Making an Environmental Impact

Developers are by far most

concerned about the economic impact of the EIS. They criticize the report for

not addressing this important component. "Economic ramifications are not

addressed," says the NAHB's Asmus of the EIS. The BIA's Reitmann concurs,

"There is no provision for economic impact. That's a major flaw."

Actually, the EIS does address "Socio-Economic"

effects in Section 4.6 by concluding, "At the scale of the regional

economy, we foresee no significant change in economic output from current

conditions that would result from either the proposed action or any of the

alternatives."

Its

detractors beg to differ. In response to the original draft EIS, PEEP sent a

200-page report to the Corps detailing the potential economic devastation the

EIS could have on Southwest Florida. The group hired Fishkind from Orlando to

analyze the economic impact of the EIS. The report predicted a loss of $1.5 to

$3.1 billion to the local economy, based on a reduction of the land available

for development by anywhere from 136,165 acres to 282,513 acres. It also

predicted that 25 to 50 percent fewer jobs would be created. It translated this

loss into 13- to 27-percent higher property taxes for existing residents.

The Corps concedes that its actions could affect the

economy of the area, but says its job is to maintain a balance, not create an

economic model. "We recognize our decisions ultimately affect a

landowner's ability to convert land from one use to some other economic

use," says Barron. "We have to balance the economy against birds and

clean water and things that don't have that direct dollar stream. We are not in

the business of putting a dollar value on each bird."

Reitmann argues that in the end, the consumer will pay

for the costs levied by the EIS. "All these regulations have to be paid

for. Citizens are going to pay. Passengers flying into Southwest Florida

Regional will pay. It will become much more expensive to live in Southwest

Florida." Affordable housing, he adds, will be dramatically affected.

"The

bottom line is it's going to cost you and me more money to build a house or

office building," agrees Falbey of the ULI. "We complain about having

no affordable housing. The reason is the expense involved."

The Permitting Process

The developer community

is also concerned about exactly how permitting decisions will be made. The

danger, says the Horizon Council's Inge, is that in making decisions, staff

will use the EIS "as a line in the sand." If a bald eagle is in the

vicinity, he asks, does that mean no development there, with no exceptions?

Environmental interests have

pretty much the opposite concern. They believe the EIS has far too many

exceptions. Everything is couched behind the term "unavoidable," says

Simonik. If a project is "unavoidable," or if there isn't a

"practicable alternative," then it's permissible, he explains.

"It's very easy to find things unavoidable. I've seen really avoidable

things said to be 'unavoidable.'

"An applicant will look

at these rules and figure out how to get around them," concludes Simonik.

He is also concerned the

EIS is too vague on evaluating cumulative effects. "My fear is it's still

going to be done in a piecemeal permitting way. The EIS is still not getting to

how to look at cumulative effects."

Reitmann agrees the EIS is too vague about cumulative

effects but his concern is for a different reason. How will the Corps calculate

cumulative impact? he asks. "Will they reach a certain critical moment and

not issue any more permits?"

"The Corps is not in

the business of stopping development," responds Barron. "That's not

our mission. If a property has wetlands, the Corps has the responsibility to

balance the need, ownership, and impacts to the water."

No matter how often or pointedly the Corps states its

lofty goals, however, the builders remain suspicious. Reitmann believes the EIS

"still smacks of local land use planning" and fears it could

supercede local planning authority. The Corps says its EIS is consistent with

local comprehensive plans, but does admit it is an area of controversy. Both

Lee and Collier plans refer the landowner to state and federal permitting programs

when dealing with wetlands. But, asks Falbey, "if a comprehensive plan

differs from what the Corps has in mind, what do you do?" The EIS does not

answer that question.

normal;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold'>The Corps has told Lee County that 92 percent

of the EIS agrees with the county's comprehensive plan, says County

Commissioner John Albion. "Where it doesn't, there are potentially

negative impacts," he says. "If they are contradictory, clearly there

will be problems."

Collier County Commissioner Jim Carter sees no conflict

between the EIS and Collier's growth plan. The county's concern is that the EIS

results in better integration with the county and other agencies in reviewing

areas for development or preservation. "We need integration with the South

Florida Water Management District and Department of Environmental Protection so

we are not working at cross purposes," he says. "I hope it will

improve the permitting process. I hope we can work cooperatively so as not to

elongate the process."

Streamlining the permitting process is of interest to all

sides. One proposal is to allow General Permits in areas deemed by the EIS to

have fewer environmental concerns. These permits are, in essence, batch permits

covering certain construction activities in an area for a period of five years.

This frees the property owner from the burden of an individual permit review.

The NAHB sees this as one of the few positives to come out of the EIS.

Too Many Questions

In the end, the EIS is deemed too vague and leaving far

too many questions. Everyone is asking for more specifics about how it will

work. Developers and landowners want to know if it means their projects will be

turned down. For Falbey at the ULI, it adds more complexity. "Over the

last 30 years, the same affect all these land use documents have had is to make

permitting more complex than the tax code. It is more time consuming. They add

more steps and agencies along the way."

Simonik call the EIS

"a good step. I don't know how small

a step in realizing and appreciating the value of the resources we have in

Southwest Florida. The Western Everglades is a treasure. We have an obligation

as a local community to protect and preserve something that's a national

treasure. The EIS from the federal government shows us how important it is for

us to be good stewards. We should be proud to try to protect a national

treasure."

If nothing else, most would agree, the whole EIS exercise

has been, and continues to be, a learning experience. In the final analysis, it

was an opportunity for the Corps to gain insight into the environmental and

economic issues that define Southwest Florida. The Corps achieved that, says

Inge. "They learned more about the area and the dynamics of the community,

and not just the environmental community, but the business community; they have

an understanding of the magnitude of the issues here."

Barron certainly agrees the Corps learned a lot about

magnitude: "One thing that definitely impressed me is there is a lot of

expertise and people working on solving the problems in Southwest Florida."

Some people speculate that the Corps didn't quite know

what it was getting into when it proposed the EIS. "My personal

observation," says Falbey, "is that they jumped before they thought

it through."

But good-natured Bob Barron is happy to take what he

learned and move forward. He says the final EIS could be ready before

Christmas. "I hope we don't go through the same level of conflict and

angst," he says. "We learned some lessons through this."

Susan Holly is a

freelance writer based on Sanibel.