complete agenda - Florida Department of Environmental Protection

12
ARC Summary August 12, 2010
Dr. Frederick wanted to know the values of the land being released and the values of what was
being provided to the OGT.
Mr. Browne requested that the item should specify that the MOU would include the estimated
values for acres to be impacted and acres anticipated to be conveyed to OGT. Dr. Frederick
wanted to see those revisions in print in the item rather than just vote it forward conceptually.
Mr. Cochran agreed; he was also concerned about the lack of specificity in the item. He
requested the sentence saying the “current use of the area for the proposed easement was a
highway corridor” be changed to say the “area is currently being used as state conservation
lands”. He appreciated DOT’s partnership on the development of mitigation plans on Highway
40. He wanted to see the construction of wildlife crossings spelled out in either the easement or
the MOU. The item was to be revised and revisited on the 13 th
.
ARC ACTION: None. It would be considered as a separate item by ARC on the following
day rather than being on the consent agenda.
ITEM 20: REQUEST: Consideration to ensure that a 1.43± acre, access and utility
easement within the Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Greenways and
Trails (OGT) managed land, Marjorie Harris Carr Cross Florida Greenway, is in
compliance with the Board of Trustees’ Linear Facilities Policy.
DISCUSSION: Mr.Gelhardt asked why the easement was needed, and was told by OGT staff
that the applicant was landlocked by state lands; the easement was for access and utilities.
ARC ACTION: Mr. Gelhardt moved that this item be placed on the consent agenda for
approval. The motion was seconded by Peter Frederick. By a unanimous vote, the
motion was approved.
ITEM 21:
Reports
REQUEST: Consideration of final Land Management Review Team
DISCUSSION:
Mr. Farr noted that all of these 11 were in compliance with the purposes for which they were
acquired and in compliance with their management plan.
Mr. Keith Singleton, DSL, said that there had been 31 reviews conducted during this 2009-2010
fiscal year. He expressed his appreciation for the cooperation of the managing agencies in
sending back the finalized reports within a timeframe that made it possible to bring a portion of
the 31 reviews before ARC for consideration and discussion. This was better for ARC than
presenting the reviews of all sites at one ARC meeting. It allows for a more manageable review
by ARC.
Mr. Singleton noted that after the site review, Office of Environmental Services’ (OES) goal
would be to get the draft report on the site out to the managing agency in about 30 days. In
cases where the managing agencies review the draft and provide their comments back to OES
in 30 days, the managing agency comments will be incorporated into the report and prepared
for the agenda. Mr. Singleton noted, however, that completed reports, with or without
responses from the managing agencies, will be placed on the next possible ARC agenda.