FWC Status FWS Status FDA Status PLANTS None WILDLIFE Audubon’s Crested caracara Polyborus plancus audubonii 221, 241 T T N/A American alligator Alligator mississippiensis 221 T(S/A)T(S/A)N/A FDA = Florida Department of Agriculture andConsumerServices FWC = Florida Fish and Wildlife ConservationCommission FWS = United States Fish &WildlifeService E = Endangered T(S/A) = Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance with the American crocodile. NL = Not Listed N/A = Not Applicable Table 3: Non-listed Wildlife Species Observed Common Name Scientific Name BIRDS Ground dove Columbina passerine Mourning dove Zenaida macroura American Kestrel **Falco sparverius Swallow tailed kite Elanoides forticatus Marsh hawk Circus cyaneus Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus Black vulture Coragyps atratus Turkey vulture Cathertes aura Limpkin Aramus guarauna Turvey Meleagris gallopavo Great blue heron Ardea herodias Great egret Ardea alba Loggerhead shrike Lanius ludovicianus AMPHIBIANS & REPTILES Black racer Coluber constrictor Brown anole Anolis sagrei MAMMALS Black bear Ursus americanus Eastern cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus White-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus Page 7998 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 11 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Table 4: Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Faunal SpeciesCommon Name Scientific Name Status (FWC/FWS)Estimated Occurrence*Habitat by FLUCCSProbablePossibleUnlikelyBIRDSLittle blue heron Egretta caerulea T/NL X Ag. ditchesSoutheastern American kestrel Falco sparverius paulus T/NL XTricolored heron Egretta tricolor T/NL X Ag. ditchesWood stork Mycteria americana T/T X Ag. ditches Roseate spoonbill Platalea ajaja T/NL X Ag. ditches MAMMALS Florida bonneted bat Eumops floridanus E/E X All Florida panther Puma concolor coryi E/E X All REPTILES Eastern indigo snake Drymarchon corais couperi T/T X All FWC = Florida Fish and Wildlife ConservationCommission FWS = UnitedStatesFishandWildlifeService T =Threatened E =Endangered NL = Notlisted * Probable Occurrence = >50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Possible Occurrence = <50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Unlikely Occurrence = <5% estimated chance of occurrence on site. ** Both migratory (non-listed) and non-migratory (listed) species present. So, subspecies identification indeterminant. Table 5: Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Floral Species Common Name Scientific Name Status (FDA/FWS) Estimated Occurrence*Habitat by FLUCCSProbablePossibleUnlikely N/A FWS = UnitedStatesFishandWildlifeService FDA = Food and Drug Administration E =Endangered CE = Commercially Exploited NL = Notlisted * Probable Occurrence = >50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Possible Occurrence = <50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Unlikely Occurrence = <5% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Table 6: Existing Vegetative Associations and Land Uses FLUCCS CODE FLUCCS DESCRIPTION Acres 214 Row crop 12.62 224 Abandoned groves 33.13 241 Tree nursery 110.36 740 Disturbed lands 113.95 8145 Graded and drained 1.97 TOTAL 272.03 Page 7999 of 9661 Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData 12 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports APPENDIX A Existing Vegetative Association & Land Use Descriptions Page 8000 of 9661 13 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalDataExisting Vegetative Association & Land Use Detailed DescriptionsRow Crops – (FLUCCS 214) – This is active row-crop agriculture including fields, internal unpaved roads, and water management ditches and dikes.Abandoned Grove (FLUCCS 224) –This is recently-abandoned citrus grove. Nearly all citrus trees aredead. Tree rows and grove infrastructure remain in unmaintained condition. Groundcover includes bahia grass (Paspalum notatum), smutgrass (Sporobolus indicus), crowsfoot grass (Dactyloctunium aegyptium), beggars tick (Bidens pilosa), elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum), Caesarweed (Urena lobata), and other ruderal pioneering species. Some regions have started the conversion to improved pasture or row-crop agriculture with the dead trees being removed and furrows graded. Tree Nursery (FLUCCS 241) – This land use represents a long-defunct date palm and queen palm nursery. Trees and infrastructure remain in unmaintained condition. Disturbed Lands (FLUCCS 740) –These are large blocks of land within or proximal to the tree nursery where trees were harvested and not replenished, or where orange trees were removed and the land has not yet been brought into crop production. In either case, the areas lack shrub and canopy coverage. Groundcover ranges from bare soil to being vegetated with herbaceous species including Caesarweed, smutgrass, broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), Mexican clover (Richardia grandiflora), beggars tick, elephant grass, and other ruderal species. Graded and Drained (FLUCCS 8145) – These are internal primary farm roads. Page 8001 of 9661 14 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData FIGURE 1 Existing Conditions Page 8002 of 9661 15 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData Page 8003 of 9661 16 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData Page 8004 of 9661 17 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData Page 8005 of 9661 18 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData FIGURE 2 Bear Incident Location Map Page 8006 of 9661 19 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData Page 8007 of 9661 20 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData FIGURE 3 Panther Habitat and Telemetry Map Page 8008 of 9661 21 P:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Reports Silver Strand MineEnvironmentalData Page 8009 of 9661 C5L14N0°17'33"W 2088.76C7C6L15L10C2L11C3L12C4L13N0°15'34"W 2601.35N0°07'26"W 3944.99N89°17'35"E1202.62L6L7L8L9C1N0°15'32"W 4936.51PARCEL 1(SEC. 15)PARCEL 2(SEC. 14)PARCEL 3(SEC. 13)PARCEL 4(SEC. 24)PARCEL 5(SEC. 23)PARCEL 6PARCEL 6(SEC.22)PARCEL 7(SEC. 27)27 2634 3522 2327 2623 2426 2524 1925 3014 1323 2415 1422 239 1016 1510 1115 1412 713 182128 27SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 3SHEET 3SHEET 5SHEET 4SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 5SHEET 2SHEET 3P.O.C.NORTHWEST CORNER OFSECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.P.O.B.(PARCEL A)L2W. LINESEC. 15(B.O.B.) L1POINT (A)11 1214 1328 2733 3413 1824 1916 1521 22STOCKADE RD.RANCH ONE RD.CAMP KEAIS RD.IMMOKALEERD.STATE RD. 29 S.P.O.B.(PARCEL B)L5L4L3O.R.962,PG.1289(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)O.R.941PG.521O.R.2493PG.2779O.R.941PG.521O.R.4322PG.1377O.R.1579PG.1732O.R.4322PG.1377O.R.1579PG.1732L16(D) 100'O.R.4322PG.1347S0°08'45"E 1319.97N89°32'49"E 2030.52N0°06'39"W 2656.84N89°04'02"E 2035.44N89°38'49"E 2587.12N89°38'42"E 2331.62S44°58'17"E 2419.10S44°59'05"E 2800.04S44°59'05"E 2023.22S0°31'11"E 2301.77S0°38'38"E 2631.42S89°44'23"W 2614.52S89°44'08"W 2613.84S89°34'23"W 2672.75S89°38'46"W 2671.33S0°04'00"W 5379.12S89°06'34"W 2674.38S89°09'03"W 2587.98OVERALL 4823.26LINE TABLELINE #L1L2L3L4L5L6L7L8LENGTH1314.26150.003945.172681.53150.00730.20680.17729.89BEARINGS0°07'26"EN89°52'34"ES0°07'26"ES0°15'34"EN89°44'26"ES44°59'18"WS44°58'03"EN45°00'39"ECURVE TABLECURVE #C1C2C3C4C5C6C7LENGTH403.88533.72584.69848.23722.57529.01151.51RADIUS3787.51760.00840.00540.00460.00760.00840.00DELTA6°06'35"40°14'11"39°52'53"89°59'58"90°00'00"39°52'53"10°20'04"CHORD BEARINGN2°47'45"EN19°49'24"EN20°00'03"EN44°56'23"WS44°56'24"ES20°00'03"WS34°46'27"WCHORD LENGTH403.69522.82572.96763.68650.54518.39151.31LINE TABLELINE #L9L10L11L12L13L14L15L16LENGTH91.7460.69543.45600.00164.71164.27600.00543.45BEARINGN5°51'03"EN0°17'42"WN39°56'29"EN0°03'36"EN89°56'24"WS89°56'24"ES0°03'36"WS39°56'29"WOFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:08:52 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 1000'N.T.S.P-023/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg1PENINSULA ENGINEERING6GENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.LEGEND:A.E. = ACCESS EASEMENTBM = BENCHMARKC/L = CENTERLINEC.C.R. = LABINS CERTIFIED CORNER RECORD FILE NUMBERC.U.E. = COUNTY UTILITY EASEMENTD.E. = DRAINAGE EASEMENTEL. & ELEV. = ELEVATIONF.P.L. = FLORIDA POWER & LIGHTO.R. = OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOKP.B. = PLAT BOOKPG. = PAGEP.U.E. = PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTR.O.W. = RIGHT-OF-WAYP = PLAT, M = MEASURED, C = CALCULATED, D = DEED(S.I.P.)SET 5/8" IRON PIN & CAP STAMPED LB-8479(F.I.P.) FOUND IRON PIN & CAP STAMPED AS SHOWN(F.C.M.) FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT(F.N.D.) FOUND PK NAIL & DISK STAMPED(PK) = PARKER KYLON NAILMAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 13, 14, 15, 22, 23, 24,AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEY OF PART OF SECTIONS 13,14, 15, 22, 23, 24, AND 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.PREPARED FOR: PENINSULA ENGINEERINGPENINSULA ENGINEERING2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAYNAPLES, FLORIDA 34105PHONE: 239.403.6700 FAX: 239.261.1797EMAIL: INFO@PEN-ENG.COMWEBSITE: WWW.PEN-ENG.COM_____________________________________________LANCE T MILLERPROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER, #LS5627NOVEMBER 27TH, 2023DATECERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION #LB- 8479NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE AND THEORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OR DIGITAL SEAL OF AFLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER.NO OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY MAY RELY UPON THISEXHIBIT.THIS EXHIBIT IS ONLY FOR THE LANDS AS DESCRIBED.IT IS NOT A CERTIFICATE OF TITLE, ZONING,EASEMENTS OR FREEDOM OF ENCUMBRANCES.SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPLEGAL DESCRIPTIONPARCEL 1ALL OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS THOSE LANDSDESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.941, PG.521, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 2ALL OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY, COLLIERCOUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 3ALL OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LYING SOUTH AND WEST OF ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY AND S.R.29RIGHT-OF-WAY, , LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.17, PG.453, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 4ALL OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS S.R.29 RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS ACL RIGHT-OF-WAY, COLLIERCOUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 5ALL OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 6ALL OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS THE WEST 50' FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD ASDESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 AND O.R.4322, PG.1377, LESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1347, LESS THOSELANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1354, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAPARCEL 7ALL OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, LESS CAMP KEAIS ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN O.R.1579, PG.1732 ANDLESS THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED IN O.R.4322, PG.1377, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAALL SAID LANDS BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:PARCEL (A)COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 1,314.26 TO A POINT HEREINAFTER TO BE KNOWN AS POINT (A);THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°52'34" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THENORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15 AND BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING;THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 89°17'35" EAST 1,202.62 FEET TO SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THENORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 15;THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 941, PAGE 521, OF THE PUBLICRECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 00°08'45" EAST 1,319.97 FEET;2. NORTH 89°32'49" EAST 2,030.52 FEET;3. NORTH 00°06'39" WEST 2,656.84 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 15;THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE NORTH 89°04'02" EAST 2,035.44 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH,RANGE 29 EAST;THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'49" EAST 2,587.12 FEET TO THE NORTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 14;THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 14 NORTH 89°38'42" EAST 2,331.62 FEET TO A POINT ON THESOUTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 29 SOUTH;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SOUTH 44°58'17" EAST 2,419.10 FEET TO THE NORTH CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND ASDESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 962, PAGE 1289, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 44°59'18" WEST 730.20 FEET;2. SOUTH 44°58'03" EAST 680.17 FEET;3. NORTH 45°00'39" EAST 729.89 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY SOUTH 44°59'05" EAST 4823.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION24, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE SOUTH 00°31'11" EAST 2,301.77 FEET TO THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 00°38'38" EAST 2,631.42 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTCORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'23" WEST 2,614.52 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 24;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 24 SOUTH 89°44'08" WEST 2,613.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTCORNER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°34'23" WEST 2,672.75 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 23 SOUTH 89°38'46" WEST 2,671.33 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTCORNER OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 00°04'00" WEST 5,379.12 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°06'34" WEST 2,674.38 FEET TO THE SOUTH 1/4CORNER OF SAID SECTION 27;THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 27 SOUTH 89°09'03" WEST 2,587.98 FEET TO A POINT ON THEEAST LINE OF AN 80-FOOT-WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY KNOWN AS CAMP KEAIS ROAD, AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 1579, PAGE17323, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE FOLLOWING TEN (10) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. NORTH 05°51'03" EAST 91.74 FEET;2. 403.88 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,787.51 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 06°06'35" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 02°47'45" EAST 403.69 FEET;3. NORTH 00°15'32" WEST 4,936.51 FEET;4. NORTH 00°17'42" WEST 60.69 FEET;5. 533.72 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 40°14'11" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 19°49'24" EAST 522.82 FEET;6. NORTH 39°56'29" EAST 543.45 FEET;7. 584.69 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 20°00'03" EAST 572.96 FEET;8. NORTH 00°03'36" EAST 600.00 FEET;9. 848.23 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 540.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 89°59'58" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS NORTH 44°56'23" WEST 763.68 FEET; 10. ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 89°56'24" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 164.71 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF A 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4322, PAGE 1347, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID PARCEL OF LAND FOR THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. NORTH 00°15'34" WEST 2,601.35 FEET;2. NORTH 00°07'26" WEST 3,944.99 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.CONTAINING: 3,914.91 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.ALONG WITHPARCEL (B)COMMENCING AT THE AFOREMENTIONED POINT (A);THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED SECTION 15 SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST 3,945.17 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNEROF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22 SOUTH 00°15'34" EAST 2,681.53 FEET;THENCE LEAVING SAID WEST LINE NORTH 89°44'26" EAST 150.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE AFOREMENTIONED CAMP KEAIS ROAD AND BEINGTHE POINT OF BEGINNING;THENCE ALONG THE WEST BOUNDARY OF CAMP KEAIS ROAD FOR THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) DESCRIBED COURSES:1. SOUTH 89°56'24" EAST 164.27 FEET;2. 722.57 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 460.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 90°00'00" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 44°56'24" EAST 650.54 FEET;3. SOUTH 00°03'36" WEST 600.00 FEET;4. 529.01 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 760.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLEOF 39°52'53" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 20°00'03" WEST 518.39 FEET;5. SOUTH 39°56'29" WEST 543.45 FEET;6. 151.51 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 840.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRALANGLE OF 10°20'04" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD WHICH BEARS SOUTH 34°46'27" WEST 151.31 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTLINE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED 100-FOOT-WIDE STRIP OF LAND;THENCE ALONG SAID EAST LINE ALONG A LINE NON-TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 00°17'33" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,088.76 FEET TO THEPOINT OF BEGINNING.CONTAINING: 22.97 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.NET AREA: 3937.88 ACRES MORE OR LESSSCALE:1" = 1000'0SCALE IN FEET20001000SURVEYORS NOTES:xA SURVEY OF THE DESCRIBED LANDS WASCONDUCTED BY AMS ENGINEERING &ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. ON OCTOBER 1ST, 2003,INDICATING FOUND MONUMENTATION ALONGSAID BOUNDARY. UPON OUR RECOVERY OF SAIDBOUNDARY THERE ARE NUMEROUSDISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE MEASUREDDISTANCES NOTED ON THE AMS SURVEY ANDTHE EXISTING FOUND MONUMENTATION. THESEDISCREPANCIES INCLUDE RECOVERED ORIGINALCOLLIER MONUMENTS AND MONUMENTSRECORDED AS CERTIFIED CORNER WITH LABINS.xAN (AMS) MEASURED DISTANCE IS NOTED ON ALLLEGS OF THE BOUNDARY THAT HAVE ADISCREPANCY EXCEEDING 0.20' FROM THEEXISTING RECOVERED BOUNDARY CORNERS.(SEE SHEETS 2, 3, 4, & 5 FOR THESE NOTES)Page 8010 of 9661 N0°07'26"W 3944.99N89°17'35"E1202.62(M) N0°06'39"W 2656.84(D) S4°09'26"E 2651.27N89°04'02"E 2035.44 N. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 15(M) N89°38'49"E 2587.12 N. LINE OF THE N.W. 1/4 SEC. 14(AMS) 2586.52 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 2SHEET 3COLLIER COUNTYO.R.941, PG.521(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)BCP LLLPN.W. 1/4 OF THEN.W. 1/4 OF SEC. 15,O.R.2493, PG.2779(NOT PART OF THISSURVEY)COLLIER COUNTYO.R.941, PG.521(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)SEMINOLE TRIBEO.R.1479, PG.976BCP LLLPO.R.2493, PG.2779IMMOKALEE ROAD (100' R.O.W.)S89°52'34"W 150.00N0°07'26"W 1314.26FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT ATEAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OFIMMOKALEE ROAD 0.03' WEST.SETFOUNDFOUNDFOUNDFOUNDIRON PINFOUNDE. LINE SEC.15, T.47S., R.29E.W. LINE SEC.14, T.47S., R.29E.UNPLATTED(SEC. 15)UNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 14)POINT AP.O.C.NORTHWEST CORNER OFSECTION 15 TOWNSHIP 47SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAFOUND IRON RODIN CENTERLINE OFIMMOKALEE ROAD30' ACCESS EASEMENT (O.R.941, PG.521) (STOCKADE ROAD)END OFEASEMENTC.C.R.116015CONCRETEMONUMENTS0°37'10"W 2704.00S0°11'26"E 2628.83N89°25'08"E 2661.33N89°59'43"E 2696.54C.C.R.115724L.B.7917S89°51'19"W 5237.38 S. LINE SEC. 15S89°48'30"W150.00C.C.R.083010NAIL(D) N85°00'00"E 676.83(M) N89°06'25"E 676.70S0°05'22"E 1320.65N. 1/4 CORNER SEC. 15FOUNDFOUNDIRON PIN X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 659.2'83.5'132.5'132.3'83.7'671.7'75.7'63.7'FARMBUILDINGS15 1422 23SETN0°07'26"W 5259.44(D) 100'O.R.4322PG.134710 1115 14(M) S89°18'51"W 751.14STAMPEDCECOVERHEAD UTILITY LINES(M) N89°32'49"E 2030.52(D) S85°26'40"W 2030.60(D) N4°09'04"W 1320.73(M) S0°08'45"E 1319.97OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:34 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-023/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg2PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPSCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET300600GENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 8011 of 9661 L6L7L8SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 3SHEET 3SHEET 2SHEET 3FOUNDSETFOUNDSETFOUNDPIN & CAPSTAMPED AMSFOUNDFOUNDPIN & CAPNO I.D.13 1824 1914 1323 2412 713 18C.C.R.116412C.C.R.115811PIN & CAPL.B.7917C.C.R.115722C.C.R.115723PIN & CAPL.B.7917C.C.R.116411UNPLATTED(N.E. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 14)UNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 13)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 13)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 13)(AMS) 2328.84(C&M) N89°38'42"E 2331.62 N. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 14(AMS) 2421.88(C&M) S44°58'17"E 2419.10S.W. R.O.W. LINES44°59'05"E 2800.04S.W. R.O.W. LINES44°59'05"E 2023.22S.W. R.O. W. LINEO.R.962, PG.1289(NOT PART OFTHIS SURVEY)OVERHEADUTILITY LINESS89°38'10"W242.07S2°15'49"E254.08S2°15'49"E 2430.13S1°31'37"E329.67S89°01'23"W315.26S89°01'23"W 2253.76N89°01'23"E 2569.02N1°36'55"W 2360.58S1°36'55"E298.69S89°33'32"W287.00N89°33'32"E 2312.62S89°59'43"W 2696.54N0°57'05"W 2655.96N89°25'14"E 2634.91N0°57'18"W 2693.16S2°15'36"E 2684.10C.C.R.115721FOUNDOVERHEAD UTILITY LINESSTATE RD. 29 S.11 1214 13MONITORING WELLSLINE TABLELINE #L6L7L8LENGTH730.20680.17729.89BEARINGS44°59'18"WS44°58'03"EN45°00'39"EOFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:44 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg3PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 8012 of 9661 (AMS) 2306.51(M) S0°31'11"E 2301.77 E. LINE OF THE N.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2617.95(M) S0°38'38"E 2631.42 E. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2647.52(M) S89°44'23"W 2614.52 S. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2643.02(M) S89°44'08"W 2613.84 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 24(AMS) 2673.51(M) S89°34'23"W 2672.75 S. LINE. OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 23SHEET 3SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 4SHEET 5SHEET 4S89°22'16"W80.09S89°03'11"W79.9424 1925 3023 2426 25C.C.R. 116415WITNESS PIN L.B.7917WITNESS PIN L.B.7917L.B.7917C.C.R. 116416N89°26'24"E 2591.61N0°08'59"W 2612.76S89°19'18"W 2591.67N0°08'37"W 2617.81S0°20'51"W 2599.23S0°21'10"W 2599.67L.B.7917COLLIER MONUMENTCOLLIER MONUMENTUNPLATTED(N.W. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(N.E. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(S.W. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(S.E. 1/4 SEC. 24)UNPLATTED(SEC. 25)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)UNPLATTED(SEC. 26)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)UNPLATTED(SEC. 23)S.R. 29 S.OVERHEADUTILITY LINESL.B.7917OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:01:54 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg4PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 8013 of 9661 C5L14N0°17'33"W 2088.76C7C6L15L10C2L11C3L12C4L13N0°15'34"W 2601.35(AMS) 2670.60(M) S89°38'46"W 2671.33 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 23SHEET 2SHEET 5SHEET 5SHEET 4SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 5(D) 100.0'O.R.4322PG.1347(D) 100.0'IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R.846)22 2327 26CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE)O.R.4322, PG.1377WIDTH VARIES150' WIDTHO.R.4322, PG.1377CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE) (O.R.1579, PG.1732)O.R.4322,PG.1354LANDSINCLUDED INSURVEYUNPLATTED(SEC. 23)UNPLATTED(SEC. 22)UNPLATTED(SEC. 26)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)S89°41'38"W 5261.34S89°41'38"W 80.00S89°41'38"W 39.68W. LINE SEC. 22N0°15'34"W 5249.84N89°56'38"W 100.19N89°55'57"W 100.18N0°14'18"E 2635.38N0°37'25"W 2599.57N0°18'18"W 60.85CURVE TABLECURVE #C2C3C4C5C6C7LENGTH533.72584.69848.23722.57529.01151.51RADIUS760.00840.00540.00460.00760.00840.00DELTA40°14'11"39°52'53"89°59'58"90°00'00"39°52'53"10°20'04"CHORD BEARINGN19°49'24"EN20°00'03"EN44°56'23"WS44°56'24"ES20°00'03"WS34°46'27"WCHORD LENGTH522.82572.96763.68650.54518.39151.31LINE TABLELINE #L10L11L12L13L14L15L16LENGTH60.69543.45600.00164.71164.27600.00543.45BEARINGN0°17'42"WN39°56'29"EN0°03'36"EN89°56'24"WS89°56'24"ES0°03'36"WS39°56'29"WL16SETFOUND IRON ROD0.45' S.E.FOUND IRON ROD0.65' N.E.L.B.69030.65' N.E.C.C.R.83011S.W. COR. SEC.22,T.47S., R.29E.SETL.B.2022L.B.2022L.B.2022IRON PINL.B.2022SETL.B.2022IRON PINL.B.2022COLLIER MONUMENTIRON PINTT X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X CAMP KEAIS RD.IMMOKALEE RD.OVERHEADUTILITYLINESUNPAVED RD.POST ANDWIRE FENCEASPHALTROAD ANDAPRONASPHALTROAD ANDAPRONO.R.4998PG.865O.R.4998PG.865GAS VALVEVAULTSWEST LINE SEC.2280' R.O.W.O.R.1579, PG.1732200'O.R.4322PG.1354OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:02:04 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg5PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.DETAIL SCALE: 1" = 200'SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 8014 of 9661 S0°04'00"W 5379.12 E. LINE SEC. 27S89°06'34"W 2674.38 S. LINE OF THE S.E. 1/4 SEC. 27S89°09'03"W 2587.98 S. LINE OF THE S.W. 1/4 SEC. 27L9C1N0°15'32"W 4936.51SHEET 5SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6SHEET 6CAMP KEAIS RD.(80' WIDE) (O.R.1579, PG.1732)120' WIDEO.R.4322, PG.1377S0°15'41"E 5431.65 W. LINE SEC. 271" IRON PIPES.W. COR. SEC.27PIN & CAPSTAMPED AIMCONC.MONUMENTRANCH ONE RD.(60' WIDE) (O.R.1376, PG.51)2833 34L.B.2022SETL.B.2022UNPLATTED(SEC. 27)UNPLATTED(SEC. 34)(NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY)S89°09'03"W88.1627 2634 35LINE TABLELINE #L9LENGTH91.74BEARINGN5°51'03"ECURVE TABLECURVE #C1LENGTH403.88RADIUS3787.51DELTA6°06'35"CHORD BEARINGN2°47'45"ECHORD LENGTH403.69OFLANCE T MILLER, P.S.M. #LS 5627REV. REVISIONTITLE:PROJECT NO.SHEET #: DRAWING NO.:CLIENT:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Fieldwork by:Fieldbook/Page:[Save Date: 11/30/2023 2:10:29 PM] [Saved By: TWehrle] [Plot Date: 12/1/2023 1:02:14 PM] [Plotted By: Tim Wehrle] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: S:\Silver-Strand\Silver-Strand-Mine-SS03-001\BOUNDARY\SILVER-STRAND-03-111423\S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg]NOVEMBER 20231" = 300'N.T.S.P-020/70 & 72SDTFWP-SS03-002-001S-SSM-P-SS03-002-001-SU-01.dwg6PENINSULA ENGINEERING6MAP OF BOUNDARY SURVEYOF PART OF SECTIONS 5, 13, 14, 22, 23, 14, &27, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.SCALE:1" = 300'0SCALE IN FEET0SCALE IN FEET600300SYMBOL LEGEND: = CLEANOUT = GRATE INLET = MITERED END = STORM MANHOLE = YARD DRAIN = GUY ANCHOR = WOOD POWER POLE = CONCRETE POWER POLE = ELECTRIC PANEL = HANDHOLE = LIGHT POLE = ELECTRIC MANHOLE = ELECTRIC METER POLE = ELECTRIC RISER = TRANSFORMER PAD = GAS VALVE = CABLE RISER = GAS RISER = TELEPHONE RISER = TELEPHONE MANHOLE = IRRIGATION CONTROL BOX = SPRINKLER HEAD = WATER BLOW-OFF = FIRE HYDRANT = GATE VALVE = WELL = MONITORING WELL = WATER METER = WATER RISER = MAILBOX = PILING = SIGNDYLEEFGVCGTTICWWPGENERAL NOTES:xBEARINGS ARE BASED ON STATE PLANECOORDINATES FLORIDA EAST ZONE (NAD83)WITH THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP47 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BEING SOUTH 00°07'26" EAST.xELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICANVERTICAL DATUM, 1988, (N.A.V.D.)xLINES SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE LAND DESCRIBEDARE FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY AND WERE NOTSURVEYED.xALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN AREMEASURED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.Page 8015 of 9661 Page 8016 of 9661 Page 8017 of 9661 Page 8018 of 9661 Page 8019 of 9661 Page 8020 of 9661 Page 8021 of 9661 Page 8022 of 9661 February 22, 2024 Re: Silver Strand Mine Project To Whom It May Concern: In recent conversations with the developer of the Silver Strand Mine project, we have been made aware of the proposed development and use of the property. As our Kaicasa neighborhood is underway nearby, we were curious about the standards of development at Silver Strand. Understanding the details and projections, we are delighted with the plans and have no objection to the formal request being included in the condition use and various petitions (CU-PL20220001634 and VA-PL20230001067). Habitat for Humanity of Collier County further supports the Applicant’s request to eliminate the code-required landscape buffer along SR29. We welcome Silver Strand to the neighborhood and know that the foundations that it provides will help to build our entire community as we prepare for future growth. Regards, Lisa B. Lefkow Chief Executive Officer Page 8023 of 9661 ¯010.5MilesSILVER STRAND MINEEAST OF IMMOKALEE RD, WEST OF SR 29PROXIMITY EXHIBITP:\Active_Projects\P-SS03-001\001_SilverStrand_III\Planning\GIS\2024-08-26-Proximity_Map.mxdDate Saved: 8/26/2024 PROJECT:NOTES:EXHIBIT DESC:2600 Golden Gate ParkwayNaples, FL 34105CLIENT:LOCATION:SOURCES: COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (2024)LegendSilver Strand Parternship Property BoundaryExcavation Area: +/-204-acresSilver Strand Mine Project BoundaryUrban BoundaryWRAIngress/EgressSILVER STRAND III PARTNERSHIPHaul RoadHaul RoadHaul RoadPontential FutureSR 29 ConnectionOne-StoryScalehousePotential FutureOne-Story ScalehouseIngress/EgressPotential Future Haul RoadSR29SR29Immokalee RDURBAN DESIGNATION LINEURBAN DESIGNATION LINECamp Keais DEquipment & Staging+/-5,300'+/-1,500'+/-4,000'+/-6,400'+/3,300'Page 8024 of 9661 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 Memorandum Date: November 5, 2024 To: Sean Sammon, Collier County Planning & Zoning Division From: Jessica Harrelson, AICP RE: Silver Strand Mine Conditional Use-PL20220001634 & Variance-PL20230001067 NIM Summary A NIM was held on Wednesday, October 30th, 2024, at the Ave Maria Master Association Office, located at 5080 Annunciation Circle, Unit #101, Ave Maria, FL, 34142. Those listed below, associated with the project, were in attendance: 1. Jessica Harrelson, AICP – Peninsula Engineering 2. Bruce Layman – Peninsula Engineering 3. Ciprian Malaescu – Trebilcock Consulting Solutions 4. Nick Kouloheras – Barron Collier Companies 5. Sean Sammons – Collier County Growth Management Three (3) members of the public attended the meeting in person, and two (2) individuals participated via Zoom. Only one question was asked by a Zoom participant: “What is the status of where you are with the County in terms of permitting?” Jessica responded that the Conditional Use and Variance were found sufficient by Staff and will be scheduled for hearings, targeted for early next year. Jessica further noted the participant would be notified of the dates and signs would be posted on the property as well. End Memo. Page 8025 of 9661 SSILVERR STRANDD MINECONDITIONALL USEE && VARIANCECU-PL20220001634 & VA-PL20230001067 NEIGHBORHOODD INFORMATIONN MEETINGOctoberr 30,, 2024Page 8026 of 9661 PProjectt TeamAPPLICANT:Silver Strand III PartnershipCONSULTANTT TEAM:Coleman,, Yovanovich,, Koester•Richard Yovanovich, Esq.Peninsulaa Engineering•Jessica Harrelson, AICPTrebilcockk Consultingg Solutions•Norman Trebilcock, AICP, PTOE, PEEarthh Techh Environmental•Jeremy SterkPage 8027 of 9661 LLocationn MapPage 8028 of 9661 SSurroundingg Landd UsesCollier County Solid WastePage 8029 of 9661 SSurroundingg Landd UsesSeminole Tribe of Florida(Residential/Park)Page 8030 of 9661 SSurroundingg Landd UsesCommon Ownership(Barron Collier Partnership)Common Ownership(Barron Collier Partnership)Page 8031 of 9661 SSurroundingg Landd UsesResidential-“Kaicasa”(Habitat for Humanity)Page 8032 of 9661 SSurroundingg Landd UsesSingle-FamilyResidentialPage 8033 of 9661 ZZoning// Requests•ZONING: Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home Overlay, & Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay•CONDITIONAL USE (CU):requesting to permit earth mining on the subject propertyoPermitted Conditional Use within the Agricultural Zoning District oDigging, processing, and hauling of raw materials off-site (fill/sand).oNo concreteoNo asphalt•VARIANCE (VA):to eliminate code-required perimeter landscape buffersPage 8034 of 9661 CConceptuall Sitee Plan±204-acPage 8035 of 9661 Developmentt StandardsAgricultural Zoning DistrictoCollier County LDC requires a 50’ setback from all property boundaries•Project exceeds required setback along every boundaryoMaximum Zoned Building Height of Structures – 35’ (Per the Land Development Code)•Project only proposes single-story maintenance/office buildingsPage 8036 of 9661 CConditionss off ApprovaloHours of Operation for Mining Activities•Monday-Friday: 6:30 am-5:00 pm •Saturday: 7:00 am-3:00 pmoMaximum Average of Haul Trucks •430 one-way trucks per dayoStaging of Haul Trucks Will Occur On-Site •Staging of Haul Trucks in Public Rights-of-Way is ProhibitedoDust Control Management PlanPage 8037 of 9661 PROXIMITYY MAPP –– VARIANCEE JUSTIFICATIONSoProximity from adjacent rights-of-way and surrounding land uses.oSurrounded by agricultural uses along most property boundaries.oCommon Ownership along a portion of the northern property boundary.oExisting vegetation provides sufficient screening and/or meets buffer requirements.oAgricultural uses will continue to occur on the property outside of the mining area.Page 8038 of 9661 EExistingg VegetationPage 8039 of 9661 Northeastt ViewPage 8040 of 9661 Northwestt ViewPage 8041 of 9661 Stockadee Road// Koowachobeee TrailPage 8042 of 9661 East/Northeastt ViewshedPage 8043 of 9661 DDeveloperr Commitments-- Variance•The Applicant will install 200 LF of a 20’ Type ‘C’ bufferadjacent to the abutting residential parcel along theeastern property boundary. xThe Applicant will install a code-required buffer within 180days along any property boundary where development hasbeen approved on an adjacent property.Page 8044 of 9661 QQUESTIONSPage 8045 of 9661 Page 8046 of 9661 Page 8047 of 9661 Page 8048 of 9661 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETINGPETITIONS: CU-PL20220001634 – SILVER STRAND MINE CONDITIONAL USEVA-PL20230001067 – SILVER STRAND MINE VARIANCE A neighborhood information meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, October 30th, 2024, beginning at 5:30 pm, to discuss the referenced zoning petitions and will be held at the Ave Maria Master Association Office, 5080 Annunciation Circle, Unit #101, Ave Maria, FL 34142. The purpose and intent of this Neighborhood Information Meeting is to provide the public with notice of the impending zoning applications and to foster communication between the applicant and the public. The expectation is that all attendees will conduct themselves in such a manner that their presence will not interfere with the orderly progress of the meeting. The Applicant, Silver Strand III Partnership, has submitted a formal application to Collier County seeking approval of a Conditional Use (CU) in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District, Mobile Home OverlayandRural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay to allow for a commercial excavation mine. A companion Variance (VA) application has also been submitted, seeking to eliminate code-required perimeter landscape buffers. The project involves seven (7) separate parcels, collectively consisting of 3,937.88 acres, located in eastern Collier County within portions of Sections 13,14, 15, 22, 23, 24, and 27, Township 47 South and Range 29 East, (the “property”). If you have questions or would like to register to participate in the meeting remotely, please contact the individual below. Jessica Harrelson, AICP Peninsula Engineering Phone: 239.403.6751 Email: jharrelson@pen-eng.com Please note, remote participation is provided as a courtesy. The applicant and Peninsula Engineering are not responsible for any technical issues. Project information can be found on our website: www.pen-eng.com/planning-projects or by using the QR code below: Page 8049 of 9661 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34105 Office 239.403.6700 Fax 239.261.1797 Fla Engineer CA 28275 Fla Landscape CA LC26000632 Fla Surveyor/Mapper LB8479 LOCATION MAP Page 8050 of 9661 1NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME6 LEGAL1 LEGAL2 LEGAL3 LEGAL4 FOLIOBARRON COLLIER P'SHIP LLLP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY # 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 11 47 29 ALL, LESS NW1/4 OF SW1/4 OF NW1/4 + RR R/W + LESS N1/2 OF NE1/4 + LESS E1/2 OF NE1/4 OF NW1/4 + LESS 00136880000BARRON COLLIER P'SHIP LLLP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY # 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 11 47 29 COM AT SE CNR SEC 11, S 89 DEG W 244.64 FT, N 45 DEG W 281 FT & POB, S 89 DEG W 843.01 FT, N 45 DEG W 942.83FT 00137160509BARRON COLLIER P'SHIP LLLP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY # 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 15 47 29 NW1/4 OF NW 1/4 LESS OR 339 PG 390-391 35.12 AC OR 975 PG 674, LESS OR 4322 PG 1361 00137760103CDC INVESTMENT PROPERTIES LLC 999 VANDERBILT BEACH RD #507NAPLES, FL 34108---0 13 47 29 ALL LYING N & ELY OF SR 29 LESS REFERENCED PARCEL 8 DESC IN OR 2153 PG 1901 00137520000COLLIER CNTY COLLIER CNTY SOLID & HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT DIVISION 3339 TAMAMI TR E, STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0 15 47 29 COMM NW CNR SEC 15, N 85 DEG E 2707.30FT TO POB, N 85 DEG E 676.83FT, S 4 DEG E 2657.21FT, S 85 DEG W 00137760006COLLIER CNTY COLLIER CNTY SOLID & HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT DIVISION 3339 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0 15 47 29 NE1/4 OF NW1/4 + N 60FT OF NW1/4 OF NW1/4, LESS THE PORTION DESC AS FOLLOWS: COM NW COR OF SEC 15, TH 00137680005COLLIER CNTY TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY 2885 HORSESHOE DRIVE SNAPLES, FL 34104---0 15 47 29 A 100FT WIDE STRIP OF LAND AS DESC IN OR 4322 PG 1361 REFERENCED AS "PARCEL 7" 00137760200COLLIER CNTY TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY 2885 HORSESHOE DRIVE SNAPLES, FL 34104---0 15 47 29 A 100FT STRIP OF LAND AS DESC IN OR 4322 PG 1351 REFERENCED AS "PARCEL 6" 00137760307COLLIER CNTY TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY 2885 HORSESHOE DRIVE SNAPLES, FL 34104---0 22 47 29 A 100FT WIDE STRIP OF LAND AS DESC IN OR 4322 PG 135200138120506COLLIER CNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY1800 FARM WORKER WAYIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---5544 11 47 29 S1/2 OF SE1\4 LYING E OF SR 29 18.82AC00137160101COLLIER LAND HOLDINGS LTD 999 VANDERBILT BEACH RD #507NAPLES, FL 34108---0 18 47 30 ALL, LESS A PORTION AS DESC IN OR 5533 PG 125700139640001COLLIER LAND HOLDINGS LTD 999 VANDERBILT BEACH RD #507NAPLES, FL 34108---0 19 47 30 ALL LYING NELY OF SR 29, LESS THAT PORTION AS DESC IN OR 5533 PG 1257 00139771103CRAPSE, OTIS & ANITA HAROLD AND LAISA CRAPSE 2525 STATE ROAD 29 SIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---9734 13 47 29 DESC IN OR 163 PG 119, COMM NW CNR OF SEC, S 100.39FT TO C/L OF ACL RR, S 44 DEG E 2175.26FT, S 45 DEG 00137400007CRAPSE, RALPH D 2525 STATE ROAD 29 SIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---9734 13 47 29 COM NW COR, S 100.39FT, SE 2175.26FT ALG CENT LI OF R R R/W, SW 100FT, SE 680FT TO POB, SW 170FT, NW 00137320006FERVIL, MAKENDY JESULA FERVIL JOSEPH 2357 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3552659921041GONZALEZ, ALYSSA R 2342 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 2952659920929HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT C-152659920026HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT C-252659920042HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT C-352659920068HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT FD-152659920084HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT L-152659920181HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT L-252659920204HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT P-352659920301HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT P-452659920327HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE TRACT R-152659920343HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3152659920961HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3852659921106HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4152659921164HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4252659921180HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4352659921203HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4452659921229HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4552659921245HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4652659921261HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4752659921287HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4852659921300HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4952659921326HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5052659921342HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5152659921368HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5252659921384HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5352659921407HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5452659921423HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5552659921449HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5652659921465HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5752659921481HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5852659921504HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 5952659921520HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6052659921546HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6152659921562HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6252659921588HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6352659921601HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6452659921627HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6552659921643HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6652659921669HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6752659921685HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6852659921708HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 6952659921724HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7052659921740HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7152659921766HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7252659921782HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7352659921805HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7452659921821HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7552659921847HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7652659921863HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7752659921889HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7852659921902HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 7952659921928HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8052659921944HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8152659921960HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8252659921986HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8352659922008HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8452659922024HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8552659922040HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8652659922066HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8752659922082HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8852659922105HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 8952659922121HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9052659922147HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9152659922163HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9252659922189HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9352659922202HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9452659922228HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9552659922244HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9652659922260HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9752659922286HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9852659922309HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 9952659922325HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10052659922341HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10152659922367HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10252659922383HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10352659922406HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10452659922422HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10552659922448HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10652659922464HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10752659922480HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10852659922503HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 10952659922529HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11052659922545HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11152659922561HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11252659922587HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11352659922600HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11452659922626HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11552659922642Notice: This data belongs to the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office (CCPA). Therefore, the recipient agrees not to represent this data to anyone as other than CCPA provided data. The recipient may not transfer this data to others without consent from the CCPA.Petition: PL20220001634 | Buffer: 1000 | Date: 8/22/24 | Site Location: 00138160003 & othersCopy of POList_1000Page 8051 of 9661 2HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11652659922668HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11752659922684HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11852659922707HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 11952659922723HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 12052659922749HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 12152659922765HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 12252659922781HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 12352659922804LARA-AGUILAR, RAFAEL JULIA ANN AGUILAR 2341 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3952659921122LOUISSAINT, ROCHEMELA 2337 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 4052659921148MALDONADO JR, GUADALUPE 2360 BAHAY LOOPIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 152659920369MC SWAIN, CARROLL 2491 STATE RD S 29IMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 13 47 29 COM NW COR, S 100.39FT, SE 2175.26FT ALG C/L OF RR R/W, SW 100FT TO POB, SW 730FT, SE 390FT NE 00137360008MULLINS, JOY L 2475 STATE ROAD 29 SIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---9734 13 47 29 COMM NW CNR OF SEC, S 100.39FT TO C/L OF A C L R/R, S 44DEG E 2175.26FT, S 45DEG W 100FT TO POB, S 44DEG 00137440009RIA, JEAN SONY GIBONNE RIA SAINT ELOI 2353 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3652659921067RIA, SHERLY 2338 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3052659920945RIOS, JOSE ANTONIO SALAZAR MA A SOTO GUEVARA 2349 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3752659921083SERENOA INVESTMENTS LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY 3RD FLNAPLES, FL 34105---0 16 47 29 ALL THAT PORTION OF SEC 16 DESC 1N OR 1685 PG 1617 628.71 AC 00137800005SERENOA INVESTMENTS LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY 3RD FLNAPLES, FL 34105---0 21 47 29 ALL LYING W OF 29 & N OF OR 1685 PG 162800138080002SHACKLETON, JN NIXON MARIE M SHACKLETON OLIVER 2326 DOM STIMMOKALEE, FL 34142---0 KAICASA PHASE ONE LOT 3252659920987SILVER STRAND III LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 13 47 29 ALL LYING S & W OF SR 29 LESS RR ROW & LESS DB 17 PG 453, DB 39 PG 304 00137280007SILVER STRAND III LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 15 47 29 ALL LESS NE1/4 OF NW1/4 & LESS N 60FT OF NW1/4 OF NW1/4, LESS OR 941 PG 521 & OR 1033 PG 1742 LESS NW 1/4 OF 00137640003SILVER STRAND III LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 22 47 29 ALL LESS CAMP KEAIS RD & LESS LANDS LYING W OF CAMP KEAIS RD OR 1560 PG 397 OR 1560 PG 404 OR 1560 PG 411, 00138120001SILVER STRAND III LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 23 47 29 ALL00138160003SILVER STRAND III LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 24 47 29 ALL00138200002SILVER STRAND III PARTNERSHIP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 14 47 29 ALL EXC ACL RR R/W + SR 2900137560002STRICKLAND JR, WILLIE H JUSTIN KYLE STRICKLAND PO BOX 5240IMMOKALEE, FL 34143---0 19 47 30 PORTION LYING SLY OF SR 29 AS DESC IN OR 4337 PG 72700139771200U S A TRUST SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLA % DEPT OF INTERIOR BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS WASHINGTON, DC 20510---1 10 47 29 ALL, LESS SE1/4 OFNE1/4 & RR R/W, LESS SE1/4 OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4 AND W1/2 OF SE 1/4 OF SW1/4 564.45 AC OR 00136680006USA % BRIAN COLEMAN, CHIEF LAND RESOURCES PROGRAM OFFICE NATIONAL PARK SERVICES 2975 HORSESHOE DR S, STE 800 NAPLES, FL 34104---0 15 47 29 COMM NW1/4 CNR SEC, E 443FT, S 36DEG E 73.53 FT TO POB, N 88DEG E 665.05FT, S 33DEG W 347.30FT, S 34DEG E 00137720004Copy of POList_1000Page 8052 of 9661 Page 8053 of 9661 Page 8054 of 9661 Page 8055 of 9661 Page 8056 of 9661 Page 8057 of 9661 Page 8058 of 9661 Page 8059 of 9661 Page 8060 of 9661 Page 8061 of 9661 Page 8062 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.EID# 2025-4283Executive SummaryThis item requires Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve a rezoning from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Overlay-Receiving Lands to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Overlay-Receiving Lands for the project to be known as the Greenway Fritchey RPUD to allow development of up to 1,299 residential dwelling units with affordable housing. The subject property, consisting of ±227.09 acres, is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20220002061] (This item is a companion to Items 16B9, 17F, and 17G) OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") review staff's findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced petition, render a decision regarding this rezoning petition, and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The property is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, and is comprised of 19 parcels. This petition seeks to allow the rezoning from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Overlay-Receiving Lands to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Overlay-Receiving Lands for the project to be known as the Greenway Fritchey RPUD to allow development of up to 1,299 residential dwelling units, with affordable housing; providing for repeal of Resolution No. 87-177, a provisional use for aquaculture. A companion Growth Management Plan Amendment is requested (GMPA- PL20220002063) to create a new overlay, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay, to allow a maximum of 1,299 residential units with 260 for-sale affordable units (20 percent) reserved for individuals earning at or below 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI) on approximately 227.09 acres. The petition also proposes an amendment to the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the creation of a new map (“Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay”) in the FLUM series of the FLUE to identify the newly created Overlay. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard Petition PUDZ-PL20220002061, Greenway Fritchey RPUD, on October 16, 2025, and voted 5-0 to forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval. There was an opposition letter from John Strathman regarding stormwater runoff onto his property. It was discussed that staff would discuss these concerns with Mr. Strathman to resolve them. It should be noted that these were only concerns and did not object to the project. One minor typo in Transportation Developer Commitment 2. B was corrected and accepted by staff, and this revision was added to the Ordinance. As such, this petition will be placed on the Summary Agenda. This item advances the Collier County Strategic Plan Objective within Community Development to support comprehensive affordable housing opportunities FISCAL IMPACT: The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to the issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD)/ Receiving Lands, and is located within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The proposed request is to allow up to a maximum of 1,299 residential units (5.72 DU/AC), including 260 for-sale affordable housing units dedicated to households earning at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County. RFMUD/Receiving Lands provide transitional areas between lands designated Urban, Estates, Agricultural/Rural, and Page 8063 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.EID# 2025-4283Conservation. Generally, Receiving Lands have lesser environmental and listed species habitat values than other lands (Sending and Neutral Lands) within the RFMUD due to prior development and/or agricultural activities. Receiving Lands have been identified as being the most appropriate lands for development and allow for a mixture of urban and rural levels of service. The RFMUD provides measures to preserve existing natural resources, retain the rural, pastoral, or park-like appearance along arterial roads, and protect private property rights. Incentives such as the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) process, clustered development, density bonus incentives, and provisions for central water and sewer service have been established to direct development into Receiving Lands and away from Sending Lands.The CHHA is the geographical area lying below the elevation of the Category 1 storm surge line, per the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council’s Hurricane Evacuation Study; increased density and expenditure of public infrastructure is discouraged in this area. Relevant to this petition, the RFMUD Receiving Lands allow the development of affordable housing projects at a maximum density of 12.2 dwelling units per acre, subject to Section 2.06.00 of the Land Development Code (LDC). These requirements include, but are not limited to: affordable housing units must be intermixed with, and not segregated from, the market rate dwelling units in the development; and the square footage, construction, and design of the affordable housing units shall be the same as market rate dwelling units. Additionally, the FLUE provides that within one year of adopting the affordable housing provision allowing increased density of up to 12.2 DU/A, the County will initiate an LDC amendment to establish appropriate criteria for affordable housing projects within Receiving Lands, e.g., design standards, development standards, and locational criteria. The implementing LDC regulations noted above are currently in draft form and will be presented to the Development Services Advisory Committee later this year. In the absence of the adopted regulations, staff finds the proposed development and design standards to be reasonable. However, an amendment to the GMP is needed to increase density on the property. A companion GMP amendment petition (PL20220002063) has been submitted to establish a new residential overlay on the subject property that will allow the uses and density proposed in the RPUD. The PUD rezoning may only be deemed consistent with the FLUE if the companion GMPA is approved and goes into effect, and if the uses and intensities in the PUD align with those in the GMPA. Transportation Element: In evaluating the Greenway-Fritchey development staff reviewed the applicant’s Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) dated July 5, 2024, for consistency using the 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR). The Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition and recommends the following: Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links, the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” Page 8064 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.EID# 2025-4283Staff findings: Staff evaluated the PUD document and the TIS dated July 5, 2024, and found that the scenario presents an accurate trip generation calculation, a reasonable trip distribution on the surrounding network, and reflects a reasonable development potential for the proposed RPUD. The PUD document establishes a total trip cap commitment for a net external maximum of +/-861 PM, peak hour, two-way trips. According to TIS, the project impacts the following County roadways: Roadway/Link # Link Location P.M. Peak Hour Peak Direction Service Volume/Peak Direction Projected PM Peak Hr./Peak Direction Project Traffic 1 2024 AUIR LOS 2024 AUIR Remaining Capacity Collier Boulevard/37.0 Manatee Rd. to Mainsail Dr. 2,200/North 45/North D(2)239 US-41 Tamiami Trail East/93.0 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. to Triangle Blvd 3,000/East 103/East D(3)248 US-41 Tamiami Trail East/94.0 Triangle Blvd. to Collier Blvd. 3,000/East 149/East C 1187 US-41 Tamiami Trail East/95.1 Collier Blvd. to Joseph Ln. 3,100/East 368/East B 1,651 US-41 Tamiami Trail East/95.2 Joseph Ln. to Greenway Rd. 2,000/East 404/East C 734 US-41 Tamiami Trail East/95.3 Greenway Rd. to San Marco Dr. 1,075/East 38/East B 616 1. Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is July 5, 2024, Traffic Impact Statement provided by the petitioner. 2. This is an expected deficiency by trip bank not caused by this development and is the jurisdiction and responsibility of FDOT. Also see key points regarding Florida Statutes 163.3180 below. 3. This is an expected deficiency by the trip bank, not caused by this development. Also see key points regarding Florida Statue 163.3180 below. Florida Statute 163.3180: Key points of applicability. Must allow an applicant to enter into a binding agreement to pay or construct their proportionate fair share. Consistency and operational fair share mitigation attachments are consistent with this requirement. Facilities determined to be deficient with existing, committed, and vested trips plus projected background traffic from any source other than the development shall be removed from the proportionate share calculation. The improvement necessary to correct this type of deficiency is the funding responsibility of the maintaining entity. Applicant must receive credit for the anticipated road impact fees. The consistency fair share attachment is consistent with this requirement. The applicant calculated their proportionate share and it does not exceed the impact fees anticipated to be Page 8065 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.EID# 2025-4283collected. The consistency fair share attachment is consistent with this requirement.Additionally, there is a companion Developer Agreement that addresses additional road, ROW, and CAT Transit stop improvements.Policy 7.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: “Collier County shall apply the standards and criteria of the Access Management Policy as adopted by Resolution and as may be amended to ensure the protection of the arterial and collector system’s capacity and integrity.” Staff findings: Staff recommends approval of the proposed access points shown on the master plan for this petition; however, nothing in this development order will vest the developer with anything more than a right-in/right-out at those locations. Directional and full median openings may be contemplated at the time of the Site Development Plan or Plat and Plan, or when/if future expansion of the roadways occurs. Staff Recommendation: Based on this information, staff finds the application consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element. The Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP and recommends approval. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff have found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site consists of 33 acres of native vegetation. A minimum of 13.2 acres of native vegetation is required to be placed under preservation and dedicated to Collier County. GMP Conclusion: The proposed PUD is inconsistent with the GMP, unless the Board approves the companion GMPA first or concurrently with the PUD, and the uses and intensities align. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is a site-specific rezone to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for a project to be known as the Greenway Fritchey RPUD. The burden falls upon the applicant to prove that the proposed rezone is consistent with all the criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners, should it consider denying the rezone, to determine that such denial would not be arbitrary, discriminatory, or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria below. Criteria for RPUD Rezones Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for approval or not. 1.Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. 2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements, contracts, or other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense? Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. 3.Consider: Conformity of the proposed RPUD with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth Management Plan. 4.Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. 5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development? 6.Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of Page 8066 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.EID# 2025-4283available improvements and facilities, both public and private.7.Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.8.Consider: Conformity with RPUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, and future land use map, as well as the elements of the Growth Management Plan? 10. Will the proposed RPUD Rezone be appropriate, considering the existing land use pattern? 11. Would the requested RPUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts? 12.Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. 13.Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. 14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood? 15. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety? 16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem? 17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas? 18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area? 19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations? 20.Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. 21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot (“reasonably”) be used in accordance with existing zoning? (a “core” question…) 22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County? 23.Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. 24.Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. 25.Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed RPUD rezone on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, art.II], as amended. 26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the RPUD rezone request that the Board of County Page 8067 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.EID# 2025-4283Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare? The Board must base its decision on competent, substantial evidence presented in the written materials supplied to it, including, but not limited to, the Staff Report, Executive Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons, and the oral testimony presented at the BCC hearing, as these items relate to these criteria. Should this item be denied, Florida Statutes section 125.022(3) requires the County to provide written notice to the applicant citing applicable portions of an ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority for the denial. This item has been approved as to form and legality and requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval. (HFAC) RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve the request for Petition PUDZ-PL20220002061, the Greenway Fritchey RPUD and proposed ordinance. PREPARED BY: Timothy Finn, AICP, Planner III, Zoning Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff report - Greenway Fritchey RPUD 2. Attachment A - Proposed Ordinance 3. Attachment B - Application-Backup Materials 4. Attachment C - Hearing Advertising Signs 5. Attachment D - Opposition Letter 6. legal ad - agenda IDs 25-4283 & 25-4616 - Greenway Fritchey RPUD & GMPA (PL20220002063) & (PL20220002061) 12-9-25 BCC Page 8068 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 1 of 25 October 3, 2025 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2025 SUBJECT: PUDZ-PL20220002061; GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD (Companion to GMPA-PL20220002063) PROPERTY OWNERS/AGENTS: Owners: Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. 7742 Alico Road 11145 Tamiami Trail East Fort Myers, FL 33912 Naples, FL 34113 Agents: Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP, Senior Vice-President Jeremie Chastain, AICP, Lead Planner Bowman 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34110 Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission consider rezoning +227.09 acres from a Rural Agricultural (A) Zoning District within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Overlay- Receiving Lands to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Overlay-Receiving Lands for the project to be known as the Greenway Fritchey RPUD to allow development of up to 1,299 residential dwelling units, with affordable housing; providing for repeal of Resolution No. 87-177, a provisional use for aquaculture. A companion Growth Management Plan Amendment is requested (GMPA-PL20220002063) to create a new overlay, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay, to allow a maximum of 1,299 residential units with 260 for-sale affordable units (20 percent) reserved for individuals earning at or below 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI) on approximately 227.09 acres. The petition also proposes an amendment to the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the creation of a new map (“Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay”) in the FLUM series of the FLUE to identify the newly created Overlay. Page 8069 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 2 of 25 October 3, 2025 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:The property is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, inSection 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map below) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The site is located at the northeastern corner of the intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, approximately a mile north of the intersection of Tamiami Trail East and Greenway Road, and is comprised of 19 parcels. This site is currently used for agricultural purposes and a single-family dwelling. The maximum number of units allowed on the site, as per the current A/RFMUO-Receiving Lands, is one unit per 5 acres, which equates to 46 units. RFMU receiving lands are those lands within the RFMU district that have been identified as being most appropriate for development and to which residential development units may be transferred from RFMU sending lands. Based on the evaluation of available data, RFMU receiving lands have a lesser degree of environmental or listed species habitat Page 8070 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 3 of 25 October 3, 2025 value than RFMU sending lands and generally have been disturbed through development or previous or existing agricultural operations. The petitioner seeks 1,253 additional units than currently allowed, which can only be approved if the companion GMP Amendment is approved to create a site-specific Future Land Use designation for the site. Current Zoning Allowed Density/Units Proposed Zoning Proposed Density/Units A/RFMUO-Receiving Lands 1 unit per 5 acres 46 units RPUD 5.72 units per acre 1,299 units The proposed rezoning to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) is intended to allow development of the site with up to 1,299 dwelling units, which calculates to a density of +5.72 units per acre. An affordable housing commitment is proposed that 260 units on Tract R2 will be sold to households whose initial certified incomes are up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County. The PUD Master Plan depicts the majority of the site (121.16 acres as Tract R1) for single and multi- family dwellings, (92.34 acres as Tract R2) for single and multi-family dwellings, and a 13.59-acre tract (Tract P) for preserve. One access point is depicted from Greenway Road into Tract R1, and another access point is depicted from Fritchey Road into Tract R1. There is a potential interconnect between Tract R1 and Tract R2 for bicycles and pedestrians at the south side of the property near Fritchey Road. Another interconnect for bicycles and pedestrians is proposed toward the western side of the PUD near Greenway Road. For Tract R2, there is an access point located on Fritchey Road, as well as an interconnect for bicycles and pedestrians along the eastern perimeter of the property. A Collier Area Transit (CAT) bus stop is proposed at the corner of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road. The petitioner’s affordable housing commitment indicates that these units will be located on Tract R2 and constructed as single-family detached, single-family attached, multifamily (townhomes), or a combination thereof. Native vegetation preserves totaling 13.59 acres are proposed toward the western side of Tract R1. The proposed maximum building height is 35 feet zoned / 42 feet actual for single-family detached, townhomes, two-family, and single-family zero-lot-line structures. The proposed maximum building height is 60 feet, zoned /62 feet actual, for multifamily dwellings. Clubhouse/recreation buildings are proposed at a maximum height of 35 feet, zoned / 47 feet actual. Nine deviations from the Land Development Code (LDC) are proposed: 1. To allow dead-end streets designed with a hammerhead or Y configuration; 2. To reduce the right-of-way width for local streets from 60 feet to 50 feet; 3. To allow Type B buffer plantings within an area a minimum of 10 feet in width when a community facility in a PUD abuts a residential unit; 4. To allow a wall 8 feet in height; 5. To allow on-premises directional signs a setback of five feet from a roadway or platted easement; 6. To allow a single sidewalk six feet in width on only one side of the street, and no sidewalks along alleys within Tract 2; Page 8071 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 4 of 25 October 3, 2025 7. To allow for a minimum lot area of 1,680 square feet and a minimum lot width of 28 feet for single-family development in; 8. To allow for a minimum side yard of 5 feet and a minimum rear yard of 10 feet for single-family development; 9. To allow for a minimum front yard of 20 feet, a minimum rear yard of 15 feet, and a minimum side yard of 5 feet for multi-family development. CONCURRENT PETITIONS AT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY: In addition to the companion GMPA-PL20220002063, a Vacation of Road Right-of-Way (AVROW) – PL20240001248 has been submitted to vacate and clear title to a bisecting roadway known as Laredo Street. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses, zoning classifications, and maximum approved densities for properties surrounding the proposed Greenway Fritchey RPUD, which is currently used for agricultural uses and one single-family home with a zoning designation of A/RFMUO- Receiving Lands North: Developed with agricultural uses, with a current zoning designation of A/RFMUO- Receiving Lands East: Developed with agricultural uses, with a current zoning designation of A/RFMUO- Receiving Lands South: Fritchey Road (local road), then developed with agricultural uses and single-family residential, with a current zoning designation of A/RFMUO- Receiving Lands West: Greenway Road, then developed with single family residential and to the north developed with mobile homes, with a current zoning designation of Agriculture (A), to the north of the mobile homes is developed with single family homes with a current zoning designation of Regal Acres RPUD (5 DU/AC), which is approved for two- family dwellings and single-family dwellings for a total of 300 units Page 8072 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 5 of 25 October 3, 2025 Source: Bowman GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD)/ Receiving Lands, and is located within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The proposed request is to allow up to a maximum of 1,299 residential units (5.72 DU/AC), including 260 for-sale affordable housing units dedicated to households earning at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County. RFMUD/Receiving Lands provide transitional areas between lands designated Urban, Estates, Agricultural/Rural, and Conservation. Generally, Receiving Lands have lesser environmental and listed species habitat values than other lands (Sending and Neutral Lands) within the RFMUD due to prior development and/or agricultural activities. Receiving Lands have been identified as being the most appropriate lands for development and allow for a mixture of urban and rural levels of service. The RFMUD provides measures to preserve existing natural resources, retain the rural, pastoral, or park-like appearance along arterial roads, and protect private property rights. Incentives such as the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) process, clustered development, density bonus incentives, and provisions for central water and sewer service have been established to direct development into Receiving Lands and away from Sending Lands. The CHHA is the geographical area lying below the elevation of the Category 1 storm surge line, as per the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council’s Hurricane Evacuation Study. Increased density and expenditure of public infrastructure are discouraged in this area. Page 8073 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 6 of 25 October 3, 2025 Relevant to this petition, the RFMUD Receiving Lands allow the development of affordable housing projects at a maximum density of 12.2 dwelling units per acre, subject to Section 2.06.00 of the Land Development Code (LDC). These requirements include, but are not limited to: affordable housing units must be intermixed with, and not segregated from, the market-rate dwelling units in the development; and the square footage, construction, and design of the affordable housing units shall be the same as those of the market-rate dwelling units. Additionally, the FLUE provides that within one year of adopting the affordable housing provision allowing increased density of up to 12.2 dwelling units per acre (DU/A), the County will initiate an LDC amendment to establish appropriate criteria for affordable housing projects within Receiving Lands, such as design standards, development standards, and locational criteria. The implementing LDC regulations noted above are currently in draft form and will be presented to the Development Services Advisory Committee later this year. In the absence of the adopted regulations, staff find the proposed development and design standards to be reasonable. However, an amendment to the GMP is needed to increase density on the property. A companion GMP amendment petition (PL20220002063) has been submitted to establish a new residential overlay on the subject property that will allow the uses and density proposed in the RPUD. The PUD rezoning may only be deemed consistent with the FLUE if the companion GMPA is approved and goes into effect, and if the uses and intensities in the PUD align with those in the GMPA. Transportation Element: In evaluating the Greenway-Fritchey development staff reviewed the applicant’s Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) dated July 5, 2024, for consistency using the 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR). The Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition and recommends the following: Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links, the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Page 8074 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 7 of 25 October 3, 2025 Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” Staff findings: Staff evaluated the PUD document and the TIS dated July 5, 2024, and found that the scenario presents an accurate trip generation calculation, a reasonable trip distribution on the surrounding network, and reflects a reasonable development potential for the proposed RPUD. The PUD document establishes a total trip cap commitment for a net external maximum of ±861 peak-hour, two-way trips. According to TIS, the project impacts the following County roadways: Roadway/ Link # Link Location P.M. Peak Hour Peak Direction Service Volume/Peak Direction Projected PM Peak Hr./Peak Direction Project Traffic 1 2024 AUIR LOS 2024 AUIR Remaining Capacity Collier Boulevard/37. 0 Manatee Rd. to Mainsail Dr. 2,200/North 45/North D(2) 239 US-41 Tamiami Trail East/93.0 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd. to Triangle Blvd 3,000/East 103/East D(3) 248 US-41 Tamiami Trail East/94.0 Triangle Blvd. to Collier Blvd. 3,000/East 149/East C 1187 US-41 Tamiami Trail East/95.1 Collier Blvd. to Joseph Ln. 3,100/East 368/East B 1,651 US-41 Tamiami Trail East/95.2 Joseph Ln. to Greenway Rd. 2,000/East 404/East C 734 US-41 Tamiami Trail East/95.3 Greenway Rd. to San Marco Dr. 1,075/East 38/East B 616 1.Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is July 5, 2024, Traffic Impact Statement provided by the petitioner. 2.This is an expected deficiency by trip bank not caused by this development and is the jurisdiction and responsibility of FDOT. Also see key points regarding Florida Statue 163.3180 below. 3. This is an expected deficiency by trip bank not caused by this development. Also see key points regarding Florida Statue 163.3180 below. Page 8075 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 8 of 25 October 3, 2025 Florida Statute 163.3180: Key points of applicability. • Must allow an applicant to enter into a binding agreement to pay or construct their proportionate fair share. Consistency and operational fair share mitigation attachments are consistent with this requirement. • Facilities determined to be deficient with existing, committed, and vested trips plus projected background traffic from any source other than the development shall be removed from the proportionate share calculation. • The improvement necessary to correct this type of deficiency is the funding responsibility of the maintaining entity. • Applicant must receive credit for the anticipated road impact fees. The consistency fair share attachment is consistent with this requirement. • The applicant calculated their proportionate share and it does not exceed the impact fees anticipated to be collected. The consistency fair share attachment is consistent with this requirement. Additionally, there is a companion Developer Agreement that addresses additional road, ROW, and CAT Transit stop improvements. Policy 7.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: “Collier County shall apply the standards and criteria of the Access Management Policy as adopted by Resolution and as may be amended to ensure the protection of the arterial and collector system’s capacity and integrity.” Staff findings: The staff recommends approval of the proposed access points shown on the master plan for this petition; however, nothing in this development order will vest the developer with anything more than a right-in/right-out at those locations. Directional and full median openings may be contemplated at the time of the Site Development Plan or Plat and Plan, or when/if future expansion of the roadways occurs. Staff Recommendation: Based on this information, staff find the application consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element. The Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP and recommends approval. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site consists of 33 acres of native vegetation. A minimum of 13.2 acres of native vegetation is required to be placed under preservation and dedicated to Collier County. GMP Conclusion: The proposed PUD is inconsistent with the GMP, unless the Board approves the companion GMPA concurrently with the PUD, and the uses and intensities align. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (referred to as the “PUD Findings”), and Section 10.02.08.F, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as “Rezone Findings”), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC’s recommendation. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading “Zoning Services Analysis.” Page 8076 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 9 of 25 October 3, 2025 Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff have reviewed the petition to address environmental concerns. The property boundary includes 227.09 acres located within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay (Receiving). A portion of the property has been historically cleared and used for agricultural use since the early 1970s; the remainder of the property is primarily impacted forested wetlands. The minimum preserve requirement is 13.2 acres (40% of 33 acres of native vegetation); however, the applicant will preserve 13.59 acres. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission provided a letter of technical assistance dated August 1, 2025, in response to the transmittal of the Collier County Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Greenway Fritchey, GMPA PL2022002063. The technical assistance letter references listed species found onsite indicates that the subject property has the potential to contain various listed species. The technical assistance letter states there were no objections to the growth management plan amendment. In response to the FWCC letter, the applicant has provided a listed species management plan to address the comments and recommendations presented by FWCC. The list species management plan must be incorporated as part of the SDP/PPL approval process. An Off-Site Mitigation area has been provided as mitigation for proposed impacts. The Off-Site Mitigation Area contains 126.12 acres of forested/herbaceous upland and wetlands located adjacent to Picayune Strand State Forest. The Off- Site Mitigation Area will save sensitive habitat and provide connectivity to protected state lands. The environmental data indicates the proposed project is in an area that has the potential to contain a variety of protected animal species. The listed species observed onsite were two Little Blue Herons (Egretta caerulea) and two American Alligators (Alligator mississippiensis). These species are transient; therefore, follow-up evaluations will need to occur to ensure appropriate protection. The proposed project is located within the FWS consultation area for Bonneted Bats (Eumops floridanus); however, no evidence was found indicating Bonneted Bats were utilizing the trees existing on-site. The property contains potential habitat for caracaras (Caracara cheriway); however, no caracaras were observed on-site. However, an off-site caracara nest is located approximately 300 feet south of the subject property. Construction activities within 1,500 meters (4,920 feet) will require an additional evaluation in conjunction with consultation with the US Federal Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) regarding guidelines and permitting requirements prior to any construction activity. The Environmental Data indicates the property is located inside the Secondary Panther Zone for Florida Panther (Felis concolor coryi). FWCC provided a letter of technical assistance relating to the Florida Panther, which states that the project design should include impediments to deter wildlife movements into residential areas, and the future residents should be provided with information to minimize human-panther conflicts. This information will be included in the required listed species management and reviewed during the SDP/PPL review. There were no direct observations of panthers on-site; however, panther tracks were observed on-site. Telemetry data indicates Florida panthers have been documented within and around the boundary of the proposed project. The most recent telemetry recorded was from Florida Panther 193 on June 5, 2019. Consultation with U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) to obtain panther mitigation will be required. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) wildlife data indicates the presence of Black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) in the area. A black bear management plan must be included in PPL or SDP review. Additionally, the property contains potential habitat for the Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi). Consultation with the US Federal Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) regarding guidelines and permitting requirements will be required before construction. Finally, Wild pine air plants Page 8077 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 10 of 25 October 3, 2025 (Tillandsia balbisiana), Florida butterfly orchids (Encyclia tampensis), and Twisted air plants (Tillandsia flexuosa), listed as ‘Less Rare Plants,’ have been observed on the property and will be protected by LDC Section 3.04.03. Prior to approval of the first development order, a second protected species survey of the subject property will be required to ensure construction activity will not impact listed species. The second listed species survey will primarily focus on avian species; however, all listed species will be evaluated for their presence in and adjacent to the subject property. Transportation Review: The Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC. Transportation Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed Greenway Fritchey PUDZ. Utilities Review:The project is located within the regional potable water service area and the south wastewater service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD). Water and wastewater services are available via existing infrastructure within the adjacent right-of-way. Sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities are available. Developer commitments are listed in “EXHIBIT F” of the RPUD document under the “UTILITIES” section. Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utilities acceptance. Landscape Review:The applicant is seeking 1 deviation regarding landscape requirements. See Deviation Discussion. The buffers labeled on the Master Plan are in accordance with the Land Development Code. Affordable Housing Review:Housing Policy & Economic Development Division staff have provided the following comments: The Greenway-Fritchey PUD is proposed to be developed as a residential community to include up to 1,299 units at a density of 5.72 units per acre. The development proposes to include 20% of the residential units (260 units) as For-Sale affordable housing, restricted to households with incomes below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI). For reference, the 2025 Florida Housing Finance Corporation Income is: Page 8078 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 11 of 25 October 3, 2025 A Restrictive Covenant will be recorded on the affordable for-sale units, requiring them to be initially and subsequently sold to qualifying households for a period of 30 years from the Certificate of Occupancy of each unit. The need for affordable housing units is great in Collier County, as the University of Florida Shimberg Center for Housing reports that there are currently 51,368 cost-burdened households in Collier County, with 25,687 of those spending more than 50% of their monthly income on housing expenses. The current Median home sales price in Collier County is $575,000 (single-family homes: $670,000, condos: $422,500). Prices in Naples have increased 75% from pre-COVID prices. 48% of sales are cash deals. Source: NABOR Market Report, July 2025 The Shimberg Center also reports that the average observed rent for apartments in Collier County has risen sharply, doubling over the past ten years to $3,234 (2024). Approval of this development will assist Collier County in addressing the continued need for affordable housing. Stormwater Management Review: According to the current FEMA FIRM, this site is located in approximate flood zone AE 7.0. Any future building Finished Floor Elevations (FFE) shall be FEMA Base Flood Elevation (BFE) plus 1 foot or the 100-year 3-day stormwater design flood elevation, whichever is highest. The site is currently covered by a SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) #11-112655-P. The project drainage system is proposed as two sub-basins, both of which discharge into the north roadside swale of Fritchey Road, which runs west and ultimately enters the Greenway Road roadside swale, located along the west boundary of the property. The Greenway Road roadside swale system flows south towards US-41 roadside canal. The project's allowable discharge is limited to the Henderson Creek-Belle Meade Basin South maximum rate of 0.04 cfs/acre, which is notably one of the most restrictive discharge rates in Collier County. The proposed project does not contribute stormwater to, or accept offsite runoff from, adjacent properties to the north, east, and west of the site. It is not expected that development of this project will generate hydrologic impacts to the adjacent surrounding properties. In addition, site development approval (SDP /PPL) will be required from Collier County, to ensure that local development standards are maintained and that proposed stormwater system(s) are designed consistent with relevant LDC and County Ordinances for water quality and water quantity, during both the interim construction phase and final implementation. Zoning Services Review: Zoning Division staff has evaluated the proposed uses related to intensity and compatibility. The density of the proposed development is 5.72 units per acre (1,299 units on 227.09 acres), which exceeds the allowable density of one unit per 5 acres and can only be achieved if the companion GMP Amendment (PL20220002063) is approved. To the north and east of the subject property is developed with agricultural uses. To the west are mobile homes and single-family residential areas. To the south are single-family homes and agricultural uses. Below is a summary chart of the nearby zoning districts. Page 8079 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 12 of 25 October 3, 2025 Zoning District Future Land Use designation Density North: A/RFMUO- Receiving Lands Rural Fringe Mixed Use District - Receiving 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres East: A/RFMUO- Receiving Lands Rural Fringe Mixed Use District - Receiving 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres South: Fritchey Road then A/RFMUO- Receiving Lands Rural Fringe Mixed Use District - Receiving 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres West: Greenway Road, then Agriculture (A), then to the north is zoned Regal Acres RPUD (5 DU/AC) Urban Residential Subdistrict Agriculture (A) - 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres Regal Acres RPUD - 5 dwelling units per acre Proposed Greenway Fritchey RPUD Proposed Greenway – Fritchey Residential Overlay 5.72 dwelling units per acre Per LDC Section 4.07.02.E. governing PUDs, dimensional standards within any tract or increment of the proposed PUD shall conform to the minimum dimensional and other standards of the zoning district to which it most closely resembles in type, density, and intensity of use. Where there is uncertainty, the more restrictive standards shall apply. As such, the zoning district that most closely resembles the development standards for the Greenway Fritchey RPUD is the Regal Acres RPUD located to the west. It is important to note that the Regal Acres RPUD was approved with an affordable housing component that was managed by Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. Standards for the Regal Acres RPUD are compared below to the proposed standards for the Greenway Fritchey RPUD per the Development Standards Table in Exhibit B of the draft Ordinance (Attachment A). Below is a summary chart of the nearby zoning districts and their development standards with comparison to Greenway Fritchey RPUD. Page 8080 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 13 of 25 October 3, 2025 A/RFMUO – Receiving Lands Standards LDC Sec. 2.03.08.A.2.a.4.a (Existing development not utilizing clustering) Agriculture (A) Standards LDC Sec. 4.02.01 Regal Acres RPUD Proposed Greenway Fritchey RPUD Min. Lot Area 5 Acres 217,800 s.f. - Single family detached and zero lot line 1,600 s.f. - Two- Family 3,750 s.f. - Single family 1,680 s.f. to 1 AC max - Townhouse 1,100 s.f. per unit - Two- Family/Single- family zero lot line 1,680 s.f. per unit - Multi-Family 1 AC Min. Lot Width 165’ 165’ - Single family detached and zero lot line 32’ - Two- Family 35’ - Single family 28’ - Townhouse 18’ - Two- Family/Single family zero lot line 27’ - Multi-Family 150’ Min. Floor Area - n/a n/a - Single family detached and zero lot line 1,000 s.f. - Two- Family 1,050 s.f. - Single family 1000 s.f. - Townhouse 1000 s.f. - Two- Family/Single family zero lot line 1000 s.f. - Multi-Family 550 s.f./DU Min. Front Yard 50’ 50’ - Single family detached and zero lot line 12’ - Two- Family 25’ - Single family 20’ - Townhouse 20’ - Two- Family/Single family zero lot line 20’ - Multi-Family 20’ Min. Side Yard 30’ 30’ - Single family detached and zero lot line 5’/ZLL 0’ ft and 10’ - Single family 5’ - Townhouse 0’ or 5’ - Two- Family/Single Page 8081 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 14 of 25 October 3, 2025 In addition to the setbacks illustrated in the above table, Greenway Fritchey RPUD will provide a 25ft setback from Greenway Road and Fritchey Road for single family detached, townhome, and two- family and single family zero lot line. For multifamily and recreation buildings a 30 ft setback will be provided from these roads. The proposed heights have a zoned height of 35 feet and an actual building height of 42 feet. The multi-family dwellings will have a zoned height of 60 feet and an actual height of 62 feet. As illustrated in the PUD Master Plan, a 10-foot-wide Type A Buffer is proposed along the northern perimeter of the PUD and a 20-foot-wide Type D Buffer or 10-foot-wide Type A Buffer is proposed along the eastern perimeter. A 20-foot-wide Type D Buffer is proposed along Fritchey Greenway Roads. The LDC requires 50% open space for affordable housing projects. Because the agent is seeking the density bonus through the companion GMPA, the provision that the affordable units be throughout the development doesn’t apply and this qualifies as an affordable with 260 units set aside. As such, the 50% open space requirement does apply with Greenway Fritchey. The master plan illustrates the open space at 60% and therefore does comply with the LDC requirements at 136.25 acres. The landscaping buffers, open space, and preserves will provide natural transitions around and within the RPUD. The development standards will provide adequate setbacks, limitations on height, and buffers to ensure compatibility with adjacent land uses. PUD FINDINGS: LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that, “In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan’s compliance with the following criteria in addition to the findings in LDC Section 10.02.08.” - Two-Family 7.5’ family zero lot line 0’ or 5’ - Multi-Family 10’ Min. Rear Yard 50’ 50’ - Single family detached and zero lot line 5’ or 20’ along an alley - Two- Family 20’ - Single family 10’ - Townhouse 5’ from edge of pavement - Two-Family/Single family zero lot line 5’ from edge of pavement - Multi-Family 10’ Maximum Height 35’ 35’ - Single family detached and zero lot line 35’ zoned/40' ft actual - Two- Family zoned 35’/35’ actual - Single family 35’ zoned/42’ actual - Townhouse 35 zoned/42 actual - Two- Family/Single family zero lot line 35’ zoned/42’ actual - Multi-Family 60’ zoned/62’ actual Page 8082 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 15 of 25 October 3, 2025 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Water and wastewater mains are available along Greenway Road. There are adequate water and wastewater treatment capacities to serve the project. Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utilities acceptance. The project is covered under an existing SFWMD ERP, and stormwater outflows are restricted to the County’s allowable discharge rate for Henderson Creek-Belle Meade Basin South (0.04 cfs/acre), notably one of the most restrictive discharge rates in Collier County. Ultimately, the stormwater drainage from the project is conveyed in the roadside swale system of Fritchey and Greenway roads, consistent with the drainage patterns that currently exist for this site. In addition, the full details of any proposed stormwater system will also be evaluated during the County’s site development permit process. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. The County Attorney’s Office reviewed documents submitted with the application and demonstrate unified control. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and policies of the [GMP]. Comprehensive Planning staff finds that the proposed PUD will only be consistent with the GMP upon adoption of the companion GMPA-PL20220002063. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. As described in the Staff Analysis section of this staff report subsection Landscape Review, staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. The Master Plan proposes the appropriate perimeter landscape buffers. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The petitioner proposes 60% of the total area of the site as open space. The LDC requires 50% for affordable housing projects. Because the applicant is seeking the density bonus through the GMPA, the provision that the affordable units be throughout the development doesn’t apply, and this qualifies as an affordable with 260 units set aside. And with a commitment to provide 60% open space, the development complies with the open space requirement. Page 8083 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 16 of 25 October 3, 2025 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at the first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. The development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans, are sought. Water and wastewater mains are available along Greenway Road. There are adequate water and wastewater treatment capacities to serve the project. Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utilities acceptance. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Water and wastewater mains are available along Greenway Road. There are adequate water and wastewater treatment capacities to serve the project. Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utilities acceptance. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on a determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. Nine deviations are requested from the LDC in connection with this request to rezone to RPUD. See the deviations section of the staff report beginning on page 19. REZONE FINDINGS: LDC Subsection 10.02.08 F. states, “When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners…shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following when applicable.” 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, & policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the GMP. The proposed PUD is inconsistent with the GMP, unless the Board approves the companion GMPA first or concurrently with the PUD, and the uses and intensities align. Page 8084 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 17 of 25 October 3, 2025 2. The existing land use pattern. The surrounding land uses are described in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section on page 4 of this staff report. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. This rezoning will not create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. As shown on the zoning map included at the beginning of this report, the existing district boundaries are logically drawn. The proposed PUD zoning boundaries follow the property ownership boundaries. The zoning map on page 2 of the staff report illustrates the perimeter of the outer boundary of the subject parcel. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed change is not necessary, but is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes. The petitioner believes the rezoning is necessary for the purpose of constructing a residential development. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The neighborhood and living conditions are characterized by the rural and natural lands in the vicinity of the site. The proposed development is more intense than the nearby residential areas to the west and agricultural areas to the north, east, and south. The proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The development standards proposed ensure compatibility with neighboring properties. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time, as outlined above, i.e., GMP consistent at the time of rezoning, as evaluated as part of the GMP Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at the time of the first development order (SDP or Plat). Additionally, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The site is currently covered by a SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) #11- 112655-P. Project discharge is into the north roadside swale of Fritchey Road, ultimately entering the Greenway Road roadside swale and flowing south towards US-41 roadside canal. Page 8085 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 18 of 25 October 3, 2025 Project allowable discharge is limited to the Henderson Creek-Belle Meade Basin South maximum rate of 0.04 cfs/acre. In addition, site development approval (SDP / PPL) will be required from Collier County, to ensure that local development standards are maintained and that proposed stormwater system(s) are designed consistent with relevant LDC and County Ordinances for water quality and water quantity, during both the interim construction phase and final implementation. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. It is not anticipated that this RPUD will reduce light or air to the adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. Transition from an agricultural zoning designation to a residential planned unit development designation, which allows for the development of 1,299 dwelling units, typically has the effect of increasing property values. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The proposed change will not be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare. If the proposed development complies with the GMP, then that constitutes a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. Should approval of the proposed GMP Amendment be granted, the proposed change would not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with the County’s comprehensive plan are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The property is currently in use in accordance with the existing zoning. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County. The proposed development is more intense than the A/RFMUO Receiving Lands to the north, east, and south, which have agricultural uses, and the residential areas to the west. As illustrated in the PUD Master Plan, a 10-foot-wide Type A Buffer is proposed along the northern perimeter of the PUD, and a 20-foot-wide Type D Buffer or a 10-foot-wide Type A Buffer is proposed along the eastern perimeter. A 20-foot-wide Type D Buffer is proposed along Fritchey Greenway Roads. These buffers should mitigate any adverse conditions and Page 8086 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 19 of 25 October 3, 2025 provide natural transitions from the adjacent properties. The proposed project layout consists of a suburban style PUD, typical of the County’s urban designated future land use areas. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The petition was reviewed for compliance with the GMP and the LDC. Staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require considerable site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting processes, and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. The development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that are responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning process, and staff have concluded that the developer has provided appropriate commitments so that the impacts to the Level of Service (LOS) will be minimized. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. To be determined by the Board during its advertised public hearing. DEVIATION DISCUSSION The petitioner seeks nine deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are directly extracted from PUD Exhibit E. The petitioner’s rationale and staff analysis/ recommendation are outlined below. Proposed Deviation # 1: (Dead-End Streets) “Deviation #1 (Street System Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J., Street System Requirements, which prohibits dead-end streets except when designed as a cul-de-sac, to instead allow for dead-end streets designed with a hammerhead or Y configuration.” Petitioner’s Justification: Only a small number of lots will be accessed from the internal dead-end roadways, and a full cul-de-sac is not necessary in order to provide safe access to these lots or to protect public health, safety, and welfare. The project must still comply with the Fire Code and provide sufficient turnarounds for the turn radius of emergency vehicles. Page 8087 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 20 of 25 October 3, 2025 Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” Proposed Deviation # 2: (Right-of-Way Width) “Deviation #2 (Street System Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N., “Street System Requirements”, which requires a minimum right-of-way width of 60 feet to instead allow a width of 50 feet for internal private roadways within the Greenway Fritchey RPUD. See Exhibit C for cross-sections.” Petitioner’s Justification: This deviation has been granted for many projects where the roads will remain private. There is adequate width in a 50-foot right-of-way for a private, local road to provide a sufficient cross-section to accommodate all necessary utilities, a sidewalk, and travel lanes while maintaining public safety. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” Proposed Deviation #3: (Type B Buffer) “Deviation #3 (Buffer Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C.2, “Types of buffers”, which requires a 15-foot-wide Type B buffer when a community facility in a PUD abuts a residential unit to instead allow Type B buffer plantings within an area a minimum of 10 feet in width.” Petitioner’s Justification: Clubhouse locations will be identified on the subdivision plat for the project, and potential purchases of lots adjacent will be aware of the clubhouse and amenity center use. A 10-foot width provides sufficient space for the required plantings. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” Proposed Deviation #4: (Fences/Wall Height) “Deviation #4 (Wall Height) requests relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C, “Fences and Walls, Excluding Sound Walls”, which limits the heights of fences or walls in residential components of PUDs to 6 feet, to instead allow a wall 8 feet in height.” Petitioner’s Justification: The applicant proposes an eight-foot wall to provide additional buffering, both visual and auditory. The wall will be constructed to all other standards as required by code, i.e. to Page 8088 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 21 of 25 October 3, 2025 present a finished side to the adjoining lot, to be located no less than six feet from the PUD boundary, and to place all required vegetative plantings and irrigation on the external side of the wall such that 50 percent of the wall is screened within one year of the installation of the vegetative material. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” Proposed Deviation #5: (On-Premises Directional Signs) “Deviation #5 (Signs) requests relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a., “On premise directional signs”, which allows on-premises directional signs be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of roadway, paved surface, or back of curb, to instead allow a setback of five feet from a roadway or platted easement. This deviation does not apply to County owned roads.” Petitioner’s Justification: This deviation will allow flexibility in locating directional signs to ensure they are clearly visible to the traveling public while maintaining public safety. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” Proposed Deviation #6: (Sidewalks) “Deviation #6 (Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.1., “Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements”, which requires sidewalks on both sides of a local street, to instead allow a single sidewalk six feet in width on only one side of the street, and no sidewalks along alleys within Tract R2. See Exhibit C for Internal Streets and Alleys Cross- Sections.” Petitioner’s Justification: Tract R2 will be the location for the proposed Habitat for Humanity affordable housing units. The proposed roads are private, low speed, and internal to the site. A sidewalk on one side will still provide sufficient pedestrian facilities while maintaining public safety; and the proposed width of six feet will still allow two pedestrians to walk abreast. This right-of-way layout, utilizing a single, five-foot sidewalk, is used within Habitat for Humanity developments throughout Collier County and will allow Habitat for Humanity to reduce permitting costs via the ability to reuse right-of-way cross-sections and site plans as the basis for this project. Where the proposed development utilizes alleys, they will be providing vehicular access to garages located at the rear of the building, making sidewalks unnecessary. This type of layout is typically found in “new urbanist” style developments, as it provides residential buildings with a walkable frontage: usable, open areas that act as a social space. Additionally, the proposed alleys will be one way, with a ±15’ wide travel lane and ±26’ wide in total to accommodate gutters, and short ±6.50’ long driveways. The reduced traffic and width, and driveways will provide traffic calming and allow for a safe environment for any potential pedestrians without the use of sidewalks. Page 8089 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 22 of 25 October 3, 2025 Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” Proposed Deviation #7A: (Minimum Lot Area) “Deviation #7A (Clustered Development) requests relief from LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a(4)(b)i.a), “Clustered development”, which requires a minimum lot area of 4,500 square feet and a minimum interior lot width of 40 feet for single-family development, to instead allow for a minimum lot area of 1,680 square feet and a minimum lot width of 28 feet for single-family development.” Petitioner’s Justification: In order to ensure affordability, Habitat for Humanity homes are typically smaller, thus requiring smaller lots. Additionally, this deviation will allow for the market rate units to adjust to the demands of the housing market and better fulfill the Collier County housing needs, such as providing a mixture of housing types. If approved, this deviation will result in a more clustered development pattern than what is required by code. The smaller lot sizes will allow for the maximization of open space in conjunction with the required preservation area, while limiting infrastructure costs, which will result in a more attractive development and cost-savings that will aid in the development of quality, affordable housing portion of the proposed RPUD. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Similar development standards were approved with Vincent Acres RPUD, with a minimum lot area of 1,680 s.f. and a minimum lot width of 28 ft for single-family detached, attached, and single-family zero lot line. Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” Proposed Deviation #7B: (Minimum Yard Requirements) “Deviation #7B (Clustered Development) requests relief from LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a(4)(b)ii.a) “Minimum yard requirements”, which requires a minimum side yard of 6 feet and a minimum rear yard of 15 feet for single-family development, to instead allow for a minimum side yard of 5 feet and a minimum rear yard of 10 feet for single-family development.” Petitioner’s Justification: In order to ensure affordability, Habitat for Humanity homes are typically smaller, thus requiring smaller lots. Additionally, this deviation will allow for the market rate units to adjust to the demands of the housing market and better fulfill the Collier County housing needs, such as providing a mixture of housing types. If approved, this deviation will result in a more clustered development pattern than what is required by code. The smaller lot sizes will allow for the maximization of open space in conjunction with the required preservation area, while limiting infrastructure costs, which will result in a more attractive development and cost-savings that will aid in the development of quality, affordable housing portion of the proposed RPUD. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: More stringent development standards were approved with Page 8090 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 23 of 25 October 3, 2025 Vincent Acres RPUD, with a minimum side yard of 5 ft for single-family detached and 0 feet or 10 feet for single-family attached/single-family zero lot line. For rear yards, Vincent Acres RPUD was approved with a minimum rear yard of 5 ft from the edge of pavement for single-family detached, attached, and single-family zero lot line. Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” Proposed Deviation #7C: (Minimum Yard Requirements) “Deviation #7C (Clustered Development) requests relief from LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a(4)(b)ii.b) “Minimum yard requirements”, which requires a minimum front yard of 30 feet, a minimum rear yard of 30 feet, and a minimum side yard of one-half the building height or 15 feet for multi-family development, to instead allow for a minimum front yard of 20 feet, a minimum rear yard of 15 feet, and a minimum side yard of 5 feet for multi-family development. This deviation excludes lots that abut an arterial or collector roadway.” Petitioner’s Justification: In order to ensure affordability, Habitat for Humanity homes are typically smaller, thus requiring smaller lots. Additionally, this deviation will allow for the market rate units to adjust to the demands of the housing market and better fulfill the Collier County housing needs, such as providing a mixture of housing types. If approved, this deviation will result in a more clustered development pattern than what is required by code. The smaller lot sizes will allow for the maximization of open space in conjunction with the required preservation area, while limiting infrastructure costs, which will result in a more attractive development and cost-savings that will aid in the development of quality, affordable housing portion of the proposed RPUD. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: More stringent development standards were approved with Vincent Acres RPUD, with a minimum front yard of 12 feet, the side yard at 0 feet or 5 feet, and the rear yard of 5 feet from the edge of pavement for townhouses. Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning and Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.” DECEMBER 5, 2022, NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM on December 5, 2022, at the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, the Auditorium, located at 300 Tower Road, Naples, FL. The meeting commenced at approximately 5:30 p.m. and ended at 6:45 p.m. Seventeen members of the public attended. Bob Mulhere, the agent, conducted the meeting, introducing the consultant team and staff, and then gave a PowerPoint presentation. The presentation consisted of an overview of the proposed RPUD rezoning application and the companion GMPA. Following the agent’s presentation, the meeting was opened to attendees to make comments and ask the consultant team questions regarding the proposed development. The concerns discussed included traffic, density, affordable housing units, notification of the NIM and public hearing process, native species on the site, and the design and price range of the proposed market-rate units. No commitments were made. A copy of the NIM Summary, NIM advertising, and sign-in sheet are included in Attachment B. Page 8091 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 24 of 25 October 3, 2025 APRIL 14, 2025, NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): Because the petition exceeded the first anniversary of the first NIM, the second NIM was scheduled. The applicant conducted a second NIM on April 14, 2025, at the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, the Auditorium, located at 300 Tower Road, Naples, FL. The meeting commenced at approximately 5:30 p.m. and ended at 5:44 p.m. Three members of the public attended. Jeremie Chastain, the agent, conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and staff, and gave a PowerPoint presentation. The presentation consisted of an overview of the proposed RPUD rezoning application and the companion GMPA. Following the agent’s presentation, the meeting was opened to attendees to make comments and ask the consultant team questions regarding the proposed development. The concerns discussed were the location of the wall and sidewalks around the perimeter of the project and access points. No commitments were made. A copy of the NIM Summary, NIM advertising, and sign-in sheets are included in Attachment B. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) REVIEW This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Environmental Services staff recommends approval of the proposed petition with the following conditions: 1. Before issuance of the first SDP and/or PPL, a follow-up listed species survey observation is required prior to any construction activities. 2. A listed species management plan is required for the management of the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), Black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus), caracara (Caracara cheriway), and all other listed species. 3. Applicant shall provide a 6-foot fence or wall along the boundaries of the project to discourage large mammals from entering the proposed development. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REVIEW: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s office on September 19, 2025. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition PUDZ- PL20220002061, Greenway Fritchey RPUD PUDZ, to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval, subject to approval of the companion GMP Amendment and subject to the following conditions: 1. Before issuance of the first SDP and/or PPL, a follow-up listed species survey observation is required prior to any construction activities. 2. A listed species management plan is required for the management of the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), Black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus), caracara (Caracara cheriway), and all other listed species. 3. Applicant shall provide a 6-foot fence or wall along the boundaries of the project to discourage Page 8092 of 9661 PUDZ-PL20220002061 Greenway Fritchey PUDZ Page 25 of 25 October 3, 2025 large mammals from entering the proposed development. Attachments: A. Draft Ordinance B. Application/Backup Materials Page 8093 of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“ $&5(6 ,6 /2&$7(' 21 7+( 1257+($67(51 ,17(56(&7,21 2) *5((1:$< 52$' $1' )5,7&+(< 52$' ,1 6(&7,21  72:16+,3  6287+ 5$1*(  ($67 &2//,(5 &2817<)/25,'$>3/@   :+(5($6 5REHUW - 0XOKHUH )$,&3 RI %RZPDQ &RQVXOWLQJ DQG 5LFKDUG ' <RYDQRYLFK(VTRI&ROHPDQ<RYDQRYLFK .RHVWHU3$UHSUHVHQWLQJ*UHHQZD\)ULWFKH\/DQG //&DQG+DELWDWIRU+XPDQLW\RI&ROOLHU&RXQW\,QFFROOHFWLYHO\WKH³'HYHORSHU´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age 8094 of 9661 >&36@   *UHHQZD\)ULWFKH\538'3/  RI 5HFHLYLQJ/DQGVIRUD“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age 8095 of 9661 10-7-25 Page 1 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx EXHIBIT A GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD PERMITTED USES 1. MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS A. The maximum number of dwelling units shall be one thousand two hundred ninety-nine (1,299) (5.72 dwelling units per acre). 2. RESIDENTIAL/TRACT R1 No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwellings; 2. Single-family attached dwellings; 3. Two-family and single-family zero lot line dwellings; 4. Townhouses; 5. Multi-family dwelling units; 6. A recreational building or clubhouse, with typical accessory recreational facilities shall be permitted which serves the residents and their guests. 7. Any other principal use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) or the Hearing Examiner (HEX), as applicable, by the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). B. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal residential uses permitted in this RPUD, including recreational facilities, such as a clubhouse, gazebos, and swimming pools, for residents and guests; Page 8096 of 9661 Page 2 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx 2. Neighborhood recreation areas for residents and their guests: swimming pools; parks, which may include seating areas, benches, and shade structures. 3. Model homes, sales centers, and temporary uses are permitted in accordance with LDC Section 5.04.00, Temporary uses and structures. 4. Entry gates and gatehouses. 5. Stormwater management treatment facilities, conveyance facilities and structures, such as berms, swales, and outfall structures. 6. Temporary construction and administrative offices for the developer and developer’s authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas, and related uses, subject to the procedures for a temporary use permit provided in LDC Section 5.04.01. 3. RESIDENTIAL/TRACT R2 No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Single-family detached dwellings; 2. Single-family attached dwellings; 3. Two-family and single-family zero lot line dwellings; 4. Townhouses; 5. Multi-family dwelling units; 6. A recreational building or clubhouse, with typical accessory recreational facilities shall be permitted which serves the residents and their guests. 7. Any other principal use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) or the Hearing Examiner (HEX), as applicable, by the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC). Page 8097 of 9661 Page 3 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx B. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal residential uses permitted in this RPUD, including recreational facilities, such as a clubhouse, gazebos, and swimming pools, for residents and guests; 2. Neighborhood recreation areas for residents and their guests: swimming pools; parks, which may include seating areas, benches, and shade structures. 3. Model homes, sales centers, and temporary uses are permitted in accordance with LDC Section 5.04.00, Temporary uses and structures. 4. Entry gates and gatehouses. 5. Stormwater management treatment facilities, conveyance facilities and structures, such as berms, swales, and outfall structures. 6. Temporary construction and administrative offices for the developer and developer’s authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas, and related uses, subject to the procedures for a temporary use permit provided in LDC Section 5.04.01. 4. PRESERVE/TRACT P No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered, or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Preservation of native habitat. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Passive recreational uses; 2. Stormwater management structures and facilities; 3. Pervious and impervious pathways and boardwalks, consistent with the LDC; 4. Benches for seating; and Page 8098 of 9661 Page 4 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx 5. Conservation-related and recreational activities as allowed by the LDC. Page 8099 of 9661 Page 5 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx EXHIBIT B GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD The table below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Greenway Fritchey RPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the Site Development Plan or Subdivision Plat. PERIMETER RPUD SETBACK: The perimeter RPUD setback shall be, at a minimum, equal to the required width of perimeter landscape buffers, but no less than 10 feet. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE TRACT R1 & R2 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SINGLE- FAMILY DETACHED TOWNHOME TWO-FAMILY & SINGLE- FAMILY ZERO LOT LINE MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS CLUBHOUSE/ RECREATION BUILDINGS Principal Structures MIN. LOT AREA 1,680 S.F. 1 AC MAX. 1,100 S.F. PER UNIT 1,680 S.F. PER UNIT 1 Ac. N/A MIN. LOT WIDTH 28 ft. 18 ft. 27 ft. 150 ft. N/A MIN. FLOOR AREA 1,000 S.F. 1,000 S.F. 1,000 S.F. 550 S.F./DU N/A MIN. SETBACK FROM GREENWAY RD. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. MIN. SETBACK FROM FRITCHEY RD. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 30 ft. 30 ft. MIN. FRONT YARD 20 ft.1 20 ft.1 20 ft.1 20 ft. 20 ft. MIN. SIDE YARD 5 ft.2 0 ft. or 5 ft. 2 0 ft. or 5 ft. 2 10 ft.6 5 ft. MIN. REAR YARD 10 ft.3 5 ft. from edge of pavement3 0 ft. or 5 ft. from edge of pavement3 10 ft. 15 ft. MIN. LAKE SETBACK4, 5 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. MIN. PRESERVE SETBACK 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. 25 ft. MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN STRUCTURES 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft.6 10 ft. MAX. HEIGHT ZONED 35 ft. NTE 2 STORIES 35 ft. NTE 2 STORIES 35 ft. NTE 2 STORIES 60 ft. NTE 4 STORIES 35 ft. NTE 2 STORIES MAX. HEIGHT ACTUAL 42 ft. 42 ft. 42 ft. 62 ft. 47 ft. Accessory Structures MIN. SETBACK FROM GREENWAY RD. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. MIN. SETBACK FROM FRITCHEY RD. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. MIN. FRONT YARD SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS MIN. SIDE YARD SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS MIN. REAR YARD 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. MIN. LAKE SETBACK SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS MIN. PRESERVE SETBACK 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. MAX. HEIGHT ZONED SPS SPS SPS 25 ft. 25 ft. MAX. HEIGHT ACTUAL SPS SPS SPS 32 ft. 32 ft. SPS = same as principal structures; NTE = not to exceed; S.F. = square feet; BH = building height; N/A = not applicable Page 8100 of 9661 Page 6 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx Footnotes: 1 Corner lots shall provide one (1) front yard setback within the yard that contains the driveway/vehicular access to the dwelling unit. The secondary front yard that does not contain the driveway/vehicular access to the dwelling unit shall provide a minimum 10-foot setback measured from the right-of-way and will have no overhang into the utility easement if there are any buildings adjacent to that secondary front yard setback. 2 5 ft. minimum side setbacks for single-family attached, two-family and single-family zero lot line must be accompanied by another 5’ minimum side setback on adjoining lot to achieve minimum 10 ft. separation. 3 Garages may be accessed from the rear of the property and will be required to provide a minimum 2-foot setback to the alley access easement. 4 Measured to the lake maintenance easement. 5 0’ principal and accessory setbacks are permitted from the lake maintenance easements and landscape buffer easements, which will be separate platted tracts on the PPL or separately labeled easements on the SDP. There shall be no setback restrictions to the installation of fencing to create private yards between principal structures. 6 The minimum side yard and distance between structures shall be increased to a minimum of 15 ft. for buildings three stories in height; and shall be increased to a minimum of 20 ft. for buildings four or more stories in height. Page 8101 of 9661 Page 7 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx Page 8102 of 9661 Page 8 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx Page 8103 of 9661 Page 9 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx Page 8104 of 9661 Page 10 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx Page 8105 of 9661 Page 11 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx Page 8106 of 9661 Page 12 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx Page 8107 of 9661 Page 13 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx EXHIBIT D GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1: THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 2: A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RUN SOUTH 00°59'06" WEST 692.65 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 80°21'12" EAST 327.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 00°59'06" WEST 200.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°21'12" EAST 140.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°59'06" WEST 362.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°21'12" WEST 467.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE NORTH 00°59'06" EAST 562.35 FEET ALONG SAID LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 3: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 4: THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 5: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING: A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST Page 8108 of 9661 Page 14 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RUN SOUTH 0°59'06" WEST 692.65 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 88°21'12" EAST 327.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 0°59'06" WEST 200.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°21'12" EAST 140.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0°59'06" WEST 362.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°21'12' WEST 467.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE NORTH 0°59'06" EAST 562.35 FEET ALONG SAID LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, LYING AND BEING IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE EAST, LESS THE SOUTHERNMOST 30 FEET. AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, LESS THE EASTERLY 30 FEET FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY AND THE SOUTHERLY 30 FEET FOR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY, CONTAINING IN ALL 10 ACRES MORE OR LESS. AND, (AS DESCRIBED IN AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION TITLE COMMITMENT FILE NO.: 1144058, COMMITMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 05, 2021 AT 11:00 PM): PARCEL 6: PARCEL B SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, LESS THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF AND LESS THE WEST 30 FEET THEREOF, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. Page 8109 of 9661 Page 15 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx PARCEL 7: PARCEL A SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, LESS THE SOUTH 1/2 OF GOVERNMENT LOT 2 AND LESS THE NORTH 1/2 OF GOVERMENT LOT 2 AND LESS THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 8: SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, AND NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, AND NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 9: NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 10: NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL 11: NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. CONTAINING A TOTAL AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 227.09 ACRES Page 8110 of 9661 Page 16 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx EXHIBIT E GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD LIST OF DEVIATIONS 1. Deviation 1 (Street System Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J., Street System Requirements, which prohibits dead-end streets except when designed as a cul-de-sac, to instead allow for dead-end streets designed with a hammerhead or Y configuration. 2. Deviation 2 (Street System Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N., “Street System Requirements”, which requires a minimum right-of-way width of 60 feet to instead allow a width of 50 feet for internal private roadways within the Greenway Fritchey RPUD. See Exhibit C for cross-sections. 3. Deviation 3 (Buffer Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C.2, “Types of buffers”, which requires a 15-foot-wide Type B buffer when a community facility in a PUD abuts a residential unit to instead allow Type B buffer plantings within an area a minimum of 10 feet in width. 4. Deviation 4 (Wall Height) requests relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C, “Fences and Walls, Excluding Sound Walls”, which limits the heights of fences or walls in residential components of PUDs to 6 feet, to instead allow a wall 8 feet in height. 5. Deviation 5 (Signs) requests relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a., “On premise directional signs”, which allows on-premises directional signs be set back a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of roadway, paved surface, or back of curb, to instead allow a setback of five feet from a roadway or platted easement. This deviation does not apply to County owned roads. 6. Deviation 6 (Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements) requests relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.1., “Sidewalks, Bike Land and Pathway Requirements”, which requires sidewalks on both sides of a local street, to instead allow a single sidewalk six feet in width on only one side of the street, and no sidewalks along alleys within Tract R2. See Exhibit C for Internal Streets and Alleys Cross-Sections. 7. Deviation 7A (Clustered Development) requests relief from LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a(4)(b)i.a), “Clustered development”, which requires a minimum lot area of 4,500 square feet and a minimum interior lot width of 40 feet for single-family development, to instead allow for a minimum lot area of 1,680 square feet and a minimum lot width of 28 feet for single-family development. Deviation 7B (Clustered Development) requests relief from LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a(4)(b)ii.a) “Minimum yard requirements”, which requires a minimum side yard of 6 feet and a minimum rear yard of 15 feet for single-family development, to instead Page 8111 of 9661 Page 17 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx allow for a minimum side yard of 5 feet and a minimum rear yard of 10 feet for single-family development. Deviation 7C (Clustered Development) requests relief from LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a(4)(b)ii.b) “Minimum yard requirements”, which requires a minimum front yard of 30 feet, a minimum rear yard of 30 feet, and a minimum side yard of one-half the building height or 15 feet for multi-family development, to instead allow for a minimum front yard of 20 feet, a minimum rear yard of 15 feet, and a minimum side yard of 5 feet for multi-family development. This deviation excludes lots that abut an arterial or collector roadway. Page 8112 of 9661 Page 18 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx EXHIBIT F GREENWAY FRITCHEY RPUD LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS The purpose of this section is to set forth the development commitments for the development of this project. 1. GENERAL A. Two entities (hereinafter the Managing Entities) shall be responsible for RPUD monitoring until close-out of the RPUD, and these entities shall also be responsible for satisfying all RPUD commitments until close-out of the RPUD. At the time of this RPUD approval, the Managing Entities are Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC (Tract R1) and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc (Tract R2). Should either Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document, to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become a Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to the County that includes an acknowledgement of the commitments required by the RPUD by the new owner and the new owner’s agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity will not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the RPUD is closed out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of RPUD commitments. B. Issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state of federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. (Section 125.022, FS) C. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. 2. TRANSPORTATION A. The maximum total daily trip generation for the RPUD shall not exceed 861 two-way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. B. All other transportation related commitments are set forth in a companion Developer Agreement (DCA). The DCA provides that prior to the issuance of 1,000th certificate of Occupancy (CO) for the RPUD, the Developer at its sole cost and expense, will Page 8113 of 9661 Page 19 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx design, permit and construct operational improvements at the intersection of U.S. 41 and Greenway Road as described in the DCA. No CO’s may be issued after the 1,000th CO if the intersection improvements are not completed and accepted by the County. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL A. There is ±33 acres of existing native vegetation within the subject property. The minimum required native preservation is ±13.20 acres (40% of ±33 acres of existing native vegetation). The Master Plan preserves ±13.59 acres of native vegetation on site within Tract P. B. Preserves may be used to satisfy the landscape buffer requirements after exotic vegetation removal in accordance with LDC Sections 4.06.02 and 4.06.05.E.1. Supplemental plantings with native plant materials shall be in accordance with LDC Section 3.05.07. In order to meet the requirements of a Type ‘A’ buffer perimeter boundaries of the RPUD; a 6-foot-wide landscape buffer located outside of the preserve will be reserved. In the event that the preserve does not meet buffer requirements after removal of exotics and supplemental planting within the preserve, plantings will be provided by Owner in the 6’ wide reservation to meet the buffer requirements. The type, size, and number of such plantings, if necessary, will be determined at time of initial SDP or plat and included on the landscape plans for the SDP or plat. C. A listed species management plan will be provided for the project at the time of development approval. The management plan will address how listed species will be protected, including the listed plant species observed within the development footprint and proposed preserve areas. 4. AFFORDABLE HOUSING A. Two-hundred sixty (260) units will be sold to households whose initial certified incomes are up to an including 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) for Collier County. B. All 260 income-restricted units will be on Tract R2. The income-restricted units will be constructed as single family detached, single family attached, multifamily (townhomes), or a combination thereof. C. These units will be committed for a period of 30 years from the date of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy and sold to households that qualify for the designated income thresholds. D. Households shall occupy the property as their primary residence as evidenced by maintenance of homestead exemption. Page 8114 of 9661 Page 20 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx E. Prior to the initial sale of any of the affordable set-aside units, the owner and developer will record a restrictive covenant in the public records of Collier County identifying the affordable set-aside units and the income threshold pertaining to each unit. The covenant will state that each unit will be initially sold and subsequently sold to qualifying households for a period of 30 years from the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for each unit. The covenant will also state that at least 30 days prior to the initial sale or subsequent sale of any unit, the County’s Community and Human Services Division, or its designee, will be notified in writing and provided documents for income verification and certification on forms acceptable to Collier County. The closing on the sale may occur after the County, or its designee, confirms that the household qualifies for the designated income thresholds. F. Income verification and certification may take the form of the most recent year’s filed income tax return for each occupant who had filed and will occupy the affordable housing unit. Income verification and certification for households or household members who had not filed the most recent year’s tax return may be based on written verification to verify all regular sources of income to the household member. The written verification shall include, at a minimum, the purpose of the verification, a statement to release information, employer verification of gross annual income or rate of pay, number of hours worked, frequency of pay, bonuses, tips, and commissions and a signature block with the date of verification. The verification shall be valid for up to 90 days prior to occupancy. Upon expiration of the 90-day period, the information may be verbally updated from the original sources for an additional 30 days, provided it has been documented by the person preparing the original verification. After this time, a new verification form must be completed. a. As part of the annual PUD monitoring report, the developer will include an annual report that provides the progress and monitoring of occupancy of the income-restricted units in a format approved by the Collier County Community and Human Services Division. The developer agrees to annual on-site monitoring by the County, or its designee. G. By way of example, the 2024 Florida Housing Finance Corporation Income Limits are: Page 8115 of 9661 Page 21 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx 5. UTILITIES A. At the time of application for subdivision Plans and Plat (PPL) and/or Site Development Plan (SDP) approval, as the case may be, offsite improvements and/or upgrades to the wastewater collection/transmission system may be required by County to adequately handle the total estimated peak hour flow from the project. Whether or not such improvements are necessary, and if so, the exact nature of such improvements and/or upgrades shall be determined by County Manager or designee during PPL or SDP review. Such improvement and/or upgrades as may be necessary shall be permitted and installed at the developer's expense and may be required to be in place prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any portion or phase of the development that triggers the need for such improvements and/or upgrades. B. At the time of application for subdivision Plans and Plat (PPL) and/or Site Development Plan (SDP) approval, as the case may be, offsite improvements and/or upgrades to the water distribution/transmission system may be required by County to adequately handle the total estimated peak hour flow to the project. Whether or not such improvements are necessary, and if so, the exact nature of such improvements and/or upgrades shall be determined by County Manager or designee during PPL or SDP review. Such improvement and/or upgrades as may be necessary shall be permitted and installed at the developer's expense and may be required to be in place prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any portion or phase of the development that triggers the need for such improvements and/or upgrades. 6. WILDFIRE PREVENTION AND MITIGATION A. Project Structural Design and Materials Page 8116 of 9661 Page 22 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx 1. Roofs shall be constructed using Class A asphalt/fiberglass shingles, sheet metal, terra cotta tile, and concrete. 2. Soffits shall be made of non-combustible material or (minimum) ½-inch nominal wood sheathing. 3. No window opening shall exceed 40 square feet and double-paned glass, or tempered glass shall be utilized. B. Location/Defensible Space 1. A minimum 30 feet of “Defensible Area” shall be maintained around principal structures. The Defensible Area may include yards, green space, required landscape buffers, sidewalks, driveways or roadways, and customary accessory uses and structures such as decks, lanais, and so forth. Defensible area shall not be construed to mean a separation between structures. 2. Within this Defensible Area: i. Vegetation shall be thinned and maintained to eliminate vegetated or “ladder fuels” and tree crowns shall be a minimum of 10 feet apart. ii. Trees will be maintained to keep branches 6 to 10 feet from the ground. iii. Trees will be maintained at a maximum canopy spread of 20’ at maturity, in order to prevent roof overhang. iv. The less-flammable trees and shrubs listed below shall be utilized within the defensible area. Other trees and shrubs not listed below may be utilized if approved by Collier County and the Florida Fire Service, Florida Forest Service, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Trees Ash Magnolia Sago/King Sage Palm Sweet Acacia Citrus Maple Pecan Silver Button Crape Myrtle Redbud Willow Tabebuia Dogwood Sycamore Pygmy Date Palm Gumbo-Limbo Jacaranda Viburnum Red Mulberry Red Bay Loquat Alexander Palm Winged Elm Green Button Oaks Sweet Gum Catalpa Mahogany Pindo Palm Persimmon Satan Leaf Hawthorne Black Cherry Queen Palm Pigeon Plum Elm Sparkleberry Sea Grape Shrubs Agave Philodendron Century Plant Aloe Pittosporum Coontie Page 8117 of 9661 Page 23 of 23 Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\PUDZ\Post 3rd Resubmittal - Sent to Staff (10-7-2025)\Greenway Fritchey RPUD Document (PL- 20220002061) (10-7-2025).docx Azalea Red Yucca Anise Viburnum Beauty Berry Indian Hawthorne Hydrangea Pyracantha Oakleaf Hydrangea Oleander Camellia v. Lava stone, gravel or other non-flammable materials shall be used in planting beds within 5 feet of a structure. 3. The managing entity shall be responsible to ensure these requirements are met. 7. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT A. Prior to the issuance of the first residential certificate of occupancy, the property owner shall provide a one-time developer’s contribution of one (1) 45 KW (or higher) towable, diesel, rental-grade generator to Collier County specification to the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Management. 8. OTHER A. Excavation setbacks are subject to the minimum requirements of Sec. 22-112(1) of the Code of Ordinances. Reduction of the required minimum setback is subject to an exception review and approval in accordance with Section 22-112(1). Page 8118 of 9661 Page 8119 of 9661 Page 8120 of 9661 Page 8121 of 9661 Page 8122 of 9661 Page 8123 of 9661 Page 8124 of 9661 Page 8125 of 9661 Page 8126 of 9661 Page 8127 of 9661 Page 8128 of 9661 Page 8129 of 9661 Page 8130 of 9661 Page 8131 of 9661 Page 8132 of 9661 Page 8133 of 9661 Page 8134 of 9661 Page 8135 of 9661 Page 8136 of 9661 Page 8137 of 9661 Page 8138 of 9661 Page 8139 of 9661 Page 8140 of 9661 Page 8141 of 9661 Page 8142 of 9661 Page 8143 of 9661 Page 8144 of 9661 Page 8145 of 9661 Page 8146 of 9661 Page 8147 of 9661 Page 8148 of 9661 Page 8149 of 9661 Page 8150 of 9661 Page 8151 of 9661 Page 8152 of 9661 Page 8153 of 9661 Page 8154 of 9661 Page 8155 of 9661 Page 8156 of 9661 Page 8157 of 9661 Page 8158 of 9661 Page 8159 of 9661 Page 8160 of 9661 Page 8161 of 9661 Page 8162 of 9661 Page 8163 of 9661 Page 8164 of 9661 Page 8165 of 9661 Page 8166 of 9661 Page 8167 of 9661 Page 8168 of 9661 Page 8169 of 9661 Page 8170 of 9661 Page 8171 of 9661 Page 8172 of 9661 Page 8173 of 9661 Page 8174 of 9661 Page 8175 of 9661 Page 8176 of 9661 Page 8177 of 9661 Page 8178 of 9661 Page 8179 of 9661 Page 8180 of 9661 Page 8181 of 9661 Page 8182 of 9661 Page 8183 of 9661 Page 8184 of 9661 Page 8185 of 9661 Page 8186 of 9661 Page 8187 of 9661 Page 8188 of 9661 Page 8189 of 9661 Page 8190 of 9661 Page 8191 of 9661 Page 8192 of 9661 Page 8193 of 9661 Page 8194 of 9661 Page 8195 of 9661 Page 8196 of 9661 Page 8197 of 9661 Page 8198 of 9661 Page 8199 of 9661 Page 8200 of 9661 Page 8201 of 9661 Page 8202 of 9661 Page 8203 of 9661 Page 8204 of 9661 Page 8205 of 9661 Page 8206 of 9661 Page 8207 of 9661 Page 8208 of 9661 Page 8209 of 9661 Page 8210 of 9661 Page 8211 of 9661 Page 8212 of 9661 Page 8213 of 9661 Page 8214 of 9661 Page 8215 of 9661 Page 8216 of 9661 Page 8217 of 9661 Page 8218 of 9661 Page 8219 of 9661 Page 8220 of 9661 Page 8221 of 9661 Page 8222 of 9661 Page 8223 of 9661 Page 8224 of 9661 Page 8225 of 9661 Page 8226 of 9661 Page 8227 of 9661 Page 8228 of 9661 Page 8229 of 9661 Page 8230 of 9661 Page 8231 of 9661 Page 8232 of 9661 Page 8233 of 9661 Page 8234 of 9661 Page 8235 of 9661 Page 8236 of 9661 Page 8237 of 9661 Page 8238 of 9661 Page 8239 of 9661 Page 8240 of 9661 Page 8241 of 9661 Page 8242 of 9661 Page 8243 of 9661 Page 8244 of 9661 Page 8245 of 9661 Page 8246 of 9661 Page 8247 of 9661 Page 8248 of 9661 Page 8249 of 9661 Page 8250 of 9661 Page 8251 of 9661 Page 8252 of 9661 Page 8253 of 9661 Page 8254 of 9661 Page 8255 of 9661 Page 8256 of 9661 Page 8257 of 9661 Page 8258 of 9661 Page 8259 of 9661 Page 8260 of 9661 Page 8261 of 9661 Page 8262 of 9661 Page 8263 of 9661 Page 8264 of 9661 Page 8265 of 9661 Page 8266 of 9661 Page 8267 of 9661 Page 8268 of 9661 Page 8269 of 9661 Page 8270 of 9661 Page 8271 of 9661 Page 8272 of 9661 Page 8273 of 9661 Page 8274 of 9661 Page 8275 of 9661 Page 8276 of 9661 Page 8277 of 9661 Page 8278 of 9661 Page 8279 of 9661 Page 8280 of 9661 Page 8281 of 9661 Page 8282 of 9661 Page 8283 of 9661 Page 8284 of 9661 Page 8285 of 9661 Page 8286 of 9661 Page 8287 of 9661 Page 8288 of 9661 Page 8289 of 9661 Page 8290 of 9661 Page 8291 of 9661 Page 8292 of 9661 Page 8293 of 9661 Page 8294 of 9661 Page 8295 of 9661 Page 8296 of 9661 Page 8297 of 9661 Page 8298 of 9661 Page 8299 of 9661 Page 8300 of 9661 Page 8301 of 9661 Page 8302 of 9661 Page 8303 of 9661 Page 8304 of 9661 Page 8305 of 9661 Page 8306 of 9661 Page 8307 of 9661 Page 8308 of 9661 Page 8309 of 9661 Page 8310 of 9661 Page 8311 of 9661 Page 8312 of 9661 Page 8313 of 9661 Page 8314 of 9661 Page 8315 of 9661 Page 8316 of 9661 Page 8317 of 9661 Page 8318 of 9661 Page 8319 of 9661 Page 8320 of 9661 Page 8321 of 9661 Page 8322 of 9661 Page 8323 of 9661 Page 8324 of 9661 Page 8325 of 9661 Page 8326 of 9661 Page 8327 of 9661 Page 8328 of 9661 Page 8329 of 9661 Page 8330 of 9661 Page 8331 of 9661 Page 8332 of 9661 Page 8333 of 9661 Page 8334 of 9661 Page 8335 of 9661 Page 8336 of 9661 Page 8337 of 9661 Page 8338 of 9661 Page 8339 of 9661 Page 8340 of 9661 Page 8341 of 9661 Page 8342 of 9661 Page 8343 of 9661 Page 8344 of 9661 Page 8345 of 9661 Page 8346 of 9661 Page 8347 of 9661 Page 8348 of 9661 Page 8349 of 9661 Page 8350 of 9661 Page 8351 of 9661 Page 8352 of 9661 Page 8353 of 9661 Page 8354 of 9661 Page 8355 of 9661 Page 8356 of 9661 Page 8357 of 9661 Page 8358 of 9661 Page 8359 of 9661 Page 8360 of 9661 Page 8361 of 9661 Page 8362 of 9661 Page 8363 of 9661 Page 8364 of 9661 Page 8365 of 9661 Page 8366 of 9661 Page 8367 of 9661 Page 8368 of 9661 Page 8369 of 9661 Page 8370 of 9661 Page 8371 of 9661 Page 8372 of 9661 Page 8373 of 9661 Page 8374 of 9661 Page 8375 of 9661 Page 8376 of 9661 Page 8377 of 9661 Page 8378 of 9661 Page 8379 of 9661 Page 8380 of 9661 Page 8381 of 9661 Page 8382 of 9661 Page 8383 of 9661 Page 8384 of 9661 Page 8385 of 9661 Page 8386 of 9661 Page 8387 of 9661 Page 8388 of 9661 Page 8389 of 9661 Page 8390 of 9661 Page 8391 of 9661 Page 8392 of 9661 Page 8393 of 9661 Page 8394 of 9661 Page 8395 of 9661 Page 8396 of 9661 Page 8397 of 9661 Page 8398 of 9661 Page 8399 of 9661 Page 8400 of 9661 Page 8401 of 9661 Page 8402 of 9661 Page 8403 of 9661 Page 8404 of 9661 Page 8405 of 9661 Page 8406 of 9661 Page 8407 of 9661 Page 8408 of 9661 Page 8409 of 9661 Page 8410 of 9661 Page 8411 of 9661 Page 8412 of 9661 Page 8413 of 9661 Page 8414 of 9661 Page 8415 of 9661 Page 8416 of 9661 Page 8417 of 9661 Page 8418 of 9661 Page 8419 of 9661 Page 8420 of 9661 Page 8421 of 9661 Page 8422 of 9661 Page 8423 of 9661 Page 8424 of 9661 Page 8425 of 9661 Page 8426 of 9661 Page 8427 of 9661 Page 8428 of 9661 Page 8429 of 9661 Page 8430 of 9661 Page 8431 of 9661 Page 8432 of 9661 Page 8433 of 9661 Page 8434 of 9661 Page 8435 of 9661 Page 8436 of 9661 Page 8437 of 9661 Page 8438 of 9661 Page 8439 of 9661 Page 8440 of 9661 Page 8441 of 9661 Page 8442 of 9661 Page 8443 of 9661 Page 8444 of 9661 Page 8445 of 9661 Page 8446 of 9661 Page 8447 of 9661 Page 8448 of 9661 Page 8449 of 9661 Page 8450 of 9661 Page 8451 of 9661 Page 8452 of 9661 Page 8453 of 9661 Page 8454 of 9661 Page 8455 of 9661 Page 8456 of 9661 Page 8457 of 9661 Page 8458 of 9661 Page 8459 of 9661 Page 8460 of 9661 Page 8461 of 9661 Page 8462 of 9661 Page 8463 of 9661 Page 8464 of 9661 Page 8465 of 9661 Page 8466 of 9661 Page 8467 of 9661 Page 8468 of 9661  7LPRWK\)LQQ)URP-RKQ6WUDWKPDQMRKQVWUDWKPDQ#JPDLOFRP!6HQW7KXUVGD\2FWREHU307R0LFKHOH0RVFD7LPRWK\)LQQ6XEMHFWJUHHQZD\IULWFKH\SURMHFWREMHFWLRQ(³“(‡b[ϙ(aI[ϡϙ“ēĖŜϙôıÍĖīϙĖŜϙċŘĺıϙÍIJϙôƄťôŘIJÍīϙŜĺŪŘèôϟϙĺIJċĖŘıϙťēĖŜϙĖŜϙÍϙťŘŪŜťôîϙŜôIJîôŘϙÍIJîϙŪŜôϙôƄťŘôıôϙèÍŪťĖĺIJϙſēôIJϙĺŕôIJĖIJČϙÍťťÍèēıôIJťŜϙĺŘϙèīĖèħĖIJČϙīĖIJħŜϟϙ IϙÍıϙťēôϙĺſIJôŘϙĺċϙťēôϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙÍťϙ͓͕͐͏͏ϙ>ŘĖťèēôƅϙ‡îϱϙ‹(ϙèĺŘIJôŘϙĺċϙ@ŘôôIJſÍƅϙÍIJîϙ>ŘĖťèēôƅϟϙŪŘŘôIJťīƅϠϙϙťēôϙ IJÍťŪŘÍīϙîŘÍĖIJÍČôϙĺċϙıƅϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϙĖŜϙĖIJťĺϙťēôϙĺŕôIJϙîĖťèēôŜϙÍīĺIJČϙæĺťēϙ@ŘôôIJſÍƅϙÍIJîϙ>ŘĖťèēôƅϙŘîϟϙaƅϙ èĺIJèôŘIJϙĖŜϙťēÍťϙſēôIJϙťēôϙŘĺÍîŜϙÍŘôϙſĖîôIJôîϙÍIJîϙťēôϙîĖťèēôŜϙÍŘôϙŕĖŕôîϙťēÍťϙťēôϙIJĺŘıÍīϙŜťĺŘıϙŘŪIJĺċċϙſĖīīϙ IJĺťϙēÍŽôϙÍIJƅϙŕīÍèôϙťĺϙîŘÍĖIJϙťĺϟϙIϙÍŜŜŪıôϙťēÍťϙťēôϙîôŽôīĺŕôŘϙſĖīīϙēÍŽôϙťĺϙŜēĺſϙēĺſϙťēôϙſÍťôŘϙĺIJϙťēôϙ͑͑͘ϙ ÍèŘôŜϙťēôƅϙÍŘôϙîôŽôīĺŕĖIJČϙſĖīīϙċīĺſϠϙæŪťϙſēÍťϙÍæĺŪťϙťēôϙIJôĖČēæĺŘĖIJČϙŕŘĺŕôŘťĖôŜϙťēÍťϙſĖīīϙæôϙÍċċôèťôîϙÍŜϙ ſôīīϦϙIϙſĺŪīîϙīĖħôϙťĺϙŜôôϙÍϙŕīÍIJϙťēÍťϙŜēĺſŜϙēĺſϙťēĖŜϙîôŽôīĺŕıôIJťϙſĖīīϙIJĺťϙIJôČÍťĖŽôīƅϙÍċċôèťϙťēôϙîŘÍĖIJÍČôϙĺċϙ ıƅϙŕŘĺŕôŘťƅϟϙIϙĺæĤôèťϙťĺϙťēĖŜϙŕŘĺĤôèťϙŪIJīôŜŜϙIϙèÍIJϙŜôôϙťēôϙŕīÍIJϙťĺϙıĖťĖČÍťôϙťēĖŜϙŕĺťôIJťĖÍīϙŕŘĺæīôıϟϙIϙīĺĺħϙ ċĺŘſÍŘîϙťĺϙƅĺŪŘϙŘôŜŕĺIJŜôϟϙ ϙ VĺēIJϙ‹ťŘÍťēıÍIJϙ ͓͕͐͏͏ϙ>ŘĖťèēôƅϙ‡îϠϙbÍŕīôŜϠϙ>[ϙ͓͓͒͐͐ϙ ͒͏͒ϙ͓͒͑ϱ͏͔͔͕ϙ VĺēIJϟŜťŘÍťēıÍIJЬČıÍĖīϟèĺıϙ Page 8469 of 9661 Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller - Crystal K. KinzelCollier County, Florida3315 Tamiami Trail East, Ste. 102 - Naples, FL 34112-5324Phone: (239) 252-2646Publication ConfirmationCOLLIER COUNTY STATE OF FLORIDA The attached copy of advertisement, Greenway Fritchey GMPA & PUDZ (PL20220002063) & (PL20220002061) 12-9-25 BCC was published on the publically accessible website https://notices.collierclerk.com as designated by Collier County, Florida on 11/19/2025. THIS IS NOT AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION. Page 8470 of 9661 Page 8471 of 9661 Page 8472 of 9661 Page 8473 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.FID# 2025-4616Executive SummaryRecommendation to approve Ordinances amending the Collier County Growth Management Plan, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Map Series to establish the Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay on property within the Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands, allowing development of up to 1,299 single-family and multifamily dwelling units, including affordable housing; and amending the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, Policy 6.1.7, to reduce the littoral shelf planting requirements. The subject property comprises approximately 227.09 acres, located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20220002063] (This item is a companion to Items 16B9, 17E, and 17G) OBJECTIVE: For the Board to review and consider approval of the proposed large-scale amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) to create the Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay and reduce littoral shelf planting requirements, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required agencies. CONSIDERATIONS: This petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE), specifically to create a new overlay, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay, to allow a maximum of 1,299 residential units with 260 for-sale affordable units (20 percent) reserved for individuals earning at or below 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI) on approximately 227.09 acres. The petition also proposes an amendment to the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the creation of a new map (“Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay”) in the FLUM series of the FLUE to identify the newly created Overlay. Additionally, the petition proposes amending Policy 6.1.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) to reduce the littoral shelf planting requirements for the project. Further explanation of the proposed amendment is provided in the Transmittal Staff Report. The proposed amended text, as recommended by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), is depicted in the Ordinance Exhibits. Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government’s adopted Comprehensive Plan. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), sitting as the “local planning agency” under Chapter 163.3184(4), Part II, Florida Statutes, held its Transmittal hearing for this petition on May 15, 2025. The Board held its Transmittal hearing on June 24, 2025. Their respective transmittal recommendations/actions are contained in the CCPC Adoption Hearing Staff Report, and the complete staff analysis of this petition is provided in the CCPC Transmittal Staff Report. The Transmittal package was provided to the Florida Department of Commerce and other reviewing agencies on July 2, 2025. After review of the transmitted amendment within each reviewing agency’s authorized scope of review, the Florida Department of Commerce, as well as the other reviewing agencies, rendered their comment letters indicating “no comment” or “no adverse impacts found” or the agency did not respond. Additionally, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) provided technical assistance and guidance to the applicants in developing the project site. The technical assistance comments will not form the basis of a challenge by the State. Comment letters received are Page 8474 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.FID# 2025-4616located within the materials provided to the CCPC.The applicant provided responses to the technical assistance guidance by the FWC and FDOT in the attachments titled “FDOT Response Letter and FWC Response Document.” The CCPC held its Adoption Hearing on October 16, 2025. The staff and CCPC Adoption Hearing recommendations are presented further below. This Adoption Hearing considers text and map changes to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map and Map Series; and a text amendment to Policy 6.1.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: That the CCPC forward petition PL20220002063 to the Board with a recommendation to adopt and transmit to the Florida Department of Commerce. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC reviewed and discussed the proposed amendment at its October 16, 2025, meeting. There were no registered speakers. The CCPC voted 5/0 to forward the subject petition to the Board with a recommendation to adopt and transmit to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required agencies, per staff’s recommendation. This item is consistent with the Collier County Strategic Plan objective to implement prudent and inclusive policy development through effective planning for transportation, land use, and growth management. FISCAL IMPACT: Petition fees account for staff review time and materials, and for the cost of associated legal advertising/public notice for the public hearings. Therefore, no fiscal impacts to Collier County result from the adoption of this amendment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This is an Adoption public hearing for amendments to the GMP. After Adoption, the Florida Department of Commerce will have 31 days (from the date the Florida Department of Commerce determines the Adoption package received from Collier County is complete) to review the adopted Plan amendments and, if an amendment is found not to be in compliance with statutory provisions, file a challenge [appeal] with the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings. Similarly, any affected party has 31 days (from the date of Board Adoption) to file a challenge. If a timely challenge is not filed by the Florida Department of Commerce or an affected party, then the amendment will become effective. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment is authorized by, and subject to the procedures established in, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, The Community Planning Act, and by Collier County Resolution No. 12-234, as amended. The Board should consider the following criteria in making its decision: “plan amendments shall be based on relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include but not be limited to surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue.” s. 163.3177(1)(f), FS. In addition, s. 163.3177(6)(a)2, FS provides that FLUE plan amendments shall be based on surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. Page 8475 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.FID# 2025-4616b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area.c. The character of undeveloped land.d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services.e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of non-conforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community.f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations.g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02.h. The need to modify land uses and development patterns with antiquated subdivisions.i. The discouragement of urban sprawl. j. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. And FLUE map amendments shall also be based upon the following analysis per Section 163.3177(6)(a)8.: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use, considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. This item is approved as to form and legality. It requires an affirmative vote of four for approval because this is the Adoption hearing of the GMP amendment. [HFAC] RECOMMENDATION(S): To adopt the proposed Ordinances and transmit petition PL20220002063 to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required agencies, per the CCPC’s recommendation. PREPARED BY: Michele Mosca, AICP, Planner III, Growth Management Community Development Department, Community Planning and Resiliency Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. 1. CCPC Adoption Staff Report - Greenway-Fritchey (2) 2. 2. FLUE Ordinance - 081825 3. 3. CCME Ordinance - 081225 4. 4. John Stratham Email 5. 5. CCPC Transmittal Staff Report - Greenway-Fritchey 6. 6. CCPC Transmittal Minutes 05_15_2025 7. 7. DOC Comments COLLIER CO. 25-02ESR (P) 8. 8. FDOT Comments CPA 25-02ESR Collier County FDOT Technical Assistance Comments 7.18.25 9. 9. BOWMAN Response_FDOT Comments (8-19-2025) 10. 10. FWC Comments for Collier County 25-02ESR_63404_08012025 11. 11. FWC Technical Assistance Regarding the Florida Panther 2025 12. 12. BOWMAN Response_FWC Comments & Tech. Assitance (Aug 2025) 13. 13. CCPC & BCC Transmital Docs. for Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 14. 14. BCC Minutes 06_24_2025 (Draft) 15. legal ad - agenda IDs 25-4283 & 25-4616 - Greenway Fritchey RPUD & GMPA (PL20220002063) & (PL20220002061) 12-9-25 BCC Page 8476 of 9661 PL20220002063 1 STAFF REPORTCOLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM:GROWTHMANAGEMENT COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE:OCTOBER 16, 2025 RE:PETITION PL20220002063, LARGE-SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (GMPA): GREENWAY-FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) [ADOPTION HEARING] COMPANION TO: PUD-PL20220002061, GREENWAY FRITCHEY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; and AVROW-PL20240001248, VACATION OF LAREDO STREET (Board action only) ELEMENTS:FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT & CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT PROPOSED AMENDMENT The petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE), specifically to create a new overlay, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay, to allow a maximum of 1,299 residential units with 260 for-sale affordable units (20 percent) reserved for individuals earning at or below 80 percent of theArea Median Income (AMI) on approximately 227.09 acres. The petition also proposes an amendment to the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the creation of a new map (“Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay”) in the FLUM series of the FLUE to identify the newly created Overlay. Additionally, the petition proposes amending Policy 6.1.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) to reduce the littoral shelf planting requirements for the project.Further explanation of the proposed amendment is provided in the Transmittal Staff Report. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) materials include the Ordinances with Exhibit text and maps for the petition. These exhibits reflect the text and maps as approved by the Board of County Commissioners (Board) for transmittal. Within the CCPC materials provided, you will find the Transmittal Executive Summary from the Board hearing and the Transmittal CCPC staff report for the petition, which provides the staff’s analysis of the petition. The amendment qualifies for the Expedited State Review Process set forth in Chapter 163.3184(3), F.S., in the following manner. The geographic area subject to this amendment is not located in an area of critical state concern or in a rural land stewardship area; the amendment is not applicable to an adopted sector plan, evaluation and appraisal-based, and does not qualify as a small-scale amendment. Page 8477 of 9661 PL20220002063 2 In accordance with Chapter 163.3184(3), F.S., pertaining to the Expedited State Review Process, this Transmittal package was provided to the Florida Department of Commerce and other reviewing agencies on July 2, 2025. TRANSMITTAL RECOMMENDATIONS The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) held its transmittal hearing on this amendment on May 15, 2025, and the Board of County Commissioners (Board) held its hearing on June 24, 2025. The Transmittal recommendations/actions were as follows: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce (vote: 6/0) per staff recommendation. There was one public speaker at the meeting who commented on the ownership of Fritchey Road, safety concerns regarding future traffic on Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, drainage and water flow issues, soil issues, and the potential for increased flooding on the speaker’s property and surrounding properties resulting from the development of the proposed project. BOARD ACTION: Approved for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce (vote: 5/0) per CCPC recommendation. There was one public speaker at the meeting who commented on the proposed reduction in the littoral shelf plantings requirements under Policy 6.1.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element, which would decrease the standard from 30 percent to 10 percent. The speaker addressed the need to maintain the plantings, primarily for supporting water quality. REVIEW AGENCY COMMENT LETTERS After review of the transmitted amendment within each reviewing agency’s authorized scope of review, the Florida Department of Commerce, as well as the other reviewing agencies, rendered their comment letters indicating “no comment” or “no adverse impacts found” or the agency did not respond. Additionally, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) offered their technical assistance and guidance to the applicants in developing the project site. The technical assistance comments will not form the basis of a challenge by the State. Comment letters received are located within the materials provided to the CCPC. The applicant responded to the technical assistance guidance by the FWC and FDOT in the attachments titled “FDOT Response Letter and FWC Response Document.” Environmental Impacts The proposed GMP amendment has no effect on the requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) regarding the protection and preservation of native vegetation onsite. Native vegetation on- site will be retained per the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.2 and LDC Section 3.05.07 of the LDC. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission provided a letter of technical assistance dated August 1, 2025, in response to the transmittal of the Collier County Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Greenway Fritchey, GMPA PL2022002063. The technical assistance letter references listed species found onsite indicates that the subject property has the potential to contain various listed species. The technical assistance letter states there were no objections to the growth management plan amendment. In response to the FWCC letter, the applicant has provided a listed species management plan to address the comments and recommendations presented by FWCC. The listed species management plan must be incorporated as part of the SDP/PPL approval process. An off-site mitigation area has been provided as mitigation for proposed impacts. The off-site mitigation area contains 126.12 acres of forested/herbaceous upland and wetlands, located adjacent to Picayune Page 8478 of 9661 PL20220002063 3 Strand State Forest. The off-site mitigation area will save sensitive habitat and provide connectivity to protected state lands. Listed species will be protected by permit and or additional letters of technical assistance from FWC/FWS per CCME Policy 7.1.2 and LDC section 3.04.01. Environmental Services staff recommends approval of the proposed petition. Littoral Shelf Planting Area The applicant has proposed a reduction from the littoral planting criteria CCME Policy 6.1.7, which requires that wet detention ponds within the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District shall have a littoral shelf with an area equal to 30% of the ponds’ surface area measured at the control elevation and be planted with native aquatic vegetation. The applicant is requesting to allow for the total littoral planting shelf area to be reduced to 10% of the wet detention ponds area. The littoral area is to be planted in one or more larger aggregated littoral planting areas. Additionally, two rows of native grasses will be planted around the perimeter of the proposed lakes, which will aid in improving water quality by slowing runoff and trapping sediment. Environmental Services staff support the reduction in the amount of littoral planting to allow for consolidated littoral areas. The consolidated littoral areas will create and enhance habitats for wading birds and waterfowl, as well as foraging areas. These areas will be designed to recreate wetland function, maximize habitat value, and minimize maintenance efforts. The consolidation of the littoral planting area will enhance the survivability of littoral area plant species, as there is a lower survivability rate in littoral planting areas when they are installed in multiple lakes. The concentration of the littoral plantings will meet the intent of the GMP requirement, which is to enhance water quality and provide habitat for a variety of aquatic species and birds. This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as it does not fall within the scope of land development project reviews identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Environmental Services staff recommends approval of the proposed petition. Transportation Impacts A Transportation Impact Statement (TIS), dated July 5, 2024, prepared by Trebilcock Planning and Engineering, was submitted as part of this petition. Transportation Planning staff reviewed the petition for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan using the previous 2023 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the current 2024 AUIR. Staff found the TIS to be sufficient. The companion Developer Commitment Agreement (DCA) addresses the transportation-related impacts and roadway improvements. Criteria for GMP Amendments in Florida Statutes Data and analysis requirements for comprehensive plans and plan amendments are noted in Chapter 163, F.S., specifically as listed below verbatim. “Section 163.3177(1)(f), Florida Statutes: (f) All mandatory and optional elements of the comprehensive plan and plan amendments shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include, but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. 1. Surveys, studies, and data utilized in the preparation of the comprehensive plan may not be deemed a part of the comprehensive plan unless adopted as a part of it. Copies of such studies, surveys, data, and supporting documents for proposed plans and plan amendments shall be made available for public Page 8479 of 9661 PL20220002063 4 inspection, and copies of such plans shall be made available to the public upon payment of reasonable charges for reproduction. Support data or summaries are not subject to the compliance review process, but the comprehensive plan must be clearly based on appropriate data. Support data or summaries may be used to aid in the determination of compliance and consistency. 2. Data must be taken from professionally accepted sources. The application of a methodology utilized in data collection or whether a particular methodology is professionally accepted may be evaluated. However, the evaluation may not include whether one accepted methodology is better than another. Original data collection by local governments is not required. However, local governments may use original data so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. 3. The comprehensive plan shall be based upon permanent and seasonal population estimates and projections, which shall either be those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or generated by the local government based upon a professionally acceptable methodology. The plan must be based on at least the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections as published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research for at least a 10-year planning period unless otherwise limited under s. 380.05, including related rules of the Administration Commission. Absent physical limitations on population growth, population projections for each municipality, and the unincorporated area within a county must, at a minimum, be reflective of each area’s proportional share of the total county population and the total county population growth. Section 163.3177(6)(a)2.: 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. Section 163.3177(6)(a)8., Florida Statutes: (a) A future land use plan element designating proposed future general distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land for residential uses, commercial uses, industry, agriculture, recreation, conservation, education, public facilities, and other categories of the public and private uses of land. The approximate acreage and the general range of density or intensity of use shall be provided for the gross land area included in each existing land use category. The element shall establish the long-term end toward which land use programs and activities are ultimately directed. 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section.” Page 8480 of 9661 PL20220002063 5 LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office on September 11, 2025. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20220002063 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve (adopt) for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required review agencies that provided technical comments. NOTE: This petition is presently scheduled for the December 9, 2025, BCC Meeting. Page 8481 of 9661 [22-CMP-01134/1963947/1]128 18-CMP-01000 Greenway Fritchey PL20220002063 4/ FLUE / 8/18/25 Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions. *** *** *** *** are a break in text 1 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. 2025- _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND MAP SERIES TO CREATE THE GREENWAY – FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (GMPA) ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE AGRICULTURAL/ RURAL, RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT-RECEIVING LANDS, TO ALLOW UP TO 1299 SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY UNITS WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTION AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 227.09± ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE NORTHEASTERN INTERSECTION OF GREENWAY ROAD AND FRITCHEY ROAD IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20220002063] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. requested an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Map Series to create the Greenway – Fritchey Residential Overlay (GMPA) on property within the Agricultural/ Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Receiving Lands, to allow up to 1299 single family and multifamily units with affordable housing; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendments to the Department of Commerce for preliminary review on July 2, 2025, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce reviewed the amendments to the Future Land Use Element to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and Page 8482 of 9661 [22-CMP-01134/1963947/1]128 18-CMP-01000 Greenway Fritchey PL20220002063 4/ FLUE / 8/18/25 Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions. *** *** *** *** are a break in text 2 of 3 WHEREAS, Collier County, has 180 days from receipt of the Comments Report from the Department of Commerce to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of these amendments, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendments and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on ______________, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on ________________; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendments to the Future Land Use Element attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference, are hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Commerce. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. Page 8483 of 9661 [22-CMP-01134/1963947/1]128 18-CMP-01000 Greenway Fritchey PL20220002063 4/ FLUE / 8/18/25 Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions. *** *** *** *** are a break in text 3 of 3 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this _____ day of _______________________ 2025. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By:__________________________ By: ______________________________ Deputy Clerk Burt L. Saunders, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: ________________________________ Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A –Proposed Text and Map Amendment Page 8484 of 9661 ______ 8-19-25 Page 8485 of 9661 Page 8486 of 9661 Page 8487 of 9661 Page 8488 of 9661 Page 8489 of 9661 [22-CMP-01134/1964102/1]130 18-CMP-01000 Greenway Fritchey PL20220002063 4/ CCME / 8/12/25 Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions. *** *** *** *** are a break in text 1 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. 2025- _______ AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT TO AMEND POLICY 6.1.7 TO REDUCE THE LITTORAL SHELF REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE GREENWAY-FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY; AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTION AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 227.09± ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE NORTHEASTERN INTERSECTION OF GREENWAY ROAD AND FRITCHEY ROAD IN SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20220002063] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. requested an amendment to the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to amend policy 6.1.7 to reduce the littoral shelf requirements for certain property within the Greenway- Fritchey Residential Overlay; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendments to the Department of Commerce for preliminary review on July 2, 2025, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Department of Commerce reviewed the amendments to the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County, has 180 days from receipt of the Comments Report from the Department of Commerce to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan; and Page 8490 of 9661 [22-CMP-01134/1964102/1]130 18-CMP-01000 Greenway Fritchey PL20220002063 4/ CCME / 8/12/25 Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions. *** *** *** *** are a break in text 2 of 3 WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of these amendments, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendments and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on ______________, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on ________________; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendments to the Conservation and Coastal Management Element attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference, are hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Commerce. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. Page 8491 of 9661 [22-CMP-01134/1964102/1]130 18-CMP-01000 Greenway Fritchey PL20220002063 4/ CCME / 8/12/25 Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions. *** *** *** *** are a break in text 3 of 3 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this _____ day of _______________________ 2025. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By:__________________________ By: ______________________________ Deputy Clerk Burt L. Saunders, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: ________________________________ Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A –Proposed Text Page 8492 of 9661 ______ 8-13-25 Page 8493 of 9661 1 Michele MoscaFrom:John Strathman <john.strathman@gmail.com>Sent:Thursday, October 2, 2025 1:20 PMTo:Michele Mosca; Timothy FinnSubject:greenway/ fritchey project objectionEXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. I am the owner of the property at 14600 Fritchey Rd- SE corner of Greenway and Fritchey. Currently, the natural drainage of my property is into the open ditches along both Greenway and Fritchey rd. My concern is that when the roads are widened and the ditches are piped that the normal storm runoff will not have any place to drain to. I assume that the developer will have to show how the water on the 229 acres they are developing will flow, but what about the neighboring properties that will be affected as well? I would like to see a plan that shows how this development will not negatively affect the drainage of my property. I object to this project unless I can see the plan to mitigate this potential problem. I look forward to your response. John Strathman 14600 Fritchey Rd, Naples, FL 34114 303 324-0556 John.strathman@gmail.com Page 8494 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 1 April 21, 2025 STAFF REPORTCOLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONFROM:GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE:MAY 15, 2025 SUBJECT: PL20220002063 LARGE-SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (GMPA): GREENWAY-FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) COMPANION TO: PUD-PL20220002061; GREENWAY FRITCHEY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT – TO BE PRESENTED AT THE GMPA ADOPTION HEARINGS ELEMENTS:FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT & CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT AGENT/OWNER: Agents: Robert Mulhere, FAICP Rich Yovanovich, Esq. Jeremie Chastain, AICP Coleman, Yovanovich, Koester, PA Bowman 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34103 Naples, FL 34110 Owners: Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. 7742 Alico Road 11145 Tamiami Trail East Fort Myers, FL 33912 Naples, FL 34113 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The 227.09-acre subject property is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, approximately a half mile north of Tamiami Trail East (US 41), in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Refer to the location map and aerial map on page 2.) Page 8495 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 2 April 21, 2025 SUBJECT SITE Page 8496 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 3 April 21, 2025 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant proposes a large-scale Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) to create a new overlay,the Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay. The applicant also proposes amending the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and creating a new map (“Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay”) in the FLUM series of the FLUE to identify the newly created Overlay. Also, the petition proposes to amend Policy 6.1.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to reduce the littoral shelf requirements. The proposed overlay text and map are attached as Exhibit “A.” PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: To redesignate the property from the Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands to Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District – Receiving Lands, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay to allow a maximum of 1,299 residential units with 20 percent of the units reserved for affordable housing to individuals earning at or below 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI), which yields a maximum of 260 for-sale residential units. A companion petition (PL20220002061) will rezone the property from Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district to allow the proposed residential uses. Note: The companion PUD rezone will be presented to the CCPC at the time of the GMPA's adoption. The draft PUD document is included in the GMPA back-up materials for informational purposes. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Subject Property: The 227.09-acre site is designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District—Receiving Lands and is located within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), all as identified on the FLUM. The subject property is zoned A, Rural Agricultural, and includes a Provisional Use for aquaculture (PU-87-6C, Reso. #87-177). A portion is undeveloped, and a portion is in agricultural operations. Surrounding Lands: North – Future Land Use Designation: Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Agricultural operations. East – Future Land Use Designation: Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Agricultural operations. (across Laredo Street, a local road) South – Future Land Use Designation: Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Single-family residential and agricultural operations, including an approved Provisional Use for earth mining and related processing (PU-79-11C, Reso. #79-124). (across Fritchey Road, a local road) West – Future Land Use Designation: Urban, Urban Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Agricultural operations, single-family residential, and mobile homes. Further to the west- northwest (500’) are lands designated Urban Mixed-Use District, zoned Regal Acres PUD (approved for 5.0 DU/A), and developed with attached single-family dwellings (across Greenway Road, a local road). Page 8497 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 4 April 21, 2025 In summary, the surrounding area's existing land uses include a mix of single-family residential, mobile homes, and agricultural operations. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: As noted above, the FLUM designation on this property is Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands located within the Coastal High Hazard Area. The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) within the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) was established in 2002 by Ordinance 02-32 to address agricultural lands within the transitional area between Golden Gate Estates and the County’s urban area and between the urban area and the agricultural lands and agricultural operations farther to the east. The land use strategies developed and employed in the RFMUD direct incompatible land uses away from environmentally sensitive lands. The Sending Lands are those lands within the RFMUD with the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant wetlands, uplands, and habitats for listed species. The Receiving Lands are those identified as the most appropriate for development and to which residential units may be received from areas designated as Sending Lands. The Coastal High Hazzard Area (CHHA) is the geographical area lying below the elevation of the Category 1 storm surge line per the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council’s Hurricane Evacuation Study; increased density and expenditure of public infrastructure is discouraged in this area. On February 10, 2015, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) directed staff to initiate the RFMUD restudy. The restudy focused on areas that included complementary land uses, economic vitality, transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship, all through a public outreach effort. The RFMUD restudy public outreach and staff assessment resulted in the RFMUD White Paper. The White Paper provided the framework for the restudy effort conducted by staff and served to further inform the Collier County Planning Commission and the public about those efforts. The RFMUD White Paper recommended GMP amendments to improve the RFMUD and Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program by further protecting the environment, conserving agricultural lands, addressing development characteristics, and establishing new development standards. In June 2023, the Board adopted restudy-based amendments to the RFMUD. Relevant to this petition, the RFMUD Receiving Lands now allows the development of affordable housing projects at a maximum density of up to 12.2 dwelling units per acre, subject to clustering provisions and Land Development Code (LDC) Section 2.06.00 for affordable housing. The FLUE states that implementing Land Development Code (LDC) regulations, such as design standards, development standards, and locational criteria, are to be established for affordable housing development within the RFMUD. The above-referenced LDC regulations are being drafted and will be presented to the CCPC and Board later this year. Additionally, an LDC amendment to implement the GMP affordable housing initiatives, adopted by the Board in November 2023, includes modifications to the affordable housing density bonus table in LDC Section 2.06.03. The changes to the table generally increase density for projects providing affordable units in the Low (>50 - <80% of Area Median Income (AMI)) and Very-low (<50% of AMI) income categories. The CCPC heard the LDC amendment on March 6, 2025, and voted to forward the amendment to the Board with a recommendation of approval; the LDC amendment will be presented to the Board on -XQH, 2025. The proposed GMPA allows a maximum of 1,299 dwelling units, including an affordable housing commitment of 20% (260 for-sale units) to households earning up to and including 80% of the County’s AMI. The proposed GMPA does not conform with the existing affordable housing income ranges, density, and requirement to integrate affordable housing units with market-rate units in accordance with LDC Section 2.06.00. However, the proposed affordable housing density and income ranges are Page 8498 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 5 April 21, 2025 consistent with past Board approvals and the proposed modifications to the affordable housing density bonus table in LDC Section 2.06.03. The project’s proposed development and design standards are generally consistent with past Board approvals. Some projects were approved with clustering standards, and others were approved with deviations from those standards. (Note: The companion petition (PL20220002061) to rezone the property from Rural Agricultural to the Greenway Fritchey Planned Unit Development (PUD) establishes the development and design standards for the project.) The table below identifies that the proposed project will provide more affordable units via the GMP amendment than the existing affordable housing density bonus table in LDC section 2.06.03 and more affordable units than the proposed affordable housing table via the pending LDCA. However, the GMPA does not provide for integrating affordable housing units with the market rate units in conformance with the RFMUD and LDC. Additionally, the companion rezone petition seeks deviations from the clustering provisions in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Zoning Overlay (RFMUO) within LDC section 2.03.08 for the minimum lot area, interior lot width, and the minimum side and rear yards – for single-family development and the minimum requirements for front, rear, and side yards for multi-family development. The applicant has indicated that the Habitat for Humanity development model and building plans are replicated for various projects throughout the community to reduce overall project costs and provide units that are affordable in the income ranges that are needed most in Collier County. As noted in the table below, the applicants receive a bonus of 994 market-rate dwelling units for providing 260 affordable units. The market rate units will be developed separately from the affordable housing units, without shared amenities or access points or a guarantee of shared bike or pedestrian access points (refer to the draft RPUD Master Plan). Base Density (per existing GMP) GMPA (227.09 acres) Project Density = 5.72 DU/A 1,299 Total Units Density Bonus Requested Affordable Housing Income Level (% of AMI) Affordable Housing Dwelling Units (% of units to achieve density bonus of 5.52 DU/A) Market Rate Dwelling Units (Bonus units generated by providing affordable housing units) 0.2 DU/A (45 dwelling units) Proposed GMPA 5.52 DU/A < 80% 260 DUs (20% of all DUs) 994 DUs N/A Existing LDC Sec. 2.06.00/2.06.03 5.52 DU/A < 80% 249 DUs (19.86% of bonus DUs) 1,005 DUs N/A Proposed LDCA Sec. 2.06.00/2.06.03 5.52 DU/A < 80% 125 DUs (10% of bonus DUs) 1,129 DUs Generally, when requesting a GMP Amendment that increases residential density, the FLUE requires the use of Transfer of Development Rights Credits to achieve that density, except when providing a “reasonably sufficient public benefit” as determined by the Board. For recent approvals, the Board has determined providing affordable housing provides such public benefit. As noted earlier, this petition includes a commitment to provide 260 affordable housing units. Page 8499 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 6 April 21, 2025 Further, the petition proposes increasing residential density within the CHHA. Policy 12.1.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP requires mitigation to reduce the impacts of evacuation times resulting from projects within the CHHA. The owner has committed to providing a towable generator at the time of the first certificate of occupancy and a second towable generator at the time of the 250th certificate of occupancy to be used at hurricane evacuation shelter sites to address the required mitigation. Compatibility: FLUE Policy 5.6 requires new land uses to be compatible with and complementary to surrounding land uses. To review the appropriateness of the requested uses and intensity on the subject site, a compatibility analysis might include a review of allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, and the amount and type of open space and location. The area surrounding the proposed overlay consists of active agricultural operations and residential uses west and south of the project site, as identified in the Existing Conditions section of this report. The proposed project is within a transitional area (RFMUD – Receiving Lands), proximate to the County’s urban boundary and services (Greenway Road is the boundary between the Urban Mixed-Use District and the RFMUD). The Board has approved several projects with similar densities in the past year proximate to the proposed GMPA location – refer to the table below. Project Location Density Affordable Housing Proposed GMPA RFMUD - Receiving Lands ½ mile north of US 41 5.72 DU/A For-sale: 20% of units at < 80% of AMI Elanto of Naples RPUD RFMUD - Receiving Lands ¾ mile east of Greenway Rd. 6 DU/A Rental:10% of units at < 50% of AMI Tamiami 50-Acre MPUD RFMUD - Receiving Lands 1/3 mile east of Greenway Rd. 8 DU/A Rental:15% of units at < 80% of AMI and 15% at < 100% of AMI For-sale:15% of units at 120% of AMI Tamiami Trail Greenway Rd. MPUD Urban -Residential Mixed- Use District 450’ west of Greenway Rd. 12.29 DU/A Rental:15% of units at < 80% of AMI and 15% of units at < 100% of AMI Compatibility can be specifically addressed within the companion zoning petition. Still, staff finds the requested uses will be compatible with the surrounding area (at the level at which GMP amendments are reviewed for compatibility) and that this is an appropriate location to provide for residential development. Project Justification: The applicant prepared a justification statement for the proposed residential project (refer to Exhibit V.D.1. in the GMPA materials). Staff notes the following from the information provided: x The County’s total population in 2024 was 404,735 people and is expected to increase by 3 percent between the years 2023 and 2028 (Source: Collier County Economic Development Office). x The University of Florida’s Shimberg Center estimated in the year 2022 that approximately 22,883 owner-occupied households making 80% and below the County’s Area Median Income (AMI) were cost-burdened (housing costs >30% of household income). Further, by 2050, the number of cost-burdened households earning < 80% of the AMI is projected to increase to 54,848 households. x The 2017 Urban Land Institute Study identified a “housing affordability problem” and, if not addressed, “will become a crisis.” Additionally, the County’s 2025 Consolidated Housing Plan Page 8500 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 7 April 21, 2025 identifies an insufficient supply of affordable housing units at the low or very low-income levels and a need for affordable rental and owned housing near job centers. x The proposed development is approximately 3.5 miles from the Activity Center at the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and Collier Boulevard. The Center is mostly built-out and provides a variety of commercial uses. Transportation Impacts: A Transportation Impact Statement (TIS), dated July 5, 2024, prepared by Trebilcock Planning and Engineering, was submitted as part of this petition. Transportation Planning staff reviewed the petition for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan using the previous 2023 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the current 2024 AUIR. Staff found the TIS to be sufficient; however, a Developer Commitment Agreement (DCA) is needed to address the project’s transportation related impacts. Transportation Planning Staff does not object to the transmittal of the GMPA and will continue to work with the applicant to finalize the DCA prior to the adoption hearings. Environmental Impacts: The proposed GMP amendment has no effect on the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) requirements regarding protecting native vegetation preservation on-site. Native vegetation on-site will be retained per the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.2 and LDC section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Listed species will be protected by permit and/or letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, per CCME Policy 7.1.2 and LDC section 3.04.01. Littoral Shelf Planting Area: The applicant has proposed a reduction from the littoral planting criteria in CCME Policy 6.1.7, which requires wet detention ponds within the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District to have a littoral shelf with an area equal to 30% of the ponds surface area, measured at the control elevation, and planted with native aquatic vegetation. The applicant is requesting the total littoral planting shelf area be reduced to 10% of the wet detention ponds area. The littoral area shall be planted in one or more larger aggregated littoral planting areas. Additionally, two rows of native grasses will be planted around the perimeter of the proposed lakes, which will aid in improving water quality by slowing runoff and trapping sediment. Environmental Services staff supports reducing the amount of littoral planting to allow for consolidated littoral areas. The consolidated littoral areas will enhance wading bird/waterfowl habitats and foraging areas. These areas will be designed to re-create wetland function, maximize habitat value, and minimize maintenance efforts. The consolidation of the littoral planting area will enhance the survivability of the littoral area plant species, as there is a lower survivability rate in littoral planting areas when installed in multiple lakes. The concentration of the littoral plantings will meet the intent of the GMP requirement, which is to enhance water quality and provide habitat for a variety of aquatic species and birds. Public Facilities Impacts: The project lies within the regional potable water service area and the South Collier Water Reclamation Facility wastewater service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD). Water and wastewater services are available via existing infrastructure within the adjacent right-of-way, and sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities are available. Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utility acceptance. Page 8501 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 8 April 21, 2025 Affordable Housing:There is a need for affordable housing units in Collier County. The University of Florida Shimberg Center for Housing reports that there are currently 51,368 cost-burdened households in the County, with 25,687 of those spending more than 50% of their monthly income on housing expenses. The current median home sales price in the County is $650,000 (Single-Family Homes- $790,000, Condos- $500,000). Prices in Naples have increased 75% from pre-COVID prices. 77% of sales are cash deals. Source: NABOR Market Report, Feb 2025 The Shimberg Center also reports that the average observed rent for apartments in the County has risen sharply, doubling over the past ten years to $3,234 (2024). For reference, the 2025 Florida Housing Finance Corporation Income Limits are: A Restrictive Covenant will be recorded on the affordable for-sale units, requiring them to be initially and subsequently sold to qualifying households for a period of 30 years from the Certificate of Occupancy of each unit. Approval of this development will assist the County in addressing the continued need for affordable housing. CRITERIA FOR GMP AMENDMENTS FLORIDA STATUTES: Data and analysis requirements for comprehensive plans and plan amendments are noted in Chapter 163, F.S., specifically as listed below verbatim. Section 163.3177(1)(f), Florida Statutes: (f) All mandatory and optional elements of the comprehensive plan and plan amendments shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include, but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. 1. Surveys, studies, and data utilized in the preparation of the comprehensive plan may not be deemed a part of the comprehensive plan unless adopted as a part of it. Copies of such studies, surveys, data, and supporting documents for proposed plans and plan amendments shall be made available for public inspection, and copies of such plans shall be made Page 8502 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 9 April 21, 2025 available to the public upon payment of reasonable charges for reproduction. Support data or summaries are not subject to the compliance review process, but the comprehensive plan must be clearly based on appropriate data. Support data or summaries may be used to aid in the determination of compliance and consistency. 2. Data must be taken from professionally accepted sources. The application of a methodology utilized in data collection or whether a particular methodology is professionally accepted may be evaluated. However, the evaluation may not include whether one accepted methodology is better than another. Original data collection by local governments is not required. However, local governments may use original data so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. 3. The comprehensive plan shall be based upon permanent and seasonal population estimates and projections, which shall either be those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or generated by the local government based upon a professionally acceptable methodology. The plan must be based on at least the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections as published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research for at least a 10-year planning period unless otherwise limited under s. 380.05, including related rules of the Administration Commission. Absent physical limitations on population growth, population projections for each municipality and the unincorporated area within a county must, at a minimum, be reflective of each area’s proportional share of the total county population and the total county population growth. Section 163.3177(6)(a)2., Florida Statutes: 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. Section 163.3177(6)(a)8., Florida Statutes: (a) A future land use plan element designating proposed future general distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land for residential uses, commercial uses, industry, agriculture, recreation, conservation, education, public facilities, and other categories of the public and private uses of land. The approximate acreage and the general range of density or intensity of use shall be provided for the gross land area included in each existing land use category. The element shall establish the long-term end toward which land use programs and activities are ultimately directed. Page 8503 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 10 April 21, 2025 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. The petitioner must provide appropriate and relevant data and analysis to address the statutory requirements for a Plan Amendment. For this petition, the applicant provided a justification statement and public facilities analysis. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) NOTES: A NIM was held on December 5, 2022, at Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Preserve, 300 Tower Road, Naples, FL 34113. The meeting began at approximately 5:40 p.m. and adjourned at approximately 6:34 p.m. Several members of the public were present at the meeting, most residing in Naples Reserve Golf Club. The applicant’s agent, Robert Mulhere, FAICP, explained the request for the proposed rezone and companion large-scale Growth Management Plan amendment. Attendees asked about the impacts on wildlife, environmental permitting, density, type of affordable housing units – rental or owner-occupied, farmland impacts, road impacts, the potential for a traffic light at Greenway Road, impacts on property values, the price points for market-rate homes, etc. The applicant’s team responded to all questions. The Administrative Code requires a second NIM to be held when a petition has not been scheduled for public hearings within a year of the initial NIM. Over a year has elapsed since the first NIM was held in 2022. As a result, the petitioner conducted a second NIM on April 14, 2025, at Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Preserve, 300 Tower Road, Naples, FL 34113. The meeting began at approximately 5:30 p.m. and adjourned at approximately 5:45 p.m. One resident of Greenway Road was present at the meeting. The applicant’s agent, Jeremie Chastain, AICP, explained the request for the proposed large- scale Growth Management Plan amendment and rezone. The attendee asked questions about sidewalks on Greenway Road, the proposed request for an eight-foot-tall wall, landscaping, and the project’s access on Greenway Road in relation to its alignment with the attendee’s driveway. The applicant’s team responded to all questions. The NIM documentation is included in the CCPC backup materials. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: x This petition proposes a large-scale Growth Management Plan amendment to create a residential overlay within the Agricultural/Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands to allow 1,299 residential units, including 260 affordable housing units. The proposed project density is generally consistent with the RFMUD restudy-based amendments, as directed by the Board, except that the project does not conform with the RFMUO clustering provisions and the requirement to integrate the affordable housing units with market-rate units, as provided in the LDC. x The project's affordable housing component will be a for-sale product and include up to 260 residential units, or a total of 20% of all residential units, restricted to households earning up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income. Approval of this development will assist Collier County in addressing the continued need for affordable housing. Additionally, the affordable Page 8504 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 11 April 21, 2025 housing commitment may be deemed a “public benefit” as required by the FLUE when increasing density in the RFMUD and not utilizing TDR Credits to obtain that increase. x To mitigate the proposed increase in residential density within the CHHA, the owner has committed to providing two towable generators for use at hurricane evacuation shelters. x This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as it does not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. x A Developer Commitment Agreement (DCA) is needed to address the project’s transportation related impacts; the DCA will be provided to the CCPC and Board of County Commissioners at adoption hearings. x There are no public utility-related concerns as a result of this petition. x There are no concerns about impacts on other public infrastructure. x There are no historical or archaeological sites affected by this amendment. LEGAL REVIEW: The County Attorney’s office reviewed the staff report on April 21, 2025. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Collier County Planning Commission forward petition PL20220002063 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required review agencies. NOTE: This petition has been tentatively scheduled for the June 24, 2025, Board of County Commissioner meeting. Page 8505 of 9661 Page 8506 of 9661 Page 8507 of 9661 Page 8508 of 9661 Page 8509 of 9661 Page 8510 of 9661 Page 8511 of 9661 Page 8512 of 9661 Page 8513 of 9661 Page 8514 of 9661 Page 8515 of 9661 Page 8516 of 9661 Page 8517 of 9661 Page 8518 of 9661 Page 8519 of 9661 Page 8520 of 9661 Page 8521 of 9661 Page 8522 of 9661 Page 8523 of 9661 Page 8524 of 9661 Page 8525 of 9661 Page 8526 of 9661 Page 8527 of 9661 Page 8528 of 9661 Page 8529 of 9661 Page 8530 of 9661 Page 8531 of 9661 Florida Department of Transportation RON DESANTIS GOVERNOR 605 Suwannee Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 JARED W. PERDUE, P.E. SECRETARY Improve Safety, Enhance Mobility, Inspire Innovation www.fdot.gov July 18th, 2025 Mike Bosi Planning and Zoning Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr Naples, FL 34104 Subject: No Significant Adverse Impacts with Technical Assistance Comments Expedited State Review Collier County Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 25-02 Mr. Bosi, Pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), Florida Statutes (F.S.) for Expedited State Review Process, in its role as a reviewing agency as identified in Section 163.3184(1)(c), F.S., the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) reviewed proposed amendment 25-02 The amendment proposes a future land use change to create the Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay to allow a maximum of 1,299 single family and multifamily residential units with housing that is affordable; and amending the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to allow the reduction in the littoral shelf planting requirements. FDOT determined the proposed amendment has no significant adverse impacts to transportation resources or facilities of state importance. In addition, FDOT is providing technical assistance consistent with Section 163.3168(3), Florida Statutes. The technical assistance comment(s) will not form the basis of a challenge. The technical assistance comment(s) can strengthen the local government’s comprehensive plan in order to foster a vibrant, healthy community or is/are technical in nature and designed to ensure consistency with the Community Planning Act in Chapter 163, Part II, F.S.): Technical Assistance #1 The proposal states that a Developer Commitment Agreement is needed to address project’s transportation impacts and staff will work with the applicant to finalize prior to adoption hearings. The amendment as proposed does not offer a spine road that does not considerably allow for interconnectedness between major or minor thoroughfares for vehicles, and also it does not address interconnectedness for other users such as pedestrian and bicyclists or transit users. The PUD Master Plan does not allow for movement over the Residential Tracts as understood currently. Resolution of Technical Assistance #1 Please consider s. 163.3177(6)(a)9.b.(III), F.S, that states criteria for considering if a map amendment promotes a connected community and discourages sprawl if it promotes walkable and connected communities and provides for compact development and a mix of uses and densities Page 8532 of 9661 Improve Safety, Enhance Mobility, Inspire Innovation www.fdot.gov and intensities that will support a range of housing choices and a multimodal transportation system including pedestrian, bicycle, and transit, if available. Consider allowing multimodal interconnections between the residential land use to the other residential uses and potential commercial uses on the frontage of US41. This can alleviate demand on US41 and provide for an interconnected community. This can also alleviate safety concerns for multiple conflict points on US41. FDOT also encourages the use of clustering for compact development which is one of the goals of this Mixed Use District and Overlay. This allows for serving the community while using the least amount of resources and space which helps with emergency evacuation and reduces maintenance of facilities. Consider s. 163.3177(6)(a)9.a.(VIII), F.S. which includes in the criteria for determining whether a future land use element or amendment to the element does not discourage the proliferation of sprawl is if it allows for land use patterns or timing that disproportionately increase costs in a variety of aspects. Please transmit a copy of the amendment, along with the supporting data and analysis, to the District upon its adoption. Thank you for coordinating on the review of this proposed amendment with FDOT. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me by email at Erica.McCaughey@dot.state.fl.us Sincerely, Erica McCaughey cc: Jennifer Carver, FDOT Central Office, Office of Policy Planning DOC Mike Bosi Vitor Suguri, FDOT Planning Manager Page 8533 of 9661 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Response to Transmmittal Comments\MB 250818 FDOT Response Letter (8-19-2025).docx August 19, 2025Mike Bosi, AICP, Division DirectorCollier County Growth Management Division2800 North Horseshoe DriveNaples, FL 34104 Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 Dear Mr. Bosi: Thank you for providing the technical assistance comments. In response to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) technical assistance correspondence dated August 1, 2025, please see the FWC Responses prepared by Passarella & Associates, Inc. and provided under separate cover. We appreciate that FDOT determined the proposed amendment has no significant adverse impacts to transportation resources or facilities of state importance. In response to FDOT’s correspondence dated July 18, 2025, we offer the following responses: Technical Assistance #1 The proposal states that a Developer Commitment Agreement is needed to address project’s transportation impacts and staff will work with the applicant to finalize prior to adoption hearings. The amendment as proposed does not offer a spine road that does not considerably allow for interconnectedness between major or minor thoroughfares for vehicles, and also it does not address interconnectedness for other users such as pedestrians and bicyclists or transit users. The PUD Master Plan does not allow for movement over the Residential Tracts as understood currently. Resolution of Technical Assistance #1 Please consider s. 163.3177(6)(a)9.b.(III), F.S, that states criteria for considering if a map amendment promotes a connected community and discourages sprawl if it promotes walkable and connected communities and provides for compact development and a mix of uses and densities and intensities that will support a range of housing choices and a multimodal transportation system including pedestrian, bicycle, and transit, if available. Consider allowing multimodal interconnections between the residential land use to the other residential uses and potential commercial uses on the frontage of US41. This can alleviate demand on US41 and Page 8534 of 9661 Mike Bosi, AICP, Division Director Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 August __, 2025 Page 2 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Response to Transmmittal Comments\MB 250818 FDOT Response Letter (8-19-2025).docx provide for an interconnected community. This can also alleviate safety concerns for multiple conflict points on US 41. FDOT also encourages the use of clustering for compact development which is one of the goals of this Mixed Use District and Overlay. This allows for serving the community while using the least amount of resources and space which helps with emergency evacuation and reduces maintenance of facilities. Consider s. 163.3177(6)(a)9.a.(VIII), F.S. which includes in the criteria for determining whether a future land use element or amendment to the element does not discourage the proliferation of sprawl is if it allows for land use patterns or timing that disproportionately increase costs in a variety of aspects. Please transmit a copy of the amendment, along with the supporting data and analysis, to the District upon its adoption. Response: Both development tracts within the overlay propose access via the same local road, Fritchey Road, making vehicular interconnection between the tracts unnecessary. The Master Plan does allow for a potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnection between the tracts and to the property to the east, if feasible. External to the site, the development proposes Fritchey Road improvements that include a sidewalk connecting to Greenway Road and a Collier Area Transit stop at the intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road. The proposed development has access to Tamiami Trail East via Greenway Road. Regarding clustering, as demonstrated through the review process the proposed GMPA meets the Collier County Comprehensive Plan RFMUD clustering provisions. Central water and sewer is available to serve the project and has the capacity to do so. Extension of the utilities to serve the proposed units will be done at the cost of the developer. The PUD document limits the maximum lot size allowable for a single-family detached dwelling to one acre. The project is proposing 13.59 acres of wetlands consisting of higher quality native vegetation. The subject property is mostly surrounded by development (fam fields, right-of-way, and single-family lots). The location of the preserve is adjacent to the only heavily vegetated area off-site, creating a larger area to act as listed species habitat and creating a corridor for wildlife to travel between the properties. Page 8535 of 9661 Mike Bosi, AICP, Division Director Re: Greenway Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA (PL-20220002063) Bowman File No.: 2022.036 August __, 2025 Page 3 950 Encore Way, Naples, FL 34110 P: 239.254.2000 bowman.com Q:\FL-NAPL-HM\HMDATA-NP2\2022\2022036\WP\GMPA\Response to Transmmittal Comments\MB 250818 FDOT Response Letter (8-19-2025).docx If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, BOWMAN Jeremie Chastain, AICP Senior Manager, Planning and Development JC/sk Enclosure as noted. cc: David Torres w/enclosure Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. w/enclosure Taylor Whitcomb w/enclosure Norman Trebilcock, AICP, PTOE, PE w/enclosure Page 8536 of 9661 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Commissioners Rodney Barreto Chairman Coral Gables Steven Hudson Vice Chairman Fort Lauderdale Preston Farrior Tampa Gary Lester Oxford Albert Maury Coral Gables Gary Nicklaus Jupiter Sonya Rood St. Augustine Office of the Executive Director Roger A. Young Executive Director Charles “Rett” Boyd Assistant Executive Director George Warthen Chief Conservation Officer Jessica Crawford Chief of Staff Division of Habitat and Species Conservation Melissa Tucker Director 850-488-3831 Managing fish and wildlife resources for their long-term well-being and the benefit of people. 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600 Voice: 850-488-4676 Hearing/speech-impaired: 800-955-8771 (T) 800 955-8770 (V) MyFWC.com August 1, 2025 Mike Bosi Planning and Zoning Division, Collier County 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 Michael.bosi@colliercountyfl.gov Re: Collier County 25-02ESR (PL20220002063 Greenway-Fritchey) Dear Mr. Bosi: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) staff reviewed the above-referenced comprehensive plan amendment package and provides the following comments and recommendations for consideration in accordance with Chapter 163.3184, Florida Statutes. While there are no objections to the amendment, the following technical assistance information is provided to assist the Department of Commerce, the County, and any applicants during the amendment review and future project planning. Project Description Collier County transmitted PL20220002063, Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use element and future land use map to create the Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay on approximately 235.8 acres. The amendment would allow a maximum of 1,299 single-family and multifamily residential housing units. The project is located on the east side of Greenway Road, approximately 0.61 miles north of Tamiami Trail East in Collier County. The dominant landcovers onsite consist of approximately 53.7 acres of tree nursery, 35.2 acres of low pasture, 25.5 acres of aquaculture, 24.1 acres of mixed exotics, 23.5 acres of cypress, 17.7 acres of ditches, 9.3 acres of disturbed land, 7.4 acres of improved pasture, 6.9 acres of berms, 5.9 acres of residential, 5.5 acres of Brazilian pepper, 5 acres of exotic wetland hardwoods, 3.7 acres of transportation, 3.4 acres of wetland mixed hardwoods, 2.4 acres of willow, 2.3 acres of pine, 2.3 acres of shallow pond, and 1 acres of pine flatwoods. Potentially Affected Resources Passarella & Associates, Inc., provided the Environmental Data Report (2023) in support of the permit application. The report indicates that wildlife assessments have been conducted on the site focused on listed and managed species within the potential to occur within the project area including: x Audubon’s crested caracara (Caracara plancus audubonii, Federally Threatened [FT]) x Florida scrub-jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens, FT) x Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus, Federally Endangered [FE]) x Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis, FT) x Wood stork (Mycteria americana, FT) x Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi, FE) x Little blue heron (Egretta caerulea, State Threatened [ST]) x Tricolored heron (Egretta tricolor, ST) x Roseate spoonbill (Plata ajaja, ST) Page 8537 of 9661 Mike Bosi Page 2 August 1, 2025 Of the species listed above, two little blue heron and Florida panther tracks were observed onsite. FWC staff conducted a geographic information system (GIS) analysis of the project area which confirmed the information from the Listed Species Survey Report and found that the project is also located near, within, or adjacent to: x Potential habitat for the following federally and state-listed species: o Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi, FT) o Gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus, ST) o Big cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia, ST) o Everglades mink (Neovison vison evergladensis, ST) o Sherman’s short-tailed shrew (Blarina shermani, ST) x Potential habitat for the Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus), South Bear Management Unit (BMU) Comments and Recommendations Wading Birds The potential exists for wading bird nesting activity along ditches and in the wetland hardwoods on the project site, particularly during periods of higher water tables. Depending on hydrological conditions, FWC staff recommends that specific surveys be conducted for wading birds along ditches and in the wetland hardwoods prior to the commencement of any clearing, grading, or filling activities. Surveys should be conducted during their breeding season, which extends from March through August. If there is evidence of nesting during this period, FWC staff recommends that any wading bird nest sites be buffered by 100 meters (330 feet) to avoid disturbance by human activities. The Species Conservation Measures and Permitting Guidelines for the Little Blue Heron, Reddish Egret, Roseate Spoonbill, Tricolored Heron (https://myfwc.com/media/18634/threatened-wading-birds-guidelines.pdf) can be referenced for biological information, survey methodology, measures for avoiding impacts, and recommended conservation practices. If nesting is discovered after site activities have begun, if the removal or trimming of trees with active nests is unavoidable, or if maintaining the recommended buffer is not possible, the applicant may contact the FWC staff identified below to discuss potential permitting alternatives. Gopher Tortoise The project area may have potential habitat for the gopher tortoise. The applicant should refer to the Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines (revised April 2023) (http://www.myfwc.com/license/wildlife/gopher-tortoise-permits/) for survey methodology and permitting guidance prior to any development activity. Burrow surveys should cover a minimum of 15 percent of potential gopher tortoise habitat to be impacted by development activities including staging areas (refer to Appendix 4 in the Guidelines for additional information). Specifically, the permitting guidelines include methods for avoiding impacts (such as preservation of occupied habitat) as well as options and state requirements for minimizing, mitigating, and permitting potential impacts of the proposed activities. Any commensal species observed during burrow excavation should be handled in accordance with Appendix 9 of the Guidelines. For questions regarding gopher tortoise permitting, contact Jessica Folsom at jessica.folsom@MyFWC.com. Page 8538 of 9661 Mike Bosi Page 3 August 1, 2025 Big Cypress Fox Squirrel Although the site’s habitat is degraded by melaleuca and Brazilian pepper, the combination of pasture and forested communities may provide potential habitat for Big Cypress fox squirrels. FWC staff recommends pre-construction surveys to determine whether they are present. Camera-based surveys (e.g., using game cameras at baited sites) can be more effective than pedestrian surveys for nests to determine their presence. Big Cypress fox squirrels typically nest between October and February and from April to August. Surveys to locate nests should be conducted within 60 days prior to the start of clearing or construction to determine if this species is onsite. Big Cypress fox squirrels can use more than one nest and nest use can vary over time. If nests are found onsite, a 574-foot (175-meter) buffer distance from the nest tree should be maintained. If it will be necessary to remove a nest tree or work within 574 feet of a nest tree, the applicant should coordinate with FWC staff to discuss permitting alternatives. The Species Conservation and Permitting Guidelines for Big Cypress Fox Squirrel (https://myfwc.com/media/11559/big- cypress-fox-squirrel-guidelines.pdf) can be referenced for biological information, survey methodology, and measures for avoiding impacts. Everglades Mink The project site is in the presumed range of the Everglades mink. Everglades mink rely on multiple wetland habitats, do not avoid human activity, and frequently make use of man-made structures such as canals and levees nearby wetland habitats. The Species Conservation Measures and Permitting Guidelines for the Everglades Mink (https://myfwc.com/media/11562/everglades- mink-guidelines.pdf) can be referenced for additional biological information, measures for avoiding impacts, and recommended conservation practices. The population size is unknown for the Everglades mink and has been inferred from limited data. If an Everglades mink is observed onsite after construction begins, FWC staff recommends that work activities cease, and the mink be allowed to leave on its own accord. It would also contribute to FWC’s research efforts if any sightings could be reported to the staff member at the close of this letter, or online at https://app.myfwc.com/hsc/weasel/Default.aspx, preferably with a photograph and GPS coordinates. Sherman’s Short-tailed Shrew This area is in the range of the Sherman's short-tailed shrew. While surveys are not required for this cryptic species, FWC staff recommends that shrews be reported along with a photo and GPS location if encountered during the project activities. Additionally, retaining coarse woody debris and snags, and reducing soil compaction in the preserve areas will help minimize impacts to Sherman's short-tailed shrews, if present. The Species Conservation and Permitting Guidelines for Sharman’s Short-tailed Shrew (https://myfwc.com/media/18636/shermans-short-tailed-shrew- guidelines.pdf) can be referenced for biological information, survey methodology, and measures for avoiding impacts. Florida Black Bear The FWC has received 1,055 reports of human-bear conflicts within a 5-mile radius of the project site since 2011. Florida black bears are frequent in this area which is within the South BMU identified in the 2019 Bear Management Plan. While black bears tend to shy away from people, they are adaptable and will take advantage of human-provided food sources. This includes sources that are currently available near this site, sources that may be available during construction, and sources available after construction including unsecured garbage, pet food, and bird seed. Once bears become accustomed to finding food around people, their natural wariness is reduced to the point that there can be an increased risk to public safety or private property. Page 8539 of 9661 Mike Bosi Page 4 August 1, 2025 Proactive planning may help prevent or reduce future conflicts with bears. Site designs for larger developments should locate conservation areas along the borders of developed areas, to avoid encouraging bears to forage within developed areas (http://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/managed/bear/crossings/). If a homeowners’ association or community covenants are planned, by-laws that would require residents to take measures to prevent attracting bears into the neighborhood are recommended. Sample by-law language used by other Florida communities is available at (http://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/managed/bear/living/community-group/bylaw/). During construction, construction sites should be kept clean, with refuse that might attract bears kept separate from construction debris and stored securely in bear-resistant containers or removed daily from the construction site before dark. Refuse that might attract bears includes all food and drink-related materials, as well as any items with strong scents like cleaning agents. Once the development is completed, residents should be provided with bear-resistant garbage cans as part of their regular waste service and any larger waste storage containers should also be bear- resistant. Providing residents with information on how to avoid human-bear conflicts is also recommended. This information can include: x Options for keeping garbage secure which can include using bear-resistant garbage containers, modifying regular containers to be bear-resistant, or keeping containers secure in a garage or sturdy shed and then placing garbage on the curb the morning of pick-up rather than the night before (http://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/managed/bear/living/attractants/); x Removing bird and wildlife feeders, or modifying them to exclude bears (http://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/managed/bear/wildlife-feeders/); x Using electric fencing to secure outdoor attractants like fruiting trees/shrubs, gardens, compost, and small livestock (https://myfwc.com/media/1886/electricfence.pdf); x Proper composting in bear range (https://myfwc.com/media/1888/howtocompostinbearcountry.pdf); x Keeping pets safe (https://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/bear/living/protect-pets/); and x Cleaning and securing barbeque grills. Information should also include guidelines for how residents should respond to bears in the area, such as: x What to do if they encounter a bear, whether from a distance or at close range, x How to keep pets and livestock safe in bear range, and x When and how to contact the FWC regarding a bear issue. FWC staff is available to assist with residential planning to incorporate the above features. Additional information about Florida black bears can be found on FWC’s website at http://www.myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/managed/bear. Florida Panther The project site is located near conservation lands known to be used by Florida panthers and a portion of the project is within the panther Secondary Zone. Recent panther telemetry point locations demonstrate that a female panther has an established home range in this area, and this panther has previously produced a litter of kittens on an adjacent property. Since panthers are known to occur near the project site and to inhabit similar "suburban fringe" areas in the region, FWC staff encourages project designs and awareness programs that reduce the risk of human- wildlife interactions. General advisory information and recommendations for reducing potential Page 8540 of 9661 Mike Bosi Page 5 August 1, 2025 conflicts with the Florida panther during the design, construction, and operation phases of this project are attached and should be utilized where appropriate. To further reduce the likelihood of human-panther interactions, FWC staff recommends the Living with Panthers informative brochure (http://www.floridapanthernet.org/) be provided to residents within the proposed residential community. Garbage management practices mentioned in the Florida black bears section below may also help reduce attractants for panther prey species, particularly raccoons.Federal SpeciesThis site may also contain habitat suitable for the federally listed species identified above. FWC staff recommends coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Florida Ecological Services Office (ESO) as necessary for information regarding potential impacts to these species. The USFWS ESO can be contacted at FW4FLESRegs@fws.gov. FWC staff appreciates the opportunity to provide input on this project. For specific technical questions regarding the content of this letter, please contact Sydney Wilson at (561) 236-6706 or by email at Sydney.Wilson@MyFWC.com. All other inquiries may be sent to ConservationPlanningServices@MyFWC.com. Sincerely, Josh Cucinella Land Use Planning Program Administrator Office of Conservation Planning Services Attachment: Technical Assistance Regarding the Florida Panther 2025 jc/sw Collier County 25-02ESR_63404_08012025 Cc : Bethany Brosious, Passerella & Associates, Inc., bethanyb@passarella.net Scott Rogers, Florida Commerce, scott.rogers@commerce.fl.gov Sincerely, JhCill Page 8541 of 9661 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Commissioners Rodney Barreto Chairman Coral Gables Steven Hudson Vice Chairman Fort Lauderdale Preston Farrior Tampa Gary Lester Oxford Albert Maury Coral Gables Gary Nicklaus Jupiter Sonya Rood St. Augustine Office of the Executive Director Roger A. Young Executive Director Charles “Rett” Boyd Assistant Executive Director George Warthen Chief Conservation Officer Jessica Crawford Chief of Staff Division of Habitat and Species Conservation Melissa Tucker Director 850-488-3831 Managing fish and wildlife resources for their long-term well-being and the benefit of people. 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600 Voice: 850-488-4676 Hearing/speech-impaired: 800-955-8771 (T) 800 955-8770 (V) MyFWC.com Technical Assistance Regarding the Florida Panther – 2025 Dear Applicant, Property Owner, and Interested Parties: According to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) data, Florida panthers (Puma concolor coryi) may utilize the project area. Human-panther conflicts, research evidence of panthers, panthers killed by vehicles, or other evidence warrants measures that may prevent or reduce such conflicts. While Florida panthers tend to avoid people, they are adaptable and will take advantage of human-dominated landscapes. Food sources, such as unsecured pets and small livestock (e.g. goats, sheep), or the deliberate or unintentional feeding of panther prey species, such as deer and raccoons, may attract panthers to areas used by people. Once panthers become accustomed to finding prey around people, their natural wariness can be reduced to the point that there is an increased risk to private property and public safety. Designs for projects in this area should include impediments to wildlife movement into the new community once construction is completed. Impediments could include the placement of borrow lakes around the perimeter of the development, particularly if the site is adjacent to natural habitat areas. Fencing is also recommended to deter deer from entering residential yards or open spaces and should be used around the community perimeter if no other impediment to wildlife movement exists. Such fencing should be six feet in height chain link (or similar material) with a three-strand overhang of barbed wire. If a homeowners’ association or community covenants are planned, by-laws that would require residents to take measures to prevent attracting panthers or their prey into the neighborhood are recommended. These measures can include proper waste management that does not attract prey animals like raccoons, securing outdoor pets or other domestic animals in fully enclosed pens, and not feeding wildlife. Providing residents with information on how to minimize human-panther conflicts is also recommended. This information can include: x Advice on avoiding a negative encounter and suggestions on living safely in panther country (https://myfwc.com/media/3112/livingwithpanthers.pdf); x Options for keeping garbage secure like wildlife-resistant garbage containers or modifications,securing containers and only placing them on the curb the morning of pick-up (http://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/managed/bear/living/attractants/); x Using electric fencing to secure outdoor attractants like fruiting trees/shrubs, gardens, compost, and small livestock (https://myfwc.com/media/1886/ElectricFence.pdf/); and x Keeping pets safe (https://myfwc.com/media/1892/protect-your-pet.pdf) x Keeping livestock safe (https://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/panther/depredations/). New roads associated with a development can also lead to collisions with panthers and other wildlife. Internal speed limits should not exceed 30 MPH and if a roadway bisects a natural habitat or preservation area, consideration should be given to installing speed control features like speed humps. If a development includes interior walking trails through preserve areas, signs should alert people to the possibility of encountering wildlife and what they should do should such an encounter occur. Signage should include this information: https://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/panther/living/. FWC staff can assist with residential planning to incorporate the above recommendations and reduce the potential for interactions between panthers and humans. Please feel free to contact our office at ConservationPlanningServices@MyFWC.com for technical assistance. Land Use Planning Program Administrator Office of Conservation Planning Services Page 8542 of 9661 Passarella & Associates, Inc. 1 of 7 #21HLN3451 08/18/2025 GREENWAY FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL RESPONSES TO FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION COMMENTS ON PROPOSED COLLIER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT August 2025 The following information is provided to address the comments provided by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) in a letter dated August 1, 2025 for Greenway Fritchey Residential (Project). The FWCC comments were provided in response to the transmittal of Collier County Comprehensive Plan Amendment PL20220002063. While the comment letter indicates that the FWCC had no objections to the proposed amendment, comments and recommendations were provided. Per correspondence from FWCC, dated August 1, 2025, the following listed and or managed species had the potential to occur within the Project area. x Audubon’s crested caracara (Caracara plancus audubonii) x Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) x Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus) x Red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) (Leuconotopicus borealis) x Wood stork (Mycteria americana) x Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) x Little blue heron (Egretta caerulea) x Tricolored heron (Egretta tricolor) x Roseate spoonbill (Plata ajaja) The Project site is composed of highly disturbed upland and wetland areas, primarily consisting of a tree nursery and aquaculture facility, both previously approved by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). These areas include mixed exotic habitat and pastures utilized for cattle grazing. The Project site plan was designed to retain and enhance the highest quality wetland habitat on-site and includes a 13.55± acre On-Site Preserve Area. The habitat within the On-Site Preserve Area will be enhanced via the removal of exotic vegetation and the installation of supplemental plantings, and will be maintained and preserved in perpetuity via a conservation easement. The Project also includes the preservation of a 126.12± acre Off-Site Mitigation Area. The Off- Site Mitigation Area is located immediately adjacent to Picayune Strand State Forest (PSSF). The property will be enhanced via the removal of exotic vegetation and the installation of supplemental plantings. In addition, it will be protected in perpetuity via a conservation easement. The location of the Off-Site Mitigation Area adjacent to PSSF will preserve and enhance regionally significant habitat, protect wildlife habitat adjacent to State of Florida (State) lands, and will preserve and Page 8543 of 9661 Passarella & Associates, Inc. 2 of 7 #21HLN3451 08/18/2025 retain regional wildlife corridors. The Off-Site Mitigation Area may be deeded to the State to complement the PSSF. As part of the review of SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit No. 11-112655-P, a listed species management plan was prepared for the Project. A copy of the listed species management plan is attached. As described in the listed species management plan, the On-Site Preserve and Off-Site Mitigation Area will be managed for listed species based on habitat type and current listed species utilization. However, the preservation, enhancement, and maintenance of the On-Site Preserve and Off-Site Mitigation Area will provide a regional and long-term benefit for area wildlife. The information below provides Project-specific details regarding each of the species listed in the August 1, 2025 letter from FWCC. Audubon’s crested caracara The crested caracara is a State- and federally listed species. No caracara nests have been documented on the Project site. As noted in the listed species management plan, an off-site caracara nest is located approximately 300 feet south of the Project site on a residential property that supports a single-family home and is utilized for storing miscellaneous equipment and materials. The primary and secondary nest buffers extend onto the Project site. This nest is not visible from the Project site; however, enhanced buffering will be utilized along the southern perimeter of the Project site to provide additional buffering between the nest location and the Project. Prior to the commencement of clearing activities within 1,500 meters (4,920 feet) of the identified nest, a survey will be conducted during the crested caracara nesting season (January through April) to determine if the off-site nest is active or if other crested caracara nests are present. The survey will be conducted in potential nesting and foraging habitat within 1,500 meters of the identified caracara nests, including land adjacent to the Project under the applicant’s ownership. The crested caracara survey will be conducted according to the methodology described in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Draft Species Conservation Guidelines for South Florida for the Audubon’s Crested Caracara (2004). If observed, the locations of crested caracara nests and the movements and activities of caracaras will be documented. If an active nest is discovered during the pre-construction surveys, coordination with USFWS and FWCC will occur to minimize adverse effects to these species. Project-related activities within the primary zone of an active nest will be conducted during the non-nesting season or when the nest is inactive. A monitoring program will be implemented when the nest is in use to monitor for signs of disturbance while construction activities are ongoing (USFWS 2004). The monitor will be on-site for a minimum of four hours per day and three days per week while the nest is in use. Page 8544 of 9661 Passarella & Associates, Inc. 3 of 7 #21HLN3451 08/18/2025 The Project site contains pasture which could be utilized for foraging activities but does not contain high-quality nesting habitat. The Off-Site Mitigation Area, located adjacent to PSSF, in combination with the surrounding lands, provides a mosaic of upland and wetland habitat that could be utilized by crested caracara and will provide large-scale foraging and nesting opportunities for crested caracara in the post-enhancement condition. Florida scrub-jay The Florida scrub jay is a State and federally threatened species. The Project site does not contain suitable habitat for the Florida scrub jay. The Project site contains no scrub habitat or scrub oaks that could potentially be utilized by the Florida scrub jay for nesting or foraging activities. Florida bonneted bat The Florida bonneted bat is a State and federally endangered species. The Project contains potential habitat for the Florida bonneted bat. Prior to construction, a survey will be conducted to identify potential cavity trees and roosts that may be utilized by Florida bonneted bats. The survey will take place over the Project’s development footprint and a 250-foot buffer from the development boundary. If any potential bonneted bat roosts are documented, the applicant will coordinate with the USFWS to obtain applicable permits, as necessary. In addition, the following best management practices will be implemented for the Project. x A Florida bonneted bat cavity tree and roost survey will be conducted on the Project site within 30 days prior to the removal of trees, snags, or structures. When possible, structures will be removed outside the breeding season (January 1 through April 15). If evidence of use by Florida bonneted bats is observed, the removal efforts will be discontinued, and the USFWS will be contacted on how to proceed. x A 250-foot buffer will be maintained around known or suspected Florida bonneted bat roosts when using heavy equipment to limit disturbance to roosting bats. x The creation of the Project’s stormwater management lakes and the preservation and enhancement of 13.59± acres of on-site habitat of 126.12± acres of off-site habitat will promote Florida bonneted bat foraging opportunities. x Widespread application of insecticides will be avoided in areas where Florida bonneted bats are known or expected to forage or roost. x Native trees and shrubs will be planted within open space and buffer areas to promote insect diversity, availability, and abundance. x Mature trees and snags that could provide roosting habitat will be retained within the conservation areas. Page 8545 of 9661 Passarella & Associates, Inc. 4 of 7 #21HLN3451 08/18/2025 Both the On-Site Preserve and Off-Site Mitigation Area contain habitat that may be considered suitable foraging and roosting habitat for the Florida bonneted bat. The preservation and enhancement of wetlands and uplands within the preserves will improve the overall quality of these habitats by increasing native vegetation and exotic understory vegetation. The creation of lakes intended for surface water management associated with the development has the potential to increase the Project’s foraging potential for the Florida bonneted bat. Red-Cockaded Woodpecker The RCW is a State- and federally threatened species. No RCWs have been documented on the Project site, nor have any been documented in the vicinity of the Project site. In addition, no cavities in live pine (Pinus sp.) have been documented during the listed species survey or other fieldwork. While the Project site contains limited habitat that contains canopy pine trees, the habitat quality is not suitable for foraging or nesting RCW due to the high concentration of exotic vegetation. The On-Site Preserve does not contain suitable habitat for RCWs. However, the Off-Site Mitigation Area contains pine habitats with varying degrees of exotic infestation, and in the post- enhancement condition, the Off-Site Mitigation Area will provide foraging and nesting opportunities for RCWs. In addition to the enhancement activities proposed, prescribed burning may be utilized as a management tool at the Off-Site Mitigation Area to maintain an open mid-story and enhance potential foraging by RCWs. Wood Stork and Listed Wading Birds The wood stork is a State- and federally listed threatened species, and the little blue heron, tricolored heron, and roseate spoonbill are State-listed threatened species. Wood storks have not been documented utilizing the Project site, and no wood stork nests were documented on the property. State-listed wading birds, including two little blue herons, were observed within the aquaculture facility on-site. The Project site contains wetlands that could potentially be utilized by wood storks and/or State-listed wading birds for nesting or foraging activities. As recommended by the FWCC, prior to construction activities, a survey will be conducted by qualified ecologists within potential nesting habitat located within the development footprint. If wood stork or other wading bird nesting activity is documented, coordination with FWCC staff will be conducted prior to clearing within the areas where the nesting activity was documented. The On-Site Preserve and Off-Site Mitigation Area contain 13.17± acres and 100.52± acres of wetlands, respectively, which will provide potential foraging and nesting habitats for wood storks and other wading bird species. The removal of invasive exotic vegetation will result in preserves that are more suitable as foraging habitats and provide enhanced wetland habitat, as well as making the wetlands better for roosting. Supplemental plantings of native vegetation will be conducted in Page 8546 of 9661 Passarella & Associates, Inc. 5 of 7 #21HLN3451 08/18/2025 areas with greater than 50 percent exotics. Both the On-Site Preserve and Off-Site Mitigation Area include the preservation, enhancement, and perpetual protection of wetland habitat that could potentially be utilized by wood storks and State-listed wading birds. Florida panther The Florida panther is a State- and federally listed endangered species. Signs (tracks) of a Florida panther were documented during the listed species survey, and the Project is located within the USFWS Panther Focus Area Secondary Zone. As recommended by the FWCC, the applicant will provide the FWCC Living with Panthers informative brochure to future residents. In addition, garbage management, including practices and containers to secure waste, will be utilized to discourage and exclude potential prey species such as raccoons (Procyon lotor). The Project site contains habitat that could be utilized by the Florida panther; however, due to previous utilization for tree farming and aquaculture activities, and the high levels of exotic vegetation throughout the site, habitat quality on-site is low. The On-Site Preserve Areas will be preserved and enhanced and may provide potential Florida panther habitat. However, the Off-Site Mitigation Area, which is located within the USFWS Panther Focus Area Primary Zone and directly abuts the PSSF, will provide high-quality habitat for Florida panther and associated prey species. In addition, the Off-Site Mitigation Area will provide connectivity, protect regional wildlife corridors, and provide a long-term benefit to wildlife, including Florida panthers. In addition to the preservation of habitat on-site and the establishment of the Off-Site Mitigation Area, the applicant will purchase Panther Habitat Units from a USFWS-approved panther habitat compensation bank. The August 1, 2025 FWCC correspondence noted that the Project was located near, within or adjacent to potential habitat for the following federal and State-listed species: x Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi) x Gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) x Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia) x Everglades mink (Neovison vison evergladensis) x Sherman’s short-tailed shrew (Blarina shermani) x Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) The following information provides Project-related information for each of the species noted and incorporates the FWCC’s comments and recommendations where applicable. Page 8547 of 9661 Passarella & Associates, Inc. 6 of 7 #21HLN3451 08/18/2025 Eastern Indigo Snake The Eastern indigo snake is a State- and federally threatened species. No Eastern indigo snakes have been documented on the Project site. The Project will implement the USFWS Eastern Indigo Snake protection measures and education plan developed by the USFWS for use in Florida. The plan outlines protection guidelines to be implemented for the Eastern indigo snake prior to and during clearing operations and requires that educational material and guidelines be provided to construction personnel in case they encounter an Eastern indigo snake. The site plan has been designed to provide a total of 13.59± acres of preserve area on-site and an additional 126.12± acres of habitat at the Off-Site Mitigation Area, which includes the preservation, enhancement, and restoration of habitat types that could potentially be utilized by the Eastern indigo snake. Gopher Tortoise The gopher tortoise is a State-threatened species. No gopher tortoises were documented on-site during the listed species survey or during other fieldwork. If gopher tortoises are documented, the applicant will follow procedures like in the FWCC Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines. Big Cypress Fox Squirrel The Big Cypress fox squirrel is a State-threatened species. No Big Cypress fox squirrels have been documented on the Project site. As recommended by the FWCC, pre-construction surveys will be conducted for the Big Cypress fox squirrel. Surveys will be conducted within 60 days prior to the start of clearing. If an active nest is documented on-site, a 574-foot (175-meter) buffer will be maintained, and the applicant will coordinate with FWCC. Everglades Mink The Everglades mink is a State-threatened species. No Everglades minks have been documented on the Project site. As recommended by the FWCC, if an Everglades mink is observed on-site during construction activities, work activities will cease to allow the Everglades mink to leave on its own accord. The sighting will subsequently be reported to the FWCC. The site plan has been designed to provide a total of 13.59± acres of preserve area on-site and an additional 126.12± acres of habitat at the Off-Site Mitigation Area, which includes the preservation, enhancement, and restoration of habitat types that could potentially be utilized by the Everglades mink. Sherman’s Short-Tailed Shrew The Sherman’s short-tailed shrew is a State-threatened species. No Sherman’s short-tailed shrews have been documented on the Project site. As recommended by the FWCC, coarse woody debris and snags will be maintained within the preserve area, and Project activities will avoid soil compaction within the preserve. Page 8548 of 9661 Passarella & Associates, Inc. 7 of 7 #21HLN3451 08/18/2025 The site plan has been designed to provide a total of 13.59± acres of preserve area on-site and an additional 126.12± acres of habitat at the Off-Site Mitigation Area, which includes the preservation, enhancement, and restoration of habitat types that could potentially be utilized by the Sherman’s short-tailed shrew. Florida Black Bear The Florida black bear is not a listed species but is protected by the State of Florida. As recommended by FWCC, efforts will be made during construction activities to properly discard refuse to minimize the likelihood of bears entering the Project site. The property owner’s association will be provided with information regarding bear safety and bear-resistant garbage cans, and residents will be provided with information on how to avoid human-bear conflicts and how to respond to bears in the area. Federally Listed Species The Project is currently under review by the USFWS (Service Code 2024-0097955) regarding federally listed species. REFERENCES U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004. Draft Species Conservation Guidelines South Florida for Audubon’s Crested Caracara. South Florida Ecological Services Office. Vero Beach, Florida. Page 8549 of 9661 Project No. 21HLN3451 GREENWAY ROAD PARCEL LISTED SPECIES MANAGEMENT PLAN Revised December 2023 Prepared For: Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC 7742 Alico Road Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 208-4079 Prepared By: Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 274-0067 Page 8550 of 9661 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 2.0 Listed Species Surveys ...................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Preserve Areas ................................................................................................................... 2 3.1 On-Site Preserve .................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Off-Site Mitigation Area ........................................................................................ 2 4.0 Wood Stork Management Plan .......................................................................................... 3 4.1 Habitat Management Plan ...................................................................................... 3 4.1.1 Pre-Construction Surveys .......................................................................... 3 4.1.2 Habitat Enhancement ................................................................................. 3 5.0 Red-Cockaded Woodpecker Management Plan ................................................................ 3 5.1 Biology ................................................................................................................... 4 5.2 Habitat Management Plan ...................................................................................... 4 6.0 Crested Caracara Management Plan .................................................................................. 5 6.1 Biology ................................................................................................................... 5 6.2 Pre-Construction Surveys ...................................................................................... 5 6.3 Nest Monitoring During Construction Activities .................................................. 5 6.4 Site Plan Accommodations .................................................................................... 6 7.0 Florida Panther Management Plan ..................................................................................... 6 7.1 Biology ................................................................................................................... 6 7.2 Habitat Management Plan ...................................................................................... 7 8.0 Florida Bonneted Bat Management Plan ........................................................................... 7 8.1 Biology ................................................................................................................... 7 8.2 Pre-Construction Cavity Tree and Roost Surveys ................................................. 8 8.3 Management Plan................................................................................................... 8 9.0 References .......................................................................................................................... 8 Page 8551 of 9661 ii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Listed Species Observed on the Project ................................................................. 1 Page 8552 of 9661 iii LIST OF APPENDICES Page Appendix A. Project Location Map ......................................................................................... A-1 Appendix B. Aerial with On-Site Preserve ............................................................................. B-1 Appendix C. Aerial with Off-Site Mitigation Area ................................................................. C-1 Appendix D. Aerial with Boundary, Caracara Nest, and Buffers Zones ................................. D-1 Page 8553 of 9661 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report documents the listed species management plan for Greenway Road Parcel (Project). The Project site totals 229.20± acres and is located in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County (Appendix A). More specifically, the Project site is located approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the Tamiami Trail East (U.S. 41) and Collier Boulevard (State Road 951) intersection and 0.6 mile north of the U.S. 41 and Greenway Road intersection. The site primarily comprises agricultural land for cattle grazing with some highly disturbed forested regions. An aerial depicting the location and boundary of the On-Site Preserve is included as Appendix B. The Off-Site Mitigation Area for the Project is located in Section 20, Township 50 South, Range 27 East, Collier County (Appendix A). The Off-Site Mitigation Area comprises 126.12± acres of forested and herbaceous uplands and wetlands adjacent to the Picayune Strand State Forest (PSSF). An aerial with the boundary of the Off-Site Mitigation Area is attached as Appendix C. This management plan pertains to the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), wood stork (Mycteria americana), crested caracara (Caracara cheriway), Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus), and Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi). 2.0 LISTED SPECIES SURVEYS Surveys for listed plant and wildlife species were conducted on the Project site on April 8, 19, and 22, 2022. Crested caracara were observed flying in the vicinity of the Project site in March 2021. Additional observations and a caracara survey were conducted between January through April 2023. A caracara nest was documented off-site, approximately 300 feet south of the Project (Appendix D). The nest was located in a cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) on a residential property. No caracara nests were documented on-site. Listed wildlife species observations made during other fieldwork on the Project site, including Florida Land Use, Cover Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) mapping, wetland flagging, and agency site visits, were also recorded. Table 1 summarizes the listed wildlife species observed on the Project site during fieldwork conducted on-site between 2021 through 2023. Table 1. Listed Species Observed on the Project Common Name Scientific Name Status FWCC USFWS Reptiles American alligator Alligator mississippiensis FT(S/A) FT(S/A) Birds Little blue heron Egretta caerula ST - Crested caracara Caracara cheriway FT FT Mammals Florida panther (sign) Puma concolor coryi FE FE Page 8554 of 9661 2 Table 1. (Continued) FWCC – Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission USFWS – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FE – Federally endangered FT(S/A) – Federally threatened due to similarity of appearance ST – Threatened 3.0 PRESERVE AREAS The On-Site Preserve and Off-Site Mitigation Area will be managed for listed species based on habitat type and current listed species utilization. The target listed species include the wood stork, red-cockaded woodpecker, crested caracara, Florida bonneted bat, and Florida panther. The Project site plan eliminated impacts to the high-quality habitat, and development is proposed to occur within habitats that contain high percentages of exotics and lack high natural resource value or were previously utilized for agricultural purposes. The On-Site Preserve has been designed to preserve high-quality habitat on-site and provide connectivity to off-site wetlands. The Off-Site Mitigation Area is adjacent to PSSF and will enhance and preserve a regionally significant wetland system and retain wildlife habitat connectivity. The On-Site Preserve and Off-Site Mitigation Area will be protected via a conservation easement or other equivalent deed restriction with inspection, enforcement, and approval rights granted to the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). Upon approval, the Off-Site Mitigation Area may be deeded to the State to complement the PSSF. Additional details regarding the On-Site Preserve and Off-Site Mitigation Area are as follows. 3.1 On-Site Preserve The On-Site Preserve totals 13.65± acres and provides connectivity to an off-site cypress (Taxodium spp.) wetland. The On-Site Preserve is situated such that it preserves and protects the highest quality wetland habitat on the Project site and is comprised of 13.17± acres of wetlands and 0.48± acre of uplands. The wetland habitats to be preserved and enhanced consist mainly of pine/cypress communities, with cypress, hydric pine, hydric cabbage palm, mixed wetland forest, and marsh communities to a lesser extent. The upland habitats consist of pine flatwoods, palmetto prairie, live oak, and cabbage palm. 3.2 Off-Site Mitigation Area The Off-Site Mitigation Area totals 126.12± acres and is situated immediately adjacent to the PSSF. The Off-Site Mitigation Area is comprised of 25.6± acres of uplands and 100.52± acres of wetlands and will preserve and enhance regionally significant habitat, protect Page 8555 of 9661 3 wildlife habitat adjacent to state lands, and will preserve and retain regional wildlife corridors. The wetland habitats to be preserved and enhanced consist mostly of pine/cypress communities, with cypress, hydric pine, hydric cabbage palm, mixed wetland forest, and marsh communities to a lesser extent. The upland habitats consist of pine flatwoods, palmetto prairie, live oak, and cabbage palm. 4.0 WOOD STORK MANAGEMENT PLAN The following habitat management plan has been prepared to address the conservation of potential wood stork and other wading bird habitat on the Project site. 4.1 Habitat Management Plan 4.1.1 Pre-Construction Surveys Wood storks have not been documented utilizing the Project site, and no wood stork nests were documented on the property. Prior to construction activities, a survey will be conducted by qualified ecologists within potential nesting habitat located within the development footprint. If wood stork or other wading bird nesting activity is documented, coordination with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) staff will be conducted prior to clearing within the areas where the nesting activity was documented. 4.1.2 Habitat Enhancement Wetlands within the On-Site Preserve and Off-Site Mitigation Area will provide potential foraging and nesting habitats for wood storks and other wading bird species. The preserves will be maintained per the Wetland Mitigation/Monitoring/Maintenance Plan. The removal of invasive exotic vegetation will result in preserves that are more suitable as foraging habitats and provide enhanced wetland habitat, as well as making the wetlands better for roosting. Supplemental plantings of native vegetation will be conducted in areas with greater than 50 percent exotics. As part of the mitigation plan, areas of highly degraded wetlands, including monocultures of melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia) or other exotics, will be enhanced through the mechanical removal of exotics, grading to wetland elevations, and planting with native vegetation. 5.0 RED-COCKADED WOODPECKER MANAGEMENT PLAN The following habitat management plan has been prepared to address the conservation of red- cockaded woodpecker habitat on the Project site. Page 8556 of 9661 4 5.1 Biology The red-cockaded woodpecker lives and breeds within old-growth pine forests. The red-cockaded woodpecker forages preferentially in stands of live pines with trees that average a diameter of ten inches or greater (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 1985). Dense pine stands or stands primarily composed of hardwoods are avoided. Red-cockaded woodpeckers feed primarily on insects, including beetles, ants, grubs, and caterpillars. A smaller percentage of the diet may consist of seasonal fruits, berries, and seeds. The red-cockaded woodpecker roosts and nests in cavities excavated in live pine trees. Cavity trees are typically at least 60 to 80 years old and usually weakened by a fungal infection known as red-heart disease (McFarlane 1992, Ehrlich et al. 1988). Cavities are typically constructed on the main trunk just below the lowest branches. Numerous resin wells are maintained around the cavity entrance. The resin wells may help defend against ground-dwelling predators and insect damage. Red-cockaded woodpeckers live in family groups composed of a mated pair, offspring of the year, and unmated male helpers. The group’s cavity trees are aggregated in clusters that typically occupy an area of about ten acres (USFWS 1985). Groups are highly territorial and may defend an area nearly 200 acres in size (McFarlane 1992, Ehrlich et al. 1988, USFWS 1985). Red-cockaded woodpeckers are cooperative breeders, and one or more non-breeding males may assist the breeding pair in brooding, feeding, and territorial defense. Egg laying typically occurs during April, May, and June (USFWS 1985). Clutch size is typically two to five eggs (Ehrlich et al. 1988, USFWS 1985). Both sexes are involved in incubating and feeding. The time from egg laying to fledging is approximately 40 days (USFWS 1985). 5.2 Habitat Management Plan Red-cockaded woodpeckers have not been documented on or in the vicinity of the Project site. In addition, no cavities in live pine trees have been documented during the listed species survey or other fieldwork. While the Project site contains limited habitat that contains canopy pine trees, the habitat quality is not suitable for foraging or nesting red-cockaded woodpeckers due to the high concentration of exotic vegetation. The On-Site Preserve does not contain suitable habitat for red-cockaded woodpeckers. However, the Off-Site Mitigation Area contains pine habitats with varying degrees of exotic infestation, and in the post-enhancement condition, the Off-Site Mitigation Area will provide foraging and nesting opportunities for red-cockaded woodpeckers. In addition to the enhancement activities outlined in the Wetland Mitigation/Monitoring/ Maintenance Plan, prescribed burning may be utilized as a management tool at the Off-Site Mitigation Area to maintain an open mid-story and enhance potential foraging by red- cockaded woodpeckers. Page 8557 of 9661 5 6.0 CRESTED CARACARA MANAGEMENT PLAN The following plan outlines protection guidelines that will be implemented for the Project before and during construction. 6.1 Biology The crested caracara is a large, non-migratory raptor that feeds mainly on carrion and is often found with flocks of turkey vultures (Cathartes aura) and black vultures (Coragyps atratus). The population of crested caracara found in peninsular Florida is genetically isolated from other populations of crested caracara subspecies found in the Southwestern United States and portions of Central and South America (USFWS 1999). While other subspecies of crested caracara are not listed as threatened or endangered, the crested caracara subspecies found in Florida was listed in July 1987 as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S. Code 1531 et seq.). Crested caracaras primarily use open habitats, including native prairies, grasslands, and pastures with their associated freshwater marshes and small clumps of cabbage palms, live oak (Quercus spp.) hammocks, and cypress. Cabbage palms in open habitats are highly important for nesting (Rodgers et al. 1996, Morrison 2001). The primary nesting season for the crested caracara is November through April. Egg laying typically occurs from December through February. Clutch size is one to three eggs, and incubation ranges from 28 to 32 days. Caracara young fledge at age seven to eight weeks, most in March and April (Wood 2001). 6.2 Pre-Construction Surveys Before the commencement of clearing activities within 1,500 meters (4,920 feet) of the identified nest, a survey will be conducted during the crested caracara nesting season (January through April) to determine if the off-site nest is active or if other crested caracara nests are present. The survey will be conducted in potential nesting and foraging habitat within 1,500 meters of the identified caracara nests, including land adjacent to the Project under the applicant’s ownership. The crested caracara survey will be conducted according to the methodology described in the USFWS Draft Species Conservation Guidelines for South Florida for the Audubon’s Crested Caracara (USFWS 2004). If observed, the locations of crested caracara nests and the movements and activities of caracaras will be documented. If an active nest is discovered during the pre-construction surveys, coordination with USFWS and/or FWCC will occur to minimize adverse effects to these species. 6.3 Nest Monitoring During Construction Activities Project activities will require habitat modification with the Primary and Secondary Zone of the off-site nest. Activities within the Primary Zone, which overlays the Project site, will be conducted during the non-nesting season or when the nest is inactive. A monitoring program will be implemented when the nest is in use to monitor for signs of disturbance while construction activities are ongoing (USFWS 2004). The monitor will be on- site for a minimum of four hours per day and three days per week while the nest is in use. Page 8558 of 9661 6 6.4 Site Plan Accommodations The off-site nest is located approximately 300 feet south of the Project site on a residential property that supports a single-family home and is utilized for storing miscellaneous equipment and materials (Appendix D). This nest is not visible from the Project site; however, enhanced buffering will be utilized along the perimeter of the Project site to provide additional buffering between the nest location and Project. The Off-Site Mitigation Area, located adjacent to PSSF, in combination with the surrounding lands, provides a mosaic of upland and wetland habitat that could be utilized by crested caracara, and will provide large-scale foraging and nesting opportunities for crested caracara in the post-enhancement condition. If any disturbances are documented, construction will be paused, and coordination with USFWS and/or FWCC will occur to minimize adverse effects to these species. 7.0 FLORIDA PANTHER MANAGEMENT PLAN The following habitat management plan has been prepared to address the conservation of Florida panther habitat on the Project site. The Florida panther is listed as endangered by the FWCC and the USFWS. 7.1 Biology The Florida panther is a large, long-tailed cat with a great deal of color variation: pale brown or rusty upper parts; dull white or buff-colored underparts; and dark brown or blackish tail tip, back of ears, and sides of nose. Mature males have an average weight range between 100 to 150 pounds and measure nearly seven feet from nose to tip of tail. Females are considerably smaller, weighing 50 to 100 pounds and measuring about six feet (USFWS 1987). Panthers subsist on a variety of mammalian prey dominated by white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), feral hog (Sus scrofa), and in some areas raccoon (Procyon lotor) (Maehr 1988a). Existing data on Florida panther reproduction indicates that breeding occurs throughout the year with a peak in the winter/spring period, a gestation period of around 90 to 95 days, litter sizes of one to four kittens, and a breeding cycle of two years for females successfully raising young to dispersal (which occurs around 18 to 24 months) (Belden 1988, Maehr 1988b). In terms of population size and occupied range, the Florida panther population is at least stable and at best expanding, as evidenced by natality rates exceeding mortality rates and by recent dispersals north of the Caloosahatchee River (Land et al. 2000). According to Maehr et al. (1991), home ranges average 200 square miles for resident adult males, 75 square miles for adult females, 241 square miles for transient males, and 69 square miles for sub-adult females. Florida panthers inhabit large remote tracts of land with adequate prey and cover and occupy various habitat types, including hardwood hammocks, pine flatwoods, mixed hardwood swamps, and cypress swamps. Appropriate cover is an important component of habitat used, especially during hunting, denning, and day-bedding. Recent information based Page 8559 of 9661 7 on global positioning system (GPS) telemetry data collected during nocturnal and diurnal periods indicates that forests are the habitats selected by panthers (Land et al. 2008). 7.2 Habitat Management Plan The preserve areas will be enhanced and managed per the Wetland Mitigation/ Monitoring/ Maintenance Plan and will serve as potential Florida panther habitat. The Project site and On-Site Preserve provide little habitat availability for Florida panthers due to surrounding land uses. However, the Off-Site Mitigation Area will be preserved and enhanced to provide habitat for the Florida panther and associated prey species. Enhancement activities will provide higher quality habitat for the Florida panther than what currently exists within the SFWMD mitigation area via the removal of exotic vegetation within both wetlands and uplands that the panther may use for foraging and denning. Preserving and protecting the Off-Site Mitigation Area will provide habitat connectivity and preserve a regional wildlife corridor within the PSSF. 8.0 FLORIDA BONNETED BAT MANAGEMENT PLAN The Project site contains potential foraging and roosting habitat for the Florida bonneted bat. The following management plan has been prepared to address the management of potential Florida bonneted bat habitat on the site. The Florida bonneted bat is listed as federally endangered by the FWCC and endangered by the USFWS. 8.1 Biology With an average wingspan of 490 to 530 millimeters (19.3 to 20.9 inches) and an average length of 130 to 165 millimeters (5.1 to 6.5 inches), the Florida bonneted bat is the largest species of bat found in Florida. They are members of the Molossidae family, commonly referred to as free-tailed bats. Molossids, including Florida bonneted bats, have tails that extend well beyond their short tail membrane. Also similar to other free-tailed bats, the Florida bonneted bat has small eyes; large upper lips; and long, narrow wings (Marks and Marks 2006). Their fur is short and glossy, with sharply bicolored hairs with a white base (Timm and Genoways 2004). Their fur ranges from dark gray to brownish-gray or cinnamon brown on its dorsal side, with lighter, grayish fur underneath. The Florida bonneted bat is characterized by its large size and its large, broad ears that slant forward over the eyes and join together along the midline of the head. Their big ears protrude over their head like a bonnet, giving them their name (Marks and Marks 2006). The current range of the Florida bonneted bat is known to include both the east and the west coast of Southern Florida (excluding the Keys) and includes Charlotte, Collier, Lee, Miami- Dade, Okeechobee, and Polk Counties. Habitat for the Florida bonneted bat consists mainly of foraging areas and roosting sites, including some artificial structures in both urban and forested areas (USFWS 2014). They are known to roost in rock crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and bat boxes (Marks and Marks 2008). South Florida bonneted bats roost primarily in trees and manmade artificial structures Page 8560 of 9661 8 with roost availability indicated as an important limiting factor (USFWS 2014). Foraging habitat includes areas over open freshwater such as ponds, streams, and wetlands; and they will drink when flying over open water (USFWS 2014). They will also forage over treetops and other open areas such as golf courses (Marks and Marks 2006). During the dry season, the bonneted bat becomes more dependent upon the remaining open water habitats such as ponds, streams, and wetland areas for foraging activities (USFWS 2014). 8.2 Pre-Construction Cavity Tree and Roost Surveys Prior to construction, a survey will be conducted to identify potential cavity trees and roosts that may be utilized by Florida bonneted bats. The survey will take place over the Project’s development footprint and a 250-foot buffer from the development boundary. If any potential bonneted bat roosts are documented, the applicant will coordinate with the USFWS to obtain applicable permits, as necessary. 8.3 Management Plan Both the On-Site Preserve and Off-Site Mitigation Area contain habitat that may be considered suitable foraging and roosting habitat for the Florida bonneted bat. Preservation, enhancement, restoration, and creation of wetlands and uplands within the preserves will improve the overall quality of these habitats by increasing native vegetation and exotic understory vegetation. The creation of lakes intended for surface water management associated with the development has the potential to drastically increase the Project’s foraging potential for the bonneted bat, particularly in tandem with littoral plantings that may be required by Collier County. 9.0 REFERENCES Belden, R.C. 1988. The Florida Panther. Pages 514-532 in W.J. Chandler (ed) Audubon Wildlife Report. 1988/1989. The National Audubon Society, New York. 817 pages. Ehrlich, Paul R. et al. 1988. The Birder’s Handbook; A Field Guide to the Natural History of North American Birds. Simon & Schuster, Inc., New York, New York. 785 pages. Land, E.D., M. Lotz, D. Shindle, and S.K. Taylor. 2000. Florida panther genetic restoration and management. Annual report, Study Number 7508. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. Land E.D., D.B. Shindle, R. J. Kawula, J.F. Benson, M.A. Lotz, D.P. Onorato. 2008. Florida panther habitat selection analysis of concurrent GPS and VHF telemetry data. Journal of Wildlife Management: Volume 72, No. 3 pp. 633–639. Maehr, D.S. 1988a. Florida Panther Movements, Social Organization and Habitat Utilization. Annual Performance Report, 7/1/87-6/30/88, Study No. E-1-12 II-E-2 7502, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. 19 pages. Page 8561 of 9661 9 Maehr, D.S. 1988b. Florida Panther Food Habits and Energetics. Annual Performance Report, 7/1/87-6/30/88, Study No. E-1-12 II-E-3 75O3, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. 4 pages. Maehr, D.S., E.D. Land, and J.C. Roof. 1991. Social Ecology of Florida Panthers. National Geographic Research & Exploration, 7(4): 414-431. McFarlane, Robert W. 1992. A Stillness in the Pines; The Ecology of the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. W.W. Norton & Company, New York, New York. 270 pages. Marks, C.S. and G.E. Marks. 2006. Bats of Florida. University Press of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. Marks, G.E. and C.S. Marks. 2008. Status of the Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus). Final report. Submitted by the Florida Bat Conservancy under grant agreement number 401815G 192. Florida Bat Conservancy. Bay Pines, Florida. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985. Recovery Plan for the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 88 pages. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Florida Panther Recovery Plan. Prepared by the Florida Panther Interagency Committee for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 75 pages. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014. Biological Opinion for Golf Club of the Everglades. Service CPA Code 2014-CPA-0037. South Florida Ecological Services Office, Vero Beach, Florida. Page 8562 of 9661 APPENDIX A PROJECT LOCATION MAP Page 8563 of 9661 REVIEWED BY DR AWN BY REVISED DA TE DA TE DA TEAUTO RANCH RDAUTO RANCH RDMANATEE RDMANATEE RD 26TH ST SE26TH ST SE76T H AVE SE76TH AVE SE TRINITY PLTRINITY PLG E O R G I A A V E G E O R G I A A V E LAAKSO LNLAAKSO LNMMAA RR SS HH DD RRLAGER LNLAGER LNLAERTES LNLAERTES LN82N D AVE SE82ND AVE SE LAFAYETTE LNLAFAYETTE LN74T H AVE SE74TH AVE SE 72N D AVE SE72ND AVE SE 84TH AVE SE84TH AVE SE 78TH AVE SE78TH AVE SE 70TH AV E S E70TH AV E S E 80 TH AVE SE80TH AVE SE BBOORR GG HH EESSEELLNN88TH AVE SE88TH AVE S E 86TH AVE SE86TH AVE SE TOMATO RDTOMATO RD90TH AV E SE90TH AV E SE 92N D AVE SE92ND AVE SE 96TH AVE SE96TH AVE SE 94TH AVE SE94TH AVE SE 110TH AVE SE110TH AVE SE 118TH AV E SE118TH AV E SE 106TH AVE SE106TH AVE SE 114 TH AVE SE114TH AVE SE 112T H AVE SE112TH AVE SE 10 8TH AVE SE108TH AVE SE 126TH AVE SE126TH AVE SE 116 TH AVE SE116TH AVE SE 122N D AVE SE122ND AVE SE F L O R I D A N A V E F L O R I D A N A V E 120TH AVE S E120TH A VE S ERI GGS RDRI GGS RD LYNCH BLV DLYNCH BLV D CCHHAAMMPP II OONNSSHHIIPP DD RR 124TH AVE S E124TH A VE S E STEWAR T BLVDSTEWART BLVD WW IILL DDFFLLOOWWEERR WWAAYYGREENWAY RDGREENWAY RDLLEELLYYRREESSOORRTTBBLLVV DD CCEELLEESSTTEE DD RRSIX LS FARM RDSIX LS FARM RDBBAA RR EE FF OOOOTTWWIILLLLIIAAMMSSRRDD68TH AVE SE68TH AVE SE GGRRAANNDDLLEELLYYDDRRSS AAIINNTTAANN DD RR EE WW SS BBLLVVDD AAVVII AAMM AA RRCCIIRRCCAAPP RR II BB LLVVDD SS AA NN MM AA RR CC OO RR DD SS HH EE LL LL IISSLL AA NN DD RR DDFF IIDD DD LL EE RR SS CCRREEEEKKPPKK WW YYCOLLIER BLVD (CR 951)COLLIER BLVD (CR 951)RRAATTTTLLEESS NNAAKKEE HHAAMMMMOO CCKK RRDD CCOOLLLLIIEERRBBLLVVDD((SSRR995511))SABAL PALM RDSABAL PALM RD MILLER BLVDMILLER BLVD(/41 Gulf of Mexico OLDUS41LIVINGSTONRD OIL W EL L R DEVERGLADES BLVD¿À892 ¿À849¿À951 ¿À858¿À837¿À839¿À29¿À846 (/41 §¨¦75COLLIERCOLLIERLEELEE MONROEMONROE ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^ ^ ^ MIAMI TAMPA NAPLES ORLANDO KE Y WE S T SARASO TAPE NS AC OLA FORT MYERS VERO BEACHLAKE PLACIDPANAMA CITY GAINESVILLETALLAHASSEEJACKSON VILLEDA YT ONA BE A CH FORT LAUDERDALE¶ PROJECT LOCATION SEC 7, TWP 51 S, RNG 27 E APPENDIX A. PROJECT LOCATION MAP T.S. R.F. 8/09/23 8/09/23GREENWAY ROAD PARCEL OFF-SITE MITIGATION AREA SEC 20, TWP 50 S, RNG 27 E Page 8564 of 9661 APPENDIX B AERIAL WITH ON-SITE PRESERVE Page 8565 of 9661 Page 8566 of 9661 APPENDIX C AERIAL WITH OFF-SITE MITIGATION AREA Page 8567 of 9661 Page 8568 of 9661 APPENDIX D AERIAL WITH BOUNDARY, CARACARA NEST, AND BUFFERS ZONES Page 8569 of 9661 Page 8570 of 9661 Page 8571 of 9661 Page 8572 of 9661 6/24/2025 Item # 9.A ID# 2025-1920 Executive Summary Recommendation to approve Resolutions of the Board of County Commissioners proposing amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, to create the Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay, to allow a maximum of 1,299 single family and multifamily residential units with housing that is affordable; and allow the reduction in the littoral shelf planting requirements. The subject property is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, approximately a half mile north of Tamiami Trail East (US 41), in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of approximately 227.09 acres. (Transmittal Hearing) [PL20220002063] OBJECTIVE: To review and consider approving the proposed large-scale amendment to the Growth Management Plan (GMP) for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required review agencies. CONSIDERATIONS: The petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE), specifically to create a new overlay, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay, to allow a maximum of 1,299 residential units with 260 for-sale affordable units (20 percent) reserved for individuals earning at or below 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI). The petition also proposes an amendment to the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the creation of a new map (“Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay”) in the FLUM series of the FLUE to identify the newly created Overlay. Additionally, the petition proposes amending Policy 6.1.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to reduce the littoral shelf planting requirements for the project. The 227.09-acre project site, zoned A Rural Agricultural and Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay, Receiving Lands, includes a Provisional Use for aquaculture (PU-87-6C, Reso. #87-177). A portion of the site is undeveloped, while another portion is in agricultural operations. The surrounding area features a mix of existing land uses, including single- family residential areas, mobile homes, and agricultural operations. Note: The companion Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezone will be presented to the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) and Board of County Commissioners [Board] at the time of adoption of the GMP amendment. The draft PUD document is included in the GMP amendment backup materials for informational purposes. The subject property is designated as Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD), Receiving Lands, and is located within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), as identified on the countywide Floodplain Management Unit Map (FLUM). The RFMUD within the FLUE was established in 2002 by Ordinance 02-32 to address agricultural lands within the transitional area between Golden Gate Estates and the County’s urban area and between the urban area and the agricultural lands and agricultural operations farther to the east. The land use strategies developed and employed in the RFMUD direct incompatible land uses away from environmentally sensitive lands. The Sending Lands are those lands within the RFMUD that have the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity, generally encompassing significant wetlands, uplands, and habitats for listed species. The Receiving Lands are those lands identified as being the most appropriate for development and to which residential units may be received from areas designated as Sending Lands through a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. The CHHA is the geographical area lying below the elevation of the Category 1 storm surge line per the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council’s Hurricane Evacuation Study; increased density and expenditure of public infrastructure are discouraged in this area. On February 10, 2015, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) directed staff to initiate the RFMUD restudy. The focus areas of the restudy included complementary land uses, economic vitality, transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship, all of which were addressed through a public outreach effort. The RFMUD restudy public outreach and staff assessment resulted in the RFMUD White Paper. The White Paper provided the framework for the restudy effort conducted by staff and served to further inform the Collier County Planning Commission and the public on those efforts. The RFMUD White Paper provided recommended GMP amendments to improve the RFMUD and TDR programs by further protecting the environment, conserving agricultural lands, addressing development characteristics, and establishing new development standards. In June 2023, the Board adopted restudy-based amendments to the RFMUD. Relevant to this petition, the RFMUD Receiving Lands now allow the development of affordable housing projects at a maximum density of up to 12.2 dwelling units per acre, subject to clustering provisions and Land Development Code (LDC) Section 2.06.00 for Page 8573 of 9661 6/24/2025 Item # 9.A ID# 2025-1920 affordable housing. The FLUE states that implementing Land Development Code (LDC) regulations, such as design standards, development standards, and locational criteria, are to be established for affordable housing development within the RFMUD. The above-referenced LDC regulations are currently being drafted and will be presented to the CCPC and Board later this year. Additionally, a proposed LDC amendment, not yet adopted by the Board, to implement the GMP affordable housing initiatives, adopted by the Board in November 2023, includes modifications to the affordable housing density bonus table in LDC Section 2.06.03. The changes to the table generally increase density for projects providing affordable units in the Low (>50 - <80% of Area Median Income (AMI)) and Very-low (<50% of AMI) income categories. The CCPC heard the LDC amendment on March 6, 2025, and voted to forward the amendment to the Board with a recommendation of approval; the LDC amendment will be presented to the Board on June 10, 2025. The proposed GMPA allows a maximum of 1,299 dwelling units, including an affordable housing commitment of 20% of the units (260 for-sale units) to households earning up to and including 80% of the County’s AMI. The proposed GMPA does not conform with the existing affordable housing income ranges, density, and requirement to integrate affordable housing units, with market-rate units in accordance with LDC Section 2.06.00. However, the proposed affordable housing density and income ranges are consistent with past Board approvals, and with the proposed modifications to the affordable housing density bonus table in LDC Section 2.06.03. The project’s proposed development and design standards are generally consistent with past Board approvals. Some projects were approved with clustering standards and others were approved with deviations to those standards. (Note: The companion petition (PL20220002061) to rezone the property from Rural Agricultural to the Greenway Fritchey Planned Unit Development (PUD) establishes the development and design standards for the project.) Based on staff’s review of the existing affordable housing density bonus table in LDC Section 2.06.03 and the proposed changes to the affordable housing table via the pending LDCA, the proposed project will provide more affordable units via the GMP amendment (refer to the CCPC Staff Report for further details). However, the GMP amendment does not provide for the integration of affordable housing units with the market-rate units in conformance with the RFMUD and LDC. Additionally, the companion rezone petition seeks deviations from the clustering provisions in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Zoning Overlay (RFMUO) within LDC section 2.03.08 for the minimum lot area, interior lot width, and the minimum side and rear yards – for single-family development; and the minimum requirements for front, rear, and side yards for multi-family development. The applicant has indicated that the Habitat for Humanity development model and building plans are replicated for various projects throughout the community to reduce overall project costs and provide units that are affordable in the income ranges that are needed most in Collier County. The applicants will receive a bonus of 994 market-rate dwelling units for providing the 260 for-sale affordable units. The market rate units will be developed separate from the affordable housing units, without shared amenities or shared access points, and without a guarantee of shared bike or pedestrian access points (refer to the draft RPUD Master Plan). Generally, when requesting a GMP amendment that increases residential density, the FLUE requires the use of Transfer of Development Rights Credits to achieve that density, except when providing a “reasonably sufficient public benefit” as determined by the Board. For recent approvals, the Board has determined the provision of affordable housing provides such public benefit. As noted earlier, this petition includes a commitment to provide 260 for-sale affordable housing units. Furthermore, the petition proposes increasing residential density within the CHHA. Mitigation to reduce the impacts of evacuation times resulting from projects within the CHHA is required by Policy 12.1.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP. The owner has committed to providing a towable generator at the time of the first certificate of occupancy and a second towable generator at the time of the 250th certificate of occupancy to be used at hurricane evacuation shelter sites to address the required mitigation. FLUE Policy 5.6 requires new land uses to be compatible with, and complementary to, surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the requested uses and intensity on the subject site, a compatibility analysis might include a review of allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and Page 8574 of 9661 6/24/2025 Item # 9.A ID# 2025-1920 location.The area surrounding the proposed Overlay consists of active agricultural operations and residential uses west and south of the project site, as identified in the Existing Conditions section of the CCPC Staff Report. The proposed project is within a transitional area (RFMUD – Receiving Lands), proximate to the County’s urban boundary and services (Greenway Road is the boundary between the Urban Mixed-Use District and the RFMUD). Several projects with similar densities have been approved by the Board in the past year proximate to the proposed GMPA location (refer to the CCPC Staff Report for further details). Compatibility can be specifically addressed within the companion zoning petition; however, staff finds that the requested uses will be compatible with the surrounding area (at the level at which GMP amendments are reviewed for compatibility) and that this is an appropriate location to provide for residential development. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Based on review of this petition, including the supporting data and analysis, staff makes the following findings and conclusions. Additional analysis is provided in the Staff Report to the CCPC. This petition proposes a large-scale Growth Management Plan amendment to create a residential overlay within the Agricultural/Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands to allow 1,299 residential units, including 260 for-sale affordable housing units. The proposed project density is generally consistent with the RFMUD restudy-based amendments, as directed by the Board, except that the project does not conform with the RFMUO clustering provisions and the requirement to integrate the affordable housing units with market-rate units, as provided in the LDC. The affordable housing component of the project will be a for-sale product and includes up to 260 residential units, or a total of 20% of all residential units, restricted to households earning up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income. Approval of this development will assist Collier County in addressing the continued need for affordable housing. Additionally, the affordable housing commitment may be deemed a “public benefit” as required by the FLUE when increasing density in the RFMUD and not utilizing TDR Credits to obtain that increase. To mitigate for the proposed increase in residential density within the CHHA, the owner has committed to providing two towable generators to be used at hurricane evacuation shelters in the companion proposed PUD. This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as it does not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. A Developer Commitment Agreement (DCA) is needed to address the project’s transportation related impacts; the DCA will be provided to the CCPC and Board of County Commissioners at adoption hearings. Page 8575 of 9661 6/24/2025 Item # 9.A ID# 2025-1920 There are no public utility-related concerns as a result of this petition. There are no concerns about impacts on other public infrastructure. There are no historical or archaeological sites affected by this amendment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC): That the CCPC, serving as the statutory Land Planning Agency and acting as the Environmental Advisory Council, forward the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to transmit to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required review agencies. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC reviewed and discussed the proposed amendment at their May 15, 2025, meeting. The CCPC unanimously recommended that the Board approve the amendments for transmittal to the Department of Commerce. (vote: 6/0) There was one public speaker at the meeting who commented on the ownership of Fritchey Road, safety concerns regarding future traffic on Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, drainage and water flow issues, soil issues, and the potential for increased flooding on the speaker’s property and surrounding properties resulting from the development of the proposed project. This item is consistent with the Collier County Strategic Plan objective to implement prudent and inclusive policy development through effective planning for transportation, land use, and growth management. FISCAL IMPACT: Petition fees account for staff review time and materials, and for the cost of associated legal advertising and public notice for the public hearings. Therefore, no fiscal impacts to Collier County result from the approval of this amendment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of the proposed amendment by the Board of County Commissioners for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required review agencies will commence the Department’s thirty (30) day review process and ultimately return the amendments to the CCPC and the Board for Adoption hearings. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Board should consider the following criteria in making its decision: “plan amendments shall be based on relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent, necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue.” 163.3177(1)(f), FS. In addition, s. 163.3177(6)(a)2, FS provides that FLUE plan amendments shall be based on surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable including: 1. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. 2. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. 3. The character of undeveloped land. Page 8576 of 9661 6/24/2025 Item # 9.A ID# 2025-1920 4. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. 5. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of non-conforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. 6. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. 7. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. 8. The need to modify land uses and development patterns with antiquated subdivisions. 9. The discouragement of urban sprawl. 10. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. And FLUE map amendments shall also be based upon the following analysis per Section 163.3177(6)(a)8.: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. This item is approved as to form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board approval because this is a transmittal hearing. [HFAC] RECOMMENDATIONS: To approve the proposed large-scale Growth Management Plan amendment for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required agencies, as recommended by the CCPC. PREPARED BY: Michele R. Mosca, AICP, Planner III, Community Planning & Resiliency Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution FLUE Greenway-Fritchey GMPA - 040225 corrected 2. Resolution CCME Greenway-Fritchey GMPA- 040225 3. CCPC Staff Report Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay (2) 4. Greenway-Fritchey DRAFT RPUD Document (PL-20220002061) 5. Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay GMPA Transmittal Documents 6. legal ad - agenda ID 25-1920 - PL20220002063, Greenway Fritchey GMPA (BCC 6-24-2025) Page 8577 of 9661 Page 8578 of 9661 Page 8579 of 9661 Page 8580 of 9661 Page 8581 of 9661 Page 8582 of 9661 Page 8583 of 9661 Page 8584 of 9661 Page 8585 of 9661 Page 8586 of 9661 Page 8587 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 1 April 21, 2025 STAFF REPORTCOLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONFROM:GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE:MAY 15, 2025 SUBJECT: PL20220002063 LARGE-SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (GMPA): GREENWAY-FRITCHEY RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) COMPANION TO: PUD-PL20220002061; GREENWAY FRITCHEY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT – TO BE PRESENTED AT THE GMPA ADOPTION HEARINGS ELEMENTS:FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT & CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT AGENT/OWNER: Agents: Robert Mulhere, FAICP Rich Yovanovich, Esq. Jeremie Chastain, AICP Coleman, Yovanovich, Koester, PA Bowman 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34103 Naples, FL 34110 Owners: Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. 7742 Alico Road 11145 Tamiami Trail East Fort Myers, FL 33912 Naples, FL 34113 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The 227.09-acre subject property is located at the northeastern intersection of Greenway Road and Fritchey Road, approximately a half mile north of Tamiami Trail East (US 41), in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Refer to the location map and aerial map on page 2.) Page 8588 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 2 April 21, 2025 SUBJECT SITE Page 8589 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 3 April 21, 2025 REQUESTED ACTION:The applicant proposes a large-scale Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment to the Future LandUse Element (FLUE) to create a new overlay,the Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay. The applicant also proposes amending the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and creating a new map (“Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay”) in the FLUM series of the FLUE to identify the newly created Overlay. Also, the petition proposes to amend Policy 6.1.7 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to reduce the littoral shelf requirements. The proposed overlay text and map are attached as Exhibit “A.” PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: To redesignate the property from the Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands to Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District – Receiving Lands, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay to allow a maximum of 1,299 residential units with 20 percent of the units reserved for affordable housing to individuals earning at or below 80 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI), which yields a maximum of 260 for-sale residential units. A companion petition (PL20220002061) will rezone the property from Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district to allow the proposed residential uses. Note: The companion PUD rezone will be presented to the CCPC at the time of the GMPA's adoption. The draft PUD document is included in the GMPA back-up materials for informational purposes. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Subject Property: The 227.09-acre site is designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District—Receiving Lands and is located within the Coastal High Hazard Area (CHHA), all as identified on the FLUM. The subject property is zoned A, Rural Agricultural, and includes a Provisional Use for aquaculture (PU-87-6C, Reso. #87-177). A portion is undeveloped, and a portion is in agricultural operations. Surrounding Lands: North – Future Land Use Designation: Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Agricultural operations. East – Future Land Use Designation: Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Agricultural operations. (across Laredo Street, a local road) South – Future Land Use Designation: Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Single-family residential and agricultural operations, including an approved Provisional Use for earth mining and related processing (PU-79-11C, Reso. #79-124). (across Fritchey Road, a local road) West – Future Land Use Designation: Urban, Urban Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, and located within the CHHA. Zoned: Rural Agricultural. Land Use: Agricultural operations, single-family residential, and mobile homes. Further to the west- northwest (500’) are lands designated Urban Mixed-Use District, zoned Regal Acres PUD (approved for 5.0 DU/A), and developed with attached single-family dwellings (across Greenway Road, a local road). Page 8590 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 4 April 21, 2025 In summary, the surrounding area's existing land uses include a mix of single-family residential, mobile homes, and agricultural operations. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:As noted above, the FLUM designation on this property is Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed UseDistrict – Receiving Lands located within the Coastal High Hazard Area. The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) within the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) wasestablished in 2002 by Ordinance 02-32 to address agricultural lands within the transitional area between Golden Gate Estates and the County’s urban area and between the urban area and the agricultural lands and agricultural operations farther to the east. The land use strategies developed and employed in the RFMUD direct incompatible land uses away from environmentally sensitive lands. The Sending Lands are those lands within the RFMUD with the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant wetlands, uplands, and habitats for listed species. The Receiving Lands are those identified as the most appropriate for development and to which residential units may be received from areas designated as Sending Lands. The Coastal High Hazzard Area (CHHA) is the geographical area lying below the elevation of the Category 1 storm surge line per the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council’s Hurricane Evacuation Study; increased density and expenditure of public infrastructure is discouraged in this area. On February 10, 2015, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) directed staff to initiate the RFMUD restudy. The restudy focused on areas that included complementary land uses, economic vitality, transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship, all through a public outreach effort. The RFMUD restudy public outreach and staff assessment resulted in the RFMUD White Paper. The White Paper provided the framework for the restudy effort conducted by staff and served to further inform the Collier County Planning Commission and the public about those efforts. The RFMUD White Paper recommended GMP amendments to improve the RFMUD and Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program by further protecting the environment, conserving agricultural lands, addressing development characteristics, and establishing new development standards. In June 2023, the Board adopted restudy-based amendments to the RFMUD. Relevant to this petition, the RFMUD Receiving Lands now allows the development of affordable housing projects at a maximum density of up to 12.2 dwelling units per acre, subject to clustering provisions and Land Development Code (LDC) Section 2.06.00 for affordable housing. The FLUE states that implementing Land Development Code (LDC) regulations, such as design standards, development standards, and locational criteria, are to be established for affordable housing development within the RFMUD. The above-referenced LDC regulations are being drafted and will be presented to the CCPC and Board later this year. Additionally, an LDC amendment to implement the GMP affordable housing initiatives, adopted by the Board in November 2023, includes modifications to the affordable housing density bonus table in LDC Section 2.06.03. The changes to the table generally increase density for projects providing affordable units in the Low (>50 - <80% of Area Median Income (AMI)) and Very-low (<50% of AMI) income categories. The CCPC heard the LDC amendment on March 6, 2025, and voted to forward the amendment to the Board with a recommendation of approval; the LDC amendment will be presented to the Board on -XQH, 2025. The proposed GMPA allows a maximum of 1,299 dwelling units, including an affordable housing commitment of 20% (260 for-sale units) to households earning up to and including 80% of the County’s AMI. The proposed GMPA does not conform with the existing affordable housing income ranges, density, and requirement to integrate affordable housing units with market-rate units in accordance with LDC Section 2.06.00. However, the proposed affordable housing density and income ranges are Page 8591 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 5 April 21, 2025 consistent with past Board approvals and the proposed modifications to the affordable housing density bonus table in LDC Section 2.06.03. The project’s proposed development and design standards are generally consistent with past Board approvals. Some projects were approved with clustering standards, and others were approved with deviations from those standards. (Note: The companion petition (PL20220002061) to rezone the property from Rural Agricultural to the Greenway Fritchey Planned Unit Development (PUD) establishes the development and design standards for the project.) The table below identifies that the proposed project will provide more affordable units via the GMP amendment than the existing affordable housing density bonus table in LDC section 2.06.03 and more affordable units than the proposed affordable housing table via the pending LDCA. However, the GMPA does not provide for integrating affordable housing units with the market rate units in conformance with the RFMUD and LDC. Additionally, the companion rezone petition seeks deviations from the clustering provisions in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Zoning Overlay (RFMUO) within LDC section 2.03.08 for the minimum lot area, interior lot width, and the minimum side and rear yards – for single-family development and the minimum requirements for front, rear, and side yards for multi-family development. The applicant has indicated that the Habitat for Humanity development model and building plans are replicated for various projects throughout the community to reduce overall project costs and provide units that are affordable in the income ranges that are needed most in Collier County. As noted in the table below, the applicants receive a bonus of 994 market-rate dwelling units for providing 260 affordable units. The market rate units will be developed separately from the affordable housing units, without shared amenities or access points or a guarantee of shared bike or pedestrian access points (refer to the draft RPUD Master Plan). Base Density (per existing GMP) GMPA (227.09 acres) Project Density = 5.72 DU/A 1,299 Total Units Density Bonus Requested Affordable Housing Income Level (% of AMI) Affordable Housing Dwelling Units (% of units to achieve density bonus of 5.52 DU/A) Market Rate Dwelling Units (Bonus units generated by providing affordable housing units) 0.2 DU/A (45 dwelling units) Proposed GMPA 5.52 DU/A < 80% 260 DUs (20% of all DUs) 994 DUs N/A Existing LDC Sec. 2.06.00/2.06.03 5.52 DU/A < 80% 249 DUs (19.86% of bonus DUs) 1,005 DUs N/A Proposed LDCA Sec. 2.06.00/2.06.03 5.52 DU/A < 80% 125 DUs (10% of bonus DUs) 1,129 DUs Generally, when requesting a GMP Amendment that increases residential density, the FLUE requires the use of Transfer of Development Rights Credits to achieve that density, except when providing a “reasonably sufficient public benefit” as determined by the Board. For recent approvals, the Board has determined providing affordable housing provides such public benefit. As noted earlier, this petition includes a commitment to provide 260 affordable housing units. Page 8592 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 6 April 21, 2025 Further, the petition proposes increasing residential density within the CHHA. Policy 12.1.2 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP requires mitigation to reduce the impacts of evacuation times resulting from projects within the CHHA. The owner has committed to providing a towable generator at the time of the first certificate of occupancy and a second towable generator at the time of the 250th certificate of occupancy to be used at hurricane evacuation shelter sites to address the required mitigation. Compatibility:FLUE Policy 5.6 requires new land uses to be compatible with and complementary tosurrounding land uses. To review the appropriateness of the requested uses and intensity on the subject site, a compatibility analysis might include a review of allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, and the amount and type of open space and location. The area surrounding the proposed overlay consists of active agricultural operations and residential uses west and south of the project site, as identified in the Existing Conditions section of this report. The proposed project is within a transitional area (RFMUD – Receiving Lands), proximate to the County’s urban boundary and services (Greenway Road is the boundary between the Urban Mixed-Use District and the RFMUD). The Board has approved several projects with similar densities in the past year proximate to the proposed GMPA location – refer to the table below. Project Location Density Affordable Housing Proposed GMPA RFMUD - Receiving Lands ½ mile north of US 41 5.72 DU/A For-sale: 20% of units at < 80% of AMI Elanto of Naples RPUD RFMUD - Receiving Lands ¾ mile east of Greenway Rd. 6 DU/A Rental:10% of units at < 50% of AMI Tamiami 50-Acre MPUD RFMUD - Receiving Lands 1/3 mile east of Greenway Rd. 8 DU/A Rental:15% of units at < 80% of AMI and 15% at < 100% of AMI For-sale:15% of units at 120% of AMI Tamiami Trail Greenway Rd. MPUD Urban -Residential Mixed- Use District 450’ west of Greenway Rd. 12.29 DU/A Rental:15% of units at < 80% of AMI and 15% of units at < 100% of AMI Compatibility can be specifically addressed within the companion zoning petition. Still, staff finds the requested uses will be compatible with the surrounding area (at the level at which GMP amendments are reviewed for compatibility) and that this is an appropriate location to provide for residential development. Project Justification:The applicant prepared a justification statement for the proposed residential project (refer to Exhibit V.D.1. in the GMPA materials). Staff notes the following from the information provided: x The County’s total population in 2024 was 404,735 people and is expected to increase by 3 percent between the years 2023 and 2028 (Source: Collier County Economic Development Office). x The University of Florida’s Shimberg Center estimated in the year 2022 that approximately 22,883 owner-occupied households making 80% and below the County’s Area Median Income (AMI) were cost-burdened (housing costs >30% of household income). Further, by 2050, the number of cost-burdened households earning < 80% of the AMI is projected to increase to 54,848 households. x The 2017 Urban Land Institute Study identified a “housing affordability problem” and, if not addressed, “will become a crisis.” Additionally, the County’s 2025 Consolidated Housing Plan Page 8593 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 7 April 21, 2025 identifies an insufficient supply of affordable housing units at the low or very low-income levels and a need for affordable rental and owned housing near job centers. x The proposed development is approximately 3.5 miles from the Activity Center at the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and Collier Boulevard. The Center is mostly built-out and provides a variety of commercial uses. Transportation Impacts:A Transportation Impact Statement (TIS), dated July 5, 2024, prepared by Trebilcock Planning and Engineering, was submitted as part of this petition. Transportation Planning staff reviewed the petition for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan using the previous 2023 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the current 2024 AUIR. Staff found the TIS to be sufficient; however, a Developer Commitment Agreement (DCA) is needed to address the project’s transportation related impacts. Transportation Planning Staff does not object to the transmittal of the GMPA and will continue to work with the applicant to finalize the DCA prior to the adoption hearings. Environmental Impacts: The proposed GMP amendment has no effect on the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) requirements regarding protecting native vegetation preservation on-site. Native vegetation on-site will be retained per the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.2 and LDC section 3.05.07 of the LDC. Listed species will be protected by permit and/or letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, per CCME Policy 7.1.2 and LDC section 3.04.01. Littoral Shelf Planting Area:The applicant has proposed a reduction from the littoral planting criteria in CCME Policy 6.1.7, which requires wet detention ponds within the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District to have a littoral shelf with an area equal to 30% of the ponds surface area, measured at the control elevation, and planted with native aquatic vegetation. The applicant is requesting the total littoral planting shelf area be reduced to 10% of the wet detention ponds area. The littoral area shall be planted in one or more larger aggregated littoral planting areas. Additionally, two rows of native grasses will be planted around the perimeter of the proposed lakes, which will aid in improving water quality by slowing runoff and trapping sediment. Environmental Services staff supports reducing the amount of littoral planting to allow for consolidated littoral areas. The consolidated littoral areas will enhance wading bird/waterfowl habitats and foraging areas. These areas will be designed to re-create wetland function, maximize habitat value, and minimize maintenance efforts. The consolidation of the littoral planting area will enhance the survivability of the littoral area plant species, as there is a lower survivability rate in littoral planting areas when installed in multiple lakes. The concentration of the littoral plantings will meet the intent of the GMP requirement, which is to enhance water quality and provide habitat for a variety of aquatic species and birds. Public Facilities Impacts: The project lies within the regional potable water service area and the South Collier Water Reclamation Facility wastewater service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD). Water and wastewater services are available via existing infrastructure within the adjacent right-of-way, and sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities are available. Any improvements to the CCWSD’s water or wastewater systems necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the CCWSD at no cost to the County at the time of utility acceptance. Page 8594 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 8 April 21, 2025 Affordable Housing:There is a need for affordable housing units in Collier County. The University of Florida Shimberg Center for Housing reports that there are currently 51,368 cost-burdened households in the County, with 25,687 of those spending more than 50% of their monthly income on housing expenses. The current median home sales price in the County is $650,000 (Single-Family Homes- $790,000, Condos- $500,000). Prices in Naples have increased 75% from pre-COVID prices. 77% of sales are cash deals. Source: NABOR Market Report, Feb 2025 The Shimberg Center also reports that the average observed rent for apartments in the County has risen sharply, doubling over the past ten years to $3,234 (2024). For reference, the 2025 Florida Housing Finance Corporation Income Limits are: A Restrictive Covenant will be recorded on the affordable for-sale units, requiring them to be initially and subsequently sold to qualifying households for a period of 30 years from the Certificate of Occupancy of each unit. Approval of this development will assist the County in addressing the continued need for affordable housing. CRITERIA FOR GMP AMENDMENTS FLORIDA STATUTES: Data and analysis requirements for comprehensive plans and plan amendments are noted in Chapter 163, F.S., specifically as listed below verbatim. Section 163.3177(1)(f), Florida Statutes: (f) All mandatory and optional elements of the comprehensive plan and plan amendments shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include, but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. 1. Surveys, studies, and data utilized in the preparation of the comprehensive plan may not be deemed a part of the comprehensive plan unless adopted as a part of it. Copies of such studies, surveys, data, and supporting documents for proposed plans and plan amendments shall be made available for public inspection, and copies of such plans shall be made Page 8595 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 9 April 21, 2025 available to the public upon payment of reasonable charges for reproduction. Support data or summaries are not subject to the compliance review process, but the comprehensive plan must be clearly based on appropriate data. Support data or summaries may be used to aid in the determination of compliance and consistency.2. Data must be taken from professionally accepted sources. The application of a methodology utilized in data collection or whether a particular methodology is professionally accepted may be evaluated. However, the evaluation may not include whether one accepted methodology is better than another. Original data collection by local governments is not required. However, local governments may use original data so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. 3. The comprehensive plan shall be based upon permanent and seasonal population estimates and projections, which shall either be those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or generated by the local government based upon a professionally acceptable methodology. The plan must be based on at least the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections as published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research for at least a 10-year planning period unless otherwise limited under s. 380.05, including related rules of the Administration Commission. Absent physical limitations on population growth, population projections for each municipality and the unincorporated area within a county must, at a minimum, be reflective of each area’s proportional share of the total county population and the total county population growth. Section 163.3177(6)(a)2., Florida Statutes: 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. Section 163.3177(6)(a)8., Florida Statutes: (a) A future land use plan element designating proposed future general distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land for residential uses, commercial uses, industry, agriculture, recreation, conservation, education, public facilities, and other categories of the public and private uses of land. The approximate acreage and the general range of density or intensity of use shall be provided for the gross land area included in each existing land use category. The element shall establish the long-term end toward which land use programs and activities are ultimately directed. Page 8596 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 10 April 21, 2025 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services.b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. The petitioner must provide appropriate and relevant data and analysis to address the statutory requirements for a Plan Amendment. For this petition, the applicant provided a justification statement and public facilities analysis. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) NOTES: A NIM was held on December 5, 2022, at Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Preserve, 300 Tower Road, Naples, FL 34113. The meeting began at approximately 5:40 p.m. and adjourned at approximately 6:34 p.m. Several members of the public were present at the meeting, most residing in Naples Reserve Golf Club. The applicant’s agent, Robert Mulhere, FAICP, explained the request for the proposed rezone and companion large-scale Growth Management Plan amendment. Attendees asked about the impacts on wildlife, environmental permitting, density, type of affordable housing units – rental or owner-occupied, farmland impacts, road impacts, the potential for a traffic light at Greenway Road, impacts on property values, the price points for market-rate homes, etc. The applicant’s team responded to all questions. The Administrative Code requires a second NIM to be held when a petition has not been scheduled for public hearings within a year of the initial NIM. Over a year has elapsed since the first NIM was held in 2022. As a result, the petitioner conducted a second NIM on April 14, 2025, at Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Preserve, 300 Tower Road, Naples, FL 34113. The meeting began at approximately 5:30 p.m. and adjourned at approximately 5:45 p.m. One resident of Greenway Road was present at the meeting. The applicant’s agent, Jeremie Chastain, AICP, explained the request for the proposed large- scale Growth Management Plan amendment and rezone. The attendee asked questions about sidewalks on Greenway Road, the proposed request for an eight-foot-tall wall, landscaping, and the project’s access on Greenway Road in relation to its alignment with the attendee’s driveway. The applicant’s team responded to all questions. The NIM documentation is included in the CCPC backup materials. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: x This petition proposes a large-scale Growth Management Plan amendment to create a residential overlay within the Agricultural/Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Receiving Lands to allow 1,299 residential units, including 260 affordable housing units. The proposed project density is generally consistent with the RFMUD restudy-based amendments, as directed by the Board, except that the project does not conform with the RFMUO clustering provisions and the requirement to integrate the affordable housing units with market-rate units, as provided in the LDC. x The project's affordable housing component will be a for-sale product and include up to 260 residential units, or a total of 20% of all residential units, restricted to households earning up to and including 80% of the Area Median Income. Approval of this development will assist Collier County in addressing the continued need for affordable housing. Additionally, the affordable Page 8597 of 9661 PL20220002063 GMPA-PL20220002063, Greenway-Fritchey Residential Overlay 11 April 21, 2025 housing commitment may be deemed a “public benefit” as required by the FLUE when increasing density in the RFMUD and not utilizing TDR Credits to obtain that increase.x To mitigate the proposed increase in residential density within the CHHA, the owner has committed to providing two towable generators for use at hurricane evacuation shelters. x This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as it does not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. x A Developer Commitment Agreement (DCA) is needed to address the project’s transportation related impacts; the DCA will be provided to the CCPC and Board of County Commissioners at adoption hearings. x There are no public utility-related concerns as a result of this petition. x There are no concerns about impacts on other public infrastructure. x There are no historical or archaeological sites affected by this amendment. LEGAL REVIEW: The County Attorney’s office reviewed the staff report on April 21, 2025. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Collier County Planning Commission forward petition PL20220002063 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Commerce and other statutorily required review agencies. NOTE: This petition has been tentatively scheduled for the June 24, 2025, Board of County Commissioner meeting. Page 8598 of 9661 Page 8599 of 9661 Page 8600 of 9661 Page 8601 of 9661 Page 8602 of 9661 Page 8603 of 9661 Page 8604 of 9661 Page 8605 of 9661 Page 8606 of 9661 Page 8607 of 9661 Page 8608 of 9661 Page 8609 of 9661 Page 8610 of 9661 Page 8611 of 9661 Page 8612 of 9661 Page 8613 of 9661 Page 8614 of 9661 Page 8615 of 9661 Page 8616 of 9661 Page 8617 of 9661 Page 8618 of 9661 Page 8619 of 9661 Page 8620 of 9661 Page 8621 of 9661 Page 8622 of 9661 Page 8623 of 9661 Page 8624 of 9661 Page 8625 of 9661 Page 8626 of 9661 Page 8627 of 9661 Page 8628 of 9661 Page 8629 of 9661 Page 8630 of 9661 Page 8631 of 9661 Page 8632 of 9661 Page 8633 of 9661 Page 8634 of 9661 Page 8635 of 9661 Page 8636 of 9661 Page 8637 of 9661 Page 8638 of 9661 Page 8639 of 9661 Page 8640 of 9661 Page 8641 of 9661 Page 8642 of 9661 Page 8643 of 9661 Page 8644 of 9661 Page 8645 of 9661 Page 8646 of 9661 Page 8647 of 9661 Page 8648 of 9661 Page 8649 of 9661 Page 8650 of 9661 Page 8651 of 9661 Page 8652 of 9661 Page 8653 of 9661 Page 8654 of 9661 Page 8655 of 9661 Page 8656 of 9661 Page 8657 of 9661 Page 8658 of 9661 Page 8659 of 9661 Page 8660 of 9661 Page 8661 of 9661 Page 8662 of 9661 Page 8663 of 9661 Page 8664 of 9661 Page 8665 of 9661 Page 8666 of 9661 Page 8667 of 9661 Page 8668 of 9661 Page 8669 of 9661 Page 8670 of 9661 Page 8671 of 9661 Page 8672 of 9661 Page 8673 of 9661 Page 8674 of 9661 Page 8675 of 9661 Page 8676 of 9661 Page 8677 of 9661 Page 8678 of 9661 Page 8679 of 9661 Page 8680 of 9661 Page 8681 of 9661 Page 8682 of 9661 Page 8683 of 9661 Page 8684 of 9661 Page 8685 of 9661 Page 8686 of 9661 Page 8687 of 9661 Page 8688 of 9661 Page 8689 of 9661 Page 8690 of 9661 Page 8691 of 9661 Page 8692 of 9661 Page 8693 of 9661 Page 8694 of 9661 Page 8695 of 9661 Page 8696 of 9661 Page 8697 of 9661 Page 8698 of 9661 Page 8699 of 9661 Page 8700 of 9661 Page 8701 of 9661 Page 8702 of 9661 Page 8703 of 9661 Page 8704 of 9661 Page 8705 of 9661 Page 8706 of 9661 Page 8707 of 9661 Page 8708 of 9661 Page 8709 of 9661 Page 8710 of 9661 Page 8711 of 9661 Page 8712 of 9661 Page 8713 of 9661 Page 8714 of 9661 Page 8715 of 9661 Page 8716 of 9661 Page 8717 of 9661 Page 8718 of 9661 Page 8719 of 9661 Page 8720 of 9661 Page 8721 of 9661 Page 8722 of 9661 Page 8723 of 9661 Page 8724 of 9661 Page 8725 of 9661 Page 8726 of 9661 Page 8727 of 9661 Page 8728 of 9661 Page 8729 of 9661 Page 8730 of 9661 Page 8731 of 9661 Page 8732 of 9661 Page 8733 of 9661 Page 8734 of 9661 Page 8735 of 9661 Page 8736 of 9661 Page 8737 of 9661 Page 8738 of 9661 Page 8739 of 9661 Page 8740 of 9661 Page 8741 of 9661 Page 8742 of 9661 Page 8743 of 9661 Page 8744 of 9661 Page 8745 of 9661 Page 8746 of 9661 Page 8747 of 9661 Page 8748 of 9661 Page 8749 of 9661 Page 8750 of 9661 Page 8751 of 9661 Page 8752 of 9661 Page 8753 of 9661 Page 8754 of 9661 Page 8755 of 9661 Page 8756 of 9661 Page 8757 of 9661 Page 8758 of 9661 Page 8759 of 9661 Page 8760 of 9661 Page 8761 of 9661 Page 8762 of 9661 Page 8763 of 9661 Page 8764 of 9661 Page 8765 of 9661 Page 8766 of 9661 Page 8767 of 9661 Page 8768 of 9661 Page 8769 of 9661 Page 8770 of 9661 Page 8771 of 9661 Page 8772 of 9661 Page 8773 of 9661 Page 8774 of 9661 Page 8775 of 9661 Page 8776 of 9661 Page 8777 of 9661 Page 8778 of 9661 Page 8779 of 9661 Page 8780 of 9661 Page 8781 of 9661 Page 8782 of 9661 Page 8783 of 9661 Page 8784 of 9661 Page 8785 of 9661 Page 8786 of 9661 Page 8787 of 9661 Page 8788 of 9661 Page 8789 of 9661 Page 8790 of 9661 Page 8791 of 9661 Page 8792 of 9661 Page 8793 of 9661 Page 8794 of 9661 Page 8795 of 9661 Page 8796 of 9661 Page 8797 of 9661 Page 8798 of 9661 Page 8799 of 9661 Page 8800 of 9661 Page 8801 of 9661 Page 8802 of 9661 Page 8803 of 9661 Page 8804 of 9661 Page 8805 of 9661 Page 8806 of 9661 Page 8807 of 9661 Page 8808 of 9661 Page 8809 of 9661 Page 8810 of 9661 Page 8811 of 9661 Page 8812 of 9661 Page 8813 of 9661 Page 8814 of 9661 Page 8815 of 9661 Page 8816 of 9661 Page 8817 of 9661 Page 8818 of 9661 Page 8819 of 9661 Page 8820 of 9661 Page 8821 of 9661 Page 8822 of 9661 Page 8823 of 9661 Page 8824 of 9661 Page 8825 of 9661 Page 8826 of 9661 Page 8827 of 9661 Page 8828 of 9661 Page 8829 of 9661 Page 8830 of 9661 Page 8831 of 9661 Page 8832 of 9661 Page 8833 of 9661 Page 8834 of 9661 Page 8835 of 9661 Page 8836 of 9661 Page 8837 of 9661 Page 8838 of 9661 Page 8839 of 9661 Page 8840 of 9661 Page 8841 of 9661 Page 8842 of 9661 Page 8843 of 9661 Page 8844 of 9661 Page 8845 of 9661 Page 8846 of 9661 Page 8847 of 9661 Page 8848 of 9661 Page 8849 of 9661 Page 8850 of 9661 Page 8851 of 9661 Page 8852 of 9661 Page 8853 of 9661 Page 8854 of 9661 Page 8855 of 9661 Page 8856 of 9661 Page 8857 of 9661 Page 8858 of 9661 Page 8859 of 9661 Page 8860 of 9661 Page 8861 of 9661 Page 8862 of 9661 Page 8863 of 9661 Page 8864 of 9661 Page 8865 of 9661 Page 8866 of 9661 Page 8867 of 9661 Page 8868 of 9661 Page 8869 of 9661 Page 8870 of 9661 Page 8871 of 9661 Page 8872 of 9661 Page 8873 of 9661 Page 8874 of 9661 Page 8875 of 9661 Page 8876 of 9661 Page 8877 of 9661 Page 8878 of 9661 Page 8879 of 9661 Page 8880 of 9661 Page 8881 of 9661 Page 8882 of 9661 Page 8883 of 9661 Page 8884 of 9661 Page 8885 of 9661 Page 8886 of 9661 Page 8887 of 9661 Page 8888 of 9661 Page 8889 of 9661 Page 8890 of 9661 Page 8891 of 9661 Page 8892 of 9661 Page 8893 of 9661 Page 8894 of 9661 Page 8895 of 9661 Page 8896 of 9661 Page 8897 of 9661 Page 8898 of 9661 Page 8899 of 9661 Page 8900 of 9661 Page 8901 of 9661 Page 8902 of 9661 Page 8903 of 9661 Page 8904 of 9661 Page 8905 of 9661 Page 8906 of 9661 Page 8907 of 9661 Page 8908 of 9661 Page 8909 of 9661 Page 8910 of 9661 Page 8911 of 9661 Page 8912 of 9661 Page 8913 of 9661 Page 8914 of 9661 Page 8915 of 9661 Page 8916 of 9661 Page 8917 of 9661 Page 8918 of 9661 Page 8919 of 9661 Page 8920 of 9661 Page 8921 of 9661 Page 8922 of 9661 Page 8923 of 9661 Page 8924 of 9661 Page 8925 of 9661 Page 8926 of 9661 Page 8927 of 9661 Page 8928 of 9661 Page 8929 of 9661 Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller - Crystal K. KinzelCollier County, Florida3315 Tamiami Trail East, Ste. 102 - Naples, FL 34112-5324Phone: (239) 252-2646Publication ConfirmationCOLLIER COUNTY STATE OF FLORIDA The attached copy of advertisement, Greenway Fritchey GMPA & PUDZ (PL20220002063) & (PL20220002061) 12-9-25 BCC was published on the publically accessible website https://notices.collierclerk.com as designated by Collier County, Florida on 11/19/2025. THIS IS NOT AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION. Page 8930 of 9661 Page 8931 of 9661 Page 8932 of 9661 Page 8933 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.GID# 2025-4584Executive SummaryRecommendation to approve Petition VAC-PL20240001248, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in the 60-foot-wide public roadway, Laredo Street, as described in Official Record Book 1033, at pages 1087, 1098, 1099, 1103, 1107, 1122, and 1126 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, to approve the quitclaim deeds and authorize the Chair to execute quitclaim deeds conveying the public interest in Laredo Street to clear title, and to accept the compensating right-of-way easements from Petitioners. (This item is a companion to Items 16B9, 17E, and 17F)OBJECTIVE: To adopt a Resolution vacating the County and the public interest in the 60-foot-wide public roadway easements as described in Official Record Book 1033, at pages 1087, 1098, 1099, 1103, 1107, 1122, and 1126 of the public records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, being more specifically shown in Exhibit A, to approve and authorize the Chair to sign quitclaim deeds conveying the public interest in Laredo Street, and to accept the compensatory and right-of-way easements. CONSIDERATIONS: Greenway Fritchey Land, LLC and Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc., submitted Petition VAC-PL20240001248 to the Development Review Division of the Growth Management Community Development Department. The Petitioners are requesting that the County vacate its interest in a 60-foot-wide roadway known as Laredo Street as more fully described in Official Record Book 1033, Pages 1087, 1098, 1099, 1103, 1107, 1122, and 1126, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida (“Laredo Street”). In addition, Petitioners are requesting that the County convey Laredo Street to Petitioners via quitclaim deeds in addition to the proposed Resolution to clear title. In exchange, Petitioners are conveying compensating right-of-way easements to the County along Fritchey Road and Greenway Road. Laredo Street is located east of Greenway Road in RFMUO- Receiving Lands. The Laredo Street right-of-way is the result of various deed conveyances in the 1980s from the then-grantors to Collier County. Petitioners own the properties abutting Laredo Street; additionally, Laredo Street is within the proposed Greenway Fritchey RPUD. The purpose of the request is to clear title to portions of Laredo Street owned by the County to eliminate the street completely and remove ambiguity with respect to the public’s right to use the street in connection with redevelopment as the Greenway-Fritchey RPUD. Laredo Street does not provide practical or legal access to any other parcels but for those owned by Petitioners. There is a 30-foot roadway easement along the eastern boundary of the Greenway-Fritchey RPUD, and the Petitioners reaffirm the 30’ public roadway easement along the eastern boundary of the Greenway-Fritchey RPUD in the Resolution attached hereto. Statement of Public Benefit: 1. There is no present necessity or reasonably foreseeable necessity for retention of Laredo Street, and no adjoining property owner’s right of legal access will be affected by the vacation of Laredo Street. 2. Under Policy II.B.1.A of the Future Land Use Element, development is to be directed to this area, designated as Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. Policies centered on Receiving Lands under the Future Land Use Element encourage and incentivize development in this area. The vacation will support these public policies aimed at directing development to Receiving Lands by eliminating gaps between Petitioners’ lands, allowing for a cohesive, contiguous project that supports market-rate and affordable housing. 3. Petitioners will reserve, on an equal square footage basis relative to the vacation area, right-of-way for a future expansion of Fritchey Road and Greenway Road, along the frontages of the proposed residential project, without compensation or impact fee credits. Pursuant to Florida Statutes section 336.09(2) and Resolution 2021-243, the Board “may adopt a resolution declaring that at a definite time and place a public hearing will be held to consider the advisability of [vacating the public road rights-of-way].” Page 8934 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.GID# 2025-4584The Development Review Division has reviewed this petition and found no reason for objection.This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objective to operate an efficient and customer focused permitting process.FISCAL IMPACT: The Growth Management Community Development Department, Development Review Division staff, has collected a $2,000 “Petition to Vacate” fee from the petitioner, which covers the County’s cost of recording and processing the Petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management plan impact associated with this action. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: Petitioner is requesting the vacation of the 60-foot-wide public roadway as described in Official Record Book 1033, Pages 1087, 1098, 1099, 1103, 1107, 1122, and 1126, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Pursuant to Resolution 2021-243 and Florida Statutes sections 336.09 and 336.10, the Board with respect to property under their control, upon petition of any person or persons, may adopt a resolution to vacate, abandon, discontinue and close any existing public or private street, alleyway, road, highway, or other place used for travel, or any portion thereof, other than a state or Federal highway, and to renounce and disclaim any right of the County and the public in and to any land in connection therewith when the following criteria are met: 1. The request is in the interest of the general public's welfare, or no public detriment is established. 2. The request does not invade or violate individual property rights; and 3. The Petitioner owns the fee simple title to the whole or that part of the parcel sought to be vacated or provides a statement demonstrating the reason for the request, including any property or financial interest or projects affected by a granting of such request. This item has been approved as to form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board approval. --CLD RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve Petition VAC-PL20240001248, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in the 60-foot-wide public roadway, Laredo Street, as described in Official Record Book 1033, at pages 1087, 1098, 1099, 1103, 1107, 1122, and 1126 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, to approve and authorize the Chair to execute quitclaim deeds conveying the public interest in Laredo Street to clear title, and to accept the compensating right-of-way easements from Petitioners. PREPARED BY: Marcus L. Berman, P.S.M., County Land Surveyor, Development Review Division. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution Greenway Fritchey 11.12.25 2. Application 3. Affidavit of Authorization Greenway Fritchey to Coleman(signed)- 4. Affidavit of Authorization Habitat to Coleman(signed)- 5. Property Ownership Disclosure Form Greenway Fritchey 6. Property Ownership Disclosure Form Habitat 7. LONO Road Bridge Stormwater Maintenance 8. LONOs - All 9. OR 1033 pgs 1087-1098-1099-1103-1107-1122-1126 10. Warranty Deed Greenway Fritchie executed 11. Warranty Deed Habitat for Humanity executed Page 8935 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.GID# 2025-458412. Road Easement Location Map13. 2024 Taxes Paid14. Resolution 2021-24315. legal ad - agenda ID 25-4584 - Laredo Street VAC-PL20250001248 - 12-9-25 Page 8936 of 9661 Page 8937 of 9661 Page 8938 of 9661 Page 8939 of 9661 Page 8940 of 9661 Page 8941 of 9661 Page 8942 of 9661 Page 8943 of 9661 Page 8944 of 9661 Page 8945 of 9661 Page 8946 of 9661 Page 8947 of 9661 Page 8948 of 9661 Page 8949 of 9661 Page 8950 of 9661 Page 8951 of 9661 Page 8952 of 9661 Page 8953 of 9661 %BWJE5PSSFT .BOBHFS Page 8954 of 9661 Page 8955 of 9661 Page 8956 of 9661 Page 8957 of 9661 Page 8958 of 9661 Page 8959 of 9661 Page 8960 of 9661 Page 8961 of 9661 Page 8962 of 9661 June 3rd, 2024 Attn: Dianna Quintanilla RE- Letter of No Objection- Release of Easement Laredo St Naples, FL Parcel lying in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East Dear Dianna Quintanilla, Thank you for contacting Comcast regarding your request to vacate easement. This is to inform you that Comcast is has no facilities within the site’s development area. We currently have no objection to your plans at this location. If you have any further question or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at (574) 808-8943. Sincerely, Christopher Plank Construction Manager SWFL 12600 Westlinks Dr. Suite #4 Fort Myers, FL 33913 574-808-8943 Christopher_Plank@Comcast.com Page 8963 of 9661 Sincerely, Dalton Rabon Engineering Lead Florida Power & Light Company, 4105 15th Ave SW, Naples, FL 34116Phone: (239)231-6983, Fax: Fax NumberApril 05, 2024 Francesca Passidomo4001 Tamiami Trl N. Suite 300Naples, Fl, 34103 Dear Francesca, This letter is in response to your request for the release of a platted road right-of- way. In meeting with your request, FPL has no objection to releasing our rights in the road right-of-way known as “LAREDO ST” Official Records Book 1033, Page 1103; and in Official Records Book 1033, Page 1099; and in Official Records Book 1033, Page 1087; in Official Records Book 1033, Page 1107; Official Records Book 1033, Page 1122; and in Official Records Book 1033, Page 1126; and in Official Records Book 1033, Page 1098, of the Public records of Collier County. The release is restricted to the following description: Florida Power and Light Company has reviewed your request on the properties located at Parcel numbers: 00748400001, 00749360001, 00749040004, 00750682008,00750640008 ,00750040006, 00749400000, 00749160007, 00750520005, 00749080006, 00749000002, 00750680903,00750160009, and 00748960004. Section 07, Township 51, Range 27. Collier County and has no objection to the termination of the FPL/PUE easement. The no objection is contingent to FPL being provided any required easement for relocation of existing facilities, if facilities are within the identified PUE that could be affected, along with FPL being completely reimbursed by owner/developer on the cost of relocating such facilities in accordance with FPL customary processes and charges. This “no objection” is provided with the stipulation that any FPL facilities within easements granted to FPL at this property retain all rights. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact Mohammad Al Hamd at 239-231-6983. A NEXTera ENERGY Company Sincerely, Dalton Rabon Engineering Lead Page 8964 of 9661 Page 8965 of 9661 Page 8966 of 9661 3/20/2024 Dianna Quintanilla Legal Assistant Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A 4001 Tamiami Trl N, ste 300 Naples, FL 34103 RE: No Objection to Terminate Easement- PL20240001248: A Parcel of Land Lying in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County Florida Dear Dianna, In response to your request to terminate the easement legally described as - A Parcel of Land Lying in Section 7, Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Collier County Florida. This includes: 00750560007, 00749040004, 00750682008, 0075640008, 00750040006, 00749400000, 00749160007, 00750520005, 00749080006, 00749000002, 00748960004, 00750680903, 00750160009, 00749360001, 00748400001. LUMEN has no objection to the termination of the PUE as shown. The no objection is contingent to LUMEN being provided any required easement for relocation of existing facilities, if facilities are within the identified PUE that could be affected, along with LUMEN being completely reimbursed by owner/developer on the cost of relocating such facilities. Customer or Contractor will need to call for Locates (Sunshine 811) prior to doing any work. Customer will be responsible for any damage to LUMEN utilities. If I can be of further assistance, feel free to contact me at (239) 237-4853 or email Alexis.Powell@lumen.com Sincerely, Alexis Powell Alexis Powell Associate Network Implementation Engineer LUMEN 2820 Cargo St, Fort Myers, Florida, 33916 Page 8967 of 9661 Page 8968 of 9661 Mb;MbbLbPEb[!P+bb!A,bWSB+bQEbb bKF%]ab?`bMbbY.Pb@E!P+'b#PbE1b ^ab'b;Db!">\7b*b bZ+Pb;MbVbAQbE2b[HMb)b$!0b;DbU+b Nb6bP:+bT9XbQEb ECA;/b Ib Rb<Mb!GbE158bb4b&bb3b_=(bObbJb;DbK-b@E_ b             $!"$ $  $  $     $$ #$$         Page 8969 of 9661          HzeHgLO]z]vX`SzX`zhOLjXb`z?zjbt`hVXez<5zhbrjVzgH`SOz7?zOHhjzLb]]XOgzLbr`jxzQ]bgXNH z>2zeIgLO]z HzeHgLO]zbgzjgHLnzbQz]I`NzhXjrHmONzX`zjVOzhjHjOzbQz Q]bgXNHzLbr`qzbQzLb]]XOgz]wX`SzX`ziOLjXb`z?z jbu`hVXez<5zhbrjVzgH`SOz7?zOHhjzH`NzJOX`SzQrgjVOgzJbr`NONzH`NzNOhLgXJONzHhzQb]]bthDz Lb__O`LX`SzHjz jVOzOHhlz frHgjOgzLbg`OgzbQzhHXNzhOMXb`z?FzjVO`LOz`!@@ 77:@t"zH]b`SzjVOzOHhky tOhjzfrHgjOgzhOLjXb`z]X`OzbQz hIXNz hOLjXb`z?z Qbgz697>#9:z QOOjzjbzjVOzibrjWz tOhjzLbg`OgzbQzjVOz ibrjVOHhjzfrHgjOgzbQzjWOz`bgjVOHhjzfrHgoOgzbQz hHXNz hOLjXb`z?Fz jVO`LOz`$22<?92O%zH]b`SzjVOz tOhjz]X`OzbQzhHXNzhbrjVOHhjzfrHgjOgzbQzjVOz`bgjVOHhjzfrHgjOgzQbgz92&22zQOOjzjbzoVOz`bgjWzgXSWjz bQztHvz]X`OzbQzQgXjLVOwzgbINzHhz NOhLgXJONzX`zbQQXLXH]zgOLbgNhzJbb[z727z eHSOz9:5zLb]]XOgzLbr`qz erJ]XLzgOLbgNiz H`Nz jVOzecX`jzbQz JOSX``X`SEzjVO`LOz`'@@77:@t(z H]b`SzhHXNz`bgjVzgXSVjzbQztHvz ]X`OzQbgz92 22z QOOjFzjVO`LOz`&22<?92O)zeHgH]]O]ztXjWz H`Nz 92"22zQOOjz tOhjzbQzHiz _OHhrgONzb`zHz eOgeO`NXLr]HgzjVOztOhjz]X`OzbQzhHXNzibrjVOIhjzfrHgjOgzbQzjVOz`bgjVOHhjzfrHgjOgzbQzhOLnXb`z?z H`Nz jWOztOhjz]X`OzbQz jVOz`bgjVOHhjzfrHgjOgzbQzjVOz `bgjVOHhjz frHgnOgzbQzhHXNz iOLjXb`z ?zQbgz 7?:5*5<zQOOnzjbzjVOz`bgjVz]X`OzbQzhHXNziOLjXb`z?GzjVO`LOzh+@@777COzI]b`SzhHXNz`bgjVz]X`OzQbgz92 4z QOOlzlbzlVOz`bgjVtOiozLbg`OgzbQz iIXNz`bglVOHhjz frHgjOgzbQzjVOz`bgjVOIhjzfrHgjOgFzjVO`LOz Lb`jX`rOzh,@A777C O"zI]b`SziHXNz`bgjVz]X`OzQbgz92%22zQOOlGzlVO`LOzi-3 <?92t.zeHgH]]O]ztXjVzH`Nz 92-4zQOOozOHhjzbQzHhz_OHhrgONzb`zHzeOgeO`NXLr]HgzhIXNztOijz]X`OhzQbgz7?:5%6<zQOOjzjbziHXNz`bgjVz gXSVpzbQztHwz]X`OzbQzQgXjLVOvzgbHNFz oVO`LOz`/@@77:A t!zH]b`SzhHXNz`bgjWzgXSWjzbQztHwz]X`OzQbgz 9204zQOOjzjbzjVOzedX`jzdQzKPTXa`X`U$z iHYNzeIgLO]zLb`jHX`hz6>;:>@ C=zhfrHgOzQOOjzbgz9-?@zHLgOhz_bgOzbgz]Ohh1z JOHgX`SizHgOzJIhONzb`zjVOzOHhjtOijzfrHgjOgzhOLjXb`z]X`OzbQzhOLjXb`z?zHhzJOHgX`Sz`"BB 77:@ t z [OzjgHh[ze H z Q]bgXNHz]XLO`iONzJriX`Oiiz]J@:<2z    \O``OjVzO zjgHh\z egbQzOihXb`H]z^`NzhrgsOvbgz Q]bgXNIz]XLO`iOz]h:>@:z  bRz8z      Zr`Oz79z7277z Page 8970 of 9661   !Mė AB1º3 ė &/Ì"3¾ăė Ďė Hė ðėė ÅėgėGė Kė  ė µ ė l, )m.,!ė Üė ė 8ė ±7­Õė 5ė 'ė Áė 5²Ö8 'ė ¡ė ė Vė &7ė  ė  ôė üėåėhė ñėė Æėiėđė •ė Lė Nė      {ėďė|ėĐėė ã}ė ė §Ýė ė Čė €ė ė ė  ÷!f ‰ė Þė ė AB1»4"ė É/?"4Ąė    n- e+ - ė ßė ė   †Oė ė Dė òėė   Gė (ė 5  5 5  5 5 5  Dėjė  kė Ēė (ė Pė êė ëė ;‡ąė o)ė  ē®¥çė Âp ;Žė ĆćĈĔ\  àė ė ÍȖ¢ė   ~ ė  ė ėė ė ·ė ė   +#5 +$ 25 (5 % 25 , 5 ,$ 25 )5 ! 5 5 .51-45 5  "/5 3"05 #-5 *5- '5 &5 +5 + 5  ] q ė áė ė          6ėėÊ?Ÿ¦ė6ė Ã%2ė'³%«ė´%ė $#Ø:ė‘Wė >æ¯&ėŒ‚ė C°Xė Ϭ$ė’ė¨ÙYė #:$@ė #>CéZė©@¶2™ė „ė¹ė=Úė—ėœšèėÔUė ¼EFFEĀõė  Ûýïÿöė   ½ėÀėâė ¤øė Ëė¸ėÓėó˜ėäė=+ėÄė       ^ĉ_` rsėĊa*ċ* <ė ›0Î9ªė ė    ė û芐ė Iė < ė    Tė“Jė ¿Ñė ÒRė”bė Sė!‹cāė ""  ""     ùėĖėyìėúxėdƒ…îwíėþĂėzė[ėˆė   £9Ð×0Ǟė . ĕQė tė uė  ė ė vė       Page 8971 of 9661 Page 8972 of 9661 Page 8973 of 9661 Page 8974 of 9661 Page 8975 of 9661 Page 8976 of 9661 Page 8977 of 9661 Page 8978 of 9661 Page 8979 of 9661 Page 8980 of 9661 Page 8981 of 9661 Page 8982 of 9661 Page 8983 of 9661 Page 8984 of 9661 Page 8985 of 9661 Page 8986 of 9661 Page 8987 of 9661 Page 8988 of 9661 Page 8989 of 9661 Page 8990 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 7,398 $74.49 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW 11/18/2024 BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Nov 30, 2024 Nov 30, 2024 0.2096 7,398 7,398 7,398 7,398 7,398 7,398 7,398 7,398 7,398 7,398 819-25-00279327 71.51 00748400001 00748400001 7 51 27 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF NW1/4OF NE1/4, N1/2 OF NW1/4 OFNE1/4, N 1/2 OF N 1/2 OF SW1/4OF NE1/4, 7 51 27 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF NW1/4 OF NE1/4, N1/2 OF NW1/4 OF NE1/4, N 1/2 OF N 1/2 OF SW1/4 OF NE1/4, GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 22.27 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC7742 ALICO RDFORT MYERS, FL 33912 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 7742 ALICO RD FORT MYERS, FL 33912 10.0700 0.18 Receipt # 5.06 11.10 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 1.00 16.51 15.40 0.72 0.70 Paid By 1.55 7,398 7,398 0 7,398 0 7,398 0 7,398 7,398 7,398 7,398 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $74.49 7,398 7,398 Page 8991 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 243,398 $2,451.01 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW 11/18/2024 BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Nov 30, 2024 Nov 30, 2024 0.2096 243,398 243,398 243,398 243,398 243,398 243,398 243,398 243,398 243,398 243,398 126-25-00278150 2352.97 00750560007 00750560007 7 51 27 N1/2 OF N1/2 OF NE1/4NE1/4, 7 51 27 N1/2 OF N1/2 OF NE1/4 NE1/4, HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 732.80 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OFCOLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TR ENAPLES, FL 34113 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TR E NAPLES, FL 34113 10.0700 5.99 Receipt # 166.58 365.10 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 32.83 543.07 506.75 23.80 23.07 Paid By 51.02 243,398 243,398 0 243,398 0 243,398 0 243,398 243,398 243,398 243,398 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $2,451.01 243,398 243,398 Page 8992 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 235,795 $0.00 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Sep 30, 2025 Sep 30, 2025 0.2096 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 00750520005 00750520005 7 51 27 S1/2 OF N1/2 OF SE1/4OF NE1/4 10 AC OR 1122 PG 114 7 51 27 S1/2 OF N1/2 OF SE1/4 OF NE1/4 10 AC OR 1122 PG 114 0.00 HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOF COLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113-7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113-7753 10.0700 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 235,795 425,000 235,795 235,795 235,795 235,795 235,795 235,795 235,795 425,000 235,795 235,795 235,795 235,795 235,795 235,795 425,000 425,000 $0.00 235,795 235,795 Institutional charitable Page 8993 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 1,562 $15.73 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW 11/18/2024 BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Nov 30, 2024 Nov 30, 2024 0.2096 1,562 1,562 1,562 1,562 1,562 1,562 1,562 1,562 1,562 1,562 819-25-00279327 15.10 00749360001 00749360001 7 51 27 N1/2 OF S1/2 OF NW1/4OF NE1/4 7 51 27 N1/2 OF S1/2 OF NW1/4 OF NE1/4 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 4.70 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC7742 ALICO RDFORT MYERS, FL 33912 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 7742 ALICO RD FORT MYERS, FL 33912 10.0700 0.04 Receipt # 1.07 2.34 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.21 3.49 3.25 0.15 0.15 Paid By 0.33 1,562 1,562 0 1,562 0 1,562 0 1,562 1,562 1,562 1,562 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $15.73 1,562 1,562 Page 8994 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 140,405 $0.00 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Sep 30, 2025 Sep 30, 2025 0.2096 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 00749040004 00749040004 7 51 27 N1/2 OF S1/2 OF N1/2NE1/4 OF NE1/4 LESS W 30FT 7 51 27 N1/2 OF S1/2 OF N1/2 NE1/4 OF NE1/4 LESS W 30FT 0.00 HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOF COLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TRAIL EASTNAPLES, FL 34113 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST NAPLES, FL 34113 10.0700 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 140,405 154,594 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 154,594 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 154,594 154,594 $0.00 140,405 140,405 Affordable housing Page 8995 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 168,357 $0.00 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Sep 30, 2025 Sep 30, 2025 0.2096 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 00749400000 00749400000 7 51 27 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF NE1/4OF NE1/4, LESS N 262.35FT OFW 467FT, LESS W 30FT R/W 7.14AC OR 1121Continued (See Tax Roll) 7 51 27 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF NE1/4 OF NE1/4, LESS N 262.35FT OF W 467FT, LESS W 30FT R/W 7.14 AC OR 1121 Continued (See Tax Roll) 0.00 HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOF COLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113-7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113-7753 10.0700 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 168,357 303,450 168,357 168,357 168,357 168,357 168,357 168,357 168,357 303,450 168,357 168,357 168,357 168,357 168,357 168,357 303,450 303,450 $0.00 168,357 168,357 Institutional charitable Page 8996 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 230,372 $0.00 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Sep 30, 2025 Sep 30, 2025 0.2096 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 00749080006 00749080006 7 51 27 N1/2 OF S1/2 OF SE1/4OF NE1/4 LESS W 30' 9.77 ACOR 1122 PG 115 7 51 27 N1/2 OF S1/2 OF SE1/4 OF NE1/4 LESS W 30' 9.77 AC OR 1122 PG 115 0.00 HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOF COLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113-7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113-7753 10.0700 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 230,372 415,225 230,372 230,372 230,372 230,372 230,372 230,372 230,372 415,225 230,372 230,372 230,372 230,372 230,372 230,372 415,225 415,225 $0.00 230,372 230,372 Institutional charitable Page 8997 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 230,608 $255.52 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $255.52 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW 11/18/2024 BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments Solid Waste 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Nov 30, 2024 Nov 30, 2024 0.2096 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 126-25-00278150 255.52 245.30 00749160007 00749160007 7 51 27 N1/2 OF N1/2 OF SE1/4OF NE1/4 LESS W 30' 9.77 ACOR 1121 PG 449 7 51 27 N1/2 OF N1/2 OF SE1/4 OF NE1/4 LESS W 30' 9.77 AC OR 1121 PG 449 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 0.00 HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOF COLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113-7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113-7753 19013 District 1 Garbage 10.0700 0.00 Receipt # 0.00 0.00 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paid By 0.00 230,608 415,325 230,608 230,608 230,608 230,608 230,608 230,608 230,608 415,325 230,608 230,608 230,608 230,608 230,608 230,608 415,325 415,325 $0.00 230,608 230,608 Institutional charitable Page 8998 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 204,669 $0.00 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Sep 30, 2025 Sep 30, 2025 0.2096 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 00749000002 00749000002 7 51 27 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF SE1/4OF NE1/4, LESS W 30FT, E 30FT& S 30FT, OR 1260 PG 2181 7 51 27 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF SE1/4 OF NE1/4, LESS W 30FT, E 30FT & S 30FT, OR 1260 PG 2181 0.00 HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOF COLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113-7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113-7753 10.0700 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 204,669 368,900 204,669 204,669 204,669 204,669 204,669 204,669 204,669 368,900 204,669 204,669 204,669 204,669 204,669 204,669 368,900 368,900 $0.00 204,669 204,669 Institutional charitable Page 8999 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 140,405 $0.00 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Sep 30, 2025 Sep 30, 2025 0.2096 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 00750682008 00750682008 7 51 27 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF N1/2OF NE1/4 OF NE1/4 LESS W 30FT 7 51 27 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF N1/2 OF NE1/4 OF NE1/4 LESS W 30FT 0.00 HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOF COLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TRAIL EASTNAPLES, FL 34113 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST NAPLES, FL 34113 10.0700 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 140,405 154,594 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 154,594 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 140,405 154,594 154,594 $0.00 140,405 140,405 Affordable housing Page 9000 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 174,724 $0.00 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Sep 30, 2025 Sep 30, 2025 0.2096 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 00750040006 00750040006 7 51 27 N1/2 OF S1/2 OF NE1/4OF NE1/4, LESS PARCEL DESC INOR 1121-450, LESS W 30FT R/W7.41 AC ORContinued (See Tax Roll) 7 51 27 N1/2 OF S1/2 OF NE1/4 OF NE1/4, LESS PARCEL DESC IN OR 1121-450, LESS W 30FT R/W 7.41 AC OR Continued (See Tax Roll) 0.00 HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOF COLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113-7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113-7753 10.0700 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 174,724 314,925 174,724 174,724 174,724 174,724 174,724 174,724 174,724 314,925 174,724 174,724 174,724 174,724 174,724 174,724 314,925 314,925 $0.00 174,724 174,724 Institutional charitable Page 9001 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 1,500 $15.11 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW 11/18/2024 BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Nov 30, 2024 Nov 30, 2024 0.2096 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 819-25-00279327 14.51 00750680903 00750680903 7 51 27 N 1/2 OF S 1/2 OF SW1/4 OF NE 1/4, 7 51 27 N 1/2 OF S 1/2 OF SW 1/4 OF NE 1/4, GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 4.52 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC7742 ALICO RDFORT MYERS, FL 33912 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 7742 ALICO RD FORT MYERS, FL 33912 10.0700 0.04 Receipt # 1.03 2.25 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.20 3.35 3.12 0.15 0.14 Paid By 0.31 1,500 1,500 0 1,500 0 1,500 0 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $15.11 1,500 1,500 Page 9002 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 366,039 $3,941.53 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $255.52 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW 11/18/2024 BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments Solid Waste 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Nov 30, 2024 Nov 30, 2024 0.2096 366,039 366,039 366,039 366,039 366,039 366,039 366,039 366,039 366,039 366,039 126-25-00278150 255.52 3783.87 00750640008 00750640008 7 51 27 COMM AT NW CNR OFNE1/4 OF NE1/4, RUN S692.65FT TO POB, S 88 DEG E327FT, S 200FT, S 88 DEGContinued (See Tax Roll) 7 51 27 COMM AT NW CNR OF NE1/4 OF NE1/4, RUN S 692.65FT TO POB, S 88 DEG E 327FT, S 200FT, S 88 DEG Continued (See Tax Roll) HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY 1,102.03 HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOF COLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TRAIL EASTNAPLES, FL 34113 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST NAPLES, FL 34113 19013 District 1 Garbage 10.0700 9.00 Receipt # 250.52 549.06 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 49.38 816.71 762.09 35.80 34.70 Paid By 76.72 366,039 366,039 0 366,039 0 366,039 0 366,039 366,039 366,039 366,039 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $3,686.01 366,039 366,039 Page 9003 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 43,859 $441.67 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW 11/18/2024 BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Nov 30, 2024 Nov 30, 2024 0.2096 43,859 43,859 43,859 43,859 43,859 43,859 43,859 43,859 43,859 43,859 819-25-00279327 424.00 00750160009 00750160009 7 51 27 S1/2 OF N1/2 OF SW1/4OF NE1/4, LESS E30FT R/W OR2037 PG 385 7 51 27 S1/2 OF N1/2 OF SW1/4 OF NE1/4, LESS E30FT R/W OR 2037 PG 385 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 132.05 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC7742 ALICO RDFORT MYERS, FL 33912 GREENWAY FRITCHEY LAND LLC 7742 ALICO RD FORT MYERS, FL 33912 10.0700 1.08 Receipt # 30.02 65.79 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 5.92 97.86 91.31 4.29 4.16 Paid By 9.19 43,859 43,859 0 43,859 0 43,859 0 43,859 43,859 43,859 43,859 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $441.67 43,859 43,859 Page 9004 of 9661 Pay in U.S. Funds Drawn on a U.S. Bank To:Collier County Tax Collector3291 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112-5758 POST DATED CHECKS ARE NOT ACCEPTED AND WILL BE RETURNED Visit our website: www.colliertaxFROOHFWRU.com Legal Description Combined Ad Valorem and Non-Ad Valorem TotalSee reverse side for important information $VVHVVHGValue 'LVWULFW Mill Rate Assessed Value Exempt Amt Taxable Value  Tax Amount Parcel Number Legal Description Mill Code Escrow Code Please Retain this portion for your records ExemptionV Millage Total Total Ad Valorem Non-Ad Valorem District Type of Assessment Amount Non-Ad Valorem Total (Detach and Return with your Payment) Parcel Number Mill Code Escrow Code 5RE6WRQHEXUQHU $PRXQW3DLGWR'DWH $&+3$<0(176:,//127%($&&(37(' 209,385 $0.00 Please Pay Please Pay $0.00 $0.00 If Paid By If Paid By CONSERVATION COLLIER $0.00 C.C. WATER POLLUTION CTRL PGM COLLIER MOSQUITO CONTROL SCHOOL BOARD - LOCAL BOARD UNINCORP GEN - MSTD GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DIS WATER MANAGEMENT FUND-SOUTH GENERAL FUND SCHOOL BOARD - STATE LAW BIG CYPRESS BASIN 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 2024 Paid Collier County Notice of Ad Valorem Taxes and Non-Ad Valorem Assessments 223 223 3.0107 2.0820 2.2312 0.0948 0.0978 0.6844 0.0246 0.1349 1.5000 Sep 30, 2025 Sep 30, 2025 0.2096 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 00748960004 00748960004 7 51 27 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF SW1/4OF NE1/4, LESS S 30' & E 30'8.88 AC OR 1849 PG 1771 7 51 27 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF SW1/4 OF NE1/4, LESS S 30' & E 30' 8.88 AC OR 1849 PG 1771 0.00 HABITAT FOR HUMANITYOF COLLIER COUNTY INC11145 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34113-7753 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF COLLIER COUNTY INC 11145 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34113-7753 10.0700 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pay your current taxes online at: http://www.colliertaxcollector.com/ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 209,385 377,400 209,385 209,385 209,385 209,385 209,385 209,385 209,385 377,400 209,385 209,385 209,385 209,385 209,385 209,385 377,400 377,400 $0.00 209,385 209,385 Institutional charitable Page 9005 of 9661 Page 9006 of 9661 Page 9007 of 9661 Page 9008 of 9661 Page 9009 of 9661 Page 9010 of 9661 Page 9011 of 9661 Page 9012 of 9661 Page 9013 of 9661 Page 9014 of 9661 Page 9015 of 9661 Page 9016 of 9661 Page 9017 of 9661 Page 9018 of 9661 Page 9019 of 9661 Page 9020 of 9661 Page 9021 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.HID# 2025-4586Executive SummaryRecommendation to approve a Resolution renaming Gorman Avenue to Sugarwood Drive, which is depicted as Tract R of the Maple Lane Home Subdivision, as recorded in Plat Book 76, Pages 25-26, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 30, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20250008479]OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approves the attached Resolution renaming Gorman Avenue to Sugarwood Drive. CONSIDERATIONS: Millrose Properties Florida LLC, is requesting renaming a street from Gorman Avenue to Sugarwood Drive, which is located within East Naples, and depicted as Gorman Avenue, Tract R, Maple Lane Home, as recorded in Plat Book 76, Pages 25–26, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, in Section 30, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, and further depicted in Exhibit “A”. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 2007-62, an advertised Neighborhood Information Meeting was held at the Collier South Regional Library, Meeting Room B, located at 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, Florida, on September 3, 2025. No members of the public attended. All abutting property owners have been notified of this public hearing. COFFIER COMNTH LFANNINU COY Y ISSION PCCLCG RECOY Y ENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission does not review street name change petitions. This item advances the Collier County Strategic Plan Objective within Quality of Place to preserve and enhance the character of our community ( ISCAF IY LACT: Fiscal impact will be incurred in the form of staff time spent documenting the change on plats and amending the affected address records. The fiscal impact to fire, police (Sheriff’s Office), Post Office, EMS, and 911 Emergency Services will be incurred in the form of costs to update records and maps. URO) TW Y ANAUEY ENT IY LACT: There is no growth management impact associated with this action. FEUAF CONSIDERATIONS: This is a request to change the name of a platted and unplatted street, Gorman Avenue, to Sugarwood Drive. Pursuant to Section 22-358(a)(1) of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, a petition to rename a platted and unplatted street requires that the applicant 1) verify with the Addressing Section of the Collier County Growth Management Department that the proposed street name is not a duplication, and 2) state the reason for the name change. This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a super-majority vote of at least four affirmative votes for approval. – CLD RECOY Y ENDATIONPSG: To approve the attached Resolution renaming Gorman Avenue to Sugarwood Drive. LRELARED BH: Timothy Finn, Planner III, Zoning Division ATTACWY ENTS: 1. Attachment A - Proposed Resolution 2. Attachment B - Backup Materials 3. legal ad - agenda ID 25-4586 - SNR-PL20250008479 Renaming Gorman Ave to Sugarwood Dr 12-9-25 BCC Page 9022 of 9661 [25-CPS-02669/1980740/1] 19 SNR-PL20250008479 10/22/2025 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 25 -_____ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RENAMING GORMAN AVENUE TO SUGARWOOD DRIVE, WHICH IS DEPICTED AS TRACT R OF THE MAPLE LANE HOME SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 76, PAGES 25–26, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LOCATED IN SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20250008479] WHEREAS, the legislature of the State of Florida by enacting § 336.05, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to name or rename streets and roads, except for certain state roads; and WHEREAS, Collier County pursuant thereto has adopted Collier County Ordinance No. 07-62, as codified in Chapter 22, Article X, of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, which establishes criteria and procedures to rename streets or roads; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners (“Board”) has held a public hearing after providing notice as required by said ordinance and has considered the advisability of granting the request by Michael J. Delate, P.E., of RDA Consulting Engineers, LLC, on behalf of the Millrose Properties Florida LLC, to rename Gorman Avenue to Sugarwood Drive. This street is located within East Naples, and depicted as Gorman Avenue, Tract R, Maple Lane Home, as recorded in Plat Book 76, Pages 25–26, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, in Section 30, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, and further depicted in Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that all criteria set forth in Ordinance No. 07-62 have been met and specifically finds that there is no other street in incorporated or unincorporated Collier County with this name or any similar sounding name as is being requested; and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that it is necessary for identification purposes to confirm the name of this street. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Effective this date, the name of the portion of the street described in the above recitals is hereby changed from Gorman Avenue to Sugarwood Drive, and is confirmed as such. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, and noted upon the maps of the street and zoning atlases of Collier County, and notations made on the referenced Plat. Page 9023 of 9661 [25-CPS-02669/1980740/1] 19 SNR-PL20250008479 10/22/2025 Page 2 of 2 This Resolution adopted after motion, second and super majority vote this _____ day of ______________ 2025. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ______________________________ By: ________________________________ , Deputy Clerk Burt L. Saunders, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: ______________________________ Courtney L. DaSilva Assistant County Attorney Exhibit “A” – Gorman Avenue Rename Exhibit CLD 10/22/25 Page 9024 of 9661 EX. RAINTREE LNEX. MAPLE LNEX. CYPRESS LNEX. TAMIAMI CTEX. TAMIAMI TRAIL E (EX. GORMAN AVE / PROPOSED SUGARWOOD DRIVEEX. GORMAN AVEEX.GORMAN AVEGORMANANSCALE: 1" = 80'GORMAN AVE RENAMEEXHIBIT11" = 80'DATUM NOTE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DESIGNED BY:DATE:PROJECT No.:SHEET:ENGINEERS STAMPSCALE:DESCRIPTIONDATEBYNO.RDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LLC.PHONE: (239) 649-1551FAX: (239) 649-7112WWW.RDAFL.COMGORMAN AVE250109JUNE 2025MAMJDMJDof 1MAPLE LNREVISED STOP SIGNVICINITY MAPSWNEPROJECT SITESUGRARWOOD DRIVEPage 9025 of 9661 Street Name Change (SNR) Petition 6/04/2024 Page 1 of 7 Growth Management Community Development • Operations & Regulatory Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov/ GMCD Public PortalLand Development CodeAdministrative CodeCollier County Ordinance No. 2007-62 states that anyone wishing to rename a County street must submit a petition of sixty-six percent of the property owners abutting the street to be renamed. The proposed name may not duplicate an existing name. Applicants must first verify with the Addressing Section of the Collier County Growth Management Community Development Division (239-252-2482) that the proposed name is not a duplication prior to submitting the application. Name of Property Owner: Address: City: State: ZIP: Phone: E-Mail: Name of Applicant/Agent: Firm: Address: City: State: ZIP: Phone: E-Mail: STREET NAME CHANGE (SNR) PROCEDURESOrd. No. 2007-62, § 13 Applicant Contact Information Page 9026 of 9661 Millrose Properties Florida LLC 600 BRICKELL AVE. SUITE 1400 Miami Florida 33131 alex.hinebaugh@lennar.com Michael J. Delate, P.E. RDA Consulting Engineers, LLC 5000 Health Center Blvd, Suite 200 Bonita Spring Florida 34135 239.649.1551 MDelate@rdafl.com Collier County Street Name Change (SNR) Petition 6/04/2024 Page 2 of 7 Growth Management Community Development • Operations & Regulatory Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov/ ܈ Street Name Change: $500.00 $ ܈ Fire Planning Review Fee: $150.00 $ ܈ Property Owner Notifications: $1.50 for each property owner requiring notification $ of the proposed name change (to be collected after letters have been sent) ܈ Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for BCC: $500.00 (Estimated amount to be reconciled against actual legal advertising billing at the completion of the project) $ 5(48,5(0(176)255(9,(:5(48,5('A petition signed by sixty-six percent of the property owners abutting the street to be renamed. (A list of all property owners abutting the street should be obtained from the Collier County Property Appraisers Office.) ܈A site plan of the street to be renamed, showing the length of the street in tenths of miles, the location and number of street signs, and the zoning of abutting properties.܈ Completed Addressing Checklist (no older than 6 months) ܈ The legal description, including section, township, range, and subdivision (as applicable) of the abutting properties. ܈ ܈The reason for requesting the name change. Electronic copies of all documents and plans. ܈ Submittal Requirements Fee Requirements )HH6XEWRWDO 7RWDO)HHV5HTXLUHG $ $ $ Page 9027 of 9661 500 150 0 500 1150 1150 Collier County Street Name Change (SNR) Petition 6/04/2024 Page 3 of 7 Growth Management Community Development • Operations & Regulatory Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov/ Complete the following for all registered Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner’s website at,https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/government/board-of-county-commissioners/civic-associations-and-communitiesNAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION:MAILING ADDRESS: NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS: NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS: CURRENT NAME OF STREET PROPOSED STREET NAME STREET IN QUESTION IS: public, or private REASON FOR PROPOSED CHANGE:(Multiline, form will adjust to fit text as needed) Approximate length of street: Number of parcels or lots abutting street: _________ Total Number of property owners abutting street to be renamed: Total Number of property owners signing petition to change street name: Percentage of property owners signing petition Applicant does, or does not; agree to pay cost of street sign replacement for public street. (Estimated cost: $100.00 per sign) Associations Proposed Change Be aware that Collier County has lobbyist regulations. Guide yourself accordingly and ensure that you are in compliance with these regulations. Page 9028 of 9661 MAPLE LANE HOA, INC.600 BRICKELL AVE. SUITE 1400 MIAMI FL 33131 Gorman Avenue Sugarwood Drive seller of property (pre plat) requested the name be changed from his last name (Gorman).we did not want to slow down platting process, so we are requesting change post plat 500 13 13 13 100% Collier County Street Name Change (SNR) Petition 6/04/2024 Page 4 of 7 Growth Management Community Development • Operations & Regulatory Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov/ List legal description(s) of properties abutting the street to be renamed. (Attach additional pages if necessary)Subdivision: Unit No. Tract No.Section/Township/ Range://Subdivision: Unit No. Tract No. Section/Township/ Range:// Subdivision: Unit No. Tract No. Section/Township/ Range:// Subdivision: Unit No. Tract No. Section/Township/ Range:// Subdivision: Unit No. Tract No. Section/Township/ Range:// Subdivision: Unit No. Tract No. Section/Township/ Range:// Subdivision: Unit No. Tract No. Section/Township/ Range:// Location Page 9029 of 9661 MAPLE LANE ESTATES (ALL LOTS 1-13)  Page 9030 of 9661 Collier County Street Name Change (SNR) Petition 6/04/2024 Page 6 of 7 Growth Management Community Development • Operations & Regulatory Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov/ NAME OFOWNER (PRINTED)OWNER SIGNATURE ADDRESS ANDFOLIO# OF PROPERTY ABUTTING STREET MAILING ADDRESS (IF DIFFERENT THAN ADDRESSABUTTING STREET)LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF ADDRESS DATE Page 9031 of 9661 Collier County Street Name Change (SNR) Petition 6/04/2024 Page 7 of 7 Growth Management Community Development • Operations & Regulatory Management Division 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov/ Section 22.357.–Duly advertised public hearing to rename a street.(1) b.: Public notification process when renaming platted streets or roadways where the change is initiated by a private individual. The applicant shall be responsible for conducting at least one neighborhood informational meeting. This meeting shall be held 30 days prior to changing of the roadway and the petitioner is required to install street signs. The location of the neighborhood information meeting should be reasonably convenient to those property owners affected by the renaming of the street and the facilities shall be of sufficient size to accommodate expected attendance. The applicant shall cause a display advertisement, in type no smaller than 12 point and said advertisement shall not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. The advertisement shall state the purpose, location, and time of the meeting and shall be placed with a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least seven days prior to the neighborhood informational meeting. Applicant must conduct at least one Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) The applicant must make arrangements for the location of the meeting. The location must be reasonably convenient to those property owners who are required to receive notice. The meeting must be held 30 days prior to renaming of the roadway. Meeting must be advertised in the newspaper at least seven (7) days prior to meeting date: x Display ad shall be no smaller than 12 point; x Shall not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices or classified ads appear; x Placed in a newspaper of general circulation; and x Must state purpose, location and time of the meeting. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATIONAL MEETING REQUIREMENTSCollier County Code of Laws and Ordinances Page 9032 of 9661 The applicant shall cause a display advertisement, in type no smaller than 12 point and said advertisement shall not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear.The advertisement shall state the purpose, location, and time of the meeting and shall be placed with a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least seven days prior to the neighborhood EX. RAINTREE LNEX. MAPLE LNEX. CYPRESS LNEX. TAMIAMI CTEX. TAMIAMI TRAIL E (EX. GORMAN AVE / PROPOSED SUGARWOOD DRIVEEX. GORMAN AVEEX.GORMAN AVEGORMANANSCALE: 1" = 80'MAPLE LANE RENAMEEXHIBIT11" = 80'DATUM NOTE:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DESIGNED BY:DATE:PROJECT No.:SHEET:ENGINEERS STAMPSCALE:DESCRIPTIONDATEBYNO.RDA CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LLC.PHONE: (239) 649-1551FAX: (239) 649-7112WWW.RDAFL.COMMAPLE LANE HOME250109JUNE 2025MAMJDMJDof 1MAPLE LNREVISED STOP SIGNVICINITY MAPSWNEPROJECT SITESUGRARWOOD DRIVEPage 9033 of 9661 Page 9034 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.IID# 2025-4602Executive SummaryThis item requires Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve a Resolution designating the Gore Nature Center as historically significant, pursuant to the historic/archaeological preservation regulations as provided in Section 2.03.07.E of the Collier County Land Development Code. The subject property, approximately 10± acres in size, is located in the Golden Gate Estates, in Section 33, Township 49 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20250010255]OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) consider an application designating Dr. Robert H. Gore III’s old Florida Cracker-styled home and 10-acre parcel, collectively referred to as the “Gore Nature Center,” as historically significant, pursuant to the historic/archaeological preservation regulations as provided in Section 2.03.07.E of the Collier County Land Development Code. CONSIDERATIONS: The BCC adopted Ordinance 91-102 establishing the Historical and Archaeological Preservation Ordinance, which was re-codified in Ordinance 2004-41, as amended. This Ordinance was enacted to protect, preserve, and perpetuate Collier County's historic and archaeological sites, districts, structures, buildings, and properties. The BCC may distinguish properties with architectural and/or historical significance by designating them as local historic landmarks. On August 8, 2025, the Collier County Conservation Collier Program purchased Dr. Robert H. Gore III's 10-acre property, including an old Florida Cracker-styled home, has plans to open the Gore Nature Center for public use. The Collier County Historic and Archaeological Preservation Board (HAPB) reviewed and considered the County's application for historic designation of the Gore Nature Center during their public meeting on October 17, 2025. At this meeting, HAPB voted 4-0 to forward petition PL20250010255 to the BCC with a recommendation that the Gore Nature Center be designated as historically significant. The HAPB found that the subject structures qualify as a locally significant historic structure pursuant to criteria "a", "b", "c", "g", and "j" of the Designation Criteria as listed in the LDC Section 2.03.07.E.1 and as noted below: a. The area is associated with distinctive elements of the cultural, social, ethnic, political, economic, scientific, religious, prehistoric, or architectural history that have contributed to the pattern of history in the community, the County, the State of Florida, or the nation. Dr. Robert H. Gore III began purchasing land in the Golden Gate Estate in the 1980s. Dr. Gore was a noted research scientist, environmentalist, educator, consultant, and author. Over two decades, he accumulated 71 parcels totaling approximately 180 acres of mostly contiguous vacant land. In 1987, he completed the construction of an Old Florida Cracker-style home on a central 10-acre parcel. Collier County Conservation Collier Program purchased the 10-acre property with a home on August 8, 2025. b. The area is associated with the lives of persons significant in history. The Gore Nature Center was the home of Dr. Robert H. Gore III. According to his obituary: Dr. Gore earned a PhD in Marine Invertebrate Zoology from the University of Miami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science. He conducted research in marine biology and ecology with the Smithsonian Institution for ten years. He has published more than seventy-five papers in the scientific and popular press, and authored several books, including "The Gulf of Mexico," "Songs from Solitude," and "Right Smart to Say." He was a consultant to many state and county governmental agencies and established the Naithloriendun Wildlife Sanctuary in Southwest Florida near the Big Cypress Swamp. He was inspired by his grandfather, R. H. Gore Sr., publisher of the Fort Lauderdale News and former governor of Puerto Rico, and his father, R. H. Gore Jr. It was from this legacy that he became a lifelong conservationist and shared his love of the Florida wilderness with children and adults, through guided forest walks and folk music gatherings at his old Florida style Cracker home. He was also an avid and highly skilled oenologist, gourmet cook, and musician, with a passion for the dulcimer, six-string and twelve-string guitars, and harmonica. c. The area embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, method, or materials of construction that possess Page 9035 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.IID# 2025-4602high artistic value, quality of design craftsmanship, or that represent an individual architect or builder's prominence or contribution to the development of the County, the State of Florida, or the nation. Construction on the home was completed in 1987. The architectural style is known as an "old-fashioned Florida Cracker house." According to a Fine Homebuilding article (December 1989), "The traditional Cracker-style house (named after early Florida settlers) was square in plan, raised on stilts and crowned with a cupola…" The article from Fine Homebuilding provides detailed information about the home's construction. It explains issues with the water table, soft ground, caprock substrate, etc. It also goes into detail about various construction methods and materials for "hurricane-proofing." Most of the home's interior walls are made of cypress, except for the kitchen and bathrooms. There are some pecky cypress boards in the study. g. The area derives its primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction of historical importance. See explanation above under (c). j. The area is a property primarily commemorative in intent, where design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own historical significance. Several historical documents were passed along with the County's purchase of the property, which tell the story of the property. Dr. Gore named the contiguous parcels Naithloriendun Wildlife Sanctuary. He regularly had events on the 170-acre Sanctuary for visitors to explore. Among the documents is a pamphlet inviting visitors to visit the Sanctuary for groups. Other flyers advertised specific events, such as the "Full Moon Forest Festival." The Naithloriendun Wildlife Sanctuary Garden and Trail Guide (attached) provides an overview of the Sanctuary. If a site and/or structure is designated "historic," the property owner (in this case, the County) is required to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness from the HAPB prior to the issuance of permits to alter, excavate, relocate, or demolish. A historic designation can make designated sites and structures eligible for the following: Building Code: Designated projects may be eligible for administrative variances or other forms of relief from building codes as follows: Repairs and alterations may be made without conformance to requirements of the Standard Building Code when the work has been issued a Certificate of Appropriateness . . . provided that: 1. The restored building will be no more hazardous than it was in its original condition, 2. Plans are sealed by a Florida registered architect or engineer, if required, 3. The Growth Management Department (GMD) Department Head has required the minimum necessary correction to be made before use, in the interest of public health, safety, and welfare. Zoning Ordinance: Subject to the conditions contained in the LDC, a variance for any historically designated site or structure can be approved regarding setbacks, lot widths, depths, area requirements, and development regulations, open space and parking requirements, and similar variances not related to a change in use of the property. Financial Assistance: Historically designated sites and structures are eligible for financial assistance set aside for historic preservation projects by the State of Florida or the federal government, provided they meet the requirements for those financial assistance programs. This item advances the Collier County Strategic Plan Objective within Quality of Place to preserve and enhance the character of our community FISCAL IMPACT: This petition by and of itself will not have a fiscal impact on Collier County. However, historic designated sites and structures are eligible to receive financial assistance set aside for historic preservation projects by the State of Florida and/or the federal government, provided it meets the requirements of those financial assistance programs. Page 9036 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.IID# 2025-4602GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The subject property is zoned Estates (E) District. The Future Land Use designation is Estates (ES) Designation. The Land Development Regulations have been adopted to implement the GMP in order to ensure protection of historic resources. Policy 3.1:h of the Future Land Use Element provides protection of historically significant properties.LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality, and a majority vote is needed for Board approval. – CLD RECOMMENDATION(S): To approve the historic designation for Petition: PL-20250010255, the Gore Nature Center, as historically significant. PREPARED BY: Timothy Finn, AICP, Planner III, Zoning Division ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment A - Proposed Resolution 2. Attachment B - Application-Backup Materials 3. Attachment C - Site Location Map 4. legal ad - agenda ID 25-4602 - Gore Center Historic Desig. -PL20250010255 12-9-25 BCC Page 9037 of 9661 1 of 4 [25-CPS-02718/1980558/1] 7 Gore Nature Center- Historic Designation 10/28/25 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-____ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, DESIGNATING THE GORE NATURE CENTER AS HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT, PURSUANT TO THE HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION REGULATIONS AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 2.03.07.E OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, APPROXIMATELY 10± ACRES, IS LOCATED IN THE GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20250010255] WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County adopted Ordinance No. 91- 70, the Historical/Archaeological Preservation Ordinance, on August 7, 1991 and subsequently incorporated this Ordinance into the Collier County Land Development Code; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County seeks to recognize the importance and significance of Collier County’s historical heritage, and to this end has enacted regulations to protect, preserve and perpetuate Collier County’s historic and archaeological sites, districts, structures, buildings and properties; and WHEREAS, Section 2.03.07.E of the Land Development Code, provides for official designation of particular sites and structures as historically significant and provides regulations to maintain the historic character of officially designated properties; and WHEREAS, Dr. Robert H. Gore III earned his PhD in Marine Invertebrate Zoology from the University of Miami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, published seventy-five papers in the scientific and popular press, authored several books including “The Gulf of Mexico,” “Songs from Solitude,” and “Right Smart to Say,” consulted state and county governmental agencies, and conducted research in marine biology and ecology with the Smithsonian Institution for a decade; and WHEREAS, Dr. Robert H. Gore III purchased land in Golden Gate Estates in the 1980s and over two decades accumulated 71 parcels totaling approximately 180 acres of mostly contiguous vacant land; and WHEREAS, Dr. Robert H. Gore III established the Naithloriendun Wildlife Sanctuary in Southwest Florida near the Big Cypress Swamp where he regularly held events on the 170-acre sanctuary to allow visitors to explore; and WHEREAS, Dr. Robert H. Gore III completed the construction of an Old Florida Cracker-style home on a 10-acre parcel in 1987; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Conservation Collier Program purchased the 10-acre property with the old Florida Cracker-styled home on August 8, 2025; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Conservation Collier Program plans to use the property to open the Gore Nature Center for public use; and Page 9038 of 9661 2 of 4 [25-CPS-02718/1980558/1] 7 Gore Nature Center- Historic Designation 10/28/25 WHEREAS, Dr. Robert H. Gore III’s home and 10-acre parcel represent characteristics of historical significance due to the cultural, social and economic history that contributed to the history in Collier County, including but not limited to Dr. Robert H. Gore III’s contribution to the protection of the environment in Collier County; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Historical/Archaeological Preservation Board (the “Preservation Board”) reviewed and considered the application for historic designation of the Dr. Robert H. Gore III’s home and 10-acre parcel, collectively referred to as the “Gore Nature Center,” at a public meeting held for that purpose; and WHEREAS, on October 17, 2025, the Preservation Board voted to recommend approval of the application for historic designation of the Gore Nature Center as a historic site; and WHEREAS, the Preservation Board hereby forwards said nomination to the Board of County Commissioners. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: In recognition of its important and significant place in the historical heritage of Collier County, the property known as the Gore Nature Center, which includes Dr. Robert H. Gore III’s home and 10-acre lot, located in the Golden Gate Estates on land more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, is hereby designated as a historical site. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Gore Nature Center shall hereafter be subject to the Historic/Archaeological Preservations Regulations of the Collier County Land Development Code as they pertain to historically designated property including all applicable incentives and restrictions. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote this ______ day of ________________, 2025. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: _________________________ By: _____________________________ Deputy Clerk Burt L. Saunders, Chairman Approved as to form and legality: ________________________________ Courtney L. DaSilva Assistant County Attorney CLD Page 9039 of 9661 3 of 4 [25-CPS-02718/1980558/1] 7 Gore Nature Center- Historic Designation 10/28/25 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A- Legal Description Page 9040 of 9661 4 of 4 [25-CPS-02718/1980558/1] 7 Gore Nature Center- Historic Designation 10/28/25 Exhibit “A” All of Tract 15 and Tract 18, Golden Gate Estates Unit No. 91, according to the Map or Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 5, Page 30, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Parcel #41501440005 Subject to easements, restrictions, and reservations of record. Page 9041 of 9661 Page 9042 of 9661 Page 9043 of 9661 Page 9044 of 9661 Page 9045 of 9661 Page 9046 of 9661 Page 9047 of 9661 Page 9048 of 9661 Page 9049 of 9661 Page 9050 of 9661 Page 9051 of 9661 Page 9052 of 9661 Page 9053 of 9661 Page 9054 of 9661 Page 9055 of 9661 Page 9056 of 9661 Page 9057 of 9661 Page 9058 of 9661 Page 9059 of 9661 Page 9060 of 9661 Page 9061 of 9661 Page 9062 of 9661 Page 9063 of 9661 Page 9064 of 9661 Gore Nature CenterHHISTORICALL DESIGNATIONN APPLICATIONPage 9065 of 9661 Post-ClosingAcquired by Collier County Government, Conservation Collier section August 8, 2025•Obtain Historical designation •Zoning & Use•Obtain Conditional Use permit (if required)•Change of Use building permit•Implement County Facilities Safety Plan•*Build ADA accessible ramp on the south side of home•Open building to the Public* Requesting Historic Designation with caveat that ADA ramp will be built in the futurePage 9066 of 9661 Dr. Robert H. Gore III•Noted research scientist, environmentalist, educator, consultant, and author•PhD in Marine Invertebrate Zoology from the University of Miami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science.•Coastal Zone Management Supervisor for the Collier County Natural Resources Management Department for five years•Over two decades, he accumulated 71 parcels, mostly contiguous, and built an Old Florida Cracker-style home on a central ten-acre parcel•Published more than seventy-five papers in the scientific and popular press, and authored several books including “The Gulf of Mexico,” “Songs from Solitude,” and “Right Smart to Say.•Dr. Gore passed away peacefully at his home on February 7, 2017 at the age of 77Page 9067 of 9661 Existing Dr. Robert H. Gore III Preserve•1980s -Dr. Robert H. Gore III Began purchasing parcels piece by piece •2018 -Gore family sold 169 acres of his land to the Conservation Collier Program•Since 2018, an additional 99 acres (36 parcels) have been acquired for a total of 279 acres•In 2018, Conservation Collier had limited funding for acquisition and decided not to purchase the 10 acres with home•Cypress Cove Landkeepers approached the County in 2024 about selling the home to Conservation CollierPage 9068 of 9661 Nature Center Building - history•11987-HouseBuiltbyGoreon10-acreproperty•20199 -- Cypresss Covee Landkeeperss (fkaa Cypresss Covee Conservancy)) formedd too purchasee thee housee andd 10-acresRENOVATIONSS (buildingg permits)•20199 -- Constructionn off elevatedd woodd deck,, walkwayy andd handicapramp•20200 -- Replacee windowss withh impactt ratedd windowss andd doors•20200 –– Neww roof,, severall renovationss inn bathrooms,, kitchen Photo from Cypress Cove LandkeepersPage 9069 of 9661 Nature Center Building •11,549squarefeetlivingarea•1,9622 squaree feett totall withh porches•2,2255 woodd deckingg •1bedroom–classroom•11 denn -- office•22 bathrooms•Livingroom•Kitchen/diningg roomPage 9070 of 9661 Nature Center Building Entry wayKitchenClassroomLiving RoomUnderneath homePage 9071 of 9661 Nature Center Building - exteriorPage 9072 of 9661 Outreach & Educational Programming •CConservationn Collierr hass committedd too continuingg too providee Collierr Countyy schooll fieldd trips•Ass staffingg allows,, otherr educationall programmingg mayy bee providedd onn thee grounds•Afterr thee appropriatee Conditionall Usee Permitt iss obtainedd thee naturee centerr mayy bee usedd byy thee public•Temporaryy restroomss willl bee availablee onsitee Photos by Cypress Cove LandkeepersPage 9073 of 9661 Public Access (existing)EExistingg traill systemm -- 22 miless onn Countyy landss maintainedd byy Conservationn Collierr staffPage 9074 of 9661 Public Access (future)PPlanss forr thee future:•Openn thee Goree Naturee Centerr forr publicc use•Days,, times,, hourss too bee determined•UseexistingCypressCoveparkinglotaspreserveparkinglotass aa formall parkingg lott doess nott exist•Openn existingg connectionn too thee Cypresss Covee Landkeeperr trailstofacilitatecommunitynature-educationprograms•Loopp systemm forr trails•Enhancedd accesss forr managementt equipmentt andd emergencyresponders•Tentativee sitee plann too bee finalizedd Conceptual trail plan has not been finalizedPage 9075 of 9661 GORE NATURE CENTER HISTORIC DESIGNATION CRITERIA 1. Association with distinctive elements of the cultural, social, ethnic, political, economic, scientiƱc, reliČious, prehistoric and architectural history that have contributed to the pattern of history in the community, Collier County, the State of Florida or the nation; or Dr. Robert H. Gore III beČan purchasinČ land in Golden Gate (state in the 1͗͘͏s. Dr. Gore was a noted research scientist, environmentalist, educator, consultant, and author. Over two decades, he accumulated ͖1 parcels totalinČ approƄimately 1͗͏ acres of mostly contiČuous vacant land. In 1͖͗͘ he completed the construction of an Old Florida Cracħer- style home on a central 1͏-acre parcel. Collier County Conservation Collier „roČram purchased the 1͏-acre property with home on AuČust ͗, ͑͏͔͑. ͑. Association with the lives of persons siČniƱcant in history; or embodiment of the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, method or materials of construction, or that possess hiČh artistic values, ŗuality of desiČn and craftsmanship, or that represent an individual architect or builder’s prominence or contribution to the development of the County, the State of Florida, or the nation; or Portion of criteria - ŜŜĺèĖÍťĖĺIJϟſĖťēϟťēôϟīĖŽôŜϟĺċϟŕôŘŜĺIJŜϟŜĖČIJĖƱèÍIJťϟĖIJϟēĖŜťĺŘƅ “he Gore bature Center was the home of Dr. Robert H. Gore III. AccordinČ to his obituary: Dr. Gore earned a „hD in aarine Invertebrate ¾ooloČy from the ˜niversity of aiami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science. He conducted research in marine bioloČy and ecoloČy with the Smithsonian Institution for ten years. He has published more than seventy-Ʊve papers in the scientiƱc and popular press, and authored several booħs includinČ Г“he Gulf of MeƄico,Г ГSonČs from Solitude,Г and ГRiČht Smart to Say.Г He was a consultant to many state and county Čovernmental aČencies, and established the Naithloriendun Wildlife Sanctuary in Southwest Florida near the iČ Cypress Swamp. He was inspired by his Črandfather, R. H. Gore Sr., publisher of the Fort [auderdale News and former Čovernor of „uerto Rico, and his father, R. H. Gore Vr. It was from this leČacy that he became a lifelonČ conservationist and shared his love of the Florida wilderness with children and adults, throuČh Čuided forest walħs and folħ music ČatherinČs at his old Florida style Cracħer home. He was also an avid and hiČhly sħilled oenoloČist, Čourmet cooħ and musician, with a passion for dulcimer, siƄ and twelve strinČ Čuitar and harmonica. Source: https:ϯϯwww.leČacy.comϯusϯobituariesϯnaplesnewsϯnameϯrobert-Čore- obituaryϦidѱ1͓͓͒1͕͔͗ Page 9076 of 9661 Portion of criteria - ôıæĺîĖıôIJťϟĺċϟťēôϟîĖŜťĖIJèťĖŽôϟèēÍŘÍèťôŘĖŜťĖèŜϟĺċϟÍϟťƅŕôϦϟŕôŘĖĺîϦϟıôťēĺîϟĺŘϟıÍťôŘĖÍīŜϟĺċϟèĺIJŜťŘŪèťĖĺIJϦϟĺŘϟťēÍťϟŕĺŜŜôŜŜϟēĖČēϟÍŘťĖŜťĖèϟŽÍīŪôŜϦϟŗŪÍīĖťƅϟĺċϟîôŜĖČIJϟÍIJîϟcraftsmanship Construction on the home was completed in 1͖͗͘. “he architectural style is ħnown as an “old-fashioned Florida Cracħer house.Ћ AccordinČ to a Fine HomebuildinČ article ϼDecember 1͗͘͘Ͻ, ““he traditional Cracħer-style house ϼnamed after early Florida settlersϽ was sŗuare in plan, raised on stilts and crowned with a cupolaϣЋ The article from Fine HomebuildinČ Čoes into detail about the construction of the home. It eƄplains issues with the water table, soft Čround, caprocħ substrate, etc. It also Čoes into detail about various construction methods and materials for “hurricane-prooƱnČ.Ћ Most of the interior walls of the home are cypress, eƄcept for the ħitchen and restrooms. There are some pecħy cypress boards in the study. ͒. [ocation of historic or prehistoric activities such as habitation, reliČious, ceremonial, burial, fortiƱcation, etc. durinČ a particular period of time, and may maintain a suƯicient deČree of environmental inteČrity to reƲect a siČniƱcant aspect of the relationship of the site’s oriČinal occupants to the environment; or Criteria 3 does not apply. 4. An historic or prehistoric site which has been severely disturbed, but which may still allow useful and representative data to be recovered; or Criteria 4 does not apply. ͔. Have yielded or are liħely to yield information on local history or prehistory; or Criteria ͔ does not apply. ͕. Derive its primary siČniƱcance from architectural or artistic distinction of historical importance; or See response to Criteria ͑, above. ͖. Is the birthplace or Črave of an historical ƱČure or is a cemetery which derives its primary siČniƱcance from Čraves of persons of transcendent importance, from aČe, distinctive desiČn features, or from association with historic events; or Criteria 7 does not apply. ͗. A buildinČ or structure removed from its oriČinal location which is siČniƱcant for architectural value, or is the sole survivinČ structure most importantly associated with an historic period, person or event; or Criteria ͗ does not apply. Page 9077 of 9661 ͘. A property primarily commemorative in intent where desiČn, aČe, tradition or symbolic value has invested it with its own historical siČniƱcance; or Several historical documents were passed alonČ which tell the story of the property. Dr. Gore named the contiČuous parcels Naithloriendun Wildlife Sanctuary. He reČularly had events on the 17͏-acre sanctuary to allow visitors to eƄplore. AmonČ the documents is a pamphlet invitinČ visitors to visit the Sanctuary by appointment for Čroups. Other Ʋyers were for speciƱc events such as the “Full Moon Forest Festival.Ћ The Naithloriendun Wildlife Sanctuary Garden and Trail Guide ϼattachedϽ provides an overview of the sanctuary. 1͏. Area contains ħnown archaeoloČical sites that have not been assessed for siČniƱcance but are liħely to conform to the criteria for siČniƱcance or areas where there is a hiČh liħelihood that unrecorded sites of potential siČniƱcance are present based on prehistoric settlement patterns and eƄistinČ topoČraphic features; or are listed in the National ReČister of Historic „laces. Criteria1͏ does not apply. Sources: “Cracħer House in a Hammocħ.Ћ Fine Homebuilding, Dec. 1͗͘͘, pp. ͕3-͕7. Naithloriendun Wildlife Sanctuary Garden and Trail Guide ϼooħletϽ Pamphlet for Naithloriendun Wildlife Sanctuary Page 9078 of 9661 Desoto BLVD SDesoto BLVD S34thAVE SE36thAVE SE38thAVE SE40thAVESE50th AVE SE48thAVE SE40th AVE SE38th AVE SE36th AVE SE34th AVE SE42nd AVE SE48th AVE SE50th AVE SEI-75 SI-75 NGOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 91APB 9 PG 9354400DeSOTO 38TH AVE SE40TH AVE SE42NDI-75 (ALLIGATOR ALLEY)SR 838SR 83856453629201345546353019143545347343118152525148333217161504912912612412512312212112812734.25114849129129.1129.2128128.1126124125121124.1121.1128.21275656.256.14453620134.145.245.136.120.113.155.15546.235.25315EE40th AVE SE38th AVE SEDesoto BLVD SI-75 SI-75 NDesoto BLVD SI-75 SI-75 NLocation MapZoning MapPetition Number: 20250010255PROJECTLOCATIONSITELOCATIONPage 9079 of 9661 Page 9080 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.JID# 2025-4620Executive SummaryRecommendation to enact an Ordinance which converts the East of 951 Ad Hoc Advisory Committee from an ad hoc committee to a permanent advisory board, renamed the Rural Golden Gate Estates Restudy Committee, and appoints the current seven members of the ad hoc advisory committee to the permanent advisory board.OBJECTIVE: To establish a permanent advisory committee to address the issues and best practices relating to the geographical area lying east of CR 951 (Collier Blvd) and north of I-75 (Alligator Alley). CONSIDERATIONS: The East of 951 Ad Hoc Advisory Committee was established on March 28, 2023, by Resolution No. 2023-54, to assist the Board of County Commissioners in compiling and identifying issues and relevant best practices relating to the geographic area lying east of CR 951 (Collier Boulevard) and north of I-75 (Alligator Alley), and to provide a forum for the citizens of this area to identify and discuss issues facing their community. The committee, originally set to sunset on August 15, 2024, was extended several times to sunset on April 8, 2026, or be converted into a permanent advisory committee. At its October 28, 2025, meeting, the Board of County Commissioners reviewed the recommendations of the East of 951 Ad Hoc Advisory Committee and voted to initiate the replacement of the East of 951 Ad Hoc Advisory Committee by converting it to the Rural Golden Gate Estates Restudy Committee (“Committee”). The functions, powers and duties of this Committee are substantially identical to that of the East of 951 Ad Hoc Advisory Committee. The Committee is composed of five regular members and two alternate members who represent a broad base of residents and business and property owners within the targeted geographic area. If the Board enacts the proposed ordinance, then the existing members of the East of 951 Ad Hoc Advisory Committee would be appointed to the Rural Golden Gate Estates Restudy Committee with two-year terms and the same seats commencing with the date of this Ordinance. They are: Name: Type of Seat: Bruce Hamels Regular Michael Ramsey Regular Kimberley Ellis Regular Robert Raines Regular Mark Teaters, Sr. Regular Aaron Zwiefel Alternate Douglas Rankin Alternate FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no growth management impact associated with this action. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed by the County Attorney, is approved as to form and legality and requires a majority vote for Board approval. -JAK RECOMMENDATION(S): That the Board of County Commissioners enacts the proposed Ordinance creating the Rural Golden Gate Estates Restudy Committee. PREPARED BY: William L. McDaniel, Jr., Commissioner District 5 ATTACHMENTS: 1. RGGERC Ordinance Page 9081 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.JID# 2025-46202. legal ad - agenda ID 25-4620 - Rural Golden Gate Estates Restudy Committee -12-9-25 BCC3. Business Impact Estimate - Agenda ID 25-4620 - Rural Golden Gate Estates Restudy Committee -12-9-25 BCC Page 9082 of 9661 Page 9083 of 9661 Page 9084 of 9661 Page 9085 of 9661 Page 9086 of 9661 Page 9087 of 9661 Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller - Crystal K. Kinzel Collier County, Florida3315 Tamiami Trail East, Ste. 102 - Naples, FL 34112-5324 Phone: (239) 252-2646Publication ConfirmationCOLLIER COUNTY STATE OF FLORIDAThe attached copy of advertisement,Business Impact Estimate – Rural Golden Gate Estates Restudy Committee – 12-9-25 BCC was published on the publically accessible websitehttps://notices.collierclerk.com as designated by Collier County, Florida on 111/19/2025. THIS IS NOT AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION. Page 9088 of 9661 Page 9089 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.KID# 2025-4641Executive SummaryThis item requires Commission members to provide ex-parte disclosure. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to amend and expand a conditional use for earth mining by adding 39.92± acres and revising the conditions of approval for property zoned Rural Agricultural (A) within the Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4) for a total of 490.62± acres located on the west side of SR 29 North, south of SR 82 in the Immokalee Planning Area in Sections 17, 18, and 19, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) review staff's findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above-referenced petition and render a decision regarding the petition; and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The Stewart Mining commercial excavation was originally approved by Resolution Number 03- 332 for 219 acres. Resolution Number 21-013 granted approval to expand the mine to 450.7 acres. This request will allow for another expansion, increasing the mine site to ±490.62 acres. The proposed area of expansion is ±39.92 acres at 3000 Edwards Grove Road, lying to the east of the existing Stewart Mining operation. The expansion area has historically been used for agricultural purposes, pasture, nurseries, and row crops, and currently includes a storage building of approximately 10,500 square feet, per Property Appraiser records. The proposed expansion site is zoned Agriculture within the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO-RLSAO-ST/W-4). Commercial excavation can be approved as a Conditional Use per LDC Section 2.03.01 A.1.c.1. The petitioner indicates that the mining operation is for the excavation of high-quality sand for beach renourishment. The proposed expansion will allow for relocation of the material processing facilities to the subject site. By relocating the material processing, the excavation limits of the existing mine expand to include the land area now occupied with processing equipment. Access to the site is via Edwards Grove Road, which connects to State Road 82. Thirteen conditions were established for the 450.7-acre mine approved by Resolution Number 21-013. For this request, those thirteen conditions are maintained with scrivener’s edits and updates, and these four conditions are added (see Exhibit C, Conditions of Approval in the Draft Resolution in Attachment A): New Condition 14 - to recognize the approved Dust Control Plan for Edwards Grove Road New Condition 15 - to note compliance with state, local, and federal laws New Condition 16 - requiring removal of vertical improvements within 12 months of completing the mining, except for improvements to be used for reclamation New Condition 17 - to note that blasting will require an Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. The petitioner indicates that the expansion will not generate additional trips to the site, as additional trucks or employees are not proposed. The trip cap of 49 pm peak hour two-way trips is maintained as Condition 6. The expansion includes a proposed preserve area of ±1.48 acres, which will be supplemented with additional vegetation to be consistent with Land Development Code requirements of Section 4.08.05 J.2. The petitioner has affirmed that the proposed Conditional Use will comply with all groundwater protection requirements for Zone W-4, which are identified in Chapter 3.06.00 of the LDC. A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan will be implemented in association with proposed mining activities to reduce or eliminate the potential for groundwater contamination via the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products or wastes. Page 9090 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.KID# 2025-4641COFFIER COMNTH LFANNINU COY Y ISSION PCCLCG: On October 16, 2025, the CCPC heard Petition CU- PL20240003054, and voted unanimously to approve. No public opposition was voiced on this item, so this petition is placed on the Summary Agenda.ENVIRONY ENTAF ADVISORH COMNCIF PEACG: This project did require the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project meets the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, Section 2-1193(m)(4) requires EAC approval for a conditional use of a commercial mine. On October 16, 2025, the CCPC, acting as the EAC, voted unanimously to approve. This item advances the Collier County Strategic Plan Objective within Community Development to encourage diverse economic opportunities by fostering a business-friendly environment. ( ISCAF IY LACT: The Conditional Use (CU) by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. There is no guarantee that the project, at build-out, will maximize its authorized level of development. However, if the CU is approved, a portion of the land could be developed, and the new development will result in an impact on Collier County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Other fees collected prior to issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. URO) TW Y ANAUEY ENT IY LACT: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the FLUE of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). On the Stewardship Overlay Map, part of the FLUM series, the site is designated “Open.” See Attachment B to the CCPC Staff Report, Consistency Memo, for staff’s finding that the proposed Conditional Use may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. Based on the TIS provided by the applicant and the 2024 AUIR, the subject Conditional Use can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP, and Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Environmental review staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site is 39.92 acres and includes an existing mine operation and an orange grove. The subject property consists of 2.30 acres of native vegetation onsite. A minimum of 0.92 acres of preservation is required; however, a 1.48-acre created preserve will be provided and dedicated to Collier County. The GMP is the prevailing document to support land-use decisions, such as this proposed conditional use. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any conditional use petition. This petition is consistent with the GMP, subject to the criteria set forth in this Conditional Use petition. FEUAF CONSIDERATIONS: Before you is a recommendation by the Planning Commission to approve amending and expanding a conditional use for earth mining by adding 39.92+/- acres and revising the conditions of approval for property zoned Rural Agricultural (A) within the Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4). A conditional use is a use permitted in a particular zoning district, subject to certain restrictions. All testimony given must be under oath. The attached report and recommendations of the Planning Commission are advisory only and are not binding on you. The petitioner has the burden of demonstrating that the necessary requirements have been met, and you may question the petitioner or staff to satisfy yourself that the necessary criteria have been satisfied. In addition to meeting the Page 9091 of 9661 12/9/2025Item # 17.KID# 2025-4641necessary criteria, you may place such conditions and safeguards as you deem appropriate to allow the use, provided that there is competent, substantial evidence that these additional conditions and safeguards are necessary to promote the public health, safety, welfare, morals, order, comfort, convenience, appearance, or the general welfare of the neighborhood. As a further condition of approval of the conditional use, you may require that suitable areas for streets, public rights-of-way, schools, parks, and other public facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use, subject to appropriate impact fee credits.Approval or denial of the petition is by Resolution. Should this item be denied, Florida Statutes section 125.022(3) requires the County to provide written notice to the applicant citing applicable portions of an ordinance, rule, statute, or other legal authority for the denial. This item has been approved as to form and legality and requires an affirmative vote of four for BZA approval. (HFAC) RECOY Y ENDATIONPSG: To approve Petition CU-PL20240003054, Stewart Materials Expansion, subject to the conditions incorporated in the Resolution. LRELARED BH: Ray Bellows, AICP, Zoning Manager ATTACWY ENTS: 1. CCPC Staff Report - Stewart Materials Exp CU 2. Att A - Resolution 3. Att B - Consistency Review 4. Att C - Applicant Backup Material 5. Att D - NIM Documentation 6. Affidavit of Sign Posting 7. legal ad - agenda ID 25-4641 - Stewart Mine expansion CU-PL20240003054 - 12-9-25 BCC Page 9092 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 1 of 11 October 3, 2025 STAFF REPORTTO:COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING & ZONING DIVISION GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE:OCTOBER 16, 2025 SUBJECT: PL20240003054; STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE ______________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner(s)/Applicant: Agent: Barfield Property Holdings, LLC Davidson Engineering P.O. BOX 2357 Brandon T. Copper, P.E. LaBelle, FL 33935 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 Southwestern Properties, LLC Nick T. Stewart, Manager (Applicant) 2875 Jupiter Park Dr., Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Southern Reserves, LLC Nick T. Stewart, Manager (Applicant) 2875 Jupiter Park Dr., Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission consider expansion of the Conditional Use for earthmining approved by the Conditional Use Resolution No. 03-332, as amended, pursuant to Section 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code, by adding 39.92+ acres for a total of 490.62+ acres and revising the conditions of approval for property located in the Agricultural with Mobile Home Overlay and Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO- RLSAO-ST/W-4). Page 9093 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 2 of 11 October 3, 2025 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject site is located on the east side of the terminating point of Edwards Grove Road, identified as Parcel Number 00065402009, with an address of 3000 Edwards Grove Road, Immokalee, FL 34142. It is approximately one mile south of State Road 82 in Section 17, Township 46, Range 30, Collier County, Florida. (See location map below.) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner is requesting Conditional Use approval for expansion of the existing Stewart Mining commercial excavation onto ±39.92 acres at 3000 Edwards Grove Road. The subject site lies to the east of the existing Stewart Mining operation. The site has historically been used for agricultural uses, pasture, nurseries, and row crops, and the site includes a storage building of approximately 10,500 square feet per Property Appraiser records. The existing mine operates per Conditional Use approvals granted by Resolution Number 03-332 for 219 acres and Resolution Number 21-013, which approved expansion of the mine to 450.7 acres. This request will allow for another expansion, increasing the mine site to ±490.62 acres. The petitioner indicates that the mining operation is for the excavation of high-quality sand for beach renourishment. The proposed expansion will allow for relocation of the material processing facilities to the subject site. By relocating the material processing, the excavation limits of the existing mine expand to include the land area now occupied with processing equipment. Page 9094 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 3 of 11 October 3, 2025 The current approved Conditional Use Master Plan, per Resolution 2021-013, and the proposed Master Plan are displayed below. Current approved Conditional Use Master Plan per Resolution 21-013 Proposed Conditional Use Master Plan, included in Attachment A - Draft Resolution Page 9095 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 4 of 11 October 3, 2025 The proposed expansion site is zoned Agriculture within the Mobile Home Overlay District,Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO-RLSAO-ST/W-4). Commercial excavation can be approved as aConditional Use per LDC Section 2.03.01 A.1.c.1.The proposed Master Plan shows access points to the existing mine and to the new equipment area/processing plant will remain as they exist today, and a new connecting driveway and material transfer pipes will connect the two sites. An access road is proposed around the perimeter of the proposed expansion, which will meet or exceed the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and Collier County requirements for fire maneuverability. Inset 1 from Master Concept Plan (Exhibit B), included in Attachment A – Draft Resolution Page 9096 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 5 of 11 October 3, 2025 Thirteen conditions were established for the 450.7-acre mine approved by Resolution Number 21-013. For this request, those thirteen conditions are maintained with scrivener’s edits and updates, and these four conditions are added (see Exhibit C, Conditions of Approval in the Draft Resolution in Attachment A): New Condition 14 - to recognize the approved Dust Control Plan for Edwards Grove Road New Condition 15 - to note compliance with state, local, and federal laws New Condition 16 - requiring removal of vertical improvements within 12 months of completing the mining, except for improvements to be used for reclamation New Condition 17 - to note that blasting will require an Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. The petitioner indicates that the expansion will not generate additional trips to the site, as additional trucks or employees are not proposed. The trip cap of 49 pm peak hour two-way trips is maintained as Condition 6. LDC section 4.08.05 requires that 40 percent of native vegetation be set aside within a preserve area. The petitioner has indicated that there are ±2.30-acres of native vegetation on the subject site, requiring ±0.92 acres for preservation. The native vegetation on-site is low quality, so the petitioner has proposed that the native vegetation be relocated to a contiguous preserve area along the southern property line and enhanced. The proposed preserve area is ±1.48 acres and will be supplemented with additional vegetation to be consistent with Land Development Code requirements of Section 4.08.05 J.2. The petitioner has provided a replanting plan prepared by an environmental consultant as part of this submittal package. The petitioner has affirmed that the proposed Conditional Use will comply with all groundwater protection requirements for Zone W-4, which are identified in Chapter 3.06.00 of the LDC. A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan will be implemented in association with proposed mining activities to reduce or eliminate the potential for groundwater contamination via the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products or wastes. [Remainder of page is intentionally blank.] Page 9097 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 6 of 11 October 3, 2025 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding the boundaries of the subject property, which is zoned Agriculture with the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, with Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO-RLSAO-ST/W-4): North: Agricultural and vacant/undeveloped, with a zoning designation of Agriculture with the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, with Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO- RLSAO-ST/W-4) East: Agricultural and single-family residential, zoned Agriculture with the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, with Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO-RLSAO-ST/W-4) South: Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida (TIITF) State-owned land, with a zoning designation of Agriculture within the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay, with Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (A-MHO- RLSAO-ST/W-4) West: Agricultural with excavation/mining Conditional Use (CU-PL-19-808), with a zoning designation of Agriculture within the Mobile Home Overlay District, Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (A-MHO-RLSAO) Page 9098 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 7 of 11 October 3, 2025 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the FLUE of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). On the Stewardship Overlay Map, part of the FLUM series, the site is designated “Open.” See Attachment B, Consistency Memo, for staff’s finding that the proposed Conditional Use may be deemed consistent with the FLUE. Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant’s June 27, 2022, Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using the 2024 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links, the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” Staff findings: According to the TIS provided with this petition, the proposed Stewart Mine Operation will generate a projected total of +/- 49 PM peak hour trips on the adjacent roadway, SR-29 and SR-82. The trips generated will occur on the following adjacent roadway network links: Page 9099 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 8 of 11 October 3, 2025 Roadway/Link Link Current Peak Hour Peak Direction Volume/Peak Direction Projected P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic (1) 2024 Level of Service (LOS) 2024 Remaining Capacity State Road 29/85.0 9th St. to CR-29A North 900/SB 17/SB D (2) 79 State Road 29/86.0 CR-29A to SR-82 900/SB 17/NB D (2) 126 State Road 82/88.0 SR-29 to Lee County Line 800/SB 25/SB F (2) (157) 1. Source for P.M. Peak Hour/Peak Direction Project Traffic is June 27, 2022; Traffic Impact Statement provided by the petitioner. 2. Road links are the jurisdiction of FDOT with planned improvements in the current work program and/or under construction. Based on the TIS provided by the applicant, the 2024 AUIR, the subject Conditional Use can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Planning staff finds this petition consistent with the GMP. Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff have found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site is 39.92 acres and includes an existing mine operation and an orange grove. The subject property consists of 2.30 acres of native vegetation onsite. A minimum of 0.92 acres preservation is required; however, a 1.48 acre created preserve will be provided and dedicated to Collier County. GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions, such as this proposed conditional use. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any zoning action. This petition can be found consistent with the GMP. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff have completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based. This evaluation is completed as part of the Conditional Use Findings, which are provided below. In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the conditional use petition to address environmental concerns. The property is located within Rural Lands Stewardship Overlay (RLSO). The minimum required preserve is 0.92 acres (40% of 2.30 acres). The applicant is proposing a recreated preservation area, which will be 1.48 acres. The existing native Page 9100 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 9 of 11 October 3, 2025 vegetated area is impacted by invasive exotic vegetation, and the location conflicted with the proposed project design. The recreated preservation area (1.48 acres) will meet all the standards established by LDC Section 3.07.05 H.1. e. The environmental data indicates the proposed project is in an area that has the potential to contain a variety of protected animal species. One alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) was observed within an existing reservoir located onsite. Consultation with the Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) will be conducted to reduce and minimize any impact on the alligators. The property contains habitat commonly occupied by caracaras (Caracara cheriway); however, no documented nest was found onsite. Consultation with USFWS and FWCC regarding guidelines and permitting requirements may be required prior to construction. The Environmental Data indicates the subject property falls within FWS Secondary Florida Panther (Felis concolor coryi) habitat. There were no observations of panthers onsite, and the telemetry data indicate Florida panthers are not abundant within the boundary of the proposed project. The property does not contain habitats preferred by the Florida panther; therefore, consultation with FWS to obtain panther mitigation is unlikely. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) wildlife data indicates the presence of Black Bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) in the area. A black bear management plan will need to be included in PPL or SDP review. Additionally, the property contains potential habitat for the Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi). Consultation with the US Federal Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) regarding guidelines and permitting requirements will be required before construction. Additionally, the subject property is located within core foraging ranges for three Wood stork (Mycteria americana) colonies. However, consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for mitigation is unlikely since the reservoirs found onsite don’t appear to contain wood stork foraging habitat. An active caracara (Caracara cheriway) nest was documented north of the project site. Consultation with USFWS and FWCC regarding guidelines and permitting requirements will be required prior to construction. Lastly, the property is in Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay zones (ST/W-4) and must address groundwater protection in accordance with LDC Section 3.06.12. Z. Stormwater Management Review: The proposed mine expansion includes 39.92 acres and is located adjacent to the larger existing mining operation, which covers 450.70 acres and was approved under FDEP permit No. 0228414-002. Although adjacent to the existing mine, this new proposed site stormwater system will remain independent from the larger project and will meet required water quality and water quantity via an onsite dry retention system contained within the project’s perimeter. The proposed dry retention swale system is designed with sufficient capacity to ensure zero discharge up to the 100-year, 3-day storm event. To provide additional safeguards, the perimeter containment berm will also include an impervious liner membrane. No impacts to water quality or runoff to adjacent properties are anticipated from these improvements. In addition, site development approval will be required from Collier County, to ensure that local development standards are maintained and that proposed stormwater system is designed consistent with relevant LDC and County Ordinances for water quality and water quantity, during both the interim construction phase and final implementation. Page 9101 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 10 of 11 October 3, 2025 Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval. Landscape Review: The landscape buffers labeled on the Master Plan are consistent with the LDC. Historic Preservation Review: The petitioner provided a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey dated March 2022. At its December 16, 2022, meeting, the Collier County Historic and Archaeological Preservation Board (HAPB) voted unanimously to accept the findings that the proposed undertaking will result in no historic properties being affected. Conditional Use Findings: Before any conditional use recommendation can be offered to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA), the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) must make findings that: 1) approval of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public; and 2) all specific requirements for the individual conditional use will be met; and 3) satisfactory provisions have been made concerning the following matters, where applicable: 1. Section 2.03.01 A.1.c.1. of the LDC permits extraction or earthmining as a conditional use in the Agriculture zoning district. The requested use for an “extraction or earthmining” operation is allowed as a conditional use in the Agriculture zoning district, subject to Section 10.08.00 of the LDC's conditional uses procedures. 2. Consistency with the Land Development Code (LDC) and the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Staff has found that this request is consistent with the GMP, and the use as proposed is consistent with the LDC; development will be subject to all requirements and standards implemented through the excavation permit and site development plan review process. 3. Ingress and egress to the property and proposed structures thereon, with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. Ingress and egress to the subject site are proposed using existing Edwards Grove Road access points. The petitioner has indicated that the expansion of the existing excavation operation will not generate additional trips to the site, as additional trucks or employees are not proposed. An access road is proposed around the perimeter of the proposed expansion, which will meet or exceed NFPA and Collier County requirements for fire maneuverability. 4. The effect the Conditional Use would have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic, or odor effects. The surrounding uses are agricultural operations, with an existing commercial excavation operation located on the parcel to the west, which will create a unified development with the Page 9102 of 9661 CU-PL20240003054 STEWART MATERIALS EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE Page 11 of 11 October 3, 2025 subject site. Although not currently under consideration, should the petitioner seek to conduct blasting operations, a nuisance mitigation plan will need to be provided at the time of Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. 5. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. The proposed operations are compatible with existing adjacent agricultural uses. The conditional use for the existing operation approved by Resolution Number 21-013 did not prohibit blasting, and the petitioner seeks to maintain the right to blast should the need arise. Should the petitioner seek to conduct blasting operations, a nuisance mitigation plan will need to be provided at the time of Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This project does require the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project does meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, Section 2-1193(m)(4), a conditional use of a commercial mine requires EAC approval. Environmental Planning staff recommends approval of the proposed petition. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The NIM was held on April 30, 2025, at Immokalee Community Park, located at 321 N 1st St, Immokalee, FL 34142, with the option to attend remotely. No members of the public were present or participating remotely. The applicant’s agent was prepared to start the presentation at 5:30 p.m.; however, no presentation was given due to no participants in-person or virtually. The meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m. See Attachment D for the NIM documentation. CONCURRENT PETITIONS: Two other applications are in process for this site. Site Improvement Plan PL20250007418 and Excavation Permit PL20240007652 are both under review by Development Review staff. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office has reviewed this staff report on September 26, 2025. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) recommend approval of Petition CU-PL20240003054, Stewart Materials Expansion, to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA), subject to conditions outlined in the Draft Resolution. Attachments: A. Draft Resolution B. FLUE Consistency Memo C. Application/Backup documents D. NIM Documentation Page 9103 of 9661 [24-CPS-02512/1962490/1]32 Stewart Materials Expansion / PL20240003054 fka Edwards Grove Road Mine 9/9/25 1 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 03-332, AS AMENDED, WHICH ESTABLISHED A CONDITIONAL USE FOR EARTHMINING, TO EXPAND THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR EARTHMINING PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY ADDING 39.92± ACRES AND REVISING THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE MOBILE HOME OVERLAY (MHO), THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY (RLSAO), AND WELLFIELD RISK MANAGEMENT SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY ZONE W-4 (ST/W-4) FOR A TOTAL OF 490.62± ACRES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF SR 29 NORTH, SOUTH OF SR 82 IN THE IMMOKALEE PLANNING AREA IN SECTIONS 17, 18 AND 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (PL20240003054) WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 67–1246, Laws of Florida, and Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on Collier County the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended) which includes a Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance establishing regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of Conditional Uses; and WHEREAS, on September 23, 2003, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved Resolution No. 03-332 which provided for the establishment of a conditional use “1” for earthmining in the “A-MHO” Rural Agricultural zoning district within the Mobile Home Overlay; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2021, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved Resolution 21- 13 amending Resolution 03-332 by adding 231.73± acres to the conditional use acreage; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals (Board), being the duly appointed and constituted planning board for the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of expanding the Page 9104 of 9661 [24-CPS-02512/1962490/1]32 Stewart Materials Expansion / PL20240003054 fka Edwards Grove Road Mine 9/9/25 2 of 3 conditional use for excavation and related processing and production pursuant to Section 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code by adding 39.92± acres to the conditional use for property in an Agricultural (A) zoning district within a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4) on the property hereinafter described, and the Collier County Planning Commission has made findings that the granting of the Conditional Use will not adversely affect the public interest and the specific requirements governing the Conditional Use have been met and that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Subsection 10.08.00.D. of the Land Development Code; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in a public meeting assembled and the Board having considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: Petition Number CU-PL20240003054 filed by Brandon T. Copper, P.E. of Davidson Engineering, be and the same is hereby approved for a Conditional Use to amend Resolution No. 03-332, as amended, to expand the conditional use for excavation and related processing and production pursuant to Section 2.03.01.A.1.c.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code by adding 39.92± acres to the conditional use for property in an Agricultural (A) zoning district within a Mobile Home Overlay (MHO), the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO), and Wellfield Risk Management Special Treatment Overlay Zone W-4 (ST/W-4) for the property hereinafter described in Exhibit A, totaling 490.62± acres, in accordance with the Conceptual Site Plan described in Exhibit B, and subject to the conditions in Exhibit C. Exhibits A, B, and C are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second, and super-majority vote, this ____ day of _______________, 2025. ATTEST: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: __________________________ By: __________________________________ , Deputy Clerk Burt L. Saunders, Chairman Page 9105 of 9661 [24-CPS-02512/1962490/1]32 Stewart Materials Expansion / PL20240003054 fka Edwards Grove Road Mine 9/9/25 3 of 3 Approved as to form and legality: _________________________ Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A - Legal Description Exhibit B - Conceptual Site Plan Exhibit C - Conditions of Approval Page 9106 of 9661 ______________9-9-25 Page 1 of 3 Page 9107 of 9661 EXHIBIT A Page 2 of 3 Page 9108 of 9661 Page 3 of 3Page 9109 of 9661 MASTER CONCEPT PLANEXHIBIT BREVISED JUNE 30, 2025SHEET NO:4365 Radio Road, Suite 201Naples, Florida 34104P: 239.434.6060Company Cert. of AuthorizationNo. 00009496REVISIONSDATE:REV.DESCRIPTIONAS NOTEDSCALE:STEWART MATERIALSLEGENDPREVIOUSLY PERMITTED LAND USE SUMMARYSEE INSET 1INSET 11" = 600'SCALE:1" = 1000'SCALE:PROPOSED LAND USE SUMMARYPRESERVE CALCULATIONSPage 9110 of 9661 EXHIBIT B Stewart Mining CU – PL20240003054 Exhibit C – Conditions of Approval June 30, 2025 www.davidsonengineering.com Strikethrough denotes a deletion, underline denotes an addition. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL EXHIBIT C 1. Edwards Road Grove Mine Conditional Use shall be limited to what is depicted on the “Master Concept Plan, revised 11/03/2020 June 30, 2025.” Prepared by Davidson Engineering, Inc. 2. The petitioner shall obtain a South Florida Water Management District Agricultural Surface Water Management Permit or permit modification for this site, if applicable. 3. The site shall be cleared of all exotic vegetation and maintained exotic- free in perpetuity. 4. Material hauling activities are permitted from 5:00 a.m. to 5:00 p. m., Monday through Saturday and 24 hours a day Monday through Sunday for excavation and processing activities. 5. The excavation shall be contained by a berm constructed to the height of the 100- year flood elevation. Unless the berm contains adequate clay content to slow the flow of water (as determined by the Collier County Engineering Division), the berm shall contain a membrane impervious to water. 6. The site shall be limited to a maximum of 49 pm peak hour, two- way trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at time of application for SDP/ SDPA or subdivision plat approval, or based on an alternate methodology accepted by staff at time of application for SDP/ SDPA in accordance with the County's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) guidelines in Resolution No. 2006-299, as it may be amended. 7. Evidence of U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) accepted mitigation for impacts to panthers, woodstorks, Florida black bear and other listed species will be required prior to excavation Site Improvement Plan (SIP) permit approval, if applicable. 8. A littoral shelf planting area to commence shall be constructed during the reclamation phase of the project shall be shown as depicted on the approved excavation permit (PL20200002472). for this petition and shall meet the current standards of the Land Development Code at time of submittal of the Commercial Excavation Permit. 9. Prior to any vehicular use of the additional 231.73± 39.92± acres, the owner shall post two (2) signs along the on- site entry drive, clearly visible to vehicles entering and leaving the site, providing information regarding potential panther presence and notifying drivers of the need to use caution. Sign wording, placement and size will be reviewed and approved by the Collier County Environmental Staff during review of the Commercial Excavation Application or other local development order, whichever is the first to allow vehicular use of the 231.73± 39.92± acres. 10. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. Page 9111 of 9661 Stewart Mining CU – PL20240003054 Exhibit C – Conditions of Approval June 30, 2025 www.davidsonengineering.com Strikethrough denotes a deletion, underline denotes an addition. 11. Pursuant to Section 125. 022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. 12. The westernmost 200 feet of the parcel 00065520004 shall be reserved for road right-of-way, for the purpose of the future Little League Road extension. Within 90 days of receipt of written notification by Collier County Transportation that the property is needed, the owner will convey the requested property to the County, for fair market value on the date of the conveyance. 13. The petitioner shall be responsible for maintenance of Edwards Grove Road, from State Road 82 to the subject 450.7± 490.62± acre property line, for the duration of the mining operation. Edwards Grove Road shall be paved a minimum of 22 feet in width and a depth of 1.5 inches of asphalt or asphalt millings. A Dust Control Plan, for Edwards Grove Road, shall be submitted with the Excavation Permit. 14. Petitioner’s dust control plan for Edwards Grove Road, required per Collier County Resolution 21- 13 and approved under Excavation Permit No. PL20200002472, shall remain in force and effect for the duration of the mining operation. 15. The mining operations shall be conducted in compliance with the laws of the State of Florida, Collier County Government, and the Federal government. 16. Upon completion of mining activities, all buildings, equipment, buffers and berms shall be removed within twelve (12) months unless said buildings and equipment will be used in the reclamation process. 17. The petitioner reserves the right to have the ability to blast in the future. Should blasting be required, the petitioner will file an Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. Page 9112 of 9661 Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 •239-252-2400 •www.colliercountyfl.gov/ Growth Management Community Development DepartmentZoning DivisionCONSISTENCY REVIEW MEMORANDUM To: Eric Ortman, Planner III, Zoning From: Stephenne Barter, Planner II, Comprehensive Planning Date: July 5, 2024 Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review PETITION NUMBER: PL20240003054 PETITION NAME: Stewart Materials Expansion (CU) REQUEST: To obtain a Conditional Use (CU) for a ±39.78-acre site request is to allow for the proposed expansion of an existing commercial excavation operation. LOCATION: The subject site abuts the east side of Edwards Grove Road, with the proposed expansion site approximately 1.1 miles south of SR 82 and approximately 1 mile west of SR 29, in Section 18, Township 46 South, Range 29 East (Immokalee). COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is designated Agricultural/Rural and within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSAO) as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). On the Stewardship Overlay Map, part of the FLUM series, the site is designated “Open.” Relevant to this petition, The Agricultural/Rural Land Use Designation is for those areas that are remote from the existing development pattern, lack public facilities and services, are environmentally sensitive or are in agricultural production. Urbanization is not promoted, therefore most allowable land uses are of low intensity in an effort to maintain and promote the rural character of these lands. The proposed earthmining, and related processing is listed as an allowable use in this designation in the FLUE. The FLUE also states that the goal of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay is to address the long-term needs of residents and property owners within the Immokalee Area Study boundary of the Collier County Rural and Agricultural Area Assessment by retaining agricultural activities, directing incompatible uses away from wetlands and upland habitat, enabling the conversion of rural land to other uses in appropriate locations, discouraging urban sprawl, and encouraging development that employs creative land use planning techniques through the use of established incentives. RLSA Policies 1.4 and 1.5 provide that properties in the RLSA may develop per the “Baseline Standards” (uses allowed by the underlying “A” zoning and Agricultural/Rural FLUM designation) which allow earth mining by conditional use. Page 9113 of 9661 Growth Management Community Development • Planning & Zoning 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, FL 34104 • 239-252-2400 • www.colliercountyfl.gov/ In reviewing Policies 5.6 and 7.1 - 7.4 (shown below) of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) staff provides the following analysis in [bracketed bold text.] FLUE Policy 5.6 requires development to be compatible with, and complementary to, surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code. Comprehensive Planning leaves these reviews for, and determinations for making further recommendations on, compatibility and complementary matters to the Zoning Services staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety. Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [The subject property does not front on a collector or arterial roadway.] Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [Given the site and the use proposed as an expansion of a single development project, no road has been proposed. Additionally, staff finds it unnecessary to provide a loop road due to the nature of the proposed use.] Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. [The applicant’s “Narrative & Evaluation Criteria” states, “Interconnections to the property to the West are proposed, to achieve the unified excavation.” Given the nature of the proposed use as well as its location, staff believes interconnections to adjacent lands other than the one to the east, of the existing CU site may not be appropriate or beneficial.] Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [This Policy addresses development characteristics mostly not applicable to the commercial excavation operation being proposed. The site will not be open to the public. Sidewalks/pathways will be provided only as necessary for employees within the site.] Based upon the above analysis, the proposed Conditional Use may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. PETITION ON CITYVIEW cc: James Sabo, AICP, Planning Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section Ray Bellows, Planning Manager, Zoning Services Section Page 9114 of 9661 Revised 5/18/2018 Provide to Agents G:\CDES Planning Services\Current\Zoning Staff Information\Job Aides or Help Guides HEARING PACKAGE CHECKLIST Return this form with printed materialsA. Backup provided by the County PlannerThe Planner is responsible for all required data included in the printed packets of information for the Hearing Examiner (Hex) or the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC). DO NOT ACCEPT DUPLICATES OF ANY DOCUMENTS. MAKE SURE ONLY THE LATEST, ACCEPTED/APPROVED COPY OF THE BELOW DOCUMENTATION. PLEASE CONFIRM THE DOCUMENTS ARE IN THE ORDER DESCRIBED IN “BACKUP PROVIDED BY APPLICANT.” Planner responsible for providing the County Attorney-drafted Ordinance for PUDs and placing in backup materials. AGENTS DO NOT INCLUDE THE PUD DOCUMENT – STAFF PROVIDES THIS TO THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WHEN THE ORDINANCE IS DRAFTED FOR A PUD. THE FINAL PUD ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION IS THE FIRST ITEM AFTER THE STAFF REPORT. [FOR HEX, THE REQUESTED LANGUAGE/ PROPOSED PLAN IS THE FIRST ITEM AFTER THE STAFF REPORT] B. Backup provided by Applicant: PLEASE PROVIDE THE DOCUMENTS IN THE ORDER DESCRIBED BELOW. DO NOT PROVIDE DUPLICATES OF ANY DOCUMENTS. PROVIDE ONLY THE LATEST, ACCEPTED/APPROVED COPY OF THE BELOW DOCUMENTATION. IF THE BACKUP PROVIDED BY APPLICANT IS IN DISARRAY-MEANING IT IS NOT IN THE PROPER ORDER AND/OR THE APPLICANT PROVIDES MULTIPLE DUPLICATES-THE APPLICANT COULD LOSE ITS HEARING DATE. ____ Application, to include but not limited to the following: ____ Narrative of request ____ Property Information ____ Property Ownership Disclosure Form ____ Any other documents required by the specific petition type; such as a variance, a boat dock extension; PUD amendment, rezone request, etc. ____ Disclosure of Property Ownership Interest (if there is additional documentation aside from disclosure form) tĂŝǀĞƌZĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚ Traffic Impact Study (TIS) N/A N/A____ Affidavit of Unified Control ____ Affidavit of Representation ____ Drawings (may include Cross-Section (for BDEs generally), proposed Boat Dock(s) with Water depth, location maps etc.) E ͲůƌĞĂĚLJWƌŽǀŝĚĞĚNIM Information (Sign in sheet, notes, minutes and transcript/or summary) /ŶĐůƵĚĞϯƚŚƵŵďŶĂŝůĚƌŝǀĞƐŽĨǀŝĚĞŽĂŶĚͬŽƌĂƵĚŝŽ Eͬ ____ Environmental Data Historical/Archeological Survey or Waiver N/A____ Utility Letter N/A____ Deviation Justifications Page 9115 of 9661 Revised 5/18/2018 Provide to Agents G:\CDES Planning Services\Current\Zoning Staff Information\Job Aides or Help Guides ____ Boundary Survey ____ Other documents, as needed, on a case-by-case basis such as relevant prior Ordinances, Conditional Uses, historical documents, any “private or legal” agreements affecting the PUD etc. ___ Submerged Resource Surveys may be included here if required. ____ CD with only one pdf file for all documents in the same order as the packets are put together. They must be in the same order. I understand that by submitting the above materials, it is the agent’s/applicant’s responsibility to ensure all materials are in the same order for all copies of backup materials to provide to the Hex/CCPC and the CD must contain the documents in one pdf file (not multiple files) in the same order as the printed materials. It is the agent’s responsibility to ensure no documentation is left out. ________________________________________ Signature of Agent Representative Date ________________________________________ Printed Name of Signing Agent Representative N/A ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌ͕W͘͘ ϵͬϮϰͬϮϬϮϱ Page 9116 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϭŽĨϭϮ WW>/Ed KEdd /E&KZDd/KE %( $:$5( 7+$7 &2//,(5 &2817< +$6 /2%%<,67 5(*8/$7,216 *8,'( <2856(/)$&&25',1*/<$1'(1685(7+$7<28$5(,1&203/,$1&( :,7+7+(6(5(*8/$7,216 A CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS A MINOR CONDITIONAL USE TO BE HEARD BY THE OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER EĂŵĞŽĨWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJKǁŶĞƌ;ƐͿ͗     EĂŵĞŽĨƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚŝĨĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚƚŚĂŶŽǁŶĞƌ͗ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚLJ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ͗ Ğůů͗ &Ădž͗ ͲDĂŝůĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗   EĂŵĞŽĨŐĞŶƚ;ƐͿ͗   &ŝƌŵ͗ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚLJ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ͗ Ğůů͗ &Ădž͗ ͲDĂŝůĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ $SSOLFDWLRQ IRU 3XEOLF +HDULQJ IRU &RQGLWLRQDO 8VH/'& VXEVHFWLRQ &KDSWHURI WKH $GPLQLVWUDWLYH &RGH %DUILHOG3URSHUW\+ROGLQJV//&Southwestern Properties, LLC;6RXWKHUQ5HVHUYHV//& Nick T. Stewart 2875 Jupiter Park Dr., Suite 100 Jupiter FL 33458 561-972-4517 nick@stewartmaterials.com Brandon 7Copper, 3( Davidson Engineering 4365 Radio Rd, Suite 201 Naples FL 34104 239-434-6060 brandon@davidsonengineering.com Page 9117 of 9661 ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϮŽĨϭϮ ^^K/d/KE^ WZKWZdz /E&KZDd/KE ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͗>ŝƐƚĂůůƌĞŐŝƐƚĞƌĞĚ,ŽŵĞKǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ;ƐͿƚŚĂƚĐŽƵůĚďĞĂĨĨĞĐƚĞĚďLJƚŚŝƐƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͘WƌŽǀŝĚĞ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƐŚĞĞƚƐ ŝĨ ŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJ͘ /ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ ĐĂŶ ďĞ ĨŽƵŶĚ ŽŶ ƚŚĞ ŽĂƌĚ ŽĨ ŽƵŶƚLJ ŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶĞƌ͛ƐǁĞďƐŝƚĞĂƚŚƚƚƉ͗ͬͬǁǁǁ͘ĐŽůůŝĞƌŐŽǀ͘ŶĞƚͬ/ŶĚĞdž͘ĂƐƉdž͍ƉĂŐĞсϳϳϰ͘ EĂŵĞŽĨ,ŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͗ DĂŝůŝŶŐĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚLJ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ EĂŵĞŽĨ,ŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͗ DĂŝůŝŶŐĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚLJ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ EĂŵĞŽĨ,ŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͗ DĂŝůŝŶŐĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚLJ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ EĂŵĞŽĨ,ŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͗ DĂŝůŝŶŐĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚLJ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ EĂŵĞŽĨ,ŽŵĞŽǁŶĞƌƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͗ DĂŝůŝŶŐĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗ ŝƚLJ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ KŶ ƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞ ƉĂŐĞ͕ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ Ă ĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚ ůĞŐĂů ĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ ĐŽǀĞƌĞĚ ďLJ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͗ x /Ĩ ƚŚĞ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ ŝŶǀŽůǀĞƐ ĐŚĂŶŐĞƐ ƚŽ ŵŽƌĞ ƚŚĂŶ ŽŶĞ njŽŶŝŶŐ ĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ͕ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ ƐŚĂůů ŝŶĐůƵĚĞ ƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞůĞŐĂůĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶĨŽƌƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŝŶǀŽůǀĞĚŝŶĞĂĐŚĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ͖ x dŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ ƐŚĂůů ƐƵďŵŝƚϰĐŽƉŝĞƐ ŽĨĂƌĞĐĞŶƚ ƐƵƌǀĞLJ ;ĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚ ǁŝƚŚŝŶ ƚŚĞ ůĂƐƚ Ɛŝdž ŵŽŶƚŚƐ͕ ŵĂdžŝŵƵŵϭΗƚŽϰϬϬΖƐĐĂůĞͿ͕ŝĨƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƚŽĚŽƐŽĂƚƚŚĞƉƌĞͲĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͖ĂŶĚ x dŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ ŝƐ ƌĞƐƉŽŶƐŝďůĞ ĨŽƌ ƐƵƉƉůLJŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ĐŽƌƌĞĐƚ ůĞŐĂů ĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͘/ĨƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĂƌŝƐĞ ĐŽŶĐĞƌŶŝŶŐƚŚĞůĞŐĂůĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͕ĂŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌΖƐĐĞƌƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŽƌƐĞĂůĞĚƐƵƌǀĞLJŵĂLJďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͘ WƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ/͘͘EƵŵďĞƌ͗   WůĂƚŽŽŬ͗ WĂŐĞη͗ ^ĞĐƚŝŽŶͬdŽǁŶƐŚŝƉͬZĂŶŐĞ͗ͬ ͬ ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ͗ >Žƚ͗ ůŽĐŬ͗ DĞƚĞƐΘŽƵŶĚƐĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͗  ^ŝnjĞŽĨWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͗Ĩƚ͘y Ĩƚ͘с dŽƚĂů^Ƌ͘&ƚ͘ ĐƌĞƐ͗ ĚĚƌĞƐƐͬ 'ĞŶĞƌĂů >ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ^ƵďũĞĐƚ WƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͗ Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline Payment GuideE-Permitting Guides Multiple parcels, See attachedVXSSOHPHQW See legal exhibit 490.62 2315 Edwards Grove Rd, (GZDUGV*URYH5G(GZDUGV*URYH5GImmokalee, FL 43142 Page 9118 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϯŽĨϭϮ ŽŶŝŶŐ >ĂŶĚhƐĞE ^  t /Ĩ ƚŚĞ ŽǁŶĞƌ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƐƵďũĞĐƚƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ ŽǁŶƐ ĐŽŶƚŝŐƵŽƵƐ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ ƉůĞĂƐĞ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚ ůĞŐĂů ĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ĞŶƚŝƌĞ ĐŽŶƚŝŐƵŽƵƐ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͗ ;/Ĩ ƐƉĂĐĞ ŝƐ ŝŶĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞ͕ ĂƚƚĂĐŚ ŽŶ Ă ƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞƉĂŐĞͿ ^ĞĞůĞŐĂůĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶĂŶĚƐƵƌǀĞLJŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘ ^ĞĐƚŝŽŶͬdŽǁŶƐŚŝƉͬZĂŶŐĞ͗ͬ ͬ >Žƚ͗ ůŽĐŬ͗ ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ͗ WůĂƚŽŽŬ͗ WĂŐĞη͗ WƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ/͘͘EƵŵďĞƌ͗ DĞƚĞƐΘŽƵŶĚƐĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͗ dLJƉĞ ŽĨ ŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů hƐĞ͗ dŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŝƐƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝŶŐĂĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƵƐĞ ĂƐĂůůŽǁĞĚ͕ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽ>ƐĞĐƚŝŽŶϮ͘Ϭϯ͘ϬϬ͕ŽĨƚŚĞ njŽŶŝŶŐ ĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ ĨŽƌ WƌĞƐĞŶƚ hƐĞŽĨ ƚŚĞ WƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͗ ^ĞĞďĞůŽǁ͘ :Ed KE/E' E >E h^ KE/d/KE> h^ ZYh^d d/> Vacant/Agricultural A-MHO-RLSAO A-MHO-RLSAO A-MHO-RLSAO A-MHO-RLSAO Vacant/Agricultural Vacant/Agricultural Vacant/Agricultural Agricultural ([FDYDWLRQDQGUHODWHGSURFHVVLQJDQGSURGXFWLRQ 3523(57<,'  675   (   (   (  ([FDYDWLRQPLQLQJ  ([FDYDWLRQPLQLQJ  $JULFXOWXUDO WƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ/͗  dLJƉĞŽĨhƐĞ;ƉƌĞƐĞŶƚͿ͗ Page 9119 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϰŽĨϭϮ WƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽ>ƐĞĐƚŝŽŶϭϬ͘Ϭϴ͘ϬϬĂŶĚŚĂƉƚĞƌϯ͘ϭŽĨƚŚĞĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝǀĞŽĚĞ͕ƐƚĂĨĨ͛ƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƚŽƚŚĞƌĞǀŝĞǁŝŶŐďŽĚLJƐŚĂůůďĞďĂƐĞĚƵƉŽŶĂĨŝŶĚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞŐƌĂŶƚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƵƐĞǁŝůůŶŽƚĂĚǀĞƌƐĞůLJĂĨĨĞĐƚƚŚĞƉƵďůŝĐŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚĂŶĚƚŚĂƚƚŚĞƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐŐŽǀĞƌŶŝŶŐƚŚĞŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƵƐĞ͕ŝĨĂŶLJ͕ŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶŵĞƚ͘&ƵƌƚŚĞƌ͕ƐĂƚŝƐĨĂĐƚŽƌLJƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶĂŶĚĂƌƌĂŶŐĞŵĞŶƚŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶŵĂĚĞĐŽŶĐĞƌŶŝŶŐ ƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐŵĂƚƚĞƌƐ͕ǁŚĞƌĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͘ KŶ ĂƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞ ƉĂŐĞ͕ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ ĂŶĂƌƌĂƚŝǀĞ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ĚĞƐĐƌŝďŝŶŐ ĂƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ ĨŽƌ ĂĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƵƐĞ ĂŶĚĂĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞ ƚŽƚŚĞĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂůŝƐƚĞĚďĞůŽǁ͘^ƉĞĐŝĨLJŚŽǁĂŶĚǁŚLJƚŚĞƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝƐ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚĞĂĐŚŽĨƚŚĞĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂ͘ZĞĨĞƌƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚŶĂƌƌĂƚŝǀĞŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘ Ă͘ĞƐĐƌŝďĞ ŚŽǁƚŚĞ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ŝƐ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚ ƚŚĞ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚLJ >ĂŶĚ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ŽĚĞ ĂŶĚ 'ƌŽǁƚŚ DĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ WůĂŶ͘ /ŶĐůƵĚĞ ŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ ŽŶ ŚŽǁ ƚŚĞ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ ŝƐ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚ ǁŝƚŚ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ ŽƌƉŽƌƚŝŽŶƐŽĨƚŚĞ&ƵƚƵƌĞ>ĂŶĚhƐĞůĞŵĞŶƚ͘ ď͘ĞƐĐƌŝďĞƚŚĞĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐŽƌƉůĂŶŶĞĚŵĞĂŶƐŽĨŝŶŐƌĞƐƐĂŶĚĞŐƌĞƐƐƚŽƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ ĂŶĚƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ ƚŚĞƌĞŽŶ ǁŝƚŚ ƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌ ƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ ƚŽ ĂƵƚŽŵŽƚŝǀĞ ĂŶĚ ƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶ ƐĂĨĞƚLJ ĂŶĚ ĐŽŶǀĞŶŝĞŶĐĞ͕ ƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ ĨůŽǁ ĂŶĚĐŽŶƚƌŽů͕ĂŶĚĂĐĐĞƐƐŝŶĐĂƐĞŽĨĨŝƌĞŽƌĐĂƚĂƐƚƌŽƉŚĞ͘ Đ͘ĞƐĐƌŝďĞƚŚĞ ĞĨĨĞĐƚƚŚĞĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƵƐĞ ǁŝůůŚĂǀĞŽŶŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌŝŶŐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐŝŶƌĞůĂƚŝŽŶƚŽ ŶŽŝƐĞ͕ ŐůĂƌĞ͕ ĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐŝŵƉĂĐƚ͕ĂŶĚŽĚŽƌ͘ Ě͘ĞƐĐƌŝďĞ ƚŚĞ ƐŝƚĞ͛Ɛ ĂŶĚ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ƵƐĞ͛Ɛ ĐŽŵƉĂƚŝďŝůŝƚLJ ǁŝƚŚ ĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐ ĂŶĚ ŽƚŚĞƌ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐŝŶƚŚĞĚŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ͘ Ğ͘WůĞĂƐĞ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂŶLJ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶǁŚŝĐŚLJŽƵŵĂLJ ĨĞĞůŝƐƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚƚŽ ƚŚŝƐ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ͘ ĞĞĚZĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐ͗dŚĞŽƵŶƚLJŝƐůĞŐĂůůLJƉƌĞĐůƵĚĞĚĨƌŽŵĞŶĨŽƌĐŝŶŐĚĞĞĚƌĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐ͖ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ŵĂŶLJ ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚŝĞƐŚĂǀĞĂĚŽƉƚĞĚƐƵĐŚƌĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐ͘zŽƵŵĂLJǁŝƐŚƚŽĐŽŶƚĂĐƚƚŚĞĐŝǀŝĐŽƌƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJŽǁŶĞƌƐ ĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶŝŶƚŚĞĂƌĞĂĨŽƌǁŚŝĐŚƚŚŝƐƵƐĞŝƐďĞŝŶŐƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚŝŶŽƌĚĞƌƚŽĂƐĐĞƌƚĂŝŶǁŚĞƚŚĞƌŽƌŶŽƚƚŚĞ ƌĞƋƵĞƐƚŝƐĂĨĨĞĐƚĞĚďLJĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐĚĞĞĚƌĞƐƚƌŝĐƚŝŽŶƐ͘ WƌĞǀŝŽƵƐ ůĂŶĚ ƵƐĞƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶƐŽŶƚŚĞƐƵďũĞĐƚ ƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ͗dŽ LJŽƵƌ ŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞ͕ŚĂƐĂƉƵďůŝĐŚĞĂƌŝŶŐďĞĞŶ ŚĞůĚŽŶƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ ǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞůĂƐƚLJĞĂƌ͍ /ĨƐŽ͕ ǁŚĂƚ ǁĂƐƚŚĞŶĂƚƵƌĞŽĨƚŚĂƚŚĞĂƌŝŶŐ͍ EŽ͘ KĨĨŝĐŝĂů /ŶƚĞƌƉƌĞƚĂƚŝŽŶƐ Žƌ ŽŶŝŶŐ sĞƌŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͗dŽ LJŽƵƌ ŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞ͕ ŚĂƐ ƚŚĞƌĞ ďĞĞŶ ĂŶ ŽĨĨŝĐŝĂů ŝŶƚĞƌƉƌĞƚĂƚŝŽŶŽƌnjŽŶŝŶŐǀĞƌŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƌĞŶĚĞƌĞĚŽŶƚŚŝƐƉƌŽƉĞƌƚLJǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞůĂƐƚLJĞĂƌ͍ EŽ zĞƐ ;/Ĩ LJĞƐƉůĞĂƐĞ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞ ĐŽƉŝĞƐ͘Ϳ s>hd/KE Z/dZ/ Page 9120 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϱŽĨϭϮ WW>/Ed /E&KZDd/KE dzW K& tdZ^Zs/ dK WZKs/ 67$7(0(17 2)87,/,7<3529,6,216 )25&21',7,21$/86(5(48(67 EĂŵĞŽĨƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ;ƐͿ͗ ĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗    ŝƚLJ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗ /W͗ dĞůĞƉŚŽŶĞ͗ Ğůů͗ &Ădž͗ ͲDĂŝůĚĚƌĞƐƐ͗     ĚĚƌĞƐƐŽĨ^ƵďũĞĐƚWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ;/ĨĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞͿ͗       ŝƚLJ͗ ^ƚĂƚĞ͗  /W͗ ^ĞĐƚŝŽŶͬdŽǁŶƐŚŝƉͬZĂŶŐĞ͗ͬ ͬ >Žƚ͗ ůŽĐŬ͗ ^ƵďĚŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ͗ WůĂƚŽŽŬ͗ WĂŐĞη͗ DĞƚĞƐΘŽƵŶĚƐĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͗ ŚĞĐŬ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƐLJƐƚĞŵ͗ Ă͘ ŽƵŶƚLJ hƚŝůŝƚLJ^LJƐƚĞŵ ď͘ ŝƚLJhƚŝůŝƚLJ^LJƐƚĞŵ Đ͘ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞĚ hƚŝůŝƚLJ ^LJƐƚĞŵ WƌŽǀŝĚĞEĂŵĞ͗ Ě͘ WĂĐŬĂŐĞ dƌĞĂƚŵĞŶƚWůĂŶƚ ;'WĂƉĂĐŝƚLJͿ͗ Ğ͘ ^ĞƉƚŝĐ^LJƐƚĞŵ Ă͘ ŽƵŶƚLJ hƚŝůŝƚLJ^LJƐƚĞŵ ď͘ ŝƚLJhƚŝůŝƚLJ^LJƐƚĞŵ Đ͘ &ƌĂŶĐŚŝƐĞĚ hƚŝůŝƚLJ ^LJƐƚĞŵ WZKs/ ED Ě͘ WƌŝǀĂƚĞ ^LJƐƚĞŵ ;tĞůůͿ dŽƚĂůWŽƉƵůĂƚŝŽŶƚŽďĞƐĞƌǀĞĚ͗ WĞĂŬĂŶĚǀĞƌĂŐĞĂŝůLJĞŵĂŶĚƐ͗ ͘ tĂƚĞƌͲWĞĂŬ͗ ǀĞƌĂŐĞĂŝůLJ͗ ͘ ^ĞǁĞƌͲWĞĂŬ͗ ǀĞƌĂŐĞĂŝůLJ͗ >'> ^Z/Wd/KE dzW K& ^t' /^WK^> dK  WZKs/ 2875 Jupiter Park Dr., Suite 100 Jupiter FL 33458 561-972-4517 nick@stewartmaterials.com 3000 Edwards Grove Rd, 2301 Edwards Grove Rd, &2315 Edwards Grove Rd Immokalee FL 34142 N/AWKHZHOOLVH[LVWLQJSURSRVHGH[SDQVLRQZLOOQRWUHVXOWLQLQFUHDVHGGHPDQG ĂƌĨŝĞůĚ WƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ ,ŽůĚŝŶŐƐ͕ >>͖ ^ŽƵƚŚǁĞƐƚĞƌŶ WƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐ͕ >>͖ ^ŽƵƚŚĞƌŶ ZĞƐĞƌǀĞƐ͕ >> 3523(57<,'  675   (   (   ( WƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ/η͗ ZĞĨĞƌƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚůĞŐĂůĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘ KŶͲƐŝƚĞƐĞǁĞƌƚŽďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚǀŝĂƉŽƌƚĂďůĞƚŽŝůĞƚƐŽŶ ƌĞŐƵůĂƌŵĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞ;ĞdžŝƐƚŝŶŐĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶͿ͘ Page 9121 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϲŽĨϭϮ /ĨƉƌŽƉŽƐŝŶŐƚŽďĞĐŽŶŶĞĐƚĞĚƚŽŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚLJZĞŐŝŽŶĂůtĂƚĞƌ^LJƐƚĞŵ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĞĚĂƚĞƐĞƌǀŝĐĞŝƐĞdžƉĞĐƚĞĚƚŽďĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͗EĂƌƌĂƚŝǀĞ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ͗WƌŽǀŝĚĞĂďƌŝĞĨ ĂŶĚ ĐŽŶĐŝƐĞ ŶĂƌƌĂƚŝǀĞ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ĂŶĚ ƐĐŚĞŵĂƚŝĐ ĚƌĂǁŝŶŐ ŽĨƐĞǁĂŐĞƚƌĞĂƚŵĞŶƚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐƚŽďĞƵƐĞĚĂƐǁĞůůĂƐĂƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽĨ ĂĨĨůƵĞŶƚĂŶĚƐůƵĚŐĞĚŝƐƉŽƐĂů͘/ĨƉĞƌĐŽůĂƚŝŽŶƉŽŶĚƐĂƌĞƚŽďĞƵƐĞĚ͕ƚŚĞŶƉĞƌĐŽůĂƚŝŽŶĚĂƚĂĂŶĚƐŽŝů ŝŶǀŽůǀĞĚƐŚĂůůďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚĨƌŽŵƚĞƐƚƐƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĚĂŶĚĐĞƌƚŝĨŝĞĚďLJĂƉƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌ͘ ŽƵŶƚLJhƚŝůŝƚLJĞĚŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ^ƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ͗/ĨƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞƐĞƌǀŝĐĞďŽƵŶĚĂƌŝĞƐŽĨ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚLJ͛Ɛ ƵƚŝůŝƚLJ ƐĞƌǀŝĐĞ ƐLJƐƚĞŵ͕ Ă ŶŽƚĂƌŝnjĞĚ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚƐŚĂůů ďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ ĂŐƌĞĞŝŶŐ ƚŽ ĚĞĚŝĐĂƚĞƚŚĞǁĂƚĞƌĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶĂŶĚƐĞǁĂŐĞĐŽůůĞĐƚŝŽŶĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚĂƌĞĂƚŽƚŚĞ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚLJ hƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ͘ dŚŝƐ ƐŚĂůů ŽĐĐƵƌ ƵƉŽŶ ĐŽŵƉůĞƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƚŚĞƐĞ ĨĂĐŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ŝŶ ĂĐĐŽƌĚĂŶĐĞ ǁŝƚŚ Ăůů ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ŽƵŶƚLJŽƌĚŝŶĂŶĐĞƐŝŶ ĞĨĨĞĐƚ Ăƚ ƚŚĂƚ ƚŝŵĞ͘ dŚŝƐ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ƐŚĂůů ĂůƐŽ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞ ĂŶ ĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ ƚŚĂƚ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƐLJƐƚĞŵ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ĐŚĂƌŐĞƐ ĂŶĚ ĐŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŽŶ ĨĞĞƐ ǁŝůů ďĞ ƉĂŝĚ ƚŽ ƚŚĞ ŽƵŶƚLJ hƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ŝǀŝƐŝŽŶ ƉƌŝŽƌ ƚŽ ƚŚĞ ŝƐƐƵĂŶĐĞ ŽĨ ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ ƉĞƌŵŝƚƐ ďLJ ƚŚĞ ŽƵŶƚLJ͘ /Ĩ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͕ ƚŚĞ ƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ƐŚĂůů ĐŽŶƚĂŝŶ ĂŶ ĂŐƌĞĞŵĞŶƚ ƚŽ ĚĞĚŝĐĂƚĞ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ ƵƚŝůŝƚLJ ĞĂƐĞŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌƐĞƌǀŝŶŐƚŚĞǁĂƚĞƌĂŶĚƐĞǁĞƌƐLJƐƚĞŵƐ͘ Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: hŶůĞƐƐǁĂŝǀĞĚŽƌŽƚŚĞƌǁŝƐĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ ĨŽƌĂƚƚŚĞƉƌĞͲĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ͕ŝĨƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝƐƚŽƌĞĐĞŝǀĞƐĞǁĞƌŽƌƉŽƚĂďůĞǁĂƚĞƌƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐĨƌŽŵ ĂŶLJ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƌ ŽƚŚĞƌ ƚŚĂŶ ƚŚĞ ŽƵŶƚLJ͕ĂƐƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ĨƌŽŵ ƚŚĂƚ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƌ ŝŶĚŝĐĂƚŝŶŐ ĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞ ĐĂƉĂĐŝƚLJ ƚŽƐĞƌǀĞƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐŚĂůůďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ͘Eͬ N/A N/A N/A Page 9122 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϳŽĨϭϮ &KDSWHURIWKH$GPLQLVWUDWLYH&RGHUHTXLUHVWKDWWKHDSSOLFDQWPXVWUHPRYH WKHLUSXEOLF KHDULQJDGYHUWLVLQJVLJQ V DIWHUILQDODFWLRQLVWDNHQE\WKH%RDUGRI &RXQW\&RPPLVVLRQHUV %DVHGRQWKH%RDUG VILQDODFWLRQRQWKLVLWHPSOHDVH UHPRYHDOOSXEOLFKHDULQJDGYHUWLVLQJVLJQ V LPPHGLDWHO\ Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer at their 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 F.S. §695. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the assigned Principal Planner, Zoning Services Department, within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS $FNQRZOHGJHG $FNQRZOHGJHG Page 9123 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϴŽĨϭϮ dŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ^ƵďŵŝƚƚĂůZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚŝƐƚŽďĞƵƚŝůŝnjĞĚĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞWƌĞͲƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶDĞĞƚŝŶŐ͕ĂŶĚĂƚƚŝŵĞŽĨ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂů͘ƚƚŝŵĞŽĨƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂů͕ƚŚĞĐŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚŝƐƚŽďĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĂŶĚƐƵďŵŝƚƚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƉĂĐŬĞƚ͘ WůĞĂƐĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŝƚĞŵƐŝŶƚŚĞĞdžĂĐƚŽƌĚĞƌůŝƐƚĞĚďĞůŽǁ͕ǁŝƚŚĐŽǀĞƌƐŚĞĞƚƐĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚƚŽĞĂĐŚƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ͘ /ŶĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůƐǁŝůůŶŽƚďĞĂĐĐĞƉƚĞĚ͘ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĨŽƌZĞǀŝĞǁ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ EŽƚ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ ŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŽǀĞƌůĞƚƚĞƌďƌŝĞĨůLJĞdžƉůĂŝŶŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ WƌĞͲƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ EŽƚĞƐ ĨĨŝĚĂǀŝƚ ŽĨ ƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƐŝŐŶĞĚĂŶĚŶŽƚĂƌŝnjĞĚ ŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĚĚƌĞƐƐŝŶŐŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚ WƌŽƉĞƌƚLJKǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ ŝƐĐůŽƐƵƌĞ&Žƌŵ tĂƌƌĂŶƚLJ ĞĞĚ;ƐͿ ŽƵŶĚĂƌLJ ^ƵƌǀĞLJ ŽŶĐĞƉƚƵĂů ^ŝƚĞ WůĂŶ Ϯϰ͟ y ϯϲ͟ ƉůƵƐ ;ŽŶĞ ϴ Ъ y ϭϭ ĐŽƉLJͿ WůĂŶƐ ƐŚŽǁŝŶŐ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ĨŽƌ ƵƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ WůĂŶƐ ĨŽƌ ƐĐƌĞĞŶŝŶŐ ĂŶĚ ďƵĨĨĞƌŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ƵƐĞǁŝƚŚ ƌĞĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ ĂƐ ƚŽ ƚLJƉĞ͕ ĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶƐ͕ ĂŶĚ ĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ WůĂŶƐƐŚŽǁŝŶŐ ƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉŝŶŐ ĂŶĚ ƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐ ĨŽƌ ƚƌĞĞƐ ƉƌŽƚĞĐƚĞĚďLJ ŽƵŶƚLJ ƌĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ WůĂŶƐƐŚŽǁŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ƐŝŐŶƐ ĂŶĚ ůŝŐŚƚŝŶŐ͕ ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐ ƚLJƉĞ͕ ĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶƐ͕ ĂŶĚ ĐŚĂƌĂĐƚĞƌ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ ƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůZĞŶĚĞƌŝŶŐ ŽĨ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ;ƐͿ͕ ŝĨ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƵƌƌĞŶƚĂĞƌŝĂů ƉŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚƐ ;ĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ ĨƌŽŵWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ ƉƉƌĂŝƐĞƌͿ ǁŝƚŚ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ďŽƵŶĚĂƌLJĂŶĚ͕ ŝĨ ǀĞŐĞƚĂƚĞĚ͕ &>h&^ ŽĚĞƐ ǁŝƚŚ ůĞŐĞŶĚ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚ ŽŶ ĂĞƌŝĂů͘ ^ƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚŽĨƵƚŝůŝƚLJ ƉƌŽǀŝƐŝŽŶƐ ;ǁŝƚŚ Ăůů ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ ĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐ Θ ƐŬĞƚĐŚĞƐͿ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůĂƚĂ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕ ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚ ƚŽ > ƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ ϯ͘Ϭϴ͘ϬϬ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂůĂƚĂZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĐŽůůĂƚĞĚŝŶƚŽĂƐŝŶŐůĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů/ŵƉĂĐƚ ^ƚĂƚĞŵĞŶƚ ;/^Ϳ Ăƚ ƚŝŵĞ ŽĨƉƵďůŝĐ ŚĞĂƌŝŶŐƐ͘ ŽŽƌĚŝŶĂƚĞǁŝƚŚ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ƉůĂŶŶĞƌ Ăƚ ƚŝŵĞ ŽĨ ƉƵďůŝĐ ŚĞĂƌŝŶŐ͘ >ŝƐƚĞĚ ^ƉĞĐŝĞƐ ^ƵƌǀĞLJ͖ ůĞƐƐ ƚŚĂŶ ϭϮ ŵŽŶƚŚƐŽůĚ͘ /ŶĐůƵĚĞ ĐŽƉŝĞƐ ŽĨ ƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐ ƐƵƌǀĞLJƐ͘ dƌĂĨĨŝĐ /ŵƉĂĐƚ ^ƚƵĚLJ ;d/^Ϳ Žƌ ǁĂŝǀĞƌ ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂů ĂŶĚ ƌĐŚĞŽůŽŐŝĐĂů ^ƵƌǀĞLJ͕ Žƌ ǁĂŝǀĞƌ ůĞĐƚƌŽŶŝĐ ĐŽƉLJ ŽĨ Ăůů ĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ ĂŶĚ ƉůĂŶƐ 3UH$SSOLFDWLRQ 0HHWLQJ DQG )LQDO 6XEPLWWDO 5HTXLUHPHQW &KHFNOLVW IRUA Conditional Use to be heard by the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals A Minor Conditional Use to be heard by the Office of the Hearing ExaminerŚĂƉƚĞƌϯŽĨƚŚĞĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝǀĞŽĚĞ X X X X X X X X X Page 9124 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline PaymentGuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϵŽĨϭϮ /d/KE>ZYh/ZDEd^ &KZ d, Wh>/ ,Z/E' WZK^^͗x &ŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ĐŽŵƉůĞƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƌĞǀŝĞǁ ƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ ďLJ ŽƵŶƚLJ ƌĞǀŝĞǁ ƐƚĂĨĨ͕ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚ ƐŚĂůů ƐƵďŵŝƚ Ăůů ŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐĞůĞĐƚƌŽŶŝĐĂůůLJƚŽƚŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĂƚĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŵĂŶĂŐĞƌ͘x WůĞĂƐĞĐŽŶƚĂĐƚ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ŵĂŶĂŐĞƌ ƚŽ ĐŽŶĨŝƌŵ ƚŚĞ ŶƵŵďĞƌ ŽĨ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ĐŽƉŝĞƐ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͘ WůĂŶŶĞƌƐ͗/ŶĚŝĐĂƚĞŝĨƚŚĞƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ ŶĞĞĚƐ ƚŽďĞƌŽƵƚĞĚƚŽƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ƌĞǀŝĞǁĞƌƐ͗ ĂLJƐŚŽƌĞͬ'ĂƚĞǁĂLJ dƌŝĂŶŐůĞ ZĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͗ džĞĐƵƚŝǀĞŝƌĞĐƚŽƌ ŵĞƌŐĞŶĐLJ DĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ Žƌ D^͗ ŽŶƐĞƌǀĂŶĐLJ ŽĨ^t&>͗ 'D 'ƌĂƉŚŝĐƐ ŝƚLJ ŽĨ EĂƉůĞƐ͗ hƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͗LJ WĂƌŬƐ ĂŶĚ ZĞĐƌĞĂƚŝŽŶ͗ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞ tĂƚĞƌͬ^ĞǁĞƌ ŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ͗ KƚŚĞƌ͗^ĐŚŽŽůŝƐƚƌŝĐƚ ;ZĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůŽŵƉŽŶĞŶƚƐͿ͗ ŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ dŽǁĞƌƐ͗ DŽƐƋƵŝƚŽŽŶƚƌŽů ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚLJ ŝƌƉŽƌƚ ƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJ EĂƉůĞƐ ŝƌƉŽƌƚ ƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJ ŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů DŝŶŝŶŐ͗ /ŵƉĂĐƚ &ĞĞƐ Page 9125 of 9661 Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline Payment GuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϭϬ ŽĨϭϮ WƌĞͲƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ DĞĞƚŝŶŐ͗ΨϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ;ƚŽďĞĐƌĞĚŝƚĞĚƚŽǁĂƌĚƐƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶĨĞĞŝĨƚŚĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŝƐĨŝůĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶϵŵŽŶƚŚƐŽĨƉƌĞͲĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŵĞĞƚŝŶŐͿ )LUHWƌĞͲƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ DĞĞƚŝŶŐ͗ΨϭϱϬ͘ϬϬ;ƉƉůŝĞĚĂƐĐƌĞĚŝƚƚŽǁĂƌĚƐĨŝƌĞƌĞǀŝĞǁĨĞĞƵƉŽŶƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŽĨ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŝĨǁŝƚŚŝŶϵŵŽŶƚŚƐŽĨƚŚĞƉƌĞͲĂƉƉŵĞĞƚŝŶŐĚĂƚĞͿ ŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů hƐĞ ƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ &ĞĞ͗Ψϰ͕ϬϬϬ͘ϬϬ R tŚĞŶ ĨŝůĞĚ ǁŝƚŚ ZĞnjŽŶĞ WĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͗ Ψϭ͕ϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ R ĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ĨĞĞĨŽƌϱ ƚŚ ĂŶĚ ƐƵďƐĞƋƵĞŶƚ ƌĞǀŝĞǁƐ͗ ϮϬйŽĨ ŽƌŝŐŝŶĂů ĨĞĞ ŽŵƉƌĞŚĞŶƐŝǀĞWůĂŶŶŝŶŐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶĐLJZĞǀŝĞǁ͗ΨϯϬϬ͘ϬϬ ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂů ĂƚĂ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐͲ/^ WĂĐŬĞƚ ;ƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂů ĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚ ĂƚƉƌĞͲĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐͿ͗ ΨϮ͕ϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ >ŝƐƚĞĚ Žƌ WƌŽƚĞĐƚĞĚ ^ƉĞĐŝĞƐ ƐƵƌǀĞLJ ƌĞǀŝĞǁ ĨĞĞ ;ǁŚĞŶĂŶ/^ ŝƐ ŶŽƚ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚͿ͗Ψϭ͕ϬϬϬ͘ϬϬ dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ &ĞĞ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͗ R DĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJ ZĞǀŝĞǁ &ĞĞ͗ ΨϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ R DŝŶŽƌ ^ƚƵĚLJ ZĞǀŝĞǁ &ĞĞ͗ ΨϳϱϬ͘ϬϬ R DĂũŽƌ ^ƚƵĚLJ ZĞǀŝĞǁ &ĞĞ͗ Ψϭ͕ϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚ>ĞŐĂů ĚǀĞƌƚŝƐŝŶŐ&ĞĞ ĨŽƌ ƚŚĞ ,ĞĂƌŝŶŐdžĂŵŝŶĞƌ Žƌ W͗Ψϭ͕ϭϮϱ͘ϬϬ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚ >ĞŐĂů ĚǀĞƌƚŝƐŝŶŐ &ĞĞ ĨŽƌ ƚŚĞ ͕ ŝĨ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ͗ΨϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ &ŝƌĞWůĂŶŶŝŶŐZĞǀŝĞǁ&ĞĞ͗ΨϭϱϬ͘ϬϬ &ŝƌĞ ŽĚĞ WůĂŶƐ ZĞǀŝĞǁ &ĞĞƐĂƌĞ ĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚ Ăƚ ƚŚĞ ƚŝŵĞ ŽĨ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ƐƵďŵŝƐƐŝŽŶ ĂŶĚ ƚŚŽƐĞ ĨĞĞƐ ĂƌĞ ƐĞƚ ĨŽƌƚŚ ďLJ ƚŚĞ ƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJŚĂǀŝŶŐũƵƌŝƐĚŝĐƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞ>ĂŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐEĞŝŐŚďŽƌŚŽŽĚEŽƚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŵĂŝůĞƌƐĨŽƌ ƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƐŚĞĂĚĞĚƚŽŚĞĂƌŝŶŐ͕ĂŶĚƚŚŝƐĨĞĞŝƐĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚƉƌŝŽƌƚŽŚĞĂƌŝŶŐ͘ ƐƚŚĞĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚĂŐĞŶƚͬĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͕/ĂƚƚĞƐƚƚŚĂƚĂůůŽĨƚŚĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŝŶĚŝĐĂƚĞĚŽŶƚŚŝƐĐŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚŝƐ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůƉĂĐŬĂŐĞ͘/ƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƚŚĂƚĨĂŝůƵƌĞƚŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂůůŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŵĂLJ ƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶƚŚĞĚĞůĂLJŽĨƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͘ ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ĂƚĞ ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌEĂŵĞ;ƉůĞĂƐĞƉƌŝŶƚͿ )((5(48,5(0(176 ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌ ^ŝŐŶĂƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƚƵƵƵƌƵĞ Page 9126 of 9661 ϬϭͬϯϬͬϮϬϮϱ ƌĂŶĚŽŶd͘ŽƉƉĞƌ͕W͘͘ Need Help?GMCD Public PortalOnline Payment GuideE-Permitting Guides ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϭϭ ŽĨϭϮ 3XEOLF 3DUWLFLSDWLRQ 5HTXLUHPHQWV/'&6HFWLRQ%RU&&KDSWHURI WKH$GPLQLVWUDWLYH &RGH 1RWLFH IRU 0LQRU &RQGLWLRQDO 8VH 3HWLWLRQV 1HLJKERUKRRG ,QIRUPDWLRQ 0HHWLQJ 1,0 5HTXLUHPHQWVApplicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the Hearing Examiner’s receipt of the staff report and application materials in accordance with the applicable sections of the Administrative Code. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. 0DLOHG 1RWLFHWritten notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing. 1HZVSDSHU $GYHUWLVHPHQWVThe legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum: x Date, time, and location of the hearing; x Description of the proposed land uses; and x 2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. 6LJQA sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing date. 3XEOLF +HDULQJ IRU 0LQRU &RQGLWLRQDO 8VH 3HWLWLRQV +HDULQJ ([DPLQHUThe Hearing Examiner shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. See Chapter 9 of the Administrative Code for the Office of the Hearing Examiner procedures. 1RWLFH IRU &RQGLWLRQDO 8VH 3HWLWLRQV 1HLJKERUKRRG,QIRUPDWLRQ0HHWLQJ 1,0 5HTXLUHPHQWVApplicant must conduct a NIM at least 15 days prior to the advertised public hearing. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to the property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. Page 9127 of 9661 ZĞǀŝƐĞĚϮϬϮϰ WĂŐĞϭϮŽĨϭϮ 0DLOHG1RWLFHWritten notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing. 1HZVSDSHU$GYHUWLVHPHQWVThe legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before theDGYHUWLVHGSXEOLFKHDULQJLQDQHZVSDSHURIJHQHUDOFLUFXODWLRQ7KH DGYHUWLVHPHQWVKDOOLQFOXGHDWDPLQLPXP x Date, time, and location of the hearing; x Description of the proposed land uses; and x 2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. 6LJQA sign shall be posted at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing date. 3XEOLF+HDULQJIRU&RQGLWLRQDO8VH3HWLWLRQV (QYLURQPHQWDO$GYLVRU\&RPPLWWHH ($& The EAC shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing, if required. &ROOLHU&RXQW\3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ &&3& The CCPC shall hold at least 1 public hearing. %RDUGRI=RQLQJ$SSHDOV %=$ The BZA shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. Page 9128 of 9661 $ 0 $ 0 $ 2,110,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 2,897,700 $ 0 $ 4,092,650 $ 0 $ 4,092,650 $ 2,455,845 $ 1,636,805 $ 1,636,805 $ 1,636,805 $ 19,944.64 $ 0 $ 19,944.64 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty SummaryParcel ID 00065520004 Site Address*Disclaimer 2315 EDWARDSGROVE RD Site City IMMOKALEE Site Zone*Note 34142Name / Address BARFIELD PROPERTY HOLDINGS LLCPO BOX 2357 City LABELLE State FL Zip 33975-2357 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 1E18 000100 003 01E18 18 46 29 231.81 Legal 18 46 29 BEG AT SW CNR SEC 18, N 1331.15FT, N 89 DEG E 2481. 55FT, S 2658.62FT, N 89 DEG E84FT, S 1353.32FT TO PT ON 1\4 SEC LI OF SEC 19, TWP 46, RNG 29 N 89 DEG W 2590.55FT, N2653.33FT TO POB 231.81 AC Millage Area 209 Millage Rates £ *Calculations Sub./Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Use Code 66 - ORCHARD GROVES, CITRUS, ETC.4.3132 7.8719 12.1851 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 01/19/21 5927-1598 05/18/20 5764-3840 12/28/16 5350-1271 11/25/08 4409-3724 07/24/07 4261-1587 01/26/07 4174-1713 06/25/85 1141-2082 2024 Certified Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+)Improved Value (=)Market Value (-)Agriculture (=)Assessed Value (=)School Taxable Value (=)Taxable Value Ad Valorem Taxes (+)Non-Ad Valorem Taxes (=)Total Taxes Values are as of January 1st each year. If all values are 0, this parcel was createdafter the Final Tax Roll. Disclaimer: The actual total property taxes may vary due to changes in millagerates set by taxing authorities, the addition of non-ad valorem assessments, andspecial assessments. For the most accurate and up-to-date tax information,please visit the Collier County Tax Collector's office to see the final Tax bills. 2/5/25, 9:17 AM Details https://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=&Map=No&FolioNum=00065520004 1/1Page 9129 of 9661 $ 0 $ 708,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 3,146,100 $ 0 $ 3,146,100 $ 3,146,100 $ 3,146,100 $ 3,146,100 $ 38,335.54 $ 0 $ 38,335.54 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty SummaryParcel ID 00065680009 Site Address*Disclaimer 2301 EDWARDSGROVE RD Site City IMMOKALEE Site Zone*Note 34142Name / Address SOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIES LLC2875 JUPITER PARK DR #1100 City JUPITER State FL Zip 33458 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 1E19 000100 004 01E19 19 46 29 209.74 Legal 19 46 29 BEG AT NE CNR SEC 19, S 2692.02FT, N 89 DEG W 2340. 90FT, N 1353.32FT, S 89 DEG W84FT, N 2658.62 TO A POINT ON THE E/W QUARTER QUARTER LINE OF THE SE1/4 OF SEC 18, N 89DEG E 2438.79FT, S 00 DEG ALG E LINE SEC 18 1345.64FT TO POB, LESS AND EXCEPT FROM SAIDTRACT, THE E 30FT THEREOF. Millage Area 209 Millage Rates *Calculations Sub./Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Use Code 47 - MINERAL PROCESSING, PHOSPHATEPROCESSING 4.3132 7.8719 12.1851 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 07/02/03 3330-3215 07/02/03 3330-3209 06/01/91 1623-926 06/01/85 1141-2084 2024 Certified Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+)Improved Value (=)Market Value (=)Assessed Value (=)School Taxable Value (=)Taxable Value Ad Valorem Taxes (+)Non-Ad Valorem Taxes (=)Total Taxes Values are as of January 1st each year. If all values are 0, this parcel was createdafter the Final Tax Roll. Disclaimer: The actual total property taxes may vary due to changes in millagerates set by taxing authorities, the addition of non-ad valorem assessments, andspecial assessments. For the most accurate and up-to-date tax information,please visit the Collier County Tax Collector's office to see the final Tax bills. 2/5/25, 9:18 AM Details https://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=&Map=No&FolioNum=00065680009 1/1Page 9130 of 9661 $ 800,000 $ 15,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 374,925 $ 344,462 $ 719,387 $ 719,387 $ 719,387 $ 719,387 $ 8,765.81 $ 0 $ 8,765.81 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty SummaryParcel ID 00065402009 Site Address*Disclaimer 3000 EDWARDSGROVE RD Site City IMMOKALEE Site Zone*Note 34142Name / Address SOUTHERN RESERVES LLC2875 JUPITER PARK DRSTE 1100 City JUPITER State FL Zip 33458 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres *Estimated 1E17 000100 012 01E17 17 46 29 39.78 Legal 17 46 29 W1/4 OF S1/2 OF S1/2 LESS W 30FT Millage Area 209 Millage Rates £ *Calculations Sub./Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Use Code 7 - MISCELLANEOUS RESIDENTIAL 4.3132 7.8719 12.1851 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 02/09/21 5894-1033 10/23/19 5689-3336 12/10/09 4520-3347 02/10/05 3731-3940 2024 Certified Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+)Improved Value (=)Market Value (=)Assessed Value (=)School Taxable Value (=)Taxable Value Ad Valorem Taxes (+)Non-Ad Valorem Taxes (=)Total Taxes Values are as of January 1st each year. If all values are 0, this parcel was createdafter the Final Tax Roll. Disclaimer: The actual total property taxes may vary due to changes in millagerates set by taxing authorities, the addition of non-ad valorem assessments, andspecial assessments. For the most accurate and up-to-date tax information,please visit the Collier County Tax Collector's office to see the final Tax bills. 2/5/25, 9:19 AM Details https://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=&Map=No&FolioNum=00065402009 1/1Page 9131 of 9661 Page 9132 of 9661 Page 9133 of 9661 Page 9134 of 9661 Page 9135 of 9661 Page 9136 of 9661 Page 9137 of 9661 Page 9138 of 9661 Page 9139 of 9661 Page 9140 of 9661 Page 9141 of 9661 Page 9142 of 9661 Page 9143 of 9661 Page 9144 of 9661 Page 9145 of 9661 Page 9146 of 9661 Page 9147 of 9661 Page 9148 of 9661 Page 9149 of 9661 Page 9150 of 9661 Page 9151 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com D esigningE xcellenceCivil Engineering • Planning • PermittingNarrative and Evaluation Criteria for Conditional UseStewart Mining East ExpansionPL20240003054 The intent of this Conditional Use request is to allow for the proposed expansion of an existing commercial excavation operation, as provided for in the Conditional Use provisions within the A-MHO-RSLAO District. A Site Improvement Plan applicationwill be submitted concurrently with this Conditional Use application. The subject expansion consists of parcel 00065402009 which is ±39.92 acres. This expansion will be incorporated into the existing mine (approved under Resolution 2021-013), increasing the size of the conditional use boundary to ±490.62 acres. The excavation is for the purpose of mining high quality sand for uses including beach renourishment. The proposed expansion is to relocate the existing material processing facilities to the subject expansion parcel. The application does not seek to expand the previously approved excavation area. The following section is a narrative of the conditional use application and how it is consistent with the standards for approval, LDC section 10.08.00. a. Describe how the project is consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan. Include information on how the request is consistent with the applicable section or portions of the Future Land Use Element. The A-MHO-RSLAO District allows commercial excavations as a Conditional Use. The application and proposed Conceptual Site Plan identifies all the required elements for a conditional use, as required by the LDC and thereby, the Future Land Use Element. b. Describe the existing or planned means of ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. The expansion site will be unified with the existing commercial excavation site (western parcels identified on the Master Site Plan) by a 120’x60’ access easement, creating a unified development. The existing ingress/egress point on Edwards Grove Road will remain, allowing material transfer vehicles to access the existing commercial excavation operation, and will continue to be utilized for the operation that this Conditional Use proposes.An alternate access to the proposed expansion exists on Edwards Grove Road and is proposed to remain. This will allow employees to access the existing storage facility on site. The expansion of the existing excavation operation will not generate additional trips to the site, as additional trucks or employees are not proposed. An access road is proposed around the perimeter of the proposed expansion which will meet or exceed NFPA and Collier County requirements for fire maneuverability. Page 9152 of 9661 c. Describe the effect the conditional use will have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic impact, and odor. Considering the location and the existing commercial excavation operation that is currently operating to the west (as identified on the Master Site Plan) no additional noise, glare, economic impact, or odor is anticipated by expanding the mine. No additional workforce or equipment is proposed although the applicant is seeking to relocate existing processing equipment on the subject expansion property. There will be no residential uses within the site. a 10’ Type A landscape buffer shall be provided on all property lines except the western most of the existing mine where a 20’ Type D buffer is proposed .The proposed Conditional Use seeks to expand the existing mining operation to relocate the existing material processing plant on the easternmost parcel. The applicant seeks to reserve the right to blast, if needed. A nuisance mitigation plan shall be provided at the time of Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County, should blasting be required. d. Describe the site’s and the proposed use’s compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district. The proposed Conditional Use is to expand the existing commercial excavation operation, to allow for the relocation of the existing processing equipment on the subject expansion property. The subject development is surrounded by similar conditions and land uses, and screening will be provided to buffer the operation from adjacent properties. The previously approved conditional use application (CU-PL20190000808) did not limit the mining activities to no blasting and the applicant seeks to maintain those rights. Should blasting be required, a nuisance mitigation plan will be provided at the time of Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. Therefore, the subject property and the proposed Conditional Use are considered compatible with the surrounding uses. e. Please provide any additional information which you may feel is relevant to this request. Upon the successful completion of the Conditional Use application, the proposed expansion will be found consistent and permitted per the requirements of the LDC and its design and development standards. The applicant wishes to maintain their existing rights to blasting. Shall the need to blast arise, a nuisance mitigation plan shall be provided at the time of Application for Blasting and the Use of Explosives in Collier County. The following section describes how this Conditional Use Application is consistent with the Future Land Use element provisions of the Growth Management Plan. Objective 1 Promote well planned land uses consistent with Future Land Use Designations, Districts and Subdistricts and the Future Land Use Map to ensure compatibility between the natural and human environments. The proposed conditional use for a commercial excavation operation is consistent with the future land use designation of Agricultural/Rural as per II.i. of the Future Land Use Element Designation Description Section, “Earth mining, oil extraction, and related processing” is “generally permitted” under this designation. Page 9153 of 9661 Objective 5 Policy 5.3 All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. For properties that are zoned inconsistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section but have nonetheless been determined to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element, as provided for in Policies 5.9 through 5.13, the following provisions apply: a. For such commercially-zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity commercial zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of commercial land use allowed by the existing zoning district, except as allowed by Policy 5.11, is not exceeded in the new zoning district. The foregoing notwithstanding, such commercial properties may be approved for the addition of residential uses, in accordance with the Commercial Mixed-Use Subdistrict, though an increase in overall intensity may result. A zoning change of such commercial-zoned properties to a residential zoning district is allowed as provided for in the Density Rating System of this Future Land Use Element and as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. b.For such industrially-zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity industrial, or commercial, zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of industrial land use allowed by the existing zoning district is not exceeded in the new zoning district. c.For such residentially zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the authorized number of dwelling units in the new zoning district does not exceed that authorized by the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of development allowed by the new zoning district does not exceed that allowed by the existing zoning district, except as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. d. For property deemed to be consistent with this Element pursuant to one or more of policies 5.9 through 5.13, said property may be combined and developed with other property, whether such other property is deemed consistent via those same policies or is deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section. For residential and mixed-use developments only, the accumulated density between these properties may be distributed throughout the project, as provided for in the Density Rating System or the Commercial Mixed- Use Subdistrict, as applicable. e. Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district and the proposed zoning district. Acknowledged. Page 9154 of 9661 Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004, and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). The A-MHO-RSLAO District allows commercial excavations. The application and Conceptual Site Plan identify the required elements for a Conditional Use, as required by the LDC and Future Land Use Element Provisions. The surrounding land is also zoned as A-MHO-RSLAO and currently hosts rural uses. This includes vacant land to the North, agricultural uses to the East and South, mining to the West. A 10’ Type A landscape buffer will be provided along the section of the property line to buffer the residentially used parcels. Objective 7 Policy 7.1 The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. The proposed expansion of the conditional use boundary will be developed as a unified operation with the existing commercial excavation site. The existing ingress/egress point, located along Edwards Grove Road, will remain, and be used for direct access to all properties. An alternate access to the proposed expansion exists on Edwards Grove Road and is proposed to remain. This will allow employees to access the existing storage facility on site. Policy 7.2 The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. The applicant has planned for the provision of internal circulation provided within the proposed Conceptual Site Plan. Construction drawings for the concurrent Site Improvement Plan will identify these circulation routes in detail. No additional trucks or employees are proposed, and per the included Traffic Impact Statement, this expansion “will not significantly or negatively impact the adjacent road network”. An access road is proposed around the perimeter of the proposed expansion which will meet or exceed NFPA and Collier County requirements for fire maneuverability. Policy 7.3 All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. An interconnection to the property to the West is proposed, to achieve the unified excavation as depicted in the Master Concept Plan. An alternate access to the proposed expansion exists on Edwards Grove Road and is proposed to remain. This will allow employees to access the existing storage facility on site. Page 9155 of 9661 Policy 7.4 The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. As this is a commercial excavation operation, the site will not be open to the public. Sidewalks/pathways will be provided only as necessary for employees within the site and as required by the LDC. CCME Policies Policy 6.1.3: For the County’s RLSA Overlay, as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved pursuant to the RLSA policies found in the Future Land Use Element. The proposed expansion site is ±39.92 acres. Of that, ±2.30 acres contain native vegetation communities. Collier County LDC 4.08.05 requires 40% of the native vegetation to remain. This equates to ±0.92 acres. Since most of the native vegetation on site is low-quality, the applicant proposes to relocate the preserve on site and provide a contiguous preserve area along the southern property line. The proposed preserve is ±1.48 acres and will be supplemented with plantings to ensure conformance with the land development code. A replanting plan, prepared by the project’s environmental consultant, is included as a supplement to this Conditional Use submittal. Policy 6.1.5: Agriculture shall be exempt from the above preservation requirements contained in Policies 6.1.1, and 6.1.2 of this Element provided that any new clearing of land for agriculture shall not be converted to non-agricultural development for 25 years. For any such conversions in less than 25 years, the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 of this Element shall be applied to the site at the time of the conversion. The percentage of native vegetation preserved shall be calculated on the amount of vegetation occurring at the time of the agricultural clearing, and if found to be deficient, a native plant community shall be restored to re-create a native plant community in all three strata (ground covers, shrubs and trees), utilizing larger plant materials so as to more quickly re-create the lost mature vegetation. Agricultural clearing within the RLSA Overlay shall be allowed and guided by the RLSA policies found in the FLUE. The proposed preserve on site shall exceed native vegetation preservation requirements outlined by the Collier County Land Development Code. Policy 7.1.3: Listed species within the RLSA shall be protected pursuant to the RLSA Overlay policies within the Future Land Use Element. No listed species have been documented within the project. Based on field observations of site characteristics, land use, known geographic distribution, and habitat requirements for listed species, no protected plants or significant nesting or foraging habitat associated with wildlife species listed by the county, state, and/or federal government are likely to be found onsite or be affected by the project. Page 9156 of 9661 Existing Conditions of Approval The following will list the existing conditions of approval per Resolution 2021-013 and that they have been or are on track to be completed. 1. Edwards Road Grove Road Mine Conditional Use shall be limited to what is depicted on the MasterConcept Plan, revised 11/ 03/ 2020," prepared by Davidson Engineering. The plan approved under CU-PL20190000808 is currently being implemented. Conformance with the previously approved plan is acknowledged. 2. The petitioner shall obtain a South Florida Water Management District Agricultural Surface Water Management Permit or permit modification for this site, if applicable. Please see included permit 11-00120-S-02 for existing operation. A new permit or permit modification shall be sought at time of site permitting. 3. The site shall be cleared of all exotic vegetation and maintained exotic- free in perpetuity. The portions of the developed existing site has been cleared and maintained exotic free. 4. Material hauling activities are permitted from 5: 00 a.m. to 5: 00 p. m., Monday through Saturday and 24 hours a day Monday through Sunday for excavation and processing activities. The hours of operation have been followed for the existing operation. 5. The excavation shall be contained by a berm constructed to the height of the 100- year flood elevation. Unless the berm contains adequate clay content to slow the flow of water (as determined by the Collier County Engineering Division), the berm shall contain a membrane impervious to water. The berm has been constructed as required. 6. The site shall be limited to a maximum of 49 pm peak hour, two- way trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval, or based on an alternate methodology accepted by staff at time of application for SDP/ SDPA in accordance with the County's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) guidelines in Resolution No. 2006-299, as it may be amended. The trip cap has not been exceeded. 7. Evidence of U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service( FWS) and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) accepted mitigation for impacts to panthers, woodstorks, Florida black bear and other listed species will be required prior to excavation permit approval, if applicable. Excavation Permit PL20200002472 was approved with all required documentation. Page 9157 of 9661 8. A littoral shelf planting area to commence during the reclamation phase of the project shall be shown on the excavation permit for this petition and shall meet the current standards of the Land Development Code at time of submittal of the Commercial Excavation Permit. The project is not at the reclamation phase; however, upon reaching this phase, the littoral plantings and shelf shall be installed per the approved permit specifications. 9. Prior to any vehicular use of the additional 231. 73± acres, the owner shall post two (2) signs along the on- site entry drive, clearly visible to vehicles entering and leaving the site, providing information regarding potential panther presence and notifying drivers of the need to use caution. Sign wording, placement and size will be reviewed and approved by the Collier County Environmental Staff during review of the Commercial Excavation Application or other local development order, whichever is the first to allow vehicular use of the 231. 73± acres. The sign requirement has been respected. 10. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. All applicable state and/or federal permits were obtained prior to commencement of the development. 11. Pursuant to Section 125. 022( 5) F. S., issuance of a development permit by a County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. Acknowledged. 12. The westernmost 200 feet of the parcel shall be reserved for road right- of-way, for the purpose of the future Little League Road extension. Within 90 days of receipt of written notification by Collier County Transportation that the property is needed, the owner will convey the requested property to the County, for fair market value on the date of the conveyance. Acknowledged. As of June 30, 2025 written notification has not been received regarding this right of way reservation. Page 9158 of 9661 13. The petitioner shall be responsible for maintenance of Edwards Grove Road, from State Road 82 to the subject 450.7± acre property line, for the duration of the mining operation. Edwards Grove Road shall be paved a minimum of 22 feet in width and a depth of 1. 5 inches of asphalt or asphalt millings. A Dust Control Plan, for Edwards Grove Road, shall be submitted with the Excavation Permit. Edwards Grove Road has been maintained per the committed requirements. A supplement has been provided along with this petition to display the conditions of the roadway. Wellfield Management Pursuant to Figure 10, a portion of the property falls within the W - 4 (20 Year Travel Time Isocontour) Wellfield Protection Zone for Collier County. The Project will comply with all groundwater protection requirements for Zone W-4 which are identified in Chapter 3.06.00 of the LDC. A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan will be implemented in association with proposed mining activities to reduce or eliminate the potential for groundwater contamination via the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products or wastes. Page 9159 of 9661 Addressing Checklist (Rev ϭϬ/2022)Page 1 of 1 Operations & Regulatory Management Division Ɣ1RUWK+RUVHVKRH'ULYHƔ1DSOHV)/Ɣ-- www.colliercountyfl.gov ADDRESSING CHECKLISTPlease complete the following and upload via the CityView Portal with your submittal. Items ŵĂƌŬĞĚǁŝƚŚ;ΎͿare required for every application, other items are optional and may not apply to every project. Forms are valid for 6 months following their submittal; an updated form will be required for a new submittal after that timeframe and any time the properties within the project boundary are modified. Additional documents may be attached to this form and can include: -ΎLOCATION MAP and/or SURVEY showing the proposed project boundary. - List of additional folio numbers and associated legal descriptions. - E-mail from Addressing Official for any pre-approved project and/or street names. LOCATION INFORMATION ΎFOLIO (Property ID) Number(s)of subject property or properties. [Attach list if necessary] ΎLEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties. [Attach list if necessary] STREET ADDRESS(ES)where applicable, if already assigned. PROJECT INFORMATION Acceptance of this form does not constitute project and/or street name approval and is subject to further review by the Addressing Official. Pre-Approval may be requested by contacting us at GMD_Addressing@colliercountyfl.gov or 239-252-2482 prior to your submittal. CURRENT PROJECT NAME PROPOSED PROJECT NAME PROPOSED STREET NAME(s) LATEST APPROVED PROJECT NUMBER [e.g., SDP-94-##, PPL-2002-AR-####, PL2017000####] Page 9160 of 9661 00065402009, 00065680009, 00065520004 See Exhibit. 3000 Edwards Grove Rd, 2301 Edwards Grove Rd, 2315 Edwards Grove Road, Immokalee, FL 34142 Property ID Number: 00065402009, 00065680009, 00065520004 Section 17, Township 46, Range 29 Size of property: 490.62 Acres Address: 3000 Edwards Grove Rd, 2301 Edwards Grove Rd, 2315 Edwards Grove Road Immokalee, FL 34142 Legal Description: BARFIELD GROVE PARCEL A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST AND A PART OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF (N ½) OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 RUN N 00°25'14” W FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,331.53 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER-QUARTER LINE N 88°51'13" E 2,481.73 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE S 00°55'38" E 2,658.69 FEET; THENCE N 89°04'22" E 84.00 FEET; THENCE S 00°35'34" E 1,352.26 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST-WEST QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 19; THENCE ALONG SAID QUARTER LINE S 89°27'14" W 2,589.72 FEET TO THE WEST ONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19; THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 19 N 00°29'38" W 2,652.80 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AND SOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIES A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18 AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19, RUN S 00°38'42" E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION FOR A DISTANCE OF 2692.02 FEET TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT BEING THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19; THENCE ALONG THE EAST-WEST QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 19 S 89°27'00" W 2341.08 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THOSE LANDS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 3330, PAGE 3215 AND Page 9161 of 9661 THE EASTERLY LINE OF THOSE LANDS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 5350, PAGE 1271, ALL OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE N 00°35'34" W 1352.26 FEET; THENCE S 89°04'22" WEST 84.00 FEET; THENCE N 00°55'38" W 2658.69 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST-WEST QUARTER LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE N 88°47'54" E ALONG SAID LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 2437.77 FEET TO A CONCRETE MONUMENT BEING THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/4; THENCE S 00°36'52" E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18 FOR A DISTANCE OF 1346.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. LESS AND EXCEPT THE EASTERLY THIRTY (30) FEET THEREOF. BEARINGS ARE RELATIVE TO NORTH AMERICAN DATUM (NAD) 1983, FLORIDA EAST ZONE. AND SOUTHERN RESERVES, LLC PARCEL THE WEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTH ONE-HALF OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS THE WEST 30 FEET OF SAID PARCEL. THE ABOVE DESCRIBES AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 490.62 ACRES OF LAND. Page 9162 of 9661 Page 9163 of 9661 Page 9164 of 9661 Page 9165 of 9661 Page 9166 of 9661 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATIONŽƌ>/D/d>//>/dzKDWEz͕ list the officers and stockholders and theƉĞƌĐĞŶƚĂŐĞŽĨƐƚŽĐŬŽǁŶĞĚďLJĞĂĐŚ͗ Name and Address % of Ownership Name and Address % of Ownership ƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚDĞŵďĞƌͲ:ŽƐĞƉŚ͘ĞĂůĞ͕:ƌ͘ ϱϭϬϱ^tŝůůŝĂŵƐtĂLJ͕^ƚƵĂƌƚ&>ϯϰϵϵϳ ƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚDĞŵďĞƌͲZĂŶĐŚƌŽǁŶ ϭϲϮϲϵϬƚŚǀĞŶƵĞ͕sĞƌŽĞĂĐŚ͕&>ϯϮϵϲϲ EĂŵĞĂŶĚĚĚƌĞƐƐ йŽĨKǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ6RXWKHUQ5HVHUYHV//& D'ZDͲEŝĐŬ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚ Ϯϴϳϱ:ƵƉŝƚĞƌWĂƌŬƌŝǀĞ͕^ƵŝƚĞϭϭϬϬ͕:ƵƉŝƚĞƌ͕&>ϯϯϰϱϴ %DUILHOG3URSHUW\+ROGLQJV//& DĂŶĂŐĞƌͲ:ĂŵĞƐWĂƵůDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ͕>> -DPHV3DXO0DQDJHPHQW//& DĂŶĂŐĞƌͲ:ĂŵĞƐ͘WĂƵů йŽĨKǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ йŽĨKǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ йŽĨKǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ 6RXWKZHVWHUQ3URSHUWLHV//& DĂŶĂŐĞƌͲEŝĐŬd͘^ƚĞǁĂƌƚ Page 9167 of 9661 33% 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100, Jupiter, FL 33458 33% 33% 100% 5701 Ft. Denaud Rd Labelle, FL 33935 0% PO Box 2357 Labelle, FL 33975 Growth Management Community Development Department2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104Phone: (239) 252-1036 | Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.govwww.colliercountyfl.gov 01/2023 Page1of3 100% d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of thegeneral and/or limited partners:Name and Address % of Ownership e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: ___________ f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust: Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired͗ Ͳ^ŽƵƚŚǁĞƐƚĞƌŶWƌŽƉĞƌƚŝĞƐ͕>> ͲĂƌĨŝĞůĚWƌŽƉĞƌƚLJ,ŽůĚŝŶŐƐ͕>> Ͳ^ŽƵƚŚĞƌŶZĞƐĞƌǀĞƐ͕>> Leased: Term of lease ____________ years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Page 9168 of 9661 JUNE 24, 2003 Growth Management Community Development Department2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104Phone: (239) 252-1036 | Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.govwww.colliercountyfl.gov 01/2023 Page2of3 FEBRUARY 9, 2021 JANUARY 19,2021 Date of option: _________________________ Date option terminates: __________________, or Anticipated closing date: ________________ AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest-holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition’s final public hearing. ƐƚŚĞĂƵƚŚŽƌŝnjĞĚĂŐĞŶƚͬĂƉƉůŝĐĂŶƚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͕/ĂƚƚĞƐƚƚŚĂƚĂůůŽĨƚŚĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŝŶĚŝĐĂƚĞĚŽŶƚŚŝƐĐŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚŝƐ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶƚŚŝƐƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůƉĂĐŬĂŐĞ͘/ƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƚŚĂƚĨĂŝůƵƌĞƚŽŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂůůŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŵĂLJ ƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶƚŚĞĚĞůĂLJŽĨƉƌŽĐĞƐƐŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƉĞƚŝƚŝŽŶ͘ ____________ ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ Date ____________________________________________ Agent/Owner Name (please print) ΎdŚĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ͕ĂůůƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƐƵďŵŝƚƚĂůŵĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐ͕ĂŶĚĨĞĞƐƐŚĂůůďĞƐƵďŵŝƚƚĞĚƚŽ͗ 'ƌŽǁƚŚDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚͮ'DWŽƌƚĂů͗ ŚƚƚƉƐ͗ͬͬĐǀƉŽƌƚĂů͘ĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀͬĐŝƚLJǀŝĞǁǁĞď YƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐ͍ŵĂŝů͗'DĐůŝĞŶƚƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀ ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌ^ŝŐŶĂƚƵƌĞ ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ ŐĞŶƚͬKǁŶĞƌEĂŵĞ;ƉůĞĂƐĞƉƌŝŶƚͿ ĂƚĞ ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ Page 9169 of 9661 Nick Stewart 2/14/25 Growth Management Community Development Department2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104Phone: (239) 252-1036 | Email: GMDClientServices@colliercountyfl.govwww.colliercountyfl.gov 01/2023 Page3of3 James C. Paul 2/14/25 Page 9170 of 9661 Page 9171 of 9661 Page 9172 of 9661 Page 9173 of 9661 Page 9174 of 9661 Page 9175 of 9661 Page 9176 of 9661 Page 9177 of 9661 Page 9178 of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age 9179 of 9661  ! &&! && $&& !& &   &  &&   & %&"#& &&       EKOC95Y$CGCR;9Y $C57CECRVYKGM5IVY ,!$Y*,)*,04Y )$!'/Y $$Y DFDJ?Y"J>LNH6SDLJY           +NDJ8D-6FY::N<PPY $ Y    Y $Y 0!2Y  Y0Y'1Y,Y $$$Y$YY %6DFDJ?Y::N<PPY *)Y)3Y  $$$Y$YY .<?DPS<N<:Y?<JSY (6H<YY::N<PPY *5TEY#5G;QYY  YKORY;I5T9Y,K59Y $57;EE;Y$YY '5G;YA5I@;9Y  Y 99O=QQYA5I@;9Y  Y USBLNDW<:Y+<NPLJXY<S6DFY   0CRE;Y&,Y #5G;QY*5TEY&5I5@;G;IRY$$Y  Y0 Y '1Y,Y $$$Y$YY JJU6FY.<-LNSPY    Y Y Y    Y   Y   Y       Page 9180 of 9661       C,&4$C"! "#C   C$C"! "#C   C$C"! "#C    C,&4$C"! "#C    C 279/)'C/5/<+*C/'(/3/=BC %0+AC15'.+C/6C!C-8:5'>C %/+AC /5'.+C/6C!C-895'?C%/+AC /5'.+C/6C !C-8;5'@C Page 9181 of 9661 -- - "- - $' &-!-'&-- *%! -!-!#!$&! %- -#- !$%- - #-+- (),- - -        EKOC:6Z&CGCS<:Z&C68CECSWZKGM6IWZ %'1Z,3&Z')"')2Z &&Z !DFDJ?Z#J>LPH7TDLJZ           -PDJ9DN7FZ;;P=QQZ  Z 2Z)3Z.Z &&&Z &ZZ (7DFDJ?Z;;P=QQZ ,+Z+5Z Z &&&Z &ZZ &  Z      Z &Z 2$4Z /=?DQT=P=;Z?=JTZ*7H=ZZ;;P=QQZ ,6UEZ%6G<RZZ  Z KOSZ<I6U:Z.K6:Z &68<EE<Z &ZZ )6G<ZA6I@<:Z   Z ::O<RRZA6I@<:Z   Z VTBLPDX=;Z-=PQLJYZ=T7DFZ   2CSE<Z'".Z ,3&Z%'1ZZ ,+Z+5Z Z &&&Z &ZZ JJV7FZ/=0LPTQZ    Z Z  Z     Z   Z   Z      Page 9182 of 9661        K''- %K*#)(*+K    K!'?/- %K*#)(*,K    K!''- %K*#)(*,K    K!''-!%K*#)(*,K    K $=BC820K&@9E43K%9019>8<K .94JK:@074K;AK )"$K5BD@0FK.94JK:@074K9AK)"$K5BD@0FK.94JK :@074K9AK)"$K6BC@0GK.94JK8@074K9AK)"$K5BC@0HK.94JK:@074KK )"$K6BC@0IK Page 9183 of 9661       3  33 c  +`Ć & Ć'aĆĆ &ÅbĆ ³Ć 'ƛ"ƟÉƞêåƗŽĆ &  cĆ\ ª'?Ć2 Ć ĆºÜĆ   Ć?ĆĆ+ĆĆ;Ć& Ć'ĆZ ©Ć œó Ć Ù ý Ć‡Ć #Mi,h |q +ĆĆ"<Ć  7#ĆĆ Ć ĆT&'ĆQ  Ć  ĆĆ ÑĆ ôĆ Ć   ĆĆ0¸   Ć ÏãĆĆĆ0 Ć"Ć  Ć  YĆ   Ć Ć KĆ *  Ć Ć    Ć 2KĆ èÈ ñĆ ĆĆ ” ƑÆÊĆ* „ @r ŠĆ2ĆĆ;ĆQ  Ć Ć Ć  Ć Ć Ć O dĆ XĆ Ć Ć XæĆõ   Ć Ć  ĆË ĆĆâĆ"ĆĆ   Ć0ĆĆ Ć ˆ s +ĆĆ   [ ĆĆ ¹Ć"Ć *  Ć * öĆĆ  Ć Ć Ć  )UĆ 7ĆĆ2O Ć ß » ĆĆ ÒĆ"Ć   Ć Ć   Ć;Ć Ô Ć ĆT Ć Ć L‰Ć Ć ‚t EĆ  UĆ Z Ć Ć Ø"  eĆ   fĆ  Ć  Ć     Ć  ÄFĆ Ć Ć  ¿Ć   FYĆ Ć ĆĆ  Ć®u ƒv ¢ ² ’ Ć      [Ć   Ć ĆĆ Öz#Ć 0  Ć ĆĆ  Ć7ĆLĆ   Ć}Ć  Ć@Ćw %/|j8,|%NNB@%Ll|:h|Ć'M]MTl>ML |l7,L|A|:h|uhu%J{|,z,'ul,*|&{|i7,|'M^|NXh|MQ|v|NXh %/|i7,|%NNC?%Ll|:h|Ć $K:k.*|$%&;D<r|KN%L{| !|MQ|$K:l,*|MKN%L{|  |l7,L|l7,|*M'uK,Llh|h7MuE* sO:'%EE{|&,|h:6L,*|&{|l7,|MKN%L{h|"%L%6:L6|",K&,R %/|o,|%NNE:'%Li|:h|%|N%cL,_7:N |l7,L|tO:'%EE{|%|N%`L,Q|(L|h:6L|ML|&,7%I|M0|i7,|N%aL,_7:N %2|o,|%NNE:'%Ll|:h|Ć E:K=n*|N%bL,_7:N |l7,L|l7,|6,L,UE|N%e,S|Kuhl|h:6L|%L*|&,|:+Lq,*|1Ć i7,|6,L,TE N%aL,Q|M0|i7,|L%K,*|N%cL,_7:N %1|j9|%NNE:'%Ll|Fh|Ćjfhl |l7,L|l7,{|Kuhi|:L'Gu*,|l7,|WV1ì))^éĆL%K,|%L*|p,|yWh|û1ĆWV1í))]x %L|,%'7|:Lhl%L',|3_i|*,i,Z:L,|l7,|%NNE:'%Llh|hl%iuh |,6| :L*:w:*u%H |)^MVk-|jghm|N%dL,_7:N|%L*|l7,L uh,|i7,|%NN\PY%l-|4[%i|5S|i7%i|Mx,_7:N %)3(%$/".3'3(,1-3 3$)30/3 3 !23 *3/!3')'#& 3"2"/3'31/!'+'%3 %3/!/3 þÿĀĆ # &/1)3 3 3  3 3 3 3  E¾Ć´Ð6$6Ć$äÍĆøĆ-89P¼°Ć(µ:ĆÌĆ(#Ć.Ć¶Ć J#$5Ć:ë-Ć:Ć $Ć/$úMĆJÀĆ Ç§Ćî½Ć !#ĆHĆ gĆ_ĆðĆ €{āhĆ(#Ć=RÂ!Ć.ĆHĆ9RĆSĆÕ<NI/>Ć ˜Ć¤Ć×Ćp£Ćò·Ć D GĆÓà=>ƙçƝ ( -Ć.<ïĆG-8Ć 5(ƨù…ĆA/Ʊá#Ć89ĆĆ.BĆSÎ!÷«!ĆĆ¯ÞĆ!Û/ĆPÁ­Ć¥,,,,ƦBĆÝ! ¬3o444m33 Ć$!NI5My šÃĆD6nÚ†Ć ĂĆ  !+ c -0cc )M]1Wc.91Fc ă~Ą¡ąüijklĆ •A C‹ĆŒC“–Ć*N[2Xc,^5HE7 /\3]:cO>c $GOT?84    PII@YYAQKc'c%&cc a c bc (`c RJJBYZCQLc#_SDU<Ycc " ; 7 < I 6 = V c   c     c Page 9184 of 9661 Document Number FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State Status Last Event Event Date Filed Event Effective Date Department of State / Division of Corporations / Search Records /Search by Entity Name /Detail by Entity Name Florida Limited Liability Company SOUTHERN RESERVES, L.L.C. Filing Information L02000026345 55-0808785 10/07/2002 FL ACTIVE LC STMNT OF AUTHORITY 21 02/02/2021 NONE Principal Address 2875 JUPITER PARK DRIVE SUITE 1100 JUPITER, FL 33458 Changed: 01/25/2021 Mailing Address 2875 JUPITER PARK DRIVE SUITE 1100 JUPITER, FL 33458 Changed: 01/25/2021 Registered Agent Name & Address STEWART, NICK 2875 JUPITER PARK DRIVE SUITE 1100 JUPITER, FL 33458 Name Changed: 03/01/2017 Address Changed: 01/25/2021 Authorized Person(s) Detail Name & Address Title MGRM D එඞඑඛඑ඗ඖ ඗ඎ C඗ක඘඗කඉගඑ඗ඖඛFlorida Department of State Page 9185 of 9661 STEWART, NICK T2875 JUPITER PARK DRIVE1100JUPITER, FL 33458Annual ReportsReport Year Filed Date2022 03/18/20222023 05/03/2023 2024 01/22/2024 Document Images 01/22/2024 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 05/03/2023 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/18/2022 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/02/2021 -- CORLCAUTH View image in PDF format 01/25/2021 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/17/2020 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/21/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/09/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/01/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/21/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/21/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/05/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/24/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/26/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/26/2011 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/20/2010 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/24/2009 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/04/2008 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/12/2007 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/13/2006 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/12/2005 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/30/2004 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/19/2003 -- LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION View image in PDF format 10/07/2002 -- Florida Limited Liabilites View image in PDF format Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations Page 9186 of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ŽJfiDLePƒ„x_DdtŽ~:rŽ:?Ybe~[DMDCŽ<DGejDŽ_DŽ<€Ž_D:cqŽeHŽ…qP?:[ŽgkDqDc>DŽelŽ ,ed\RdDŽdet:mQ:tRebŽuOQrŽ 6†ŽC:€ŽeIŽyŽ@Ž Ž‡Ž<€ŽgnSbvECŽd:_DŽeJŽe~dDlŽeoŽhz:[WIUDjŽAŽˆ Ž‰Ž Ž 1{?OŽgDmredrŽ*et:m€Ž.{<]T?Ž_{rtŽ?OD?YŽ:gg^U?:<[DŽ<eŽ ŠgDmred:]]€ŽZde~bŽteŽ_D ":rŽgmeC{?DCŽ:Ž?{mmDbtŽCmU}DmrŽ[U?DdrDŽ777777Ž8Ž ":rŽg ` C{?DCŽ ‹Ž :rŽUCDdtTKX?:tUeb Ž Ž *et:m€Ž1VNb:t|mDŽŒŽ ŽsŽw‚;Ž9Ž         2#+-+Ž245Ž -()%22&-+Ž#$ŽŽ !/'02Ž FBa=pŽŽŽ Page 9187 of 9661 Document Number FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State Status Department of State /Division of Corporations /Search Records /Search by Entity Name /Detail by Entity Name Florida Limited Liability Company SOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIES, LLC Filing Information L03000014304 57-1171149 04/22/2003 FL ACTIVE Principal Address 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Changed: 02/15/2021 Mailing Address 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Changed: 02/15/2021 Registered Agent Name & Address Stewart, Nick 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Name Changed: 04/14/2014 Address Changed: 02/15/2021 Authorized Person(s) Detail Name & Address Title Manager STEWART, NICK T 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 D එඞඑඛඑ඗ඖ ඗ඎ C ඗ක඘඗කඉගඑ඗ඖඛFlorida Department of State Page 9188 of 9661 Jupiter, FL 33458Title Authorized MemberBEALE, JOSEPH E, Jr.5105 SE WILLIAMS WAYSTUART, FL 34997Title Authorized MemberBROWN RANCH1626 90TH AVENUE VERO BEACH, FL 32966 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2022 03/18/2022 2023 05/03/2023 2024 01/25/2024 Document Images 01/25/2024 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 05/03/2023 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/18/2022 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/15/2021 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/17/2020 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/21/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/09/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/01/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/02/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/24/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/14/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/25/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/06/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/05/2011 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/15/2010 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/28/2009 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/11/2008 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/23/2007 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/21/2006 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/28/2005 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/13/2004 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/22/2003 -- Florida Limited Liabilites View image in PDF format Page 9189 of 9661 MASTER CONCEPT PLANEXHIBIT BREVISED JUNE 30, 2025SHEET NO:4365 Radio Road, Suite 201Naples, Florida 34104P: 239.434.6060Company Cert. of AuthorizationNo. 00009496REVISIONSDATE:REV.DESCRIPTIONAS NOTEDSCALE:STEWART MATERIALSLEGENDPREVIOUSLY PERMITTED LAND USE SUMMARYSEE INSET 1INSET 11" = 600'SCALE:1" = 1000'SCALE:PROPOSED LAND USE SUMMARYPRESERVE CALCULATIONSPage 9190 of 9661 AAA-A4365 Radio Road, Suite 201Naples, Florida 34104P: 239.434.6060Company Cert. of AuthorizationNo. 00009496SHEET:REVISIONSDATEREV.DESCRIPTIONMASTER CONCEPT PLANREVISED JUNE 30, 2025AS NOTEDSCALE:STEWART MININGLEGENDPREVIOUSLY PERMITTED LAND USE SUMMARY1" = 300'SCALE:1" = 150'SCALE:SEE INSET 1INSET 1PROPOSED LAND USE SUMMARYPRESERVE CALCULATIONSPage 9191 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com D esigningE xcellenceCivil Engineering • Planning • PermittingFebruary 6, 2025Michael SawyerProject Manager II Transportation Management Services Department 2685 S Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Re: CU-20240003054 - Stewart Materials Expansion (CU) TIS Waiver Request Dear Mr. Sawyer: This letter is a formal request for a no impact TIS Waiver per the email correspondence attached for CU20240003054. The proposed relocation of the processing plant at 3000 Edwards Grove Rd is not anticipated to generate additional trips as the proposed works will not expand on the previously permitted excavation boundary per Resolution 2021-013 and companion Lake Excavation permit PL20200002472. Should you have any questions or require additional information please contact me directly at 239.434.6060 or via email: Brandon@davidsonengineering.com Sincerely, Brandon T. Copper, P.E. Project Manager Page 9192 of 9661 1 Brandon CopperFrom:Michael Sawyer <Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov>Sent:Tuesday, January 28, 2025 4:02 PMTo:Brandon Copper; Lorraine LantzCc:Sean Sammon; Anthony KhawajaSubject:RE: CU-20240003054 - Stewart Materials Expansion (CU) Good afternoon, Brandon, Please submit the waiver request with the next submittal. Just make the request on a separate sheet of letterhead noting there are no increases in the number of trips proposed with the revised CU. I’m sure you’ll make sure everyone understands the revised petition request. You are correct the issue is that the 50’-utility easement shown on the master plan is that it is for FP&L use only which cannot be shared with the future Little League corridor/ROW reservation. You are also correct the issue is new to our office with the FP&L solar farms. The reservation needs to be 250’ (if it includes the FP&L easement) measured from your western development line or 200’ from the eastern edge of the FP&L easement. I hope that’s somewhat clear...it does get a little complicated. Again, please let me know of any questions or if you need anything. I’m glad to see this petition moving forward and apologize for any delays our office may have unintentionally caused. Respectfully, Michael Sawyer Project Manager II Transportation Management Services Department Transportation Planning 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 239-252-2926 michael.sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov Michael Sawyer Project Manager II Transportation Engineering Office:239-252-2926 Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov Page 9193 of 9661 2 &ƌŽŵ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх^ĞŶƚ͗dƵĞƐĚĂLJ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϴ͕ϮϬϮϱϯ͗ϯϰWDdŽ͗DŝĐŚĂĞů^ĂǁLJĞƌфDŝĐŚĂĞů͘^ĂǁLJĞƌΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх͖>ŽƌƌĂŝŶĞ>ĂŶƚnjф>ŽƌƌĂŝŶĞ͘>ĂŶƚnjΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀхĐ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх͖ŶƚŚŽŶLJ<ŚĂǁĂũĂфŶƚŚŽŶLJ͘<ŚĂǁĂũĂΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐdžƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿEXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, Michael. May I simply request the waiver in my response letter or is there a form that we must provide? Regarding the easements…FPL called me at the end of last week, so I had a feeling something was in the works. The approved resolution shows both the 50’ utility easement and 200’ ROW reservation, which overlaps the 50’ easement. Are you requesting that the 200’ is in addition to the 50’ for a total of 250’? I just want to make sure we’re on the same page, so I present it to the Stewart Materials team correctly. Brandon Copper, P.E. Project Manager Davidson Engineering, Inc.  Main: 239.434.6060 Brandon@davidsonengineering.com www.davidsonengineering.com Page 9194 of 9661 3 &ƌŽŵ͗DŝĐŚĂĞů^ĂǁLJĞƌфDŝĐŚĂĞů͘^ĂǁLJĞƌΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх^ĞŶƚ͗DŽŶĚĂLJ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϳ͕ϮϬϮϱϰ͗ϯϱWDdŽ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх͖>ŽƌƌĂŝŶĞ>ĂŶƚnjф>ŽƌƌĂŝŶĞ͘>ĂŶƚnjΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀхĐ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх͖ŶƚŚŽŶLJ<ŚĂǁĂũĂфŶƚŚŽŶLJ͘<ŚĂǁĂũĂΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐdžƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿGood afternoon, Brandon, If the new direction does not result in additional mining areas/potential new trips, then it’s possible to request a TIS waiver instead of the TIS. You already have the TIS, but this is a viable alternative with the new direction. We do need you to revise the master plan for the Little League extension. We are working with the FP&L staff permitting the solar farms to the west and south of your project. Part of this discussion is the discovery that there is a 50’ wide FP&L easement that runs north and south including the western edge of Steward Materials. The Little League reservation intended to provide 200 feet of usable width which is not possible with the FP&L easement. I think perhaps the real issue is the number of easements in this location and the scale needed to show your entire site. Please revise your master plan to show the full 200-foot reservation as originally approved by the BCC. Please let me know if you have any follow-up questions or need anything from our team. Respectfully, Michael Sawyer Project Manager II Transportation Management Services Department Transportation Planning 2685 South Horseshoe Drive, Suite 103 Naples, Florida 34104 239-252-2926 michael.sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov Michael Sawyer Project Manager II Transportation Engineering Office:239-252-2926 Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov &ƌŽŵ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх ^ĞŶƚ͗DŽŶĚĂLJ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϳ͕ϮϬϮϱϵ͗ϰϱD dŽ͗DŝĐŚĂĞů^ĂǁLJĞƌфDŝĐŚĂĞů͘^ĂǁLJĞƌΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх Page 9195 of 9661 4 Đ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗&t͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐdžƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿEXTERNAL EMAIL:This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Good morning, Michael Can you please opine on the below? Since the conditional use is not requesting to expand on the previously permitted mine, this is to entitle the neighboring parcel for mining activities (relocate the processing plant) is a TIS still required? Thank you, Brandon Copper, P.E. Project Manager Davidson Engineering, Inc. Main: 239.434.6060 Brandon@davidsonengineering.com www.davidsonengineering.com &ƌŽŵ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх ^ĞŶƚ͗&ƌŝĚĂLJ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϰ͕ϮϬϮϱϰ͗ϱϴWD dŽ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐdžƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿ Good afternoon Brandon, I went back to look at the pre-app notes and saw that the TIS was marked as required. Can you please reach out to Mike Sawyer (Michael.Sawyer@colliercountyfl.gov or 239-252-2926) who would be more appropriate to make the decision you’re requesting? Thank you, have a nice weekend. Sean Sammon Planner III Zoning Office:239-252-8422 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Sean.Sammon@colliercountyfl.gov &ƌŽŵ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх ^ĞŶƚ͗dŚƵƌƐĚĂLJ͕:ĂŶƵĂƌLJϮϯ͕ϮϬϮϱϭϮ͗ϬϯWD dŽ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐdžƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿ Page 9196 of 9661 5 EXTERNAL EMAIL:This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Good afternoon, Sean Given our change in direction with this project – now being we are trying to entitle the eastern parcel for the relocated processing plant and not an expansion of the mine itself – can you please confirm the need for a TIS? The relocation of the plant will not result in any additional trips and the existing mine will not be modified beyond what was approved under the current conditional use and excavation permit. Thank you, Brandon Copper, P.E. Project Manager Davidson Engineering, Inc. Main: 239.434.6060 Brandon@davidsonengineering.com www.davidsonengineering.com &ƌŽŵ͗ZĂLJĞůůŽǁƐфZĂLJ͘ĞůůŽǁƐΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх ^ĞŶƚ͗dŚƵƌƐĚĂLJ͕ĞĐĞŵďĞƌϱ͕ϮϬϮϰϯ͗ϰϭWD dŽ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх Đ͗^ĞĂŶ^ĂŵŵŽŶф^ĞĂŶ͘^ĂŵŵŽŶΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐdžƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿ Good afternoon, The Conditional Use petition has been reassigned to Sean Sammon after Eric’s retirement. I have copied him on this e-mail to see if he can assist with your questions. Respectfully, Ray Zoning Division - Zoning Services Section Growth Management Department Telephone: 239.252.2463 Ray Bellows Manager - Planning Zoning Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov Page 9197 of 9661 6 &ƌŽŵ͗ƌĂŶĚŽŶŽƉƉĞƌфďƌĂŶĚŽŶΛĚĂǀŝĚƐŽŶĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ĐŽŵх^ĞŶƚ͗dŚƵƌƐĚĂLJ͕ĞĐĞŵďĞƌϬϱ͕ϮϬϮϰϮ͗ϱϲWDdŽ͗ZĂLJĞůůŽǁƐфZĂLJ͘ĞůůŽǁƐΛĐŽůůŝĞƌĐŽƵŶƚLJĨů͘ŐŽǀх^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗hͲϮϬϮϰϬϬϬϯϬϱϰͲ^ƚĞǁĂƌƚDĂƚĞƌŝĂůƐdžƉĂŶƐŝŽŶ;hͿEXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. 'ŽŽĚĂĨƚĞƌŶŽŽŶ͕ZĂLJ  ƌŝĐKƌƚŵĂŶǁĂƐƚŚĞƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐƉůĂŶŶĞƌŽŶƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘KƵƌƉůĂŶŚĂƐĐŚĂŶŐĞĚ͕ĂŶĚ/ŚĂǀĞĂĨĞǁƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐĂďŽƵƚƚŚĞ ĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞǁĂLJƚŽƉƌŽĐĞĞĚ͘tŚŽƐŚŽƵůĚ/ƌĞĂĐŚŽƵƚƚŽ͍  dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵ͕  Brandon Copper, E.I.  Project Manager  Main: 239.434.6060  Brandon@davidsonengineering.com  www.DavidsonEngineering.com   Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Page 9198 of 9661 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE IMMOKALEE EXPANSION EAST PROPERTY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Performed for: Stewart Materials, //& 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 Jupiter, Florida 33458 Prepared by: Florida’s First Choice in Cultural Resource Management Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 (941) 379-6206 March 2022 Page 9199 of 9661 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE IMMOKALEE EXPANSION EAST PROPERTY, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Performed for: Stewart Materials, LLC 2875 Jupiter Park Drive Suite 1100 Jupiter, Florida 33458 Conducted by: Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 8110 Blaikie Court, Suite A Sarasota, Florida 34240 Marion Almy - Project Manager Elizabeth A. Horvath - Project Archaeologist Justin Winkler – Archaeologist March 2022 Page 9200 of 9661 i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) of the 160-acre Immokalee Expansion East property in Collier County for Stewart Materials, LLC. This project will involve most of the property being converted to a sand and gravel mine. The property is located on the west side of State Road (SR) 29, south of SR 82, in the north central portion of the county. Johnson Road is within the property. The project is being conducted as due diligence in anticipation of permitting requirements. The purpose of this CRAS was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As defined in 36 CFR Part § 800.16(d), the APE is the “geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.” Based on the scale and nature of the activities, the project has a limited potential for any indirect (visual or audible) or cumulative effects outside the immediate footprint of construction. The APE was defined as the property footprint. The survey was conducted in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations in 36 CRF Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties. It was carried out in conformity with the standards contained in the Florida Division of Cultural Resources’ (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual (FDHR 2003). In addition, this study meets the specifications set forth in Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code, and complies with Chapters 267.061 and 373.414, Florida Statutes (FS), as well as Florida’s Coastal Management Program and local regulations. The Principal Investigators meet the Secretary of the Interior's Historic Preservation Professional Qualification Standards (48 FR 44716) for archaeology, history, architecture, architectural history, or historic architecture. Background research and a review of the Florida Master Site File (FMSF) and the NRHP indicated that there are no sites recorded within the APE, and none have been recorded within two miles of the APE. The APE was considered to have a low to moderate indigenous archaeological potential based on the environmental setting and a low historic archaeological site potential. The field investigations, which included surface reconnaissance and the excavation of 96 shovel tests, discovered no archaeological sites within the APE. Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, revealed no previously recorded historic resources within or adjacent to the APE. A review of the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Immokalee quadrangle map, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) historic aerial photos, and the Collier County Property Appraiser’s data revealed no potential for historic resources within the APE (Skinner 2022; USDA 1947, 1953, 1963, 1980; USGS 1958). This was confirmed by the field investigations. Given the results of background research and field survey, including the excavation of 96 shovel tests, no archaeological sites or historic resources were discovered. Thus, there are no cultural resources that are listed, eligible for listing, or that appear potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP within the APE. As such, it is the professional opinion of ACI that the proposed undertaking will result in no historic property affected. Page 9201 of 9661 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1-12.0ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ......................................................................................... 2-12.1Project Location ........................................................................................................ 2-12.2Physiography and Geology ....................................................................................... 2-12.3Soils and Vegetation .................................................................................................. 2-32.4Paleoenvironmental Considerations .......................................................................... 2-4 3.0CULTURE HISTORY ......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1Paleoindian ................................................................................................................ 3-2 3.2Archaic ...................................................................................................................... 3-2 3.3Glades ........................................................................................................................ 3-4 3.4Colonialism ............................................................................................................... 3-5 3.5Territorial and Statehood ........................................................................................... 3-7 3.6Civil War and Aftermath ......................................................................................... 3-10 3.7Twentieth Century ................................................................................................... 3-12 3.8APE Specifics .......................................................................................................... 3-16 4.0RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODS ..................................................... 4-1 4.1Background Research and Literature Review ........................................................... 4-1 4.2Archaeological Considerations .................................................................................. 4-1 4.3Historical Considerations .......................................................................................... 4-5 4.4Field Methodology .................................................................................................... 4-5 4.5Inadvertent/Unanticipated Discoveries ..................................................................... 4-6 4.6Laboratory Methods/Curation ................................................................................... 4-7 5.0RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 5-1 5.1Archaeological Results .............................................................................................. 5-1 5.2Historical Results ...................................................................................................... 5-1 5.3Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 5-3 6.0REFERENCES CITED ....................................................................................................... 6-1 APPENDIX Survey Log Page 9202 of 9661 iii LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND PHOTOGRAPHSFigureFigure 1.1. Location of the Immokalee Expansion East APE. ............................................................ 1-2Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the APE. .................................................................................... 2-2Figure 2.2. Soil type distribution within the APE. .............................................................................. 2-4Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. ....................................................................................... 3-1Figure 3.2. 1839 Mackay and Blake map showing the approximate location of the APE. ................. 3-8 Figure 3.3. 1856 Ives map showing the approximate location of the APE. ........................................ 3-9 Figure 3.4. 1873 plat showing the APE. ............................................................................................ 3-11 Figure 3.5. 1947 Collier County map showing the APE. .................................................................. 3-14 Figure 3.6. 1958 Immokalee USGS quadrangle map. ....................................................................... 3-15 Figure 3.7. 1947 and 1980 aerial photos showing the APE. ............................................................. 3-17 Figure 4.1. Previously recorded cultural resources within 1.6 km (1 mi) of the APE. ........................ 4-2 Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests within the APE. .................................................................... 5-2 Table Table 2.1. Soil types within the APE (Liudahl et al. 1998). ................................................................ 2-4 Table 4.1. Surveys conducted within 1.6 km (1 mile) of the APE. ..................................................... 4-3 Table 4.2. Distribution of sites by water type and distance. ................................................................ 4-3 Table 4.3. Distribution of sites by drainage and soil types. ................................................................. 4-4 Photo Photo 2.1. Pasture south of Johnson Road, facing west. ..................................................................... 2-1 Photo 2.2. Modified southern wetland, facing west. ........................................................................... 2-3 Photo 2.3. Western nursery, facing southwest. ................................................................................... 2-3 Photo 5.1. Stratigraphy in the pasture. ................................................................................................ 5-1 Photo 5.2. Stratigraphy in the nursery. ................................................................................................ 5-3 Page 9203 of 9661 ACI 1-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 1.0 INTRODUCTIONArchaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) conducted a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the 160-acre Immokalee Expansion East property in Collier County for Stewart Materials, LLC. This project will involve most of the property being converted to a sand and gravel mine. The property is located on the west side of State Road (SR) 29, south of SR 82, in the north central portion of the county; Johnson Road is within the property (Figure 1.1). The project is being conducted as due diligence in anticipation of permitting requirements. The purpose of this CRAS was to locate and identify any cultural resources within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) and to assess their significance in terms of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). As defined in 36 CFR Part § 800.16(d), the APE is the “geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.” Based on the scale and nature of the activities, the project has a limited potential for any indirect (visual or audible) or cumulative effects outside the immediate footprint of construction. The APE was defined as the property footprint. The survey was conducted in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations in 36 CRF Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties. It was carried out in conformity with the standards contained in the Florida Division of Cultural Resources’ (FDHR) Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual (FDHR 2003). In addition, this study meets the specifications set forth in Chapter 1A-46, Florida Administrative Code, and complies with Chapters 267.061 and 373.414, Florida Statutes (FS), as well as Florida’s Coastal Management Program and local regulations. The Principal Investigators meet the Secretary of the Interior's Historic Preservation Professional Qualification Standards (48 FR 44716) for archaeology, history, architecture, architectural history, or historic architecture. Background research preceded the field investigations. Such research provides and informed set of expectation as to the types and locations of resources expected within the APE. In addition, the data can be used to assess the significance of any sites discovered. Page 9204 of 9661 ACI 1-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 1.1. Location of the Immokalee Expansion East APE. Page 9205 of 9661 ACI 2-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Environmental factors such as geology, topography, relative elevation, soils, vegetation, and water are important in determining where archaeological sites are likely to be located. These variables influenced what types of resources were available in an area, which in turn influenced decisions regarding settlement location and land-use patterns. Because of the influence of these environmental factors upon the inhabitants, a discussion of the environment is included. 2.1 Project Location The 160-acre APE is located in the southern quarter of Section 17 of Township 46 South, Range 29 East (United States Geological Survey [USGS] Immokalee 2013) in Collier County, Florida. It is on the west side of SR 29, south of SR 82; Johnson Road runs east/west through the center of the APE (Figure 2.1). The area consists of pasture with a residence and religious retreat area, a modified chain of wetlands, and the western portion of the APE is an abandoned plant nursery with associated buildings and infrastructure (Photos 2.1-2.4). Photo 2.1. Pasture south of Johnson Road, facing west. 2.2 Physiography and Geology According to White (1970), Collier County is included in the southern, or distal, physiographic zone, and more specifically, the APE is within the Immokalee Rise. It sits at an elevation of 11 to 12 meters (m) (35-40 feet [ft]) above mean sea level. The property is underlain by the Tamiami formation, which is surficially evidenced by medium fine sand and silt (Florida Department of Environmental Protection [FDEP] 2001a, 2001b). Page 9206 of 9661 ACI 2-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 2.1. Environmental setting of the APE. Page 9207 of 9661 ACI 2-3 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Photo 2.2. Modified southern wetland, facing west. Photo 2.3. Western nursery, facing southwest. 2.3 Soils and Vegetation According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the APE is situated within the Immokalee-Oldsmar-Basinger soil association (Liudahl et al. 1998). It is characterized by nearly level, poorly drained soils on flatwoods and in sloughs. The native vegetation of the flatwoods consists of saw palmetto and scattered areas of South Florida slash pine, wax myrtle, and gallberry. The natural vegetation in the sloughs consists of scattered areas of slash pine, scrub cypress, cabbage palm, saw palmetto, wax myrtle, sand cordgrass, pineland threeawn, panicums, and chalky bluestem. There are Page 9208 of 9661 ACI 2-4 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 four soil types within the APE, and they are listed in Table 2.1 and their locations are depicted on (Figure 2.2) (USDA 2018). Table 2.1. Soil types within the APE (Liudahl et al. 1998).Soil type, % slopes Drainage Setting Chobee, Winder & Gator soils, depressional Very poor Depressions and marshes Immokalee fine sand Poor Flatwoods Oldsmar fine sand Poor Flatwoods Pomello fine sand Moderately well Low ridges on the flatwoods Figure 2.2. Soil type distribution within the APE. 2.4 Paleoenvironmental Considerations The early environment of the region was different from that seen today. Sea levels were lower, the climate was arid, and fresh water was scarce. An understanding of human ecology during the earliest periods of human occupation in Florida cannot be based on observations of the modern environment because of changes in water availability, botanical communities, and faunal resources. Indigenous inhabitants would have developed cultural adaptations in response to the environmental changes taking place, which were then reflected in settlement patterns, site types, artifact forms, and subsistence economies. Due to arid conditions between 16,500 and 12,500 years ago, the perched water aquifer and potable water supplies were absent. Palynological studies conducted in Florida and Georgia suggest that between 13,000 and 5000 years ago, this area was covered with an upland vegetation community of scrub oak and prairie (Watts 1969, 1971, 1975). However, the environment was not static. Evidence recovered from the inundated Page-Ladson Site in north Florida has clearly demonstrated that there were two periods of low water tables and dry climatic conditions and two episodes of elevated water tables and wet conditions (Dunbar 2006b). Page 9209 of 9661 ACI 2-5 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 By 5000 years ago, a climatic event marking a brief return to Pleistocene climatic conditions induced a change toward more open vegetation. Southern pine forests replaced the oak savannas. Extensive marshes and swamps developed along the coasts and subtropical hardwood forests became established along the southern tip of Florida (Delcourt and Delcourt 1981). Northern Florida saw an increase in oak species, grasses, and sedges (Carbone 1983). In south central Florida, pollen cores were dominated by wax myrtle and pine. The assemblage suggests that by this time, a forest dominated by longleaf pine along with cypress swamps and bayheads were present (Watts 1971, 1975). About 5000 years ago, surface water was plentiful in karst terrains and the level of the Floridan aquifer rose to 1.5 m (5 ft) above present levels. With the establishment of warmer winters and cooler summers than in the preceding early Holocene, the fire-adapted pine communities prevailed. These depend on the high summer precipitation caused by the thunderstorms and the accompanying lightning strikes to spark the fires (Watts et al. 1996; Watts and Hansen 1994). The increased precipitation also resulted in the formation of the large swamp systems such as the Okefenokee and Everglades (Gleason and Stone 1994). After this time, modern floral, climatic, and environmental conditions began to be established. Page 9210 of 9661 ACI 3-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 3.0 CULTURE HISTORY A discussion of the culture history the region provides a framework within which the local archaeological and historic record can be examined. Archaeological and historic sites are not individual entities but are the remains of once dynamic cultural systems. As a result, they cannot be adequately examined or interpreted without reference to other sites and resources in the area. In general, the culture history of an area (i.e., an archaeological region) outlines the sequence of archaeological cultures through time. These cultures are defined largely in geographical terms but also reflect shared environmental and cultural factors. The APE is situated at the interface of the Caloosahatchee and Glades archaeological regions but is inland far enough to be considered part of the Glades culture area due to the lack of intensive coastal interaction (Carr and Beriault 1984; Griffin 1988) (Figure 3.1). It should be noted that this regional assignment is one of several competing interpretations for the area, and Griffin (1988) supplies an excellent discussion of alterative groupings. Figure 3.1. Florida Archaeological Regions. The area is better understood after the introduction of pottery (ca. 500 BCE [Before Common Era]). Prior to this, regional characteristics of native populations are not easily identified, as malleable materials such as textiles and basketry, which lend themselves to cultural expression, are typically destroyed by environmental processes. With the arrival of pottery, the clay provided both a means of cultural expression and an archaeologically durable artifact. Thus, the use of pottery as a marker of cultural diversity probably post-dates the inception of distinct Florida cultures by many centuries. The local history of the region is divided into four broad periods named with reference to the prevailing governmental powers or historical trends. The first period, Colonialism, occurred during the exploration and control of Florida by the Spanish and British from around 1513 until 1821. At that time, Florida became a territory of the United States (U.S.) and 21 years later became a State (Territorial and Page 9211 of 9661 ACI 3-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Statehood). The Civil War and Aftermath (1861-1900) period covers the Civil War, the period of Reconstruction following the war, and the late 1800s, when the transportation systems were dramatically increased and development throughout the state expanded. The Twentieth Century period has subperiods based on important historic events such as the World Wars, the Boom of the 1920s, and the Depression. Each of these periods evidenced differential development and utilization of the region, thus effecting the historic archeological site distribution. 3.1 Paleoindian Current archaeological evidence indicates that the earliest human occupation of the Florida peninsula dates back some 13,500 years ago or ca. 11,500 BCE (Widmer 1988). The earliest occupation is referred to as the Paleoindian period, which lasted until approximately 7000 BCE. During this time, the climate of South Florida was much drier than today. Sea level was 80 to 130 m (260-425 ft) lower than present, and the coast extended approximately 160 kilometers (km) (100 miles) seaward on the Gulf coast. With lower sea levels, today’s well-watered inland environments were arid uplands (Milanich 1994). Lake Okeechobee, the Caloosahatchee, Myakka, and Peace Rivers, the Big Cypress Swamp, and the Everglades were probably dry. Because of drier global conditions and little or no surface water available for evaporation, Florida’s rainfall was much lower than at present (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980). Potable water was obtainable at sinkholes, where the lower water table could be reached. Plant and animal life were also more diverse around the oases that were frequented by both people and game animals (Milanich 1994; Widmer 1988). Thus, the prevailing environmental conditions were largely uninviting to human habitation during the Paleoindian period (Griffin 1988:191). Given the inhospitable climate, it is not surprising that the population was sparse and Paleoindian sites are uncommon in south Florida. Exceptions include two sites to the north in Sarasota County, Little Salt Springs (Clausen et al. 1979) and Warm Mineral Springs (Clausen et al. 1975a, 1975b; Cockrell and Murphy 1978) and one site to the southeast, Cutler Fossil Site, in Dade County (Carr 1986). Archaeologists hypothesize that this period was characterized by small groups utilizing a hunting and gathering mode of subsistence. Dunbar (2006a:540) suggests that Paleoindians identified and migrated to “unexploited resource-rich areas” of food. Permanent sources of water, scarce during this time, were very important in settlement selection as well (Daniel and Wisenbaker 1987). This settlement model, often referred to as the Oasis Hypothesis, has a high correlation with geologic features in southern Florida such as deep sink holes like those noted in Sarasota and Dade Counties (Milanich 1994:41). Sites of this period are most readily identified based on distinctive lanceolate shaped stone projectile points including those of the Simpson and Suwannee types (Bullen 1975). The tool assemblage also included items manufactured of bone, wood, and very likely leather, as well as plant fibers (Clausen et al. 1979). 3.2 Archaic The succeeding Archaic period is divided into three temporal periods: Early Archaic (ca. 7000 to 5000 BCE), Middle Archaic (ca. 5000 to 2000 BCE), and the Late Archaic (ca. 2000 to 500 BCE). According to Widmer (1988), the extreme aridity of the south Florida region during the Early Archaic period may have led to the abandonment of the area. Sites of the Early Archaic and Middle Archaic are not common in southern Florida. In a recent archaeological context, James Pepe confirms the locations of three Early Archaic and 13 Middle Archaic sites in the 13 county Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Project (CERP) area (Janus Research 2008). Initially, the settlement patterns and tools of Page 9212 of 9661 ACI 3-3 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 the Early Archaic were like those of the preceding Paleoindian period, but through time, more wetland habitats began to emerge.During the Archaic, marked environmental changes occurred that had profound influence upon human settlement and subsistence practices. Humans adapted to this changing environment and regional differences are reflected in the archaeological record (Russo 1994a, 1994b; Sassaman 2008). Among the landscape alterations were rises in sea and water table levels that resulted in the creation of more available surface water. It was during this period that Lake Okeechobee, the Everglades, the Big Cypress Swamp, and the Caloosahatchee and Peace Rivers formed. In addition, hydrological changes, this period is characterized by the spread of mesic forests and the beginnings of modern vegetation communities including pine forests and cypress swamps (Griffin 1988; Widmer 1988). Two Early Archaic horizons, the Bolen and the Kirk, have been identified (Janus Research 2008). The main diagnostic markers for the Bolen Early Archaic are side-notched projectile points such as the Bolen and Greenbriar types as well as Kirk Corner-Notched (Austin 1997; Bullen 1975; Farr 2006). Other stone artifacts include adzes, Edgefield scrapers, end scrapers, spokeshaves with graver spurs, side scrapers, and Waller knives (Purdy 1981). In southern Florida, the archaeological record for the Middle Archaic is better known than the Early Archaic. Among the material culture inventory are several varieties of stemmed, broad blade projectile points including those of the Newnan, Levy, Marion, and Putnam types (Bullen 1975). At sites where preservation is good, such as sinkholes and ponds, an elaborate bone tool assemblage is recognized along with shell tools and complicated weaving (Beriault et al. 1981; Wheeler 1994). In addition, artifacts have been found in the surrounding upland areas, such as the upland palmetto and pine flatwoods surrounding the Bay West Site (Beriault et al. 1981). Along the coast, excavations on both Horr’s Island in Collier County and Useppa Island in Lee County (Milanich et al. 1984; Russo 1991) have uncovered pre-ceramic shell middens that date to the Middle Archaic period. The Horr’s Island shell ring is accompanied by at least three ceremonial mounds. Large architectural features such as these were designed to divide, separate, and elevate above other physical positions within the settlement as a reflection and reinforcement of the social segmentation within society (Russo 2008:21). Mortuary sites, characterized by interments in shallow ponds and sloughs, as discovered at the Little Salt Springs Site in Sarasota County (Clausen et al. 1979) and the Bay West Site in Collier County (Beriault et al. 1981), are also distinctive of the Middle Archaic. The beginning of the Late (or Ceramic) Archaic period is similar to the Middle Archaic but includes the addition of pottery. The earliest pottery in the south Florida region is fiber-tempered (Orange Plain and Orange Incised), as represented at sites on Key Marco (Cockrell 1970; Widmer 1974). Projectile points of the Late Archaic are primarily stemmed and corner-notched, and include the Culbreath, Clay, and Lafayette types (Bullen 1975). Other Late Archaic lithic tools included hafted scrapers and ovate and triangular-shaped knives (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980). Essentially modern environmental conditions were reached by the beginning of the Late Archaic period, when freshwater resources were available throughout southern Florida. Sea levels continued to rise slightly during the post Archaic periods, inundating small knolls located along the edge of the Everglades in the process (Carr et al. 1991:125-126; Wheeler 2004:49). The emergence of stable coastal environments led to greater estuarine richness, which permitted larger human populations and regionalization of cultures as people adapted to specific habitats (Milanich 1994:83). The South Florida Native Americans increased their reliance on marine resources in coastal areas and expanded hunting, fishing, and plant collection throughout the interior (Carr 2002:195). Page 9213 of 9661 ACI 3-4 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Until recently, variations of Bullen’s chronology for the Late Archaic Orange culture in northeastern Florida were generally used for the Late Archaic in southern Florida. Fiber-tempered pottery, the earliest known for all North America, was considered a marker for the ceramic portion of the Late Archaic. The use of this standard fiber-tempered sequence for the Late Archaic in southern Florida has come into question. Based on his research in southwestern Florida, Widmer (1988:68) hypothesized that the earliest Late Archaic sites included “untempered chalky pottery and limestone-tempered pottery as well as the usual fiber-tempered Orange pottery.” Austin (1997:136) stated that the “identification of a true Orange Horizon in south Florida is debatable.” Instead, what is more common is the presence of “semi-fiber tempered” pottery in the basal levels of middens, “often in association with thick St. Johns Plain or sand tempered plain sherds, and overlying either culturally sterile sands, or sparse scatters of lithic artifacts” (Austin 1996, 1997). Both Widmer and Austin agreed that semi- fiber tempered components at sites throughout southern Florida are “ephemeral” and soon replaced in the archaeological record by components consisting exclusively of sand-tempered pottery (Austin 1997:136; Widmer 1988:72-73). Importantly, it is now becoming clear that many of the ubiquitous faunal bone middens located in the interior wetlands of southern Florida date to the Late Archaic, even though many of them lack pottery. Such sites are difficult to date because, not only do they often lack chronologically diagnostic artifacts, most of the faunal bone at the sites lacks collagen, the datable material in bone samples that are sent to radiocarbon labs. Nonetheless, ongoing research by the National Park Service in the Big Cypress National Preserve and Everglades National Park has yielded dense aceramic faunal bone middens yielding radiocarbon dates between 2800 and 1500 BCE (Schwadron 2006). 3.3 Glades The termination of the Late or Ceramic Archaic corresponds to a time of environmental change. The maturing of productive estuarine systems was accompanied by cultural changes leading to the establishment of what John Goggin originally defined as the “Glades Tradition” (Griffin 1988:133). The Glades Tradition was characterized by “the exploitation of the food resources of the tropical coastal waters, with secondary dependence on game and some use of wild plant foods. Agriculture was apparently not practiced, but pottery was extensively used” (Goggin 1949:28). Unlike much of peninsular Florida, the region does not contain deposits of chert, and as such, stone artifacts are rare. Instead of stone, shell and bone were used as raw materials for tools (Milanich 1994:302). Most information concerning the post-500 BCE indigenous populations is derived from coastal sites where the subsistence patterns are typified by the extensive exploitation of fish and shellfish, wild plants, and inland game, like deer. Inland sites show a greater reliance on interior wetland resources. Known inland sites often consist of sand burial mounds and shell and dirt middens along major water courses, and small dirt middens containing animal bone and pottery in oak/palm hammocks, or palm tree islands associated with freshwater marshes (Griffin 1988). These islands of dry ground provided space for settlements (Carr 2002). Glades I - Beginning around 500 BCE, fiber-tempered and semi fiber-tempered pottery of the Late Archaic period was replaced by sand-tempered pottery (Glades Plain). This change in tempering agent marks the beginning the Glades cultural tradition. For 700 years, sand-tempered plain pottery dominated the assemblage, but from 200 CE (Common Era) to 800 CE, Gordon’s Pass Incised, Sanibel Incised, and a decorated pottery type that has not been classified, were the predominant decorated wares (Carr and Beriault 1984; Griffin 1988). The tremendous increase in Glades I sites within the Big Cypress indicates a dramatic increase in the usage of the area during this time (Widmer 1988), and the Page 9214 of 9661 ACI 3-5 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 geographic extent of the Glades I diagnostics indicates a considerable degree of interchange and interaction (Griffin 1988). Glades II (800 to 1200 CE) is marked by a tremendous diversity in decorated ceramic types. Goggin (n.d.) described the decorations as being “neatly and cleanly cut and apparently made with swift cutting strokes while the clay is partially dry.” Glades IIa (750-900 CE) is identified by the presence of Key Largo Incised, Opa Locka Incised, and Miami Incised. During Glades IIb (900-1100 CE), Key Largo Incised remained the primary decorated ware. The number of sites increased, and the period would appear to be one of “relative stability in technology and subsistence” (Griffin 1988:140). From ca. 1100 to 1200 CE there is conspicuous absence of decorated pottery, and the number of sites drops dramatically (Griffin 1988:142). This cultural hiatus has been correlated to the NeoAtlantic warm period and associated with high sea levels (Fairbridge 1984; Gleason et al. 1984). Glades III begins with the reintroduction of decorated ceramics; however, the motifs and techniques are noticeably different from previous styles. Glades IIIa (1200-1400 CE) is identified by the appearance of Surfside Incised, St. Johns Check Stamped, and Safety Harbor wares. There is also an accompanying increase in bone ornaments. Then again, ca. 1400 CE, ceramic decoration ceases except for tooled rim types (Griffin 1988). Griffin hypothesizes that this ceramic style might have been associated with increasing Calusa influence in the area (Griffin 1988:142). Whereas the earlier cultural periods of the Glades area are defined exclusively by the archaeological record, historical documents provide greater information, including tribal names, for the peoples of the terminal Glades III period. Much of the early historical ethnographic information is derived from the account of Hernando d’Escalante Fontaneda, a Spanish captive of the Calusa (True 1944). During his 17-year captivity, Fontaneda learned of the political structure, economy, social hierarchy, and religion of the south Florida indigenous. 3.4 Colonialism The cultural traditions of the native Floridians changed because of European expansion into America. The initial events, authorized by the Spanish crown in the 1500s, ushered in devastating European contact. After Ponce de Leon’s landing near St. Augustine and circumnavigation of the peninsula in 1513, official Spanish explorations were confined to the west coast of Florida until 1565. Florida’s east coast, lacking deep-water harbors like Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor, was left to a few shipwrecked sailors from treasure ships, which, by 1551, sailed through the Straits of Florida on their way to Spain. When the first Europeans arrived in coastal southwest Florida in the 16th century, they encountered the Calusa, a powerful, complex society ruled by a paramount chief. The principal town of the Calusa is thought to have been on Mound Key in Estero Bay. Documents suggest that the Calusa chief ruled over 50 towns, from which he exacted tribute (Widmer 1988). Between 1513 and 1558, Spain launched several expeditions of exploration and ultimately failed, colonization of La Florida. Archaeological evidence of contact can be found in the form of European trade goods such as glass beads, bells, and trinkets recovered from village sites. Prior to the settlement of St. Augustine in 1565, European contact with the indigenous peoples was sporadic and brief; however, the repercussions were devastating. The southeastern indigenous population in 1500 has been estimated at 1.5 to 2 million (Dobyns 1983). Following exposure to European diseases such as bubonic plague, dysentery, influenza, and smallpox, epidemics to which they had no immunity, the native population was reduced by as much as 90% (Ramenofsky 1987). The social consequences of such a swift and merciless depopulation were staggering. Within 87 years of Ponce de Leon’s landing, the Mississippian cultures of the Southeast were collapsed (Smith 1987). In 1708, the Spanish Page 9215 of 9661 ACI 3-6 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 government reported that three hundred refugees were all that remained of the original Florida population (Mulroy 1993). Along the Gulf Coast between Charlotte Harbor and Tampa Bay, Spanish and Cuban anglers established communities, or “ranchos,” with the earliest being at Useppa Island and San Carlos Bay (Hammond 1973; Palov 1999). There is growing archaeological evidence that the surviving Native Americans of the region were assimilated into these mixed communities (Almy 2001; Hann 1991; Neill 1968; Palov 1999). These west coast ranchos supplied dried fish to Cuban and northern markets until the mid-1830s, when the Seminole Wars and customs control closed the fisheries. During the two centuries following the settlement of St. Augustine, the Spanish widened their Florida holdings to include the settlement at Pensacola and a garrison at Saint Marks. With the British to the north and the French to the west, the Spanish colony of La Florida was extremely fragile. In the early 1700s, Spain invited some of the Lower Creek, displaced by British settlements, into La Florida to provide a hostile buffer against the British (Mulroy 1993). What formed as a border population evolved as other bands of Lower Creek extraction moved into the peninsula. This first migration formed a confederation, which included Cowkeeper and his Alachua band, the Apalachicolas, and the Mikasukis (Mulroy 1993). The Treaty of Paris (1763) reallocated the British, French, and Spanish holdings in America. As a result, Florida was ceded to Great Britain. After this, bands of Upper Creek, Muskogee speakers, began moving into Florida, increasing the indigenous population to around two thousand by 1790 (Mulroy 1993). Although cultural distinctions existed between the various Native American groups entering Florida, Europeans collectively called them Seminoles: The word Seminole means runaway or broken off. Hence Seminole is a distinctive appellation, applicable to all the Indians in the Territory of Florida, as all of them run away, or broke off, from the Creek or Nuiscoge [Muskogee] nation (U.S. Congress 1837). The Seminoles formed, at various times, loose confederacies for mutual protection against the new American Nation to the north (Tebeau 1980:72) which considered them to be “the wildest and fiercest remnant of a tribe which has been distinguished for their ceaseless opposition to the arts of civilization” (U.S. Congress 1850). The Seminoles were joined by escaped slaves from South Carolina and Georgia (Porter 1996), “many of whom were seduced from the service of their masters” (Jackson et al. 1817-1818). The loss of slave labor, particularly considering the abolitionists’ movement in the northeast, coupled with the anxiety of having a free and hostile slave population immediately to the south, caused great concern among plantation owners. This historically underestimated nuance of the Seminole Wars prompted General Thomas S. Jesup to say, “This you may be assured is a negro and not an Indian War” (Knetsch 2003:104). Following the treaty of Paris (1763), the ensuing decades witnessed the American Revolution during which British loyalists immigrated to Florida. Following the Revolution, the second Treaty of Paris (1783) returned Florida to Spain; however, Spanish influence was nominal during this second period of ownership. For the next 36 years, Spain, from the vantage of Florida, watched with growing concern as the infant American Nation to the north gained momentum. When the U.S. acquired the Louisiana Purchase from France in 1803, Spain was hemmed in. When the Seminoles began cross-border raids from Spanish Florida into the U.S., General Andrew Jackson was commissioned to defend the nation. His orders permitted him to cross the international border to pursue Seminoles, but he was to respect Spanish authority. General Jackson’s Page 9216 of 9661 ACI 3-7 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 subsequent actions belie either tacit instructions or a personal agenda, as he killed hundreds of Seminoles and runaway slaves, took control of several Spanish garrisons and towns, confiscated the Spanish royal archives, named an American as governor of the area, and announced that the Spanish economic laws would be replaced by the revenue laws of the U.S. (Tebeau 1980). This aggression understandably strained relations between the U.S. and Spain. Spain, who had more pressing concerns with its Central and South American colonies, ceded Florida to the U.S. in the Adams-Onis Treaty of 1819 in exchange for the territory west of the Sabine River. 3.5 Territorial and Statehood Andrew Jackson, named provisional governor of Florida, divided the territory into St. Johns and Escambia Counties. At that time, St. Johns County encompassed all of Florida lying east of the Suwannee River, and Escambia County included the land lying to the west. In the first territorial census in 1825, some 317 persons reportedly lived in South Florida; by 1830 that number had risen to 517 (Tebeau 1980:134). Although what became known as the First Seminole War (the cross-border hostilities between the U.S. and the Seminoles) was fought in north Florida, the Treaty of Moultrie Creek in 1823, at the end of the war, was to affect the settlement of south Florida. In exchange for occupancy of a four- million-acre reservation south of Ocala and north of Charlotte Harbor, the Seminoles relinquished their claim to the remainder of the peninsula (Covington 1958; Mahon 1985). The treaty satisfied neither the Indigenous population nor the settlers. The inadequacy of the reservation, the desperate situation of the Seminoles, and the demand of would-be settlers for their removal, produced another conflict. By 1835, the Second Seminole War was underway, initiated with the Seminole attack on Major Dade’s company in route to Fort King. Although much of the Second Seminole War occurred in central Florida, as the Seminoles fled southward into the Big Cypress and Everglades, U.S. forces pursued them. In October 1840, U.S. Secretary of War Joel Poinsett advised commander Armistead that the construction of fixed post installations should be discontinued, and temporary depots should be adopted (Knetsch 2003). This new strategy was a direct response to the guerilla-like warfare utilized by the Seminoles and the abandonment of set piece warfare. Because of this directive, the landscape of south Florida was dotted with depots and only slightly more substantial “forts.” The forts of south Florida very rarely approximated the size and permanency of forts such as Brooke, King, and Mellon. The Mackay and Blake map from this time shows a number of roads/trails in the vicinity and Forts Adams, Deynaud, and Thompson to the north and Fort Keais to the south (Mackay and Blake 1839) (Figure 3.2). Geo-referencing maps from this time is a difficult proposition, thus this figure shows the approximate location of the APE. The federal government ended the Second Seminole War in 1842 by withdrawing troops from Florida. At the war’s end, some of the battle-weary Seminoles were persuaded to emigrate to the Oklahoma Reservation where the federal government had set aside land for them. After much political deliberation over the fate of black Seminoles (Knetsch 2003:126), approximately 500 black Seminoles were allowed to accompany the “red Seminoles” west (Porter 1996). Those Seminoles who wished to remain in Florida could do so, but the reservation boundary was redrawn, reducing Seminole lands to south and west of Lake Istokpoga in Highlands County. To limit contact between the Seminoles and Cuban anglers, the offshore islands were excluded from the territory (Covington 1982:3). The government considered these two and one half million acres “a temporary hunting and planting reserve” (Covington 1982:3) and continued to pressure the remaining Seminoles to leave by “sending a delegation of their tribe, which have emigrated West, to visit their brethren in Florida, and explain to them the advantages of rejoining their tribe” (U.S. Congress 1850). Page 9217 of 9661 ACI 3-8 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 3.2. 1839 Mackay and Blake map showing the approximate location of the APE. In 1845, the Union admitted the State of Florida with Tallahassee as the state capital and survey and exploration of the Big Cypress and Okeechobee areas was intensified. Tension mounted as the Seminoles watched with growing alarm the passage of military patrols and survey parties, and complaints were made to Indian Agent Captain Casey that such activities made hostilities inevitable (Covington 1982:30). Patrols typically found little remaining of previous military installations; however, navigation and location was always in doubt given the limited cartography and featureless swamps. One officer lamented that “The maps represent the shape of the Big Cypress so differently in this portion of it and also the course of the creek Okholoakooche [Okaloacoochee Slough] from what I found that I felt doubts if I had yet reached the right place.” On January 22, 1855, Lt. George Hartsuff, appointed topographical engineer and main surveyor, began exploration of the Big Cypress and Everglades. During this time, he helped establish Forts Simon Drum and Shackleford. When the rainy season of June 1855 set in, survey was suspended and Hartsuff began work on his field notes and maps. In a sketch furnished to the War Department, he showed the exact location of many Seminole villages and noted that he had been into the chief haunt of the Seminoles that contained most of their villages, gardens, and cattle pens (Covington 1982:35). Sampson Forrester, a Black Seminole, provided the following account of the Seminole existence in the swamps: Within the swamp are many pine-islands, upon which the villages are located. They are susceptible of cultivation; and between them is a cypress swamp, the water from two to three feet deep. The Indians rely principally upon their crops, which, though small, add much to their comfort. Corn, pumpkins, beans, wild potatoes, and cabbage palmetto, afford subsistence. The scarcity of powder deprives them partially of game; though bears and turkey are frequently killed with arrows. Discharging a rifle was forbidden, as in a country so flat and wet the reverberation is in abundance; but there they apprehend discovery. A few ponies, cattle, hogs, and chickens are owned by the chief (Tampa Tribune 1955). Page 9218 of 9661 ACI 3-9 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 On December 7, 1855, Lieutenant Hartsuff again set out for the Big Cypress with orders to make reconnaissance and take note of any Seminole fields and settlements (Covington 1982:1). Within a few days, the company found the charred ashes of Forts Simon Drum and Shackelford, which had been abandoned during the rainy season. Every Seminole village entered was found to be deserted, and when leaving Billy Bowlegs’ village on December 18, 1855, artillerymen took bunches of planted bananas. Later, in the day, the company received orders to return to Fort Myers and they began the trip westward. They camped for the evening in a small grove south of present-day Immokalee; 30 Seminole warriors led by Billy Bowlegs ambushed them at 5:00 AM (Covington 1982:1). In what was perhaps the result of misunderstood aggression, and tragically ill-timed orders (had they only left a day earlier), the Third, and final, Seminole War began. For the following two and a half years, hit and miss skirmishes extended from the Big Cypress and Everglades to Darby in Pasco County and New Smyrna Beach in Volusia County. Through this period, U.S. military strategy included the use of poorly disciplined militia, aggressive campaigns, and truce offerings. After several previous betrayals, the Seminoles did not respond to the latter tactic. By the summer of 1857, the focus was on Billy Bowlegs in the Big Cypress. This effort was greatly aided by the use of shallow draft boats (Covington 1982). When found, villages were burned, fields were destroyed, horses and cattle were slaughtered, and Seminoles captured. As Seminole warriors were occupied hunting or scouting, captured villagers were typically women and children, the wounded, and the elderly. On November 19, 1857, Captain William Cone’s company discovered an occupied village. Two Seminole guards were killed and five women, thirteen children, and a wounded warrior were taken prisoner (Covington 1982:72). During the Seminole War, the U.S. Army Engineers surveyed the region south of the Caloosahatchee River. The Ives map depicts numerous trails in the area as well as Fort Simon Drum to the southeast and Forts Keais and Doane to the south; the northward trending road leads to Fort Deynaud and Fort Thompson (Figure 3.3.) (Ives 1856). Figure 3.3. 1856 Ives map showing the approximate location of the APE. Page 9219 of 9661 ACI 3-10 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 After years of running, struggling to provide for his people, and mounting attacks, when possible, Billy Bowlegs finally surrendered to federal forces at Fort Myers. On May 4, 1858, the ship Grey Cloud departed Fort Myers for Egmont Key with 38 warriors and 85 women and children. An additional 45 captives were boarded at Egmont, and the ship set sail for New Orleans where they would depart for Oklahoma. Although some Seminoles remained in the Big Cypress and the Everglades, the U.S. government did not deem it worthy to pursue them. This half-starved and battle-weary population was left to eke out an existence in the south Florida swamps (Covington 1982). As settlers moved into the Big Cypress region, cattle ranching served as one of the major economic activities. Mavericks left by early Spanish explorers such as DeSoto and Narváez provided the stock for the herds raised by the mid-eighteenth century “Cowkeeper” Seminoles. As the Seminoles were pushed further south during the Seminole Wars and their cattle were either sold or left to roam, settlers captured or bought the cattle. By the late 1850s, the cattle industry of southwestern Florida was developing on a significant scale. By 1860, cattle owners from all over Florida drove their herds to Fort Brooke (Tampa) and Punta Rassa for shipment to Cuba, at a considerable profit. During this period, Jacob Summerlin became the first cattle baron of southwest Florida. Known as the “King of the Crackers,” his herds ranged from Ft. Meade to Ft. Myers (Covington 1957). 3.6 Civil War and Aftermath In 1861, Florida followed South Carolina’s lead and seceded from the Union as a prelude to the Civil War. Florida had much at stake in this war as evidenced in a report released from Tallahassee in June of 1861. It listed the value of land in Florida at $35,127,721 and the value of the slaves at $29,024,513 (Dunn 1989:59). Although the Union blockaded the coast of Florida during the war, the interior of the state saw very little military action. Florida became one of the major contributors of beef to the Confederate government (Shofner 1995:72). Summerlin originally had a contract with the Confederate government to market thousands of head a year at eight dollars per head. However, by driving his cattle to Punta Rassa and shipping them to Cuba, he received 25 dollars per head (Grismer 1946:83). To limit the supply of beef transported to the Confederate government, Union troops stationed at Ft. Myers conducted several raids into the Peace River Valley to seize cattle and destroy ranches. In response, Confederate supporters formed the Cattle Guard Battalion, consisting of nine companies under the command of Colonel Charles J. Munnerlyn (Akerman 1976). The cattle owners and the farmers in the state lived simply. The typical home was a log cabin without windows or chinking, and settlers’ diets consisted largely of fried pork, corn bread, sweet potatoes, and hominy. The lack of railway transport to other states, the federal embargo, and the enclaves of Union supporters and Union troops holding key areas such as Jacksonville and Ft. Myers prevented an influx of finished materials. As a result, settlement remained limited until after the Civil War. Immediately following the war, the South underwent a period of “Reconstruction” to prepare the Confederate States for readmission to the Union. The program was administered by the U.S. Congress, and on July 25, 1868, Florida officially returned to the Union. After the war ended, southerners who faced reconstruction and rebuilding saw Florida as a frontier full of opportunity and welcome. In southwest Florida, settlers first arrived by ones or twos, drifting through the area. Many of the early arrivals, however, were apparently “squatters” (Tebeau 1966:167). In most of the early settlements, development followed the earlier pattern with few settlers, one or two stores, and a lack of available overland transportation. In the 1870s, while the region was still part of Monroe County, settlement of Collier County evolved slowly and in isolated pockets. Immokalee, Everglades City, Chokoloskee, Marco, Caxambas, Goodland, and Naples served as the early centers for settlement (Tebeau 1966:96). These first Page 9220 of 9661 ACI 3-11 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 permanent pioneers were farmers; the hunters and fisherfolk who had preceded them established only temporary camps. As the land was largely impassable, their market was Key West, a growing city which produced almost none of its own food (Tebeau 1966). The Homestead Act, created by Congress in 1862, allowed settlers to obtain title to 160 acres by residing on and working the land. The property had to first be surveyed by the government. It was not until the 1870s that Matthew H. Clay and W.L. Apthorp surveyed the lands within Township 46 South, Ranges 29 East (Apthorp 1872; Clay 1873). Other than the Southeast Road, an old military road with a branch leading to Fort Simon Drum, no historic features were identified within or proximate to the APE (Figure 3.4) (Apthorp and Clay 1873). The lands closest to the APE were described as 3rd rate prairie (Clay 1873:771, 778, 780). Figure 3.4. 1873 plat showing the APE. By the early 1880s, the State of Florida faced a fiscal crisis involving title to public lands. By act of Congress in 1850, the federal government turned over to the states for drainage and reclamation all “swamp and overflow land.” Florida received approximately 10,000,000 acres. To manage that land and the 5,000,000 acres the state had received on entering the Union, the state legislature in 1851 created the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund. In 1855, the legislature established the actual fund (the Florida Internal Improvement Fund), in which state lands were to be held. The fund became mired in debt after the Civil War and under state law no land could be sold until the debt was cleared. In 1881, the Trustees started searching for a buyer capable of purchasing enough acreage to pay off the fund’s debt and permit the sale of the remaining millions of acres that it controlled. In 1881, Hamilton Disston, a member of a prominent Pennsylvania saw manufacturing family entered into an agreement with the State of Florida to purchase four million acres of swamp and overflowed land for one million dollars. In exchange, he promised to drain and improve the land. This transaction, which became known as the Disston Purchase, enabled the distribution of large land subsidies to railroad Page 9221 of 9661 ACI 3-12 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 companies, inducing them to begin extensive construction programs for new lines throughout the state. The purchase, although technically legal, was extremely generous with the designation “swamp and overflow land.” Grismer (1946) estimates that at least half of the acreage was “high and dry.” Disston and the railroad companies, in turn, sold smaller parcels of land to developers and private investors (Tebeau and Carson 1965:252). All of Section 17 was deeded to the Carrabelle, Tallahassee & Georgia Railroad Company in 1894 (State of Florida n.d.:265). By the late 1880s, squatters were sufficient in numbers to protest when “their land” became the property of Hamilton Disston. Squatters could have purchased the land on which they had taken up residence and constructed improvements, for such a provision was made in the Disston contracts. But the early settlers believed they should each be permitted to homestead 160 acres of high and dry land. They had not been able to do so because the land was designated “swamp and overflowed” and title to it had been transferred to the state (Tebeau 1966:167). Disston’s purchase included what is now Naples, and he formed the Florida Land and Improvement Company. In 1886, Charles Adams bought a parcel from Disston which formed the basis for the Naples Town Improvement Company of Tallahassee. When John Williams and Walter Haldeman, both from Kentucky, decided “Naples” was the perfect place to develop a city, they bought the controlling interest in the Naples Town Improvement Company. They reorganized it, gave it new direction, and renamed it the Naples Company. With Haldeman directing the work, the company was ready, by December 1887, to embark into a new period of full-scale town building and improvement including a hotel, churches, and shops. The name “Naples” is attributed to numerous Florida developers’ sales schemes to romanticize the Florida peninsula into a pleasant “Italian” seaside resort. Unfortunately, the only activity for the next few years was on paper - the buying and selling of land; little construction took place (Jamro and Lanterman 1985). In 1887, the land, which today is Collier County, became part of the newly created Lee County. It was named for Barron Gift Collier, a Memphis born businessperson who promoted the region’s development. When Billy Bowlegs departed for Oklahoma, Old Tiger Tail became the de facto leader of the remaining Seminoles. He lived at the headwaters of the Okaloacoochee Slough, and his holdings included cattle, agricultural fields, and Corn Dance Grounds (West 1990). In 1891, under the direction of Amelia S. Quinton, the Women’s National Indian Association resolved to establish a mission near Immokalee (then known as Allen’s Place) (West 1990). Dr. J.E. Brecht and his wife were hired as missionaries, and the mission consisted of a residence, a schoolhouse, barn, and fenced land. It was as this time that Allen’s Place became known as Immokalee (Mikasuki for “home”). A lumber mill was established in 1892 to provide the Native Americans with employment and industrial training, although it burned down the following year (FPS 1986:62). In 1893, the Episcopal Dioceses established a mission for the Seminoles and the federal government established an agency there. The Episcopal Indian Mission held its first service in 1896, though established for the Native Americans, white settlers made use of the church until 1924 (Tebeau 1966). In 1896, trader Bill Brown established a post on the western rim of the Everglades. Over time, the missionary activities shifted from Immokalee to Brown’s Landing where the Glade Cross Mission was established. As a result, when the Big Cypress Reservation boundaries were drawn, they included the Glade Cross Mission, but Immokalee was excluded. When the reservation was created, Bill Brown’s son, Frank, who grew up amongst the Seminoles, was appointed the Agent for the reservation (Brown 1989). 3.7 Twentieth Century From 1899 until 1914, the Naples Company struggled but the town slowly grew. In 1914, E.W. Crayton, an Ohio real estate developer with a successful record of accomplishment in St. Petersburg, Page 9222 of 9661 ACI 3-13 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 purchased the controlling interest in the company and renamed it the Naples Improvement Company. His direction is credited with leading Naples into the future. In 1925, Naples was incorporated and by 1927, reached by two railroad lines (Dean 1991). In 1911, successful New York City advertiser, Barron Gift Collier, visited Useppa Island. Collier was captivated, “Frankly, I was fascinated with Florida and swept off my feet by what I saw and felt. It was a wonderland with a magic climate, set in a frame of golden sunshine” (Collier County Museum 2010). Over the next decade, Collier amassed over one million acres in southwest Florida and his property stretched from the Ten Thousand Islands to Useppa Island, and from the coast to the Big Cypress and the Everglades (Clement n.d.). Collier was the largest landholder in the state and created a luxury resort, the Useppa Inn, which was visited by corporate giants, presidents, movie stars, authors, and sports celebrities. To facilitate development, Collier made a pledge to the Florida State Legislature to complete the Tamiami Trail from Tampa to Miami (Naples Daily News 1976). The roadway was finished in 1928 and as traffic increased, southwest Florida’s tourist industry was born (Scupholm 1997). The construction of the Tamiami Trail had a tremendous effect on Seminole settlement patterns. The roadway interrupted traditional canoe routes and as a result, Seminoles were forced to use the Tamiami Canal, which was created during road construction. Many Seminole families moved closer to the Tamiami Canal to facilitate canoe transportation (Carr 2002). On July 7, 1923, the state legislature created Collier County and named Everglades City as county seat. Collier became the second largest county in Florida with a land area of 2032 square miles. At the time of its creation, the county consisted of pine and cypress land and extensive swampland. The towns within the county, Immokalee, Naples, Marco, Caxambas, Chokoloskee, Deep Lake, and Everglades City, were all small settlements separated by almost inaccessible terrain. Barron Collier was instrumental in bringing modern communications, roadways, and railroads to his namesake county (Collier County Museum 2010). His promotions eventually opened up the area’s enormous agricultural and resort potential, but the Great Depression halted growth. The number of residents in 1925 of 1256 grew to only 2883 by 1930 (Tebeau 1966:212). By the mid-1930s, federal programs, implemented by the Roosevelt administration, started employing large numbers of construction workers, helping to revive the economy of the state. The programs were instrumental in the construction of parks, bridges, and public buildings. However, Collier County’s economy and population remained at a virtual standstill until the end of WWII when a new wave of national prosperity sent thousands of people to Florida (Dean 1991). Improvements in transportation included the 1921 Atlantic Coast Line (ACL) Railway Company’s extension south from LaBelle to Immokalee. The town took on new importance and became a center for inland activity in Collier County (Tebeau 1966). While Barron Collier was promoting the Tamiami Trail, he and his supporters were also trying to open a direct highway route from Immokalee to the county seat of Everglades City. By 1923, an unimproved road from LaBelle through Immokalee, terminating at Deep Lake, was depicted on a Florida State Map (Kendrick 1964). This road was completed between Immokalee and Everglades City in the early 1920s (FPS 1986). Collier County induced the ACL to continue its line south to Everglades City around 1927. The two projects linked the town with outer areas of the county and the Tamiami Trail. With the arrival of the railroad and road Immokalee became a center for ranching, farming, and lumbering (Tebeau 1966). In 1923, Collier County had one of the largest stands of virgin cypress and pine timber in the country (Tebeau 1966). Roads leading into the Everglades were completed in the 1920s, enabling logging companies to exploit the region’s cypress (Klinkenberg 1994). From the 1920s to the late 1950s, steam powered mills cut cypress board, which was valued for its durability and imperviousness to water. “Swamp Loggers” would cut down the trees and oxen and mules would pull the downed trees Page 9223 of 9661 ACI 3-14 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 to temporary tram railways where they were loaded for transport to the nearby mills. Logging activities in the Big Cypress Swamp and Fakahatchee Strand were prevalent in the 1940s in response to wartime needs (U.S. Fish and Wildlife n.d.). The cypress was used in the construction of P.T. boats, and, later, was shipped to Europe to supply the post-war rebuilding efforts (Klinkenberg 1994). Two of the companies with logging operations in the area were the Lee Tidewater Cypress Company and the C. J. Jones Logging Company. The logging industry required the construction of rail lines traversed by steam locomotives, which resulted in the establishment of several sawmills and lumber towns within the region. The largest of these towns was Jerome, located off of present-day State Road 29, north of US 41 (Tamiami Trail) (Klinkenberg 1994). Two mills, one at Naples and the other at Bonita Springs, reached into the timber lands from the west coast (Tebeau 1966:252). However, as a result of heavy lumbering activities from the 1940s to 1957, much of the trees were cleared (FDEP n.d.; Tebeau 1966; U.S. Fish and Wildlife n.d.). When the cypress supply was exhausted, logging establishments became ghost towns, and the rail lines were abandoned, leaving only remnant segments of trails and ditches. There are a number of trails that converge at the northern edge of the APE, one of which traverses the APE and connected with SR 29 (Copeland 1947) (Figure 3.5). Other than ditches and berms, no development of the APE was evident on the 1958 Immokalee quadrangle map (Figure 3.6) (USGS 1958) Figure 3.5. 1947 Collier County map showing the APE. In 1943, the first commercial oil well in Florida was drilled in Sunniland. The Humble Oil and Refining Company (now Exxon) struck crude, finally proving that there is oil in Florida. Sunniland remained the state’s only commercial oil field until 1964. In the 1950s, thousands of acres of cheap farmland opened due to the extensive drainage projects. At approximately this time, the agricultural thrust in Collier County began with approximately 640 cultivated acres near Ochopee-Copeland. By the early 1970s, citrus, watermelons, tomatoes, bell peppers, and cucumbers were the largest producing crops in the area. Other vegetable crops included squash, cantaloupes, potatoes, melons, cabbage, lettuce, eggplant, corn, beans, and okra (Naples Daily News 1973). Page 9224 of 9661 ACI 3-15 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 3.6. 1958 Immokalee USGS quadrangle map. Like many Florida communities, World War II changed the face of Naples and later added to its growth. Largely, the post-World War II development of Collier County is like that of the rest of America: increasing numbers of automobiles and asphalt, an interstate highway system, suburban sprawl, and strip development along major state highways. The county, like most of Florida, experienced a population boom in the 1950s. Florida’s population increased from 1,897,414 in 1940 to 1950 in 2,771,305. Collier County’s population grew from 5082 in 1940 to 6488 in 1950 (Forstall 1995). After the war, car ownership increased, making the American public more mobile, making vacations more inexpensive and easier. Many who had served at Florida’s military bases during World War II also returned with their families to live. As veterans returned, the trend in new housing focused on the development of small tract homes in new subdivisions. The agricultural growth of the county led to an influx of migrant workers into the area. In 1966, Collier County began its first effort to house these workers. The Farm Workers Village, located along SR 29, was a 491-unit apartment complex operated by the county Housing Authority, it provided affordable housing to the workers as well as daycare, postal services, a convenience store, laundromat, and educational facilities (Naples Daily News 1991). The number of permanent Collier County residents grew rapidly from 6,488 in 1950 to 85,000 by 1980. In 1967, SR 84 (Alligator Alley) or the Everglades Parkway was built. In 1970, FDOT appointed an advisory panel to evaluate possible routes across south Florida for the proposed I-75. The plans were prepared by 1972 and the Interstate was built thereafter, utilizing existing lanes from Alligator Alley for eastbound traffic. Two westbound lanes were built on the vacant strip of land between Alligator Alley and the canal (Duever et al. 1985). From 1980 to 1990, Collier County experienced a 77% percent increase in population and between 1990 and 2000, the population increased 65%. The population continued to increase in the Page 9225 of 9661 ACI 3-16 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 county, albeit at a slower rate of 28% from 2000 to 2010 with an estimate of 357,470 individuals for 2017. Leisure and hospitality (19.4%) and trade, transportation, and utilities (18.8%) are the two largest sectors of employment in the county today (Enterprise Florida 2017). 3.8 APE Specifics A review of the aerial photographs available from the Publication of Archival and Museum Materials (PALMM) revealed that the APE was undeveloped prairie and wetlands in 1947. Trails are visible on the 1953 aerial, but no development was noted. By 1963, the property had been cleared and drained with ditches and berms. The 1980 aerial photo depicts the eastern two-thirds of the property as a pasture with a number of structures; the western third was wooded pasture (Figure 3.7) (USDA 1947, 1953, 1963, 1980). Based on the property appraiser’s data, the structures in the eastern portion of the APE were constructed in the early to mid-1970 and the plant nursery in the western portion of the APE was built around 1994 (Skinner 2022). Page 9226 of 9661 ACI 3-17 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 3.7. 1947 and 1980 aerial photos showing the APE. Page 9227 of 9661 ACI 4-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 4.0 RESEARCH CONSIDERATIONS AND METHODS 4.1 Background Research and Literature Review A review of archaeological and historical literature, records and other documents and data pertaining to the APE was conducted. The focus of this research was to ascertain the types of cultural resources known in the APE and vicinity, their temporal/cultural affiliations, site location information, and other relevant data. This included a review of sites listed in the NRHP, the FMSF, CRAS reports, published books and articles, aerial photographs, unpublished manuscripts, and maps. In addition to the NRHP and FMSF, other information relevant to the historical research was obtained from the files of ACI. The FMSF data in this report were obtained in January 2022, which is the most recent edition. However, according to FMSF staff, input may be a month or more behind receipt of reports and site files. No individuals with knowledge of historic or prehistoric activities specific to the APE were discovered during this project; thus, no informant interviews were conducted. 4.2 Archaeological Considerations Background research indicated that no archaeological sites have been recorded within 1.6 km (1 mile) of APE (Figure 4.1). The closest, which is 3.8 km (2.4 mile) away, is 8CR00708, a ceramic scatter recorded during the survey of Collier County (Dickel 1991). Table 4.1 provides a list of the CRAS projects conducted within 1.6 km (1 mile) of the APE. These have primarily been conducted for transportation projects, but also include electric lines, a cell tower, and archaeological/historical surveys. Based on these data, and other regional site location predictive models (ACI 1992, 1999, 2014b, 2014c; Austin 1987; Bellomo and Fuhrmeister 1991; Carr 1988; Dickel 1991; Smith 2008) and informed expectations concerning the types of sites likely to occur within the APE, as well as their probable environmental settings, was generated. As archaeologists have long realized, indigenous populations did not select their habitation sites and activity areas in a random fashion. Rather, many environmental factors had a direct influence upon site location selection, including soil drainage, distance to water, topography, and proximity to resources. It should be noted that the settlement pattern noted below cannot be applied to sites of the Paleoindian and Early Archaic periods, which precede the onset of modern environmental conditions. Analysis of the April 2020 data for the 32 indigenous archaeological sites, with known locations in the Immokalee Rise physiographic region of Collier County that is outside of National Park Service (NPS) lands, was conducted. The NPS lands were not included as there is not a modern soil survey for that area. Historic archaeological sites and indigenous archaeological sites that were plotted “per vague verbal description” were deleted from this analysis. Although this is a small sample size, it can give us clues as to which areas were preferred. Proximity to water is an important site location feature. Over 96% of the sites are located within 100 m (328 ft) of a water source, and only one of the sites further than 200 m (656 ft) from a water source (Table 4.2). Ninety percent of the sites are proximate to a wetland or swamp, while three sites are associated with a lake. Page 9228 of 9661 ACI 4-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 4.1. Previously recorded cultural resources within 1.6 km (1 mi) of the APE. Page 9229 of 9661 ACI 4-3 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Table 4.1. Surveys conducted within 1.6 km (1 mile) of the APE. FMSF Manuscript # / Reference Project # of Newly Recorded Resources # of Previously Recorded Resources 1108 / FPS 1986 Historical/architectural Survey of Collier County, Florida 120 0 2858 / Dickel 1991 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County 22 0 8141 / Batategas 2001 An Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Proposed DT Immokalee Tower Location in Collier County, Florida 0 0 14907 / Janus Research 2007 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of State Road 82 from Lee Boulevard to State Road 29 Lee, Hendry, and Collier Counties 6 0 16907 / ACI 2009 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study S.R. 29 from North of S.R. 82 to South of C.R. 80A Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida 13 2 20872 / ACI 2014a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Lee County Electric Cooperative (LCEC) SR 82 and SR 29 Distribution Line Replacement, Collier County, Florida 0 0 21792 / ACI 2015b Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Preferred Stormwater Treatment Areas, State Road (SR) 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida 0 1 21923 / ACI 2015a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Addendum Preferred Stormwater Treatment Areas, State Road (SR) 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida 0 0 23126 / ACI 2016 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum, Regional Stormwater Pond 4B and Proposed Roundabout State Road 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida 0 0 24480 / ACI 2017 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Preferred Ponds, Drainage Easements, and Right-of-Way, State Road (SR) 82 from the Hendry County Line to Gator Slough Lane, Collier County, Florida 2 0 25332 / Janus Research 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey for the State Road 29 Project Development & Environmental Study from Oil Well Road (County Road 858) to State Road 82, Collier County, FL 44 2 26188 / Janus Research 2019 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Orange River to Terrytown 500 kV Transmission Line Rebuild 0 0 Table 4.2. Distribution of sites by water type and distance. Type ”100 m (356 ft) ”200 m (656 ft) ”300 m (984 ft) Total Cnt %Cnt %Cnt %Cnt % Lake 3 9.38% 0.00% 0.00% 3 9.38% Swamp/wetland 28 87.50% 0.00% 1 3.13% 29 90.63% Total 31 96.88% 0 0.00% 1 3.13% 32 100.00% Page 9230 of 9661 ACI 4-4 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Soil types and their drainage characteristics can also be used to assess the likelihood for indigenous site occurrence (Almy 1978). There are 45 soil types within this study area; of which 36 have recorded archaeological sites (Table 4.3). Those within the APE are shaded in orange on the table. Many of the sites occurred on more than one soil type. This analysis only includes the four types covering the greatest acreage for each site, which totaled 41 soil type occurrences. The column “1”, indicates that this soil type had the greatest area of the site, and so on down the line, so that the “4” column had the smallest site acreage. However, this analysis may not prove an accurate representation of the site distribution. While we know the percentage of sites on the various soil types, we do not have an accurate assessment as to how much of each soil type has been surveyed for archaeological sites. Table 4.3. Distribution of sites by drainage and soil types. DRAINAGE/Soil Type, % slopes % of Area 1 2 3 4 Total % of Sites difference MODERATELY WELL DRAINED Pomello fine sand, 0-2% 0.95% 1 0 1 2.44% 1.49% Total 0.95% 1 0 1 2.44% 1.49% POORLY DRAINED Basinger fine sand, 0-2% 5.79% 0 0.00% -5.79% Boca fine sand, 0-2% 1.52% 2 2 4.88% 3.35% Ft. Drum and Malabar, high, fine sands 1.34% 0 0.00% -1.34% Hallandale and boca fine sands 0.06% 0 0.00% -0.06% Hallandale fine sand, 0-2% 0.04% 0 0.00% -0.04% Hilolo, Jupiter, and Margate fine sands 0.80% 6 6 14.63% 13.83% Holopaw fine sand, 0-2% 4.44% 2 2 4.88% 0.44% Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum (ls) 0.25% 0 0.00% -0.25% Immokalee fine sand, 0-2% 19.19% 1 1 2.44% -16.75% Malabar fine sand, 0-2% 4.50% 4 4 9.76% 5.26% Myakka fine sand, 0-2% 1.44% 0 0.00% -1.44% Oldsmar fine sand, 0-2% 12.71% 0 0.00% -12.71% Oldsmar fine sand, ls 0.99% 1 1 2.44% 1.45% Pennsuco silt loam 0.06% 0 0.00% -0.06% Pineda and Riviera fine sands 3.67% 2 1 1 4 9.76% 6.08% Pineda fine sand, ls 0.23% 0 0.00% -0.23% Riviera fine sand, ls 0.65% 0 0.00% -0.65% Riviera, ls-Copeland fine sands 1.02% 1 1 2.44% 1.42% Tuscawilla fine sand 4.30% 2 2 4 9.76% 5.45% Wabasso fine sand, 0-2% 5.40% 2 2 4.88% -0.52% Total 68.41% 22 4 1 0 27 65.85% -2.55% VERY POORLY DRAINED Boca, Riviera, ls, and Copeland fine sands, depressional (depr) 7.11% 3 1 4 9.76% 2.64% Chobee, ls, and Dania mucks, depr 0.21% 0 0.00% -0.21% Chobee, Winder, and Gator soils, depr 6.94% 1 1 2 4.88% -2.06% Holopaw and Okeelanta soils, depr 1.19% 0 0.00% -1.19% Winder, Riviera, ls, and Chobee soils, depr 13.13% 2 2 4 9.76% -3.38% Total 28.59% 6 4 0 0 10 24.39% -4.20% OTHER Urban land 0.01% 0 0.00% -0.01% Urban land-Holopaw-Basinger complex 0.01% 0 0.00% -0.01% Urban land-Immokalee-Oldsmar, ls, complex 0.95% 0 0.00% -0.95% Page 9231 of 9661 ACI 4-5 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 DRAINAGE/Soil Type, % slopes % of Area 1 2 3 4 Total % of Sites difference Urban land-Matlacha-Boca complex 0.02% 0 0.00% -0.02% Water 1.07% 3 3 7.32% 6.25%Total 2.05% 3 0 0 3 7.32%5.27%Grand Total 100.00% 32 8 1 0 41 100.00% 0.00% This portion of Collier County is damp and soggy as evidenced by the fact that 68% of the soils are poorly drained and another 29% of the soils are very poorly drained. The moderately well drained soils do not even make up 1% of the area. Water and urban land underlie the remaining portion (2%) of the study area. Those soils that have a higher percentage of sites as compared to area (2% or greater) are marked in red on the table, while those that seem less likely to be used (-2% or less) are marked in blue. There are six preferred soil types; in order of preference are: Hilolo, Jupiter, and Margate fine sands; Pineda and Riviera fine sands; Tuscawilla fine sand; Malabar fine sand 0-2% slopes; Boca fine sand, 0-2% slopes; and Boca, Riviera, limestone substratum, and Copeland sands, depressional. The last soil type may have been chosen as a water hole as opposed as a camping area. There are three soils that appear to have been avoided. In order of avoidance, they area Immokalee fine sand, 0-2% slopes; Oldsmar fine sand, 0-2% slopes; and Basinger fine sand, 0-2% slopes. Based on the environmental setting, the APE was considered to have a low to moderate probability for indigenous archaeological site occurrence. Much of the property is underlain by Immokalee and Oldsmar sands that have a high negative correlation with sites, but there were water sources within the APE prior to development. A review of the 1947 suggested the potential for tree islands, which often contain sites in spite of the low soil potential; these areas would have the highest archaeological potential. Areas of more moderate potential would be along the 40-foot contour and on the Pomello sand adjacent to a water source. There is a low probability for the occurrence of historic archaeological sites as development of the property was not identified until the 1970s. 4.3 Historical Considerations Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, indicated that one historic resource is located adjacent to, but outside of the APE. 8CR01309 (SR 29) was recorded in 2017 during the survey of SR 29 from Oil Well Road to SR 82 (Janus Research 2018). At that time, the resource was determined ineligible for listing in the NRHP by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). 4.4 Field Methodology The FDHR’s Module Three, Guidelines for Use by Historic Professionals, indicates that the first stage of archaeological field survey is a reconnaissance of the APE to “ground truth,” or ascertain the validity of the predictive model (FDHR 2003). During this part of the survey, the researcher assesses whether the initial predictive model needs adjustment based on disturbance or conditions such as constructed features (i.e., parking lots, buildings, etc.), underground utilities, landscape alterations (i.e., ditches and swales, mined land, dredged and filled land, agricultural fields), or other constraints that may affect the archaeological potential. Additionally, these Guidelines indicate that non-systematic “judgmental” testing may be appropriate in urbanized environments where pavement, utilities, and constructed features make systematic testing unfeasible; in geographically restricted areas such as proposed pond sites; or within APEs that have limited high and moderate probability zones, but where a larger subsurface testing sample may be desired. While predictive models are useful in determining preliminary testing strategies in a broad context, it is understood that testing intervals may be altered Page 9232 of 9661 ACI 4-6 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 due to conditions encountered by the field crew at the time of survey. A reasonable and good faith effort was made to identify the historic properties within the project APE (cf., Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d.). Archaeological field survey methods consisted of surface reconnaissance combined with systematic and judgmental subsurface testing. Testing was conducted at 25 m (82 ft) intervals in the potential tree island areas. The 40-foot contour line was tested at 50 m (164 ft) intervals as was the Pomello sand proximate to a water source. The trail that ran diagonal through the APE was tests at 100 m (328 ft) intervals and the remainder of the APE was tested at 200 m (656 ft) off-set intervals along transects spaced 100 m (328 ft) apart or judgmentally. Shovel tests were circular and measured approximately 50 centimeters (cm) (20 inches [in]) in diameter by at least 1 m (3.3 ft) in depth unless precluded by water intrusion. All soil removed from the shovel tests was screened through a 0.64 cm (0.25 in) mesh hardware cloth to maximize the recovery of artifacts. The locations of all shovel tests were recorded using a Trimble Juno 5D device. Following the recording of relevant data such as stratigraphic profile, all shovel tests were refilled. Historic/architectural field methodology consisted of a field survey of the APE to determine and verify the location of all buildings and other historic resources (i.e., bridges, roads, cemeteries) that are 50 years of age or older (constructed in or prior to 1970), and to establish if any such resources could be determined eligible for listing in the NRHP. For each property, photographs would have been taken, and information needed for the completion of FMSF forms gathered. In addition to architectural descriptions, each historic resource would have been reviewed to assess style, historic context, condition, and potential NRHP eligibility. Also, informant interviews would have been conducted, if possible, with knowledgeable persons to obtain site-specific building construction dates and/or possible associations with individuals or events significant to local or regional history. 4.5 Inadvertent/Unanticipated Discoveries Occasionally, archaeological deposits, subsurface features or unmarked human remains are encountered during the course of development, even though the APE may have previously received a thorough and professionally adequate cultural resources assessment. Such events are rare, but they do occur. In the event that human remains are encountered during the course of development, the procedures outlined in Chapter 872, FS must be followed. No human remains were anticipated within the APE; however, the field crew was prepared to follow Chapter 872, FS should such materials be located. In the event such discoveries are made during the development process, all activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery will be suspended, and a professional archaeologist will be contacted to evaluate the importance of the discovery. The area will be examined by the archaeologist, who, in consultation with staff of the Florida SHPO, will determine if the discovery is significant or potentially significant. In the event the discovery is found to be not significant, the work may immediately resume. If, on the other hand, the discovery is found to be significant or potentially significant, then development activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery will continue to be suspended until such time as a mitigation plan, acceptable to SHPO, is developed and implemented. Development activities may then resume within the discovery area, but only when conducted in accordance with the guidelines and conditions of the approved mitigation plan. Page 9233 of 9661 ACI 4-7 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 4.6 Laboratory Methods/Curation No cultural materials were recovered; thus, no laboratory methods were utilized. All project related material (including field notes, maps, digital data, and photographs) will be stored at ACI in Sarasota (P22026), unless the client requests otherwise. Page 9234 of 9661 ACI 5-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 5.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Archaeological Results Archaeological field survey included surface reconnaissance and the excavation 96 shovel tests (Figure 5.1). Testing was conducted at 25 m (82 ft) intervals in the potential tree island areas. The 40-foot contour line was tested at 50 m (164 ft) intervals as was the Pomello sand proximate to a water source. The trail that ran diagonal through the APE was tests at 100 m (328 ft) intervals and the remainder of the APE was tested at 200 m (656 ft) off-set intervals along transects spaced 100 m (328 ft) apart or judgmentally. All shovel tests were negative, and no archaeological sites were discovered. A reasonable and good faith effort was made to identify the historic properties within the project APE (cf., Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d.). The Survey Log is in the Appendix. In the pasture area, the stratigraphy consisted of 0-20 cm (0-8 in) gray sand and 20-100 cm (8- 40 in) light gray sand (Photo 5.1). Extensive ground disturbance was noted in the nursery area. The upper 40 cm (16 in) consisted of gray-brown sand with irrigation drip lined, 40-80 cm (16-32 in) consisted of light brown sand with irrigation pipes, and 80-100 cm (32-40 in) was a dark brown sandy clay (Photo 5.2). Photo 5.1. Stratigraphy in the pasture. 5.2 Historical Results Historical background research, including a review of the FMSF and NRHP, revealed no previously recorded historic resources within or adjacent to the APE. A review of (USGS Florida Immokalee quadrangle map, the USDA historic aerial photos, and the Collier County Property Appraiser’s data revealed no potential for historic resources within the APE (Skinner 2022; USDA 1947, 1953, 1963, 1980; USGS 1958). This was confirmed by the field investigations. Page 9235 of 9661 ACI 5-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Figure 5.1. Location of the shovel tests within the APE. Page 9236 of 9661 ACI 5-3 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Photo 5.2. Stratigraphy in the nursery. 5.3 Conclusions Given the results of background research and field survey, including the excavation of 96 shovel tests, no archaeological sites or historic resources were discovered. Thus, there are no cultural resources that are listed, eligible for listing, or that appear potentially eligible for listing in the NRHP within the APE. As such, it is the professional opinion of ACI that the proposed undertaking will result in no historic property affected. Page 9237 of 9661 ACI 6-1 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 6.0 REFERENCES CITED Advisory Council on Historic Preservation n.d. Meeting the "Reasonable and Good Faith" Identification Standard in Section 106 Review. http://www.achp.gov/docs/reasonable_good_faith_identification.pdf. Akerman, Joe A. 1976 Florida Cowman: A History of Florida Cattle Raising. Florida Cattlemen's Association, Kissimmee. 4th edition. Almy, Maranda M. 2001 The Cuban Fishing Ranchos of Southwest Florida 1600-1850s. Honor's thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Almy, Marion M. 1978 The Archaeological Potential of Soil Survey Reports. The Florida Anthropologist 31(3):75-91. Apthorp, W.L. 1872 Field Notes. Volume 220. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Apthorp, W.L. and M.H. Clay 1873 Plat. Township 46 South, Range 29 East. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Archaeological Consultants, Inc. (ACI) 1992 Mapping of Areas of Historical/Archaeological Probability in Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 3160. 1999 1999 Update Historic/Archaeological Probability Maps and Data Sheets for Collier County Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2009 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study S.R. 29 from North of S.R. 82 to South of C.R. 80A Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 16907. 2014a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Lee County Electric Cooperative (LCEC) SR 82 and SR 29 Distribution Line Replacement, Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 20872. 2014b Cultural Resources Avoidance Model Nobles Grade 3D Seismic Survey Big Cypress National Preserve Collier County, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2014c Cultural Resources Predictive Model Tellus 3D Seismic Survey Collier and Hendry Counties, Florida. ACI, Sarasota. 2015a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Addendum Preferred Stormwater Treatment Areas, State Road (SR 82) from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida. Financial Project ID No.: 430849-1-52-01. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 21923. 2015b Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Preferred Stormwater Treatment Areas, State Road (SR) 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida. Financial Project ID No.: 430849-1-52-01. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 21792. 2016 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum, Regional Stormwater Pond 4B and Proposed Roundabout State Road 82 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29, Collier County, Florida. Financial Project ID No.: 430849-1-32-01. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 23126. Page 9238 of 9661 ACI 6-2 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Archaeological Consultants, Inc. 2017 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Technical Memorandum Addendum Preferred Preferred Ponds, Drainage Easements, and Right-of-Way, State Road (SR 82) from the Hendry County Line to Gator Slough Lane, Collier County, Florida. Financial Project ID No.: 430848-1-52-01. ACI, Sarasota. MS# 24480. Austin, Robert J. 1987 An Archaeological Site Inventory and Zone Management Plan for Lee County, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 1561. 1996 Prehistoric Chert Procurement and Mobility Strategies on the Lake Wales Ridge. The Florida Anthropologist 49(4):211-223. 1997 The Economics of Lithic-Resource Use in South-Central Florida. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Batategas, Juliet T. 2001 An Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Proposed DT Immokalee Tower Location in Collier County, Florida. Panamerican Consultants, Inc., Tampa. MS# 8141. Bellomo, Randy V. and Charles Fuhrmeister 1991 1992 Update of an Archaeological and Zone Management Plan for Lee County, Florida. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 3145. Beriault, John G., Robert Carr, Jerry Stipp, Richard Johnson, and Jack Meeder 1981 The Archaeological Salvage of the Bay West Site, Collier County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 34(2):39-58. Brown, Percy 1989 A Family of Early Settlers of Immokalee. The Timepiece 16(1):3-9. Bullen, Ripley P. 1975 A Guide to the Identification of Florida Projectile Points. Kendall Books, Gainesville. Carbone, Victor 1983 Late Quaternary Environment in Florida and the Southeast. The Florida Anthropologist 36(1-2):3-17. Carr, Robert 1988 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County, Florida. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Miami. MS# 2544. Carr, Robert S. 1986 Preliminary Report on Excavations at the Cutler Ridge Fossil Site (8DA2001) in Southern Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 39(3, Part 2):231-232. 2002 The Archaeology of Everglades Tree Islands. In Tree Islands of the Everglades. Edited by Fred H. Sklar and Arnold Van der Valk. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands. Carr, Robert S. and John G. Beriault 1984 Prehistoric Man in Southern Florida. In Environments of South Florida, Past and Present. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 1-14. Miami Geological Society Memoir 2, Miami. Page 9239 of 9661 ACI 6-3 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Carr, Robert S., Patricia Fay, and Jane S. Day 1991 Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Crane Point Hammock, Marathon, Monroe County.AHC Technical Report 24. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Davie. Clausen, Carl J., H. K. Brooks, and A. B. Wesolowsky 1975a The Early Man Site at Warm Mineral Springs, Florida. Journal of Field Archaeology 2(3):191-213. 1975b Florida Spring Confirmed as 10,000 Year Old Early Man Site. Florida Anthropological Society Publications 7 Clausen, Carl J., A. D. Cohen, Cesare Emiliani, J. A. Holman, and J. J. Stipp 1979 Little Salt Spring, Florida: A Unique Underwater Site. Science 203(4381):609-614. Clay, M. H. 1873 Field Notes. Volume 222. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee. Clement, Gail n.d. Barron Gift Collier. Everglades Digital Library, Florida International University, http://everglades.fiu.edu/reclaim/bios/collier.htm Cockrell, W. A. 1970 Glades I and Pre-Glades Settlement and Subsistence Patterns on Marco Island. MS Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Cockrell, W. A. and Larry E. Murphy 1978 Pleistocene Man in Florida. Archaeology of Eastern North America 6:1-13. Collier County Museum 2010 One Man's Vision: Barron Gift Collier. Collier County Museum, Naples. http://colliermuseums.com/history/barron_collier.php Copeland, Graham D. 1947 Map of Collier County Florida. Collier County Board of County Commissioners, Naples. Covington, James W. 1957 The Story of Southwestern Florida. Lewis Historical Publishing Company, Inc., New York. 1958 Exploring the Ten Thousand Islands: 1838. Tequesta 18:7-13. 1982 The Billy Bowlegs War 1855-1858: The Final Stand of the Seminoles Against the Whites. The Mickler House Publishers, Chuluota. Daniel, I. Randolph and Michael Wisenbaker 1987 Harney Flats: A Florida Paleo-Indian Site. Baywood Publishing Co., Inc., Farmingdale. Dean, Virginia 1991 Naples on the Gulf: An Illustrated History. Windsor Publications, Inc., Chatsworth. Delcourt, Paul A. and Hazel R. Delcourt 1981 Vegetation Maps for Eastern North America: 40,000 yr B.P. to the Present. In Geobotony II. Edited by R. C. Romans, pp. 123-165. Plenum Publishing Corp., New York. Page 9240 of 9661 ACI 6-4 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Dickel, David N. 1991 An Archaeological Survey of Collier County, Florida. AHC Technical Report 38. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Davie. MS# 2934. Dobyns, Henry F. 1983 Their Numbers Become Thinned. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. Duever, Michael J., John E. Carlson, John F. Meeder, Linda C. Duever, Lance H. Gunderson, Lawrence A. Riopelle, Taylor R. Alexander, Ronald L. Myers, and Daniel P. Spangler 1985 The Big Cypress National Preserve. Research Report 8. National Audubon Society, New York. Dunbar, James S. 2006a Paleoindian Archaeology. In First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Edited by S. David Webb. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 2006b Pleistocene-Early Holocene Climate Change: Chronostratigraphy and Geoclimate of the Southeast US. In First Floridians and Last Mastodons: The Page-Ladson Site in the Aucilla River. Edited by S. David Webb, pp. 103-155. Springer, The Netherlands. Dunn, Hampton 1989 Back Home: A History of Citrus County, Florida. Citrus County Historical Society, Inverness. 2nd edition. Enterprise Florida, Inc. 2017 Florida Counties. https://www.enterpriseflorida.com/data-center/florida- communities/floridas-counties/ Fairbridge, Rhodes W. 1984 The Holocene Sea Level Record in South Florida. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past II. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 427-436. Miami Geological Society, Coral Gables. Farr, Grayal Earle 2006 A Reevaluation of Bullen's Typology for Preceramic Projectile Points. MA thesis, Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee. Florida Department of Environmental protection (FDEP) 2001a Geology (Environmental). Florida Geographic Data Library, Gainesville. 2001b Surficial Geology. Florida Geographic Data Library, Gainesville. n.d. Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee. Florida Division of Historical Resources (FDHR) 2003 Cultural Resource Management Standards and Operational Manual. Florida Division of Historical Resources, Tallahassee. Florida Preservation Services (FPS) 1986 Historic/Architectural Survey of Collier County, Florida. Florida Preservation Services, St. Augustine. MS# 1108. Page 9241 of 9661 ACI 6-5 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Forstall, Richard L. 1995 Population of Counties by Decennial Census. www.census.gov/population/cencounts/fl190090.txt. Gleason, Patrick J., Arthur D. Cohen, William Smith, H. Kelly Brooks, Peter A. Stone, Robert Goodrick, and William Spackman, Jr. 1984 The Environmental Significance of Holocene Sediments from the Everglades and Saline Tidal Plain. In Environments of South Florida: Present and Past II. Edited by Patrick J. Gleason, pp. 297-351. Miami Geological Society, Coral Gables. Gleason, Patrick J. and P. Stone 1994 Age, Origin and Landscape Evolution of the Everglades Peatland. In Everglades: The Ecosystem and Its Restoration. Edited by S. M. Davis and J. C. Ogden, pp. 149-197. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach. Goggin, John M. 1949 Cultural Traditions in Florida Prehistory. In The Florida Indian and His Neighbors. Edited by John W. Griffin, pp. 13-44. Inter-American Center, Winter Park. Griffin, John W. 1988 The Archeology of Everglades National Park: A Synthesis. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee. Grismer, Karl H. 1946 The Story of Sarasota. Florida Grower Press, Tampa. Hammond, E. A. 1973 The Spanish Fisheries of Charlotte Harbor. Florida Historical Quarterly 51(4):355-380. Hann, John H. 1991 Missions to Calusa. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Ives, Lieut. J. C. 1856 Map of the Peninsula of Florida South of Tampa Bay. Top Engineers, Sarasota. http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~crackerbarrel/Ives.html, http://files.mapoftheweek.net/2009/09/18/1856%20Ives%20MilitaryMap.pdf. Jackson, General Andrew, John C. Calhoun, and others 1817-1818 Seminole Indians: Message from the President of the United States, Transmitting Copies of Documents in Relation to the Seminole War. E. DeKraft, Washington, D.C. Jamro, Ron and Gerald L. Lanterman 1985 The Founding of Naples. Friends of Collier County Museum, Naples. Janus Research 2007 Cultural Resource Assessment of State Road 82 from Lee Boulevard to State Road 29 Lee, Hendry, and Collier counties. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 14907. 2008 South Florida Archaeological Context. South Florida Water Management District. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. Page 9242 of 9661 ACI 6-6 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Janus Research 2018 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey for the State Road 29 Project Development & Environment Study from Oil Well Road (County Road 858) to State Road 82, Collier County, FL. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 25332. 2019 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey Orange River to Terrytown 500 kV Transmission Line Rebuild. Janus Research, Inc., Tampa. MS# 26188. Kendrick, Baynard 1964 Florida Trails to Turnpikes 1914-1964. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Klinkenberg, Jeff 1994 "Swamp Loggers." The St. Petersburg Times, September 18. Knetsch, Joe 2003 Florida's Seminole Wars 1817-1858. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, SC. Liudahl, Kenneth, David J. Belz, Lawrence Carey, Robert W. Drew, Steve Fisher, and Robert Pate 1998 Soil Survey of Collier County Area, Florida. USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Mackay, John and J. E. Blake 1839 Map of the Seat of War in Florida.https://digital.lib.usf.edu/?u15.246. Mahon, John K. 1985 History of the Second Seminole War 1835-1842. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Revised edition. Milanich, Jerald T. 1994 Archaeology of Precolumbian Florida. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Milanich, Jerald T., Jeffery Chapman, Ann S. Cordell, Stephen H. Hale, and Rochelle A. Marrinan 1984 Prehistoric Development of Calusa Society in Southwest Florida: Excavations on Useppa Island. In Perspectives on Gulf Coast Prehistory. Edited by Dave D. Davis, pp. 258-314. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Milanich, Jerald T. and Charles H. Fairbanks 1980 Florida Archaeology. Academic Press, New York. Mulroy, Kevin 1993 Freedom on the Border: The Seminole Maroons in Florida, the Indian Territory, Coahuila, and Texas. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock. Naples Daily News 1973 "Big Farming Major Cog in County Economy." Naples Daily News, March 6. 1976 "The Collier Story." Naples Daily News, July 4. 1991 "Farm Workers Village Celebrates 25 Years." Naples Daily News, September 24. Neill, Wilfred T. 1968 An Indian and Spanish Site on Tampa Bay, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 21(4):106-116. Page 9243 of 9661 ACI 6-7 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Palov, Maria Z. 1999 Useppa's Cuban Fishing Community. In The Archaeology of Useppa Island. Edited by William H. Marquardt, pp. 149-169. Monograph 3. Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies, Gainesville.Porter, Kenneth W. 1996 The Black Seminoles. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Purdy, Barbara A. 1981 Florida's Prehistoric Stone Tool Technology. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Ramenofsky, Ann F. 1987 Vectors of Death: The Archaeology of European Contact. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Russo, Michael 1991 Archaic Sedentism on the Florida Coast: A Case Study from Horr's Island. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. 1994a A Brief Introduction to the Study of Archaic Mounds in the Southeast. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):89-92. 1994b Why We Don't Believe in Archaic Ceremonial Mounds and Why We Should: The Case from Florida. Southeastern Archaeology 13(2):93-108. 2008 Late Archaic Shell Rings and Society in the Southeast U.S. The SAA Archaeological Record 8(5):18-22. Sassaman, Kenneth E. 2008 The New Archaic, It Ain't What It Used to Be. The SAA Archaeological Record 8 (5): 6- 8. Schwadron, Margo 2006 Everglades Tree Islands Prehistory: Archaeological Evidence for Regional Holocene Variability and Early Human Settlement. Antiquity 80(310). Scupholm, Carrie 1997 The Tamiami Trail: Connecting the East and West Coasts of the Sunshine State. The Society for Commercial Archeology Journal 15(2):20-24. Shofner, Jerrell H. 1995 History of Brevard County. Brevard County Historical Commission, Stuart. Skinner, Abe 2022 Records Search. Collier County Property Appraiser, Naples. http://www.collierappraiser.com/ Smith, Greg C. 2008 Cultural Resources Overview and Survey Strategy: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. New South Associates, Stone Mountain, GA. Smith, Marvin T. 1987 Archaeology of Aboriginal Culture Change in the Interior Southeast: Depopulation during the Early Historic Period. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Page 9244 of 9661 ACI 6-8 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 State of Florida n.d. Tract Book. Volume 25. On file, FDEP, Tallahassee. Tampa Tribune 1955 "Pioneer Florida." Tampa Tribune, January 2. Tebeau, Charlton W. 1966 Florida's Last Frontier: The History of Collier County. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables. 1980 A History of Florida. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables. Revised Edition. Tebeau, Charlton W. and Ruby Leach Carson, Eds. 1965 Florida -- From Indian Trail to Space Age. Southern Publishing Co., Delray Beach. True, David O., Ed. 1944 Memoir of D. Escalante Fontaneda Respecting Florida. University of Miami and South Florida Historical Society, Miami. United States Congress 1837 Report from the Secretary of War in Compliance with Resolution of the Senate of the 14th and 18th Instant, Transmitting Copies of Correspondence Relative to the Campaign in Florida. 24th Congress, 2nd Session, May 21, Washington, D.C. 1850 Hostilities Committed by the Seminole Indians in Florida during the Past Year. 31st Congress, 1st Session, Washington, D.C. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 1947 Aerial Photograph: MAR 28 1947, BUN-1D-94. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 1953 Aerial Photograph: 1-1-53, DSM-2L-207. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 1963 Aerial Photograph: 11-15-63, DSM-3DD-7. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 1980 Aerial Photograph: 1-2-80, 12021-178-160. On file, PALMM, Gainesville. 2018 Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for Florida - September 2018. USDA, NRCS, Fort Worth, TX. United States Fish and Wildlife Service n.d. History. Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, Naples. http://www.fws.gov/refuges/profiles/index.cfm?id=41545 United States Geological Survey (USGS) 1958 Immokalee, Fla. 1987 PR 1973. 2013 Immokalee, Fla. USA_Topo_Maps. Watts, William A. 1969 A Pollen Diagram from Mud Lake, Marion County, North-Central Florida. Geological Society of America Bulletin 80(4):631-642. 1971 Post Glacial and Interglacial Vegetational History of Southern Georgia and Central Florida.Ecology 51:676-690. 1975 A Late Quaternary Record of Vegetation from Lake Annie, South-Central Florida. Geology 3(6):344-346. Page 9245 of 9661 ACI 6-9 March 2022 CRAS Immokalee Expansion East P22026 Watts, William A., Eric C. Grimm, and T. C. Hussey 1996 Mid-Holocene Forest History of Florida and the Coastal Plain of Georgia and South Carolina. In Archaeology of the Mid-Holocene Southeast. Edited by Kenneth E. Sassaman and David G. Anderson, pp. 28-38. University Press of Florida, Gainesville. Watts, William A. and Barbara C. S. Hansen 1994 Pre-Holocene and Holocene Pollen Records of Vegetation History for the Florida Peninsula and their Climatic Implications. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 109:163-176. West, Patsy 1990 History of Post-War Seminole Settlement in the Big Cypress. The Florida Anthropologist 43(4):240-248. Wheeler, Ryan J. 1994 Early Florida Decorated Bone Artifacts: Style and Aesthetics from Paleo-Indian Through Archaic.The Florida Anthropologist 47(1):47-60. 2004 Southern Florida Sites Associated with the Tequesta and Their Ancestors: National Historic Landmark/National Register of Historic Places Theme Study. FDHR, Tallahassee. White, William A. 1970 Geomorphology of the Florida Peninsula. Geological Bulletin 51. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Geology, Tallahassee. Widmer, Randolph J. 1974 A Survey and Assessment of the Archaeological Resources on Marco Island, Collier County, Florida. Miscellaneous Project Report Series 19. FDHR, Tallahassee. MS# 265. 1988 The Evolution of the Calusa. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. Page 9246 of 9661 APPENDIX Survey Log Page 9247 of 9661 Florida Master Site File / Div. of Historical Resources / R.A. Gray Bldg / 500 S Bronough St., Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 HR6E066R0, effective 05/2016 Rule 1A-46.001, F.A.C. Phone 850.245.6440, Fax 850.245.6439, Email: SiteFile@dos.myflorida.com Page 1 Ent D (FMSF only) __________ Survey Log Sheet Survey # (FMSF only) ___________ Florida Master Site File Version 5.0 /1 Consult Guide to the Survey Log Sheet for detailed instructions. Manuscript Information Survey Project (name and project phase) Report Title (exactly as on title page) Report Authors (as on title page) 1._______________________________ 3. _____________________________ 2._______________________________ 4. _____________________________ Publication Year __________ Number of Pages in Report (GRQot include site forms) ___________ Publication Information (Give series, number in series, publisher and city. For article or chapter, cite page numbers. Use the style of American Antiquity.) Supervisors of Fieldwork (even if same as author) Names _____________________________________________________ Affiliation of Fieldworkers: Organization _____________________________________ City ______________________ Key Words/Phrases (Don’t use county name, or common words like archaeology, structure, survey, architecture, etc.) 1. ___________________ 3.___________________ 5. ___________________ 7.____________________ 2. ___________________ 4.___________________ 6. ___________________ 8.____________________ Survey Sponsors (corporation, government unit, organization, or person funding fieldwork) Name. ____________________________________ Organization. ______________________________________ Address/Phone/E-mail. __________________________________________________________________________ Recorder of Log Sheet _________________________________________ Date Log Sheet Completed ___________ Is this survey or project a continuation of a previous project? q No q Yes: Previous survey #s (FMSF only) _______________ Project Area Mapping Counties (select every county in which field survey was done; attach additional sheet if necessary) 1. ___________________________ 3. ____________________________ 5. ___________________________ 2. ___________________________ 4. ____________________________ 6. ___________________________ USGS 1:24,000 Map Names/Year of Latest Revision (attach additional sheet if necessary) 1.Name ____________________________ Year_____4.Name _____________________________ Year_____ 2.Name ____________________________ Year_____5.Name _____________________________ Year_____ 3.Name ____________________________ Year_____6.Name _____________________________ Year_____ Field Dates and Project Area Description Fieldwork Dates: Start _________B End _B________ Total Area Surveyed (fill in one) _____BB_hectares BB______acres Number of Distinct Tracts or Areas Surveyed _________ If Corridor (fill in one for each) Width: ___B___meters ___B___feet Length: __B____kilometers ____B__miles CRAS Immokalee Expansion East, CR Co. - Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Immokalee Expansion East Property, Collier County, Florida ACI 2022 48 ACI (2022) Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Immokalee Expansion East Property, Collier County, Florida. Conducted for Stewart Materials, LLC, Jupiter by ACI, Sarasota. P22026 Horvath, Elizabeth A. Archaeological Consultants Inc Sarasota Stewart Materials, LLC 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100, Jupiter FL 33458 Horvath, Elizabeth A. 3-8-2022 Collier IMMOKALEE 2013 2-28-2022 3-4-2022 160.00 1 Page 9248 of 9661 Florida Master Site File / Div. of Historical Resources / R.A. Gray Bldg / 500 S Bronough St., Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 HR6E066R0, effective 05/2016 Rule 1A-46.001, F.A.C. Phone 850.245.6440, Fax 850.245.6439, Email: SiteFile@dos.myflorida.com Page 2 Survey Log Sheet Survey #__________ Research and Field Methods Types of Survey (select all that apply): archaeological architectural historical/archival underwater damage assessment monitoring report other(describe):. _________________________ Scope/Intensity/Procedures Preliminary Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Florida Archives (Gray Building)q library research- local public q local property or tax records q other historic maps q Florida Photo Archives (Gray Building)q library-special collection q newspaper files q soils maps or dataq Site File property search q Public Lands Survey (maps at DEP) q literature search q windshield survey q Site File survey search q local informant(s)q Sanborn Insurance maps q aerial photography q other (describe):. ______________________________________________________________________________ Archaeological Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Check here if NO archaeological methods were used. q surface collection, controlled q shovel test-other screen size q surface collection, uncontrolled q water screen q shovel test-1/4”screen q posthole tests q shovel test-1/8” screen q auger tests q shovel test 1/16”screen q coring q shovel test-unscreened q test excavation (at least 1x2 m) q block excavation (at least 2x2 m) q soil resistivity q magnetometer q side scan sonar q JURXQGSHQHWUDWLQJUDGDU *35 q /,'$5 q other (describe):. _______________________________________________________________________________ Historical/Architectural Methods (select as many as apply to the project as a whole) q Check here if NO historical/architectural methods were used. q building permits q demolition permits q neighbor interview q subdivision maps q commercial permits q occupant interview q tax records q interior documentation q ZLQGVKLHOGVXUYH\ q local property records q occupation permits q unknown q other (describe):. _______________________________________________________________________________ Survey Results Resource Significance Evaluated? q Yes q No Count of Previously Recorded Resources____________ Count of Newly Recorded Resources____________ List Previously Recorded Site ID#s with Site File Forms Completed (attach additional pages if necessary) List Newly Recorded Site ID#s (attach additional pages if necessary) Site Forms Used: q Site File Paper Forms q Site File PDF Forms REQUIRED: Attach Map of Survey or Project Area Boundary SHPO USE ONLY SHPO USE ONLY SHPO USE ONLY Origin of Report: 872 Public Lands UW 1A32 # Academic Contract Avocational Grant Project # Compliance Review: CRAT # Type of Document: Archaeological Survey Historical/Architectural Survey Marine Survey Cell Tower CRAS Monitoring Report Overview Excavation Report Multi-Site Excavation Report Structure Detailed Report Library, Hist. or Archival Doc MPS MRA TG Other: Document Destination: ________________________BB____ Plotability: ___________________________________________ /,'$5RWKHUUHPRWHVHQVLQJ SHGHVWULDQVXUYH\ XQNQRZQ PHWDOGHWHFWRU RWKHUUHPRWHVHQVLQJ 'HVNWRS$QDO\VLV background research, surface reconnaissance; systematic and judgmental subsurface testing (25, 50, 200 m) N=96, all negative; 50 cm diameter, 1 m deep, 1/4" screen; historic resources reconnaissance 00 NA NA Plottable Projects Page 9249 of 9661 Sand Mine Property Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Section 17 USGS Immokalee Collier County, Florida Page 9250 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page i of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT IMMOKALEE SAND MINE, EAST EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA KLEINFELDER PROJECT #20223424.001 Updated February 2025 Prepared for: 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Prepared by: 3663 Lake Center Drive Mount Dora, FL 32757 Copyright 2025 Kleinfelder All Rights Reserved ONLY THE CLIENT OR ITS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES MAY USE THIS DOCUMENT AND ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT FOR WHICH THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED. Page 9251 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page ii of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com A Report Prepared for: Stewart Materials 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT IMMOKALEE SAND MINE, EAST EXPANSION CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared by: Bill Newlon Senior Ecologist Reviewed by: Lisa Daugherty Program Manager KLEINFELDER 3663 Lake Center Drive Mount Dora, Florida 32757 February 11, 2025 Kleinfelder Project No 20223424.001A Page 9252 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page iii of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com TABLE OF CONTENTS ____________________________________________________________________________ Section Page 1INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 12OVERALL PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................. 2 3PROJECT AREA CONDITIONS .......................................................................... 4 3.1LAND USE AND COVER TYPES .............................................................. 4 3.2NATIVE VEGETATION .............................................................................. 7 3.3WETLANDS AND OTHER SURFACE WATERS ...................................... 7 3.3.1Wetland and Other Surface Water Impacts ..................................... 8 3.4LISTED SPECIES ...................................................................................... 9 3.4.1Listed Plants ................................................................................. 10 3.4.2Listed Wildlife ................................................................................ 10 3.5WELLFIELD PROTECTION ZONES ....................................................... 19 4RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ........................................................... 21 5LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................................... 24 FIGURES 1 Project Location Map 2 Existing Land Use Map 3 Wood Stork Colony Location Map 4 USFWS Florida Panther Focus Area Map 5 Florida Panther Telemetry Map 6 Black Bear Range Map 7A 1973 Historic Imagery 7B 1994 Historic Imagery 7C 1999 Historic Imagery 8 Wetland and Surface Water ID Map 9 Wetland and Surface Water Impact Map 10 Collier County Well Field Protection Zones 2010 ATTACHMENTS 1 Bill Newlon’s Resume 2 FNAI Biodiversity Matrix 3 Eastern Indigo Snake Standard Protection Measures 4 USFWS Caracara Coordination and Mapping Page 9253 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 1 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 1 INTRODUCTION ____________________________________________________________________________ The following environmental data report was prepared for the Collier County Growth Management Department to meet the requirements of Section 3.08.00 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) in association with a proposed plant site that includes processing, staging, and materials storage areas east of the existing Edwards Grove Road Sand Mine, a.k.a. Immokalee Sand Mine. Previous environmental data was provided for the Conditional Use (CU) approvals established for the original 219.0-acre mine site and a 231.7-acre expansion of mining to the west which increased the total mine area to 450.7 acres via Resolution Numbers 03-332 and 21-13, respectively. Field assessments for the proposed 39.92-acre CU boundary associated with the eastern plant site were conducted on February 23 and 24, 2022. The environmental data herein was prepared by Bill Newlon, a Senior Environmental Scientist with Kleinfelder, Inc. (Kleinfelder). Pursuant to Section 3.08.00.A.2., the minimum academic credentials and experience required in association with the preparation of the environmental data submittal requirements include a Bachelor’s degree or higher in one of the biological sciences and at least two years of ecological or biological professional experience in the state of Florida. Mr. Newlon meets these requirements with Bachelor and Master of Science degrees in wildlife biology and has 23 years of experience with field surveys and environmental permitting related to wetlands, protected species, and native communities in Florida. A resume for Mr. Newlon documenting these academic credentials and experience has been included with this report as Attachment 1. Page 9254 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 2 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 2 OVERALL PROJECT DESCRIPTION ___________________________________________________________________________________ The project proposes a 39.92-acre CU boundary for a plant site east of the existing 450.7 acre permitted CU boundary (Figure 1). The proposed eastern plant site (project) for which CU is being requested is located approximately 1.1 miles southwest of the intersection of State Road (SR) 29 and SR 82 and north of the City of Immokalee, in Section 17, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida (Figure 1). Environmental impacts associated with the project are expected to be minimal because the project consists of land historically converted to agricultural uses, specifically pasture lands, nurseries, and row crops. Impacts to wetlands were avoided where practicable, and where unavoidable, were minimized to 0.21 acres of wetland with a wetland exotic designation of E3, that contains between 51-75% exotic vegetation. Additionally, no listed species of plants or wildlife were identified on the project and a wildlife management plan will be implemented with protection measures and monitoring for listed species with the potential to occur on the project to minimize potential impacts. Best Management Practices, Erosion Control Measures, and Pollution Prevention Plans will be used during the project to provide safeguards to public health, safety and welfare, and protect undisturbed natural resources. Existing water use on the project involves the presence of drainage ditches and reservoirs constructed within the pasture operation to provide site drainage and cattle ponds. Historic water use continues to be associated with the abandoned agricultural areas, including ditching, and a vegetated non-forested wetland and a willow and elderberry wetland. The vegetated non-forested wetland appears to have been created as a cow pond pursuant to the 1973 imagery (Figure 7A), which had been converted to a reservoir by 1994 (Figure 7B) and has since filled in with wetland vegetation. Based on the 1973, 1994, and 1999 (Figure 7C) imagery, the willow and elderberry wetland also appears to have been created, likely in association with the historic agricultural operation. Water use for the proposed project will be the same as within existing mining areas where use is associated with the transport and processing of sand materials. Water associated with transport is used as a medium to pump dredged sand material through above ground pipes to the existing plant facility for processing. Water associated with processing is used to wash and remove Page 9255 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 3 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com undesirable material from the sand. Water used for transport and processing is recirculated back to the mine pit. No dewatering will occur in association with the project and all stormwater run-offs will be retained within the mine pit to the west. Portions of the project are mapped as being within the 100-year flood zone; however, because of the additional flood storage created by mining to the west, onsite or offsite flooding resulting from project related impacts to mapped flood zone areas (Zone AH) is not anticipated. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) approval of a stormwater management plan demonstrating the permitted mine pit to the west will have sufficient storage to retain the 25-year / 72-hour design storm during and after the project will be required for the Environmental Resource Permit (ERP). Page 9256 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 4 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 3 PROJECT AREA CONDITIONS ____________________________________________________________________________ An environmental site assessment to determine the land use and cover types, and the presence or potential for native vegetation, wetlands, and listed species within the project (Figure 1) was conducted by Kleinfelder on February 23 and 24, 2022. The findings of this assessment are provided as follows. 3.1 LAND USE AND COVER TYPES Existing land use and cover types within the project were mapped over aerial imagery (2021) utilizing the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS, FDOT 1999) (Figure 2). The project is found in a rural setting and consists primarily of existing and abandoned agricultural land uses. Pursuant to a review of historic aerial imagery, the entire project had been converted to pasture by 1973 (Figure 7A), approximately 50 years ago. Further conversion from pasture to nursery and row crop operations in the western two-thirds of the project are also evident in historic images from 1994 (Figure 7B) and 1999 (Figure 7C), respectively. Adjoining land uses currently include agriculture, mining, and low density residential. Eight FLUCFCS land use and cover types in total were identified for the project, as detailed below: 211 Improved Pastures (5.11 acres, 12.80%) A central and southern portion of the eastern one-third of the project and a narrow strip along the northeastern project boundary consist of improved pasture. These areas have been cleared of native vegetation, ditched, and planted with pasture grasses in support of livestock such as cattle, horses, sheep, and donkeys. Bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum) was the dominant pasture grass, but Bermudagrass (Cynadon dactylon), big carpetgrass (Axonopus furcatus), and torpedograss (Panicum repens) were also observed. Other representative pasture vegetation observed includes shrubby false buttonweed (Spermacoce verticillata), rustweed (Polypremum procumbens), largeflower Mexican clover (Richardia grandiflora), tropical soda apple (Solanum viarum), smutgrass (Sporobolus indicus), spiny amaranth (Amaranthus spinosus), dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), and John Charles (Condea verticillata) with scattered Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolia), slash pine (Pinus elliottii), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), and sabal palm (Sabal palmetto). Page 9257 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 5 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 214 Row Crops (9.99 acres, 25.02%) The southern portion of the western two-thirds of the project consists of an area that appears to have been used historically for a row crop operation. Based on historical imagery (Figures 7B and 7C), this area had been converted from pasture to row crops between 1994 and 1999. Presently, use of this land for row crops has been abandoned. The rows are still evident; however, they are now covered by a variety of colonial vegetation such as elephantgrass (Cenchrus purpureus), white seed beggarticks (Bidens alba), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), torpdedograss, guineagrass (Urochloa maxima), shrubby false buttonweed, shrubverbena (Lantana strigocamara), knotroot foxtail (Setaria parviflora), broomsedge bluestem (Andropogon virginicus), dogfennel, hairy indigo (Indigophera hirsuta), creeping cucumber (Melothria pendula), and Caesarweed (Urena lobata) with scattered Brazilian pepper and groundsel tree (Bachharis halimifolia). 240 Nurseries and Vineyards (18.21 acres, 45.62%) The central and northern portion of the western two-thirds of the project consists of an area that appears to have been used historically for a nursery operation. Based on historical imagery (Figure 7B), this area had been converted from pasture to a nursery by 1994. Presently, however, use of this land as a nursery has been abandoned. Rows of dilapidated structures where the nursery vegetation appears to have been cultivated are still present with intervening shallow ditches that have been included as part of this land use area. Additionally, abandoned buildings and equipment, shipping containers, and piles of discarded sheeting and other materials were observed. Abandoned nursery areas are now covered by a variety of colonial vegetation such as common ragweed, Caesarweed, dogfennel, broomsedge bluestem, bahiagrass, elephantgrass, manyflower marshpennywort (Hydrocotyle umbellata), cogongrass (Imperata cylindrica), Bermudagrass, muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia), and foxtail flatsedge (Cyperus alopecuroides) with scattered laurel oak, Brazilian pepper, castorbean (Ricinus communis), cabbage palm, and mimosa (Albizia julibrissin). 422 Brazilian Pepper (2.09 acres, 5.24%) In the northern half of the eastern one-third of the project, a shrub forest dominated by Brazilian pepper was observed around the perimeter of a willow and elderberry marsh in between the pasture and nursery land use areas to the southeast and northwest, respectively. Discarded Page 9258 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 6 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com materials that appeared to be from the nursery operation were observed within this area. Outside of Brazilian pepper, little other vegetation was observed under the canopy except Caesarweed, scattered clumps of sword fern (Nephrolepis spp), and vining species such as muscadine grape, greenbriar (Smilax spp.), and air potato (Dioscorea bulbifera). 514 Upland-Cut Ditches (0.52 acres, 1.30%) Several man-made ditches which appear to have been excavated for use in draining the various agricultural land use types on the project were observed. Representative species included torpedograss, red-leaf ludwigia (Ludwigia repens), dotted smartweed (Persecaria punctata), manyflower marshpennywort, Asian coinwort (Centella asiatica), Peruvian primrosewillow (Ludwigia peruviana), Bermudagrass, bahiagrass, sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum), and big carpetgrass. Based on a review of NRCS soils, all the soils where ditches were excavated are mapped as predominantly nonhydric and nonhydric soil units; thus, all of the ditches are considered upland-cut. 530 Reservoirs (1.70 acres, 4.26%) Portions of two open water reservoirs were observed within / adjacent to improved pasture. Both had uniform moderately steep slopes along the edges and appeared to have been excavated. The smaller of the two (Surface Water 2, 0.05 ac. – Figure 8) was located at the eastern edge of the willow elderberry marsh and continues offsite to the east. The larger one (Surface Water 1, 1.65 ac. – Figure 8) was located south of the willow elderberry marsh and appears to have been excavated to depths which have precluded wetland vegetation. Both are accessible to cattle and other livestock; however, they did not appear to use the larger reservoir, presumably because of the lack of shallower, accessible water depths. 618 Willow and Elderberry (2.06 acres, 5.16%) A willow and elderberry marsh was observed between the pastureland and the abandoned nursery operation. It was dominated by Primrose willow and southern willow (Salix caroliniana). Other species observed along the wetland edges included common banana (Musa x paradisiaca), common dayflower (Commelina diffusa), Brazilian pepper, elephantgrass, Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia virginica), swamp fern (Telmatoblechnum serrulatum), and manyflower marshpennywort. Discarded materials that appeared to be from the nursery operation were Page 9259 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 7 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com observed within this area. Based on the historical imagery (Figures 7A-C), this area appeared to have formerly been used as a reservoir. 640 Vegetated Non-Forested Wetlands (0.24 acres, 0.60%) There are two southern areas along the eastern boundary of the project, within pasture south of the larger reservoir (Surface Water 1 – Figure 8), and one in the western part of the project, between the abandoned nursery and row crop land uses that consist of excavated depressions, shallow enough to support wetland vegetation. The two areas on the pasture side of the property were accessible to and grazed by cattle at the time of the site assessment. The western area is drained by interconnected east-west ditching. Wetland vegetation within these areas included torpedograss, Cuban bulrush (Cyperus blepharoleptos), dotted smartweed, Peruvian primrosewillow, manyflower marshpennywort, broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes), and scattered southern willow and common banana. 3.2 NATIVE VEGETATION Due to the long-standing history and extent of agricultural land uses on the project, there is a limited amount of native vegetation within the land use and cover types observed onsite as described in Section 3.1; however, Section 3.05.07.A.1. of the LDC indicates native vegetation is defined as a vegetative community with 25% or more canopy coverage or highest existing vegetative strata of native plant species. Wetland E (0.01 acres) is an E2 wetland with 26% - 50% exotics and Wetlands D (0.02 acres), F (2.06 acres), and G (0.21 acres) are E3 wetlands with 51 – 75% exotics. Despite the predominance of exotic vegetation within these wetland communities, pursuant to the LDC they meet the minimum vegetation requirement for native vegetation of 25%. As such, the total wetland area with existing native vegetation is 2.30 acres. 3.3 WETLANDS AND OTHER SURFACE WATERS State jurisdictional wetlands and surface water boundaries, except ditches, within the project were delineated in the field with a sub-meter GPS unit pursuant to criteria found in Ch. 62-340, F.A.C. Linear ditch surface water boundaries were aerial interpreted based on ground-truthing. The boundaries of these aquatic features are depicted in Figures 2 and 8. The surface waters on the project are man-made and consist of reservoirs and ditches. The ditches are all mapped within upland soil units as determined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service; thus, they are Page 9260 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 8 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com all considered upland-cut. All wetlands have been used as reservoirs, vegetated cow ponds, and/or been subject to impacts by cattle in association with the agricultural operations as shown in historic aerial imagery from 1973-1999 (Figures 7A-C) and observed during the site investigation. Vegetation within project wetlands and surface waters is predominated by exotics, nuisance species, and pasture grasses such as torpedograss, Peruvian primrosewillow, Brazilian pepper, smutgrass, big carpetgrass, Bermudagrass, bahiagrass, southern willow, Cuban bulrush, watter lettuce, and broadleaf cattail. Exotic codes (E1 - E4) for all project wetlands have been included on Figure 8. Federal jurisdiction of wetlands and surface waters that are considered assumed waters has been determined by the FDEP since it assumed administration over a portion of the CWA Section 404 program from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) on December 22, 2020; however, a recent lawsuit has vacated the FDEPs regulatory authority over assumed waters, and jurisdiction over all 404 waters has since reverted to the Corps. As a result of the ongoing litigation, the Corps is currently the only entity in the State of Florida with authority to issue permits under Section 404 of the CWA. As such, if Section 404 authorization were to be required for the Project, it would need to be obtained from the Corps. Pursuant to the latest Corps guidance, determination of federal jurisdiction is currently based on the pre-2015 regulatory regime, consistent with the May 25, 2023, Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) Sackett opinion, under which the Corps will not assert jurisdiction based on the significant nexus standard, will not assert jurisdiction over interstate wetlands solely because they are interstate, will interpret “adjacent” to mean “having a continuous surface connection,” and will limit the scope of the (a)(3) provision to only relatively permanent lakes and ponds that do not meet one of the other jurisdictional categories. Based on this rationale, project wetlands and surface waters need to share a continuous surface connection with WOTUS to be considered jurisdictional. Because the wetland being proposed for impact is hydrologically isolated and the surface waters proposed for impact are upland-cut ditches as detailed in the following section, there does not appear to be federal jurisdiction or regulatory authority under Section 404 of the CWA, and permitting is not anticipated based on the current site plan. 3.3.1 Wetland and Other Surface Water Impacts All wetland and other surface water (OSW) impacts being proposed onsite have been identified in Figure 9. These impacts will be permitted separately with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. A total of 0.21 acres of wetlands and 0.31 acres Page 9261 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 9 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com of OSWs are proposed for direct impact. All 0.21 acres of wetland impacts will be to Wetland G and all 0.31 acres of OSW impacts will be to OSW ditches. Wetland G is hydrologically isolated, less than 0.5 acres, and not utilized by threatened or endangered species. Pursuant to Section 10.2.2.1 of the Statewide Environmental Resource Permit (SWERP) Applicant’s Handbook, Vol. 1, no compensatory mitigation is required for impacts to this wetland. All 0.33 acres of the ditches proposed for impact are associated with nonhydric and predominantly nonhydric soil units according to the Florida Association of Environmental Soil Scientists (FAESS) in the Hydric Soils of Florida Handbook, Fourth Edition (2007), and thus, are upland-cut. Pursuant to Section 10.2.2.2 of the SWERP Applicant’s Handbook, Vol. 1, upland-cut ditches are exempt from mitigation. No secondary impacts will occur as an undisturbed 15-foot minimum, 25-foot-wide average upland buffer will be maintained between areas of disturbance and preserved wetlands pursuant to Section 10.2.7(a) of the SWERP Applicant’s Handbook, Vol. 1, and Sections 3.05.07 and 4.08.05 of the Collier County LDC. All 2.06 acres of Wetland F are being preserved as identified in the Site Plans provided under separate cover. The minimum setback associated with Wetland F will be 32.21-feet which is shown in the Site Plans and has also been identified in Figure 9. 3.4 LISTED SPECIES Preliminary listed species surveys were conducted on February 23 and 24, 2022, within the project for the occurrence and potential for occurrence of floral or faunal species listed or otherwise protected by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Collier County. Random transects were surveyed within all land use and cover types shown on Figure 2. In addition to the preliminary site survey, available database reviews and mapping were used to ascertain any previous documentation or likelihood of occurrence of FDACS, FWC, USFWS, and County listed or otherwise protected species. Specifically, reviews of the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) Biodiversity Matrix (Attachment 2), FWC Eagle Nest Locator, and FWC/USFWS listed species records were conducted. The results of the preliminary listed species surveys are as follows: Page 9262 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 10 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 3.4.1 Listed Plants Pursuant to a query of FNAI’s Biodiversity Matrix (Attachment 2), no state and/or federally listed native plant species or plants identified as rare or less rare in Chapter 3.04.03 of the Collier County LDC have been documented or are likely within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512, which are the one-square mile assessment areas in which the project is located. Pursuant to a review of historic imagery from 1973 (Figure 7A), the entirety of the project site has been disturbed for at least approximately 50 years. Due to the site wide and long- term persistence of agricultural related disturbances, the project consists primarily of planted pasture grasses, and invasive exotic and ruderal plants such as Brazilian pepper, Peruvian primrosewillow, shrubby false buttonweed, elephantgrass, torpedograss, smutgrass, shrubverbena, bahiagrass, Bermudagrass, and big carpetgrass. As such, the presence of state and/or federally listed plant species or native species considered rare or less rare by Collier County are not anticipated, and none were observed; thus, impacts to protected native plant species are not anticipated. 3.4.2 Listed Wildlife Pursuant to the FNAI Biodiversity Matrix (Attachment 2), one listed native wildlife species, the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), has been identified as documented within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512, the one-square mile assessment areas in which the project is located. Five additional listed or otherwise protected native wildlife species, the Audubon’s crested caracara (Polyborus plancus audubonii), wood stork (Mycteria americana), gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), mangrove fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), and Florida black bear (Ursu americanus floridanus) are considered by FNAI as “likely” to occur within one or both matrix units. No listed species and one otherwise protected species, the American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis), was observed on the project during the preliminary site surveys. Based on site characteristics, land use, known geographic distribution, and habitat requirements, listed or otherwise protected species that could be found on the project or adjacent lands in addition to the American alligator include the Florida panther, crested caracara, Florida black bear, wood stork, gopher tortoise, and eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon couperi). The presence of the mangrove fox squirrel and Florida scrub jay (identified by FNAI as likely and potential elements, respectively) were determined to be Page 9263 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 11 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com unlikely onsite due to habitat limitations and the presence of the bald eagle was determined to be unlikely due to records of known nesting locations. The mangrove fox squirrel, also known as the Big Cypress fox squirrel, which is found in five counties in south Florida, requires forested areas with an open understory including habitats such as cypress stands, slash pine savanna, mangrove swamps, tropical hardwood forests, live oak woods, coastal broadleaf evergreen hammocks, as well as suburban areas also containing forested components and open understories like golf courses, city parks, and residences. The open understory is important for accessing food which primarily consists of nuts, seeds, fungi, fruit, and buds, and avoiding predation. The project contains cleared, open agricultural lands and what forested component is present consists of dense invasive species lacking an open understory; thus, the project does not contain habitat suitable to support this species and impacts to this species are not anticipated. The Florida scrub jay inhabits fire-dominated, low growing oak scrub found on well-drained sandy soils but may also be found on modified lads such as abandoned citrus groves with scrub oaks; however, the types of abandoned and active agricultural uses found on the project lack a sufficient supply of acorn forage from scrub oaks and bare, dry, sandy soils for caching acorns. As such, the project does not contain habitat suitable to support this species and impacts to this species are not anticipated. Searches of the FWC Eagle Nesting and Audubon Florida EagleWatch Nest Locator mapping databases did not have records of any bald eagle nests on the project or within 660 feet. Protective buffers are typically required for development within 660 feet of a bald eagle nest. With no nests documented within 660 feet of the project or observed within 660 feet of the project during the preliminary listed species survey, no impacts to this species are anticipated. The following provides additional information on the one otherwise protected faunal species identified onsite. American Alligator The American alligator was observed within the project reservoirs which is listed as “Threatened” due to similarity of appearance to the American crocodile Page 9264 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 12 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com (Crocodylus acutus) by the USFWS and Federally-designated Threatened due to similarity of appearance by the FWC. The American crocodile is a coastal species and thus, misidentification of an American crocodile as an American alligator on this inland site is highly unlikely. While there are regulations related to the intentional feeding, harm, take, possession, or sale of individual alligators, nests, or eggs without appropriate licensing and permits, no developmental permitting restrictions are typically associated with the American alligator. Based on site characteristics, land use, known geographic distribution, and habitat requirements, the following species, which have not been identified on the project, have the potential to occur. Gopher Tortoise No gopher tortoise burrows were observed along ditch berms where present or elsewhere on the project during the preliminary survey. Pursuant to a query of FNAI Biodiversity Matrix, the gopher tortoise is a potential element within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512 (Attachment 2), in which the project is located. The gopher tortoise is listed as “Threatened” by the FWC and permits are required to impact areas containing tortoises or their burrows. Suitable habitat includes dry, sandy upland land uses and cover types, such as sandhills, scrub, xeric oak hammock, dry pine flatwoods, pastures, and abandoned groves. Based on the widespread land use disturbances, low elevations and corresponding high- water table, the likelihood of tortoises utilizing the project site is considered low and would most likely be limited to berms noted along the perimeter ditches within the pasture at times of the year when the water table is depressed. In advance of land disturbing activities associated with the project, surveys will be conducted pursuant to the FWC Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines and as identified in the wildlife management plan. Any potentially occupied gopher tortoise burrows occurring within the limits of disturbance will be addressed via permitting and relocation, per the FWC Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines. Additional protected commensal species associated with gopher tortoise burrows have a low to moderate potential to utilize the property. These species are known Page 9265 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 13 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com as gopher tortoise burrow commensals and include species such as the Florida pine snake (Pituophis melanoleucus mugitus) and eastern indigo snake. No commensal species were observed during the field review. Permitting and relocation of these protected species is generally addressed concurrently in association with the gopher tortoise permitting. Eastern Indigo Snake No eastern indigo snakes have been observed on the project. Pursuant to a query of FNAI Biodiversity Matrix, the eastern indigo snake is a potential element within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512, (Attachment 2), in which the project is located. The eastern indigo snake is listed as a “Threatened” species by the FWC and USFWS. It ranges over large areas often in the hundreds of acres over which it utilizes a mosaic of upland and wetland habitats, from scrub and sandhill to wet prairies and mangrove swamps. It will use most of the available habitats within its home range, but prefers open, undeveloped areas. The burrows of gopher tortoises are often used for denning as thermal refugia from winter cold and desiccating sandhill environments. While no gopher tortoise burrows were observed on the project, the likelihood of occurrence of the eastern indigo snake onsite is considered low to moderate based on the rural nature of the area, the potential for gopher tortoise burrows outside the project, and the large territorial ranges used by this species. As such, the USFWS’s Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake will be used during site preparation and project construction as identified in the wildlife management plan. This will include an outline of the measures being incorporated, educational pamphlets, and signage (Attachment 3). In the event potentially occupied gopher tortoise burrows were to be identified on the project in advance of project areas proposed for land disturbance, they will be permitted and excavated prior to the initiation of site disturbance in the vicinity of the burrow. Any eastern indigo snakes which are encountered will be allowed to vacate the area prior to additional work in the burrow vicinity. These measures along with the use of the USFWS’s standard protection measures should help to minimize impacts to this species, and as such, adverse effects are not anticipated. Page 9266 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 14 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com Wood Stork No wood storks or rookeries have been observed on the project. Pursuant to a query of the FNAI Biodiversity Matrix, the wood stork is a likely element within matrix units 46511 and 46512 (Attachment 2), in which the project is located. The wood stork is listed as “Threatened” by both the FWC and USFWS. Wood storks typically nest in rookeries found in stands of medium to tall trees, particularly cypress, which occur along the edges of, or which form islands in large water bodies. Ideal habitat consists of a variety of inundated forested wetlands, including cypress strands and domes, mixed hardwood swamps, and sloughs. Foraging occurs in shallow marshes or artificial impoundments with fluctuating pools of open water that trap and concentrate prey items, particularly when water levels recede. Prey is comprised primarily of fish 1-6 inches in length, which require wetlands or surface waters that are inundated for most of the year, and which seldom dry up entirely. The bulk of wood stork foraging occurs within areas designated by the USFWS as core foraging area (CFAs). A CFA is measured as a radial distance from the rookery. Pursuant to USFWS guidelines, the size of the CFA varies regionally across Florida, with CFAs of 18.6 miles for rookeries in south Florida in which the project is located. A review of the USFWS Wood Stork Nesting Colonies database revealed that the expansion area is located within the CFAs of three known rookeries, Corkscrew, Barron Collier and Collier-Hendry (Figure 3). Pursuant to Figure 8, wetlands and surface waters on the project include 0.24 acres of vegetated non-forested wetlands (Wetlands D, E, and G), 1.70 acres of reservoirs (Surface Waters 1 and 2), 0.52 acres of upland-cut surface water ditches, and 2.06 acres of willow and elderberry marsh (Wetland F). Most of these areas are unsuitable as the willow and elderberry marsh appears to be too densely vegetated with shrubs and the upland-cut ditches, vegetated non-forested Wetlands D and E, and reservoirs appear to either have limited water sources or greater water depths that provide only limited wood stork foraging opportunities. Vegetated non-forested Wetland G and reservoirs Surface Water 2 have mostly permanent water sources and shallow enough depths to adequately support wood stork foraging. Surface water 2 will not be impacted. Page 9267 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 15 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com While Wetland G is being proposed for impact and does contain suitable habitat within the CFA, because it is only 0.21 acres in extent, and the CFA includes an area of 1,086 square miles, these impacts are considered de minimis. Because of the limited wood stork foraging habitat onsite and de minimis impacts, the project is not anticipated to adversely affect this species. Additionally, as shown on the project plans, the posting of educational signage for wading birds along access roads will be implemented as a protection measure to caution haul truck drivers. Florida Panther No Florida panthers or evidence of their occurrence have been observed on the project. The Florida panther is listed as “Endangered” by the USFWS and FWC. Panthers require an extensive mosaic of native plant communities, which are contiguous and largely forested to meet their social, reproductive, and energetic needs. Large wetlands generally inaccessible to humans are important for diurnal refuge. Improved land use areas located within a mosaic of natural communities are tolerated. Panther habitat selection is related to prey availability, which means they select habitats that make prey vulnerable to stalking and capturing. Dense understory vegetation provides some of the most important feeding, resting, and denning cover for panthers. A search of the FNAI biodiversity index indicated the Florida panther has been documented within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512 (Attachment 2), within which the project is located. According to the FWC’s wildlife maps, the project exists within the secondary Florida panther habitat zone (Secondary Zone) (Figure 4). The Secondary Zone is defined as lands that are contiguous with the Primary Zone and although these lands are used to a lesser extent by panthers, they are important to the long-term viability and persistence of the panther in the wild. Panthers use these lands in a much lower density than those found in the Primary Zone. Pursuant to telemetry data received from the FWC (Figure 5), almost all panther activity in the area has occurred in association with Corkscrew Swamp to the west Page 9268 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 16 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com and Graham Marsh to the east of the project. There are a minimal number of telemetry records in the vicinity of the project that are located outside of these wetland corridors. There is one record from the 2010’s east of Edwards Grove Road which is on the property immediately north of the project. One other record from the 1980’s is located approximately 0.75 miles to the south; however, considering these are the only records in the proximity of the project, regular use of this habitat as part of a territorial range or travel corridor appears unlikely, especially considering the lack of vegetative cover/forested corridors. Due to the absence of recorded telemetry data and wildlife corridors on the project, and the rarity of recorded data on surrounding properties, the project does not appear to be regularly used as part of a travel corridor or territorial range. Additionally, there are no natural habitats associated with the project or nearby. All land on and surrounding the project consists primarily of altered land use areas, with little functional value, such as extraction areas, citrus groves, active and abandoned agricultural areas, disturbed lands, and man-made surface water ditches and reservoirs. The project would appear to be compatible with Chapter 3.04.02 of the Collier County LDC which discourages the destruction of native habitats preferred by the Florida panther such as pine flatwoods and hardwood hammocks by directing intensive land uses to currently disturbed areas. As such, the project is not anticipated to adversely affect this species; however, protection measures such as the preservation of 2.06 acres of wetland and the surrounding 25-foot wide average upland buffer, educational signage, and reduced speed limits will be implemented on the project to ensure impacts to this species are minimized to the extent practicable as identified in the wildlife management plan. Audubon’s Crested Caracara No Audubon’s crested caracaras or nests have been observed on the project. The Audubon’s crested caracara (caracara) is listed as “Threatened” by the USFWS and FWC. The project is located within the USFWS consultation area for the caracara. Caracaras prefer large pasture expanses, grasslands, or prairies with numerous shallow ponds and sloughs for foraging and single to small clumps (2 to 10) of cabbage palm, live oak (Quercus virginiana), and/or cypress (Taxodium spp.) for nesting, with a strong preference for cabbage palm as the primary nest Page 9269 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 17 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com tree. Nests are typically constructed 4 to 18 meters off the ground and nesting typically occurs from January through April. Caracaras are opportunistic feeders that eat carrion and capture live prey, including a wide variety of vertebrates and invertebrates. A search of the FNAI biodiversity index indicated the caracara is likely to occur within Matrix Units 46511 and 46512 (Attachment 2), in which the project is located. Evidence of caracara activity was previously documented in the area but not on the site by Kleinfelder and the USFWS. Previous records from the USFWS showed four nests between 1.3 and 4.6 miles away from the western mining expansion and an individual sighting approximately 3.5 miles away. Additionally, a caracara pair and individual had been observed by Kleinfelder northwest and northeast of the western mining expansion, respectively, during a March 2020 site assessment; however, none were observed on this project site or the previously permitted mining areas. The project consists of a mix of active and abandoned agricultural land uses. The abandoned nursery and row crops area are overgrown and of limited suitability for this species. The active pasture areas do have some ponds and wetlands and provide moderate suitability for foraging; however, there are very few cabbage palm trees present that are solitary or found in small clumps which are of suitable size for nesting. Any cabbage palm trees that did appear suitable or nesting were inspected for nests, and no nests were observed. The land area between the project and SR-29 which was once part of the project area was also investigated for nests, and none were identified. A protective buffer of 1,500 meters is recommended around active caracara nests to avoid impacts to potentially occupied habitat. All land surrounding the project consists of agricultural use, citrus groves, and mining. Scattered, solitary palm trees were observed in some of the groves and other agricultural lands surrounding the project which could potentially support nesting. As such, coordination was conducted with the USFWS to obtain the most current mapping/nesting data. Pursuant to records provided by the USFWS in 2022, there have been individual observations approximately 3.4 and 4.0 miles north of the project (Attachment 4), but no documented nests within less than approximately 3.0 miles; thus, no Page 9270 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 18 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com impacts to nests or habitat occupied by this species are anticipated. The project is mapped by the USFWS as being located within a communal roost/gathering area of juveniles/subadults where 50+ individuals have been observed which is represented as a circular plot greater than 5 miles in diameter; however, the conversion of the project from the active and abandoned agricultural land use types to a plant site would not appear to have significant adverse effects on this species. While adverse effects are not anticipated, a monitoring program will be implemented under the wildlife management plan to evaluate any future use of the property and minimize impacts to this species to the extent practicable. Black Bear No black bears or evidence of their occurrence have been observed on the project. The Florida black bear was de-listed by the FWC in August 2012, but is still protected by the Florida Black Bear Conservation Rule, 68A-1.004, F.A.C., and the Florida Black Bear Management Plan. According to the rule, no person is allowed to possess, injure, shoot, wound, trap, collect, or sell Florida black bears and the FWC is to provide comments to permitting agencies to minimize the impacts of land modifications on the conservation and management of black bears as outlined in the Florida Black Bear Management Plan. The goal of the Black Bear Management Plan is to maintain healthy populations in suitable habitats throughout Florida for the benefit of the species and people and prevent the re- listing of the species due to population and habitat decline. A search of the FNAI’s Biodiversity Matrix indicated the Florida black bear is a likely element within the matrix units 46511 and 46512 (Attachment 2), in which the project is located. Additionally, pursuant to the latest FWC coverage of Florida Black Bear populations, the Project is mapped within a portion of the geographic range of the Big Cypress black bear population where it has been determined to be a frequent occurrence (Figure 6). This designation is indicative of areas within their range where records have shown that densities are highest, and bears spend the most amount of time. Such areas make up the core of bear populations, where reproduction is occurring as evidenced by the consistent presence of females and cubs. Page 9271 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 19 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com The Florida black bear is known to utilize a variety of habitats including pine flatwoods, swamps and forested scrub and relies on contiguous forested expanses for cover and travel corridors. Bears main forage in Florida includes acorns, saw palmetto, and cabbage palm. Denning typically occurs in the ground surrounded by dense protective vegetation such as saw palmetto. The project consists of active and abandoned agricultural land use types, with no saw palmetto, native vegetation, or natural forested communities. As such, there is limited cover, and no foraging or denning habitat onsite and the proposed project is not anticipated to adversely affect this species. Because the project is within a range where occurrence is designated as frequent, however, protection measures will be implemented as identified in the wildlife management plan that include the preservation of 2.06 acres of wetland and the surrounding 25-foot wide average upland buffer, placement of signage along the entrance road from Edwards Grove Road to inform haul truck operators of its potential as a black bear crossing area, limitation of haul trucks to a maximum speed of 15 MPH, and utilization of bear-proof trash containers to discourage scavenging by black bears and minimize interactions between black bears and humans. When considering the use of these protection measures and the lack of habitat value onsite, it is anticipated the goals of the Florida Black Bear Management Plan will be met and no adverse effects will occur to this species. Based upon known geographic distribution and habitat requirements, no other floral or faunal species listed or otherwise protected by the county, state or federal governments are likely to be found onsite or affected by the proposed project. While no significant habitat for county, state and/or federally listed species is known to be present or anticipated onsite due to the site wide and long-term persistence of agricultural related disturbances, if any use by listed species is identified, Stewart Materials will comply with all requirements to avoid and/or minimize impacts and mitigate if necessary. 3.5 WELLFIELD PROTECTION ZONES Pursuant to Figure 10, much of the project falls within the W - 4 (20 Year Travel Time Isocontour) Wellfield Protection Zone for Collier County. The Project will comply with all groundwater protection requirements for Zone W-4 which are identified in Chapter 3.06.00 of the LDC. A Spill Page 9272 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 20 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan will be implemented in association with the project to reduce or eliminate the potential for groundwater contamination via the discharge or accidental release of hazardous products or wastes. Page 9273 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 21 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 4 RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ___________________________________________________________________________________ The following additional project information is being provided to demonstrate consistency with the policies related to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay which are found in the CCME of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Applicable policies are listed and addressed as follows: Policy 1.3.2: The overall purpose and description of the Rural Stewardship program is defined in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) Overlay found in the Future Land Use Element. A Stewardship Credit system has been established that shall serve as the primary basis for the protection of Flowway Stewardship Areas (FSAs), Habitat Stewardship Areas (HSAs) and Water Retention Areas (WRAs). The RLSA Overlay also contains policies that shall direct incompatible land uses away from FSAs, HSAs and WRAs in order to protect wetlands, upland habitats and listed species within the RLSA. There are no native upland habitat communities on the project, and it appears none have been present since the land was converted to agriculture historically which occurred by at least approximately 50 years ago (Figure 7A). Wetland habitat communities are dominated by exotic vegetation; however, pursuant to the LDC they meet the minimum vegetation requirement for native vegetation of 25%, and thus, existing native vegetation is considered to be 2.30 acres. All surface waters on the project are man-made, consisting of reservoirs and ditches (Figure 8). All wetlands have been used as reservoirs, vegetated cow ponds, and/or been subject to impacts by cattle in association with the agricultural operations as shown in historic aerial imagery from 1973- 1999 (Figures 7A-C) and observed during the project investigation. Vegetation within project wetlands and surface waters is predominated by exotics, nuisance species, and pasture grasses such as torpedograss, Peruvian primrosewillow, Brazilian pepper, smutgrass, big carpetgrass, Bermudagrass, bahiagrass, southern willow, Cuban bulrush, watter lettuce, and broadleaf cattail. As indicated in Section 3.4, based on field observations of project characteristics, land use, known geographic distribution and habitat requirements for listed species, no protected floral species or significant nesting or foraging habitat associated with faunal species listed by either the State or Federal government are likely to be found within the project. As such, the proposed land use associated with the project would not appear to be incompatible with the purpose of the Rural Stewardship program. Page 9274 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 22 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com Policy 6.1.3: For the County’s RLSA Overlay, as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved pursuant to the RLSA policies found in the Future Land Use Element. The total wetland area with existing native vegetation is 2.30 acres. Pursuant to LDC section 4.08.05.J.2, the minimum amount of native vegetation required to be preserved is 40%, or 0.92 acres. All 2.06 acres of Wetland F have been identified for preservation; thus, meeting the native vegetation preservation requirement. Policy 6.1.5: Agriculture shall be exempt from the above preservation requirements contained in Policies 6.1.1, and 6.1.2 of this Element provided that any new clearing of land for agriculture shall not be converted to non- agricultural development for 25 years. For any such conversions in less than 25 years, the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 of this Element shall be applied to the site at the time of the conversion. The percentage of native vegetation preserved shall be calculated on the amount of vegetation occurring at the time of the agricultural clearing, and if found to be deficient, a native plant community shall be restored to re-create a native plant community in all three strata (ground covers, shrubs and trees), utilizing larger plant materials so as to more quickly re-create the lost mature vegetation. Agricultural clearing within the RLSA Overlay shall be allowed and guided by the RLSA policies found in the FLUE. All uplands onsite had been converted to agricultural pastureland by 1973 as evidenced by the historical imagery provided as Figure 7A. Additional agricultural conversions included nursery and row crop operations in the western two-thirds of the project which are evident in the 1994 and 1999 historical imagery (Figures 7B&C), but which have since been abandoned. The eastern one-third of the project continues to actively be used as pastureland for livestock. There are no natural upland areas remaining onsite which could be converted to agriculture. As such, the native vegetation preservation requirements of Policies 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 are limited to the 2.30 acres of wetlands, of which 2.06 acres, or 90% will be preserved. Policy 7.1.3: Listed species within the RLSA shall be protected pursuant to the RLSA Overlay policies within the Future Land Use Element. Page 9275 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 23 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com As indicated in Section 3.4, no listed species have been documented within the project; however, a wildlife management plan has been prepared pursuant to Sections 3.04.02 and 4.08.05.J.3. of the Collier County LDC to account for listed wildlife species the site is capable of supporting. Page 9276 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 24 of 24 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 5 LIMITATIONS ____________________________________________________________________________ This work was performed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by other members of Kleinfelder’s profession practicing in the same locality, under similar conditions and at the date the services provided. Our conclusions, opinions, and recommendations are based on a limited number of observations and data. It is possible that conditions could vary between or beyond the data evaluated. Kleinfelder makes no other representation, guarantee, or warranty, express or implied, regarding the services, communication (oral or written), report, opinion, or instrument of service provided. Page 9277 of 9661 FIGURES Page 9278 of 9661 Page 9279 of 9661 Page 9280 of 9661 Page 9281 of 9661 Page 9282 of 9661 Page 9283 of 9661 Page 9284 of 9661 Page 9285 of 9661 Page 9286 of 9661 Page 9287 of 9661 Page 9288 of 9661 Page 9289 of 9661 Page 9290 of 9661 ATTACHMENTS Page 9291 of 9661 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 9292 of 9661 RESUME Kleinfelder | 1 Bill Newlon Senior Environmental Scientist Project Professional Mr. Newlon has worked in the environmental planning and permitting field for over 23 years and has an extensive background in wetlands, listed species, and natural resource management. Wetland related experience includes wetland delineations of local, state and federal jurisdictional wetlands, significant nexus evaluations, formal state and federal jurisdictional wetland determinations, agency wetland line verifications, ordinary high water determinations, quantitative functional wetland assessments, permitting of wetland impacts and related mitigation design, and wetland mitigation monitoring, related reporting, and quality/technical review. Wetland work has been conducted in several states, including Florida, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, and Utah. Listed species related experience includes preliminary faunal and floral species surveys, species specific floral and faunal surveys and/or agency consultation related to the giant orchid, sweetscented pigeon wing, Florida scrub jay, gopher tortoise, Audobon's crested caracara, Florida black bear, eastern indigo snake, Florida sandhill crane, whooping crane, Florida burrowing owl, sand skink, Panama City crayfish, and wood stork, submerged aquatic vegetation surveys/monitoring, giant orchid relocations, wading bird rookery and bald eagle nest monitoring, gopher tortoise and bald eagle permitting, gopher tortoise and burrow commensal relocations via mechanical excavation, bucket trapping, and hand digging, Florida mouse relocation via Sherman trapping, and herp array trapping/sampling. Natural resource management related experience includes habitat and land use mapping, state and federal environmental resource permitting, environmental impact and mitigation assessments, water quality sampling, mitigation design and monitoring, sovereign submerged lands investigations, enforcement and compliance resolution, and nuisance species maintenance. He has worked for a wide variety of clients in public and private sectors, including local governmental departments such as the Lake County School Board, Public Works, Board of County Commissioners, and Parks and Trails; companies within the mining industry such as Vulcan/Florida Rock, Mosaic, DuPont, Iluca, Stewart Mining, Panadero, Votorantim Cimentos, and Sun-Gro, which are associated with limerock, sand, phosphate, peat and heavy minerals mining; residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, and waterfront developers and rail/shipping terminal operators such as NASCAR, Disney, Dollar General, Vulcan/Florida Rock, and Panadero; and oil and natural gas providers such as Chesapeake, Newfield, SECO, Exxon-Mobil, and QEP. To serve those clients, he has worked with various government agencies across local, state and federal levels to secure entitlements and permits, including Environmental Management, Building and Zoning, and Planning and Development departments of various municipalities, Canaveral Port Authority, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Division of State Lands, Bureau of Mining and Minerals Regulation, Environmental Resource Program, Wetland Evaluation and Delineation Section, and Compliance and Enforcement), Florida Water Management Districts (St. Johns River, South Florida, Southwest Florida, Northwest Florida, and Suwannee River), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Years of Experience 20+ years Education Bachelors, Management, Gettysburg College, Pennsylvania, 1991 Bachelors, Biology, Old Dominion University, Virginia, 1997 Masters, Biology, University of New Orleans, Louisiana, 2001 Registrations Authorized Gopher Tortoise Agent, No. GTA-09-00239G, FFWCC Certifications CPR & First Aid, Red Cross Mine Safety Training, MSHA, Basic Fire Management training, NWCG Open Water Diver Certification, PADI Professional Affiliations Society of Wetland Scientists Florida Association of Environmental Professionals Florida Wildlife Society Gopher Tortoise Council Publications Primary Researcher and Author, Phenotypic Plasticity of Reproductive Effort in a Colonial Ascidian, Botryllus schlosseri, Journal of Experimental Zoology. 297A: 180-188, 2003, Estuarine Biology, Article Page 9293 of 9661 ATTACHMENT 2 Page 9294 of 9661 Page 9295 of 9661 Page 9296 of 9661 Page 9297 of 9661 Page 9298 of 9661 Page 9299 of 9661 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 9300 of 9661 STANDARD PROTECTION MEASURES FOR THE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKEU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceAugust 12, 2013The eastern indigo snake protection/education plan (Plan) below has been developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in Florida for use by applicants and their construction personnel. At least 30 days prior to any clearing/land alteration activities, the applicant shall notify the appropriate USFWS Field Office via e-mail that the Plan will be implemented as described below (North Florida Field Office:jaxregs@fws.gov; South Florida Field Office: verobeach@fws.gov; Panama City Field Office: panamacity@fws.gov). As long as the signatory of the e-mail certifies compliance with the below Plan (including use of the attached poster and brochure), no further written confirmation or “approval” from the USFWS is needed and the applicant may move forward with the project. If the applicant decides to use an eastern indigo snake protection/education plan other than the approved Plan below, written confirmation or “approval” from the USFWS that the plan is adequate must be obtained. At least 30 days prior to any clearing/land alteration activities, the applicant shall submit their unique plan for review and approval. The USFWS will respond via e- mail, typically within 30 days of receiving the plan, either concurring that the plan is adequate or requesting additional information. A concurrence e-mail from the appropriate USFWS Field Office will fulfill approval requirements. The Plan materials should consist of: 1) a combination of posters and pamphlets (see Poster Information section below); and 2) verbal educational instructions to construction personnel by supervisory or management personnel before any clearing/land alteration activities are initiated (see Pre-Construction Activities and During Construction Activities sections below). POSTER INFORMATION Posters with the following information shall be placed at strategic locations on the construction site and along any proposed access roads (a final poster for Plan compliance, to be printed on 11” x 17” or larger paper and laminated, is attached): DESCRIPTION: The eastern indigo snake is one of the largest non-venomous snakes in North America, with individuals often reaching up to 8 feet in length. They derive their name from the glossy, blue-black color of their scales above and uniformly slate blue below. Frequently, they have orange to coral reddish coloration in the throat area, yet some specimens have been reported to only have cream coloration on the throat. These snakes are not typically aggressive and will attempt to crawl away when disturbed. Though indigo snakes rarely bite, they should NOT be handled. SIMILAR SNAKES: The black racer is the only other solid black snake resembling the eastern indigo snake. However, black racers have a white or cream chin, thinner bodies, and WILL BITE if handled. LIFE HISTORY: The eastern indigo snake occurs in a wide variety of terrestrial habitat types throughout Florida. Although they have a preference for uplands, they also utilize some wetlands 1 Page 9301 of 9661 and agricultural areas. Eastern indigo snakes will often seek shelter inside gopher tortoise burrows and other below- and above-ground refugia, such as other animal burrows, stumps, roots, and debris piles. Females may lay from 4 - 12 white eggs as early as April through June,with young hatching in late July through October.PROTECTION UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAW: The eastern indigo snake is classified as a Threatened species by both the USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. “Taking” of eastern indigo snakes is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act without a permit. “Take” is defined by the USFWS as an attempt to kill, harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect, or engage in any such conduct. Penalties include a maximum fine of $25,000 for civil violations and up to $50,000 and/or imprisonment for criminal offenses, if convicted. Only individuals currently authorized through an issued Incidental Take Statement in association with a USFWS Biological Opinion, or by a Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the USFWS, to handle an eastern indigo snake are allowed to do so. IF YOU SEE A LIVE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: x Cease clearing activities and allow the live eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site without interference; x Personnel must NOT attempt to touch or handle snake due to protected status. x Take photographs of the snake, if possible,for identification and documentation purposes. x Immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,and the appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. x If the snake is located in a vicinity where continuation of the clearing or construction activities will cause harm to the snake, the activities must halt until such time that a representative of the USFWS returns the call (within one day) with further guidance as to when activities may resume. IF YOU SEE A DEAD EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: x Cease clearing activities and immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,and the appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. x Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. x Thoroughly soak the dead snake in water and then freeze the specimen. The appropriate wildlife agency will retrieve the dead snake. Telephone numbers of USFWS Florida Field Offices to be contacted if a live or dead eastern indigo snake is encountered: North Florida Field Office – (904) 731-3336 Panama City Field Office – (850) 769-0552 South Florida Field Office – (772) 562-3909 2 Page 9302 of 9661 PRE-CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 1. The applicant or designated agent will post educational posters in the construction office andthroughout the construction site, including any access roads. The posters must be clearly visible to all construction staff. A sample poster is attached.2. Prior to the onset of construction activities, the applicant/designated agent will conduct a meeting with all construction staff (annually for multi-year projects) to discuss identification of the snake, its protected status, what to do if a snake is observed within the project area, and applicable penalties that may be imposed if state and/or federal regulations are violated. An educational brochure including color photographs of the snake will be given to each staff member in attendance and additional copies will be provided to the construction superintendent to make available in the onsite construction office (a final brochure for Plan compliance, to be printed double-sided on 8.5” x 11” paper and then properly folded, is attached). Photos of eastern indigo snakes may be accessed on USFWS and/or FWC websites. 3. Construction staff will be informed that in the event that an eastern indigo snake (live or dead) is observed on the project site during construction activities, all such activities are to cease until the established procedures are implemented according to the Plan, which includes notification of the appropriate USFWS Field Office. The contact information for the USFWS is provided on the referenced posters and brochures. DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES 1. During initial site clearing activities, an onsite observer may be utilized to determine whether habitat conditions suggest a reasonable probability of an eastern indigo snake sighting (example: discovery of snake sheds, tracks, lots of refugia and cavities present in the area of clearing activities, and presence of gopher tortoises and burrows). 2. If an eastern indigo snake is discovered during gopher tortoise relocation activities (i.e. burrow excavation), the USFWS shall be contacted within one business day to obtain further guidance which may result in further project consultation. 3. Periodically during construction activities, the applicant’s designated agent should visit the project area to observe the condition of the posters and Plan materials, and replace them as needed. Construction personnel should be reminded of the instructions (above) as to what is expected if any eastern indigo snakes are seen. POST CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES Whether or not eastern indigo snakes are observed during construction activities, a monitoring report should be submitted to the appropriate USFWS Field Office within 60 days of project completion. The report can be sent electronically to the appropriate USFWS e-mail address listed on page one of this Plan. 3 Page 9303 of 9661 IF YOU SEE A LIVE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE:•Cease clearing activities and allow the eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site without interference.•Personnel must NOT attempt to touch or handle snake due to protected status. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,andthe appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •If the snake is located in a vicinity where continuation of the clearing or construction activities will cause harm to the snake, the activities must halt until such time that a representative of the USFWS returns the call (within one day) with further guidance as to when activities may resume.IF YOU SEE A DEAD EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE:•Cease clearing activities and immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,andthe appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Thoroughly soak the dead snake in water and then freeze the specimen.The appropriate wildlife agency will retrieve the dead snake. USFWS Florida Field Offices to be contacted if a live or dead eastern indigo snake is encountered:North Florida ES Office – (904) 731-3336Panama City ES Office – (850) 769-0552South Florida ES Office – (772) 562-3909DESCRIPTION: The eastern indigo snake is one of the largest non-venomous snakes in North America, with individuals often reaching up to 8 feet in length. They derive their name from the glossy, blue-black color of their scales above and uniformly slate blue below. Frequently, they have orange to coral reddish coloration in the throat area, yet some specimens have been reported to only have cream coloration on the throat. These snakes are not typically aggressive and will attempt to crawl away when disturbed. Though indigo snakes rarely bite, they should NOT be handled. SIMILAR SNAKES: The black racer is the only other solid black snake resembling the eastern indigo snake. However, black racers have a white or cream chin, thinner bodies, and WILL BITE if handled.LIFE HISTORY: The eastern indigo snake occurs in a wide variety of terrestrial habitat types throughout Florida. Although they have a preference for uplands, they also utilize some wetlands and agricultural areas. Eastern indigo snakes will often seek shelter inside gopher tortoise burrows and other below- and above-ground refugia, such as other animal burrows, stumps, roots, and debris piles. Females may lay from 4 - 12 white eggs as early as April through June, with young hatching in late July through October.Page 9304 of 9661 Killing, harming, or harassing indigo snakes is strictly prohibited and punishable under State and Federal Law.Only individuals currently authorized through an issued Incidental Take Statement in association with a USFWS Biological Opinion, or by a Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the USFWS, to handle an eastern indigo snake are allowed to do so.LEGAL STATUS: The eastern indigo snake is classified as a Threatened species by both the USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. “Taking” of eastern indigo snakes is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act without a permit. “Take” is defined by the USFWS as an attempt to kill, harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect, or engage in any such conduct.Penalties include a maximum fine of $25,000 for civil violations and up to $50,000 and/or imprisonment for criminal offenses, if convicted.ATTENTION:THREATENED EASTERN INDIGO SNAKES MAY BE PRESENT ON THIS SITE!!! Please read the following information provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to become familiar with standard protection measures for the eastern indigo snake. Photo: Dirk StevensonAugust 12, 2013Page 9305 of 9661 ATTENTION:THREATENED EASTERN INDIGO SNAKES MAY BE PRESENT ON THIS SITE!!! IF YOU SEE A LIVE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: •Cease clearing activities and allow the eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site without interference. •Personnel must NOT attempt to touch or handle snake due to protected status. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent, and the appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •If the snake is located in a vicinity where continuation of the clearing or construction activities will cause harm to the snake, the activities must halt until such time that a representative of the USFWS returns the call (within one day) with further guidance as to when activities may resume. IF YOU SEE A DEAD EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: •Cease clearing activities and immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent, and the appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Thoroughly soak the dead snake in water and then freeze the specimen. The appropriate wildlife agency will retrieve the dead snake. USFWS Florida Field Offices to be contacted if a live or dead eastern indigo snake is encountered: North Florida Field Office – (904) 731-3336 Panama City Field Office – (850) 769-0552 South Florida Field Office – (772) 562-3909 Killing, harming, or harassing indigo snakes is strictly prohibited and punishable under State and Federal Law. DESCRIPTION: The eastern indigo snake is one of the largest non-venomous snakes in North America, with individuals often reaching up to 8 feet in length. They derive their name from the glossy, blue-black color of their scales above and uniformly slate blue below. Frequently, they have orange to coral reddish coloration in the throat area, yet some specimens have been reported to only have cream coloration on the throat. These snakes are not typically aggressive and will attempt to crawl away when disturbed. Though indigo snakes rarely bite, they should NOT be handled. SIMILAR SNAKES: The black racer is the only other solid black snake resembling the eastern indigo snake. However, black racers have a white or cream chin, thinner bodies, and WILL BITE if handled. LIFE HISTORY: The eastern indigo snake occurs in a wide variety of terrestrial habitat types throughout Florida. Although they have a preference for uplands, they also utilize some wetlands and agricultural areas. Eastern indigo snakes will often seek shelter inside gopher tortoise burrows and other below- and above- ground refugia, such as other animal burrows, stumps, roots, and debris piles. Females may lay from 4 - 12 white eggs as early as April through June, with young hatching in late July through October. PROTECTION: The eastern indigo snake is classified as a Threatened species by both the USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. “Taking” of eastern indigo snakes is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act without a permit. “Take” is defined by the USFWS as an attempt to kill, harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect, or engage in any such conduct. Penalties include a maximum fine of $25,000 for civil violations and up to $50,000 and/or imprisonment for criminal offenses, if convicted. Only individuals currently authorized through an issued Incidental Take Statement in association with a USFWS Biological Opinion, or by a Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the USFWS, to handle an eastern indigo snake are allowed to do so. Photo: Dirk Stevenson August 12, 2013 Page 9306 of 9661 ATTACHMENT 4 Page 9307 of 9661 Page 9308 of 9661  %LOO1HZORQ)URP/LVD'DXJKHUW\6HQW)ULGD\0DUFK307R%LOO1HZORQ6XEMHFW):>(;7(51$/@86):6&DUDFDUD/RFDWLRQ'DWD$WWDFKPHQWV)HOGDDQG,PPRNDOHH65&DUDFDUDJHSULQWMSJ^ĞĞďĞůŽǁĂŶĚĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚʹƚŚĞLJĐŚĂŶŐĞĚƚŚĞƐĞƚƵƉƐŽŶŽŵŽƌĞ<DĨŝůĞƐĨŽƌƵƐ͘ >ŝƐĂ&͘ĂƵŐŚĞƌƚLJ͕WDW WƌŽŐƌĂŵDĂŶĂŐĞƌ  ϯϲϲϯ>ĂŬĞĞŶƚĞƌƌŝǀĞ DŽƵŶƚŽƌĂ͕&ůŽƌŝĚĂϯϮϳϱϳ ĚͮϯϱϮ͘ϱϱϰ͘ϴϬϴϵ ŵͮϰϬϳ͘Ϯϳϲ͘ϰϲϱϯ  dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŵĂLJĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĐŽŶĨŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͘/ĨLJŽƵŚĂǀĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚƚŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůͶŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂŶLJĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐͶŝŶĞƌƌŽƌ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞŶŽƚŝĨLJ ƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌƉƌŽŵƉƚůLJĂŶĚĚĞůĞƚĞƚŚĞĞŵĂŝůĂŶĚĂŶLJĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐĨƌŽŵĂůůŽĨLJŽƵƌƐLJƐƚĞŵƐ͘  &ƌŽŵ͗<ŶƵƚƐŽŶ͕ĚĂŵdфĂĚĂŵͺŬŶƵƚƐŽŶΛĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀх ^ĞŶƚ͗&ƌŝĚĂLJ͕DĂƌĐŚϭϭ͕ϮϬϮϮϯ͗ϯϳWD dŽ͗ůĞdžŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶф^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶΛŬůĞŝŶĨĞůĚĞƌ͘ĐŽŵх Đ͗DĐĚŽŶĂůĚ͕<ĞŶŶĞƚŚфŬĞŶŶĞƚŚͺŵĐĚŽŶĂůĚΛĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗ZĞ͗΀ydZE>΁h^&t^ĂƌĂĐĂƌĂ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶĂƚĂ  džƚĞƌŶĂůŵĂŝů ,ŝůĞdžŝƐ͕  dŚĞƉŽƌƚĂůǁĂƐŽŶŽƵƌǁĞďƐŝƚĞ͕ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐĂƉƉĂƌĞŶƚůLJŐŽŶĞ͘tĞŚĂǀĞĂŶĞǁǁĞďƐŝƚĞƚŚĂƚŝƐŵƵĐŚŵŽƌĞůĞĂŶ͘  ƚƚĂĐŚĞĚŝƐĂ'ŽŽŐůĞĂƌƚŚƐĐƌĞĞŶŐƌĂďŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĞĂŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͘dŚĞƚǁŽĚŽƚƐĂƌĞŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůŽďƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ƚŚĞ ďŝŐĐŝƌĐůĞŝƐĂĐŽŵŵƵŶĂůƌŽŽƐƚͬŐĂƚŚĞƌŝŶŐĂƌĞĂŽĨũƵǀĞŶŝůĞͬƐƵďĂĚƵůƚďŝƌĚƐǁŚĞƌĞϱϬнŝŶĚŝǀŝĚƵĂůƐŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶ ŽďƐĞƌǀĞĚ͘>ĞƚŵĞŬŶŽǁŝĨLJŽƵŚĂǀĞĂŶLJƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐŽƌŶĞĞĚĂŶLJƚŚŝŶŐĨƵƌƚŚĞƌ͘  dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵ͕ ĚĂŵ  Adam Knutson Fish and Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Page 9309 of 9661  1339 20th StreetVero Beach, Florida 32960Tel: 772-469-4252Fax: 772-562-4288&ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶdǁŝƚƚĞƌΛh^&t^sZK&ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶ&ĂĐĞŬΛh^&t^^ŽƵƚŚ&ůŽƌŝĚĂ&ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶ/ŶƐƚĂ'ƌĂŵΛƵƐĨǁƐͺƐŽƵƚŚͺĨůŽƌŝĚĂsŝƐŝƚŽƵƌǁĞďƐŝƚĞĂƚǁǁǁ͘ĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀͬǀĞƌŽďĞĂĐŚͬEKd͗dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůĐŽƌƌĞƐƉŽŶĚĞŶĐĞĂŶĚĂŶLJĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐƚŽĂŶĚĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐƐĞŶĚĞƌŝƐƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞ&ƌĞĞĚŽŵŽĨ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶĐƚ;&K/ͿĂŶĚŵĂLJďĞĚŝƐĐůŽƐĞĚƚŽƚŚŝƌĚƉĂƌƚŝĞƐ͘  &ƌŽŵ͗ůĞdžŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶф^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶΛŬůĞŝŶĨĞůĚĞƌ͘ĐŽŵх ^ĞŶƚ͗dŚƵƌƐĚĂLJ͕DĂƌĐŚϯ͕ϮϬϮϮϳ͗ϱϭD dŽ͗<ŶƵƚƐŽŶ͕ĚĂŵdфĂĚĂŵͺŬŶƵƚƐŽŶΛĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗Z͗΀ydZE>΁h^&t^ĂƌĂĐĂƌĂ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶĂƚĂ  ,ŝĚĂŵ͕  /ƚŚŽƵŐŚƚ/ƌĞŵĞŵďĞƌĞĚĂƉŽƌƚĂů͕ďƵƚ/ĐŽƵůĚŶ͛ƚĨŝŶĚĂŶLJůŝŶŬ͘tĞ͛ƌĞůŽŽŬŝŶŐĂƚĂŶĂƌĞĂďĞƚǁĞĞŶ&ĞůĚĂĂŶĚ/ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞŝŶ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚLJ͘EŽƌƚŚŽĨϴϰϲ͕ƐŽƵƚŚŽĨϴϯϬ͕ϰŵŝůĞƐĞĂƐƚĂŶĚϰŵŝůĞƐǁĞƐƚŽĨϮϵ͘/ĐĂŶŵĂƌŬƵƉĂŬŵnjŝĨƚŚĂƚ͛ƐŚĞůƉĨƵů͘   dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵ͕  ůĞdžŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚDĂŶĂŐĞƌΘĐŽůŽŐŝƐƚ  ϯϲϲϯ>ĂŬĞĞŶƚĞƌƌŝǀĞ DŽƵŶƚŽƌĂ͕&>ϯϮϳϱϳ ŽͮϯϱϮ͘ϱϱϰ͘ϴϬϳϲ ŵͮϯϱϮ͘ϵϳϴ͘ϯϮϰϯ  dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŵĂLJĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĐŽŶĨŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͘/ĨLJŽƵŚĂǀĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚƚŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůͶŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂŶLJĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐͶŝŶĞƌƌŽƌ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞŶŽƚŝĨLJ ƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌƉƌŽŵƉƚůLJĂŶĚĚĞůĞƚĞƚŚĞĞŵĂŝůĂŶĚĂŶLJĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐĨƌŽŵĂůůŽĨLJŽƵƌƐLJƐƚĞŵƐ͘     &ƌŽŵ͗<ŶƵƚƐŽŶ͕ĚĂŵdфĂĚĂŵͺŬŶƵƚƐŽŶΛĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀх ^ĞŶƚ͗tĞĚŶĞƐĚĂLJ͕DĂƌĐŚϮ͕ϮϬϮϮϰ͗ϮϱWD dŽ͗ůĞdžŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶф^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶΛŬůĞŝŶĨĞůĚĞƌ͘ĐŽŵх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗ZĞ͗΀ydZE>΁h^&t^ĂƌĂĐĂƌĂ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶĂƚĂ  džƚĞƌŶĂůŵĂŝů Page 9310 of 9661  ,ŝůĞdžŝƐ͕tĞƵƐĞĚƚŽŚĂǀĞĂƉŽƌƚĂůƚŽƌĞƋƵĞƐƚƐƉĞĐŝĞƐŽĐĐƵƌƌĞŶĐĞƐŚĂƉĞĨŝůĞƐ͖ŝƚĂƉƉĞĂƌƐƚŚĂƚŚĂƐďĞĞŶƌĞŵŽǀĞĚ͘ƐǁĞŚĂǀĞĂůŽƚŽĨĚĂƚĂĨŽƌƚŚĞĐĂƌĂĐĂƌĂ͕ŝƚŵĂLJďĞĞĂƐŝĞƌƚŽƌĞĨŝŶĞƚŚĞĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂƚŽƚŚĞĂƌĞĂLJŽƵĂƌĞůŽŽŬŝŶŐ͘ĂŶLJŽƵƐŚĂƌĞƚŚĞŐĞŶĞƌĂůůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚŝƐŽĨŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚ͍dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵ͕ĚĂŵAdam KnutsonFish and Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1339 20th Street Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Tel: 772-469-4252 Fax: 772-562-4288  &ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶdǁŝƚƚĞƌΛh^&t^sZK &ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶ&ĂĐĞŬΛh^&t^^ŽƵƚŚ&ůŽƌŝĚĂ &ŽůůŽǁƵƐŽŶ/ŶƐƚĂ'ƌĂŵΛƵƐĨǁƐͺƐŽƵƚŚͺĨůŽƌŝĚĂ sŝƐŝƚŽƵƌǁĞďƐŝƚĞĂƚǁǁǁ͘ĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀͬǀĞƌŽďĞĂĐŚͬ  EKd͗dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůĐŽƌƌĞƐƉŽŶĚĞŶĐĞĂŶĚĂŶLJĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐƚŽĂŶĚĨƌŽŵƚŚŝƐƐĞŶĚĞƌŝƐƐƵďũĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞ&ƌĞĞĚŽŵŽĨ/ŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶĐƚ;&K/ͿĂŶĚ ŵĂLJďĞĚŝƐĐůŽƐĞĚƚŽƚŚŝƌĚƉĂƌƚŝĞƐ͘  &ƌŽŵ͗ůĞdžŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶф^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶΛŬůĞŝŶĨĞůĚĞƌ͘ĐŽŵх ^ĞŶƚ͗dƵĞƐĚĂLJ͕DĂƌĐŚϭ͕ϮϬϮϮϯ͗ϭϵWD dŽ͗<ŶƵƚƐŽŶ͕ĚĂŵdфĂĚĂŵͺŬŶƵƚƐŽŶΛĨǁƐ͘ŐŽǀх ^ƵďũĞĐƚ͗΀ydZE>΁h^&t^ĂƌĂĐĂƌĂ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶĂƚĂ   dŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŚĂƐďĞĞŶƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĨƌŽŵŽƵƚƐŝĚĞŽĨK/ͲhƐĞĐĂƵƚŝŽŶďĞĨŽƌĞĐůŝĐŬŝŶŐŽŶůŝŶŬƐ͕ŽƉĞŶŝŶŐĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐ͕Žƌ ƌĞƐƉŽŶĚŝŶŐ͘  ,ŝĚĂŵ͕  /ŚŽƉĞLJŽƵ͛ƌĞĚŽŝŶŐǁĞůů͘/ǁĂƐǁŽŶĚĞƌŝŶŐŝĨƚŚĞƌĞǁĂƐĂŶLJĚĂƚĂĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐĐĂƌĂĐĂƌĂůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐŝŶƐŽƵƚŚ&ůŽƌŝĚĂ͕ ƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌůLJŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚLJ͍WůĞĂƐĞůĞƚŵĞŬŶŽǁŝĨƚŚĞƌĞŝƐƐŽŵĞŽŶĞĞůƐĞ/ƐŚŽƵůĚƌĞĂĐŚŽƵƚƚŽ͘  dŚĂŶŬLJŽƵ͕  ůĞdžŝƐ^ĞĞĐŚĂƌĂŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚDĂŶĂŐĞƌΘĐŽůŽŐŝƐƚ  ϯϲϲϯ>ĂŬĞĞŶƚĞƌƌŝǀĞ Page 9311 of 9661  DŽƵŶƚŽƌĂ͕&>ϯϮϳϱϳŽͮϯϱϮ͘ϱϱϰ͘ϴϬϳϲŵͮϯϱϮ͘ϵϳϴ͘ϯϮϰϯdŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůŵĂLJĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĐŽŶĨŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͘/ĨLJŽƵŚĂǀĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚƚŚŝƐĞŵĂŝůͶŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĂŶLJĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐͶŝŶĞƌƌŽƌ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞŶŽƚŝĨLJƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌƉƌŽŵƉƚůLJĂŶĚĚĞůĞƚĞƚŚĞĞŵĂŝůĂŶĚĂŶLJĂƚƚĂĐŚŵĞŶƚƐĨƌŽŵĂůůŽĨLJŽƵƌƐLJƐƚĞŵƐ͘ Page 9312 of 9661 /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞĂƐƚhƉůĂŶĚWƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶWůĂŶƟŶŐWůĂŶ An undeveloped 1.48-acre ƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶĂƌĞĂǁŝůůďĞƉůĂŶƚĞĚǁŝƚŚŵĞƐŝĐŇĂƚǁŽŽĚƐƉĞĐŝĞƐƚŽŵĞĞt ƚŚĞŶĂƟǀĞǀĞŐĞƚĂƟŽŶƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐin ƐĞĐƟŽŶϰ͘Ϭϴ͘Ϭϱ͘:͘Ϯ of the Land Development Code. The ůŽĐĂƟŽŶŽĨƚŚĞƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶĂƌĞĂŝƐĚĞƉŝĐƚĞĚŝŶĐŽŶũƵŶĐƟŽŶǁŝƚŚϮ-foot LiDAR contours ŽŶƚŚĞĂƩĂĐŚed Preserve Area map (&ŝŐƵƌĞϭ). EZ^ŵĂƉƉĞĚƐŽŝůƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶĂƌĞĂconsist of /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞƐĂŶĚ͕ϬƚŽϮйƐůŽƉĞƐ. Pursuant to the NRCS Soils Survey for Collier County, DĞƐŝĐŇĂƚǁŽŽĚƐĂƌĞƚLJƉŝĐĂůůLJĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐĞƐŽŝůƚLJƉĞƐ͘EĂƟǀĞƉůĂŶƟŶŐƐƚLJƉŝĐĂůŽĨŵĞƐŝĐ ŇĂƚǁŽŽĚƐĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐǁĞƌĞĐŚŽƐĞŶďĂƐĞĚŽŶƌĞƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƟǀĞƐƉĞĐŝĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĮĞĚŝŶƚŚĞEZ^^ŽŝůƐ Survey and the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) 'ƵŝĚĞƚŽƚŚĞEĂƚƵƌĂůŽŵŵƵŶŝƟĞƐŽĨ Florida. ĂŶŽƉLJ͕ƐŚƌƵď͕ĂŶĚŐƌŽƵŶĚĐŽǀĞƌƐƚƌĂƚĂǁŝůůall be planted. The canopy stratum will consist of slash pine (WŝŶƵƐĞůůŝŽƫŝ); the shrub stratum will consist of saw ƉĂůŵĞƩŽ (Serenoa repens)͕ŐĂůůďĞƌƌLJ (Ilex glabra), and wax myrtle (Morella cerifera); and the ŐƌŽƵŶĚĐŽǀĞƌƐƚƌĂƚƵŵǁŝůůĐŽŶƐŝƐƚŽĨƉŝŶĞůĂŶĚƚŚƌĞĞĂǁŶ (ƌŝƐƟĚĂƐƚƌŝĐƚĂ var. beyrichiana), chalky ďƌŽŽŵƐĞĚŐĞ (ŶĚƌŽƉŽŐŽŶǀŝƌŐŝŶŝĐƵƐ), and shiny blueberry (sĂĐĐŝŶŝƵŵŵLJƌƐŝŶŝƚĞƐ)͘ůůƉůĂŶƟŶŐƐ will be installed on 4-ĨŽŽƚĐĞŶƚĞƌƐ͖ŚŽǁĞǀĞƌ͕ƚŽĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƚĞĂůůƚŚƌĞĞƐƚƌĂƚĂ͕ƐƉĂĐŝŶŐďĞƚǁĞĞŶ plants within the same strata will vary. Canopy stratum ƉůĂŶƟŶŐƐǁŝůůďĞinstalled on 16-foot ĐĞŶƚĞƌƐ͖ƐŚƌƵďƐƚƌĂƚƵŵƉůĂŶƟŶŐƐǁŝůůďĞŝŶƐƚĂůůĞĚon 8-foot and 16-foot centers; and ŐƌŽƵŶĚĐŽǀĞƌ ƐƚƌĂƚƵŵƉůĂŶƟŶŐƐǁŝůůďĞŝŶƐƚĂůůĞĚŽŶϰ-foot and 8-foot centers. WůĞĂƐĞƌĞĨĞƌƚŽƚŚĞĂƩĂĐŚĞĚ ƚLJƉŝĐĂůƉůĂŶƟŶŐĚĞƚĂŝůwhich illustrates the proposed ƉůĂŶƟŶŐƚLJƉĞƐĂŶĚŽǀĞƌĂůl ĐŽŵƉŽƐŝƟŽŶŽĨ the ƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƟŽŶĂƌĞĂ͘ Page 9313 of 9661 4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'4'48'Continues for 1,290'Legend: Tree Shrub Ground CoverPlanting Area (1,290' x 48')Not to ScalePlanting CompositionTrees, Shrubs, and Ground CoverGround CoverShrubs and Ground CoverGround CoverTrees, Shrubs, and Ground CoverGround CoverShrubs and Ground CoverGround CoverTrees, Shrubs, and Ground CoverGround CoverShrubs and Ground CoverGround CoverTrees, Shrubs, and Ground Cover\\mountdora\MOUNTDORA-DATA\GISCAD\0_Map Data\0_LOGO\Kleinfelder\KLF MD Logo with Address & COA.jpgCAD FILE: \\azrgisstorp03\GIS_Projects\Mt_Dora\GISCAD\Stewart Mining\_2025\26000118.001A_SMI-Immokalee-East Expansion 40Ac\DWG_APRX\ LAYOUT: PlantingDetailPLOTTED: 21 May 2025, 9:24am, NLawrenceATTACHED XREFS:ATTACHED IMAGES: Images: KLF MD Logo with Address & COA.jpgFILE NAME:25-0519_ImmokaleeEastExp.dwgDRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:DRAWN:PROJECT NO.www.kleinfelder.comThe information included on this graphic representation has been compiled from a variety ofsources and is subject to change without notice. Kleinfelder makes no representations orwarranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use ofsuch information. This document is not intended for use as a land survey product nor is itdesigned or intended as a construction design document. The use or misuse of the informationcontained on this graphic representation is at the sole risk of the party using or misusing theinformation.MT. DORA, FLStewart MaterialsImmokalee Mine East ExpansionCollier County, FloridaFIGURE-NLAWN5/19/202526000118.001ATypical Planting DetailPage 9314 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page i of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com IMMOKALEE SAND MINE, EAST EXPANSION WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA KLEINFELDER PROJECT #20223424.001 Updated February 2025 Prepared for: 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 Prepared by: 3663 Lake Center Drive Mount Dora, FL 32757 Copyright 2025 Kleinfelder All Rights Reserved ONLY THE CLIENT OR ITS DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES MAY USE THIS DOCUMENT AND ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT FOR WHICH THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED. Page 9315 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page ii of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com A Report Prepared for: Stewart Materials 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100 Jupiter, FL 33458 WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN IMMOKALEE SAND MINE, EAST EXPANSION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared by: Bill Newlon Senior Ecologist Reviewed by: Lisa Daugherty Program Manager KLEINFELDER 3663 Lake Center Drive Mount Dora, Florida 32757 February 11, 2025 Kleinfelder Project No 20223424.001A Page 9316 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page iii of iii February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________________________________________________ SECTION Page 1INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 12WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN ....................................................................... 2 3WILDLIFE MONITORING PROGRAM ................................................................. 7 FIGURES 1 PROJECT LOCATION 2 NRCS SOILS 3 BLACK BEAR RANGE MAP 4 USFWS FLORIDA PANTHER FOCUS AREA MAP ATTACHMENTS 1 EAGLE WATCH NESTING LOCATIONS MAP 2 EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE STANDARD PROTECTION MEASURES Page 9317 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 1 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 1 INTRODUCTION ____________________________________________________________________________ The following wildlife management plan was prepared for the Collier County Growth Management Department to meet the requirements of Sections 3.04.02 and 4.08.05.J.3. of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The wildlife management plan was requested in association with Conditional Use approval for a proposed 39.92-acre eastern expansion of the Edwards Grove Road Sand Mine (a.k.a. Immokalee Sand Mine) for the construction of a plant site (the project), which is located in Section 17, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida (Figure 1). The 39.92-acre eastern expansion property is herein referred to as the “site.” Page 9318 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 2 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 2 WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT PLAN ___________________________________________________________________________________ Pursuant to Sections 3.04.02 and 4.08.05.J.3. of the Collier County LDC, a wildlife habitat management plan for listed species shall be submitted for County approval for all projects where the wildlife survey indicated listed species are utilizing the site, or the site is capable of supporting and is likely to support listed species. While wildlife surveys and records have not identified listed species utilizing the site, the site is capable of supporting listed species, and thus, this plan has been prepared as required. The purpose of this plan is to describe how the project will direct incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats. Specifically, the management and protection of wildlife should include requirements detailed in Sections 3.04.02 and 4.08.05.J.3. for the following species: Gopher tortoise, sea turtles, Florida scrub jay, bald eagle, red-cockaded woodpecker, Florida black bear, Florida panther, and west Indian manatee. Additionally, two other listed species of wildlife not specifically identified in these sections of the LDC have been included in this wildlife management plan, the eastern indigo snake and Audubon’s crested caracara. The following addresses each of these species as applicable: Gopher Tortoise No gopher tortoise individuals or their burrows have been documented on the site. Pursuant to the Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines, suitable soils are typically those that are moderately well-drained to excessively drained, with a midpoint of the upper limit of the water table value of 18 inches or greater. A map of the NRCS soil units has been provided as Figure 2. Pursuant to the NRCS, all mapped soils on the site are somewhat poorly to poorly drained and the only soil with a midpoint water table value of 18 inches or greater is Pomello fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes (15). This soil type is mapped over a small portion of the site (3.42%) along the northern boundary. Based on the widespread land use disturbances, associated with the sites former use for agriculture and as a nursery, general soil unsuitability, low elevations, and corresponding high- water table, the likelihood of tortoises utilizing the site is considered low. Potentially suitable habitat would most likely be limited to berms noted along the perimeter ditches within the eastern pasture areas at times of the year when the water table is depressed. Mining will avoid pasture areas and is being limited to the portions of the site consisting of abandoned nursery and fallow row crop operations. While tortoises are not anticipated in these areas, a survey for tortoises that includes berms and the area mapped with Pomello fine sand, 0 to 2 Page 9319 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 3 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com percent slopes (15) will be conducted as specified in the FWC Gopher Tortoise Permitting Guidelines in advance of the project. In the event potentially occupied gopher tortoise burrows are identified within the limits of project related disturbance, they will be permitted for relocation, and no project related activities will occur until all burrows are excavated and the tortoises in any occupied burrows are relocated. Sea Turtles The management of sea turtles does not apply since this project is located inland and does not contain coastal habitats utilized by these species. Florida scrub jay No Florida scrub jay (scrub jay) individuals have been documented on the site. The scrub jay inhabits fire-dominated, low growing oak scrub found on well-drained sandy soils but may also be found on modified lands such as abandoned citrus groves or other developed lands where scrub oaks provide a supply of acorn forage and bare, dry, sandy soils are present for caching acorns. Management of the scrub jay does not apply to this project since no suitable habitats with scrub oaks or bare, dry sandy soils are present to support the use of this site by this species. Bald Eagle No known bald eagle nests have been documented on the project or within 660 feet of the site. Protective buffers where certain activities are restricted are typically required for development within 660 feet of a bald eagle nest. Up to date mapping of documented eagle nests from Audubon’s Eagle Watch which includes the 660-foot buffers has been provided as Attachment 1. With no nests documented within 660 feet of the project, no restrictions are currently being implemented on the project for this species. In the event future bald eagle nesting occurs on or within 660 feet of the project, this wildlife management plan will be updated to address the implementation of applicable protection measures. Red-Cockaded Woodpecker No red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) individuals have been documented on the site. The RCW has very specific habitat requirements which limit them to open pine woodlands and savannahs with large, old pines for nesting and roosting, and open mid-stories with abundant bunchgrasses and forb groundcovers for foraging. The management of the RCW does not apply to this project since no suitable pine woodland habitat is present to support the use of this site by this species. Page 9320 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 4 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com Florida black bear Pursuant to the latest FWC coverage of Florida Black Bear (black bear) populations, the project is mapped within a portion of the geographic range of the Big Cypress black bear population where it has been determined to be a frequent occurrence (Figure 3). The black bear is known to utilize a variety of habitats including pine flatwoods, swamps and forested scrub and relies on contiguous forested expanses for cover and travel corridors. Black bears main forage in Florida includes acorns, saw palmetto, and cabbage palm. Denning typically occurs in the ground surrounded by dense protective vegetation such as saw palmetto. The project consists of active and abandoned agricultural land use types, with no saw palmetto and habitats with limited shrubby native vegetation that provide cover but no real foraging or denning opportunities. What native vegetation is present is associated with the 2.06-acre willow and elderberry wetland which will be preserved to maintain existing cover for black bears (See Sheet C-20.00 of the plans). A 25-foot-wide average upland buffer is also being proposed surrounding this preserved wetland to buffer the undisturbed low intensity land use areas to the east consisting of the preservation wetland and pastureland from the western most intense land use areas associated with the project. Additional protection measures for this species will also include the placement of signage along the entrance road from Edwards Grove Road (See Sheet C-20.00 of the plans) to inform haul truck operators of its potential as a black bear crossing area, limiting haul trucks to a maximum speed of 15 MPH, and utilizing bear-proof trash containers to discourage scavenging by black bears and minimize interactions between black bears and humans. Florida Panther According to the FWC, the project exists within the Secondary Zone (Figure 4), or Priority II area, defined as lands important to the long-term persistence of the Florida panther (panther) where expansion of the population is likely to occur, but not essential like Primary Zone, or Priority I areas which are typically occupied by panthers and crucial to maintaining a viable population. The Florida panther requires an extensive mosaic of native plant communities, which are contiguous and largely forested to meet their social, reproductive, and energetic needs. All land on and surrounding the project consists primarily of altered land use areas, with relatively low functional value, such as extraction areas, citrus groves, active and abandoned agricultural areas, disturbed lands, and man-made surface water ditches and reservoirs. The site being proposed for the project would appear to be compatible with Chapter 3.04.02 of the Collier County Land Development Codes which discourages the destruction of native habitats preferred by the Florida panther such as pine flatwoods and hardwood hammocks by directing intensive land uses to currently disturbed areas. Page 9321 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 5 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com Native vegetation on the site is associated with the 2.06-acre willow and elderberry wetland which will be preserved to maintain existing cover for panthers (See Sheet C-20.00 of the plans). A 25-foot-wide average upland buffer is also being proposed surrounding this preserved wetland to buffer the undisturbed low intensity land use areas to the east consisting of the preservation wetland and pastureland from the western most intense land use areas associated with the project. Additional protection measures for this species will also include the placement of signage along the entrance road from Edwards Grove Road (See Sheet C-20.00 of the plans) to inform haul truck operators of its potential as a panther crossing area and limiting haul trucks to a maximum speed of 15 MPH. West Indian Manatee The management of the west Indian Manatee does not apply since this project is located inland and does not contain coastal habitats utilized by this species. Eastern Indigo Snake The eastern indigo snake (EIS) ranges over large areas often in the hundreds of acres over which it utilizes a mosaic of upland and wetland habitats, from scrub and sandhill to wet prairies and mangrove swamps. It will use most of the available habitats within its home range, but prefers open, undeveloped areas. The burrows of gopher tortoises are often used for denning as thermal refugia from winter cold and desiccating sandhill environments. While no gopher tortoise burrows were observed on the project, the likelihood of occurrence of the EIS on the site is considered low to moderate based on the rural nature of the area, the potential for gopher tortoise burrows outside the project, and the large territorial ranges used by this species. As such, the USFWS’s Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake will be used during site preparation and project construction. This will include an outline of the measures being incorporated, educational pamphlets, and signage (Attachment 2). Audubon’s crested caracara The Audubon’s crested caracara (caracara) prefers large pasture expanses, grasslands, or prairies with numerous shallow ponds and sloughs for foraging and single to small clumps (2 to 10) of cabbage palm. The project consists of a mix of active (pasture) and abandoned (row crops and nursery) agricultural land uses. The abandoned nursery and fallow row crops areas are overgrown and of limited suitability for this species. The active pasture which extends offsite to the east has some ponds and wetlands which provide moderate suitability for foraging; however, there are very few individual or small clumps of cabbage palm trees which are of suitable size for Page 9322 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 6 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com nesting. Any cabbage palm trees that did appear suitable for nesting were located within the improved pasture. These trees were inspected during the site assessment, and no nests were observed. The improved pasture areas will be avoided by the project and a forested buffer will be retained between the project and pasture areas, leaving potential nesting and foraging areas intact for use by this species. Page 9323 of 9661 20223424.001A/MOU25O177812 Page 7 of 7 February 11, 2025 © 2025 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com 3 WILDLIFE MONITORING PROGRAM Pursuant to 4.08.05.J.3.a.iii. of the LDC, a wildlife monitoring program is required for developments over 10 acres. Annual wildlife monitoring will occur in February or March of each year. These months were chosen as they fall within the most active portions of the nesting season for the bald eagle and Audubon’s crested caracara and any evidence of nesting on the site or nearby would likely be evident at that time. Monitoring will include reconnaissance of the 39.92- acre project site for signs of nesting or other evidence of utilization by the bald eagle, caracara, gopher tortoise, black bear, panther, or EIS. The results of each annual monitoring event will be documented in a summary report and will be available to Collier County upon request. Page 9324 of 9661 FIGURES Page 9325 of 9661 Page 9326 of 9661 Page 9327 of 9661 Page 9328 of 9661 Page 9329 of 9661 ATTACHMENTS Page 9330 of 9661 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 9331 of 9661 VV H ORX J K * D W R U 6 O R X J K) X V V H O 6 O R X J K 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˙ 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˙ 3 H S S H U 5 D Q F K 3 U H V H U Y H / D N H 7 U D I I R U G & R U N V F U H Z 6 Z D P S , P P R N D O H H 5 G & R Z 6 O R X J K ) H O G D ˝ 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˝ 1 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˝ 1 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˙ , P P R N D O H H 5 H J L R Q D O $ L U S R U W ˙ ˇ ˙ ˇ 6 V W 6 W ( 0 D L Q 6 W , P P R N D O H H 5 G 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˝ 6 , P P R N D O H H 5 H V H U Y D W L R Q , P P R N D O H H 6 W D W H 5 R D G ˝ 6 ( D J O H : D W F K 0 D S 8 Q L Y H U V L W \ R I 6 R X W K ) O R U L G D ) ' ( 3 ( V 6 D I H * U D S K * H R 7 H F K Q R O R J L H V , Q F 0 ( ( 3 $ 1 3 6 8 6 ' $ 8 6 ) : 6 6 W D W H R I ) O R U L * H R J U D S K L F V % D O G ( D J O H 1 H V W / R F D W L R Q V X Q P R Q L W R U H G ˇ ˇ I W % X I I H U $ U R X Q G 1 H V W / R F D W L R Q V ˙ ˇ ˛ ˛ ˆ 3 0 ˘ ˆ ˘ P L N P ˛ ˆ $ U F * , 6 : H E $ S S % X L O 6 W D W H R I ) O R U L G D ( D U W K V W D U * H R J U D S K L F V _ 8 Q L Y H U V L W \ R I 6 R X W K ) O R U L G D ) ' ( 3 ( V U L 7 R P 7 R P * D U P L Q 6 D I H * U D S K * H RPage 9332 of 9661 PROJECT SITE ATTACHMENT 2 Page 9333 of 9661 IF YOU SEE A LIVE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE:•Cease clearing activities and allow the eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site without interference.•Personnel must NOT attempt to touch or handle snake due to protected status. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,andthe appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •If the snake is located in a vicinity where continuation of the clearing or construction activities will cause harm to the snake, the activities must halt until such time that a representative of the USFWS returns the call (within one day) with further guidance as to when activities may resume.IF YOU SEE A DEAD EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE:•Cease clearing activities and immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent,andthe appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Thoroughly soak the dead snake in water and then freeze the specimen.The appropriate wildlife agency will retrieve the dead snake. USFWS Florida Field Offices to be contacted if a live or dead eastern indigo snake is encountered:North Florida ES Office – (904) 731-3336Panama City ES Office – (850) 769-0552South Florida ES Office – (772) 562-3909DESCRIPTION: The eastern indigo snake is one of the largest non-venomous snakes in North America, with individuals often reaching up to 8 feet in length. They derive their name from the glossy, blue-black color of their scales above and uniformly slate blue below. Frequently, they have orange to coral reddish coloration in the throat area, yet some specimens have been reported to only have cream coloration on the throat. These snakes are not typically aggressive and will attempt to crawl away when disturbed. Though indigo snakes rarely bite, they should NOT be handled. SIMILAR SNAKES: The black racer is the only other solid black snake resembling the eastern indigo snake. However, black racers have a white or cream chin, thinner bodies, and WILL BITE if handled.LIFE HISTORY: The eastern indigo snake occurs in a wide variety of terrestrial habitat types throughout Florida. Although they have a preference for uplands, they also utilize some wetlands and agricultural areas. Eastern indigo snakes will often seek shelter inside gopher tortoise burrows and other below- and above-ground refugia, such as other animal burrows, stumps, roots, and debris piles. Females may lay from 4 - 12 white eggs as early as April through June, with young hatching in late July through October.Page 9334 of 9661 Killing, harming, or harassing indigo snakes is strictly prohibited and punishable under State and Federal Law.Only individuals currently authorized through an issued Incidental Take Statement in association with a USFWS Biological Opinion, or by a Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the USFWS, to handle an eastern indigo snake are allowed to do so.LEGAL STATUS: The eastern indigo snake is classified as a Threatened species by both the USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. “Taking” of eastern indigo snakes is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act without a permit. “Take” is defined by the USFWS as an attempt to kill, harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect, or engage in any such conduct.Penalties include a maximum fine of $25,000 for civil violations and up to $50,000 and/or imprisonment for criminal offenses, if convicted.ATTENTION:THREATENED EASTERN INDIGO SNAKES MAY BE PRESENT ON THIS SITE!!! Please read the following information provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to become familiar with standard protection measures for the eastern indigo snake. Photo: Dirk StevensonAugust 12, 2013Page 9335 of 9661 ATTENTION:THREATENED EASTERN INDIGO SNAKES MAY BE PRESENT ON THIS SITE!!! IF YOU SEE A LIVE EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: •Cease clearing activities and allow the eastern indigo snake sufficient time to move away from the site without interference. •Personnel must NOT attempt to touch or handle snake due to protected status. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent, and the appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •If the snake is located in a vicinity where continuation of the clearing or construction activities will cause harm to the snake, the activities must halt until such time that a representative of the USFWS returns the call (within one day) with further guidance as to when activities may resume. IF YOU SEE A DEAD EASTERN INDIGO SNAKE ON THE SITE: •Cease clearing activities and immediately notify supervisor or the applicant’s designated agent, and the appropriate USFWS office, with the location information and condition of the snake. •Take photographs of the snake, if possible, for identification and documentation purposes. •Thoroughly soak the dead snake in water and then freeze the specimen. The appropriate wildlife agency will retrieve the dead snake. USFWS Florida Field Offices to be contacted if a live or dead eastern indigo snake is encountered: North Florida Field Office – (904) 731-3336 Panama City Field Office – (850) 769-0552 South Florida Field Office – (772) 562-3909 Killing, harming, or harassing indigo snakes is strictly prohibited and punishable under State and Federal Law. DESCRIPTION: The eastern indigo snake is one of the largest non-venomous snakes in North America, with individuals often reaching up to 8 feet in length. They derive their name from the glossy, blue-black color of their scales above and uniformly slate blue below. Frequently, they have orange to coral reddish coloration in the throat area, yet some specimens have been reported to only have cream coloration on the throat. These snakes are not typically aggressive and will attempt to crawl away when disturbed. Though indigo snakes rarely bite, they should NOT be handled. SIMILAR SNAKES: The black racer is the only other solid black snake resembling the eastern indigo snake. However, black racers have a white or cream chin, thinner bodies, and WILL BITE if handled. LIFE HISTORY: The eastern indigo snake occurs in a wide variety of terrestrial habitat types throughout Florida. Although they have a preference for uplands, they also utilize some wetlands and agricultural areas. Eastern indigo snakes will often seek shelter inside gopher tortoise burrows and other below- and above- ground refugia, such as other animal burrows, stumps, roots, and debris piles. Females may lay from 4 - 12 white eggs as early as April through June, with young hatching in late July through October. PROTECTION: The eastern indigo snake is classified as a Threatened species by both the USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. “Taking” of eastern indigo snakes is prohibited by the Endangered Species Act without a permit. “Take” is defined by the USFWS as an attempt to kill, harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, collect, or engage in any such conduct. Penalties include a maximum fine of $25,000 for civil violations and up to $50,000 and/or imprisonment for criminal offenses, if convicted. Only individuals currently authorized through an issued Incidental Take Statement in association with a USFWS Biological Opinion, or by a Section 10(a)(1)(A) permit issued by the USFWS, to handle an eastern indigo snake are allowed to do so. Photo: Dirk Stevenson August 12, 2013 Page 9336 of 9661 From:FinnTimothyTo:GundlachNancy; BellowsRayCc:Jessica KluttzSubject:PL20210003005 Stewart Mining Conditional Use - HAPBDate:Monday, December 19, 2022 8:56:18 AMAttachments:image001.pngHi Nancy, Last Friday the HAPB voted 4-0 to accept the findings and recommendation in the Cultural ResourceAssessment for the above referenced petition. Timothy Finn, Principal Planner Zoning Division - Zoning Services Section Growth Management Department Telephone: 239.252.4312 Exceeding expectations, every day! Tell us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at https://goo.gl/eXjvqT. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Page 9337 of 9661 N00°25'13"W 1331.15'(D)N00°25'14"W 1331.53'(S)N00°19'08"W 2653.33'(D)N00°29'38"W 2652.80'(S)N89°39'50"E 2481.85'(D)N88°51'13"E 2481.73'(S)S00°07'03"E 2658.62'(D)S00°55'38"E 2658.69'(S)S00°12'54"E 1353.32'(D)S00°35'34"E 1352.26'(S)N89°52'57"E(D)84.00'(D)N89°04'22"E(S)84.00'(S)N89°43'00"W 2590.55'(D)S89°27'14"W 2589.72'(S)N89°43'00"W 2340.90'(D)S89°27'00"W 2341.08'(S)N89°39'50"E 2448.79'(D)N88°47'54"E 2437.77'(S)33.933.832.533.032.833.733.633.833.532.933.333.433.733.133.633.834.534.835.435.734.433.532.732.932.833.132.932.332.632.833.133.032.831.532.232.832.432.031.732.434.034.232.332.632.932.932.232.331.832.832.232.532.532.131.432.832.032.733.632.433.533.133.635.033.533.332.433.433.433.532.632.832.933.033.033.332.732.535.035.234.834.033.334.434.734.633.533.634.434.435.734.135.835.634.435.834.833.033.132.834.434.634.435.334.534.134.133.934.634.733.635.133.133.932.934.233.934.834.834.734.834.134.034.034.733.334.033.234.934.935.036.435.535.235.235.0334.535.334.635.234.435.034.235.033.434.233.634.033.533.533.434.433.734.834.935.936.436.036.635.934.834.535.834.634.633.832.833.333.032.733.333.834.335.435.335.835.234.935.736.036.135.635.435.337.239.036.838.136.135.137.437.936.735.438.035.637.635.336.636.333.833.833.635.233.033.435.433.2BARFIELD GROVE(O.R.BOOK 5350, PAGE 1271) 231.73 ACRES OF LANDPOINT OF BEGINNINGSOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 18,TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EASTFOUND 5/8" IRON PIN AND CAPSTAMPED MINOR LB 5151POINT OF BEGINNINGNORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 19,TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EASTFOUND 1" PIPE WITH1/2" CAP STAMPEDLB 642FOUND 1" PIPE WITH1/2" CAP STAMPEDLB 642FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 642FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB F043FOUND 4"X4" CONCRETEMONUMENT (BROKEN)WEST 1/4 CORNER OF SECTION 19,TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EASTCCR# 106978N00°12'54"W 1353.32'(D)N00°35'34"W 1352.26'(S)S89°52'57"W 84.00'(D)S89°04'22"W 84.00'(S)N00°07'03"W 2658.62'(D)N00°55'38"W 2658.69'(S)SOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIES(O.R.BOOK 3330, PAGE 3215) 218.97 ACRES OF LANDTIITF / ED UNIV FLPARCEL NO. 00066000002SOUTHERN RESERVES LLCPARCEL NO. 00065402009 39.92 ACRES OF LANDRINKER MATERIALS WEST LLCPARCEL NO. 00065480005TURNER GROVES CITRUS LTD PRTNRPARCEL NO. 00050600007TURNER GROVES CITRUS LTD PRTNRPARCEL NO. 00052520004TURNER GROVES CITRUS LTD PRTNRPARCEL NO. 00065600005BARRON COLLIER P'SHIP LLLPPARCEL NO. 00065640007TIITF / ED UNIV FLPARCEL NO. 00066040004FOUND 4"X4" CONCRETECOLLIER MONUMENT WITHBRASS DISC STAMPED1/4 CORNER (BROKEN)FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED MINORLB 5151FOUND 5/8" IRONPIN AND CAPSTAMPED LB 642S00°11'07"W 2692.02(D)S00°38'42"E 2692.02'(S)S00°12'15"W 1345.64'(D)S00°36'52"E 1346.05'(S)S00°36'52"E 1345.75'(S)S00°38'42"E 2691.98'(S)2407.77'2311.08'LESS AND EXCEPT THEEAST 30 FEET QUIT CLAIM DEED(O.R. BOOK 156, PAGE 375)LESS AND EXCEPT THEEAST 30 FEET QUIT CLAIM DEED(O.R. BOOK 156, PAGE 375)FOUND 4"X4" CONCRETECOLLIER MONUMENT WITHBRASS DISC STAMPED1/4 CORNERFOUND 5/8" IRONPIN NO I.D., 25.10'WEST OF COMPUTEDPROPERTY CORNEREASEMENT FOR CANALS AND DRAINAGE(O.R. BOOK 1141, PAGE 2089)EASEMENT FOR CANALS AND DRAINAGE(O.R. BOOK 1141, PAGE 2089)EASEMENT FOR CANALS AND DRAINAGE(O.R. BOOK 1141, PAGE 2089)EASEMENT FOR CANALS AND DRAINAGE(O.R. BOOK 1141, PAGE 2089)50' UTILITY EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 3909, PAGE 2831)50' UTILITY EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 3909, PAGE 2831)50' UTILITY EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 3974, PAGE 1369)50' UTILITY EASEMENT(O.R. BOOK 3974, PAGE 1369)EASEMENT FOR ROAD(O.R. BOOK 1141, PAGE 2093)FLOOD ZONE AH36.5 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH36.5 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH36 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH35.5 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH35 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH34.5 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH34 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH33.5 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH36 CONTOUR LINEFLOOD ZONE AH35 CONTOUR LINE19 2018 1719 2019 2024 1924 1924 1913 18N88°59'44"E 4923.89'(S)SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EASTSECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EASTAPPROXIMATE DIRTROADEDWARDS GROVE ROAD5,780 FEET± TO S.R. 82LAMM ROAD7,327 FEET± TO S.R. 82APPROXIMATEASPHALT/DIRTROADAPPROXIMATE DIRTROADAPPROXIMATE ASPHALTROADGATE IS 7'±WEST OFPROPERTY CORNEROHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHUOHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHUAPPROXIMATE OVERHEADPOWER LINESN88°47'54"E 30.00'S89°27'00"W 30.00'N88°51'16"E 30.00'N88°51'16"E 1289.04'S00°36'30"E 1351.88'N89°06'28"E 1288.86'N00°36'52"W 1346.18'N89°06'28"E 30.00'WEST 30 FEET LESSEDOUT AND QUIT CLAIMEDTO COLLIER COUNTY(O.R. BOOK 156, PAGE 375) CLIENT:TITLE:FILE NO.:SHEET OFNO.REVISION DESCRIPTIONDATE BY28421 BONITA CROSSINGS BLVD.CECI GROUP SERVICESCOASTAL AND MARINE ENGINEERINGENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOLOGICAL SERVICESLAND AND MARINE SURVEY AND MAPPINGNAPLES, FLORIDA 34135PHONE: (239)643-2324 FAX: (239)643-1143www.coastalengineering.comE-Mail: info@cecifl.comServing Florida Since 1977THIS DOCUMENT, AND THE CONCEPTS AND DESIGNS PRESENTED HEREIN, AS AN INSTRUMENT OFSERVICE, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND CLIENT FOR WHICH IT WAS PREPARED.REUSE OF AND IMPROPER RELIANCE ON THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION ANDADAPTATION BY COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC. (CECI) OR ITS SUBSIDIARIES SHALL BEWITHOUT LIABILITY TO CECI OR ITS SUBSIDIARIES.FLORIDA BUSINESS AUTHORIZATION NO. LB 2464COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.DATE OF SIGNATURE:FLORIDA CERTIFICATE NO. 5295PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPERTHE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDANOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE ANDLICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPERRICHARD J. EWING, VPCHECKED:F.B.ACAD NO.PG.DRAWN:DATE:REF. NO.SCALE:SEC. TWP. RNG.21.41011SKETCH OF DESCRIPTIONSTEWART MATERIALS1" = 250'H6471329E46S17.25117.251-SKETCH WITH 40 AC.05/30/2024MMWRJE18 & 19LEGEND(S) - SURVEY / REVISED DESCRIPTION DATA(D) = PROVIDED DESCRIPTION DATACCR# = CERTIFIED CORNER RECORD0 125 250 500250 OF TRACTS OF LANDLOCATED IN SECTIONS 17, 18 AND 19,TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,LEGAL DESCRIPTIONBARFIELD GROVE PARCELA TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF SECTION 18,TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST AND A PART OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF(N ½) OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 18 RUN N 00°25'14” W FOR ADISTANCE OF 1,331.53 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWESTONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER (SW ¼) OF SAID SECTION 18;THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER-QUARTER LINE N 88°51'13" E 2,481.73FEET;THENCE LEAVING SAID LINE S 00°55'38" E 2,658.69 FEET;THENCE N 89°04'22" E 84.00 FEET;THENCE S 00°35'34" E 1,352.26 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST-WESTQUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 19;THENCE ALONG SAID QUARTER LINE S 89°27'14" W 2,589.72 FEET TO THE WESTONE-QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19;THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 19 N 00°29'38" W 2,652.80 FEET TO THEPOINT OF BEGINNING.ANDSOUTHWESTERN PROPERTIESA TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 18 AND THENORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29 EAST, COLLIERCOUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19, RUN S 00°38'42" E ALONGTHE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION FOR A DISTANCE OF 2692.02 FEET TO A CONCRETEMONUMENT BEING THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 19;THENCE ALONG THE EAST-WEST QUARTER LINE OF SAID SECTION 19 S 89°27'00" W2341.08 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THOSE LANDS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 3330,PAGE 3215 AND THE EASTERLY LINE OF THOSE LANDS RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 5350,PAGE 1271, ALL OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA;THENCE ALONG SAID LINE N 00°35'34" W 1352.26 FEET;THENCE S 89°04'22" WEST 84.00 FEET;THENCE N 00°55'38" W 2658.69 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST-WEST QUARTER LINE OFTHE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18;THENCE N 88°47'54" E ALONG SAID LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 2437.77 FEET TO ACONCRETE MONUMENT BEING THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/4;THENCE S 00°36'52" E ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18 FOR A DISTANCE OF1346.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.LESS AND EXCEPT THE EASTERLY THIRTY (30) FEET THEREOF.BEARINGS ARE RELATIVE TO NORTH AMERICAN DATUM (NAD) 1983, FLORIDA EAST ZONE.ANDSOUTHERN RESERVES, LLC PARCELTHE WEST 14 OF THE SOUTH ONE-HALF OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LESS THE WEST 30 FEET OF SAID PARCEL.THE ABOVE DESCRIBES AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 490.62 ACRES OF LAND.Page 9338 of 9661   %RQLWD&URVVLQJV%OYG%RQLWD6SULQJV)/  1RUWK5DQJH$YH6XLWH('HQKDP6SULQJV/$ 3KRQH  x)D[  3KRQH   (PDLOLQIR#FHFLIOFRP SERVING COASTAL COMMUNITIES SINCE 1977 &RDVWDODQG0DULQH(QJLQHHULQJ(QYLURQPHQWDODQG*HRORJLFDO6HUYLFHV/DQGDQG0DULQH6XUYH\DQG0DSSLQJ:HEVLWHZZZFRDVWDOHQJLQHHULQJFRPy,//d͟͞;W'ϭK&ϮͿ^dtZdDdZ/>^>'>^Z/Wd/KE Z&/>'ZKsWZ>  dZdK&>E>Kd/Ed,^Khd,t^dKEͲYhZdZ;^tЬͿK&^d/KEϭϴ͕ dKtE^,/Wϰϲ^Khd,͕ZE'Ϯϵ^dEWZdK&d,EKZd,KEͲ,>& ;EЪͿK&^d/KEϭϵ͕dKtE^,/Wϰϲ^Khd,͕ZE'Ϯϵ^d͕K>>/ZKhEdz͕&>KZ/͕/E' DKZWZd/h>Z>z^Z/^&K>>Kt^͗  '/EE/E'dd,^Khd,t^dKZEZK&^/^d/KEϭϴZhEEϬϬΣϮϱΖϭϰ͟t&KZ /^dEK&ϭ͕ϯϯϭ͘ϱϯ&ddKd,EKZd,t^dKZEZK&d,^Khd,t^dKEͲYhZdZ ;^tЬͿK&d,^Khd,t^dKEͲYhZdZ;^tЬͿK&^/^d/KEϭϴ͖  d,E>KE'd,EKZd,>/EK&^/YhZdZͲYhZdZ>/EEϴϴΣϱϭΖϭϯΗϮ͕ϰϴϭ͘ϳϯ&d͖ d,E>s/E'^/>/E^ϬϬΣϱϱΖϯϴΗϮ͕ϲϱϴ͘ϲϵ&d͖ d,EEϴϵΣϬϰΖϮϮΗϴϰ͘ϬϬ&d͖ d,E^ϬϬΣϯϱΖϯϰΗϭ͕ϯϱϮ͘Ϯϲ&ddKE/EdZ^d/KEt/d,d,^dͲt^dYhZdZ>/E K&^/^d/KEϭϵ͖ d,E>KE'^/YhZdZ>/E^ϴϵΣϮϳΖϭϰΗtϮ͕ϱϴϵ͘ϳϮ&ddKd,t^dKEͲYhZdZ KZEZK&^/^d/KEϭϵ͖ d,E>KE'd,t^d>/EK&^/^d/KEϭϵEϬϬΣϮϵΖϯϴΗtϮ͕ϲϱϮ͘ϴϬ&ddKd,WK/Ed K&'/EE/E'͘  E ^Khd,t^dZEWZKWZd/^  dZdK&>E>Kd/Ed,^Khd,^dYhZdZK&^d/KEϭϴEd,EKZd,^d YhZdZK&^d/KEϭϵ͕dKtE^,/Wϰϲ^Khd,͕ZE'Ϯϵ^d͕K>>/ZKhEdz͕&>KZ/͕ /E'^Z/^&K>>Kt^͗  '/EE/E'dd,EKZd,^dKZEZK&^/^d/KEϭϵ͕ZhE^ϬϬΣϯϴΖϰϮΗ>KE'd, ^d>/EK&^/^d/KE&KZ/^dEK&ϮϲϵϮ͘ϬϮ&ddKKEZdDKEhDEd /E'd,^dYhZdZKZEZK&^/^d/KEϭϵ͖ d,E>KE'd,^dͲt^dYhZdZ>/EK&^/^d/KEϭϵ^ϴϵΣϮϳΖϬϬΗtϮϯϰϭ͘Ϭϴ&d dKd,t^dZ>z>/EK&d,K^>E^ZKZ/EK͘Z͘KK<ϯϯϯϬ͕W'ϯϮϭϱEd,  Page 9339 of 9661 6WHZDUW0DWHULDOV&2$67$/(1*,1((5,1*&2168/7$176,1&/HJDO'HVFULSWLRQ%DUILHOG*URYH3DUFHO([KLELW³$´3DJHRI  %RQLWD&URVVLQJV%OYG%RQLWD6SULQJV)/  1RUWK5DQJH$YH6XLWH('HQKDP6SULQJV/$ 3KRQH  x)D[        3KRQH       (PDLOLQIR#FHFLIOFRP SERVING COASTAL COMMUNITIES SINCE 1977  y,//d͟͞;W'ϮK&ϮͿ^dZ>z>/EK&d,K^>E^ZKZ/EK͘Z͘KK<ϱϯϱϬ͕W'ϭϮϳϭ͕>>K&d,Wh>/ZKZ^K&K>>/ZKhEdz͕&>KZ/͖d,E>KE'^/>/EEϬϬΣϯϱΖϯϰΗtϭϯϱϮ͘Ϯϲ&d͖d,E^ϴϵΣϬϰΖϮϮΗt^dϴϰ͘ϬϬ&d͖d,EEϬϬΣϱϱΖϯϴΗtϮϲϱϴ͘ϲϵ&ddKWK/EdKEd,^dͲt^dYhZdZ>/EK&d, ^Khd,^dYhZdZK&^/^d/KEϭϴ͖ d,EEϴϴΣϰϳΖϱϰΗ>KE'^/>/E&KZ/^dEK&Ϯϰϯϳ͘ϳϳ&ddKKEZd DKEhDEd/E'd,^dYhZdZKZEZK&^/^Khd,^dϭͬϰ͖ d,E^ϬϬΣϯϲΖϱϮΗ>KE'd,^d>/EK&^/^d/KEϭϴ&KZ/^dEK&ϭϯϰϲ͘Ϭϱ &ddKd,WK/EdK&'/EE/E'͘  >^^EyWdd,^dZ>zd,/Zdz;ϯϬͿ&dd,ZK&͘  Z/E'^ZZ>d/sdKEKZd,DZ/EdhD;EͿϭϵϴϯ͕&>KZ/^dKE͘  E  ^Khd,ZEZ^Zs^͕>>WZ>  d,t^dϭͬϰK&d,^Khd,KEͲ,>&K&^d/KEϭϳ͕dKtE^,/Wϰϲ^Khd,͕ZE'Ϯϵ^d͕ K>>/ZKhEdz͕&>KZ/͕>^^d,t^dϯϬ&dK&^/WZ>͘  d,Ks^Z/^EZK&WWZKy/Dd>zϰϵϬ͘ϲϮZ^K&>E͘  K^d>E'/EZ/E'KE^h>dEd^͕/E͘ &>KZ/h^/E^^hd,KZ/d/KEEK͘>Ϯϰϲϰ    ͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺͺ Z/,Z:͘t/E'͕s͘W͘ WZK&^^/KE>^hZszKZEDWWZ &>KZ/Zd/&/dEK͘ϱϮϵϱ EKds>/t/d,Khdd,^/'EdhZE d,KZ/'/E>Z/^^>K&&>KZ/ >/E^^hZszKZEDWWZ &/>EK͘Ϯϭ͘ϰϭϬ dK&^/'EdhZ͗ Page 9340 of 9661 10+0011+0012+0013+0014+0015+0016+0017+0018+0019+0020+0021+0022+0023+00BMEL. = 41.19(295) SET NAIL ANDDISK STAMPED"NORTHSTARTRAV/TBM" IN POWERPOLEBP: 10+00.0010+50 11+5012+50 13+5014+50 15+5016+50 17+5018+50 19+5020+50 21+5022+50 23+5024+0025+0026+0027+0028+0029+0030+0031+0032+0033+0034+0035+0036+0037+00BMEL. = 40.97(1) SET IRON ROD ANDCAP STAMPED"NORTHSTARTRAV/TBM"BMEL. = 42.53(4) SET NAIL AND DISKSTAMPED "NORTHSTARTRAV/TBM" IN POWERPOLE24+5025+5026+50 27+5028+50 29+5030+50 31+5032+50 33+5034+50 35+5036+50 37+50 SURVEYOR'S NOTES1. THE EXPECTED USE OF THIS SURVEY IS FOR ROAD MAINTENANCEPURPOSES.2. ALL MEASUREMENTS SHOWN HEREON ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEUNITED STATES STANDARD AND ARE IN FEET.3. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE SURVEY MAP AND/OR REPORT BY OTHERTHAN THE SIGNING PARTY IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OFTHE SIGNING PARTY OR PARTIES AND RENDERS THE SURVEY INVALID.4. THIS SURVEY CANNOT BE TRANSFERRED OR ASSIGNED WITHOUT THESPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE SURVEYOR HEREON.5. THE SURVEY MAP AND REPORT OR THE COPIES THEREOF ARE NOT VALIDWITHOUT THE ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSEDSURVEYOR AND MAPPER.6. THIS SURVEY MEETS OR EXCEEDS APPLICABLE ACCURACY REQUIREMENTSAND IS PREPARED ACCORDING TO THE STANDARDS OF PRACTICE SETFORTH BY THE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CHAPTER 5J-17 AS CODE,ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPERS.7. THERE WAS NO ATTEMPT TO LOCATE ANY UNDERGROUND UTILITIES,EXCEPT AS SHOWN.8. SYMBOLS SHOWN HEREON ARE NOT TO SCALE.9. LAST DATE OF DATA ACQUISITION: 12/6/202310. THIS SURVEY IS INTENDED TO BE DISPLAYED AT THE SCALE SHOWN ON THESCALE BAR.11. BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN DATUMOF 1983 (NAD83), ADJUSTMENT OF 2011, FLORIDA STATE PLANE EAST ZONE.FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PERMANENT REFERENCENETWORK WAS USED AS HORIZONTAL CONTROL AND GPS RTK WITHREDUNDANT MEASUREMENTS. HORIZONTAL ACCURACY IS 0.10 FOOT, PLUSOR MINUS.12.ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE REFERENCED TO THE NATIONALAMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88), AS ESTABLISHED BYNATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY (NGS). BENCHMARK 1, 295, AND 296 AREESTABLISHED USING THE NGS BENCHMARK "G 533" HAVING AN ELEVATIONOF 39.19'. ELEVATIONS DEPICTED ON THIS SURVEY WERE OBTAINED USINGREAL TIME KINEMATIC (RTK) GPS METHODS WITH AN EXPECTED ACCURACYOF +/- 0.1'.13.IMAGERY SHOWN WAS OBTAINED FROM FDOT AND DATED 2021 WITH A 2'PIXEL RESOLUTION.14.RIGHT OF WAY LINES ARE APPROXIMATE AND BASED ON CERTIFIEDCORNER RECORD CALCULATIONS.15.ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON PRE-ROAD CONSTRUCTION ON 9/8/2023. POSTROAD ELEVATIONS WERE COLLECTED ON 12/6/2024.= SURVEYOR'S POINT NUMBER(xxxxx)LEGEND= BENCHMARK (AS LABELED)AbbreviationsSymbols= BENCHMARKBM= EXISTING ELEVATIONX 14.2SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION(THIS SURVEY IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND RAISED EMBOSSEDSEAL ON PAPER OR DIGITAL SEAL IF DIGITAL OF FRANK C. VELDHUIS, FLORIDAPROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER.)I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY SHOWN ANDDESCRIBED HEREON WAS COMPLETED UNDER MY DIRECTION AND SAID SURVEY IS TRUEAND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT THIS BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY MEETS THESTANDARDS OF PRACTICE FOR SURVEYS SET FORTH BY THE FLORIDA BOARD OF LANDSURVEYORS IN CHAPTER 5J-17, FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, PURSUANT TO SECTION472.027 FLORIDA STATE STATUTES. NO SEARCH OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS HAS BEEN MADEBY THIS OFFICE. THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON INFORMATION FURNISHED BY CLIENT ORCLIENT'S REPRESENTATIVENORTHSTAR GEOMATICS, INC.DATE FRANK C. VELDHUIS PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR & MAPPER FLORIDA CERTIFICATION NO. 6582ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE REFERENCED TO THENORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88)= CORRUGATED METAL PIPECMP= EDGE OF PAVEMENT/MILLINGSEOP= HIGH-DENSITY POLYETHYLENEHDPE= TOP OF BANKTOB= TOE OF SLOPETOSPage 9341 of 9661 52+0053+0054+0055+0056+0057+0058+0059+0060+0061+0062+0063+0064+0065+00PI: 65+35.9552+5053+5054+5055+5056+5057+5058+5059+5060+5061+5062+5063+5064+5065+5038+0039+0040+0041+0042+0043+0044+0045+0046+0047+0048+0049+0050+0051+00PI: 39+05.0138+5039+5040+5041+5042+5043+5044+5045+5046+5047+5048+5049+5050+5051+50 Page 9342 of 9661 BMEL. = 37.85(296) SET NAIL ANDDISK STAMPED"NORTHSTARTRAV/TBM" IN POWERPOLE Page 9343 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com EDWARDS GROVE ROAD - ROADWAY PHOTOS CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION CU20240003054 Photos Obtained March 9, 2025 Image 1: ±150 LF south of SR 82/ Edwards Grove Rd Intersection (facing north) Page 9344 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 2: ±150 LF south of SR 82/ Edwards Grove Rd Intersection (facing south) Page 9345 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 3: Roadway condition (±3,000 LF from SR 82 entrance, facing north) Page 9346 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 4: Roadway condition (±3,000 LF from SR 82 entrance, facing south) Page 9347 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 5: Roadway condition (±4,500 LF from SR 82 entrance, facing south) Page 9348 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 6: Entrance to mine (±5,500 LF from SR 82 entrance, facing south) Page 9349 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com Image 7: Entrance to mine (±5,780 LF from SR 82 entrance, facing north) Page 9350 of 9661 4365 Radio Road • Suite 201 • Naples, FL 34104 • P: 239.434.6060 • www.davidsonengineering.com D esigningE xcellenceCivil Engineering • Planning • Permitting ENGINEERINGG REPORTT Stewart Materials - Immokalee East Expansion Collier County, FL PREPARED FOR: Stewart Materials, LLC 2875 Jupiter Park Drive, Suite 1100 Jupiter, Florida 33458 PREPARED BY: Davidson Engineering, Inc. 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34104 June 20, 2025 _________________________________________________ Brandon Copper, P.E. License No. 100296 Company ID No. 9496 Page 9351 of 9661 Table of Contents General .......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Proposed Improvements .............................................................................................................................. 2 Stormwater Management ............................................................................................................................ 3 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................. 3 HydroCAD® Results ................................................................................................................................... 4 Floodplain Compensation ......................................................................................................................... 5 Appendix A: Stormwater Design Calculations Appendix B: HydroCAD® Results Appendix C: Floodplain Compensation Calculations Page 9352 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 1 General The ±490.62-acre project site is currently partially developed with previous uses defined predominantly as agricultural and surface mining operation. The subject property is surrounded by other agricultural zoned properties on the North, South, and East. Refer to Figure 1 below for the site location map.The project will consist of the expansion of operational land which will function in conjunction with the existing lake and will also contain its own independent stormwater management system, construction of a culvert in a county drainage ditch, a gravel access roadway, and relocation of the mining operations processing equipment. Figure 1: Site Location Map Existing Conditions The existing mining operation encompasses ±450.7 acres and was previously expanded under Collier County Boardof Zoning Appeals Resolution 2021-013 in 2021. The subject property is situated to the east of the existing mining facility, west of State Road 29, south of State Road 82 which are a Florida Department of Transportation Right-Of-Way (ROW) and borders Edwards Grove Rd, a Collier County public Right-of-Way to the north. Potable water and sanitary sewer service are not available at this site. The previously permitted surface mine expansion has a previously approved excavation permit (PL20200002472) with Collier County. Page 9353 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 2 Proposed Improvements Davidson Engineering, Inc. (DE) proposes to clear a portion of the existing vegetation located within the ±39.92-acre expansion parcel, leaving an existing storage structure undisturbed within the project area. The parcel is partially inundated with a ±1.48-acre wetland, which is low-quality non-native and proposed to be removed. A replacement preserve is proposed along the southern property line. DE proposes an equipment area which will be used to relocate the existing processing plant along with a dedicated area for material storage, both areas would be surrounded by gravel roadways. Additionally, DE proposes a drainage swale surrounding the gravel roadway to mitigate any stormwater runoff from disturbing the preserve located along the southern property line. Access to the site will come in two forms, (1) a gravel roadway to be made possible with two proposed culverts, within the Collier County ROW swale consisting of two 30-inch concrete pipes as to not restrict any conveyance in said swale, and (2) an existing access to Edwards Road at the northwest corner of the site. Table 1 outlines the previously permitted conditions land use table for the existing mine site. Table 2 outlines the proposed conditions land use for the expansion property only. *The above was approved by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners under resolution No. 21-13. Table 1: Previously Permitted Land Use Table Area (Ac.) % of Site Impervious ROW RESERVATION & EASEMENTS 24.19 5.37 PERIMETER BUFFERS 4.93 1.09 DEVELOPMENT / EXCAVATION AREA 421.58 93.54 TOTAL SITE AREA 450.70 100.0 Table 2: Land Use Table – East Expansion Area (Ac.) % of Site Impervious BUILDING 0.25 0.63 STABILIZED GRAVEL/ DIRT ROAD 6.48 16.23 Total Impervious 6.73 16.86 Pervious PRESERVE 1.48 3.71 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 3.85 9.64 OPEN SPACE 27.86 69.79 Total Pervious 33.19 83.14 Total (Site) 39.92 100 Page 9354 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 3 Stormwater Management Methodology The eastern expansion will contain its own stormwater management system independent from the existing system involving with western lake. The project area proposes a 100-yr storm berm to completely surround the project area which will not connect into the Collier County ROW swale instead it will function as a containment of stormwater within the project area, ensuring there will be zero discharge during the 100-year, 3-day storm event. The proposed stormwater management system will provide adequate storage via dry retention areas and will function with no outlets to any drainage ditch or lake. Thus, all stormwater runoff will be contained on-site. Stormwater Model Based on the depicted rainfall events, the project was modeled using HydroCAD® technology to ensure the minimum water quality and quantity requirements are met. Table 3 provides a summary of the criteria used to model the projects’ water quantity/ quality volumes: Table 3: Stormwater Design Criteria WSWT Elevation (Ft- NAVD) [2] 32.70 10-Year, 1-Day Rainfall Event (inches) 5.00 25-year, 3-day Rainfall Event (inches)8.00 100-year, 3-day Rainfall Event (inches) 10.00 Total Required Water Quality Volume (ac-ft) 4.99 [2]WSWT based on previously approved SFWMD ERP No. 0228414-002, Application No. 090618-9. The full design calculations for the proposed development can be found in Appendix A: Stormwater Design Calculations. Page 9355 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 4 HydroCAD® Results The proposed stormwater management system consists of a large swale surrounding the project area that serves as storage for stormwater runoff and acts as a barrier for the southern preserve. Once in the swale, the stormwater runoff will be retained and permitted to exfiltrate through the ground. No outfall structure is proposed. Table 4 outlines the HydroCAD® modeling results and outfall structure details. The full HydroCAD® results are provided in Appendix B. Table 4: Post-Development Stormwater Management Summary Provided Water Quality Volume (ac-ft) 17.284 Water Quality Elevation (ft-NAVD) [3] 36.15 Peak Modeled Discharge (cfs) N/A 10-Year, 1-Day Storm Stage (ft-NAVD) 35.42 Minimum Parking Elevation (ft-NAVD) 35.50 25-Year, 3-Day Storm Stage (ft-NAVD) 35.97 Minimum Road Elevation (ft-NAVD) 36.00 100-Year, 3-Day Storm Stage (ft-NAVD) 36.15 Minimum Finished Floor Elevation (ft-NAVD) 37.50 Minimum Perimeter Berm Top of Bank Elevation (ft-NAVD) 36.15 [3] Water quality elevation is based on the min. top of bank elevation of the proposed perimeter swale. Page 9356 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 5 Floodplain Compensation Floodplain compensation calculations were performed to determine if the existing site was an importer or exporter. The existing sites’ pervious area, total site area, available soil storage, depth to water table, and 100-year rain fall amount were used to calculate the site’s runoff. The site’s area, FEMA base flood elevation, and average existing elevation were utilized to calculate the pre-development site storage capacity. The results of the existing site’s runoff and site storage capacity were 11.23 ac-ft and 6.18 ac-ft respectively. Since the runoff is greater than the available storage capacity (5.05 ac-ft difference) the site is considered an exporter, therefore floodplain compensation is not required on the proposed site. The floodplain compensation calculations can be found in Appendix C. Page 9357 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 6 Appendix A Stormwater Design Calculations Page 9358 of 9661 ProjectProj. #:21-0099 Task #Calculated By:NCT Date: Checked By:BTC Date:18-Jun-25A ) LAND USE SUMMARY - CONTRIBUTORY BASIN ONLY Land Use Total Basin Area Water Surface Future Imp. Pavement Impervious Area Pervious Area Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Lake 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Preserve 1.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.48 Stabilized Roadway, Pavement, Concrete 6.48 0.00 0.00 6.48 6.48 0.00 Building 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 0.00 Open Space 27.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.86 Retention Areas (Stormwater Ditch) 3.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.85 Total Basin: 39.92 0.00 0.25 6.48 6.73 33.19 B ) DESIGN PARAMETERS Control Elevation = 32.70 NAVD 3-day rainfall(100yr) = 10.0 Inches 3-day rainfall(25yr) = 8.0 Inches 1-day rainfall(10yr) = 5.0 Inches Q(Allow) = 0.15 CFS/ac "All other Basins" Soil compaction factor (i.e. 25%) 25% Pervious Area= Project Area - Impervious Area Pervious Area= 39.92 - 6.73 Pervious Area=33.19 Acres B ) PEAK ALLOWABLE DISCHARGE Excludes Wetland and Upland Preserve Q(Allowable)= 0.15 x 39.921 ac Q(Allowable)=5.99 CFS STEWART MATERIALS - IMMOKALEE EAST EXPANSION Water Management Design CalculationsSTEWART MATERIALS - IMMOKALEE EAST EXPANSION Page 9359 of 9661 C ) WATER QUALITY STORAGE VOLUME1. First Inch of Runoff Criteria:Water Quality Vol.= Project Area * 1 in.*(1ft/12in.)Water Quality Vol.= 39.92 * 1 in.*(1ft/12in.)Water Quality Vol.=3.33 Ac-ft.Allowable 24-HR Discharge Volume 1.66 Ac-ft. 1/2"2. 2.5 % Impervious Criteria:a) Site Area= Project Area - (Lake + Conservation) - RoofSite Area= 39.92 - 1.48 -0.25Site Area= 38.19 Acresb) Imp. Area= Site Area - Pervious Area Imp. Area= 38.19 - 33.19 Imp. Area= 5.00 Acres c) Vol. Stor. Req'd= 2.5 in.*(1ft/12in.) * (Imp. Area/Site Area) * (Project Area - Lake - Conserv.) Vol. Stor. Req'd= 2.5 in.*(1ft/12in.) * 0.13 * 38.44 Vol. Stor. Req'd=1.09 Ac-ft. Therefore, calculation # 1 controls and a water quality volume of 3.33 Ac-ft must be detained on-site prior to discharge. 3. Maximum Daily Discharge: Criteria: 1/2" per day Q(Bleed-Down)= {(0.5in./24hrs.) * (1ft/12in.) * (43560sf/acre) * (1hr/3600s)} * (Project Area - Lake-Wetland-Preserve) Q(Bleed-Down)= 0.021 * 39.92 - 1.75 Q(Bleed-Down)=0.80 CFS 4. Type of Water Quaility Area (1st stage or pre-treatment)Dry Retention Type of Water Quaility Area (2nd stage if needed)Not Required 5. Water Quaility calculations Water quaility pre-treatment for Commerical and Industrial sites (1/2" min. no reduction) = 1/2" =1.66 Ac-Ft. Water Quality Required By SFWMD per B.O.R. (Greater of 1" or 2.5" x % Imp.)1'' =3.33 Ac-Ft. 150% of B.O.R. =2.50 Ac-Ft. of Dry Retention 1 1/2" =4.99 Ac-Ft. Total Water Quaility Required =4.99 Ac-Ft. Water quaility provided (1st stage or pre-treatment) =17.28 Ac-Ft. of Dry Retention Water quality volume will start at Control Elevation:32.70 NAVD (ft.) D ) SOIL STORAGE Depth to Water Table = 3.0 ft. Interpolated Soil Storage for pervious areas = Sd = 4.95 Inches From SFWMD; Basis for Review, Volume IV S= Site-Wide Soil Storage S= Sd * (Pervious Area/Project Area) S= 4.95 * 33.19 / 39.92 S=4.12 Inches Water Quality Required by Collier County [per CC LDC 3.07.02 150% of BOR 5.2.1(a) 25% reduction for Dry Detention or 50% reduction for Dry Retention or 1 1/2" min.] Page 9360 of 9661 E ) MINIMUM FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION1. Peak Stage from HydroCAD routings (100-year, 3-day, zero discharge):Peak Stage=36.15 NAVD (ft.)2. FEMA Flood Zone:AHThe flood hazard elevation is:36.50 (worst case if more than one elevation zone)3. 100-year, 3-day, zero discharge calculations (SCS method)3-day rainfall= 10.00 InchesInches of Runoff= (P-0.2S)^2/(P+0.8S)Inches of Runoff= 6.34 InchesVolume of Runoff= (1ft/12in.) * (Inches of Runoff) * (Project Area) Volume of Runoff= 1ft/12in. * 6.34 * 39.92 Volume of Runoff=21.08 Ac-ft. Therefore, using the stage storage curve a minimum finished floor elevation will be equal to or greater than 37.50 NAVD F ) MINIMUM ROADS ELEVATION 1. Peak Stage from HydroCAD routings (25-year, 3-day): Peak Stage=35.97 NAVD (ft.) 2. 25-year, 3-day, zero discharge calculations (SCS method) 3-day rainfall= 8.00 Inches Inches of Runoff= (P-0.2S)^2/(P+0.8S) Inches of Runoff= 4.56 Inches Volume of Runoff=(1ft/12in.) * (Inches of Runoff) * (Project Area) - (Bleed-down 3-Day Volume Allowed in Ac-Ft) Volume of Runoff= 4.56 * 1'/12" * 39.92 - 4.77 Volume of Runoff=10.40 Ac-ft. Therefore, using the stage storage curve a minimum road elevation will be approximately:36.00 NAVD (ft.) G ) MINIMUM PARKING ELEVATION 1. Peak Stage from HydroCAD routings (10-year, 1-day): Peak Stage=35.42 NAVD (ft.) 2. 10-year, 1-day, zero discharge calculations (SCS method) 1-day rainfall= 5.00 Inches Inches of Runoff= (P-0.2S)^2/(P+0.8S) Inches of Runoff= 2.10 Inches Volume of Runoff=(1ft/12in.) * (Inches of Runoff) * (Project Area) - (Bleed-down 3-Day Volume Allowed in Ac-Ft) Volume of Runoff= 2.10 * 1'/12" * 0.00 - 0.00 Volume of Runoff=0.00 Ac-ft. Therefore, using the stage storage curve a minimum parking elevation will be approximately:35.50 NAVD (ft.)(Minimum 2' above C.E. Controls) H ) PERCENT DIRECTLY CONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA (DCIA) %DCIA= Impervious Area / Project Area %DCIA= 6.73 / 39.92 %DCIA=16.9% I ) CURVE NUMBER FOR PERVIOUS AREA CN= 1000 / (10 + Sd) CN=55 Page 9361 of 9661 J ) DISCHARGE STRUCTURESee Storm Water or HydroCAD® Draw Down Routings for calculations and results.K ) STORMWATER FLOOD ROUTING1. Flood routing for the system is accomplished through the use of Santa Barbara Urban Hydrograph method to generate the runoff hydrographs and through the HydroCADfor multiple pond routing. The following pages are the input and output for this drainage area.NATURAL DEV.DEPTH TO AVAILABLE AVAIL. WTR TABLE STORAGE STORAGE 0 0.00 0.00 1 0.60 0.45 1.5 1.50 1.10 2 2.50 1.88 2.5 4.50 3.40 3 6.60 4.95 3.5 8.90 6.80 4 10.90 8.18 10 10.9. 8.18 Page 9362 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 7 Appendix B HydroCAD® Results: 10 Year- 1 Day, 25 Year- 3 Day & 100 Year- 3 Day Storm Events (Zero Discharge) Page 9363 of 9661 10S SMIEE 11P Contributory Basin Routing Diagram for 2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Prepared by Davidson Engineering, Printed 6/13/2025 HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Subcat Reach Pond Link Page 9364 of 9661 2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 2HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCRainfall Events ListingEvent# EventName Storm Type Curve Mode Duration(hours)B/B Depth(inches)AMC1 10 YR-1 DAY SFWMD 24-hr Default 24.00 1 5.00 22 25 YR-3 DAY SFWMD 72-hr Default 72.00 1 8.00 2 3 100 YR-3 DAY SFWMD 72-hr Default 72.00 1 10.00 2 Page 9365 of 9661 2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 3HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCArea Listing (selected nodes)Area(acres)CN Description(subcatchment-numbers)0.250 98 Building (10S)27.860 55 Open Space (10S) 1.480 55 PRESERVE (10S) 3.850 55 Retention (10S) 6.480 98 Roadways, pavement, Concrete (10S) 39.920 62 TOTAL AREA Page 9366 of 9661 2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 4HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCSoil Listing (selected nodes)Area(acres)SoilGroup SubcatchmentNumbers0.000 HSG A0.000 HSG B 0.000 HSG C 0.000 HSG D 39.920 Other 10S 39.920 TOTAL AREA Page 9367 of 9661 2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 5HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCGround Covers (selected nodes)HSG-A(acres)HSG-B(acres)HSG-C(acres)HSG-D(acres)Other(acres)Total(acres)GroundCover SubcatchmentNumbers0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 0.250 Building 10S0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 27.860 27.860 Open Space 10 S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.480 1.480 PRESERVE 10 S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.850 3.850 Retention 10 S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 6.480 6.480 Roadways, pavement, Concrete 10 S 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 39.920 39.920 TOTAL AREA Page 9368 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 6HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCTime span=0.00-360.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 7201 pointsRunoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv.Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind methodRunoff Area=39.920 ac 16.86% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.62"Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 Runoff=39.37 cfs 5.382 afPeak Elev=35.42' Storage=5.382 af Inflow=39.37 cfs 5.382 afPond 11P: Contributory Basin Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Total Runoff Area = 39.920 ac Runoff Volume = 5.382 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.62" 83.14% Pervious = 33.190 ac 16.86% Impervious = 6.730 ac Page 9369 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 7HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCSummary for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEERunoff = 39.37 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 5.382 af, Depth= 1.62" Routed to Pond 11P : Contributory BasinRunoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrsSFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00" Area (ac) CN Description * 6.480 98 Roadways, pavement, Concrete * 0.250 98 Building * 27.860 55 Open Space * 3.850 55 Retention * 1.480 55 PRESERVE 39.920 62 Weighted Average 33.190 55 83.14% Pervious Area 6.730 98 16.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00" Runoff Area=39.920 ac Runoff Volume=5.382 af Runoff Depth=1.62" Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 39.37 cfs Page 9370 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 8HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCHydrograph for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEETime(hours)Precip.(inches)Perv.Excess(inches)Imp.Excess(inches)Runoff(cfs)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0010.00 1.07 0.00 0.85 1.3820.00 4.76 0.86 4.52 1.93 30.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 40.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 50.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 60.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 70.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 80.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 90.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 100.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 110.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 120.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 130.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 140.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 150.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 160.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 170.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 180.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 190.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 200.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 210.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 220.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 230.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 240.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 250.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 260.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 270.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 280.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 290.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 300.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 310.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 320.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 330.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 340.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 350.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 360.00 5.00 0.98 4.76 0.00 Page 9371 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 9HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCSummary for Pond 11P: Contributory BasinInflow Area = 39.920 ac, 16.86% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.62" for 10 YR-1 DAY eventInflow = 39.37 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 5.382 afOutflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 minRouting by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 35.42' @ 30.95 hrs Surf.Area= 3.654 ac Storage= 5.382 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 33.70' 23.580 af DITCH (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) #2 35.00' 5.320 af PAVEMENT Listed below #3 35.50' 13.930 af OPEN SPACE Listed below #4 33.70' 18.574 af SWM AREA (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) 61.404 af Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.131 7,603.0 0.000 0.000 1.131 34.70 1.655 7,547.0 1.385 1.385 2.691 35.70 2.181 7,641.0 1.912 3.297 5.305 45.00 2.181 7,641.0 20.283 23.580 6.936 Elevation Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 35.00 0.000 0.000 35.50 0.110 0.110 36.00 1.320 1.430 36.50 3.890 5.320 Elevation Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) 35.50 0.000 36.00 3.480 36.50 13.930 Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.375 1,587.0 0.000 0.000 1.375 34.70 1.522 1,612.0 1.448 1.448 1.526 35.70 1.670 1,637.0 1.595 3.043 1.679 45.00 1.670 1,637.0 15.531 18.574 2.028 Page 9372 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 10HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCPond 11P: Contributory Basin InflowHydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)4442403836 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Inflow Area=39.920 acPeak Elev=35.42' Storage=5.382 af 39.37 cfs Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Storage Stage-Area-Storage Storage (acre-feet) 605550454035302520151050Elevation (feet)45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 DITCH + SWM AREA PAVEMENT OPEN SPACE Page 9373 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 11HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCHydrograph for Pond 11P: Contributory BasinTime(hours)Inflow(cfs)Storage(acre-feet)Elevation(feet)0.00 0.00 0.000 33.705.00 0.49 0.076 33.7310.00 1.38 0.447 33.87 15.00 3.44 3.943 35.04 20.00 1.93 4.880 35.29 25.00 0.03 5.381 35.42 30.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 35.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 40.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 45.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 50.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 55.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 60.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 65.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 70.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 75.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 80.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 85.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 90.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 95.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 100.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 105.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 110.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 115.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 120.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 125.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 130.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 135.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 140.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 145.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 150.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 155.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 160.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 165.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 170.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 175.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 180.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 185.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 190.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 195.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 200.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 205.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 210.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 215.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 220.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 225.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 230.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 235.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 240.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 245.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 250.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 255.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 260.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 Time(hours)Inflow(cfs)Storage(acre-feet)Elevation(feet)265.00 0.00 5.382 35.42270.00 0.00 5.382 35.42275.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 280.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 285.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 290.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 295.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 300.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 305.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 310.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 315.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 320.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 325.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 330.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 335.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 340.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 345.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 350.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 355.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 360.00 0.00 5.382 35.42 Page 9374 of 9661 SFWMD 24-hr 10 YR-1 DAY Rainfall=5.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 12HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCStage-Area-Storage for Pond 11P: Contributory BasinElevation(feet)Storage(acre-feet)33.70 0.00033.80 0.25433.90 0.514 34.00 0.780 34.10 1.053 34.20 1.332 34.30 1.619 34.40 1.912 34.50 2.212 34.60 2.518 34.70 2.833 34.80 3.153 34.90 3.481 35.00 3.815 35.10 4.177 35.20 4.546 35.30 4.922 35.40 5.304 35.50 5.694 35.60 7.028 35.70 8.370 35.80 9.715 35.90 11.060 36.00 12.405 36.10 15.658 36.20 18.911 36.30 22.165 36.40 25.418 36.50 28.671 36.60 29.056 36.70 29.441 36.80 29.826 36.90 30.211 37.00 30.596 37.10 30.981 37.20 31.366 37.30 31.752 37.40 32.137 37.50 32.522 37.60 32.907 37.70 33.292 37.80 33.677 37.90 34.062 38.00 34.447 38.10 34.832 38.20 35.217 38.30 35.603 38.40 35.988 38.50 36.373 38.60 36.758 38.70 37.143 38.80 37.528 38.90 37.913 Elevation(feet)Storage(acre-feet)39.00 38.29839.10 38.68339.20 39.068 39.30 39.454 39.40 39.839 39.50 40.224 39.60 40.609 39.70 40.994 39.80 41.379 39.90 41.764 40.00 42.149 40.10 42.534 40.20 42.919 40.30 43.305 40.40 43.690 40.50 44.075 40.60 44.460 40.70 44.845 40.80 45.230 40.90 45.615 41.00 46.000 41.10 46.385 41.20 46.770 41.30 47.156 41.40 47.541 41.50 47.926 41.60 48.311 41.70 48.696 41.80 49.081 41.90 49.466 42.00 49.851 42.10 50.236 42.20 50.621 42.30 51.007 42.40 51.392 42.50 51.777 42.60 52.162 42.70 52.547 42.80 52.932 42.90 53.317 43.00 53.702 43.10 54.087 43.20 54.472 43.30 54.858 43.40 55.243 43.50 55.628 43.60 56.013 43.70 56.398 43.80 56.783 43.90 57.168 44.00 57.553 44.10 57.938 44.20 58.323 Elevation(feet)Storage(acre-feet)44.30 58.70944.40 59.09444.50 59.479 44.60 59.864 44.70 60.249 44.80 60.634 44.90 61.019 45.00 61.404 Page 9375 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 13HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCTime span=0.00-360.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 7201 pointsRunoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv.Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind methodRunoff Area=39.920 ac 16.86% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.62"Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 Runoff=84.37 cfs 12.053 afPeak Elev=35.97' Storage=12.053 af Inflow=84.37 cfs 12.053 afPond 11P: Contributory Basin Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Total Runoff Area = 39.920 ac Runoff Volume = 12.053 af Average Runoff Depth = 3.62" 83.14% Pervious = 33.190 ac 16.86% Impervious = 6.730 ac Page 9376 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 14HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCSummary for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEERunoff = 84.37 cfs @ 59.95 hrs, Volume= 12.053 af, Depth= 3.62" Routed to Pond 11P : Contributory BasinRunoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrsSFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00" Area (ac) CN Description * 6.480 98 Roadways, pavement, Concrete * 0.250 98 Building * 27.860 55 Open Space * 3.850 55 Retention * 1.480 55 PRESERVE 39.920 62 Weighted Average 33.190 55 83.14% Pervious Area 6.730 98 16.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00" Runoff Area=39.920 ac Runoff Volume=12.053 af Runoff Depth=3.62" Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 84.37 cfs Page 9377 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 15HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCHydrograph for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEETime(hours)Precip.(inches)Perv.Excess(inches)Imp.Excess(inches)Runoff(cfs)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0010.00 0.36 0.00 0.19 0.2120.00 0.72 0.00 0.52 0.23 30.00 1.17 0.00 0.95 0.37 40.00 1.69 0.00 1.47 0.37 50.00 2.23 0.04 2.00 0.66 60.00 5.98 1.50 5.74 83.13 70.00 7.86 2.69 7.62 2.07 80.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 90.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 100.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 110.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 120.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 130.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 140.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 150.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 160.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 170.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 180.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 190.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 200.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 210.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 220.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 230.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 240.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 250.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 260.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 270.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 280.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 290.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 300.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 310.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 320.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 330.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 340.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 350.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 360.00 8.00 2.78 7.76 0.00 Page 9378 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 16HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCSummary for Pond 11P: Contributory BasinInflow Area = 39.920 ac, 16.86% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.62" for 25 YR-3 DAY eventInflow = 84.37 cfs @ 59.95 hrs, Volume= 12.053 afOutflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 minRouting by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 35.97' @ 79.00 hrs Surf.Area= 3.851 ac Storage= 12.053 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 33.70' 23.580 af DITCH (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) #2 35.00' 5.320 af PAVEMENT Listed below #3 35.50' 13.930 af OPEN SPACE Listed below #4 33.70' 18.574 af SWM AREA (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) 61.404 af Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.131 7,603.0 0.000 0.000 1.131 34.70 1.655 7,547.0 1.385 1.385 2.691 35.70 2.181 7,641.0 1.912 3.297 5.305 45.00 2.181 7,641.0 20.283 23.580 6.936 Elevation Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 35.00 0.000 0.000 35.50 0.110 0.110 36.00 1.320 1.430 36.50 3.890 5.320 Elevation Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) 35.50 0.000 36.00 3.480 36.50 13.930 Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.375 1,587.0 0.000 0.000 1.375 34.70 1.522 1,612.0 1.448 1.448 1.526 35.70 1.670 1,637.0 1.595 3.043 1.679 45.00 1.670 1,637.0 15.531 18.574 2.028 Page 9379 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 17HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCPond 11P: Contributory Basin InflowHydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)908580 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Inflow Area=39.920 acPeak Elev=35.97' Storage=12.053 af 84.37 cfs Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Storage Stage-Area-Storage Storage (acre-feet) 605550454035302520151050Elevation (feet)45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 DITCH + SWM AREA PAVEMENT OPEN SPACE Page 9380 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 18HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCHydrograph for Pond 11P: Contributory BasinTime(hours)Inflow(cfs)Storage(acre-feet)Elevation(feet)0.00 0.00 0.000 33.705.00 0.15 0.028 33.7110.00 0.21 0.105 33.74 15.00 0.22 0.194 33.78 20.00 0.23 0.288 33.81 25.00 0.31 0.385 33.85 30.00 0.37 0.526 33.90 35.00 0.35 0.672 33.96 40.00 0.37 0.816 34.01 45.00 0.47 0.990 34.08 50.00 0.66 1.219 34.16 55.00 2.15 1.733 34.34 60.00 83.13 5.514 35.45 65.00 3.05 10.533 35.86 70.00 2.07 11.660 35.94 75.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 80.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 85.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 90.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 95.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 100.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 105.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 110.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 115.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 120.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 125.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 130.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 135.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 140.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 145.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 150.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 155.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 160.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 165.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 170.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 175.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 180.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 185.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 190.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 195.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 200.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 205.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 210.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 215.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 220.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 225.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 230.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 235.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 240.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 245.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 250.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 255.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 260.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 Time(hours)Inflow(cfs)Storage(acre-feet)Elevation(feet)265.00 0.00 12.053 35.97270.00 0.00 12.053 35.97275.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 280.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 285.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 290.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 295.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 300.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 305.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 310.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 315.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 320.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 325.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 330.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 335.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 340.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 345.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 350.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 355.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 360.00 0.00 12.053 35.97 Page 9381 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 25 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=8.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 19HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCStage-Area-Storage for Pond 11P: Contributory BasinElevation(feet)Storage(acre-feet)33.70 0.00033.80 0.25433.90 0.514 34.00 0.780 34.10 1.053 34.20 1.332 34.30 1.619 34.40 1.912 34.50 2.212 34.60 2.518 34.70 2.833 34.80 3.153 34.90 3.481 35.00 3.815 35.10 4.177 35.20 4.546 35.30 4.922 35.40 5.304 35.50 5.694 35.60 7.028 35.70 8.370 35.80 9.715 35.90 11.060 36.00 12.405 36.10 15.658 36.20 18.911 36.30 22.165 36.40 25.418 36.50 28.671 36.60 29.056 36.70 29.441 36.80 29.826 36.90 30.211 37.00 30.596 37.10 30.981 37.20 31.366 37.30 31.752 37.40 32.137 37.50 32.522 37.60 32.907 37.70 33.292 37.80 33.677 37.90 34.062 38.00 34.447 38.10 34.832 38.20 35.217 38.30 35.603 38.40 35.988 38.50 36.373 38.60 36.758 38.70 37.143 38.80 37.528 38.90 37.913 Elevation(feet)Storage(acre-feet)39.00 38.29839.10 38.68339.20 39.068 39.30 39.454 39.40 39.839 39.50 40.224 39.60 40.609 39.70 40.994 39.80 41.379 39.90 41.764 40.00 42.149 40.10 42.534 40.20 42.919 40.30 43.305 40.40 43.690 40.50 44.075 40.60 44.460 40.70 44.845 40.80 45.230 40.90 45.615 41.00 46.000 41.10 46.385 41.20 46.770 41.30 47.156 41.40 47.541 41.50 47.926 41.60 48.311 41.70 48.696 41.80 49.081 41.90 49.466 42.00 49.851 42.10 50.236 42.20 50.621 42.30 51.007 42.40 51.392 42.50 51.777 42.60 52.162 42.70 52.547 42.80 52.932 42.90 53.317 43.00 53.702 43.10 54.087 43.20 54.472 43.30 54.858 43.40 55.243 43.50 55.628 43.60 56.013 43.70 56.398 43.80 56.783 43.90 57.168 44.00 57.553 44.10 57.938 44.20 58.323 Elevation(feet)Storage(acre-feet)44.30 58.70944.40 59.09444.50 59.479 44.60 59.864 44.70 60.249 44.80 60.634 44.90 61.019 45.00 61.404 Page 9382 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 20HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCTime span=0.00-360.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 7201 pointsRunoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv.Reach routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind methodRunoff Area=39.920 ac 16.86% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.16"Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 Runoff=119.42 cfs 17.167 afPeak Elev=36.15' Storage=17.167 af Inflow=119.42 cfs 17.167 afPond 11P: Contributory Basin Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Total Runoff Area = 39.920 ac Runoff Volume = 17.167 af Average Runoff Depth = 5.16" 83.14% Pervious = 33.190 ac 16.86% Impervious = 6.730 ac Page 9383 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 21HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCSummary for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEERunoff = 119.42 cfs @ 59.95 hrs, Volume= 17.167 af, Depth= 5.16" Routed to Pond 11P : Contributory BasinRunoff by SBUH method, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrsSFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00" Area (ac) CN Description * 6.480 98 Roadways, pavement, Concrete * 0.250 98 Building * 27.860 55 Open Space * 3.850 55 Retention * 1.480 55 PRESERVE 39.920 62 Weighted Average 33.190 55 83.14% Pervious Area 6.730 98 16.86% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 15.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 10S: SMIEE Runoff Hydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00" Runoff Area=39.920 ac Runoff Volume=17.167 af Runoff Depth=5.16" Tc=15.0 min CN=55/98 119.42 cfs Page 9384 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 22HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCHydrograph for Subcatchment 10S: SMIEETime(hours)Precip.(inches)Perv.Excess(inches)Imp.Excess(inches)Runoff(cfs)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0010.00 0.45 0.00 0.27 0.2720.00 0.90 0.00 0.69 0.29 30.00 1.46 0.00 1.24 0.47 40.00 2.11 0.03 1.89 0.66 50.00 2.79 0.14 2.56 1.07 60.00 7.47 2.43 7.23 117.35 70.00 9.82 4.09 9.58 2.80 80.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 90.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 100.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 110.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 120.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 130.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 140.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 150.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 160.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 170.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 180.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 190.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 200.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 210.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 220.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 230.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 240.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 250.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 260.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 270.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 280.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 290.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 300.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 310.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 320.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 330.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 340.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 350.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 360.00 10.00 4.23 9.76 0.00 Page 9385 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 23HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCSummary for Pond 11P: Contributory BasinInflow Area = 39.920 ac, 16.86% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.16" for 100 YR-3 DAY eventInflow = 119.42 cfs @ 59.95 hrs, Volume= 17.167 afOutflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 100%, Lag= 0.0 minRouting by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-360.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 36.15' @ 78.60 hrs Surf.Area= 3.851 ac Storage= 17.167 af Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no outflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 33.70' 23.580 af DITCH (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) #2 35.00' 5.320 af PAVEMENT Listed below #3 35.50' 13.930 af OPEN SPACE Listed below #4 33.70' 18.574 af SWM AREA (Irregular) Listed below (Recalc) 61.404 af Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.131 7,603.0 0.000 0.000 1.131 34.70 1.655 7,547.0 1.385 1.385 2.691 35.70 2.181 7,641.0 1.912 3.297 5.305 45.00 2.181 7,641.0 20.283 23.580 6.936 Elevation Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 35.00 0.000 0.000 35.50 0.110 0.110 36.00 1.320 1.430 36.50 3.890 5.320 Elevation Cum.Store (feet) (acre-feet) 35.50 0.000 36.00 3.480 36.50 13.930 Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (acres) (feet) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) (acres) 33.70 1.375 1,587.0 0.000 0.000 1.375 34.70 1.522 1,612.0 1.448 1.448 1.526 35.70 1.670 1,637.0 1.595 3.043 1.679 45.00 1.670 1,637.0 15.531 18.574 2.028 Page 9386 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 24HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCPond 11P: Contributory Basin InflowHydrograph Time (hours) 360340320300280260240220200180160140120100806040200Flow (cfs)130120110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Inflow Area=39.920 acPeak Elev=36.15' Storage=17.167 af 119.42 cfs Pond 11P: Contributory Basin Storage Stage-Area-Storage Storage (acre-feet) 605550454035302520151050Elevation (feet)45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 DITCH + SWM AREA PAVEMENT OPEN SPACE Page 9387 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 25HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCHydrograph for Pond 11P: Contributory BasinTime(hours)Inflow(cfs)Storage(acre-feet)Elevation(feet)0.00 0.00 0.000 33.705.00 0.22 0.044 33.7210.00 0.27 0.147 33.76 15.00 0.29 0.263 33.80 20.00 0.29 0.383 33.85 25.00 0.39 0.506 33.90 30.00 0.47 0.685 33.96 35.00 0.51 0.874 34.03 40.00 0.66 1.116 34.12 45.00 0.80 1.420 34.23 50.00 1.07 1.802 34.36 55.00 3.34 2.619 34.63 60.00 117.35 8.142 35.68 65.00 4.16 15.106 36.08 70.00 2.80 16.635 36.13 75.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 80.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 85.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 90.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 95.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 100.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 105.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 110.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 115.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 120.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 125.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 130.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 135.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 140.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 145.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 150.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 155.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 160.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 165.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 170.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 175.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 180.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 185.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 190.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 195.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 200.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 205.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 210.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 215.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 220.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 225.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 230.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 235.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 240.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 245.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 250.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 255.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 260.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 Time(hours)Inflow(cfs)Storage(acre-feet)Elevation(feet)265.00 0.00 17.167 36.15270.00 0.00 17.167 36.15275.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 280.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 285.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 290.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 295.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 300.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 305.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 310.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 315.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 320.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 325.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 330.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 335.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 340.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 345.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 350.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 355.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 360.00 0.00 17.167 36.15 Page 9388 of 9661 SFWMD 72-hr 100 YR-3 DAY Rainfall=10.00"2025-05-12 Stewart Materials Printed 6/13/2025Prepared by Davidson Engineering Page 26HydroCAD® 10.20-7a s/n 02995 © 2025 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCStage-Area-Storage for Pond 11P: Contributory BasinElevation(feet)Storage(acre-feet)33.70 0.00033.80 0.25433.90 0.514 34.00 0.780 34.10 1.053 34.20 1.332 34.30 1.619 34.40 1.912 34.50 2.212 34.60 2.518 34.70 2.833 34.80 3.153 34.90 3.481 35.00 3.815 35.10 4.177 35.20 4.546 35.30 4.922 35.40 5.304 35.50 5.694 35.60 7.028 35.70 8.370 35.80 9.715 35.90 11.060 36.00 12.405 36.10 15.658 36.20 18.911 36.30 22.165 36.40 25.418 36.50 28.671 36.60 29.056 36.70 29.441 36.80 29.826 36.90 30.211 37.00 30.596 37.10 30.981 37.20 31.366 37.30 31.752 37.40 32.137 37.50 32.522 37.60 32.907 37.70 33.292 37.80 33.677 37.90 34.062 38.00 34.447 38.10 34.832 38.20 35.217 38.30 35.603 38.40 35.988 38.50 36.373 38.60 36.758 38.70 37.143 38.80 37.528 38.90 37.913 Elevation(feet)Storage(acre-feet)39.00 38.29839.10 38.68339.20 39.068 39.30 39.454 39.40 39.839 39.50 40.224 39.60 40.609 39.70 40.994 39.80 41.379 39.90 41.764 40.00 42.149 40.10 42.534 40.20 42.919 40.30 43.305 40.40 43.690 40.50 44.075 40.60 44.460 40.70 44.845 40.80 45.230 40.90 45.615 41.00 46.000 41.10 46.385 41.20 46.770 41.30 47.156 41.40 47.541 41.50 47.926 41.60 48.311 41.70 48.696 41.80 49.081 41.90 49.466 42.00 49.851 42.10 50.236 42.20 50.621 42.30 51.007 42.40 51.392 42.50 51.777 42.60 52.162 42.70 52.547 42.80 52.932 42.90 53.317 43.00 53.702 43.10 54.087 43.20 54.472 43.30 54.858 43.40 55.243 43.50 55.628 43.60 56.013 43.70 56.398 43.80 56.783 43.90 57.168 44.00 57.553 44.10 57.938 44.20 58.323 Elevation(feet)Storage(acre-feet)44.30 58.70944.40 59.09444.50 59.479 44.60 59.864 44.70 60.249 44.80 60.634 44.90 61.019 45.00 61.404 Page 9389 of 9661 Engineering Report Stewart Materials – Immokalee East Expansion Page 8 Appendix C Floodplain Compensation Calculations Page 9390 of 9661 Existing Site Runoff Total Area of Impacts w/in Floodplain 0.65 acres 21.41 acres Area w/in Floodplain (below BFE) 0 acres 13.74 acres Area w/in Floodplain (above BFE) 0.65 acres 7.67 acres 100-yr, 3-Day Rainfall 10.00 inches 10.00 inches WSWT 32.70 ft-NAVD 32.70 ft-NAVD Average Existing Grade 36.99 ft-NAVD 36.05 ft-NAVD Base Flood Elevation 36.00 ft-NAVD 36.50 ft-NAVD 100-yr, 3-Day Storm Stage 36.15 ft-NAVD 36.15 ft-NAVD Soil Storage Average Existing Grade 36.99 ft-NAVD 36.05 ft-NAVD Depth to Water Table (avg. ex. grade- WSWT) 4.29 ft 3.35 ft Ex. Soil Storage (Refer to table on following sheet)8.18 in 6.25 in Runoff Volume Site Runoff (100-yr, 3-day rainfall - Ex. Soil Storage) 1.82 in 3.755 in Runoff Volume = Site Runoff *Site Area Below BFE* (1 ft/12 in) 0.00 ac-ft 4.30 ac-ft Runoff Volume = 100-yr, 3-day Rainfall *Site Area Above BFE * (1 ft/12 in) 0.54 ac-ft 6.40 ac-ft Total Runoff ( ac-ft) Total Runoff (Area 1 and 2, ac-ft) Existing Site Storage Surface Storage = Site Area Below BFE * (BFE-Avg. Ex.Grade)0 ac-ft 6.181 ac-ft Total Surface Storage (Area 1 & 2), ac-ft Existing Site Discharge at Peak Total Discharge (Total Runoff - Total Surface Storage), ac-ft The existing site discharge is a positive number, representing the site is an exporter. No additional analysis is necessary. 6/11/2025DateCalculated By:Checked By:BTCBTC 5.05 Stewart Materials - ±40 ac. Expansion Compensating Storage Calculations Area 1 Area 2 11.23 6.18 0.54 10.69 Page 9391 of 9661 NATURAL DEV. DEPTH TO AVAILABLE AVAIL. WTR TABLE STORAGE STORAGE 0 0.00 0.00 1 0.60 0.45 1.5 1.50 1.10 2 2.50 1.88 2.5 4.50 3.40 3 6.60 4.95 3.5 8.90 6.80 4 10.90 8.18 10 10.90 8.18 Wet Season Wtr Tbl Elev 32.70 (FT-NAVD) Existing Conditions Area 1 Area 2 Avg. Ex Grade 36.99 36.05 (FT-NAVD) Depth To Wtr Tbl 4.29 3.35 FT Soil Storage (interpolated)8.18 6.25 IN Stewart Materials - ±40 ac. Expansion Soil CalculationsDate 6/11/2025Calculated By: BTCChecked By: BTC Page 9392 of 9661