The URL can be used to link to this page

CCPC Agenda 09/19/2013 R CCPC MEETING AGENDA SEPTEMBER 19, 2013 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2013, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM,ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER,THIRD FLOOR,3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST,NAPLES,FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES— August 15,2013 6. BCC REPORT-RECAPS 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PL20130000139/CP-2013-1: Naples Reserve RPUD, a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element to allow the Urban Residential Fringe portion of the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development to utilize transfer of development rights from any lands designated as Sending Lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, and furthermore recommending transmittal of the amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. The subject 668 acre property is located approximately 1- 1/2 miles East of Collier Boulevard and one mile North of US 41 in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] Page 1 of 2 B. PL20130000365/CP-2013-4: Olde Florida Golf Club, a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element Future Land Use Map and Map Series to change the designation of the Olde Florida Golf Club property from Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RMFUD) Neutral Lands to Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) Receiving Lands,and furthermore recommending transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. The subject property consisting of 554± acres is located on the North side of Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension,two miles East of Collier Boulevard in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, and Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] C. PL20120002909/CP-2013-3: Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, a Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing an amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element to revise the Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict to remove the office and retail caps and allow up to 7,500 square feet of gross floor area of commercial uses per acre or 15 residential dwelling units per acre, to make residential development optional, to prohibit commercial and residential uses on the same parcel,to limit multi-tenant commercial building to no more than 50% of the commercial square footage, to revise development standards including the cap on the size of the footprint of commercial buildings, and furthermore recommending Transmittal of the amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. The subject property is 21.70 acres and located on the west side of Airport Road and approximately 330 feet north of Orange Blossom Drive in Section 2, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Michele Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner] 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS 15. ADJOURN CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows/jmp Page 2 of 2 Clerk of Court COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT S aas I I a - u.s i I mii I m .a 1 awl I aaee I Iiii Mum I g �, r 4 r Collor County CA SIP .. Florida a I • ,, ,s srn P `" I s I La1SIIgN MIT WON • •/.OiMM L 'r- uN4 t� •LA,7NNIII Illf ~ Cl,il II Pi as —^ 4-M 1-711 vimi ti �s tj .Mf700SIII ii 0 1 r _ N. If 1 .;„z.i.;:ry / 0 ) I , a&WIG .a « cti4Iale l i .t".,~'I1 i. • .y r Yi..+. ..�A�N w�e"min 2013 1 CYCLE (TRANSMITTAL HEARINGS) Petitions:CP-2013-1,CP-2013-3;and CP-2013-4 CCPC: September 19, 2013 BCC: November 12, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS CCPC— 2013 Cycle 1 GMP Transmittal Amendments CCPC September 19, 2013 AGENDA 1) TAB: Table of Contents DOCUMENT: Table of Contents 2) TAB:Transmittal Staff Reports DOCUMENTS: CCPC Staff Reports: PL20130000139/CP-2013-1, PL20120002909/CP-2013-3, PL20130000365/CP-2013-4; EAC Transmittal Staff Report: PL20130000364/CP-2013-4 3) TAB: Resolutions DOCUMENTS:Transmittal Resolutions with Exhibit "A" text (and/or maps): PL20130000139/CP-2013-1; PL20120002909/CP-2013-3; & PL20130000365/CP-2013-4 4) TAB: Petition DOCUMENT: Project PL20130000139/ Petition CP-2013-1 5) TAB: Petition DOCUMENT: Project PL20120002909/ Petition CP-2013-3 6) TAB: Petition DOCUMENT: Project PL20130000365/ Petition CP-2013-4 7) TAB: Legal Advertisements DOCUMENT: CCPC Advertisement 8) TAB: Correspondence DOCUMENTS: Staff Correspondence Item #9A CP-2013- 1 NAPLES RESERVE RPUD PETITION PL20130000139 HOLE MONTES ENGINEERS•PLANNERS•SURVEYORS May 14,2013 950 Encore Way•Naples,Florida 34110•Phone 239.254.2000•Fax:239.254.2099 VIA HAND DELIVERY Corby Schmidt,AICP,Principal Planner Comprehensive Planning Section Collier County Growth Management Division 2800 North horseshoe Drive Naples,FL 34108 Re: Growth Management Plan Amendment(Petition CP-2013-1) for SFI Naples Reserve,LLC and Wilton Land Company, LLC HM File No.: 2012.103 Dear Mr. Schmidt: In response to your comment letter dated March 25,2013,we offer the following responses: Comprehensive Planning Comments related to the application form: Page 2 • . II.B. State: "see Exhibit B to the Letter of Authorization provided herewith", or a similar suitable entry. Provide the percentage of stock owned by each officer and/or stockholder of the Corporation identified. Response: We have provided all information required. Note that the same information was provided most recently in conjunction with the PUD Amendment and deemed to be sufficient. We have also included relevant information from the Florida Department of State Division of Corporations. Page 3 • III.B. A specific property is described in"A" above, but location entered here appears as a GMP or LDC designation; Answer here would likely provide a general location for the property; spell out"51 South and"26 East". Response: Revision has been made. The proposed Amendment will apply to lands within the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD). These lands are located in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, approximately 1 % miles east of County Road 951 and 1 mile north of U.S. 41 East. • III.E. A specific property is described in "A" above, but "N/A" entered here indicates otherwise; answer here should provide a numerical acreage figure, same as the acreage provided throughout application materials; correct response to provide correct figure. H:\2012\20 12103\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\CS 130514 resubmittal cover letter.docx Naples• Fort Myers Corby Schmidt,AICP,Principal Planner Comprehensive Planning Section Re: Growth Management Plan Amendment(Petition CP-2013-1) for SFI Naples Reserve, LLC and Wilton Land Company, LLC May 14, 2013 Page 2 Response:Revision has been made. • III.F. Provide the correct zoning designation for the property described in III.A. Spell out RFMUD or URF (but not both), and provide full responses; correct and full response would likely be: "Urban Designation, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Subdistrict" Response:Revision has been made. • III.H. Provide the correct zoning designation for the property described IN III.A. Spell out RFMUD or URF (but not both), and provide full responses; correct and full response would likely be: "Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands" Response:Revision has been made. Page 4 • IV.A. Correct to indicate element with "X" or other simple mark; "Exhibit `B" does not appear to reflect a proposed map amendment, and should be referred to elsewhere, likely, in V.A.1. below. Response:Revision has been made. • IV.B. Correct Exhibit "A" subsection 2.a. language to spell out "RPUD" as Residential Planned Unit Development; spell out "51 South and "26 East". Correct Exhibit "A" subsection B.21(c) language to spell out "RPUD" as Residential Planned Unit Development; Spell out"51 South and "26 East"; Response:Revisions have been made to Exhibit "A' • V.A.1. Response would likely read: "see Exhibit"C" or"refer to Exhibit"C" Response:Revision has been made. • V.A.2. Response would likely read: "see Exhibit"D" or"refer to Exhibit"D" Response:Revision has been made. • Prepare and submit an analysis of the impact approval of the proposed amendment will have on the County's Transfer of Development Rights program. Provide, as parts of this TDR analysis, a survey and count of Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Subdistrict parcels and acreage still eligible to use TDRs; and, a survey and count of Rural Fringe Mixed H:\2012\2012103\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\CS 130514 resubmittal cover letter.docx Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner Comprehensive Planning Section .-. Re: Growth Management Plan Amendment(Petition CP-2013-1) for SFI Naples Reserve, LLC and Wilton Land Company, LLC May 14, 2013 Page 3 Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands parcels and acreage with TDRs not yet severed and with TDRs not yet redeemed. Response: In addition to the information we have already submitted, we are providing Exhibit "A-1" TDR Analysis URF/RFMUD One Mile Area as requested. The summary conclusion of the analysis is as follows: Analysis -RFMUDS Sending Lailds Within One Mile of Urban Boundary o/ Estimated Sending Severed Estimated Sending %Not TDRS from Total Acres Acres TDRS from Acres Not Severed Not Severed Severed Severed Severed Acres4 Acress 2,911.67 1,599.60 55% 1,279.68 1,311.77 45% 524.71 Total Estimate TDRs from One mile Sending Area 1804.39 TDRS Already Committed to URF Project 721.00 Remaining TDRS for Use in URF 1083.39 Acres in URF Eligible to Use TDRs 3249.87 Acres eligible for TDRs 66%of after remaining Eligible available TDRs within URF one mile are utilized 2166.87 Lands • V.A.1. Response would likely read: "see Exhibit"C" or"refer to Exhibit"C" Response:Revision has been made. • Table of Exhibits (to be added) Although not required, it is recommended that a table of exhibits be prepared listing all exhibits by number with the name of each exhibit. This table will make the application more user-friendly, particularly when reviewed by the EAC, CCPC, BCC, and eventually to the DEO. Response:Acknowledged. We included a Table of Exhibits. H:\2012\2012103\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\CS 130514 resubmittal cover letter.docx Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner Comprehensive Planning Section Re: Growth Management Plan Amendment(Petition CP-2013-1) for SFI Naples Reserve, LLC and Wilton Land Company, LLC May 14, 2013 Page 4 • Comprehensive Planning Comments related to specific exhibits All of the Exhibits should be labeled in the lower right corner of each Exhibit page for ease of finding and consistency throughout. Realize that the reviewers of this application will include lay persons, including members of the EAC, CCPC, and the BCC. Response:Revisions have been made. • Stormwater and Environmental Planning Sufficiency Comments: This application package is adequate and sufficient to enable staff to conduct a formal [substantive] review concerning environmental matters. Response:Acknowledged. • Transportation Planning Sufficiency Comments: Collier County Transportation Planning staff has not completed their review of the traffic study/impact statement for completeness, and their determination and comments on sufficiency matters remain pending and forthcoming. Response:Acknowledged. • Public Utilities Planning and Project Management Sufficiency Comments: This application package is adequate and sufficient to enable staff to conduct a formal [substantive] review concerning public utilities matters. Response:Acknowledged. • Closing remarks: The original application and copies are available for pick-up (one copy is kept for the file). Once the petition has been modified/enhanced to address the above items, re- submit the original plus four copies, all properly assembled, for a second sufficiency review. Paragraph C. of Resolution No. 12-234 provides 30 days for you to respond to this letter with supplemental data. Since there is uncertainty as to the timing of this application moving forward to transmittal hearings, the applicant may wish to request a second 30 day time period, in accordance with Resolution No. 12-234, beyond 30 calendar days from the date of this letter to remedy the deficiencies. Also, note that this is not a substantive review and that the substantive review will not be completed until this application has been found sufficient. Response:Acknowledged. H:\2012\2012103\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\CS 130514 resubmittal cover letter.docx Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner Comprehensive Planning Section Re: Growth Management Plan Amendment(Petition CP-2013-1) for SFI Naples Reserve, LLC and Wilton Land Company, LLC May 14, 2013 Page 5 Very Truly Yours, HOLE MONTES,INC. / /61 Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP Director of Planning RJMlsek Enclosures as noted. cc: Donald E. Mears, Jr., Vice President, iStar Development Co. David Torres, President, Wilton Land Company, LLC Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire, Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester H:\2012\2012103\WP\GMPA\Resubmittal\CS 130514 resubmittal cover letter.docx III NI HOLE MONTES ENGINEERS•PLANNERS•SURVEYORS 950 Encore Way•Naples, Florida 34110•Phone 239.254.2000•Fax:239.254.2099 February 20, 2013 VIA HAND-DELIVERY Mr. David Weeks,AICP Comprehensive Planning Manager Collier County Growth Management Divisions 2800 North horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34108 Re: GMP Amendment Submission for SFI Naples Reserve,LLC and Wilton Land Company, LLC (Co-Applicant) HM File No.: 2012.103 Dear Mr. Weeks: Accompanying this letter you will find the application for amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (Future Land Use Element) and the requisite number of initially required copies of the application and related exhibits. The proposed amendment is very simple and straightforward. Pages 29 and 49 of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) are proposed to be amended to provide for a limited exclusion to the requirement that TDRs to be utilized to increase density in the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) be acquired from Sending designated lands located within one mile of the County's Urban Boundary. TDRs coming from Sending lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary are refereed to as "qualified" TDRs. The limited exclusion would apply only to the Naples Reserve RPUD, the owner of which (SFI Naples Reserve, LLC) has entered into an agreement with the co-applicant for this petition, Wilton Land Company, LLC. The owners of Hacienda Lakes, LLC also own several other parcels within Sending lands both within the "one-mile qualified area" and also outside of that one-mile area. A number of these TDRs are under the ownership of Wilton Land Company, LLC. As indicated Wilton Land Company, LLC is the co-applicant on this petition. All of the TDRS to be sold to SFI Naples Reserve, LLC (406 TDRs) were derived from the North Belle Meade NRPA Sending lands, and therefore of the highest ecological value. The proposed amendment would be site specific in that the exclusion from the requirement to use Qualified TDRs would only apply to the Naples reserve RPUD. Any future increase in density in the URF above the allowable 1.5 dwelling units per acre would still be required to use qualified TDRs. The stated primary purpose of the TDR process is as follows: The primary purpose of the TDR process within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District is to establish an equitable method of protecting and conserving the most valuable environmental lands, including large connected wetland systems and significant areas of habitat for listed species, while allowin property owners of such lands to ^ecoup Zost value and development H:\2012\2012103\WP\GMPA\GMP Amendment Cover letter 02-20-13.doc Naples•Fort Myers Mr. David Weeks,AICP Comprehensive Planning Manager Re: GMP Amendment Submission for SFI Naples Reserve, LLC and Wilton Land Company, LLC (Co-Applicants) HM File No.: 2012.103 February 20, 2013 Page 2 potential through an economically viable process of transferring such rights to other more suitable lands. The amendment furthers the TDR program primary objectives in that it does achieve significant protection and conservation of the "most valuable environmental lands" (coming from Sending lands in the North Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) and it provides an acceptable economic return to the Sending lands owner allowing him to "recoup lost value"that resulted from the loss of development rights and down-zoning that occurred when the lands were designated Sending. Although the TDRs do not originate from Sending lands within one-mile of the Urban Boundary they do come from very high ecological value NRPA Sending lands. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you require any additional information or if you find this submittal deficient in any way. We trust that the application submittal package is complete and sufficient and await further instruction upon completion of your review. Very truly yours, HOLE MONTES,INC. l i 'Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP Director of Planning Enclosure(s) as noted. cc: Donald E.Mears, Jr., Vice President, iStar Development Co. David Torres, President, Wilton Land Company, LLC Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire, Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester ,r. H:\2012\2012103\WP\GMPA\GMP Amendment Cover letter 02-20-13.doc APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATOIN NUMBER DATE RECEIVED PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE January 29,2013 DATE SUFFICIENT This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Comprehensive Planning Department, Suite 400, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252-2400 (Fax 239-252-2946). The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application,see Resolution 97-431 as amended by Resolution 98-18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239-252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Name of Applicant Donald E. Mears, Jr., Vice President Company iStar Development Company Address 3232 West Lake Mary Boulevard,Suite 1410 City Lake Mary State Florida Zip Code 32746 Phone Number 407-323-9200 Fax Number N/A Name of Applicant David Torres, President Company Wilton Land Company, LLC Address 3921 Prospect Avenue City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34104 Phone Number 239-263-9700 Fax Number 239-263-1058 B. Name of Agent* Robert J. Mulhere, FAICP • THESE WILL BE THE PERSONS CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company Hole Mantes, Inc. Address 950 Encore Way City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34110 Phone Number 239-254-2000 Fax Number 239-254-2099 Name of Agent* Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire Company Coleman Yovanovich & Koester Address 4001 Tamiami Trail North City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239-435-3535 Fax Number 239-435-1218 -� 1 C. Name of Owner (s) of Record SFI Naples Reserve, LLC Address c/o iStar Financial, Inc , 1114 Avenue of the Americas, 39th Floor City New York State New York Zip Code 10036 Phone Number 212-930-9400 Fax Number 212-930-9494 D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. II. Disclosure of Interest Information: 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. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage 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 Percentage of Stock SFI Naples Reserve, LLC 100%Ownership c/o iStar Financial, Inc., 1 114 Avenue of the Americas,39th Floor New York, NY 10036 For list of officers see Exhibit B to Letter of Authorization 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 Percentage of Interest 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 Percentage of Ownership v-,, 2 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 Percentage 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 (X ) leased ( ):8-2010 Term of lease yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing: H. 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. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION All of Section 1,Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)) B. GENERAL LOCATION These lands are located in Section 1,Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, approximately 1 1/2 miles east of County Road 951 and 1 mile north of U.S. 41 East C. PLANNING COMMUNITY Royal FakaPalm D. TAZ 357.1 E. SIZE IN ACRES 688 acres F. ZONING Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN Low Density Residential H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S) Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) is designated both an Agricultural/Rural Designation and Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) receiving (372±acres) and Urban Mixed Use District/ Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF) (316±acres) 3 IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: .-� A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Recreation/Open Space Traffic Circulation Sub-Element Mass Transit Sub-Element Aviation Sub-Element Potable Water Sub-Element Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element NGWAR Sub-Element Solid Waste Sub-Element Drainage Sub-Element Capital Improvement Element CCME Element X Future Land Use Element Golden Gate Master Plan Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) 29 and 49 OF THE Future Land Use ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Striko through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to Identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary:See attached Exhibit A: Naples Reserve GMPA-Proposed Amendment Language,Narrative and Justification C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM N/A TO D. D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) N/A E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N/A V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN 1"=400'. At least one copy reduced to 8- 1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE See Exhibit "C" Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. See Exhibit "D" Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source,and date. N/A Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION N/A Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands,with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL N/A Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE:THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. N/A Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish &Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.),Identify historic and/or archaeological sites on the subject property. 4 D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J-11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2(Copies attached). 1. INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: N Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)(5), F.A.C.). IF so,identify area located in ACSC. N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)7.b, F.A.C.) Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County-wide population by more than 5%of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes,indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. N Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial,industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference Rule 9J-5.006(5) F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J-11.007, F.A.C.) E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the N/A impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Potable Water N/A Sanitary Sewer N/A Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS N/A Drainage N/A Solid Waste N/A Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS,indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. N/A Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e.water,sewer,fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services. 3. N/A Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools,fire --� protection and emergency medical services. 5 F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: N/A Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). N/A Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable N/A Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable N/A High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport,if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Yes $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) N/A $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) Yes Proof of ownership (copy of deed) Yes Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) Yes 1 Original and 5 complete,signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1"=400' or at a scale as determined during the pre-application meeting. 6 LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCLRN I hereby authorize Robert J..Mulhere,FAICP of Hole Mantes,Inc.&Richard D.Yovanovich,Esquire of Coleman.,Yovanovich&Koester to serve as my Agents in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application_ Signed: S 1 /415 1 .le tf ` Z1.6 Date: of"3/ 13 (Name of Ow xer(s)of Record) I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing applic.: n, :id ti t the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my.tmowledge. S.•, -re rfs plicant erAr / -/ s,s.L . Name-Typed or Printed ° STATE OF (f� COUNTY OF ( 'off-l_) • Sworn to and subscribed before me this / day of J1,0014.(2.k4 ,2013 2 by ita_sos Z asa;�� ' MY COMMISSION:EXPIRES: Notary Public / Jesus Rosado Notary Public,State of New York CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: No.01E06242246 Qualified in Bronx County who is personally known to me, Commission Expires May 31,20 '5 who has produced as identification and did take an Oath did not take and Oath NOTICE BE AWARE THAT: Florida Statute Section 537.06—.False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum.of%500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail term." SFI NAPLES RESERVE LLC Certificate The undersigned hereby certifies as follows: 1. I am the duly elected and acting General Counsel, Corporate and Secretary of iStar Financial Inc., a Maryland corporation, which is the sole member (the "Member") of SFI Naples Reserve LLC, a Delaware limited liability company(the"Company"). 2. Daniel Melaugh in his capacity as Vice President and Don Mears in his capacity as Vice President of the Company, and any other officer of Company (collectively,the"Authorized Officers") are authorized to act on behalf of the Company, to execute and deliver any instruments, documents and certificates, and to take such other and further actions, from time to time, as such Authorized Officers deem necessary,advisable, appropriate or convenient. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have affixed my signature as of July 23,2012. • . Air tit 1 . ' Geoffr•lp ugan General Counsel, Co •+ - • s Secretary • THE MEMBERSHIP INTERESTS EVIDENCED BY THIS AGREEMENT HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 ORUNDERTHE SECURITIES LAWS OF ANY STATE OR FOREIGN JURISDICTION AND MAY NOT BE SOLD OR TRANSFERRED WITHOUT COMPLIANCE WITH ANY APPLICABLE FEDERAL,STATE OR FOREIGN SECURITIES LAWS. • LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT OF SFI NAPLES RESERVE LLC THIS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT OF SFI NAPLES RESERVE LLC (the"Agreement")is entered into as of the 3rd day of June,2009,by iSTAR FINANCIAL INC.,a Maryland corporation (the "Member"), and such other persons as may from time to time be admitted as members of the limited liability company formed hereby (the "Company")in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and the Act(defined below). ARTICLE I. FORMATION OF LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY The Member hereby forms the Company under the provisions of the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act(6 Del.C. §18-101,et seq.)(such act as heretofore and hereafter amended is herein called the"Act")and,except as herein otherwise expressly provided,the rights and liabilities of the Members shall be as provided in the Act. ARTICLE II. NAME The name of the limited liability company formed hereby is SFI Naples Reserve LLC, or such other name as the Member shall hereafter designate. Geoffrey M.Dugan is hereby designated as an"authorized person"within the meaning of the Act,and has executed,delivered and filed the Certificate of Formation of the Company(the"Certificate of Formation")with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware on June 2,2009. Upon the filing of the Certificate of Formation with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware, his powers as an "authorized person" ceased, and the Member thereupon became the designated"authorized person" and shall continue as the designated "authorized person"within the meaning of the Act. The Member shall execute,deliver and file any other certificates(and any amendments and/or restatements thereof)necessary for the Company to qualify to do business in any jurisdiction in which the Company may wish to conduct business. ARTICLE III. PURPOSE The purpose and business of the Company shall be to engage in any lawful activity for which limited liability companies may be organized under the Delaware Act. ARTICLE IV. NAMES AND BUSINESS ADDRESSES OF MEMBERS The names and business addresses of the Members are the same as to which notices should be directed as set forth in Section 19.07 hereof. Upon its execution of a counterpart signature page to this Agreement, iStar Financial Inc. is hereby admitted to the Company as a member in the Company. ARTICLE V. TERM The Company shall have a perpetual existence unless sooner dissolved and terminated as hereinafter provided. ARTICLE VI. PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS The principal place of business of the Company shall be do iStar Financial Inc., 1114 Avenue of the Americas,New York,New York 10036 or such other place or places as the Member may,from time to time,designate. The address of the registered office of the Company in the State of Delaware is do Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street,Wilmington,Delaware, 19801. The name and address of the registered agent of the Company for service of process on the Company in the State of Delaware is the Corporation Trust Company,Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street,Wilmington,Delaware, 19801, ARTICLE VII. CAPITAL AND CONTRIBUTIONS 7.01 The Member has made the capital contribution set forth opposite such Member's name in Exhibit A, 7.02 No additional capital contribution shall be required from any Member provided, however,the Member in its sole discretion,without creating any right in favor of any third party, may contribute such additional contributions to the Company as the Member shall, in its sole discretion, determine. 7.03 An individual capital account (herein called a "Capital Account") shall be maintained for each Member.Such Member's Capital Account shall be comprised of(i)the amount of such Member's cash contribution actually contributed to the Company's capital,plus(ii)the value of the capital contributions described in Section 7,01,plus(iii)all income,profit and gains allocated to such Member pursuant to this Agreement,and shall be decreased by the amount of(x)all losses and expenses allocated to such Member pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and (y)all distributions to such Member by the Company pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 7.04 Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement(i)no Member shall be entitled to withdraw any amount on account of its Capital Account,to demand or receive any property from the Partnership other than cash, or to receive any interest on, or payment in respect of, its Capital 2 Account,and(ii)no Member shall be required to contribute any additional money or property to the capital of or lend money to the Company. ARTICLE VIII. DISTRIBUTIONS When in the opinion of the Member there is cash available for distribution from any source whatsoever, all of such funds shall be distributed to the Member. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary contained in this Agreement,the Company shall not be required to make a distribution to the Member on account of its interest in the Company if such distribution would violate Sections 18-607 and 18-804 of the Act or any other applicable law. ARTICLE ALLOCATIONS OF PROFITS AND LOSSES All items of Company income,gain,loss,deduction,or credit for federal or state income tax purposes shall be allocated to the Member. ARTICLE X. BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND RECORDS The books and records of the Company shall at all times be maintained at the principal offices of the Company by the Member on behalf of the Company or at such other location as the Member may determine from time to time. ARTICLE XL FISCAL YEAR The fiscal year of the Company shall end on the thirty-first day of December in each year. ARTICLE XII. COMPANY FUNDS The Company's funds shall be deposited in such bank account or accounts, or invested in such interest-bearing or noninterest-bearing investments,as shall be designated by the Member from time to time. All withdrawals from, or closing of, any such bank accounts shall be made by the authorized agent or agents of the Member from time to time. ARTICLE XIII. [INTENTIONALLY OMITTED] ARTICLE XIV. POWERS,RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF MEMBER. 14.01 Subject to the express terms of this Agreement,the Member shall have exclusive authority to manage the operations and affairs of the Company and to make all decisions regarding ..� the business of the Company. Pursuant to the foregoing,it is understood and agreed that the Member 3 shall have all of the rights and powers of a member as provided in the Act and as otherwise provided by law, and any action taken by the Member shall constitute the act of and serve to bind the Company. In dealing with the Member acting on behalf of the Company,no person shall be required to inquire into the authority of the Member to bind the Company. Persons dealing with the Company are entitled to rely conclusively on the power and authority of the Member as set forth in this Agreement. • 14.02 Subject to the express terms of this Agreement,the Member is hereby granted the right,power and authority to do on behalf of the Company all things which,in its sole judgment,are necessary,proper or desirable to carry out the aforementioned duties and responsibilities. 14.03 The Member may, from time to time, appoint officers (the "Officers") of the Company in its sole discretion as the Member deems necessary,appropriate,advisable or convenient. The Officers of the Company may include, without limitation, a chief executive officer, a chief financial officer,a president,one or more vice presidents,executive vice presidents and senior vice presidents, a treasurer, one or more assistant treasurers, a secretary, and one or more assistant secretaries. Pursuant to the foregoing,the Member hereby appoints the Officers listed in Exhibit B. Each Officer shall hold office until the Officer's death, resignation or removal in the manner hereinafter provided. In its sole discretion,the Member may leave unfilled any office. Appointment of an Officer or agent shall not of itself create contract rights between the Company and that Officer or agent. Any Officer or agent of the Company may be removed by the Member if in its sole judgment such removal is necessary, appropriate, advisable or convenient. Any Officer of the Company may resign at any time by giving written notice of the resignation to the Member. Any resignation shall take effect at the time specified therein or,if the time when it shall become effective is not specified therein,immediately upon its receipt. The acceptance of a resignation shall not be necessary to make it effective unless stated in the resignation. 14.04 To the fullest extent permitted by law, neither the Member, any Officer of the Company, nor any officer, partner, director, stockholder or agent of the Member shall be liable, responsible or accountable in damages or otherwise to the Company or any Member for any action taken or failure to act on behalf of the Company within the scope of the authority conferred on the Member by this Agreement or by law unless such act or omission was performed or omitted fraudulently or in bad faith or constituted gross negligence. 14.05 The Member shall be the"tax matters member"for purposes of Sections 6221-6233 of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended from time to time(the"Code"). The Member may enter into any settlement agreement pursuant to the Code;provided,however,that the Member shall,to the fullest extent permitted by law,not be liable,responsible or accountable in damages or otherwise to the Company or any Member with respect to any audit of the Company for income tax or other purposes. All costs and expenses incurred by the "tax matters member" in connection with an audit of the Company's income tax return shall be borne by the Member. 14.06 To the fullest extent permitted by law,the Company shall defend,indemnify and hold harmless the Officers of the Company,the Member and its officers,partners,directors,stockholders and agents from and against any loss,expense,damage or injury suffered or sustained by any of them by reason of their acts,omissions or alleged acts or omissions arising out of its activities on behalf of the Company,including any judgment,award,settlement,attorneys'fees and other costs or expenses incurred in connection with the defense of any actual or threatened action,proceeding or claim,if the 4 acts,omissions or alleged acts or omissions upon which such actual or threatened action,proceeding or claim is based were for a purpose reasonably believed to be in the best interests of the Company and were not performed or omitted fraudulently or in bad faith or as a result of gross negligence by such party. 14.07 The Member may have other business interests and may engage in other activities in addition to those related to the Company. Neither the Company nor any Member shall have any right by virtue of this Agreement or the limited liability company relationship created hereby in or to such other ventures or activities or to the income or proceeds derived therefrom,and the pursuit of such ventures and activities,even if such other ventures or activities are competitive with the business of the Company, shall not be deemed wrongful or improper. ARTICLE XV. TRANSFER OF INTERESTS 15.01 Any assignee or transferee shall not automatically become a substituted Member unless the assignee is the assignee of the Member and upon such assignee's execution of a counterpart signature page of this Agreement. • ARTICLE XVI. DISSOLUTION OF THE COMPANY 16.01 The Company shall be dissolved,and its affairs shall be wound up upon the first to occur of the �) p following: (z upon the unanimous written consent of the Members,and(ii)the entry of a decree of judicial dissolution under Section 18-802 of the Act. 16.02 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement,the Bankruptcy(as defined below) of the Member shall not cause the Member to cease to be a member in the Company,and upon the occurrence of such an event, the business of the Company shall continue without dissolution. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement,to the fullest extent permitted by law,the Member waives any right it might have under Section 18-801(b)of the Act to agree in writing to dissolve the Company upon the Bankruptcy of the Member or the occurrence of any other event that causes such Member to cease to be a member in the Company. "Bankruptcy"means, with respect to the Member,if the Member(i)makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors,(ii) files a voluntary petition in bankruptcy, (iii) is adjudged a bankrupt or insolvent, or has entered against itself an order for relief, in any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding,(iv)files a petition or answer seeking for itself any reorganization,arrangement,composition,readjustment,liquidation, dissolution or similar relief under any statute,law or regulation,(v)files an answer or other pleading admitting or failing to contest the material allegations of a petition filed against it in any proceeding of this nature, (vi) seeks, consents to or acquiesces in the appointment of a trustee, receiver or liquidator of the Member or of all or any substantial part of its properties,or(vii) 120 days after the commencement of any proceeding against the Member seeking reorganization, arrangement, composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution, or similar relief under any statute, law or regulation, of the proceedings has not been dismissed, or if within 90 days after the appointment, without the Member's consent or acquiescence,of a trustee,receiver or liquidator of the Member or of all or any substantial part of its properties,the appointment is not vacated or stayed,or within 90 -� days after the expiration of any such stay, the appointment is not vacated. With respect to the 5 Member, the foregoing definition of"Bankruptcy" is intended to replace and shall supersede the definition of"bankruptcy" set forth in Sections 18-101(1)and 16-304 of the Act. 16.03 In the event of dissolution,the Company shall conduct only such activities as are necessary to wind up its affairs (including the sale of the assets of the Company in an orderly manner),and the assets of the Company shall be applied in the manner,and in the order of priority, set forth in Section 18-804 of the Act. 16.04 Notwithstanding any other provision o�t�ease�o be anmember of the Company,and (as the Act) of a Member shall not cause such Member to the occurrence of such an.event,the Company shall continue without dissolution. ARTICLE XVII. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS CONCERNING DISSOLUTION OF THE COMPANY 17.01 In the event of the dissolution of the Company for any reason,the Member,or in the event that the Member is not then a Member,the former Member shall be elected as the liquidating trustee of the Company and the liquidating trustee shall wind up the affairs of the Company and liquidate its investments. The Member shall continue to share profits,losses and cash distributions during the period of liquidation in the same manner as immediately before the dissolution. 17.02 Following the satisfaction(by payment or reasonable provision for payment) of all debts and liabilities of the Company and all expenses of liquidation in accordance with applicable law,the remaining proceeds of the liquidation and any other legally available funds of the Company shall be distributed in accordance with Article VIII hereof. 17.03 The Member shall look solely to the assets of the Company for all distributions with respect to the Company and for the return of its capital contribution and shall have no recourse therefor against any other Member. The Members shall not have any right to demand or receive property other than cash upon dissolution and liquidation of the Company or to demand the return of their capital contributions to the Company prior to dissolution and termination of the Company. 17.04 'Upon the completion of the liquidation of the Company and the distribution of all Company funds in accordance with this Agreement, the Company shall be terminated, and the Member (or such liquidating trustee) shall have the authority to execute and file a certificate of cancellation of the Certificate of Formation of the Company as well as any and all other documents required to effectuate the termination of the Company. ARTICLE XVIII. AMENDMENT This Agreement may be amended at any time by the written consent of the Member except as otherwise provided in this Agreement or the Certificate of Formation. 6 • ARTICLE XIX. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS 19.01 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement among the parties. It supersedes any prior agreement or understandings among them, and it may not be modified or amended in any manner other than as set forth herein. 19.02 This Agreement and the rights of the parties hereunder shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware without regard to conflict of laws principles. 19.03 Except as herein otherwise specifically provided,this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their legal representatives,heirs, administrators, executors,successors and assigns. 19.04 Wherever from the context it appears appropriate, each term stated in either the singular or the plural shall include the singular and the plural, and pronouns stated in either the masculine, the feminine or the neuter gender shall include the masculine,feminine and neuter. As used in this Agreement,the terms"include","includes","including",and any other derivation of "include"mean"including,but not limited to"unless specifically set forth to the contrary. 19.05 Captions contained in this Agreement are inserted only as a matter of convenience and in no way define,limit or extend the scope or intent of this Agreement or any provision thereof. 19.06 If any provision of this Agreement,or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance,shall be held invalid,the remainder of this Agreement,or the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those to which it is held invalid, shall not be affected hereby. 19.07 All notices, demands, consents, requests, approvals, and other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been properly given if hand delivered, or if mailed (effective upon receipt or, if refused, upon the date of refusal) by United States registered or certified mail,with postage pre-paid,return receipt requested,or if sent by a nationally recognized private courier postage pre-paid,return receipt requested(effective upon receipt or, if refused,upon the date of refusal)to the Members at the following addresses(or such other address within the United States of America as shall be given in writing by any Member to the other Members in accordance with this Section 19.07): iStar Financial Inc. 1114 Avenue of the Americas New York,New York 10036 • Attention: Chief Legal Officer 19.08 This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original,but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. In addition,this Agreement may contain more than one counterpart of the signature page and this Agreement may be executed by the affixing of the counterpart signature page(s)containing the signatures of each of the 7 Members. All of such counterpart signature pages shall be read as though one,and they shall have the same force and effect as though all of the signers had signed a single signature page. 19.09 The Member is not obligated to deliver or mail to any Member a copy of the Company's Certificate of Formation or of any amendment thereto or restatement thereof. 19.10 Each Member revocably waives any sight to maintain an action of partition with respect to the Company's properties. 19.11 The Members will execute and deliver such further instruments and do such further acts and things as may be required to carry out the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Nothing contained herein,however,shall require any of the Members to make any material representations, warranties, or obligations except as specifically set forth herein or as clearly contemplated hereby. 8 IN WITNESS'WHEREOF,the undersigned has executed this Agreement as of the day first set forth above. MEMBER: iSTAR FINANCIAL INC., a Maryland co •oration By: . / A f /& Geoffrey I General 'tinsel, Corporate.and eeretaty 9 EXHIBIT A Member Contribution $100 Member EXHIBIT B. Name Title Jay S. Sugarman Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Jay S.Nydick President Nina B. Matis Chief Legal Officer&Chief Investment Officer James D.Bums Chief Financial Officer Barbara Rubin Executive Vice President Daniel S. Abrams Executive Vice President Steven R. Blomquist Executive Vice President Chase S. Curtis,Jr. Executive Vice President R.Michael Dorsch III Executive Vice President Barclay G. Jones III Executive Vice President Michelle M. Mackay Executive Vice President Vernon Schwartz Executive Vice President David DiStaso Chief Accounting Officer Geoffrey M.Dugan General Counsel, Corporate& Secretary Alec Nedelrnan General Counsel, Structured Finance Philip S.Burke Chief Information Officer Andrew G. Backman Senior Vice President Cathy S. Blankenship Senior Vice President William D. Burns,Jr. Senior Vice President Gregory F. Canna Senior Vice President Collin L. Cochrane Senior Vice President&Corporate Controller Samantha K. Garbus Senior Vice President Alidad Govahi Senior Vice President Bert Haboucha Senior Vice President William W.Hyatt Senior Vice President Erin Kerrigan Senior Vice President Joseph L. Kirk, Jr. Senior Vice President John F. Kubicko Senior Vice President Lesley Love Senior Vice President Steven Magee Senior Vice President C. Gregory Newman Senior Vice President Thomas Paella Senior Vice President Mary-Beth C. Roselle Senior Vice President,Associate General Counsel& Assistant Secretary David Sotolov Senior Vice President Stephen M. Spencer Senior Vice President Erich J. Stiger Senior Vice President Stephen Stinson Senior Vice President Nancy Sulse Senior Vice President Cynthia M. Tucker Senior Vice President Kelly K. Wachowicz Senior Vice President Nancy M.Zoeckler Senior Vice President Dan Allen Vice President Deborah Bacon Vice President Michael Baffin Vice President Matthew Ballinger Vice President Christopher Beach Vice President Elisha Bleckner Vice President Anthony Burns Vice President Julia Butler Vice President Mary Anne Carlin Vice President Carrie E.Crain Vice President Jeffrey Dewey Vice President Matthew Doerr Vice President Larsen.Fusco Vice President Sabrina Gleizer Vice President Elizabeth Glover Wilson Vice President Matthew Gouvion Vice President Douglas Heyman Vice President Gray Hughes Vice President Lloyd Huie Vice President Sylvia Jacques Vice President Jason Longo Vice President Sandy Maclean Vice President .-. Jay R. Mancl Vice President John Miller Vice President Thomas Moore Vice President Katie Morris Vice President Donna Musial Vice President Mark E.Paparella Vice President Scott Quigle Vice President Toni Anne Sanzone Vice President&Assistant Controller J. Paul Sharp Vice President Scott T. Smith Vice President William T. Stabinsky Vice President Troy Stephan Vice President Lizbeth Stokes Vice President Cheryl Tam Vice President Jennifer Tarlow Vice President Shawn Wardlow Vice President Tim Wegner Vice President Joseph F. Welch Vice President Detail by Entity NNante FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE e° ._DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS �_ �1, '-'-= 3 I_ Home Contact Us E-Filing Services Document Searches Forms Help I No Events No Name History II Entity Name Search ----------- Return to Search Results Search Detail by Entity Name Foreign Limited Liability Company SF!NAPLES RESERVE LLC Filing Information :rt:;:',(ri.'11,.'1., Document Number M09000002198 270294219 06/09/2009 DE ACTIVE FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State or Country Status Principal Address 1114 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS 39TH FLOOR C/O ISTAR FINANCIAL INC. NEW YORK, NY 10036 Mailing Address rt 3114 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS 39TH FLOOR ISTAR FINANCIAL INC. ist W YORK, NY 10036 rt: Registered Agent Name & Address C T CORPORATION SYSTEM 1200 SOUTH PINE ISLAND ROAD PLANTATION, FL 33324 Manager/Member Detail V. Li Name&Address Title MGRM Li (STAR FINANCIAL INC. 1114 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS 39TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10036 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date iv tit 2011 04/15/2011 2012 04/16/2012 2013 04/12/2013 Document Images 2/2013-ANNUAL -tr KEPORT gilii hit'://searchsunbcz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/Search...8-f6e431d1-9dDa-4775-9ee6-4c1cb019d737/sfi%20naples!Page1(1 of 2)5;6/2013 3:41:29 PM Detail by Entity Name U16/2012--ANNUAL - - EPORT 11111 1/15/2011--ANNUAL _ EPORT 1111 1/16/2010--ANNUAL - EPORT NEI 3/09/2009—Foreign Limited 4o Events No Name History I Entity Name Search I Search Zetum to Search Results Home I Contact us I Document Searches E-Filing Services I Forms t Help I r Copyright®and Privacy Policies State of Florida, Department of State http:llsearebsunbimorg/Inquiry/CorporationSearcb/Search...8-f6e431d1-9d0a-4775-9ee6.4c16019d787/sfi%2Onaples/Pagel(2 of 2)5/612013 3:41:29 PM INSTR 4471686 OR 4602 PG 273 RECORDED 9/3/2010 3:40 PM PAGES 2 DWIGHT E. BROCK, COLLIER COUNTY CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT DOC@.70 $35,000.00 REC $18.50 CONS $5,000,000.00 . • IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWEN UETH • JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA ISTAR FINANCIAL,INC.,a Maryland • corporation, Case No.: 09-1977-CA Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION v. . NAPLES RESERVE,LLC,a Florida limited liability company; and RWA,INC.,a Florida .a corporation, Pi Defendants. 8 T , r-: • /c4çfifieaofT le \ U � >, o � may:The undersigned Clerk of thca er i •es}tlta j e -c d an filed a C t fica of .e in ik s — th r in C lli r ty,Florid descrrr$ed a.follows: action on ■ G •S1 _ .0 i �� . ...-Fp y �PARCEL NO. 1: All of ,4 ion 1,Township h, e 26 East,Collier County, Florida. �"' _ }' 1 PARCEL NO. 1A--EASE 1+ 'T r • (-Jeasement described in Roadway Easement and Maintenance Agreeme t-r- fili% ©.R•Book 2495,Page 1430,as amended in O.R.Book 2525,Page 300,O.R.Book 2773,Page 2118 and O.R.Book 2842,Page 565, all of the Public Records of Collier County,Florida,further described as the West 110 feet of Section 12,Township 51 South,Range 26 East lying North of U.S.Highway 41,Collier County,Florida. and no objectionto the sale having been filed within the time allowed for filing objections,the property was • sold to ' I. Nn t ` K = i ►- ; • ': ' ' c-f o CMG.tU_ ,Vet t,fi$()NAQ.uAsiiP.R., 35.50Tflnr)far iTRr'liLEis7 NfYP Lei W.-6110A34113-y90 . WITNESS my hand and the seal of this court on,,ZSgiiaLA-r)f,.t�- 3�" _ ,2010. • • DWIGHT E.BROCK' . '•• Clerk of the Circuit.Court • By:e, : ,. f - J�: ,• Deputy Clerk:.� ! 'C " _ '� (Court Seal) : , . ` .' . p`�:: ...F,.. •• - Law Offices of Cardillo,Keith&Bonaquist, P.A. 3550 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112-4905 (239)774-2229 - _ ** OR 4602 PG 274 *** • • • • CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE . ' I CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Certificate of Title has been furnished by • United States Mail on S. S ,.,- 1 ,2010,to each of the following:'"Edward K.Cheffy,Esq.,Cheffy Passidomo,F.A.,821 Fifth Avenue South,Suite 201,Naples,Florida 34102-6621,1 hn D.Kehoe,Esq., _ Cheffy Passidomo,P.A., 821 Fifth.Avenue South, Suite 201,Naples,Florida 34102-6621,'rerdinand J. Gallo, Esq., Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, 575 Madison Avenue, New York,NY 10022,4tewart T.. Kusper,Esq.,Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, 525 W.Monroe Street, Chicago,IL 60661, and'James A. Bonaquist,Jr.,Esq.,Cardillo,Keith&Bonaquist,P.A.,3550 East Tamiami Trail,Naples,'FL 34112:. DWIGHT E.BROCK , Clerk of the Circuit Court • •, • . - . a e I -:'r' ' :, C 08000B/drg / � � - sa po9a j . .. r-- Mt: P....:‘\*, — } \. - ,,_E.-4 - ,...--. • • . 2 Law Offices of Cardillo,Keith&Bonaquist,P.A. 3550 East Tamiami Trail,Naples,FL 34112-4905 (2.39)774-2229 • TABLE OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A—Naples Reserve GMPA—Proposed Amendment Language,Narrative and Justification Exhibit A-1 —TDR Analysis URF/RFMUD One Mile Area Exhibit B—Collier County Future Land Use Element RFMUD/Urban Residential Fringe Area Exhibit C—URF—RFMUD Boundary Exhibit D—Aerial of Collier County Future Land Use Element RFMUD/Urban Residential Fringe Area EXHIBIT A Naples Reserve GMPA Proposed Amendment Language, Narrative and Justification (Underlined/Stfikethr-etigli Format) Page 29 of the Future Land Use Element 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict: The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide transitional densities between the Urban Designated Area and the Agricultural/Rural Area and comprises approximately 5,500 acres and 5% of the Urban Mixed Use District. Residential land uses may be allowed at a maximum base density of 1.5 units per gross acre, plus any density bonus that may be achieved via CCME Policy 6.2.5 (6) b.1., and either"a"or"b"below: a. Up to 1.0 unit per gross acre via the transfer of up to one (1.0) dwelling unit (transferable development right) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands, except in the case of properties that straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations, and meet the other Density Blending criteria provided for in subsection 5.2 of the Density Rating System, which may achieve an additional maximum density of up to 1.3 units per gross acre for all lands designated as Urban Residential Fringe via the transfer of --� up to 1.3 dwelling units (transferable development rights) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands. The Urban Residential Fringe portion of the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development located in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, shall not be subject to the one mile limitation set forth above and may utilize TDRs from any lands designated Sending within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District to achieve up to the maximum allowable density; or, Page 49 of the Future Land use Element B. DENSITY RATING SYSTEM: This Density Rating System is only applicable to areas designated on the Future Land Use Map as: Urban, Urban Mixed Use District; and, on a very limited basis, Agricultural/Rural. It is not applicable to the Urban areas encompassed by the Immokalee Area Master Plan, and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; these two Elements have their own density provisions. The Density Rating System is applicable to that portion of the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the extent that the residential density cap of 4 dwelling units per acre is not exceeded, except for the density bonus provisions for Affordable Housing and Transfer of Development Rights, and except as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. The final determination of H:\2012\2012103\WP\GMPA\RJM\GMP Amendments 07-03-2013.doc Exhibit A permitted density via implementation of this Density Rating System is made by the Board of County Commissioners through an advertised public hearing process (rezone or Stewardship Receiving Area designation). 2. Density Bonuses Consistency with the following characteristics may add to the base density. Density bonuses are discretionary, not entitlements, and are dependent upon meeting the criteria for each bonus provision and compatibility with surrounding properties, as well as the rezone criteria in the Land Development Code. f. Transfer of Development Rights Bonus To encourage preservation/conservation of natural resources, density transfers are permitted as follows: (a) From Urban designated areas into that portion of the Urban designated area subject to this Density Rating System, in accordance with the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) provision contained in Section 2.03.07 of the Land Development Code, adopted by Ordinance No. #04- 41, as amended, on June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004. For projects utilizing this TDR process, density may be increased above and beyond the density otherwise allowed by the Density Rating System. (b) From Sending Lands in conjunction with qualified infill development. (c) From Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe, at a maximum density increase of one unit per gross acre, except for properties that straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations, and meet the other Density Blending criteria provided for in subsection 5.2 of the Density Rating System, which may transfer TDRs from Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe, at a maximum density increase of 1.3 units per gross acre. The Urban Residential Fringe portion of the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development located in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, shall not be subject to the one mile limitation set forth above and may utilize TDRs from any lands designated Sending within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District to achieve up to the maximum allowable density increase. In no case shall density be transferred into the Coastal High Hazard Area from outside the Coastal High Hazard Area. ****************************************************************************** H:\2012\2012103\WP\GMPA\R.1M\GMP Amendments 07-03-2013.doc Exhibit A Narrative and Justification: The Urban Residential Fringe is a sub-district located at the boundary of the County's coastal urban area. It is one-mile wide and stretches from Davis Blvd. in the north to US 41 at its southern terminus. The maximum allowable density within the URF sub-district is 1.5 units per acre. This density may be increased to 2.5 units per acres (or 2.8 units per acres for properties that straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations, and meet the other Density Blending criteria provided for in subsection 5.2 of the Density Rating System) through the use of Transferable Development Rights (TDRs) from "qualified" Sending lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. The term qualified, in this context, means that such TDRs must come from Sending lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary. During the development and adoption process for the RFMUD, an argument was made that the Sending lands closest to the Urban Boundary had greater future potential to be converted to urban lands and developed at urban density, since these lands are adjacent or proximate to the existing coastal urban area, and adjacent or proximate to the County's adopted sewer and water district boundary , and could easily be served by, or have access to, nearby existing services and facilities including law enforcement and emergency services, parks and recreations, solid waste collection, and so forth. The argument followed, therefore, that TDRs derived from these lands should be of higher value or should yield more TDRs than Sending lands further east (more remote). It was argued that this higher variable TDR rate was necessary in order to fairly compensate the owners of these lands for loss of that value which occurred when such lands were changed to Sending, and such loss of value was greater on these lands than other lands farther away from the urban area. .� Although there was no support for a variable (higher) TDR rate for these lands, the requirement that TDRs to be used in the URF come from these "closer in" Sending lands within one mile of the Urban Boundary was enacted. It was assumed that there would likely be greater demand for TDRs in the URF first (before the more remote RFMUD Receiving designated lands) and that such greater demand coupled with the restriction to obtain TDRs from these "close in" Sending lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary would yield faster utilization of those TDRS at a higher market value (an assumption based upon the theory of supply and demand). Several factors interfered with this desired outcome. One was the established minimum TDR cost of $25,000.00 which took free market arms length negotiation out of play. Another thing that affected TDR movement was the deep recession which resulted in significantly reduced property values and significantly lower demand for new development. As demand dropped so too did the activity related to TDR severance and transfers. Over time, as free market forces rebounded, investments in new development began to reappear. One such new development of significant size and located both in the URF and the RFMU Sending area (particularly the Sending area within one mile of the Urban Boundary) was the Hacienda Lakes DRI/PUD. This project controlled and utilized a number of TDRs from within the one mile Sending area to entitle residential development within the 2262.14 acre DRI/PUD (transferring such development rights from a portion of the +/- 1637.07 acres of RFMUD H:\2012\2012103\WP\GMPA\RJM\GMP Amendments 07-03-2013.doc Exhibit A Sending lands into 625.07 acre URF portion of the project). However,not all of the "qualified" TDRs and none of the "unqualified"were utilized to entitle the DRI/PUD. These left over TDRs are a commodity under control of the original Hacienda Lakes property owner, Wilton Land Company, LLC, who is a co-applicant for this petition. In order to develop the Naples Reserve RPUD at its maximum allowable density, the developer must acquire 406 TDRs from Sending lands. Finding this number of TDRs from "qualified" Sending lands (within one mile of the Urban Boundary) at a price that makes economic sense has proved to be very difficult as there are limited willing sellers and many landowners owning smaller parcels, requiring difficult if not impossible aggregation of many of these smaller parcels to get the necessary TDRs. Conversely, the Wilton Land Company, LLC controls sufficient TDRs to allow the Naples Reserve developer to acquire the necessary 406 TDRS for that PUD in a single and relatively simple transaction. These two entities have entered into an agreement wherein the developer of the Naples Reserve RPUD, will acquire the 406 TDRs. This requires an amendment to the GMP to exclude the Naples Reserve PUD from the requirement that TDRs to increase density in the URF portion of the PUD come from Sending Lands within one mile of the Urban Boundary. Since this is a site specific GMPA, it will not apply to any other URF lands which propose to utilize TDRs to increase density. The justification for approving this GMPA is as follows" 1. The one mile area from which TDRs must be acquired to increase density in the URF was arbitrarily created based upon a belief that such lands have a higher value due to their proximity to the Urban Area. No empirical study or analysis was conducted to demonstrate that lands within one mile were of any higher appraised or projected value than lands located 1.1 or 1.2 or 1.5 mile from the Urban Boundary. It may seem obvious that more remote far eastern Sending lands are less desirable from a development perspective, but this in fact may not be the case for lands located just outside and to the east of the one mile Sending corridor. 2. There are fewer large parcels left in the one mile corridor and thus acquiring TDRs is more difficult and more expensive as it requires significant aggregation of numerous smaller parcels. As the market demand grows and fewer TDRs are available overall, the demand to acquire TDRs from smaller disparate parcels may become more viable but at present, transferring a significant number of TDRs from larger tracts with higher ecological value, as is the case with the Hacienda Lakes Sending lands, makes sense and furthers the Key objectives of the RFMUD TDR Program which is stated in the GMP as follows: The primary purpose of the TDR process within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District is to establish an equitable method of protecting and conserving the most valuable environmental lands, including large connected wetland systems and significant areas of habitat for listed species, while allowing property owners of such lands to recoup lost value and development potential through an economically viable process of transferring such rights to other more suitable lands. This petition simply furthers that primary purpose. H:\2012\2012103\WP\GMPATMGMP Amendments 07-03-2013.doc Exhibit A D D m -0 -I N -1 T v) G) = n = 7o z 5 u A w a) no N v cD n n (D 'i 0 cD 0 O w o v O a) 0 a) D LA (11 D X 3 a = c ' 3 -, O. 3 .+ -1 O 0 - n n -. 3 - m o - 0.) v, vvi ry c`D cn fl- D—' 0- -1 3 m' r�-o 0- °' n -s = `o v CD CD CD °<' m cD 7 3 ,+ D on vii -, a, 1 0 72 o- ao x) o. N .A v p o v O C 4q ,.= C ,q D '* > ter. CD N < -1 -1 C w a C _ >v i3• a! CDD � , 3 O* vt 'v 3' v * rD C 70 7J F.,' O vv∎ cD �• —n m A cD ._I DO * ai rD _ .< 4 co a_ iv O V1 0 .{ N rt - * * N N a) , n C cD D cD OO ,=r Q * C 3 crs to cvo c � . CD _ �' D v 5. Q.) v co co Ht „ v) rt C rr -I i7, f7 VI UO et C v 0 v, �* 0 V (D (D Q- a) v < a-) .-i � C `° co. 3 In * ro v) C a.w c Q O N O fD .•r 0 * O n O < (D ;-r. .' -I C ° 3 * CD a rD fD a V 3' v C O cn n C O C W 3 7:2 -n 'T�j C o v, .a Or) v H _ -{ or 0 0p 3 = n 3 cD 0• 01. (D (D r. o v, c o —h rD t9 a) .-t 0 C V1 �: (�D * * * * * m a) .� O * * * * c o_ N -I * * * v Q o CD ,- D - ^ < . N r• a n * p v, C Q O rD O M a! -. rD n P.) CDD u 6 -.o v ET a c Cn Q ? w �, D Q fD •G. CCD D=a < = Q T CD 3 0.1 N w W NJ (D LLD 0 0 NJ OJl N CD r+ Q v co DO W N N u, to u, to o, Do CD - n D W N O t, O ❑ • (n r, ..-..O Cr) N D -o CCD ,-r NJ W I-, F- N O. , W W 3� a) O' F, N 0 V 00 U1 H N -o K E tD n N cm co NJ 0 t0 H C v D < D -, c CD 0 00 Co W o W rn O c. o Q 7, -' •< 00 CD V v 10 O t0 O C a 0 v Q a- < rn C rn a• - C o o C rt - a) n. c u o 7 N < p cp O O 0 O 3 2 O_ rD r* 73 0o w fl - s m o VI 7 v a) 0 a) C VI V lfl 00 W tJ1 P P P F� W F� I-� O fD n r 0 (�i n O 0 C N o cD a/ N O o Oo 0 o t0 . . v, C rt O n m v C . 0 0 0 0 \ \ \ \ \ o \ \ o s? C CD N Ul (D CO v, O T O' y •tr■ in f)). rt C N Q Q- -TI CD C (D ao o -. v, a) * ^ C cu --I -I ED-CD C < (QD 0 = C n z) 0 oq c_'* (o G 0 N D X O O a) in C - N' y o c rn to n 3- v -n C rD C N CD cD O O_ N' O O 3 v ter N• cii) 3 O. I^ 011 .+ 71 f0 C CO cD CD < al 3 C C tD �; < `-.. v, CD 6 .. co -I N m •* 00 w N rn - < 'o D 3 O C -I N c * t0 N cD O. A N N NJ N N W N• 0 F a O o o cT 3 a ^ v V 3- >v t0 F-1 co O W O O O O VI O N W d cD LO 3 N Po -I cD co 6 O rn D 0 O. bo W u, Ll1 O to rn N C 0 0 ( _ O 0 L O , < m DO co n� N in ...,J V V 3 J O -Ln CO -I r O� 0 3 Ohm = co O as 'S r1 -' -I 70 ,-, o Di 0 2. c O 0 (o 3 c 3 0' C a) 0- Q o) v, n C D) q < 2, 3 v O C ,< a) 0- (D o0 rD a) rD Ti; co cD — (cu cn MI o fD O C � 7 rt -. -17 �r. O C O_ rD v C - ° 3 C MI • N rro = 7 0 (ND CD to T n r+ r* n 0 rt \ O O' r •< a<) -. C O0 O. > O _ Q y 3 70 'O n O N •a 3 C D/ T O O O_ N O a) fl_ 0 00 a T Z •< E fD v, Dl -, = H•O 0 v-, S H. O h� D 3 W lD 00 ° 3 H v a3i O C rD :D C• vCi W cD CO .p, N N N F.� N W Fes- 3 0- rr 3 r O O I' N O W �, In O W O O O O N O F� (, ( 0 `^ ro O I--, C J I-' U, in rn N -i 3 C N 'O O 0 > -p V Z 3 W W Ol (J1 v v fD v, -o N - CCD -' C V e°-F O. lD 3 3 C a) a) u, C y N H n v, fD — a� CD a D a) < 3 fD rD a i Di rD C u0 D -0 " m a) n m C fD 0 ta 0 U.) CD at 0- n. — (D o n 3 -< v n (D 3• c Q Al n in r) rr in C c - )v ~' -, -a <• Q a a) CO o a FE"; ''t 0 n _ O.. o ° 3 CU m 0 O C 0_ Z M. 0 3 0 '± Q S • = vi Vf FN•► •0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 cD CD a, cD c 0 < O O 1_, I-, 'G at a0 V ° c r. O 3 (7D O 0 C CD O• O. rD (D O r*. O. n 3 0 rt a N. ''t o0 '+ cD C -1 D n v 0 < C n v,' 7 C C v C o ° a < (D N oo , ID 3 -I (D 0 (n CDD v 3 co a v) Vf a -< ,,, co -i s to < 0 N m v -r=. C VI V O. F-> 1 0 H:\2012\2012103\0W\E%HIBITS\TSR Belle Meade Evhibit_2013-02-11dwg Tab: Belle Meade Feb 11,2013—11:07am Plotted by. JonSmith EXHIBIT 'B' COLLIER COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT • RFMUD / URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE AREA IIIIIIUIIiIIIiIIlI Ii IIIIIIIIIr111I1..Iiiu II.,III;.,, iiiAb.ii i, 111 hi i1 61 11EI iii4i iii4ia�i iii i IIIIIII''■81i liiii 1111iiliglill� 'R III119ii!lJiiiiii atilii®--- ®: v = _- v... Illliilil1111H,i1iillIIIIIIII Ifli;lli='sa-111191II11"II1I111!I1II1' " — _ -=4��„t• ►• th.. • ii 1111•111111111111;11111M i1'MPE111111•l 11111111131111111111lli_:M== rr — __ ' Akk,-. ,'►�i 11!Iiill1111II1i1111111111111111111f IIII.IIpIIIIIIIIIII'I111111t' ---�'=_ e — ” - !;!�!.!�!►!6;M;MQ �E' "'' ' E il�lill8i;11RITIii HI== ®= r4..r ilLi x :itt : : il:li lllllll lVllll;Illlllllu;ilhllflllll�l—III I�s, lil ®____1": -it i lllllirli!I,i i�lilitiffilli miillllllll!IIINIIIIIIi"iflllll . ---��1 omar #iilllilmIilIIIIrIII�JIIIIII. .II1i�VIII I,I I1i:.111" rim •.w..111.N1111GlI =`. i Milk 11 �I F . "7i11911Ii19Il"il...'r■■■■■■�■�II�' 1�111�� 1 7 l -- t♦,.t t.�,ttl►.. 1=:ice �= rte , I I�r� *---111.-'.j t r / .:►_►►�.•.... r �1 .._. -- -r- �;IIIIti�il€• � ' Cs!: .b r44�►1:44:14.,,..%.=,..i��°∎ �`' '—.�i, ■r._ i�� 111111111131111 :::1:::.11:;:;;::::: y i 1, ■�� - �� _ .� ��%��.. ;s,- __ --r-�-� 1111•1111114` :1:x.:.:,,1:11r ,44� ,j•== _ - _ �.. � ' �- �' _ ...,..-t,; 1 ;I f ��.... .;•.•.:. � -.:.� I __ --■■ �■rr.� 111IIIII!�i IIII.�a � i� err - ..... 11� ., ■Ill 1r71i ii1 rl� TT -1' .I' _ �...�. filllllllli!Iill " ` i r ilium 111�11111� III ` ■ .. ..... _ nH- IIIllllii#i F� ✓�` 1 ��1111111111111�11� 1/11111111 M'A 1��IIIi�n i M_11111111111111111111i:'11111J �t � = • �� 11111111111111111 1 ! 1 It111111■1.1111r111 1 � . .. 1111111 lilt ! i• �i .111111111111:11 �� . � � �_ � . .. unlit T� ,.,,.s F ... . :sl zv Y 3= t N• 11111111111111 11 w _ . •"� 11111111111111 .-1.It11i11...r+.ar..11.rrl■r■.►.rl.: 11111 Ili'.- IIIPIIHI1I1III 11�� 1111\ 1 �� 1�.'r" 11� 111111111111111 _ _ _Fill[14 , I��l`1g m� .�■'. 1 dili �� I�••�r ^�,_ e 1 , — _- �. �� 1 I'�'�r►,�,- ,� ,I..47-, .--- ,,•11, . �,� a �' ,` :,- �._ w i2% j�tia I► itY; A .W L.Aia,, .a1;.Lilr :r - 111 IIIIIIIIIIIMIP I;%//: i '� �� 1�� I I :1 .. ;■oli rillilirM,Tr' ne M,- A_- � utL.� �I'1'rI' 111111.. 1r ... . ,:.... j. - r4i.11 _11111 ,�,. _ �,� . , .�„. - �. 11 ' ,..I;1-%%/� _ � X1111111.11 11191 Rii�� 1.'-=41/% ° c'��.-r L'�-r •— ■ . I 111:11.711/%11.71151.1-7;� ;i % d .6 . WINN B ... .�` �� 1�1!I'► W 191lN r . I 1� 1 1 �i « .r s I`r 1 ''Y-. ■ II I �"'" rrrr i-� `/ wry i 11111 .111111111116110a I iri& . s-Nt. . t.- 7 Ti 4 1.4c•-v r . ......._ � sa ax t�4 �, 4, � '�_� ; �, AGRICULTURAL I RURAL � .�i�lglll►uli►�, �� ».�a U ,�b* A DESIGNATION III •• ,w ; u I��... -_ _ - - ® NEUTRAL LANDS ,I. --1 . . ��\� . .Lip',r•1 o I:- ;''�1 ,� ` ~w+ - RECEIVING LANDS 1 �` 1 SENDING LANDS 1 ��I,_�-„ ,.`� �� - INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT �-l_-- "_ 't 1 4w T - -- = URBAN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT .ak1 , , .fir , r , 1.2 _ - � URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE 1,=1■ 1�� `fit; !,■ -,1 _ _ _ URBAN COASTAL FRINGE wI �0.�..�•I r• ,C 1 i `r 11 1`11 n CONSERVATION LANDS t.. Ir,�� 1 ,� �44�* URBAN BOUNDARY ._ / . •4404. I 44♦44••kihhAltlil:TIAIIILrr 1--U-44.:" ---•V411prair_AllP401:441rair ..• , N frg;01, , ,. r f 41 �• 'A 4�4t ,- .•• ifs' ► , i4 : � i ► 4.'41-i � i6. �r , � 4 Il� / _ 11i � 4 iii . 44444.44444r4 .4 p4,404,0�..•.� ��: �� ♦444♦4444�� s♦ , „V..4♦ 'M ' < t,' �� X44 44•4 444�-� •aka**i :,;-AA1.4■r.% _ __ _ 2400 0 2400 4800 1111111111 '. .7 a ..4 `V SCALE IN FEET C 0 0 H.\2012\2012103\OW\EXHIBITS\TSR Exhibit_20t3-02-11.dvg Tab: 1200xp Feb vn 11,2013- 11.13 Plotted by. on JSoIth EXHIBIT 'C' � ,41� �� -, RFMUD E E BAND I ,rr _ - 11111 URF - RFMUD BOUNDARY � i`►n!�•,. � TOPUPD A 11111111111111 1 � I1Ifl!1IIVI ��`x��111111 I+� = ; _ ruIII nna �-� ,`�� EAST TOLL PLAZA • _ ar 1 fir-_ `1 R.V.RESORT C11,71,..41,InD1:4!1� ■ 6 ■.1=ih-0N!/ PPM r .�i� 3.. 3 lINID111�111D1 _ � ..._ _ '�H''5 Ip♦X1111111111111111111111 1P� \��'T'''�1: Y 0 I ♦ �1,`,111::lii1111,,,,,,1111,,,,,,,� V `` 2 : 4..ii % - _--- -„ ��7�1111 . e _ ,`/11.1 _ ip: g r _ 1�Fi ' II 7 tit: 7 ,_•. Vii♦ �i►,�P�� Ik �� !!!/mm11 hit 't \ _ Q.Ip- N OF 111 1 �� r'!!!� -- I till. -_ , ~ ^'=� •� 11 �� /JI/!/. f 1 --___Sit___. rimoommovaill ;1,.. :7 il Ililf-i%/pi iii �1, ''''. ill I 1 ; _ x,11 ►..•,L./ Li , -- '1'" ti t 6 � ll ■■■■■ A - lollui 1 gym/ � :�,,:'�., 111112111 c Deus ll/A//r/ 1/ 4 ��_ am ens 0�+tt111 �uupi//iiuinn:/ __—■■■■■■■■ Palk : 1em�J '/,;; , ==-....—..■ _.-._ �- I ��IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII=�, �`+ —� SAN M RIND _■■■— �_ r _!/r•I■�_�_— �-, ._ — __ ) / %!AirAl/`!!■■■■■■■__ ■ME cam!!1!!! ■�■■ON■ lijij.:� UR Al BOUNDARY L.rlii!/,/r:...■L,r.. ___. + ir!!l i!!■■■� r∎!!// 3P.4■■__.-- C■�1■ice �� .. I!!/ '.ice■��►J// _ --- Ct1■'■■ �'-�" ili�rrwi■■■rlP„ ,(,)7,.....jiiiiii isiormimm 11.4,..r.111.1111E1.111111111 -dt ;# L rr� 11 rte!/�!!/■■ „Ir ■ + 0��M8 8 8 I/t/inu 41 ziwiIrt3 118�.�:W�E 14: 1��1 11III RURAL FRINGE 1$ 11■■ 111111111♦1 ',,I�g11I111111111111111I1t1 - .” M.U.D. !VENDING our . i11iiii1■1111 : . ;., •. - MPU1 '�!' wx 1 MILE BAND i i FIRST A - m „s. 11/ ■ • IIL, INI' RTES LT r iIII! 'L Ir!% _. I� I ,,� ��rR , • -IIIIImIII� 0001 N-i /A --"H!!�!!! `*. : 1 CE _ i ..:.!.! � II::e' VIII!:■ 1:'''`i:/;;4 _ �►4 —!!!« 1 el .I 13 8 � . I m1.0•vA IIIIIIIIIIIIM ' — ,�u+cenTK'^ MPUD 14 ``«;`,�F/!!!!! 18 rrr� V MaMULLEN 9•Irill/ /V)■s T4,t) : Eunuunll 1111 - — ,:• IIIIIIIIIIII1._: I-.�. or,�- A � r��IS��!/q�-. , 19 Air. -..,......-1::: _ ��■i r ® rr 19 --1'''' Nip_ /!!�/!! , .., ,, m. 1 /!!/%./ - ',' -.0 •L•2 •: ilIJI/iir rrrr�.ril/.1 ��C .• , �!1.ll,,,m �� PUD INI %!!/�!!/I!! _ uVll. pipi _11,as COLLIER REGIONAL - MEDICAL CENTER �'��/2/ ! I� ri`. :: .00' 44 bk-;O' .- .PUD 1 i I ■♦ A% /!!/. TDR-URF AREAS . ♦• ♦ 4+ •1 �� ---1 rarrrr URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE , r ' ,- ■■■��1�lil�y ff JjIh,, 4j# )1 1 1 11♦.■■9/r./!!ld4ll ►� - /,'` 19 DESCRIPTION AREA(AC/ 4 EXISTING PUD'S ::t !: 78% � \�` �1/,: �+ y/�� 26 rl�!!!!�, -------,70 *- 1 NON PUD AREAS 20% t t .` IIIiI!♦�/ ♦ 1111011lll'IIIIIMtwilp, ryp/I 4 LL 2°A `1\,`1,`1`1�J •,►i I'lilt,r.4• 111111 p�"'o' 1p11U / qjy r �'!!!!!!!!" _Illle� 1\I�,p\\1111111111111 VIII VIII/l///qfj Hq '!!!'`1p'�`1,1 ��L //j I.100% \x"11 '1� I• ♦♦ IfII6W\\ \� ,\p1\11IIIIIII IRI//1/, ip/j///� " !. I1fr • ♦I. ♦ N� �i ,` glllllBlll ellrU /ip/ 40�'//� - ♦. r • Iropl � 1S(°OIIIIf ,;,,, ''Al: 1l1�!!/!� TDR AREA WITHIN 1 MILE OF U.R.F. 1 ♦♦Q 16 ; HU+ S'• 4*1°°II 1 ♦it,,‘ c ��ItlIUg► 910p10„pIJ D isle.� }; �1�111:1111` ! ! !!/' 1111111.11/1111111111Mil DESCRIPTION AREA IAC.1 PCT.{%j ,� �� 11111.110 X11111111111111111111111111 �� •■ J, :•, `,. 111111111 moil �` SENDING NOT SEVERED 1,311.77 45% )� ;( O� \ _3 cR11\9\N1\111113HIIOIIpfll/11111 !!!!� `1r r`�yy ®/ SENDING SEVERED 1,599.90 68% (, -_ I lIpH01tI111111111U110tllll ...∎. ! !!/��!!� r �� TOR TOTAL(WITHIN I MILE) 2,911.87 100% % 11\@8118111111111111111 /F'!ll��yyy1.. ii./++�!!�!!�'�!!! /,�/ /! �! /A�;, . £,I81111M1111111110111 �!!!lLl if!.►!!! !!.r!!� .■■.. ....r'�. Area.o/Public,Neutral d Receiving Lend.are Net Included I I,CIA. 1,\\ I \IIIMIII 1111 �,'!r! / l !!!�'!/� ! ■■ � '! 1: \O 4:1 \,:111111111 -"'��`-, 41j ,••► -4%„ 1..11■ r,/•d/p �1r` I /!!!!!IV`!!!!!!!!t/!!!!!`�■ "�U■i!!/ r CALCULATIONS WERE MADE USING VARIOUB COLLIER TDRM 90TN MP ED U0 ) .. -r\..1 i- ,.:',11111/ /// / \1COLLIER COUTYZOOMPS 'Igg■a...Z ►♦� /111/1"/I /ll�I ///////// \\``, ..��P. RP .a . _ ♦ , ( I�I \, //f/I/ IIIL .4:. .a r,«.sM..s�.t• g x �!!!!!ll�� a n4,w: : ' : ,,,, ',- °r.kis ;1_,,," % /lnu 35 36, In/n/ . !!!!!!!f LEGEND ;S .: „/ !/!!!!!!/ TOR PENDING ?, IF, P• ' • !P. Il!!!!!�F7' TDR SEVERED �q ♦•i 4►•� i /411flllillul• 1, <!!!!!!� ' rj NIID1110ed n TDR NOT SEVERED ni 1'e e 1 '�P„�� -- IRIIP""°1` PUD _.. /!!V�!!!!�j''', IBI, I•e`�• ■ •4•�.44. °110,e111111�xJ WINDING CYPRESS s �!!!!!!!'3 NATURAL RESOURCE '�' ,Q1- •t 4 "411 tolmnnD°`� A r :�!!!l�l.� °'� .g�i+►O enlnmlm # ��Il.�!!. PROTECTION AREA ;44 4*' ._7��/��t -l�� . RURAL FRINGE MU DISTRICT ' ;A �!!//P!!!!!!/! -- 0 . a 7rlililrr!!!!i PUBLIC LANDS � it <!!I!!!!!! tt (NOT ELIGIBLE FOR TDR) 111* �!!!!!!!!!! y�ji RF-NEUTRAL `�!! !!!!!!/ !L!!!!!!! RF-RECEIVING ,I!!!!!!!! t:�!!!!!!!/r n RF-SENDING i 34 35 35 '36 36 /!!/!! �'` 31 32 EXISTING P.U.D. 4IPI .44r 3 2 r,/4/�/!NON P.U.D. LANDS �� ' 2 1 1 6 (OUTSIDE TDR AREA) 'tI r , , 6 5 _� �� RFMUD SENDING ;1`�!f` �.� ��\ ! 1 MILE URF 1 MI,I.E BAND�__._ qi L ■r_ PUD ,..: ` II , r .,, lr� iiiiiiiiior,‘,..4......::::,-.,,,-.:: : r----11 1200 0 1200 2400 �) I� /i1:RRUHnn9R: ` 1 6 uam91111im., /f////laluilii i/ %')- SCALE IN FEET r'♦”Iplo,��aea :��III ///b1:11 11 �1} > $3 a ".,- y _. I 22 SCALE: 1.•• 1200' [ ° - B T nr ulnly -..._.._- 7 8 � � IC_ ' I�IP IIIWWllil E H:\2012\2012103\OV/\E%HIRITS\TSR_Aeriol.dwg fob: AERIAL Feb 19.2013—10:58om Plotted by JonSmith EXHIBIT 'D' AERIAL OF COLLIER COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT X • • ��",} RFMUD / ,U Rm B'-m AN b k RESIDENTIAL FRINGE AREA k•e ,t m Aa y '04' :3 a -t-'7!'-'7,"'7.-.4' te ya`T -`. s 5 .$T r "7 1 Lg y t , - , a Ili AL fi g • .. e r mss t '' m' `` u • .., pw , wi ,,,T „.i''',' r FF, , r. w _ \cv..' r : •1s PUD V•V, .; 1 O E i1 c L E v t r ttfs LF5 t'':: . € , .; w_ s t. V_ PI 11) 3 rte "t !It ■ f x` . -„ • w e •tt 1,. MPUD. HACIENDA LAKES ■ :,::it:,'..,,,:.' q F 10OICA413141 w r`.. ID k $, I , { N. .of `'"°' . < $f 1 p - {,,`. P U D NAPLES RESERVE Cot...FCL.UB.- . �xU�_„---:.-,• rx put) fgtctVrvin �,, T , e , PIJC) 3 u 11 ..tom„ g `. y•{ t .. .,RF. F 1 $ 1 if , t'..a' A V y p 2400 0 2400 4800 1 t k SCALE IN FEET .,,. , .' SCALE : 1'e 2400' t41.1.6 NOME 2.311.14.1 P120130000139/CP-2013-1 CCPC STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 9.A. Co e-r Covi�-l.ty STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/PLANNING AND REGULATION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 19, 2013 RE: PETITION CP-2013-1 / PL-2013-0000139, Growth Management Plan Amendment (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) APPLICANTS/OWNERS/AGENTS: iStar Development Company Wilton Land Company, LLC Donald E. Mears, Jr., Vice President David Torres, President 3232 West Lake Mary Boulevard, Suite 1410 3921 Prospect Avenue, Lake Mary, Florida 32746 Naples, Florida 34104 SFI Naples Reserve, LLC do iStar Financial, Inc. 1114 Avenue of the Americas, 39th Floor New York, New York 10036 Robert j. Mulhere, FAICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Hole Montes, Inc. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 950 Encore Way 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34110 Naples, Florida 34103 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element introduce text-based exceptions from certain Transfer of Development Rights limitations, but are not site specific. However, text amendments relate to two identifiable geographic areas of origin and destination: those Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands located beyond one (1) mile from the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF), and; that portion of the URF located in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East - commonly known as the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development (PUD). This PUD is located approximately 1% miles east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), and approximately 1/2 mile north of US 41 East, north of the Reflection Lakes development (Walnut Lakes PUD). REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) text of the Growth Management Plan to introduce specific exceptions from Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program limitations, affecting the transfer of TDR credits among properties in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) and the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Subdistrict. - 1 - CP-2013-1/PL20130000139 2013-1, iStar Development: allowing TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Agenda Item 9.A. Presently, properties located within the URF may only receive TDR credits from the RFMUD Sending Lands located within 1 mile of the URF boundary. Stated differently, TDR credits may be transferred from any RFMUD Sending Lands to any RFMUD Receiving Lands and Urban area receiving lands except that TDR credits from Sending Lands beyond 1 mile of the URF boundary cannot be transferred into the URF. This amendment would allow the transfer of TDR credits originating more distant than one (1) mile from the URF boundary for use in [the URF portion of] the Naples Reserve PUD. Adoption of these amendments would grant new rights to the co-applicant's property to utilize TDRs from distant RFMUD Sending Lands. (CP-2013-1 Resolution Exhibit A reflects the petitioner's proposed text changes) SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Note: For purposes unique to this application, there are two geographic areas - those RFMUD Sending Lands located beyond one mile from the Urban Residential Fringe (URF), with origination TDRs, and the Naples Reserve Residential PUD, the TDR destination. Subject [TDR origination] RFMUD Sending Lands: The subject Sending Lands area is zoned A-RFMUO, Sending Lands (Rural Agricultural District, Rural Fringe Mixed Use - Sending Lands Overlay) and some portions contain one or more of the MHO, Mobile Home Overlay, NBMO, North Belle Meade Overlay, and NRPA, Natural Resources Protection Area Overlay; and, the area is designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands (and some portions are within one or more of the North Belle Meade Overlay and the Natural Resource Protection Area Overlay on the Future Land Use Map. These lands are largely undeveloped. Residential density is permitted at 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres or legal non- conforming lot/parcel of record. Permitted non-residential uses are limited to: agricultural uses, consistent with the Florida Right to Farm Act; habitat preservation and conservation uses; passive parks and other passive recreational uses; sporting and recreational camps; limited essential services; and oil extraction and related processing. Subject ITDR destination] Residential PUD Site: The subject site is zoned Naples Reserve RPUD and designated partly Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands and partly Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF) on the Future Land Use Map. The ±688 acre subject site is undeveloped and the PUD provides for a maximum gross density of 1.67 dwelling units per acre. Surrounding Lands: North of the [TDR destination] Naples Reserve RPUD: Land to the north of the subject RPUD is zoned A-RFMUO, Sending Lands and within the NRPA Overlay, and designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands, overlaid by the Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) on the Future Land Use Map. These lands lie inside the Picayune Strand State Forest and are owned by the State of Florida. Public lands are not part of the TDR program. West of the(TDR destination] Naples Reserve RPUD: Land to the west of the subject RPUD is zoned Winding Cypress PUD/DRI (Development of Regional Impact) and partially developed as Verona Walk. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and Urban Residential Subdistrict. - 2 - CP-2013-1/PL20130000139 2013-1, iStar Development: allowing TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Agenda Item 9.A. South of the [TDR destination] Naples Reserve RPUD: Land to the south of the subject RPUD is zoned Walnut Lakes PUD and developed as Reflection Lakes of Naples; and, undeveloped land zoned A, Rural Agricultural. These lands are designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map. East of the [TDR destination] Naples Reserve RPUD: Across Greenway Road, land to the east of the subject RPUD is in agricultural use. The zoning district is A-RFMUO, Receiving Lands and designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map. In summary, the existing land uses in the area immediately surrounding or directly opposite the subject RPUD are predominately rural non-residential in nature to the north and east, and residential to the west and south. STAFF ANALYSIS: Background and Considerations -- History of the Rural Fringe GMP Amendments: The Governor and Cabinet issued a Final Order on June 22, 1999, pertaining to GMP amendments adopted in 1997 pursuant to the 1996 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). The Final Order required the County to conduct a Rural and Agricultural Assessment for the Rural and Conservation Designated lands within the County, and then adopt measures to protect natural resources such as wetlands, wildlife and their habitats, and prevent the premature conversion of unique agricultural lands to other uses. This was to be accomplished while directing incompatible land uses away from these sensitive lands by employing creative land planning techniques. The Final Order allowed the County to conduct this Assessment in phases. Accordingly, the County divided the Assessment into two geographical areas, the Rural Fringe Area and the Eastern Rural Lands Area. Relevant to this petition, the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) was established. The RFMUD represents a transitional area between Golden Gate Estates and the County's urban area, and between the urban area and vast agricultural lands and agricultural operations farther to the east. The RFMUD consists of approximately 73,222 acres and is divided into three distinct designations: Sending Lands (±41,535 acres originally; ± 41,414 acres now), Receiving Lands (± 22,020 acres originally; ± 22,373 acres now), and Neutral Lands (± 9,667 acres originally; ± 9,427 acres now). Allowable uses, density, and preservation standards vary by designation. Sending Lands are those lands that have the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant wetlands, uplands, and habitat for listed species. The preservation standard for non-NRPA Sending Lands is eighty percent (80%) of the native vegetation on site while the standard for NRPA Sending Lands is ninety percent (90%). Density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record (created on or before June 22, 1999). Transfer of development rights from Sending Lands may occur at a rate of 1 dwelling unit per five acres (0.2 du/ac.) or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/ parcel of record. Permitted non-residential uses are limited to: agricultural uses, consistent with the Florida Right to Farm Act; habitat preservation and conservation uses; passive parks and other passive recreational uses; sporting and recreational camps; limited essential services; and oil extraction and related processing. 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. The - 3 - CP-2013-1/PL20130000139 2013-1, iStar Development: allowing TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Agenda Item 9.A. preservation standard for Receiving Lands, except for the North Belle Meade Overlay, is forty percent (40%) of the native vegetation present, not to exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the total site area to be preserved. The base residential density (non-Rural Village development) is 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du/ac.) or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record. The maximum density achievable for non-Rural Village development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through the Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs). The minimum and maximum density for Rural Village development within Receiving Lands is 2 and 3 dwelling units per acre, respectively, except that the minimum density for Rural Village development on Receiving Lands within the North Belle Meade Overlay is 1.5 dwelling units per acre. Permitted non-residential uses are primarily the same as those uses permitted in the agricultural zoning district prior to the Final Order (e.g. full range of agricultural uses, community facilities, recreational uses, etc.). Neutral Lands are those lands suitable for semi-rural residential development. Generally, Neutral lands have a higher ratio of native vegetation than lands designated as Receiving Lands, but do not have values approaching those in the Sending Lands. The preservation standard for Neutral Lands is sixty percent (60%) of the native vegetation present, not to exceed forty-five percent (45%) of the total site area to be preserved. The maximum residential density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du/ac.) or legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record. These lands are "neutral" to the TDR program and do not generate or receive residential density. Permitted non-residential uses are primarily the same as the uses permitted in the agricultural zoning district prior to the Final Order (e.g. full range of agricultural uses, community facilities, recreational uses, etc.). The consultant who assisted in development of the RFMUD TDR program found a correlation between the proximity of properties lying east of CR 951 and their land values. The higher transitional/residential densities allowed in the Urban Residential Fringe affected these nearer lands with higher property values while more-distant Sending Lands - which are less dense, further removed from urban services, less acceptable, and so forth - revealed notably lower values. This geographical relationship was recognized and specific limitations established to bolster TDR values for the more proximate lands, and provided special arrangements for the transfer, redemption and use of TDRs. The consultant also directly addressed the TDR program, and predicted the haste which requests to change the program to benefit only a few, or single, landowners would appear. The County was cautioned to keep the TDR program intact [for a substantial period of time]. Changes weaken the program, diminish TDR values and discourage the viability of long-term continuing participation. How TDRs are Expected to Transfer Into Naples Reserve: A number of TDRs are expected to originate from Hacienda Lakes PUD/DRI land. To date, Sending Lands located in the easternmost part of the Hacienda Lakes PUD/DRI have produced ±190 [base & Early Entry bonus]TDR credits from ±475 acres. Development Standards found in the standing Naples Reserve PUD Ordinance indicate, "There shall be no more than 1,154 residential dwelling units permitted which provides for a maximum gross density of 1.67 dwelling units per acre. A minimum of 612 Transfer of Development Rights Credits shall be obtained to achieve the maximum gross density." ...with Planning provision "B" stating, -4 - CP-2013-1/PL20130000139 2013-1, iStar Development: allowing TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Agenda Item 9.A. "In order to increase the residential density allowed in the Urban Mixed Use District, Residential Fringe Subdistrict and the Agricultural/Rural - Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands, 612 TDR credits shall be severed from qualifying Sending Lands, of which a minimum of 311 TDR credits shall be severed from [qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of the Urban Area." The clear implication is that the remaining 301 TDR credits may be obtained from [qualified] Sending Lands located within one mile OR beyond one mile from the Urban Area [unqualified], as the origination TDRs pertinent to this application - despite such a transfer from beyond one mile being inconsistent with the FLUE provision for the URF. Approximately 190 of these TDR credits originate from Hacienda Lakes' Sending Lands - leaving 111 to be obtained from other [qualified and/or unqualified]Sending Lands. [See calculations below.] 1154 maximum DUs in Naples Reserve ** - 612 minimum TDR credits to be severed/transferred from RFMU Sending Lands ** 542 intrinsic DU density 311 = minimum TDR credits to be severed/transferred from [qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of Urban Area [attributable to the '612'figure above] ** 301 = remaining TDR credits to be severed/transferred from [qualified and/or unqualified] Sending Lands within one mile of Urban Area or beyond one mile of the Urban Area [attributable to the '612'figure] - 190 = TDR credits severed/to be transferred from Hacienda Lakes' [unqualified] Sending Lands beyond one mile of Urban Area [attributable to the '301' figure] *** = 111 = TDR credits to be severed/transferred from other Sending Lands located within one mile or beyond one mile from Urban Area [attributable to the '301'figure] Of all Sending Lands, only those located within one mile of the Urban area qualify to transfer TDR credits into the Urban Residential Fringe (URF). 1804 estimated TDR total in [qualified]Sending Lands within one mile of the Urban Area * - 721 TDR credits from [qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of Urban Area already committed to URF use * = 1083 TDR credits in [qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of Urban Area remaining for URF use * For the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) lands, only a portion of them can make use of the TDR credits available from [qualified]Sending Lands. 3249 approximate URF acres eligible for TDR use (w/ an equivalent TDR count- potential TDR credit demand in URF) * - 1083 TDR credits in [qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of Urban Area remaining for URF use (potential TDR credit supply for URF)* = 2166 approximate potential unmet need of TDR credits for URF use (potential TDR credit demand in URF unmet by Sending Lands within 1 mile of URF boundary) * - 5 - CP-2013-1/PL20130000139 2013-1, 1Star Development: allowing TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Agenda Item 9.A. Sources: * Petitioner provided figures. ** Naples Reserve PUD Ordinance derived figures. *** Staff provided figures. The petitioner's eligible acreage, thus potential demand for TDR credits, in the URF includes Winding Cypress PUD/DRI. Staff believes Winding Cypress should be excluded. It is presently approved for 2,300 DUs (1.19 DU/A) and 796 acres of preserve. A PUD amendment presently under review would increase this to 2,854 DUs (1.48 DU/A) and 840 acres of preserve. Phase I of Winding Cypress (Veronawalk) has been platted, infrastructure put in place, and DUs at or near build out. Phase II, the balance of the PUD, will contain fewer DUs than Phase I due to environmental constraints. Almost all of the Preserve is located in Phase II; there is limited land available for residential development. The below figures reflect staff's exclusion of Winding Cypress PUD/DRI. 2,177 potential TDR credits demand in URF 1,083 TDR credits in Sending Lands within 1 mile of URF 1,034 approximate unmet need of TDR credits for URF use This potential need for 2,166 TDR credits (petitioner's figure) or 1,034 TDR credits (staff's figure) in the URF would go unmet due to the existing prohibition on transferring TDR credits from Sending Lands beyond one mile of the URF boundary. The subject GMP amendment would satisfy a portion of that potential unmet need for TDR credits. On the other hand, this amendment could potentially devalue TDR credits generated from Sending Lands within one mile of the URF by increasing the eligible supply - all Sending Lands would become eligible to transfer TDR credits to the Naples Reserve PUD, not just those within one mile of the URF boundary. According to application materials, the co-applicant of this petition is the original owner of Hacienda Lakes PUD/DRI, maintains ownership of TDR credits from Hacienda Lakes, and will sell 406 TDR credits to the Naples Reserve developer if this amendment is successful. Accordingly, this amendment could be viewed as self-serving. Nonetheless, it may further the success of the TDR program and protection of Sending Lands. Environmental Impacts: Collier County Department of Natural Resources personnel reviewed this petition and provided the following analysis: The majority of the land within Naples Reserve PUD was previously cleared for agricultural purposes prior to approval of the rezone to PUD. Native vegetation occurs primarily in the preserves on site. There is also in an existing conservation easement, in favor of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), over the preserves. An updated listed species survey was recently provided with the subdivision plat/plans for the project, currently under review with the County. Listed species documented on site were all associated with the agricultural ditches and the borrow pond on site, and consist of American alligator, several species of wading bird and snail kite. None of these species were found to be nesting on the subject property. A letter provided with the original PUD rezone, from the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, indicates no significant archaeological or historical sites recorded for or likely to be present within the project area. The letter also states that because of the project - 6- CP-2013-1/PL20130000139 2013-1, iStar Development: allowing TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Agenda Item 9.A. location and/or nature it is unlikely that any such sites will be affected. The project will be subject to the usual requirement for accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites as required by Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 11.1.3. The provision is also included in Subsection 2.03.07 E of the Land Development Code (LDC). The proposed GMP amendment for transfer of TDRs to allow Naples Reserve to achieve its maximum allowable density will have no affect on the requirements of the (CCME). The percent requirements of preserves will also not change. [Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist] Historical and Archaeological Impacts: The historical and archaeological characteristics inherent to the subject property are addressed in the Naples Reserve PUD. The transfer of TDRs from beyond one mile from the Urban Area does not in itself impact the site and further analysis is unnecessary. Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Impact Analysis, Including Transportation Element Consistency Determination: The traffic capacity and /traffic circulation characteristics associated with developing the subject property are addressed in the Naples Reserve PUD. The transfer of TDRs from beyond one mile from the Urban Area does not in itself impact these traffic characteristics and further analysis is unnecessary. Public Facilities Impact: The public facilities services needed to develop the subject property are addressed in the Naples Reserve PUD. The transfer of TDRs from beyond one mile from the Urban Area does not in itself impact these services and further analysis is unnecessary. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by LDC Section 10.03.05 F was [duly advertised, noticed and] held on Thursday, August 22, 2013, 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County South Regional Library, Meeting Rm. "B", located at 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples. Two people other than the applicant's team and County staff attended - and heard the following information: The applicant's agent provided a full description of the proposed amendment to the group, including how the transfer of TDR credits will be allowed to the Naples Reserve PUD located in the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) from Rural Fringe Mixed Used District Sending Lands. No one in attendance expressed opposition to the changes. The meeting was completed by 5:40 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The following findings and conclusions result from the reviews and analyses of this request: • Impact upon the TDR program could be noteworthy. A number of TDR credits originally intended for use in areas of designated Receiving Lands will be redirected to the Urban Residential Fringe-a reallocation of TDR credits. • This GMP amendment could potentially devalue TDR credits generated from Sending Lands within one mile of the URF. - 7 - CP-2013-1/PL20130000139 2013-1, iStar Development: allowing TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Agenda Item 9.A. • This GMP amendment would satisfy a portion of the potential unmet need in the Urban Residential Fringe for TDR credits. • Though this amendment could be viewed as self-serving, it may further the success of the TDR program and protection of Sending Lands. • Correlating amendments to the Naples Reserve PUD may be submitted subsequent to, or concurrent with the Adoption phase of this GMPA application. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This staff report has been approved as to form and legality by the Office of the County Attorney. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP-2013-1 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve this petition for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. PR7ARED BY: l J 4 1 L%i /�1.�.�- I, _ 1 DATE: ° Y/!-- CORBY SCHMIDT,AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER + ,,r COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT RlIEWED BY: 5 _ .2„.___t I - n te , DATE: `i//f 5 DAVID WEEKS, AICP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT REVIEWED BY: , is � DATE: ) — -2 - 1 3 MIKE BOSI,AICP, DIRECTOR, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT APPR•VED BY: Oil/i L /�� U 0:1 7-A D 60,111r—RATOR DATE: l 0 G OWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION PETITION NO.: CP-2013-1 / PL-2013-0000139 Staff Report for the September 19, 2013, CCPC Meeting. NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 12, 2013, BCC Meeting. — 8 - CP-2013-1/PL20130000139 2013-1, iStar Development: allowing TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD P120130000139/CP-2013-1 RESOLUTION & EXHIBIT `A' RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO ALLOW THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE PORTION OF THE NAPLES RESERVE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO UTILIZE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FROM ANY LANDS DESIGNATED AS SENDING LANDS WITHIN THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT 668 ACRE PROPERTY IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1-1/2 MILES EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD AND ONE MILE NORTH OF US 41 IN SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20120000139/CP-2013-1] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985,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, Petitioners, Star Development Company and Wilton Land Company LLC, have initiated this amendment to the Future Land Use Element; and WHEREAS, on September 9, 2013, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, F.S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners;and WHEREAS, on November 12, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184,F.S.; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have Words underlined are additions;Words strmmsk-thr-eugh are deletions 1 *** *** *** *** are a break in text PL2013 0000139/CP-2013-1 Rev.9/03/13 thirty(30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing,to Collier County its comments within said thirty(30)days pursuant to Section 163.3184,F.S.;and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty(180)days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184,F.S.;and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion,second and majority vote this day of ,2013. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQ. Chairwoman Approved as to form and legality: DRAFT Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit"A" CP\13-CMP-00903\5-7/16/13 Words underlined are additions; Words struck stEuek-thceugh are deletions 2 '' *** *** *** *** are a break in text PL20130000139/CP-2013-1 Rev.9/03/13 PL20130000139 CP-2013-1 EXHIBIT "A" FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT [Page 29] 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict: The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide transitional densities between the Urban Designated Area and the Agricultural/Rural Area and comprises approximately 5,500 acres and 5% of the Urban Mixed Use District. Residential land uses may be allowed at a maximum base density of 1.5 units per gross acre, plus any density bonus that may be achieved via COME Policy 6.2.5 (6) b.1., and either"a" or"b" below: a. Up to 1.0 unit per gross acre via the transfer of up to one (1.0) dwelling unit (transferable development right) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands, except in the case of properties that straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations, and meet the other Density Blending criteria provided for in subsection 5.2 of the Density Rating System, which may achieve an additional maximum density of up to 1.3 units per gross acre for all lands designated as Urban Residential Fringe via the transfer of up to 1.3 dwelling units (transferable development rights) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands. The Urban Residential Fringe portion of the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development located in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, shall not be subject to the one mile limitation set forth above and may utilize TDRs from any lands designated Sending within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District to achieve up to the maximum allowable density; or, **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** [Page 49] B. DENSITY RATING SYSTEM: This Density Rating System is only applicable to areas designated on the Future Land Use Map as: Urban, Urban Mixed Use District; and, on a very limited basis, Agricultural/Rural. It is not applicable to the Urban areas encompassed by the Immokalee Area Master Plan, and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; these two Elements have their own density provisions. The Density Rating System is applicable to that portion of the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the extent that the residential density cap of 4 dwelling units per acre is not exceeded, except for the density bonus provisions for Affordable Housing and Transfer of Development Rights, and except as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. The final determination of permitted density via implementation of this Density Rating System is made by the Board of County Commissioners through an advertised public hearing process (rezone or Stewardship Receiving Area designation). **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** 1 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. Row of asterisks (**** **** ****) denotes break in text. PL20130000139 CP-2013-1 2. Density Bonuses Consistency with the following characteristics may add to the base density. Density bonuses are discretionary, not entitlements, and are dependent upon meeting the criteria for each bonus provision and compatibility with surrounding properties, as well as the rezone criteria in the Land Development Code. **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** f. Transfer of Development Rights Bonus To encourage preservation/conservation of natural resources, density transfers are permitted as follows: (a) From Urban designated areas into that portion of the Urban designated area subject to this Density Rating System, in accordance with the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) provision contained in Section 2.03.07 of the Land Development Code, adopted by Ordinance No. #04-41, as amended, on June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004. For projects utilizing this TDR process, density may be increased above and beyond the density otherwise allowed by the Density Rating System. (b) From Sending Lands in conjunction with qualified infill development. (c) From Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe, at a maximum density increase of one unit per gross acre, except for properties that straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations, and meet the other Density Blending criteria provided for in subsection 5.2 of the Density Rating System, which may transfer TDRs from Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe, at a maximum density increase of 1.3 units per gross acre. The Urban Residential Fringe portion of the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development located in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, shall not be subject to the one mile limitation set forth above and may utilize TDRs from any lands designated Sending within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District to achieve up to the maximum allowable density increase. In no case shall density be transferred into the Coastal High Hazard Area from outside the Coastal High Hazard Area. 2 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. Row of asterisks (**** **** ****) denotes break in text. Item #9B CP-20 13-4 OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB PETITION PL20130000365 Growth Management Plan Amendment (FLU Map Change) for Olde Florida Golf Club Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay District— Neutral Lands to Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay District— Receiving Lands Sufficiency Response Letter dated April 25, 2013 Cover/Submittal Letter dated February 22, 2013 Check in the amount of$16,700 (application fee) (note: included with initial submittal) Check in the amount of$1,500 (transportation review fee) (note: included with initial submittal) One CD containing the contents of this re-submittal Application for Request to Amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan, including Letter of Authorization (revised to reflect comments contained in sufficiency letter) List of Exhibits Exhibit A General Location Map including surrounding zoning and FLUE designations of lands within 300 feet Exhibit B Recent Aerial including source and date Exhibit C Existing FLUE Designation Exhibit D Proposed FLUE Designation Exhibit E Recent Aerial with FLUCCS and Native Habitat Acreage Exhibit F Soils Map Exhibit G Listed Species Summary Table Exhibit G-1 Listed Species Survey dated October 15, 2008 Exhibit G-2 SFWMD 1990 Wetland Determination Exhibit G-3 SFWMD 1992 Wetland Determination Exhibit G-4 SFWMD 2010 Wetland Determination Exhibit G-5 ACOE 1990 Wetland Determination Exhibit G-6 ACOE 1993 Wetland Determination Exhibit G-7 ACOE 2011 Wetland Determination Exhibit G-8 Color Photographs Documenting Current Site Conditions (Pages 1 -10) Exhibit H Collier County Archaeological/Historical Probability Map Exhibit H-1 Archeological Consultant Summary dated 4/23/13 Exhibits I Public Facilities Report and supporting exhibits, including: Exhibits I-1 Public Facilities Report thru 1-4 Exhibits 1-5 Utility Availability Map Exhibits 1-6 FIRM Data (or FEMA) Map Exhibit I-7 Locations of Wells, Future Well Fields and Cones of Influence Exhibit 1-8 Locations of Wells and Cones of Influence Exhibits 1-9 Availability of Service Request/Approvals from Utility Providers thru 1-19 Exhibit J Traffic Impact Statement Exhibit J-1 Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard Intersection Analysis Exhibit K Deeds Exhibit L List of Owners COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW Kevin G.Coleman NORTHERN TRUST BANK BUILDING Linda C.Brinkman Richard D.Yovanovich 4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH Matthew M.Jackson Edmond E. Koester SUITE 300 Jeffrey J. Beihoff William M. Burke NAPLES,FLORIDA 34103 Harold J. Webre Gregory L. Urbancic 239-435-3535 Caroline M. Magliolo Matthew L. Grabinski 239-435-1218 FACSIMILE Charles A.B.Thomson Craig D.Grider www.cyklawfirm.com David Kerem Michael D. Gentzle Writer's Email: Of Counsel: ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com Kenneth R.Johnson April 25, 2013 Mr. Corby Schmidt, AICP Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Division — Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 RE: Sufficiency Response to Growth Management Plan (GMP)Amendment Petition CP- 2013-4 Comments;proposed Redesignation of RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Dear Mr. Schmidt, Pursuant to the review comments received from Collier County dated March 25, 2013 and April 8, 2013, our project team offers the following responses (in bold) for your review and approval of the subject GMP Amendment Application: Comprehensive Planning Comments related to the application form: Page 3 III.F. RFMU is a zoning "overlay district" — Correct response to read: "(A) Rural Agricultural District; "Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay District—Neutral Lands". [emphasis added] III.H. As with "F" above, correct response to be: "Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District,Neutral Lands" IV.C. Correct to read: From: "Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Neutral Lands"To: "Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands" April 25,2013 _ 2 Response: Page 3 of the Application has been revised to reflect the requested changes. Page 4 V.A.1. Response would likely read: "see Exhibit"A"or"refer to Exhibit"A" V.A.2. Response would likely read: "see Exhibit`B"or"refer to Exhibit`B" V.A.3. Response would likely read: "see Exhibit "A" or "refer to Exhibit "A"; OR, REFER TO EXHIBITS "A" & "B", GENERAL LOCATION MAP & AERIAL, HERE V.B.1 Response would likely read: "see Exhibit"C"or"refer to Exhibit"C" V.C.1. Response would likely read: "see Exhibit"E"or"refer to Exhibit"E" V.C.2. Response would likely read: "see Exhibit "E" or "refer to Exhibit "E". Please note that the standard application form language regarding applicants providing "plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site" is non-instructive in this situation. In other application materials, the plant and animal species on the subject property are identified as evidence of significant hydrologic changes described. Providing a single sample of species known to a similar site does little to substantiate this claim. Prepare and submit at least one survey conducted prior to the changed conditions and at least one such survey conducted as, and/or after conditions changed. See also comments for "Exhibit G"below. Response: The application has been revised to identify the various components as Exhibits. Included with this submittal is Exhibit G-1, a copy of the Listed Species Survey Report for Olde Florida Golf Club dated October 15, 2008. The report references listed species that were documented occurring on the property and listed species that have potential to occur on the property. Pages 4 & 5 V.D.4 Expand this written response. Provide interpretative explanations of the map figures (presently) found in Exhibit"I". Provide the details regarding causes and changes impacting the site's characteristics. Then either include two sets of the raw data (particularly baseline conditions and long-term sampling) in this response that substantiates the actual events and physical changes pertaining to: • Surrounding canals(from County and Regional water management agencies); • Nearby water well-field (from County water service); • Hydrological"changes"; • Other relevant changes; and the direct effects and apparent results evident on the property; or, you may choose to reference such data here, and submit the actual support materials as inclusions to the application package. • Drier wetland areas and depressed water table; • Confirmation from the appropriate State and federal agencies that certain plant habitat(s) have been reclassified; • "significant"spread of vines and ivies; • Other measurable and quantifiable effects. April 25,2013 3 Application materials are lacking certain backup data that will be necessary for substantive approval. Submit real or anecdotal evidence that changes have been observed in the amount, variety and behavior of wildlife. Explain all efforts and practices to identify, protect and conserve your vegetative communities and wildlife habitat, in accordance with the LDC. Produce PUD monitoring reports, maintenance logs, water test results, historic and current photographic images of canals, preserves and other plant areas, and wildlife, as would be beneficial to illustrate conditions described in the written response to application item V.D.4. Establish a direct scientific cause and effect relationship between the hydrological conditions and vegetative habitats. Describe and discuss the Olde Florida Golf Club maintenance practices, protections and caretaking activities historically taking place on the subject property, especially in areas now identified where exotics or nuisance species are not under control. Response: Included with this submittal is Exhibit G-2, a copy of the original South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Wetland Delineation and correspondence letter dated August 8, 1990. Also included is Exhibit G-3, a copy of the revised SFWMD Wetland Delineation and correspondence letter dated May 28, 1992. Exhibit G-4, a copy of the current SFWMD Wetland Delineation and correspondence letter dated December 15, 2010, is also included with this submittal. Also included are Exhibit G-5, a copy of the original U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Wetland Delineation and correspondence letter dated May 14, 1990; Exhibit G-6, a copy of the revised ACOE Wetland Delineation and correspondence letter dated December 15, 1993; and Exhibit G-7, a copy of the current ACOE Wetland Delineation and correspondence letter dated July 6,2011. WilsonMiller, Inc. (Stantec) performed several site visits with SFWMD and ACOE field representatives over the years, has installed and monitored numerous groundwater monitoring wells and has provided state and federal agencies with the above-referenced data. The original wetland determinations, performed in the early 1990's, were based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation and approximately 245 acres of the site was considered jurisdictional wetlands by SFWMD and ACOE. The G-3 May 28, 1992 SFWMD Memo mentions grape vine and poison ivy dominating the understory throughout the transitional areas. The Memo also mentions the site hydrology altered by Immokalee Road and the Cypress Canal. The groundwater well data collected by Stantec over the years indicated a majority of the site does not meet the state and federal criteria for wetland hydrology or hydric soils criteria for wetland soils. Currently, SFWMD has asserted wetland jurisdiction over five (5) isolated areas totaling 30.88 acres. Four of the five wetland areas claimed by SFWMD are the result of surface soil removal years ago, creating depressions that retain surface waters for longer periods than would have the undisturbed surface areas. The fifth area, being approximately 19 acres located in the center of the undeveloped area west of the existing golf course, is also the result of surface disturbance. In this instance the natural surface flow to the south was partially blocked during the surface soil removal south of the 19 acre area, again causing surface water to be retained for longer periods than would have occurred in the natural undisturbed surface conditions. Please see the Project Site Description, Project Background and Wetlands on Exhibit G-4 page 2 of 4 of the December 21, 2010 SFWMD Staff Report for more detailed information. Currently, the ACOE considers the above-referenced five (5) scrape down April 25,2013 4 areas "isolated wetlands" and pursuant to the Supreme Court decision (SWANCC), isolated waters are not jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act. Please see the Project History and Jurisdictional Determination on Exhibit G-7 pages 1, 2, 3 and 6 respectfully of the July 6, 2010 ACOE Memorandum of Record for more detailed information. The G-7 July 6, 2011 ACOE Memorandum of Record (MOR) mentions the surrounding canals having a significant impact on the area's hydrology, as the site is bounded by the Cocohatchee Canal to the north, Curry Canal to the east and the Cypress Canal to the south. The MOR mentions the 1993 wetland boundaries were smaller based on the area's lowered water table. The MOR mentions the cypress trees are covered with poison ivy and ground cover dominated by muscadine grape that resemble other wetland areas in Golden Gate Estates where the hydrology has been removed. The MOR also mentions the groundwater well data submitted by Stantec tends to correspond with relative water levels in the Cypress Canal which is controlled between 9.75 and 10.5 feet, with ground elevation on the property varying from 13.5 feet in the north to 12.7 feet in the south. The Olde Florida Club project is not a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and no PUD monitoring reports, maintenance logs or water tests results were required. The native habitats within the undeveloped portions of Olde Florida Golf Club (Phase 2) were not required to be maintained by SFWMD, ACOE or Collier County. However, Phase 2 was fenced for the prevention of trespassing, poaching, and illegal dumping. Color photographs documenting current site conditions on the Olde Florida Golf Club site are included with this submittal as Exhibit G-8, pages 1 through 10. The photographs of cabbage palm and pine/cypress/cabbage palm habitats clearly show the ground cover dominated by muscadine grape and a combination of poison ivy and muscadine grape surrounding/strangling canopy and sub-canopy species. The dominance of muscadine grape in the ground cover is often an indicator of lowered groundwater tables on a site. The photographs of the cypress habitats clearly show the sub-canopy dominated by cabbage palm and Brazilian pepper, indicating the historically wetland habitat is transitioning to a dryer community due to hydrological impacts. V.E.I.a. Response would likely read "see Exhibit "I" or "refer to Exhibit "I"-Potable Water" V.E.1.b. Response would likely read "see Exhibit "I" or "refer to Exhibit "I"-Sanitary Sewer" V.E.1.c. Response would likely read "see Exhibit "I" or "refer to Exhibit "I"-Arterial & Collector Roads;Name of specific road and LOS" V.E.1.d. Response would likely read "see Exhibit"I"or"refer to Exhibit"I"-Drainage" V.E.1.e. Response would likely read"see Exhibit"I"or"refer to Exhibit"I"-Solid Waste" V.E.1.f. Response would likely read "see Exhibit "I" or "refer to Exhibit "I"-Parks: Community and Regional" V.E.2. Response would likely read"see Exhibit"I"or"refer to Exhibit"I" V.E.3. Response would likely read"see Exhibit"I"or"refer to Exhibit"I" April 25,2013 _ 5 Response: The application has been revised to identify the various components as Exhibits. Page 6 V.F.I. Response would likely read "see Exhibit"I" or"refer to Exhibit"I" V.F.2. Response would likely read"see Exhibit"I"or"refer to Exhibit"I" V.F.3. Response would likely read"N/A" V.F.4. Response would likely read"N/A" V.F.5. Response would likely read"N/A" Response: The application has been revised to identify the various components as Exhibits. Comprehensive Planning Comments related to specific exhibits All of the Exhibits should be labeled in the lower right corner of each Exhibit page for ease of finding and consistency throughout. Show dates on exhibits reflecting their dates of preparation. Show the subject property location on map figures—preferably by outlining its shape and size to scale. Realize that the reviewers of this application will include lay persons, including members of the EAC, CCPC, and the BCC. Response: All exhibits are labeled. Exhibit G. (Listed Species Summary Table) This petition seeks re-designate RFMUD Neutral Lands (with certain "before" characteristics) to RFMUD Receiving Lands (with certain "after" characteristics). Application exhibit does not present it in "before" and "after" form, considered necessary to evaluate the request. See also comments for "V.C.2. "above. Response: Included with this submittal is Exhibit G-1, a copy of the Listed Species Survey Report for Olde Florida Golf Club dated October 15, 2008. The report references listed species that were documented occurring on the property and listed species that have potential to occur on the property. Exhibit I. (Public Facilities Report) Application exhibit provides the public facility level of service information associated with Application Section "E". Exhibit I also currently provides map figures that are not associated with public facilities. These appear to be pages copied from a "CDM"-prepared 2008 plan update and an un-labeled FEMA flood zone map combined with letters confirming availability of certain public services to the site. Separate this exhibit in to two or more individual exhibits that are clearly connected to separate submittal requirement entries or groupings, re-label and properly reference in application page entries. Clearly explain an exhibit's relevance and always accompany an exhibit with an interpretation. More than one item [an exhibit within an exhibit] is labeled the same. Modify letters, labeling and exhibits to properly reference items made part of the application package. April 25,2013 6 Generally, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the justification and the need for this amendment. Staff's approach is to look for conclusive data and analysis to that effect. A GMP amendment such as this will also be evaluated for impacts upon infrastructure, compatibility considerations, etc. It is particularly important that application materials assess and report any impact, however small, on surrounding properties. Response: The various exhibit pages contained in Exhibit I have been renumbered accordingly. Below is a brief explanation of each exhibit herein,and its relevance to the project and the proposed amendment. Exhibits I-1 -1-4: Identifies the existing Level of Service Standard(LOS) and the impact of the changes proposed with this amendment on the public facilities, including potable water,sanitary sewer,drainage,solid waste,community and regional parks,county jails and emergency medical facilities. Please note this Public Facility Report (Exhibits I-1 thru I-4) does not specifically address the LOS and the impact on arterial and collector roads. Analysis for these public facilities is provided within the enclosed Traffic Impact Statement,which is identified as Exhibit J. In summary, the proposed amendment poses no negative impact to the public facilities identified above. Exhibit I-5: Identifies the various special hazard areas or flood zones relating to the subject property. Exhibits I-7- 1-8: Utilizing the 2008 Water Master Plan Update prepared by CDM, the locations of existing and proposed wells, cones of influence and potential wellfield areas adjacent to the project have been identified. In summary, the facilities shown in the provided exhibits, and adjacent to the project, identify the County's raw water supply wells and potential future areas which support the drinking water supply to the public. Since it is likely that any future development would utilize the existing Collier County potable and sanitary services, additional potable water wells and septic systems to support any future development would not be necessary. Exhibits I-9- 1-19: Availability of Service Requests and Responses from Utility Providers, including Collier County Public Utilities, Florida Power & Light, Comcast, Century Link and Golden Gate Fire Control&Rescue District. In summary, Utility Providers have no objections with the proposed amendment and can provide service to the project. Prepare and submit an analysis of the impact approval of the proposed amendment will have on the County's Transfer of Development Rights program. April 25,2013 7 Response: The TDR program is a voluntary program and the success of the program has been and is based on market conditions. In order to achieve a successful TDR program, willing sellers and buyers are necessary. By designating additional lands as receiving areas provides additional lands for owners of TDR's to transfer their TDR's, furthering the goal of converting sending lands to a conservation use. Public Utilities Planning and Project Management Sufficiency Comments: This application package is adequate and sufficient to enable staff to conduct a formal [substantive] review concerning public utilities. Response: Acknowledged. Transportation Planning Sufficiency Comments: Collier County Transportation Planning staff has not completed their review of the traffic study/impact statement for completeness, and their determination and comments on sufficiency matters remain pending and forthcoming. April 2, 2013 Update: Collier County Transportation Planning staff has completed their review of the traffic study/impact statement for completeness The Olde Florida Golf Club GMPA CP- 2013-4 can be found sufficient for review purposes. The (Stantec) TIS [dated April 1, 2013] should supersede the TIS in the document that was distributed to Staff. [paraphrased] Response: For clarification purposes, the submittal of April 1, 2013 was an intersection analysis of Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard; it was submitted to supplement the original TIS; it does not supersede the original TIS. Stormwater and Environmental Planning Sufficiency Comments: This application package is not adequate and sufficient to enable staff to conduct a formal [substantive] review concerning environmental matters. The application package provides a FLUCFCS Code map with standard modifier identifying percent exotic and nuisance vegetation coverage for environmental review. Also provided are native vegetation retention calculations based on the FLUCFCS Code map provided. A listed species survey for the site is not provided, but a list of state and federal listed species known to inhabit biological communities similar to those found on site is. Provide a listed species survey, and historic and archaeological survey for the property, as required on the standard application for GMP amendments. In addition to being used by staff, I'm sure the review boards and public will also want to see this information. Also provide the wetland jurisdictional determination(s)pertaining to the subject property. Response: Included with this submittal is Exhibit G-1, a copy of the Listed Species Survey Report for Olde Florida Golf Club dated October 15, 2008. The report references listed species that were documented occurring on the property and listed species that have potential to occur on the property. The current South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) jurisdictional wetland determination and correspondence letter is included as April 25,2013 8 Exhibit G-4. The current U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) jurisdictional wetland determination is included as G-7. Included with this submittal is Exhibit H-1, the Archaeological Consultant Summary dated April 23, 2013. The applicant will provide the full report when received from the Consultant, Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc.; however, the summary is sufficient for moving the application forward through the review process. Closing remarks: The original application and copies are available for pick-up (one copy is kept for the file). Once the petition has been modified/enhanced to address the above items, re-submit the original plus four copies, all properly assembled, for a second sufficiency review. Paragraph C. of Resolution No. 12-234 provides 30 days for you to respond to this letter with supplemental data. Since there is uncertainty as to the timing of this application moving forward to transmittal hearings, the applicant may wish to request a second 30 day time period, in accordance with Resolution No. 12-234, beyond 30 calendar days from the date of this letter to remedy the deficiencies. Also, note that this is not a substantive review and that the substantive review will not be completed until this application has been found sufficient. Response: Acknowledged. Very truly yours, Richard Yovanovich cc: William Barton - COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW Kevin G.Coleman NORTHERN TRUST BANK BUILDING Linda C.Brinkman Richard D.Yovanovich 4001 TAIvIIAMI TRAIL NORTH Matthew M.Jackson Edmond E.Koester SUITE 300 Jeffrey J.Beihoff William M.Burke NAPLES,FLORIDA 34103 Harold J.Webre Gregory L.Urbancic 239-435-3535 Caroline M.Magliolo Matthew L.Grabinski 239-435-1218 FACSIMILE Charles A.B.Thomson Craig D.Grider www.cvklawfirm.com David Kerem Michael D.Gentzle Writer's Email: Of Counsel: ryovanovich @cyklawfirm.com Kenneth R. Johnson February 22,2013 Marcia R.Kendall Senior Planner Growth management Division/Planning&Regulation Planning and Zoning Department Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples,Florida 34104 RE: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Dear Ms.Kendall, We are submitting an application to amend the Future Land Use Map of the Collier County Growth Management Plan on behalf of Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. One original and five copies are being provided to you,along with checks in the amount of$16,700(application fee)and$1,500(transportation review fee). The application proposes the redesignation of the 554-acre site from Rural Fringe Mixed Use District—Neutral to Rural Fringe Mixed Use District—Receiving. The property is predominantly surrounded by receiving lands and due to the change in the environmental condition of the property, changing the designation to receiving lands is appropriate. In addition, designating additional lands as receiving lands provides additional lands for owners of TDR's to transfer their TDR's,furthering the goal of converting sending lands to a conservation use. If you have any questions about this application or need additional information,please do not hesitate to contact me or Margaret Perry at Stantec (239-649-4040). We look forward to working with your staff in the processing of this application. Ve truly yours, 12: Richard Yovanovich cc: William Barton,w/enclosures APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATION NUMBER DATE RECEIVED PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE DATE SUFFICIENT This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Comprehensive Planning Department, Suite 400, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252-2400(Fax 239-252-2946). The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97-431 as amended by Resolution 98-18(both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239-252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFOMRATION A. Name of Applicant William Barton, Corporate Secretary Company Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. Address 9393 Vanderbilt Beach Road City Naples State FL Zip Code 34120 Phone Number 239-641-7941 Fax Number 239-262-0334 B. Name of Agent* Richard Yovanovich, Esa. • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company Coleman, Yovanovich, & Koester, PA Address Northern Trust Building;4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34103 Phone Number 239-435-3535 Fax Number 239-435-1218 B. Name of Agent* Margaret Perry, AICP • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Address 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34105 Phone Number 239-649-4040 Fax Number 239-643-5716 C. Name of Owner(s)of Record Same as applicant. Address City State Zip Code Phone Number Fax Number 1 D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. Transportation: Jeff Perry, AICP Environmental: Thomas Trettis, PWS, CSE Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Engineering: Raymond Piacente, PMP, LEED AP Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. II. Disclosure of Interest Information: 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. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage 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 Percentage of Stock This is an equity owned club in which each of the 209 members own 0.478%of the corporation. The corporation is a "C", for profit corporation. Please refer to Exhibit L, List of Equity Members as of 2/13/13. Corporate officers are: Thomas Kukk, President; Donald Vining, Vice President; William Barton, Secretary; and Clyde Quinby, Treasurer 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 Percentage of Interest 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 Percentage 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 Percentage of Ownership N/A ^ Date of Contract: 2 .-� 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 N/A G. Date subject property acquired (x)leased 0: 1993 and 1997 Term of lease yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing: H. 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. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION All of Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, less the east 1/2 of the northeast 1/4, Collier County, Florida B, GENERAL LOCATION North side of Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension;approximately two miles east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951). C. PLANNING COMMUNITY Rural Estates D. TAZ 217 E. SIZE IN ACRES 553.7 F. ZONING (A)Rural Aaricultural District; Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay District- Neutral Lands G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN Golf course and single family residential H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S)Agricutural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Neutral Lands IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S)TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Recreation/Open Space Traffic Circulation Sub-Element Mass Transit Sub-Element Aviation Sub-Element Potable Water Sub-Element Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element NGWAR Sub-Element Solid Waste Sub-Element Drainage Sub-Element Capital Improvement Element CCME Element x(map only) Future Land Use Element Golden Gate Master Plan Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) OF THE ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: N/A C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM Agricultural/Rural Desianation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Neutral Lands 3 TO Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S)AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name& Page#) N/A E. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N/A V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE:ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN l"=400'. At least one copy reduced to 8- 1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE See Exhibit A Provide general location map showing surrounding developments(PUD, DRI's, existing zoning)with subject property outlined. See Exhibit B Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. See Exhibit A Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION See Exhibit C Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s)of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. Please also see Exhibit D, Proposed FLUE Designation. C. ENVIRONMENTAL See Exhibits E & F Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A"ABOVE. See Exhibits G&G-1 Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish &Wildlife Service)and State (Florida Game &Freshwater Fish Commission)listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site(e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.),Identify historic and/or archaeological sites on the subject property. Please also see Exhibits G-2 through G-7, previously approved SFWMD and ACOE wetland determinations; Exhibit H, Collier County Archaeological/Historical Probability Map, and Exhibit H-1, Archeological Survey. D.GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J-11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2(Copies attached). 1. INSERT "Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: N Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)(5), F.A.C.). IF so, identify area located in ACSC. N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J-1 1.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187(1)(c), F.S. ? �-. (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)7.b, F.A.C.)Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential 4 increase in County-wide population by more than 5%of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. Y Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.)or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference Rule 9J-5.006(5) F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J-1 1.007, F.A.C.) Response: The proposed change from Rural Fringe Mixed Use- Neutral to Rural Fringe Mixed Use- Receiving could allow for an increase in density for residential uses through the use of the TDR program. A maximum density of one unit per acre could be achieved through the TDR program if the property is changed to Receiving. Commercial or industrial development is not contemplated with this GMP amendment. The Olde Florida Golf Club was constructed in a region of Collier County that has undergone significant hydrologic alterations from the surrounding canals and nearby County water well-field.The Cocohatchee Canal, north of the project, effectively drains sheet flow to the west. The Curry Canal, to the east, and the Cypress Canal, to the south,surround the property and have a significant impact on the area's hydrology. The typical wetland Cypress and Cypress-Pine-Cabbage Palm habitats on the site are now considered non-jurisdictional to the State and Federal agencies.The depressed water table has allowed nuisance and exotic plant species to begin to dominate many of the habitats. There is also a significant spread of grapevine and poison ivy that are smothering habitats, climbing and strangling trees. Cabbage palms continue to proliferate the canopy and sub-canopy in many habitats and reduces the suitability of the site for wildlife utilization by some species. The property is predominantly surrounded by receiving lands and due to the change in the environmental condition of the property, changing the designation to receiving lands is appropriate. In addition, designating additional lands as receiving lands provides additional lands for owners of TDR's to transfer TDR's furthering the goal of converting sending lands to conservation use. E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS)and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: See Exhibits I-1 thru I-4 Potable Water See Exhibits I-1 thru 1-4 Sanitary Sewer See Exhibits J &J-1 Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS See Exhibits I-1 thru I-4 Drainage See Exhibits I-1 thru 1-4 Solid Waste See Exhibits I-1 thru 1-4 Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. See Exhibit I-5 Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property(i.e. water, sewer, fire 5 protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services. 3.See Exhibits I-1 thru 1-4 Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, & Exhibits 1-9 thru 1-19 and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: See Exhibit 6 Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data(FIRM). See Exhibits 1-7 thru 1-8 Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable N/A Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable N/A High Noise Contours(65 LDN or higher)surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable(identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION x $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) N/A $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) See Exhibit K Proof of ownership(copy of deed) Attached to Application Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner(See attached form) x 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1"=400' or at a scale as determined during the pre-application meeting. n 6 LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize Richard Yovanovich, Esa. and Margaret Perry, AICP (Name of Agent) to serve as my Agent i a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting propered in his Application. Signed: '= Date: i /-/3 (Name of Owner(s)of Record) William Barton, Corporate Secretary I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowled Signature of Applicant Name-Typed or Printed William Barton, Corporate Secretary STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER Sworn to nd s bscribe.i ef• e me this / 9 day of February, 2013 by C�LC , i MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: y Notary Public =o<.!•!r : COLLEEN C.HOFFERSER CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: ': �1 ;t �COMMISSION RES:May 3,280746 y�� . Pi EXPIRES:May 3,2015 %'�„'of r Bonded Thru Notary Public Unden niters X who is personally known to me, who has produced as identification and / did take an Oath ✓ did not take and Oath NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: Florida Statute Section 837.06- False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of%500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail term." 7 Soil# Description 0 350 700 1,400 N 10 OLDSMAR FINE SAND, LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM Legend Feet 11 HALLANDALEFINESAND � ° 18 RIVIERA FINE SAND LIMESTONE SUBSTRATUM ' Property Boundary *:�t -0<a;. �; r }I. 21 BOCA FINE SAND i NRCS Soils f,,"' �' ` I� > '' . ,rte"' r; ' ': ', 49 HALLANDALE AND BOCA FINE SANDS Y +�- & 18s. ...t: , 99 Water ky4�1 ��`•,�4 : f,,c.„,., ,-y .rte � Y.,� ��n.�M'"-Y� .c T.,.� xo! v,sr•K' ,+. ,+_ .:c b"'- ✓}f •'i !.. a ' 7` y�'°t$' i. ry-;rtik.4:,-,ts.r r. ��- A,'�C. �'t. �l �'4�" `�1 I' � �,g r�� •�.s�•te,'• ",i, �x c ie.,a, i + ','�"'. " '� ''y •'S``�Ft� '.Y; '� r . s`7;f ,, r•=r,�t� ti : ,ter t. 0. ♦• `i' -a, 1 4.�` s �F,',""rol ta+ y,,,� •t p-a' a , -.. ,1`...-1,-,r3.-∎.A - p.1s'3>�^ .}•. `t~a�g .. k+ rr 'z'� ,e;.7 ,, ''.Gt' �n:'c„ w, ,,"awz"u" ``'..-i' s** 3"'a''qv-`�a� ... 4°4!' yF4.. }i. 3' ��,,,�;.- ~ 'f . �`:t•'£`:'' x.. . °n-w. f1e,"7_y ;,°..r .*^Y•,.. _ �'1. ? . - 1 4 t 't ,y, .-. `.re't „t, rte'` `+."c _.. •... ft,..,;4 ..?..•.I'':,'N't..kt.j‘i"4-A-117* :;77 ' i'-'" ' - • • 4 " i,,',...,.fr.. d'4 tit..... :Vt.4"..V:'•',: ' t,q.. ".'1,,"'.•?3,•47.114,C47.:.'; Ft7;..i'' 1; k ' '.. 3-,4,- `i,• `f ri'�, `., ,�4ysi.-,,--r -- ,;s' _ 1,--v-..--- '3,. •.S' 'r., - ,a' „5 5 '• s"_i.�.r1+-rs ;.' .f,.sr '` e, raw,j z ,...,...'*"...e... R:i r`« 'n..-r' -?"C,9 +.• -` .`;s" ,. �.4 t '/�s -r it -. yy c w _` . e,:s'.a j�:, .,.2, ,w•?.r ,r.c. . t'. 1�t } 194.,..4.16E 7 ) tl� `2�'•_'.',:,r •„�9a "'• " r'+";•V� ;J,r.'J_'( � `7? "'�X, ,_,i ;;.r ..`4. 'IS i,vc ' .� i fi d .. ,,., .�i=4� i :9yR`� ny,.^' ` K. .+t. -,p:fig. _ yr , 'i1 1t; , ,,..x18 .,, ` , } kf_ • :•` 4 ,.....N..$4, r a.. aGe „.7.,.,,_, `" i 'No. ° 1§4 1 R.B r•.,s;a a K _� Yt>r ': � f ' -S: Y - .Y. fr- i „ 4 ; .-4,,% ti t 4 4,' r P r M1 ^ r. i ,y��_ � a� .,, �5 .rJ v k f st----'t- MI a _F s.� ,+ y, . �, s k 4., r.,g/Svr i 4 11 `5 " " .. � ®`S" .. �1Yt' ,4+ � � .�. *1.0.-'4i FL e "^'- Sw }s;y x Y ` g'; s " ax e: s.4,• '? 'f--.:;.,a4 c . }- f" .:. �,,t y o tN "`'L_ ? ; ' }. w r , f .... 4.�:N *a:tirr fi . .2' . i "` . ,, The information on this map has been compiled +.-' Stantec Consulting b Stantec staff from a varie of sources and is �,� 9 N R oils a p subject to change without notice.Stantec makes 3200 Bailey Lane,Suite 200 Naples,FL 34105 no representations or warrant es,express or implied, te1239.649.4040 fax 239.263.6446 Olde Florida Golf Club as[o accuracy,completeness,t mel ness,or rights to tl1e use of such information. Stantec Exhibit F V.2158i 1 eQ15att377'ckm advn t3 _0FGC_soY 2a1105My0t_2rs2.mxd One Team. Infinite Solutions. LISTED SPECIES SUMMARY- EXHIBIT G Listed Plants and Animals known to inhabit or occur in Biological Communities similar to the site I1, pV *— oI 'WCJ` .. I j�+E.. pry :. C:�°..+I v` A,y {,� Ili ay raj z - t,,x�r + � - a�� G f u`�N4 e '� r Big Cypress fox squirrel NL ST (Sciurus niger avicennia) Florida panther (Fells concolor corp) FE FE American alligator FT(S/A) SSC (Alligator missippiensis) Eastern indigo snake FT(S/A) FT (Drymarchon corals couperi) Gopher tortoise (Gopherus po/yphemus) ST ST I ,. ��°- BIRD %ilktO `itif *`r ,�,. _J 1 fr'FV1lC I i�`;I' t "',�I l` �� ' I �',t,s� - zr A, .., !I Y 3ra r s. � u i aa.: r.{�.� i �:. i u h aF t`n Limpkin NL SSC (Aramus guarauna) Little blue heron NL SSC (Egretta caerulea) Reddish egret NL SSC (Egretta rufescens) Roseate spoonbill NL FT (Platalea ajaja) Snowy egret NL SSC (Egretta thula) Tricolored heron NL SSC (Egretta tricolor) White ibis NL SSC (Eudocimus albus) Wood stork (Mycteria americana) FE FE 141€ l, PT NHS ti 1y N r� p ��FWD. I � ®�S I .,, � .e :. r 1, Rigid epidendrum NL E (Epidendrum ridigum) Hand fern NL E (Ophioglossum palmaturn) Stiff-leaved wild-pine NL E (Tillandsia fasciculata) Hoary air-plant NL E (Tillandsia pruinosa) Twisted air NL (Tillandsia flexuosa) Reflexed wild pine NL T (Tillandsia balbisinia) Royal fern NL CE (Osmunda regalis) Page 1 FWS= U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services FWC= Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FE= Federally-designated Endangered FT= Federally-designated Threatened ST=State-designated Threatened SSC=Species of Special Concern FT(S/A)= Federally-designated Threatened species due to similarity of appearance CE=Commercially exploited NL= Not listed DOACS= Division of Agriculture and Consumer Services via Chapter 5-B-40, F.A.C. Page 2 OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB LISTED SPECIES SURVEY REPORT Prepared For: Olde Florida Golf Club 9393 Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Naples, Florida 34120 Prepared By: WilsonMiller, Inc. 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite # 200 Naples, Florida 34105 OCTOBER 15 , 2008 Exhibit G-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 . INTRODUCTION 1 2 . VEGETATION SURVEY AND LISTED PLANT SPECIES 1 2.1. Vegetation Survey/Mapping Methodology 1 2.2. FLUCCS Categories Documented On site 2 3 . LISTED SPECIES SURVEY AND RESULTS 3 3.1. Survey Methodology 3 3.2. Listed Plant Species Documented Onsite 4 3.3. Listed Plant Species That Could Potentially Occur Onsite But Were Not Observed 5 3.4. Listed Wildlife Species Documented Onsite 6 3.5. Listed Wildlife Species That Could Potentially Occur Onsite But Were Not Observed 6 3.6. Non-listed Species Documented Onsite (General Wildlife Observations) 7 4 . SUMMARY 8 4.1. Listed Plants 8 4.2. Listed Wildlife 8 5 . REFERENCES 9 Tables Table 1 - Listed Vegetation Species Survey 4 Table 2 - Listed plant species observed 5 Table 3 - Listed plant species that could potentially occur but were not observed 5 Table 4 - Listed wildlife species that could potentially occur but were not observed 7 Table 5 - List of non-listed wildlife species observed 7 10/13/2008-206828-Ver 2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32525 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report 1. INTRODUCTION The Olde Florida Golf Club project site encompasses approximately 552± acres and is located in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. A private 18-hole golf course with club house and maintenance facility has been constructed on a portion of the site. The property is bordered on the north by Calusa Pines Golf Club and undeveloped lands, on the east by undeveloped lands, on the south by the Cypress Canal and Golden Gate Estates, and on the west by Golf Club of the Everglades. The property is located in a rapidly developing region of Collier County. A Location Map, showing the approximate location of the subject property is included with this report as Exhibit A. WilsonMiller Certified Senior Ecologist Craig Schmittler and Certified Ecologist Justin Styer conducted a listed species survey of the project site using field methodology guidelines largely consistent with those established by both the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and Collier County Environmental Service Department. This survey included mapping the major vegetative habitats and performing meandering pedestrian transects searching for listed plant and wildlife species utilization of the subject property. In addition to the listed species survey, the ecologists also recorded notes regarding general wildlife observations which are presented in Table 5 of this report. 2. VEGETATION SURVEY AND LISTED PLANT SPECIES 2.1. Vegetation Survey/Mapping Methodology The dominant plant communities and land uses within the project limits were mapped by WilsonMiller ecologists utilizing field assessment methods. Vegetation mapping was performed utilizing color aerial photographs and ground-truthing of the project site. A detailed analysis of vegetative structure and composition of each habitat was performed during the site visits. The vegetative associations and land uses were classified in general accordance with the Department of Transportation's Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) manual, January 1999 edition. Refer to the included FLUCCS Map for the vegetative community types found on the site (Exhibit B). The primary factor contributing to alteration of native vegetative communities on the site is a change in site hydrology. With this change, opportunistic plant species (i.e. exotic and/or nuisance species) may establish and further negatively impact the native plant community. Natural site conditions on the property have been altered by human induced activities. Examples include the disruption of the historical hydrological sheet flow with the construction of the Cypress Canal to the south, construction of CR-951 and associated canal to the west, construction of Immokalee Road and Cocohatchee Canal to the north, development of surrounding areas, and a lowered groundwater table. Alteration of the hydrologic regime on the subject property most likely caused a change in the structure and composition of the native plant community, and may have provided an opportunity for exotic and nuisance vegetative species to become established. Exotic vegetation observed on the project site during the 2007 listed species survey include melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), and earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis). Nuisance species such as Caesar-weed (Urena lobata), and muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia) are also present. One or more of these exotic and/or nuisance species may be influencing the population distribution of the native plant communities on the project site. Levels of exotic plant infestations, based on their aerial cover, were mapped in conjunction with mapping of native vegetation associations and land uses. Code modifier suffixes are appended to descriptive FLUCCS codes to indicate the 10/13/2008-206828-Ver 2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32525 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report approximate abundance of exotic species within a particular FLUCCS community. Code modifiers used for the site are shown below: E = Exotic Plant Species El = Exotics 10-24% E2 = Exotics 25-49% E3 = Exotics 50-75% E4 = Exotics >75% N = Nuisance Plant Species N1 = Nuisance species 10-24% N2 = Nuisance species 25-49% N3 = Nuisance species 50-75% N4 = Nuisance species > 75% 2.2. FLUCCS Categories Documented On Site The following is a list of the FLUCCS associations mapped on the Olde Florida Golf Club site, along with a brief description of each category. Golf Course (FLUCCS 182) - This category represents the existing golf course including golf cart paths, practice driving range, internal roads and paths, club house, and maintenance facility. Saw Palmetto Prairies— (FLUCCS 321) - These areas typically lack a canopy stratum and are dominated by a groundcover of dense saw palmetto (Serenoa repens) with scattered sub-canopy and herbaceous vegetation occurring scattered throughout. Sub-canopy species include rusty lyonia (Lyonia ferruginea), winged sumac (Rhus copallinum), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), gallberry (Ilex glabra), American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), and myrsine (Rapanea punctata). Groundcover vegetation includes saw palmetto, bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), winged sumac, shiny blueberry (Vaccinium myrsinites), myrsine, and muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia). Other Shrubs and Brush (FLUCCS 329) - This category describes several small areas immediately north of the Cypress Canal on the southern end of the property. These areas are dominated by Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), rayless golden rod (Euthamia minor), dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), Caesar-weed, muscadine grape vine, broom sedge (Andropogon glomeratus) and scattered cypress (Taxodium distichum). Pine Flatwoods - Palmetto Understory - (FLUCCS 411) - These areas are dominated by a canopy of slash pine with a ground cover dominated by saw palmetto. Sub-canopy species include slash pine, winged sumac, cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), buckthorn (Bumelia tenax), myrsine, wax myrtle, dahoon holly (Ilex cassine), gallberry, and rusty lyonia. The dominant groundcover vegetation is saw palmetto with scattered pennyroyal (Piloblephis rigida), chocolate weed (Melochia corchorifolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), muscadine grape, winged sumac, love vine (Cassytha filiformis), Caesar-weed, dog fennel, gulfdune paspalum (Panicum monostachyum), chalky bluestem (Schizachyrium spp.), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), cabbage palm, snowberry (Chiococca alba), rustweed (Polypremum procumbens), and catbriar (Smilax bona-nox). Melaleuca, Brazilian pepper and downy rose myrtle (Rhodomyrtus tomentosus) are also present in these areas. Pine Flatwoods - Graminoid Understory (FLUCCS 416) - These areas are dominated by slash pine in the canopy. Sub-canopy species include slash pine, cabbage palm, widely scattered cypress (Taxodium spp.), wax myrtle, cabbage palm, myrsine, American beautyberry, winged sumac, rusty lyonia, and dahoon holly. Groundcover species include 1011312008-206828-Ver:2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32525 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report Caesar-weed, broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), pennyroyal, muscadine grape, winged sumac, love vine, Caesar-weed, catbriar, myrsine, red bay (Persea borbonia), and ragweed. Brazilian Pepper (FLUCCS 422) - This habitat contains a dense monoculture of Brazilian pepper with very little other vegetation present. When other species are present they are limited to widely scattered swamp fern (Blechnum serrulatum) and scattered willow (Salix caroliniana) and grape vine or poison ivy. These areas are typically associated with previously cleared or disturbed habitats on the property. Live Oak (FLUCCS 427) - This habitat includes areas where live oak (Quercus virginicus) dominantes the canopy. Other sub-canopy and ground cover species present include cabbage palm, slash pine, saw palmetto, grape vine, green briar, pennyroyal and other incidental ground cover species. Cabbage Palm (FLUCCS 428) - Relatively pure stands of cabbage palm may be found on the site. Some scattered live oak, laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) and slash pine may also be present in the canopy. Subcanopy species include scattered live oak, myrsine (Myrsine floridana), red bay, and Brazilian pepper. Ground cover species include scattered saw palmetto, Boston fern (Thelypteris exaltata), wild coffee (Psychotria nervosa), shoebutton ardisia (Ardisia elliptica), poison ivy, American beautyberry, and myrsine. Western Everglades Hardwoods (FLUCCS 433) - This category represents one of the dominant habitat types found on site. Cabbage palm dominates this habitat, but cypress is relatively abundant in many areas. This habitat type was historically part of a large cypress-dominated slough. The construction of Immokalee Road and Cocohatchee Canal to the north and the excavation of the Cypress Canal on the southern property boundary resulted in significant and permanent alteration to the historic water table in this region of the county. The alteration of hydrology and decrease in hydro-period has resulted in an increase in the number of cabbage palms, transitional and upland vegetation throughout the general area. Cabbage palm now dominates most of the vegetative strata in this habitat, but cypress, occasional red maple (Acer rubrum), laurel oak and other incidental species are present. Grape vine forms a dense ground cover and thick mat in the ground cover in many of these areas. Previously Cleared/Disturbed Lands — (FLUCCS 740) - These areas are highly disturbed habitats that have been previously cleared and are dominated by nuisance and/or exotic vegetation. Grape vine and Brazilian pepper usually dominate these areas. These disturbed areas are used as disposal sites for much of the vegetative debris generated during routine golf course maintenance activities. Borrow Areas — (FLUCCS 742) - These areas include large, shallow excavations where the topsoil was removed in the past during the original golf course construction. These areas have been scraped down to the underlying limerock in most instances and vegetation is limited to nuisance and/or exotic species that can tolerate the fluctuations in water levels from summer to winter months. Most of these areas are dominated by dense Brazilian pepper with primrose willow (Ludwigia peruviana), willow and scattered herbaceous species that are seasonally present. 3. LISTED SPECIES SURVEY AND RESULTS 3.1. Survey Methodology Prior to field investigations, a literature search was performed and color aerials were reviewed to identify the various vegetative communities present on the project site. Information regarding listed plant and animals that have the potential to occur in habitats 10/13/2008-206828-Ver.2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32525 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report onsite was obtained from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI). The FWC's publication Florida's Endangered Species, Threatened Species and Species of Special Concern, Official List, December 1999, was reviewed to determine the current state and federal status of listed wildlife and plant species potentially present onsite. In-house FWC data is depicted on the enclosed FWC Regional Listed Species Data Map (Exhibit C). Field surveys consisted of meandering pedestrian transects through each habitat present on the project site. These survey methodologies were generally consistent with those prescribed by the FWC (FGFWFC 1988 Wildlife Methodology Guidelines for Section 18.D of the Application for Development Approval. FGFWFC. Tallahassee, FL). WilsonMiller ecologists were equipped with a compass, aerials, binoculars, and field notebooks for documentation purposes. While performing meandering pedestrian transects, ecologists periodically stopped, looked for wildlife, signs of wildlife, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. Pedestrian transects were conducted in the early morning and late evening. Early morning transects were started one-half hour before sunrise and evening transects lasted until one- half hour after sunset. The listed species survey was performed on August 25, September 23, 24 and 29 and October 1, 2008. WilsonMiller Exhibit D shows the Listed Species Transects and Locations Map for the listed species survey. Table 1 lists pertinent information relating to the vegetation mapping/listed species survey. Table 1 - Listed Vegetation Species Survey Ecologists involved, survey dates and time and weather conditions during survey (temperature given represents temperature at beginning of survey when no range is specified. ECOLOGIST DATE TIME OF DAY WEATHER Justin Styer 8/25/08 7:00 am—10:30 am 75°F-85°F, sunny skies,wind 0—5 mph Justin Styer 9/23/08 7:15 am—3:00 pm 73°F-90°F, partly cloudy,wind 5—10 mph Justin Styer 9/24/08 7:15 am—3:00pm 72°F-90°F, mostly sunny,wind 10-15 mph Craig Schmitt ler 9/29/08 11:00 am—7:10 pm 85°F, partly cloudy,wind 0—5 mph Craig Schmittler 10/1/08 11:15 am—7:30 pm 87°F, mostly sunny,wind 0—5 mph The following provides a discussion of how the methodologies employed during the surveys deviated from the specific subcategories of wildlife survey methods recommended in the referenced FWC document. "Upland Surveys" - Methods used were consistent except that in the majority of cases, the density of transects occupied exceeded the recommended density; and surveys addressed more species than those listed in the 1988 FWC publication. "Small Mammal Sampling" - No small mammal trapping was performed. None of the species listed under this methodology could be reasonably expected to occur on the property due to inappropriate range and habitat. "Herpetofaunal_Surveys" - No herpetofaunal trapping was performed. None of the species listed under this methodology could be reasonably expected to occur on the property due to inappropriate habitat. 3.2. Listed Plant Species Documented Onsite During the course of mapping vegetation associations and conducting listed species transects, WilsonMiller ecologists also searched for plants listed by the Florida Department 10/13/2008-206828-Ver:2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32526 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report of Agriculture (FDA) and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) that may be present on the project site. The above-noted agencies have categorized the various listed plant species based upon their relative abundance in natural communities. Those categorizations include "Endangered;" "Threatened," and "Commercially Exploited". "Endangered" means species of plants native to the State that are in imminent danger of extinction within the State, the survival of which is unlikely if the causes of a decline in the number of plants continue, and includes all species determined to be endangered or threatened, pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, Public Law No. 93-205 (87 Stat. 884). "Threatened" means species native to the State that are in rapid decline in number of plants within the State, but which have not decreased in such number as to cause them to be endangered. "Commercially exploited" means species native to the State which are subject to removal in significant numbers from native habitats in the State and sold or transported for sale. The protection afforded plants listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture entails restrictions on harvesting or destroying plants found on private lands of another, or public lands, without permission and/or a permit from the FDA. There are no restrictions for landowners, unless the sale of plants is involved. These provisions are found in Section 581.185, FDA under State law. Those plants listed by the FDA, which were documented by the listed species survey to exist on the project site, are listed in Table 2. There were four species of listed plants, per the FDA list, were observed on the property: the twisted air plant (Tillandsia flexuosa), the stiff-leaved wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata), the wild pine (Tillandsia balbisinia), and the butterfly orchid (Encyclia tampensis). The twisted air plant is listed by the FDA as Endangered, the stiff-leaved wild pine is listed by the FDA as Endangered, the wild pine is listed as Endangered, and the butterfly orchid is listed as Commercially Exploited by the FDA. None of these plant species are listed by the FWS. The above-mentioned plant species, although listed by the FDA, are relatively common in southwest Florida. Table 2 - Listed plant species observed COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS HABITAT FDA FWS Twisted air plant Tillandsia flexuosa E NL 411, 416,433 Stiff-leaved wild pine Tillandsia fasciculata E NL 411,416,433 Wild pine Tillandsia balbisinia E NL 428 Butterfly orchid Encyclia tampensis C NL 416,433, 621 FDA =Florida Department of Agriculture FWS =United States Fish and Wildlife Service E =Endangered T =Threatened NL =Not Listed Habitat =Major FLUCCS categories in which indicated species were observed or are most likely to occur. 3.3. Listed Plant Species That Could Potentially Occur On Site But Were Not Observed The following species listed in Table 3 could potentially be found on the project site due to the presence of appropriate habitat, but were not actually observed. Table 3 - Listed plant species that could potentially occur but were not observed COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS HABITAT FDA FWS Giant wild pine Tillandsia utriculata E NL 411,416,433 FDA = Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWS = United States Fish and Wildlife Service 10/13/2008-206828-Ver:2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32525 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report E = Endangered C = Commercially exploited NL = Not listed Habitat = Major FLUCCS categories in which indicated species were observed or are most likely to occur. 3.4. Listed Wildlife Species Documented Onsite During the listed species survey, state and federally listed wildlife species were observed on the project site including the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia) and American alligator (Alligator mississippensis). The gopher tortoise is listed as Threatened by the FWC and is not listed by the FWS. The Big Cypress fox squirrel is listed as Threatened by the FWC and is listed not listed by the FWS. The American alligator is listed as a Species of Special Concern by the FWC and is not listed by the FWS. A total of seventeen active and inactive gopher tortoise burrows were observed on the site and their approximate locations are presented on the Listed Species Transects and Locations Map (Exhibit D). Several listed wading birds were observed foraging in the stormwater management lakes within the existing golf course during the listed species survey. These species include the little blue heron (Egretta caerulea), snowy egret (Egretta thula), white ibis (Eudocimus albus), and tri-colored heron (Egretta tricolor). These wading birds are listed by the FWC as Species of Special Concern and are not listed by the FWS. 3.5. Listed Wildlife Species That Could Potentially Occur Onsite But Were Not Observed Although not observed during the listed species survey, the following state and/or federally listed wildlife species could utilize or visit the site as a result of potentially suitable habitat being present: Florida panther, Eastern indigo snake, bald eagle, wood stork, and the Florida black bear. Various sources of information were used to determine the possibility of occurrence (FNAI, 1998; FWS 1997, FWC 1997, FDA 1997). Table 4 denotes listed wildlife species that have a potential to occur on the project site, although they were not observed. Common habitat occurrence, state/federal status, and potential for occurrence are also given in Table 4. Florida Panther - The Florida panther is listed as Endangered by the FWS and the FWC. A portion of the western-most property is located within the FWS Panther Secondary Protection Zone, as mapped by the FWS. WilsonMiller Exhibit C shows the Secondary Protection Zone mapped for this region of the county. The FWC telemetry data indicates Florida panther #28 was documented occurring on or near the property on June 21 and June 23, 1989. FWC telemetry data indicates Florida panther (Texas Cougar #101) was documented occurring approximately 1.0 and 1.6 miles north and northwest of the project site in 1995. This female Texas cougar was introduced into the population in the mid-1990's in an effort to restore historic genetics of the Florida panther population. FWC telemetry data indicates Florida panther #66 was documented occurring approximately 1.3 miles to the east of the site in 1998. FWC telemetry data indicates Florida panther #92 was documented occurring approximately 1.3 miles north of the site in 2001. The FWC data indicates that a collared panther has not been documented on the subject property for 19 years and two panthers occurred within 1.3 miles of the site 10 years ago and 7 years ago. No individuals or signs of panther were observed on the site during the listed species survey. Florida Black Bear - The Florida black bear is listed as Threatened by the FWC and is not listed by the FWS. The black bear is a transient animal that is highly opportunistic, and is not an uncommon occurrence in residential neighborhoods in search of food. Current FWC data indicates that the nearest documented Florida black bear location to the project 10/13/2008-206828-Ver:2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32525 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report site were individuals more than two (2) miles south of the site in the Golden Gate Estates. Black bear have also been documented occurring four miles to the east and northeast of the site. Although there is a possibility of a black bear to walk across or visit the project site, no individuals or signs of this species were observed during the listed species survey. Eastern Indigo Snake - The Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) has the potential to occur on the project site. The indigo snake is listed as Threatened by FWS and FWC. No individuals or signs of this species were observed on the site during listed species surveys. Wood Stork - There is a potential for the wood stork (Mycteria americana), to forage on or otherwise utilize the property. The wood stork is listed as Endangered by the FWC and the FWS. The site is located within the 18-mile wood stork foraging core of Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary. Bald Eagle - There is a potential for the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) to forage on or otherwise utilize the property. The bald eagle has been taken off the endangered species list but is still protected by the Golden and Bald Eagle Protection Act. The FWC data indicates the presence of an active bald eagle nest within 1 mile of the site. The FWS and FWC protection zones established around active bald eagle nest trees are a 330' and 660' foot radius from the tree. The documented bald eagle tree is located near the southwest property corner of the Calusa Pines Golf Club and is approximately a mile or more for the site. .The bald eagle could spend time foraging for fish within the stormwater management lakes on the property. Table 4- Listed wildlife species that could potentially occur but were not observed -�-. SCIENTIFIC COMMON FWC FWS Habitat Observed Potential NAME NAME Status Status (FLUCCS) During For COMMENTS Survey Occurrence Felis concolor Florida panther E E All No Low- Unlikely coryi _ Moderate _ transient Ursus Florida black Low- Unlikely americanus bear T NL All No Moderate transient floridanus Haliaeetus Bald eagle NL NL 527,433, No Low Potential visitor leucocephalus 621 Mycteria Wood stork E E 527, 621, No Moderate Potential visitor americana 740 Drymarchon Eastern indigo Potential corais coupieri snake T T All No Moderate resident or visitor FWC =Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FWS = United States Fish and Wildlife Service E = Endangered T =Threatened SSC =Species of Special Concern NL =Not Listed Habitat =Major FLUCCS categories in which indicated species were observed or are most likely to occur. 3.6. Non-listed Species Documented Onsite (General Wildlife Observations) Table 5 gives a list of non-listed wildlife species and their FLUCCS occurrence as documented on the site during the listed species survey. Table 5 - List of non-listed wildlife species observed COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME FLUCCS Occurrence BIRDS Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 428,433 Common nighthawk Chordeiles minor 411 10/13/2008-206828-Ver:2-TKING NO107-015-001-PZON-32525 8 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME FLUCCS Occurrence Blue jay Cyanocitta crisata 416 Pileated woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus 411 Red-bellied woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus 411,416 Mockingbird Mimus polyglottos 411,433,416 Downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens 411,416,433 Mourning dove Zenaida macroura 411,416,433, 740 AMPHIBIANS&REPTILES Brown anole Anolis sagrei 411,416,433,621 Cuban anole Anolis s. sagrei 411,416,433,621 Cuban treefrog Osteopilus septentrionalis 433 MAMMALS Nine-banded armadillo* Dasypus novemcinctus 411,416 White-tailed deer* Odocoileus virginianus 411,428,433, 740 Raccoon* Procyon lotor 411,416,433 Feral hog Sus scrofa 411,416,428,433 Marsh rabbit Sylvilagus palustris 416 *Signs of these species(i.e.—tracks,scat,burrows,rubs,etc.)were observed. 4. SUMMARY 4.1. Listed Plants The protection afforded plants listed by the FDA entails restrictions on harvesting or destroying listed plants found on private lands of another or on public lands without permission and/or a permit from the FDA. There are no restrictions for landowners, unless the sale of plants is involved. No plants listed by the FWS were observed on the site. The following plants, listed by the FDA as Endangered, were observed on the project site: the stiff-leaved wild pine, twisted air plant, wild pine, and butterfly orchid. These species of listed air plants are relatively common in southwest Florida. 4.2. Listed Wildlife The Florida panther has not been documented by the FWC as occurring on the site but the property occurs within the Secondary Protection Zone as mapped by the FWS. The site has not functioned during recent decades as any portion of any known home range of breeding females, adult males or sub-adult males. Furthermore, the site has not been documented contributing to the survival of any collared female, adult or sub-adult dispersing male panthers. The site offers limited landscape linkage to panther dispersal routes. The property is not adjacent to habitats that are currently occupied by panther. The FWS describes the Secondary Zone as natural and potentially restorable disturbed lands adjacent to the Primary Zone that are not known to support panthers on a regular basis. The site does not provide habitat important for transient sub-adult male panthers. The Florida black bear has not been documented occurring on or otherwise utilizing the site however black bear have been documented by the FWC occurring in nearby Golden Gate Estates properties to the south and east. Black bears have been documented by the FWC occurring over 2 miles to the south and over 4 miles to the east of the property. There is a potential for black bear to walk across or otherwise visit the site in the future. Therefore, the FWC and Collier County Environmental Services Department may require the preparation of a Florida black bear management plan. The Big Cypress fox squirrel has been documented utilizing the site and there is potential for the Big Cypress fox squirrel to utilize the property in the future. Therefore, the FWC, South Florida Water Management District and Collier County Environmental Services will likely require the preparation of a Big Cypress fox squirrel management plan. 10/13/2008-206828-Ver:2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32525 9 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report The Eastern indigo snake has the potential to utilize the property but has not been documented onsite. The FWC, FWS, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Collier County Environmental Services Department may require the preparation of an Eastern indigo snake management plan. The gopher tortoise has been documented occurring on the property. There were a total of seventeen active and inactive burrows observed within native habitats. Using the FWC burrow occupancy conversion factor of 0.614, approximately ten (17 X 0.614 = 10.4) tortoises are estimated to inhabit the site. Collier County will likely request the tortoises to be preserved on the site within retained native vegetation. A gopher tortoise relocation permit will need to be processed through the FWC and Collier County should the tortoises be required to be relocated within the property. A gopher tortoise permit to relocate tortoises' offsite could also be obtained through FWC and Collier County. The wood stork has the potential to forage on or otherwise utilize portions of the property. The Olde Florida Club property is within 18-miles of a documented nesting site (Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary). If wetland impacts are proposed on the site, technical assistance with FWS will be required to address mitigation for impacts to wood stork habitat. The exact amount of mitigation required for impacting potential wood stork habitat is not known and will be determined when the project goes through the federal permitting process. The bald eagle has the potential to occur on the property and an active bald eagle nest is documented by FWC occurring within 1 mile of the site. However, the Olde Florida Club property is located well out of the established 330' and 660' protection zones for bald eagle nest trees. No bald eagle individual or nests were observed on the property during the listed species survey. The listed wading birds documented foraging on the subject property are fairly common to south Florida. No nests of these species were documented occurring on the site. It is anticipated listed wading birds will continue to foraging on or utilize the site. The Florida panther, Eastern indigo snake, wood stork, bald eagle, and the Florida black bear have the potential to utilize the project site. However, none of the above-listed wildlife species, or signs of their presence, were observed occurring on the project site during the listed species survey. This region of the county is rapidly developing and represents fragmented wildlife habitat. This plays a significant role in deterring wildlife species, listed or otherwise, from utilizing the site. With the proper approved state, federal and local agency wildlife management plans in place, no adverse impacts to listed wildlife species are anticipated to occur as a result of the future development of the property. 5. REFERENCES The Audubon Society, Field Guide to North American Mammals, 1989. Behler, John L. and F. Wayne King. 1980. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Reptiles & Amphibians. Chanticleer Press, Knopf, New York. 8th printing, 1989. Bull, John, and John Farrand, Jr. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Birds, Eastern Region. 1977. Chanticleer Press, Knopf, New York. 22nd printing, 1993. Dressler, Robert L., David W. Hall, Kent D. Perkins, and Norris H. Williams. Identification Manual for Wetland Plant Species of Florida. Florida Department of Transportation. January 1999 Flo_rid a Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. Third Edition. 10/13/2008-206828-Ver 2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32525 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2007. Florida's Endangered Species, Threatened Species and Species of Special Concern, Official Lists. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. 1988. Wildlife Methodology Guidelines. Humphrey, S.R. 1992. Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida, Volume I Mammals. University Press of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Moler, P.E. 1992. Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida, Amphibians and Reptiles. Volume Ill. University Press of Florida, Tallahassee, FL. National Geographic Society. Field Guide to the Birds of North America. National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. Second Edition, 1994. University Presses of Florida. 1991. Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida. Volume 5 (Plants). Whitaker, Jr., John O. 1980. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mammals. Chanticleer Press, Knopf, New York. 8th printing, 1989. Wunderlin, Richard P. Guide to The Vascular Plants of Central Florida. 1982. Board of Regents of the State of Florida. 1986. 10/13/2008-206828-Ver:2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32525 Olde Florida Golf Club Listed Species Survey Report EXHIBITS 10/13/2008-206828-Ver:2-TKING N0107-015-001-PZON-32525 EI,, M4A, OP -�F -� !1 South Florida Water Management District r� ,aY os - • • i° Fort Myers Area Office • 2209 Peck Street • Fort Myers,FL 33901 • (813)332-0399 • FL WATS 1-800-248-1201 r TFIL ..Z.7-277 11-71 ,._,!„ ; CON 24-06 AUG 15 1990 August 8, 1990 WILSON,14IILLEIt. BARTON,SOLL&PEEK,INC. Mr. Arthur Pritzker Wilson, Miller, Barton, & Peek, Inc. 1383 Airport Rd. North Naples, Florida 33942-9986 Dear Arthur: Subject: Wetland Pre-application Inspection Project: Olde Florida Golf Course Location: Collier Co. S31/T48S/R27E Please find enclosed copy of a memorandum to Terri Bates of our West Palm Beach office regarding the above referenced project. As outlined in the memorandum, the field delineated wetlands lines have been approved by staff. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at 332-6900. Sincerely, (1 4L,fraj- .s . �l Jahtt S. Strutzel ' Environmental Analyst Natural Resource Management Division cc: T. Bates Exhibit G-2 G^rning Boar! F.Garner,Chairman-Fort Myers Fritz Stein-Belle Glade Valerie Boyd-Naples John R.Wodraska.Executive Director L .A.Jason.Vice Chairman-Key Biscayne Mike Stout-Windermere James E.:Nall-Fort Lauderdale Tilford C.Creel,Deputy Executive Director Arsenio Milian-Miami Ken Adams-West Palm Beach Charles W.Causey-Islamorada Thomas K.MacVicar,Deputy Executive Director District Headquarters, P.O.Box 24680 • 3301 Gun Club Road • West Palm Beach,FL33416-4680 • (407)686-8800 • Florida WATS 1-800.432.2045 CON24-06 MEMORANDUM 'L,k1j AUG 151990 TO: Terri Bates FROM: Janet Strutzel WILSON,MILLER. BARTON,SOLL&PEEK, INC. DATE: August 9, 1990 SUBJECT: Olde Florida Club (pre-application meeting/2/13/90) Collier County, S 31/T48S/R27E A pre-application meeting was conducted in order to inspect flagged wetland boundaries. The parcel is located two miles east of SR951 and south of Immokalee Rd. The property consists of cypress wetlands, transitional cypress/pine wetlands and pine flatwood uplands. Some areas of the site have been invaded with the exotic Melalueca. The submitted wetland survey appears to accurately reflect existing wetland boundaries. The attached copy of the wetland survey is provided for your records. cc. A. Pritzker i!.. ‘s, 4# 1 Ma . ' trI- LU ,,..k,,,, LL Z a . le a 0 IIII, IMMI Cn Cif) 2 Cn > w 4. Fit- • > 0 > ,, .. . t. ,,,, Z ....E, U.11 �- W Z W F. W of • rt (1) 4 W 0 CI v „, ...... ,..., „.... W' / o �d'>• .O ,,!p N l' tit** I "'I"Y A R i CO VP UNI ILL 4. W =C lir NW 4 Mop, 0 South Florida Water Management District r�os - • • '' Fort Myers Area Office: 1342 Colonial Blvd.,Suite 81 • Fort Myers,FL 33907 • (813)278-SFWM • 1-800-248-1201 • FAX(813)278- }}.j44uN - 21992 CON 24-06 WILSON-M{LLc Regulation Department May 28, 1992 Mr. Clay Carithers Wilson, Miller, Barton, & Peek Wilson Proffessional Center Suite 200, 3200 Bailey Lane at Airport Road Naples, Florida 33942 Dear Mr: Carithers, Please find enclosed copy of the site inspection memorandum for the above mentioned project. A more detailed review of the proposed project site and any proposed mitigation can be provided following the submittal of additional pre-application information or at the time of permitting. The proposed project design will be evaluated for consistency with Appendix 7 of the Basis of Review, found in the District's "Permit Information Manual, Volume IV". Please note that review of pre-application information is informal • and will not be binding on the District until a permit has been issued. A file has been set up at the Fort Myers office with pre- application materials. If you have any further question pertaining to the pre-application information, please contact Janet Strutzel at (813) 278-7396. Si �y� K en Johnso Senior Environmental Analyst Natural Resource Management Division C: Lucie Blair, FDER (Fort Myers, office) Skip Bergman, ACOE (Fort Myers, office) bc: Area Engineer, Field Rep. , files, T. Bates Exhibit G-3 Governing Board: Allan Milledge,Chairman-Miami James E.Nall-Fort Lauderdale Leah G.Schad-West Palm Beach Tilford C.Creel,Executive Director Valerie Boyd,Vice Chairman-Naples Annie Betancourt-Miami Frank Williamson,Jr.-Okeechobee Thomas K.Mac Vicar,Deputy Executive Director Ken Adams-West Palm Beach Franklin B.Mann-Fort Myers Eugene K.Pettis-Fort Lauderdale CON 24 M E M O R A N D U M TO: File THROUGH: Karen Johnson, Senior Environmental Analyst FROM: Janet Strutzeltaff Environmental Analyst DATE: May 28, 1992 SUBJECT: Olde Florida Golf Club, Collier County, S31/T48S/R27E (Pre-application meeting on May 8, 1992) On May 8, 1992 I met with Clay Carithers and Tom Trettis from Wilson, Miller, Barton, and Peek, at the above referenced site. The site is located in Golden Gate Estates south of Immokalee Road and east of SR 951. The site contains a total of approximately 552 acres, including: remnant pine/cypress transitional wetlands, cypress wetlands and pine flatwoods. Some areas on the site have been invaded with the exotic melaleuca. A jurisdictional determination was conducted on the project site several years ago. The site consisted of cypress wetlands and extensive transitional pine/cypress wetlands of marginal quality. These transitional areas were delineated as wetlands based on the vegetative composition of the project site. Several fires have swept the property over the last four years. The understory vegetation within the transitional areas has changed significantly since the original wetland determination was completed. Grape vine and poison ivy dominate the understory throughout the transitional areas. Data gathered by Wilson Miller within the last two years indicates that the maximum wet season water table in the southern segment of the property is about 2 . 5 feet or greater below the soil surface. The northern segment of the property maximum wet season water tables reach the soil surface. Based on monitoring well data and vegetative conditions on the project site staff has agreed with Wilson Miller's request to re- examine the original wetland determination. Original wetland acreage totaled 235 acres. Much of the original wetland acreage consisted of the described transitional areas. The transitional areas of the property have been deleted from the wetland delineation areas. These transitional areas are primarily located at the southern end of the property. Con 24 page 2 Olde Florida Golf Club Several factors have altered the hydrology on the project site. Immokalee Road to the north of the project area has significantly altered historic flows from the north. The Cypress Canal located south of the project site has also altered the hydrology of the wetland located on the project site. The Cypress Canal seems to have primarily affected those wetlands located on the southern half of the project site. Wetlands were delineated by the consultant using aerial photointerpretation from a recently taken scaled and rectified color photograph of the project site. Ground truthing of the project site was conducted in order to verify Fluccs code mapping units of upland and wetland vegetative communities. This site has an existing construction and operation permit. The permittee has been advised that he must abide by conditions set forth in the existing permit until a modified permit is issued. C: Area Engineer, Field Rep. , T. Bates, Mitigation File 1 - M T 0 w % o co J N- t 01 LL c0c, o✓- U• y r >t Z CL. ri. zQ (� CI} - 54 �% W , >-- " -- -1 S H F--- > Q H- < D cu Z - W 0 CC 0 R5r3 ` CO Z O 7C ofi D L `, 0 w -J <Z u .• U F__ o ____J z J W J c.n Q= u IL o u_ Q , I p z W -1 3 > 1 0 v: H 9 4 W � SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT s., . y� December 15, 2010 • Olde Florida Golf Club Inc. 9393 Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext Naples, FL 4120 Dear Applicant: Subject: Petition for Formal Determination of Wetlands and Surface Waters Application No. 100629-8 Olde Florida Golf Club Phase 2 Collier County: S31/T48S/R27E Enclosed is a copy of the District's intended agency action regarding your petition for a formal wetland/surface water determination. It is requested that you read this intended agency action thoroughly and understand its contents. The District will publish its notice of intended agency action in a newspaper of general circulation. If no petition requesting an administrative hearing is timely filed with the District Clerk, the Executive Director will then take final agency action on your petition in accordance with the intended agency action. You will receive notification of the final agency action. Should you wish to object to the intended agency action, you must file a petition in conformance with Rule 40E-1.521, Florida Administrative Code (attach): Elizabeth Veguilla, Deputy Clerk South Florida Water Management District Post Office Box 24680 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-4680 The attached "Notice of Rights" addresses your rights under Florida law should you wish to contest the intended agency action. However, the referenced "Noticed of Rights" should not be used as your sole source of information. To be fully advised of your legal rights, you should seek legal counsel. Please contact the District if you have any questions concerning this process. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a "Notice of Rights" has been mailed to the addressee and the persons listed in the attached distribution list no later than 5:00 p.m. this 15th day of December, 2010. Since el •nt ony - •• e, '.E., Deputy Director E ironmental Resource Regulation Department AW/dr CERTIFIED MAIL 7008 1830 0001 0508 3954 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Exhibit G-4 3301 Gun Club Road,West Palm Beach,Florida 33406 • (561)686-8800 • FL WATS 1-800-432-2045 Mailing Address: P.O.Box 24680,West Palm Beach,F1,33416-4680 • wwwsfwmd.gm NOTICE OF RIGHTS As required by Sections 120.569(1), and 120.60(3), Fla. Stat., following is notice of the opportunities which may be available for administrative hearing or judicial review when the substantial interests of a party are determined by an agency. Please note that this Notice of Rights is not intended to provide legal advice. Not all the legal proceedings detailed below may be an applicable or appropriate remedy.You may wish to consult an attorney regarding your legal rights. RIGHT TO REQUEST ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING A person whose substantial interests are or may be affected by the South Florida Water Management District's (SFWMD or District) action has the right to request an administrative hearing on that action pursuant to Sections 120.569 and 120.57, Fla. Stat. Persons seeking a hearing on a District decision which does or may determine their substantial interests shall file a petition for hearing with the District Clerk within 21 days of receipt of written notice of the decision, unless one of the following shorter time periods apply: 1) within 14 days of the notice of consolidated intent to grant or deny concurrently reviewed applications for environmental resource permits and use of sovereign submerged lands pursuant to Section 373.427, Fla. Stat.; or 2) within 14 days of service of an Administrative Order pursuant to Subsection 373.119(1), Fla. Stat. "Receipt of written notice of agency decision" means receipt of either written notice through mail, or electronic mail, or posting that the District has or intends to take final agency action, or publication of notice that the District has or intends to take final agency action. Any person who receives written notice of a SFWMD decision and fails to file a written request for hearing within the timeframe described above waives the right to request a hearing on that decision. Filing Instructions The Petition must be filed with the Office of the District Clerk of the SFWMD. Filings with the District Clerk may be made by mail, hand-delivery or facsimile. Filings by e-mail will not be accepted. Any person wishing to receive a clerked copy with the date and time stamped must provide an additional copy. A petition for administrative hearing is deemed filed upon receipt during normal business hours by the District Clerk at SFWMD headquarters in West Palm Beach, Florida. Any document received by the office of the SFWMD Clerk after 5:00 p.m. shall be filed as of 8:00 a.m. on the next regular business day. Additional filing instructions are as follows: • Filings by mail must be addressed to the Office of the SFWMD Clerk, P.O. Box 24680, West Palm Beach, Florida 33416. • Filings by hand-delivery must be delivered to the Office of the SFWMD Clerk. Delivery of a petition to the SFWMD's security desk does not constitute filing. To ensure proper filing, it will be necessary to request the SFWMD's security officer to contact the Clerk's office. An employee of the SFWMD's Clerk's office will receive and file the petition. • Filings by facsimile must be transmitted to the SFWMD Clerk's Office at(561)682-6010. Pursuant to Subsections 28-106.104(7), (8) and (9), Fla. Admin. Code, a party who files a document by facsimile represents that the original physically signed document will be retained by that party for the duration of that proceeding and of any subsequent appeal or subsequent proceeding in that cause. Any party who elects to file any document by facsimile shall be responsible for any delay, disruption, or interruption of the electronic signals and accepts the full risk that the document may not be properly filed with the clerk as a result. The filing date for a document filed by facsimile shall be the date the SFWMD Clerk receives the complete document. Rev.07/0112009 1 Initiation of an Administrative Hearing Pursuant to Rules 28-106.201 and 28-106.301, Fla. Admin. Code, initiation of an administrative hearing shall be made by written petition to the SFWMD in legible form and on 8 and 1/2 by 11 inch white paper. • All petitions shall contain: 1. Identification of the action being contested, including the permit number, application number, District file number or any other SFWMD identification number, if known. 2. The name, address and telephone number of the petitioner and petitioner's representative, if any. 3. An explanation of how the petitioner's substantial interests will be affected by the agency determination. 4. A statement of when and how the petitioner received notice of the SFWMD's decision. 5. A statement of all disputed issues of material fact. If there are none,the petition must so indicate. 6. A concise statement of the ultimate facts alleged, including the specific facts the petitioner contends warrant reversal or modification of the SFWMD's proposed action. 7. A statement of the specific rules or statutes the petitioner contends require reversal or modification of the SFWMD's proposed action. 8. If disputed issues of material fact exist, the statement must also include an explanation of how the alleged facts relate to the specific rules or statutes. 9. A statement of the relief sought by the petitioner, stating precisely the action the petitioner wishes the SFWMD to take with respect to the SFWMD's proposed action. A person may file a request for an extension of time for filing a petition. The SFWMD may,for good cause, grant the request. Requests for extension of time must be filed with the SFWMD prior to the deadline for filing a petition for hearing. Such requests for extension shall contain a certificate that the moving party has consulted with all other parties concerning the extension and that the SFWMD and any other parties agree to or oppose the extension. A timely request for extension of time shall toll the running of the time period for filing a petition until the request is acted upon. If the District takes action with substantially different impacts on water resources from the notice of intended agency decision, the persons who may be substantially affected shall have an additional point of entry pursuant to Rule 28-106.111, Fla.Admin. Code, unless otherwise provided by law. Mediation The procedures for pursuing mediation are set forth in Section 120.573, Fla. Stat., and Rules 28-106.111 and 28-106.401-.405, Fla. Admin. Code. The SFWMD is not proposing mediation for this agency action under Section 120.573, Fla. Stat., at this time. RIGHT TO SEEK JUDICIAL REVIEW Pursuant to Sections 120.60(3)and 120.68, Fla. Stat.,a party who is adversely affected by final SFWMD action may seek judicial review of the SFWMD's final decision by filing a notice of appeal pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110 in the Fourth District Court of Appeal or in the appellate district where a party resides and filing a second copy of the notice with the SFWMD Clerk within 30 days of rendering of the final SFWMD action. Rev.07/01/2009 2 erp_staff_report.rdf Last Date For Agency Action: December 21, 2010 INDIVIDUAL FORMAL WETLAND DETERMINATION STAFF REPORT Project Name: Olde Florida Golf Club Phase 2 Formal Wetland Determination Permit No.: 11-00024-F Application No.: 100629-8 Application Type:New Formal Wetland Determination Location: Collier County, S31/T48S/R27E Applicant: Olde Florida Golf Club Inc Project Area: 258.41 acres Project Land Use: Wetland Determination Special Drainage District: NA Conservation Easement To District: No Sovereign Submerged Lands: No PROJECT PURPOSE: This application is a request for a formal wetland determination of the boundary of wetlands and other surface waters, pursuant to Rule 40E-4.042 Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), for a 258.41 acre parcel known as Olde Florida Golf Club Phase 2. App.no. 100629-8 Page 1 of 4 ei:p_staff_report.rdf PROJECT EVALUATION: PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION: The site is located north of the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension, south of Immokalee Road, east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), in Naples, Collier County. A location map is attached as Exhibit 1.0. Hydrology in this area is affected by the Cocohatchee Canal to the north, Curry Canal to the east and Cypress Canal to the south. The upland habitat onsite consists of palmetto prairie, upland pine flatwoods, live oak with less than 25% invasive species, cabbage palm with varying levels of invasive and nuisance plant species (0-75%), previously cleared disturbed lands, Brazilian pepper monoculture, a small portion of the existing golf course, and non-hydric cypress-pine-cabbage palm habitat. Wetland habitat onsite consists of freshwater marsh with varying levels of invasive species, and cypress-pine-cabbage palm with up to 50% invasive species. The cypress-pine-cabbage palm habitat not claimed as jurisdictional wetlands do not show signs of hydric soils or hydrology. Surface waters consist of a borrow area with approximately 75% invasive species.A FLUCCS habitat map is attached as Exhibit 2.0. PROJECT BACKGROUND: A field inspection of the property was conducted by Karyn Allman of the South Florida Water Management District,Tom Trettis and Craig Schmitt ler of Wilson Miller/Stantec on August 12, 2010. The methodologies utilized to delineate and verify the locations of the wetlands and other surface waters onsite were consistent with Rule 62-340 F.A.C. and subsection 373.421(2) Florida Statutes (F.S.). The wetland lines were delineated using a GPS in accordance with Section 4,5.2 (b)1 of the Basis of Review and Rule 62.340, F.A.C. Due to the hydrologic alterations within the region from the surrounding canals, the use of groundwater well data was utilized to delineate the extent of jurisdictional cypress-pine-cabbage palm habitat. Pursuant to 62-340.500(8) F.A.C., measurements of inundation or saturation which support the presence of water to an extent consistent with the provisions of the definition of wetlands can be utilized as hydrologic indicators in delineating wetlands. A description of the ground water well data and the wetland habitats are provided in the wetland section of this staff report. The 258.41 acres onsite are within ERP permit 11-00898-S. In 1991, Application No. 901105-11 revised the wetland lines within the entire Olde Florida Golf Club based on ground water well data and site visits by District and Army Corps of Engineer staff. The current wetland determination reflects additional changes to the wetland line within Phase 2. The habitats within the 38.71 acres of existing conservation easement in the north east corner of the Olde Florida Phase 2 site were not reviewed under this determination,and were not included in the project acreage. WETLANDS: DOMINANT VEGETATION/WETLAND DESCRIPTION: Based on the August 12, 2010 site visit, there are a total of 30.88 acres of herbaceous and forested wetlands within the project area. The 19.91-acre forested wetland is located in the central portion of the property and contains cypress, slash pine, red bay, cabbage palm, swamp fern, wire grass, and Brazilian pepper. The delineation of the forested wetland is described in the Soils/Hydrologic Indicators section. The smallest wetland onsite is a pocket of freshwater marsh (0.04 acres) located in the south east portion of the project within the disturbed land habitat (piles of landscape debris). The wetland is in a small depression and is comprised of largely cattails with some maidencane and other herbaceous vegetation. There are three larger herbaceous wetlands (labeled as Wetland 1, 3, and 5 on Exhibit 3.0), one in the south east and two in the south west. Wetland 1 is 5.14 acres,Wetland 3 is 2.91 acres,and Wetland 5 is App.no.: 100629-8 Page 2 of 4 erp_staff_report.rdf 2.88 acres. It appears that the ground within these three wetland areas was at one time mechanically scraped down, creating the herbaceous habitat. There are portions of the herbaceous wetlands that are shallow, closer to wet prairie habitat with rock outcroppings at the surface. Vegetation in these shallower portions of the wetlands consists of pluchea, coreopsis, eleocharis, and white top sedge. The deeper portions of the wetlands contain willow, primrose willow, torpedo grass, maidencane, fox tail, eleocharis, juncus, cattail, frog fruit, button bush, and dog fennel. The wetlands have been field flagged and surveyed (See Exhibit 3.0). Delineation of the herbaceous wetlands was based on the B-test under Section 62-340.300(2)(b) F.A.C. SOIL TYPES AND HYDROLOGIC INDICATORS: The site is underlain by four(4) soil types: Oldmar fine sand, limestone substratum (10), Hallandale fine sand (11), Riviera fine sand, limestone substratum (18), and Boca fine sand (21). Please see exhibit 4.0 for location of each soil type within the site. The hydric soils within the site showed signs of altered hydrology. Hydric soil indicators within the cypress habitat were below 6". Some organic bodies were present but did not meet the hydric soil criteria. Another sign of hydrologic alteration included extensive grape vine in the ground cover in some areas, outcompeting wire grass and other wetland ground cover species. The wetland boundaries within the cypress habitat were determined based on vegetation and the hydrology criteria outlined in Section 62-340.500(8) F.A.C. Hydrologic data from groundwater wells indicated areas that met the criteria of inundation for 7 consecutive days or saturation within 6"of the soil surface for 20 consecutive days. Data from eighteen (18) groundwater wells located throughout the property were collected over three years (2008-2010). The data indicated that the cypress habitat met the inundation or saturation criteria at ground elevation 12.47 NGVD or below all three years. The habitat found at elevations between 12.47 and 12.6 NGVD met the hydrologic criteria in some years, but not all three years. The wetland line was therefore delineated using elevation 12.47 NGVD. Please see the permanent permit file for a copy of the groundwater well data, rainfall data, and ground elevations. The location of the wells and associated elevations are shown on page 1 of Exhibit 3.0. WETLAND DELINEATION: Pursuant to Subsection 373.421(2), F.S. and Section 4.5 of the Basis of Review,the formal determination of wetlands and other surface waters were surveyed in a mathematically reproducible form as provided on Exhibit 3.0. App no 100629-8 Page 3 of 4 erp_staff_report.rdf STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: The Staff recommends that the following be issued : A formal determination of the extent of wetlands and other surface waters, pursuant to Rule 40E-4.042 F.A.C. within the boundaries of the approximately 258.41-acre site known as Olde Florida Golf Club Phase 2. As shown on Exhibit 3.0, the project contains 30.88 acres of wetlands, as defined by Rule ' 62-340, F.A.C. Based on the information provided, District rules have been adhered to. Staff recommendation is for approval subject to the attached Special Conditions. STAFF REVIEW: NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT APPROVAL ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION SUPERVI OR ,5 P.. ,t. KaryrAljth n i Lau Or Layman P ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMITTING DIVISION DIRECTOR: //f H/f ? /`L, DATE: /.-1/1-..' ", Anita R. Bain SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1. The formal determination shall be binding for five years provided the physical condition on the property does not change so as to alter the boundary of the wetlands and other surface waters during that period.The permit shall expire five years from the date of permit issuance. App.no.: 100629-8 Page 4 of 4 ►Ir i . 4 , ....t 1 c 1 T } t' i {' _ i '►Iii►1, a t .1 1r rr { . (111,141 i , 1. 1 I f J '•.-JI t GAis S3GViO3 • u 1l!!1 !S, I W t1 .. I , it iTl� T 1 .. ' 1. `• 4 r rl . r 111 ,, tr cl' .t. t l , , , es a�� 1 ti 1- U _ 41 M. o V C7 I c } ' ,'-'t.. Y • J . ( 1 w 1 111,'.13.11 r.., 'S'r�if }I 1 gl,48 9 1 , ' Q �k ,. yp. tII i { t o,_ r i'I I! I:. .'' ,496"2J3 ' is .-d wi11., + 16 � 1 l . O 4 1 r 1+,n , I i w !II' ,, 9L I •1•U'I t , , w Z H �. I �I �. p < '1 ' �'� r 1 ,, 1j1 ` fi , „ Y ,,oh 1 _ C t .. /.-_ fG i t .I d -3 Dil i!�I M ', 1.4'1 i ' 1 ( L'',' ff°I, . ' ' ;�\ I 111�f , q9l 1. 1 ,.i( + r � Sn{' �I I (�.' _... ..asset . .,• .�.. .... 1 Exhibit 1.0 Application No. 100629-8 1 of 1 416 62 426 El 624 E2 N1(NN/0) 411 E2 624 E2 N:(6107) 6246362(N11/0) 321 426 E2 N2 624 E2 61(4166) 624 E2(NW0) 428E2142 416 E1 N2 427 El 112 416 El N1 321 641E2 411 El NI 321 614 E2 42$62142 321 411 61 N1 428 E2 442 .62 1 422 624 El NI WWII) 414E 1 141 641 E2 624 E1(N q10) 425 E3 321 624 53 43(46215 742 E4 62<E2(4WD) 416 E3 742 E4 42567 416 E3 42162 641 El 428 E2 64)E]---* 426E1 740 E3 143 415 416 610 63(61201 _ 4.41.4.44 w ...4.. a.p" .�w.S�w+a .JM%1� w,�nnra 6rw Mph w.....4N4 0W Cf'O4.o044 4,441 Ba..444 p Iw 1lr>��"x►'6...�1��r�.-Mln .iaNMY i fltn65 F ti~••a �11 411E2 143 40 Emir.44414 1444 WilsvnMiller ,�r,�M1M1, s1.�» �.4,� �_„_ �w+Inr• 4.�Q i 14..1...r.1y W .n um. tty�51lt 68e-,y. lHlr.y�.bM Jai ,.Ir 6�6.M.4.rYN..tW7"r»w.r..w4Nw ,6 yea 4r ..1.'.'..1414.1 ,... Na4 ►�.bwhw.nl.w Jot ( ()I 1)1 1.I OIZII),\ CI-I'1/ 1711 \ 'i PI I C ( c M :\ 11 Exhibit 2.0 Application No. 100629-8 1 of 2 ' , 1 C'1'Itf • , Y' ' ,utt,ct.J::',.,., l • , • !� \ ^jr:. J 1 ,,, .,,:71n:;.11 ` �, , •\ hell.+l 1`... �.... , `, I 1 l Or 171':i. \ 1 r :• ,� 1 I , .:.1 J.Zh' ;/, e,rft..1:.1 .(. ! � �� l� ertI �„ S. it • • . th.,■I:t / I / r` t i \ • T'11:!t'q \\ i at 16,I, *A.. ,\ ) • 4 I: tract,,r i i I iff , z - ■..11.r.r5-7-- ..r , -' 1 1c.rrcr, r /'Fula, �\ i ._ �� . ! ,...ator� S Er-- -- ,}t 1� , alra ,,,.=M yy....=�..rrno]... Koff ". SL..+��r�p� W. 114 oMVrn,m..Ph".26w�Ory IMa4-, �i��ww+M��. NWelfN� �\ :11 ftlel flUCCS \ N , M71..M4.p4rpr•� ' 1. L.YK�M.�,4 IMO p WilsoiMiller /1 ;:,c ., " ,.».r.»...,:- ...., to 14 "`/ . . �, OI.m1 Fi.oRIi)A GOI.i' ci uI; I'IIAI I 1 I t, (' (' ,, Ni \ P Exhibit 2.0 Application No. 100629-8 2 of 2 — '••• fir w * . d ` ,4, ," `: g '` d , ' i`r`at ,if�;J`� i N t it 4 a Y $�� N�'# S 7+.{ T � �'I � �.?' `3 ,« r�,oi" ; 4� � ; 4+ .G •HY + r s ,Ysx l �-it �''� "%L�+ �, ' k& 4, * � j*. I i1''',yr��ti_•. ��i" y �`,«�, � �, 7,16....4/4:'/V.J.` s.. �iN s,� ' y i :l a. ,: a r ti ' o a r'.' y ''t?). z, ,,rt ' �'' > rWrW. .fir f ?. f=t vrS f;.- •3 - orb A «, lb.: �' ,{,�,� �. � r'S?" � F{S44i''Jr •`. `�'T v � �*l��tj�,,;[9t�„y�itr j�yi �,r� }� tt . .,. ..A.4 .1/4 x `;, N a_ - -,"+rt-it ` f, :iiif.71 t ja .,.!..441.41•+. t+Ec �- * `ft I^ r .F1a" r. ��n?!-A�4�"�.` ,; (�r' -} t' .' 7 t * . ', `r' - > St 4,„, tKli+ tk`'� ''.,.'�i• 'T'-i•�yi. < ? y'. ,'f:�±,yys y�,}ww4 i' `S'yto(4- rt w'L . d�rt' �4w.1,as4,1/,- , �, Ty �31dr St''r $ jy (I'�'�iv'1'} yj�:Iwi le f z4.j. , 4.' '4:-, . t.....,, , id,:,«.',14'y- , > At!' �.' .Nil y'1' "4vw a ¢�+ / kx !z 1s _ a , 1�4,�d v ,,,,.,,,,-.3, ' i f ,t+' 3' 4' s ye f t '+r 1 > i. �� t .I {y • t a;� it i/7 41M"4 Y `y"k'''' d o ''''.. },�r ' I.1 f ��" r 4r•�t"y.�?4..,,,‘J �� "'i :�'.•r w: � �i?'�' •r i. ��y �r«,` f'' �`x-"t S.C�td•�.,�'S �. it C{t .t Sr y. .fir }+ v *'. r:'. 4:0"; « �G, 11 f a.•-Al' .7,�;;?,,,t drAC' '',',f.' .7.s ;. ' •'I ,V ,,' + ,-,‘1,,,,.... I l•.�.ri,?,�, - �' ' ^i «41r;,A,'r ,/ t �c i f' rl ;� .t •,tic 1 l,..i!,,,,,5.,,,t,:id„,.<:..-4.,,,:.;. ..„,,,. ... _- .,..,1 eit., ) ., ''.,"1,..".:-..,4:,i,,, ',,,,,1.1:;„/ ;7.+,',.,ri.„ ,.'",:`,. '',,.„,y;,.;"tte., ' -f;,..44,'. 4:.A.4., ' :.,,I. -,,";..,- ,.. , `'.i ".7;'..'•:.• �'1' jj`'�9;�,+�r' ,S y�'giy{'• . .�yyMt. �y�j!��. :n�'}�k t �""+,. (+'jam✓y,-t''' I A, f f >7 } y+F'- ,-0,,,1.---71,$.r.;P41 .i+ k fif +' } t �" t +� +�� i + • b .�,.,t. '4"rya cK ri sr tr ��` t�+� ..'O ..1 �. ` •�, ,5� t ,,, 4 F Yf� `, a s. 0 :1...,','; ' .,.:'''S ' :111,..,i . i■l• ,...—''''',C. . k ti« - 9FNMD KHI2M,(;A.88Ao-c:) i 4 ., - f ! Appinximnr PMN 2 F88 Ac7 . , . . 41r, .... __ WilsonMiller y ' --„:-.7- ,ems w'< «�L� Y,5 T 0 . . .. ., 1)1 I+I 11 1,1:111 V 1,111 11 I 1 I; : I'll 1-1 4 Exhib4 3.0 O:1101.6.No.100627-I O1 y m Ehg iJ �J^ g ri ; N 63° m a" g sk. 'i �W $ >s .„ win„ 1 o 8� g t•�I Rig 3 loo .009= /_ oo Z �aa��.�° Y > m g Y Pe a _ a w O 01.01 Eo a E£ @a3 Y i0° 2 "� : ; 3 ? 123 xa 2060 IL *1,, € Ho =a4 Nte o Q W "ga r o fin"w e _ ?o. E :=,a Y 1 s:: g E .. 4 =1 tD - = o S>a� ��Y: 5,0' am" K g ^ „° a '- Pi.."-.0 "d� ' _ , g 36 o i a m0- %MSS r ° y a a 7 r Q �_ TV j <O M iin g cs:N g�oY N WEST USE SECTION s1 �` w 5 02'15'57"E L268.53 0 0 - 3gir.. "q 1341.27 EAST EWE SEC110M 31 .-1 0 W W �, 0 ..1 07 N— AE Om a 5� 5 n Oi 4 g -Z AC b�— �6 w co g w r€33„at = j N "'ail: 5 42'21'86"E 2677.26 +, W ii Or R �° � � qo � � °�3 a �6 y_° l` / a" `- of o m iLI.';: ____?_!.______-----'gl ct ,^ ,..};:;'' °'w a'8 > fib+ m \ v w a. ,te a 5i 0.V�'i o r W=V w 'a';' lil ,,e7.-, z 1 a - . N � 4 Mai €8:8a `".'4.6;=-.' :off, r _ 0,r MST 0 l SEC1gN DI W t0 N 02'40'16'W DST UN SECnW1 36 N 025558W • •. — 0.5 1n 2658.70 �Si N% 267 a.17 Z 9 W w F I 0 e urn i r i io.m '"N o Exhibit 3.0 Application No. 100629-8 2 of 6 $ a b ril " rne .� '''!!711 I ON N n 0 mb m 0 0 m N O 0^n m n N n O w^a O NnIOI^,4bhmh,,5 ,n rj,64,6m(V N 4 3R g i W WN N D D p N n N b b N^m N b m N N N 0 m n ,02 t t 3?VOS LZ 0 ptN 8 i J L5 vi.a a aapff aaaaN N N N N PN N a N Q at" a a a P f Q PQ a a a Q Q - _ o W I 8 0 rrE n Q _ lir§2 0 a 00:O m b N N¢)N n O Z^m N'm b b O n 100 b b 00 N r)a CO n N N n.b 2 n n N O m G,0 n ,N n O n N. nM• N O i ry pZQQj O�b M M M M fM V N ON N b O l O NM b M tO`M Mn M M n A IM J op z O O O b m b m m m m m 8'8 m b m m m m m b b re b m ca ci .0 On S os aw Z a V p< Y siN N NN to N Nfj b na W c -dg a ON ppo000000oo°ooa0o0cv 0,0 N U m N Nf N N N N N N N N N N N N oN 0 p N W g cq N w•�Q. t C O\ . • - O h I ° X•-O m m^b N N O n N b N 0 -0IN CO N (0 H zm m M N 00M hnO O1 O'NMb g 0 n N<V^b N ? W w WF N N N N O<,3 i D A n n•O•O•p b p b N N N• N U a z 0 'u- b w J1 PQ P Q aaQ V Paaaa4Qa4 44. m ?P P P a a Q a aIa a a P Pia P a Q Q P O f.i a . 6 S In=Q E+ O 004ONnowv-o Pn m Of N Nm m m^N^Nn 00 O UZ r FTN Z ?N N n l a n n a N N,O N N rj IV b 03 OV Y m m m ,O" �W K O j K K <=0 ^N a P a 1..O0 0 0 0 n0 0n n b 04 Q a i0 050.1 O ¢¢g m b on no m m m n on on on or m m n b O m 0 m b m m b b f0 m b f0 0 0 1 N--010 -W O Z b b(0 0 c0 10 b O,O b b O b b 0 b m ID',O m i 4 -w• =o i . CO 8� 0 0� w0 LL Z N . �+ s%N N a N bm mOM NM M NbN m0^NM 8 1 N 0 0 N N N N N N 0 N N N 0 N 0 N M M N°0M N M M N M O a O a pY Yp) , 0) tim.r - " OWW r tw z2 6^ • K<wZ _FOE O O w .!z .t7 z m-N-O Nt m m a n b N m a N m b N^,O,n J O w O P. n b N a M N m m M n n b b n O M N n'43 o w �M M n n M M N N N n n n M M M M a a Q P N >w w �� J W a a Q a a Pf a a a a a a P a a a a a a a a uz� - pap N M Q a a a a a P a a P a a a a a f a a a f a a G J b O Q ?a� • I— 0^b N0 4 -On n a N N n O•N 00 m 0 N n m-N b N N 000 0^m N 0p,p N m 0:4 V O S O b M W f f M b m O N b O a^M N O N N 00 N 0 d H. H O O N M M a s a N N N,O t0 A n n O0 O0 m m re,b b b b,D b b b b b 01 b b,O u3"01•O b b b Zmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Z b b b b b,0 b b b b b b b b b b b b b b b LO 0 I 0 - Oo$ i b 0 A 1 O 0 m 0- IN pp 0000N oo N N °1 pp N N N N, C W %; ,y3 i Om 4 W O N � n o N > : 4 W o N q N O O n }O -�v O I a = NON N N n S LS 1„ I O O 1 O N O ..9.N y O N j bN N\`\ ,2, 11,,,,. t m^ j ,,,t, $ O i00 ; m A•,I+ N OO 8 - Y00 N N 1 a N N Nb w N z w,n O O Nh Ca O - J O H+ N� Z S WEST LINE SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST 6 6 m I9 fni N EAST LINE SECTION 36. TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST N 02'45'S8•'W 2658.70 i M`, s g. o >go4af"e o Exhibit 3.0 Application No. 100629-8 3 of 6 o) Mg= 1_ rn m �< : NN+1∎W iC0 pY�y�MP 7M1,M W NN*000 0.- p O .,x (V•-N^gr"A� .-1mmIMpf On INne N W ao YoMi!°lf Na'-PPN^OMiaO� M � tS ommomplogocone J a s*O a.+f Y O a a a a a v a a v a M h M r�M n 0 $ M c .. ... a P P P P a P P P P P P P P a P v a P+P Q . Da M �— U' ^10.-+N n b M P N 4l N UD N VI 10-0!N 0 woo-M n �` O2 .iC�n Z 01 A*8.7 y7 1p n O 1-01 f�81p mm P-Vf 1V 1G lV o O U O < + PMPnnoa N^ PmM 01ONm Nn Nn nNPP A C 8 Z 9aw6n`o _Z h- �a;g crl^1 rig g r e y tpo h np��n n n n pnp��n n n n n n {� Q� grc =10400100 m V‘0,0E0 0 0 100 100 100 100 01 0 8 100 W 10010010a 1001010,100100100 FL:b W G .$3 cg 20y fi,ry to 0 9� ;IY Q. ?amoo Plrnrnt4228G28822^'°"-NMalnlonm c O pzgF'„O aS�1R1�i1R�i1Qilpnl°n1n1�.1n1n1r�4n1n»1nlnnln1n1n1r)Ir>1nm ��^yy 1� 4.- - . F`1 ax5 W V Ni I W V 0100 mNOO^mM40mm 00n40MNm000MNVp101O^ m a V\. J Znp O+i OMI NNN�01rrPA�7 H11ny��n(pND^NNNNn�100�ma�n Y ni00� U CO �� - g W 1 M h h N r l M M h M n n n n°n n n n M� °°07 M h h w l i N —I W a a a a a P P++P a++P++V P V P P r f t V P J w Z • 0 m v+P P a P P+P P P P P..... . P a a w p m Q a o 61 : Q ('wa �N - 1 L�000^m nolm mulm^NN Mn^.-N+OI M10 P P.- Q z'”, S a•..,NH NNNMN�P M 04np„....0,. 01 P .. -Stab Cp< f-" Knnnf°+nnnnnlnolno.nnnnn+*nnnn Rn°n°n 10o iEU.W V2 ` �'ii z gmwrnrno.rnaao,ma.olrnaammammmolrnamma _ 000,00000,00 om1o1o1o1o1o8882u1o288: 1�8p- $ °y`- 0 1pp �� ff•-0.6.822S,988222288288§°08888888 2 O �40 � �ci W m W� .,,,,,s6..=,,,i>,f,!h2 „,z.-,0" m i co WPM 1,-&---1.P,A h g4 :611§nsz oo a Ow w oz3 < g p'-U g gn EQ b $ 4� W W wa '/'''N, <N yam co o n m m ^ o FZm Esbg 8 o m za mN z a 8 a ��M -W Sm � z o-J O o h i 4IE La ri; -A E o N 0%A,@$ ts N = EW I YY QYV nn L $ m ; N n•an 2 rk S N a O E 0� N n j i U NN Yf li WU m p^O O t_ N < ! j1 222, N N O O 0 Fl N� O 8. a ; 117 yy m N p W C ><O4x Gei Exhibit 3.0 Application No. 100629-8 4 of 6 Cr, cc m 0 Y . _ �J CO M N O01M Nm M _N A.-IM.:�bNt'1 o riei u tp LL EM O n r 02 a N h iuO,M-1 Y0 00 N lil J v a a a s N fa N a N N a a N N a a a a ,OCI = L i U G -Pu• S m Z — N Oo yg I I— hk1i N him' o Z O0 N M 0^N M 0 O N N N N NNNNC,INM M M M o g5imii i. a to 0 to N N h o o N to N N N N to N d to Ri E i - I O Z L...2'1:3 y g tpj, ... 3 N U W O N F�1 O6 AWJ a .- Q ay mwO .7; -3 Z4 r 5 W V -- a o / N Ps,- 4i r, 7, 02\ Q> 1c6 2,1 q2 ;t.: o 6 \ ~te 6V-r2 N W a N tW. O, �xJ as G. + le;-.gt� YN_.. _ Dt„_ 4 m 8~it° v ° i a":N N_ N �`. • :4'—a,m Z l W N ne-4 S N N CZ 1 i 'it h N h 3 00 it ii M. i an & e, 9 rulm { 060.:-. - '' 4.02241 • ' w 4 ..., WEST LINE SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANCE 27 EAST v a 114 02 CO ..�o CO CV C*3 S 02'40'16"E 2674.17 EA57 LfNE SECTION 36. TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST g Exhibit 3.0 Application No. 100629-8 5 of 6 co g_gm .09t =„tail g a:°N 1W[l8 e, L 1-6k°i WgNeb cOMa!Nm00.-m 7n V mWMOnN^NM a a N O O LLl P nvg§R§ nAiIM ,,A g q=f J ; . <W a SY MM n V.Y , a v r a Q a a a a a a a av Oy o':_. „�lQ U ° Z ',JEW.,f U N W a W h W m N.r.M m.co.co.p?M N^M b N a 1A N S O a M py -v 141 = N U W 7a l 2 p L-r K SOn NW 0M c i2MO m<al D�OOYW! i t mPmi p8°p Z Zm mm m m1 2,m m,2 b mm ig m mW mp�m3 m m mb mW�m . .-0 D p bo p p Ip Ip p b W b W b b W b b b b b W W b Q I-ambl�T n0e NM a.W,bm0 N y .. O O .W.VVI ,,., Z M M M M 17 a s a a a a a a•n In 'm w 0 W 0 0 m ° V O C IA 1c1 IA h N N i.g C•nNN too N W N W N N N h W to 0 In N N Vf to o to to to to ° h w O W 8 o_ 0 It h W co U y� 0 00 Z` T T O 3W g9 ALLWa - W°N g2 -rg s� m=co 00 Q d m Z- J W W. g+'1 a 1 O �^Q J W _ € a p Waa h ° n =p V ESL'.W n a° n < , W g rma ■ �'^ WETLAND W AREA #5 n a o .7; 2.88 ACRES } — g G z o A _ N n .% yv 2 n n - 0 W to- N a 3 .` a t W 1. N 92 R 0 M a 2 z o r a i zsir Z W_ 2 W . Y G N Exhibit 3.0 Application No. 100629-8 6 of 6 -) Limits of Wetland Determination • • eY • L Soil ti Descrt.tion �-- ._...�... 10 Oldsmar fine sand limestone substratum ��` 11 Hallandale fine sand • 18 Riviera fine sand,limestone substratum • • 21 Boca fine sand • NRCS SOILS MAP i 01 1)1 ll.01(11Mc.c0l.rc•i1;11- I91:1s1 li --- Exhibit 4.0 Application No. 100629-8 1 of 1 STAFF REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB PHASE 2 Application No: 100629-8 Permit No: 11-00024-F INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION X Karyn Allman-4270 X Laura Layman-4270 X Permittee-Olde Florida Golf Club Inc X Permit File X Permittee-Olde Florida Golf Club Inc GOVERNMENT AGENCIES X Collier County Property Appraiser X FDEP, Eric Hickman Environmental Administrator STAFF REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST • ADDRESSES • Olde Florida Golf Club Inc Olde Florida Golf Club Inc 9393 Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext 9393 Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext Naples FL 34120 Naples FL 34120 Collier County Property Appraiser FDEP, Eric Hickman Environmental Administrator 2600 Blair Stone Road Ms2500 Tallahassee FL 34952 Application No 100629-8 Page 2 of 2 1' V , .;; .., II Limits of Wetland Determination ii sr t 4 L t •. . . -.... ... .. .. ,-,, .; • ....,,,. .• . t-4,--- ---.. L1'. ,, -' ,,,„. , ,----, -/- _ ,, ... ,. . •:.1.5.4- ,iff'..,mst,-.,,---+ ,..v.--.-,-.,-, ,, V .",•,,s•/- 1,*),12, 7••■,",'..'• -'' /i"..' .. ' ' '. ' * ' .01f,, Vkirtyrtti'.'140°1' 1..*k•Y` .1.4, -,....'''''P';r ,.- 4.. .-. „-...:...,.. .:-..?.-/IN .._ , ,''... ,,, -, -,,-,, .,,, 4.- ,,,,A... ' .1"2/4.1r .-'"`'.-- •' ..."';,tr:.i....4; . • 1 ' ' • i,.:, -''''^"..,' C .4.1."°%4"' ",.. ' *'..A.-k ''t...;f*. ..-*'-'2,..... :.r*t. ' ti*","1:4:r.,-,-- ,•'''''\,.«-, .' , 4.2 ' v/., - Jt, • :;c2-.._ ,s,i. ...:, ,,Z*.`..t. ''-,. ,,,,,,,,, .., '. . •.7.: . 41,..‘■4".*'.'rT4 11,t.:oirf s. 46',...*.,.%t I.. ,-.*"'",„1,44, '*.t-, . ". , it \..e' ert ., -2r=roflt - 0 - ,•-,-r•,., .,., .; -..--=, •., -*,, ' -..,... _. ;,. tSf' .- do4.."ir;-;4:i,:---.=',,,,,-(-4;444-,*'=-1,t'eZt---9-'4'-'' ' -''''!-..",4 r: - •-i#. •,- . • •,,*!:-'-'''.,, • . ...10-==‘!,P=1.,...-1.- ' =": te*sr'...s==.,.$, - -:". i .-%---1 ,,,,,:f.,, , ,,!.. ..,,a. = „,,,,, ,..t.'' t",114-•-;....., ....-,, . .1,u..• I.,'' - i}...X44.t.. ....#.+.- -2Z .'`, •••t I-'. . t:'..' ." .. ff.,..P.1,,:‘ 'A' 1441., .V.,,,,',! ,l. .4,N07 ' , - ,'-..., '.!IV,,,,,,,,1 tr f.: *'''i- *.A. b; :4, ' " "?..7414"-4 ...,4...4,16'-."--;:',.* ,..z.- ay.;-`4-- -,-, ,. ,li•j'A'iii.,:_.`rf'. .4.,Pt--- _,"i.:1-,Ti rt„,-le ,,,;:`)4'4' ..,,,,:z-t .47 1.11-' ' .1- •••• ' ,'1 • ; ..., •11.' .1, 1•)'*''' '"::' .....4v444.4i''',,,' •••• . &ii.1'14* 2,1'■■••• '•••' ,-.4-)''' ,V,,,4-‘ ,e, '4",?•- ';...etl` ,V„,1.*' ' ..e'&14•11 ,7' '.4...1,1•• ''..,, .1'71;;',1!W-4.1..t' 4i,,,,-. . 0,,,,,,,.. st..-&se-di ' 4.,.*,-- Ael' 7-1, T' • fr....4.i 1"A, "'.. ,•1111,-.X1 ' • 4i• C..•:;!%, :-1,11,,41-f,'43', '4 rtwri,w4z, - 6-4,.; .;',1.t. * ---q--*' ': • . 41.- s,.--,..- .. 41:'-'.''" ''',, "" , 4,11. /: ,:'7.Y..-4 ,T‘fi--' -,tak I . .r,).1. 4 ' . . 't ; ,.,. ',',..,,-. ,.., ...0.: °!... I g,,,..,- ..?1, rpzi4.,i'..:1 , ,F--.4. '.,-...440:' ,..),..z.:,3/4.....--,,. ----, 4...;-. t,..d.i-,4:2- - ,; '-, .4-., t*" ci. ' `- .'?.-i"..i., !-":. :,.:, ,4:xi:I i t.,-'1 •.'-''r:i .... ;:.'*"t. ,:`, es-- '4.-,-•if-61,,e,,,,!-',-,,, ,t): '-i.::'::• :.••0-Yf' -t- -.,i1..-,:•*-,l'-* .,-;.,e',,z• '.,SiYi'rwl,'"`"7Ii,...„,c" ' - -1.- -.."; ,‘ .-,c..4,t , ,:.. c, .ti °,4:,, ,'', „,„41,. '. 4.. . '....;,... .'. terf-,,, - ,.. ., .-. -. - ttrc:i !...4;4, - . ki:,-. i,,„i .-. .-0,. - ...i. :;,..7 .r.i... •"...,,......,- „., ... .. , ,...,.. -, -!,,z... ''•,. , -. ;=•, -- i, - ..--:-. . .=. 4,4',4`e.: :- =""ste''3..,1:-./0•1'.-01.0 .i.,141 , .,el •C a ' .^ .''"'- ''46' e J4 , .' •,:i ''•1*,;;I-,V,, 't.'"r...°.,Iv'e 444,1 '4,... - . .. t '',..7..k.*.: '',, 4.,,,,e, ;40 r,,,t, a.,,;",.tts.,. . 4:' ,Aok,0.3,,,,,.f•zipiri.w•..: ,:.-.^1. ' , ...t • , •••• ,. irs.i. ....;: .. .„... ,?:.1„.a... . -,...„..* '!''4"c .,StA -4 : .-:ets.:A•A:;44A° "- ** ' .•4.., -,'., :-,...?,_f...':'.4... ..,e....,,t-4 , , 4 -4 •, i ' ' ''r.r4.'*•f:r:fi . .,'.4'47:1. --"" -!'•'6'---:`-'' - - -. - , 1-k , _ t,, - t. et.ii,i. ' • , :''Al . 'fi.r./ri , , Y:CE"-if Or/t' P' - ::'Zr.,Z.,,, ‘tt 4:-41irV,:'4. .,, ,.... :.3- 1 1.0,/,...24„,t,A.- ,- : w, i i.V.F71.0 "'"".... ', ..,'.... io t.,.%:,,,,,i.....,-1. '' , ' • ' , ,r • ' .„. :;) 4,4„..„,- . .. p f . - - - - - r-7.....,.,,..,„...24,.., , .'r. 4 - ., . 4,111 . ' I 70 ' - °■■• - liqlsOnfifIllerG70 -1 !Jr...0,;.... ..,, ,,,- _4; 1.1c4., ,. z,.,. .,‘,. , Fs 00 RurmAH LF ALoppR RIDoAxwimAATTEER wMANAGEMENT ETLANo juRisoDI iscTTRI oicNT AL ,..r. 44,.,..'‘i DETERMINATION ,,,,,„— „-, ., ,., '4 ' . • ' FIELD VERIFIED BY KARYN ALLMAN _ .*14' ' - - SFWVAD APPLICATION#100629-8 , .., 1 ;`''''4 ' b. •. • ''' • * ' ;' .41!" .- , , .•'-' - 0! 1)1 i I 01:11) 1 (, )1 I L. I CII : I'll \'I 2 AP'11`.$14,/41114REI. ■■,(.A%q ° I , N # i, a - ! fr 4 + \ ._ - ``, , I . x♦ i - ` ,y� J - , - — ---,—''. M 1. ,ter .` �, 1 . L: .,, •. .+• s : - H. )r , „ - rt.,. '. n �` • A, :-.4 �,. ," ' O It r E, c N . t I rk t t e • . .. , .. yb i.•I fAA. ~ ^J c.----- � aNt • mamas{ - fr g . .A . ;pi, - . .. . . _...0„, ,.,......4 ., ,\. --- /y y i _z "LI :; :° 1 / . -!ill r f r ?if I • -i_t 2 Iv r. .;" rof DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY /qs/` GULF COAST AREA OFFICE. JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS i0' ,,U, P. O. BOX 19247 TAMPA. FLORIDA 33686-9247 ,,,,,,,,,,,..''' REPLY TO May 14 1990 ATTENTION OF y Regulatory Section Eignanp. 90JD(4)0101 JURISDICTIONAL MAY 16 1990 Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc. WILSON,MILLER. c/o Mr. Arthur Pritzker BARTON, SOLL&PEEK,INC. 1383 Airport Road North Naples, Florida 33942-9986 Dear Mr. Pritzker: Reference is made to your correspondence received on April 25, 1990, concerning a jurisdictional determination for the "Olde Florida Golf Club Project" located near Golden Gate Estates in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. Your request was made on behalf of 0.F.C. of Naples, Incorporated. An onsite field meeting on March 15, 1990, was attended by Mr. Skip Bergmann of my staff. The lines shown on the aerial maps, which were submitted with your correspondence, have been verified by Mr. Bergmann and represent the approximate upland/wetland boundary for purposes of determining the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional line. The jurisdictional delineation shown on the enclosed aerials can be considered current and correct for a period of two (2) years from the date of this letter. Any reliance upon jurisdictional correspondence beyond that time frame may lead to incorrect planning and design efforts as well as possible violations of current Federal Laws and/or Regulations. The jurisdictional areas are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The discharge of dredged ,.or fill material into these areas will require Department of the Army authorization. Other Federal, State or local permits may be required. Thank you for your cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program. If you have any questions regarding this letter or the Corps of Engineers regulations, please contact Mr. Bergmann at the Fort Myers Regulatory Office, telephone number 813-332-7808. Sincerely, Enclosure(s) f JOSEPH R. BACHELER / I Chief, Tampa Regulatory Section • Copies Furnished: 0.F.C. of Naples, Inc. w/o encl. Collier County Planning Review Services w/encl Exhibit G-5 a �� a i - 1 ' ' L r I 6 ., . N X I Cr . =`. a r : Cn 6 o 1;) rn O o z n -n o n�_rl ► p rn 70 N Z 0 , n ,. z u rip. .-f '.i',, -7 7:..ia,„...., . . 0 a -,. i': ' w...,, ., . . .0 , i ..r.t. , -o n , ...... . . --ri _.1 . , ..„. (,. a ZIP 0 'Mai 0 373:3 C S �, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 44/ � \ MIAMI FIELD OFFICE,8410 NW 53RD TERRACE MONTEREY BLDG.,SUITE 225 4 MIAMI,FLORIDA 33166-4565 DEC: 0 i�v3 a 1 Ili J M , WILSON,j P ns_ti `s REPLY TO o'YILSON, itre[' • k rir ATTENTION OF BART ON & PEEK,Miami Regulatory December 15, 1993 r INC.iv�c Field Office 199331697 (JDF-SB) JURISDICTIONAL Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek,n Inc. c/o Ms. Dorothy Zysko 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, Florida 33942 Dear Ms. Zysko: Reference is made to your correspondence dated December 7, 1993, requesting a jurisdictional determination on the "Olde Florida Golf Club - Phase II" project located in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. Onsite field meetings on September 8, 1993 and September 17, 1993 were attended by Mr. Skip Bergmann of my staff. Your request was submitted on behalf of OFC of Naples, Inc. The delineation shown on the aerial photographs which were submitted with your correspondence, has been verified by Mr. Bergmann and represents the approximate upland/wetland boundary for purposes of determining the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional line. Please be advised that the jurisdictional delineation shown reflects current policy and regulations and is valid for a period no longer than 3 years from the date of this letter. If after the 3-year period, this jurisdictional determination has not been specifically revalidated by the Corps of Engineers, it shall automatically expire. Any reliance upon jurisdictional correspondence beyond that time frame may lead to incorrect planning and design efforts, as well as possible violations of current Federal laws and/or regulations. You may revalidate or update the jurisdictional guidance as appropriate for your project duration. Any revalidation or updating will then reflect current Federal laws and regulations. The jurisdictional areas are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Any activities undertaken in these areas may require Department of the Army authorization. State, local or other Federal permits may also be required. Thank you for your cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program. If you have any questions regarding this letter or the Corps of Engineers regulations, please contact Mr. Rer„mann at the Pcsrt Mycrc Regulatory Field Office, telephone number (813) 694-3438. Sincerely, Cha es A. Sch/el Chief, Regulat, y Secti•.n Miami Field 0 fice Enclosure Copy Furnished: USFWS (NapJ.es) w/encl SFWMD w/encl Lee County w/encl OFC of Naples, Inc. wo/encl CESAJ-RD-S w/encl CESAJ-RD-SM-F w/encl Exhibit G-�6 • CO vow 0 1 ..... 4.7.4 I .12 ...„ t Cr) 0 aa j Is 2 0 LLI 141. ..'-, • r , aro Z ....— t- -c•.,,, , . . , •, II" ..-,1 • cn , ." . , 4 < . - . , LI) UMW .--• ;35 C.) "; rf) Q.) . ■ ,.I" ■ ISM /1.1111 4 Y. U., Ili • us 0 • Ire i Cill IC( %.0 • 46 , r . .#44'• *.1 I 'CE '. ‘ . ..o 2 --1„dit ca .. __. ,..... _.., 01.• . 41111J '' II.111. 0 LLI 0 UN. II.A."' ■ (111) mos 0 I • „'V II". 1 0 0 Ca --I Om HIM 0 , . f Cr (11) . , 4 - - — -..., • I 41 All Lt. •',.. , 11('. ',17 " ti. LC) ' • MI) CI .• . -41„, !• ' 4. 4040 '', Vt'r ,' • C:::1 " ... _ .._ , lti 'r 4 rilli Jo ch ,: i - t.N.‘i - -„„, 1 . 1 -• CV 4 'i t lc / N 1 ' ):, • •%, 1- CO '•• ' b;`. • (41 I FO) LIM I 1: i '3 '1. } • ' , ' •ilk ICE ��,_ of DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 4�'-I "r.>4t, JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS �� ‘ % `; �y 1520 ROYAL PALM SQUARE BOULEVARD;SUITE 310 w t ,_Ir v, cl,> '3„glllp�` �,h, FORT MYERS,FLORIDA 33919 ; , fa ,�� July 6, 2011 SrArts of REPLY TO ATTENTION OF Fort Myers Regulatory Office SAJ-1993-31697 (JD-hwb) JURISDICTIONAL VERIFICATION Mr. Bill Barton Olde Florida Golf Club Inc . 605 Palm Circle East Naples, Florida 34102 Dear Mr. Barton: Reference is made to information submitted to the U. S . Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regarding the potential extent of Federal jurisdiction at Olde Florida Golf Club in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, near Naples in Collier County, Florida. The evaluation of this jurisdictional determination involved many factors and may have included a field visit, review of aerial photographs, geological quad sheets, county soils maps, and site specific information provided by you. A copy of the approved jurisdictional determination form and depiction of the geographic extent of Federal jurisdiction are enclosed. A Department of the Army permit may be required for work in areas identified as waters of the United States . Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps ' regulations at 33 CFR Part 331 . If you request to appeal this determination, you must submit a completed RFA form to the South Atlantic Division Office at the following address : Mr. Jason Steele South Atlantic Division U. S . Army Corps of Engineers CESAD-CM-CO-R, Room 9M15 60 Forsyth St . , SW. Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801 . Mr. Steele can be reached by telephone number at 404-562-5137, or by facsimile at 404-562-5138 . Exhibit G-7 n -2- In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 CFR Part 331 . 5, and that it has been received by the Division office within 60 days of the date of the RFA. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by September 6, 2011 . The determination shown on the enclosed information represents the upland/wetland boundary for purposes of determining the Corps jurisdictional line. As depicted on the enclosed drawing, it has been determined you have waters of the United States onsite, which are subject to regulation by the Corps, and/or you have wetlands onsite which are considered to be isolated, and thus not subjected to regulation by the Corps. Please be advised that the jurisdictional determination shown is based on the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987) or current regional supplement, and is valid for a period no longer than 5 years from the date of this letter unless new information warrants a revision of the determination before the expiration date . If, after the 5-year period, the Corps has not specifically revalidated this jurisdictional determination, it shall automatically expire. Any reliance upon this jurisdictional determination beyond the expiration date may lead to possible violation of current Federal laws and/or regulations . You may request revalidation of the jurisdictional determination prior to the expiration date. Any revalidation or updating will be considered under the method of jurisdictional determination and other applicable regulations in use at the time of the request . Additionally, this determination has been based on information provided by you or your agent; should we determine that the information was incomplete or erroneous this delineation would be invalid. This determination has been conducted to identify the limits of the Corps Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site identified in this request . This determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985, as amended. If you or your tenant are U. S . Department of Agriculture (USDA) program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service prior to starting work. You are cautioned that work performed below the mean high water line or ordinary high water line in waters of the United States, or the discharge of dredged or fill material into adjacent wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit could subject you to enforcement action. Receipt of a permit from the -3- Department of Environmental Protection or the Water Management District does not obviate the requirement for obtaining a Department of the Army permit for the work described above prior to commencing work. The Corps' Jacksonville District Regulatory Division is committed to improving service to our customers . We strive to perform our duty in a friendly and timely manner while working to preserve our environment . We invite you to take a few minutes to visit http: //per2 .nwp.usace.army.mil/survey.html and complete our automated Customer Service Survey. Your input is appreciated - favorable or otherwise. Please be aware this web address is case sensitive and should be entered as it appears above. Thank you for your cooperation with our permit program. If you have any questions concerning this matter please contact Mr. Skip Bergmann by mail at the letterhead address, by electronic mail at Harry.W.Bergmann2@usace.army.mil, or by telephone at 239- 334-1975 . Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED Donald W. Kinard Chief, Regulatory Division Enclosures Copy Furnished: (w/o encls) Mr. Thomas Trettis Stantec Consulting 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, Florida 34105 n NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND REQUEST FOR APPEAL plicant: Olde Florida Golf Club Incorporated File Number: SAJ-1993-31697 Date: 6 July 2011 Attached is: See Section below INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT(Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A PROFFERED PERMIT(Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B PERMIT DENIAL C X APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E SECTION I-The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision. Additional information may be found at http://www.usace.armv.miUCECW/Pages/reg materials.aspx or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit. • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit,you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP),you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • OBJECT: If you object to the permit(Standard or LOP)because of certain terms and conditions therein,you may request that the permit be modified accordingly.You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice,or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter,the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a)modify the permit to address all of your concerns,(b)modify the permit to address some of your objections,or(c)not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections,the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration,as indicated in Section B below. B: PROFFERED PERMIT:You may accept or appeal the permit • ACCEPT.. If you received a Standard Permit,you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission(LOP),you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on P—**N the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit(Standard or LOP)because of certain terms and conditions therein,you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information. • ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD. • APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD,you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish,you may request an approved JD(which may be appealed),by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD. SECTION II-REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record,the Corps memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting,and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record. POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION: If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may process you may contact: also contact: Project Manager as noted in letter Jason Steele 404-562-5137 RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel,and any government consultants,to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation,and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations. Date: Telephone number: Signature of appellant or agent. SAJ-RD-SF SAJ-1993-31697 (JD) MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD SUBJECT: Approved Jurisdictional Determination for Olde Florida Golf Club Incorporated, Phase II. 1. Introduction: This is in reference to a request to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Jacksonville District1 (SAJ) to conduct an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) . The request was made by Olde Florida Golf Club Incorporated (file No. SAJ-1993-31697) for a project known as Olde Florida Golf Club, Phase II . The project site contains 5 separate isolated wetlands, which are the subject of this Memorandum for Record (MFR) . 2 . Project Location: The project site is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road approximately 5 miles east of Interstate 75 in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. The center of the parcel is located at Latitude 26.251956 North and Longitude 81 . 651793 West. 3. Project History: Olde Florida Golf Club, Phase II, is the second phase of a two phase development (Attachment 1) planned in the late 80' s . The original project site was approximately 552 acres and included all of Section 31 minus a portion of the northeast corner. The Corps of Engineers inspected the site for wetlands on 31 May 1989, 14 June 1989, and 15 March 1990. The project site was dominated by hydric soils and numerous cypress strands . An approved JD was issued a JD on 14 May 1990 (SAJ- 90JD (4) 0101) . While the project site did contain jurisdictional wetlands, field notes indicate that the surrounding canals have had a significant impact on the area' s hydrology. The project site is bounded by the Immokalee or Cocohatchee Canal to the north, the Curry Canal to the east, and Cypress Canal to the south (Attachment 2) . Florida is in the Eleventh Circuit and the Eleventh Circuit' has concluded that the Kennedy standard is the sole method of determining CWA jurisdiction in that Circuit. Therefore, unless the aquatic resources are traditional navigable waters or wetlands adjacent to traditional navigable waters, the Corps needs to conduct a significant nexus determination on all other waters in order to determine jurisdiction under the CWA. United States v. McWane, Inc., et al., 505 F.3d 1208 (11th Cir. 2007) . Exhibit G-7 SAJ-1993-31697 Olde Florida Golf Club Phase II 2 Based on the verified JD conducted by the Corps of Engineers, the applicant divided the site into two parts. The first part avoided all jurisdictional areas and was identified as Phase I . The applicant submitted a permit application to develop Phase I as an 18-hole golf course and the Corps of Engineers issued a "no permit required" verification letter (SAJ-1991-01871) on 13 February 1992 . The remaining 258 acres of the property was identified as Phase II . An 18-hole golf course was also proposed for Phase II . Based on a depressed water table in the area the applicant installed shallow wells and requested that the Corps re-evaluate the earlier approved JD. The Corps of Engineers inspected the site on 8 & 17 September 1993, and issued a revised JD for Phase II (SAJ-1993-31697) on 15 December 1993 . The wetland boundaries were smaller in 1993 based on the area' s lowered water table. The JD had a three-year expiration date. By letter dated 9 May 2011, the applicant requested that the Corps of Engineers conducts another JD for Phase II . The applicant provided wetland data forms and groundwater monitoring data from 18 wells installed within the project boundaries . Based on the applicant' s analysis, the site has five isolated areas (approximately 30 . 88 acres) that meet the Corps' definition of a wetland (Attachment 3) . The Corps of Engineers inspected the site on 24 May 2011 . All five wetland areas identified by the applicant are essentially borrow areas used in the construction of Phase I . The change in topography was obvious upon approaching each wetland. All five wetland areas were dominated by hydrophytic shrubs and herbaceous vegetation including saw grass, cattails, and buttonbush. All five wetland areas lack a tree strata although there were scattered willows and pop ash. The area surrounding the five wetland areas resembled other wetland areas in Golden Gate Estates where the hydrology has been removed. Cypress trees are covered with poison ivy and ground cover is dominated by muscadine grape. Well data provided by the applicant supports the depressed water table. The closest groundwater monitoring well to the Cypress Canal is Well L. Well L is located approximately 1800 feet north of the Cypress Canal and is installed in an area with a ground SAJ-1993-31697 Olde Florida Golf Club Phase II 3 elevation of 12 . 89 feet (NGVD) . Groundwater never came within 6 inches of the surface at this well between 2006-2010 except for once in the 2008 wet season. Groundwater at Well L stays around 10 . 00 feet or slightly higher for most of the year, with a typical wet season spike of about 11 . 3 feet but quickly recedes back to 10 .00-10 . 5 NGVD range. Water level in the Cypress Canal is controlled between 9. 75 and 10 .5 feet. Well data tends to correspond with relative water levels in the Cypress Canal . Ground elevations on the project site vary from 13 .5 feet in the north to 12 . 7 feet in the south near Cypress Canal. The elevation in wetland #4 is near 11 feet. Based on the site inspection and the well data provided by the applicant, the Corps of Engineers concurs with the applicant that only five areas within Phase II meet the federal definition of wetland. While much of the other areas on the site were historically wetland, they no longer satisfy the hydrology criteria and are classified as uplands . South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) uses slightly different criteria than the federal government to identify wetlands . Never-the-less, SFWMD inspected the site and also concurred with the applicant that there are only five wetlands (30 . 88 acres) or other surface waters on the project site (SFWMD letter dated 15 December 2010 regarding Petition for Formal Determination of Wetlands and Surface Waters) . 4 . Watershed: According to the U. S . Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) , the project site is located within the Everglades West Coast Sub-Basin (HUC 03090204) . The Everglades West Coast Sub-Basin is also known as the Big Cypress Swamp and includes all of southwest Florida south of the Caloosahatchee River Basin. The Everglades West Coast Sub-Basin includes southern Lee and Hendry Counties, all of Collier County, and very small portions of western Dade, Broward, and northern Monroe Counties and is approximately 2, 710 square miles is size. A further division of the Everglades West Coast Sub-Basin at the project site into watersheds and sub watersheds identifies the entire project site as within the Naples Frontal watershed (HUC 0309020405) (Attachment 4) . The Naples Frontal watershed can also be further divided into three sub-watershed; Curry Island Drain (HUC 030902040502) , Golden Gate Drain (HUC 030902040503) , and Clam Pass - Doctors Pass Frontal (HUC 030902040504) (Attachment 5) . n SAJ-1993-31697 Olde Florida Golf Club Phase II 4 The actual flow pattern in the vicinity of the project site is shown on Attachment 6 . Actual drainage boundaries are difficult to determine because of the many equalizer canals . During high water conditions, flows from Bird Rookery Swamp can move southeast into Golden Gate Estates and into the Corkscrew Canal system. These flows are joined by flows from Twin Eagles and can move west into the Immokalee Road Canal, south under Immokalee Road into Curry Canal, or east and south under Immokalee Road into the main Corkscrew Canal . There is an equalizer canal between the Corkscrew Canal and Curry Canal and another equalizer between the Main Golden Gate Canal and Corkscrew Canal . The Curry Canal and an equalizer from the Corkscrew Canal flow west and form the Cypress Canal. The Cypress Canal flows west and south until converging with the Main Golden Gate Canal . The Main Golden Gate Canal flows into the Gordon River, which is the nearest Traditional Navigable Water. Gordon River flows south into Naples Bay and out into the Gulf of Mexico via Gordon Pass . 5. Determination of Relevant Reach: Based on the Golden Gate Estates canal system and other known drainage systems in the vicinity, the Corps of Engineers has determined that the closest tributary to the project site is Cypress Canal. The pertinent section of Cypress Canal or relevant reach for purposes of determining a significant nexus was not determined since the subject wetlands are isolated. 6. Adjacent Wetlands: Adjacent means bordering, contiguous, or neighboring. Wetlands separated from other waters of the U.S . by man-made dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes, and the like are adjacent (See 33 CFR 328 . 3 (c) ) . For purposes of this jurisdictional determination the Corps has classified each of the on-site wetlands into one of the following categories : • Abutting Wetlands: Wetlands that directly abut a tributary are called abutting wetlands . Abutting wetlands have a continuous or unbroken surface connection to the tributary. There are no man-made dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes, and the like between the wetland and the tributary. n SAJ-1993-31697 Olde Florida Golf Club Phase II 5 • Adjacent wetlands by surface water connection: Wetlands that are physically separated from jurisdictional waters by man-made dikes or barriers, natural river berms, beach dunes, and the like, but have a continuous surface water connection to jurisdictional waters . This hydrologic connection can be in the form of culverts, pipes, drainage swales, ditches, or other surface water conveyance features . The connection may be intermittent and range in length from a few feet to several hundred feet. These are called adjacent wetlands with a surface water connection to the tributary. • Adjacent wetlands by shallow subsurface flow: Wetlands that have no surface water connection to jurisdictional waters; but, have a hydrologic connection via shallow subsurface flow between the wetland and jurisdictional waters . These are called adjacent wetlands with shallow subsurface flow. Shallow subsurface flow is determined by examining the seepage potential of the soils. While most of the mineral soils in southwest Florida have high seepage potential, wetlands separated from a tributary by hydric soil have a higher potential to satisfy this criteria. This category includes wetlands bisected by canals, roads, berms or other barriers that have divided the wetlands into two or more parts, whereas, aerial photographs, soil maps, NWI map, or other documents clearly identify the divided wetland as historically, one larger wetland system. • Adjacent wetlands by proximity: A final criteria includes wetlands that are adjacent to jurisdictional waters by proximity. These wetlands are reasonably close to jurisdictional waters and have an inferred ecological interconnection to jurisdictional waters . No guidance has been provided to define "reasonably close" . There is no hydrologic connection to jurisdictional waters, either surface or subsurface . These are called adjacent wetlands by proximity. • Isolated wetlands : Wetlands without an ecological interconnection and without a hydrologic connection to jurisdictional waters, either surface or subsurface, are classified as isolated wetlands . SAJ-1993-31697 Olde Florida Golf Club Phase II 6 According to the above definitions the Corps of Engineers has determined the following: On-Site Waters Wetland or Adjacency Wetland Area Water Number Classification or (acres) Water Area (acres) Water Type Wetland 1 Isolated 5.14 Wetland 2 Isolated 0.04 Wetland 3 Isolated 2.91 Wetland 4 Isolated 19.91 Wetland 5 Isolated 2.88 Totals 30.88 0.00 7 . Jurisdictional Determination: There are 5 wetland areas (30 .88 acres) within Phase II of Olde Florida Golf Club. These wetlands are not part of the drainage or irrigation system, nor are they a part of any surface water management area. All 5 areas were excavated for fill material and have developed wetland characteristics based on their proximity to the water table. The largest of these wetlands is Wetland No. 4 (19. 91 acres) . These wetlands have no direct flow or indirect surface or shallow subsurface flow to jurisdictional waters and the Corps can find no ecological interconnection between these wetlands and the nearest jurisdictional water. The closest jurisdictional water is Cypress Canal and the closest wetland to Cypress Canal is Wetland No. 1, which is 1, 130 feet away. After a close examination of these 5 wetlands, the Corps has determined that these wetlands are not adjacent to Cypress Canal or any other jurisdictional water. These 5 wetlands are non- navigable, intrastate, and are classified as isolated wetlands . Pursuant to the Supreme Court decision (SWANCC) , isolated waters are not jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act. APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S.Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION(JD): B. DISTRICT OFFICE,FILE NAME,AND NUMBER:SAJ-1993-31697 JD C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State:Florida County/parish/borough:Collier City: Unincorporated Center coordinates of site(lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat.26.41814°N,Long.81.67931°W. Universal Transverse Mercator: Name of nearest waterbody:Cypress Canal Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water(TNW)into which the aquatic resource flows:Main Golden Gate Canal Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code(HUC): Everglades West Coast(HUC 03090204). ® Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. El Check if other sites(e.g.,offsite mitigation sites,disposal sites,etc...)are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ❑ Office(Desk)Determination. Date: ▪ Field Determination. Date(s):24 May 2011 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no "navigable waters of the U.S."within Rivers and Harbors Act(RHA)jurisdiction(as defined by 33 CFR part 329)in the review area.[Required] ❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. ❑ Waters are presently used,or have been used in the past,or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. Explain: B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no"waters of the U.S."within Clean Water Act(CWA)jurisdiction(as defined by 33 CFR part 328)in the review area.[Required] I. Waters of the U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S.in review area(check all that apply):t ❑ TNWs,including territorial seas ❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs El Relatively permanent waters'(RPWs)that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs El Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters ❑ Isolated(interstate or intrastate)waters,including isolated wetlands b. Identify(estimate)size of waters of the U.S.in the review area: Non-wetland waters: linear feet: width(ft)and/or acres. Wetlands: acres. c.Limits(boundaries)of jurisdiction based on:1987 Delineation Manual Elevation of established OHWM(if known): 2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands(check if applicable):3 El Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: 5 separate wetlands within the project and all are isolated. Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below. 2 For purposes of this form,an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least"seasonally" (e.g.,typically 3 months). Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW,complete Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1.only;if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW,complete Sections HI.A.1 and 2 and Section III.D.1.;otherwise,see Section III.B below. 1. TNW Identify TNW: Summarize rationale supporting determination: 2. Wetland adjacent to TNW Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is"adjacent": B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY(THAT IS NOT A TNW)AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS(IF ANY): This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands,if any,and it helps determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met. The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are"relatively permanent waters"(RPWs),i.e.tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally(e.g.,typically 3 months).A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional.If the aquatic resource is not a TNW,but has year-round (perennial)flow,skip to Section III.D.2.If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow, skip to Section III.D.4. A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation.Corps districts and EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial(and its adjacent wetlands if any)and a traditional navigable water,even though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law. If the waterbody4 is not an RPW,or a wetland directly abutting an RPW,a JD will require additional data to determine if the waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW.If the tributary has adjacent wetlands,the significant nexus evaluation must consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands.This significant nexus evaluation that combines,for analytical purposes,the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is the tributary,or its adjacent wetlands,or both.If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands,complete Section III.B.1 for the tributary,Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands,and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary,both onsite and offsite.The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below. 1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW (i) General Area Conditions: Watershed size: Pick List Drainage area: Pick List Average annual rainfall: inches Average annual snowfall: inches (ii) Physical Characteristics: (a) Relationship with TNW: ❑Tributary flows directly into TNW. ❑Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW. Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW. Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW. Project waters are Pick List aerial(straight)miles from TNW. Project waters are Pick List aerial(straight)miles from RPW. Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries.Explain: Identify flow route to TNW5: Tributary stream order,if known: °Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales,ditches,washes,and erosional features generally and in the arid West. 'Flow route can be described by identifying,e.g.,tributary a,which flows through the review area,to flow into tributary b,which then flows into TNW. (b) General Tributary Characteristics(check all that apply): Tributary is: ❑Natural ❑Artificial(man-made). Explain: ❑Manipulated (man-altered). Explain: Tributary properties with respect to top of bank(estimate): Average width: feet Average depth: feet Average side slopes:Pick List. Primary tributary substrate composition(check all that apply): ❑Silts ❑Sands ❑Concrete ❑Cobbles ❑Gravel ❑Muck ❑Bedrock ❑Vegetation. Type/%cover: ❑Other.Explain: Tributary condition/stability[e.g.,highly eroding,sloughing banks]. Explain: Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: Tributary geometry: Pick List Tributary gradient(approximate average slope): (c) Flow: Tributary provides for:Pick List Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:Pick List Describe flow regime: Other information on duration and volume: Surface flow is Pick List. Characteristics: Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings: ❑Dye(or other)test performed: Tributary has(check all that apply): ❑Bed and banks ❑OHWM6(check all indicators that apply): ❑ clear,natural line impressed on the bank ❑ the presence of litter and debris ❑ changes in the character of soil ❑ destruction of terrestrial vegetation ❑ shelving ❑ the presence of wrack line ❑ vegetation matted down,bent,or absent ❑ sediment sorting ❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away ❑ scour ❑ sediment deposition ❑ multiple observed or predicted flow events ❑ water staining ❑ abrupt change in plant community ❑ other(list): ❑Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain: If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction(check all that apply): High Tide Line indicated by: ❑ Mean High Water Mark indicated by: ❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑survey to available datum; ❑ fine shell or debris deposits(foreshore) ❑physical markings; ❑ physical markings/characteristics ❑vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types. ❑ tidal gauges ❑ other(list): (iii) Chemical Characteristics: Characterize tributary(e.g.,water color is clear,discolored,oily film;water quality;general watershed characteristics,etc.). Explain: Identify specific pollutants,if known: "....."N" the natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction(e.g.,where the stream temporarily flows underground,or where the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow regime(e.g.,flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert),the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break. 'Ibid. (iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports(check all that apply): ❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics(type,average width): ❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics: ❑ Habitat for: ❑Federally Listed species. Explain findings: ❑Fish/spawn areas.Explain findings: ❑Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings: ❑Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: 2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW (i) Physical Characteristics: (a) General Wetland Characteristics: Properties: Wetland size: acres Wetland type. Explain: Wetland quality. Explain: Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries.Explain: (b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW: Flow is:Pick List.Explain: Surface flow is:Pick List Characteristics: Subsurface flow:Pick List. Explain findings: ❑Dye(or other)test performed: (c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW: ❑Directly abutting ❑Not directly abutting ❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: ❑ Ecological connection. Explain: ❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: (d) Proximity(Relationship)to TNW Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW. Project waters are Pick List aerial(straight)miles from TNW. Flow is from:Pick List. Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain. (ii) Chemical Characteristics: Characterize wetland system(e.g.,water color is clear,brown,oil film on surface;water quality;general watershed characteristics;etc.). Explain: Identify specific pollutants,if known: (iii)Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports(check all that apply): ❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics(type,average width): ❑ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: ❑ Habitat for: ❑Federally Listed species. Explain findings: ❑Fish/spawn areas.Explain findings: ❑Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings: ❑Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: 3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary(if any) All wetland(s)being considered in the cumulative analysis:Pick List Approximately( )acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis. For each wetland,specify the following: Directly abuts?(Y/N) Size(in acres) Directly abuts?(Y/N) Size(in acres) Summarize overall biological,chemical and physical functions being performed: C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical,physical,and biological integrity of a TNW. For each of the following situations,a significant nexus exists if the tributary,in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands,has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical,physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW. Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include,but are not limited to the volume,duration,and frequency of the flow of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW,and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance(e.g.between a tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW).Similarly,the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus. Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW,as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and discussed in the Instructional Guidebook.Factors to consider include,for example: • Does the tributary,in combination with its adjacent wetlands(if any),have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to TNWs,or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW? • Does the tributary,in combination with its adjacent wetlands(if any),provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and other species,such as feeding,nesting,spawning,or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW? • Does the tributary,in combination with its adjacent wetlands(if any),have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that support downstream foodwebs? • Does the tributary,in combination with its adjacent wetlands(if any),have other relationships to the physical,chemical,or biological integrity of the TNW? Note:the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented below: 1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below,based on the tributary itself,then go to Section III.D: 2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands,where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below,based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands,then go to Section III.D: 3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW.Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below,based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands,then go to Section I11.D: D. DETERtMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS.THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area: ❑TNWs: linear feet width(ft),Or, acres. ❑Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres. 2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional.Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial: ❑ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow"seasonally"(e.g.,typically three months each year)are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area(check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width(ft). ❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s)of waters: 3. Non-RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW,but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW,and it has a significant nexus with a TNW is jurisdictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area(check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width(ft). ❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s)of waters: 4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands. • Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: ❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow"seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is seasonal in Section II1.B and rationale in Section III.D.2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW,but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters,and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9 As a general rule,the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional. ❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from"waters of the U.S.,"or ❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above(1-6),or ❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce(see E below). E. ISOLATED(INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATEJ WATERS,INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS,THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE,INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10 ❑ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. ❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. ❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. ❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain: ❑ Other factors. Explain: Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination: "See Footnote#3. 9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IIl.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook. 10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category,Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area(check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width(ft). ❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s)of waters: . ❑ Wetlands: acres. F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS,LNCLUDING WETLANDS(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ❑ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area,these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. ® Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate(or foreign)commerce. ® Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in"SWANCC,"the review area would have been regulated based solely on the "Migratory Bird Rule"(MBR). ❑ Waters do not meet the"Significant Nexus"standard,where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: . Other:(explain,if not covered above): . Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area,where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors(i.e.,presence of migratory birds,presence of endangered species,use of water for irrigated agriculture),using best professional judgment(check all that apply): ❑ Non-wetland waters(i.e.,rivers,streams): linear feet width(ft). ❑ Lakes/ponds: acres. O Other non-wetland waters: acres.List type of aquatic resource: . El Wetlands:30.88 acres. Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the"Significant Nexus"standard,where such a finding is required for jurisdiction(check all that apply): • Non-wetland waters(i.e.,rivers,streams): linear feet, width(ft). ❑ Lakes/ponds: acres. ❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: . �� ❑ Wetlands: acres. SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD(check all that apply-checked items shall be included in case file and,where checked and requested,appropriately reference sources below): ® Maps,plans,plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: . ® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. 0 Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. ❑Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. ❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: . ❑ Corps navigable waters'study: . ® U.S.Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: . ❑USGS NHD data. 0 USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. ❑ U.S.Geological Survey map(s).Cite scale&quad name: . ❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.Citation: . O National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: . ❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s): . ❑ FEMA/FIRM maps: . ❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) ❑ Photographs:❑Aerial(Name&Date): . or❑Other(Name&Date): . ❑ Previous determination(s). File no.and date of response letter: . ❑ Applicable/supporting case law: . ❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature: . ❑ Other information(please specify): . B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:A MFR was prepared for the project site and should be attached to this form. CO L _0 LL 4-1 C 0 N (B CO - a v _C a fV n. CL . aU n Cr) 0 _� —0(.. CO C v �, — ��. U w a--+ 0 C� 4•'"' M O N i R N N aJ Q-1 tea} v 4 I M Ln C t s- - �-�- CO � - m Cr D Z vQi 0 vQi t �' LL al I- - / `� c-I I i • O cn cif A -1 ! r �,� i ;, y �. i 1 . 4 ' 1I 4. * c 2 f o • 1 s at m n. d ip • 1,`/•, 1 � .T j . .. ..,... ... d r L ............. t. ... l t . \ ---k• 1 • • # •"` w� , ^a---nnN is•ups r".1 16 l _mil. C/. 1 1' U as Q 03 73 0 a C = = CU ea 0 -C Cl.) a - - 0 i - - u f5 — j 1a1 �_ O N L9 L.0 CC 1,.. , ...... .! -."2 rn taro)- I. 274.. } L P M = O N N V , • tit i --13 i - . N • ...L. - l • .- , - ' - ■ I• Li D . 1 - m _. _ �......... d .0 -- "..11"' \ t 4 h • l t 2 4., t ' _ � --i yy U U I ,l (Q] • i . , Y, 1 to Q c13 L O U- C CU 0 crs U RI L -C C) O = U V uD cc II M ono ` v `� t--1 1 m • Y^ O < cn C/ 1I/�� y�� w/ tV' r 1 t. ■ 1`,, W (., i ce' , / _ ;) - .. , c ... Or • r t t-° w- • - . -. ji. . .... .N...t.i. i , A . , ,: M a-, C d) E U as 4-, a co L 0 LL C O vii U co L _c OJ CL - -Q O _= U :'' - U L- c r' - S 3 c0 c-1 'a m cn t {(c y - O Ql ■ L1- a1 I- ` i; CU I r- 1 - m J • :. u ter_ , #w x, i ID ' . i p.. r • ' i.. y r A ' •-,. .• ' ice- r � N N 'F *• * O - d .-.*• D Q i_ N O k Cry ..---^%✓ el- ; : a - O �i=C C+ D N f6 VI m 4J = O E C U ^ C U +-, U cif 2 ��, a-, Q as 0 U- C _ = 0 vii U co _C v a — U `U U- .4.F _ i 0 CD CC K co ` rte -a M V i- �-1 m 0 cm N O a e1 , ri L ,n '70 Q m (n O I ra-1 O (!) V.) �' CD N ' _. U _- c D •� W . r - i• { ^' Q M M -A- as fa O .—- ---- --e ' • cf N v) O i d O d' i O ro C N C m O N O •gyp O v O Q O O O (11 ,/) U C N N c i U C co 1-•-.4 p C p 2 0- 2 E + >- CO 0 "CS°J Cr) C LS U 0 U 4 ' 4-,Q U D (.9 D U O Q cN—I c—I = N = Cr) L (o *L 0 u_ . C N U iii CU s. L C) .]• tfi'!:- - y — 'ai -0 U -N •_ ;` 2 w • ,, N. �, '!s ,; C9 ko U 0 Cl.) . _ _ •L m d- o c. 1 •o 01 I- !.� . n ° (1) -r Q m Li— . C . J 'L V { - •C f 1 r w' f - W hho co c Iv' � D -Q•co C) N 0 ca C C i C (v O U V N L L N CS N (0 N C C u Lo v o> 0 4- 4J LJ N C) N O C� U i U C al (0 .. C 4O+ N C _ v :7)61 t CoU �I2 17 CD > U -cs U 3 a Q r fd. •, -- 4 - • ..• ' k} .. '.•o-5!*! t m \ vC a, d {�G� ) + ! ¢♦ Wit„�:-177.07' 44^ �M.% Jf �3 j# _,' ✓n LLyw,�.p r` f. tt* ro r n c co co Y y S ti m C - - x .3 C_ ~' + . *< H>>� co - ' .t T moy y ` l«. ' /a Y. . y 0 -C r+x.1 i ira. ... ,s �� fi. r ,-1 TM. sr. ra ``t , t� mo .. a`` • H ^. . — MO µ - p - ■ : a F,- r . t_.f Vi '`1r 'i tk f ®'/ ;if_ v 0 V5 y mo � ti � • c . a t , ...-. r._,:.Y %fir 5 ,.. ..„., , ,,-07. . ,:t. o.r .. r. - / 'J�" i r � j CV �." ■ �� O� N w..■ 44," t wy , i r....., ,........ , , , _. ...... �� - �� versoes vis111110 OM. MIMI UM 1111111 AIM NM 0.11 MINI mil ism WINN RNG 26 RNG 27 1 1 I 1"=4300' � � I I Q TWP 47 c.) TWP 48 I � w 2 C I � LEE COUNTY J COLLEER COUNTY 7 8 9 10 11 12 0 0. -n 18 17 16 15 14 13 o O n al a! 0 O _« Q, ti C) W � 19 r, 20 21 22 23 24 Cr E- z Nule •CR200 ®Pen Camp SR. 846 30 29 28 27 m 26 25 30 29 x rn X 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 LEGENQ + INDICATES AREAS OF HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROBABIUTY • * INDICATES HISTORIC STRUCTURE (NOT TO SCALE) CORKSCREW SW QUADRANGLE INDICATES ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE (NOT TO SCALE) AREAS OF HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROBABILITY P-1--"r— INDICATES HISTORIC DISTRICT O GKA„S.DWG ]non]COWEN COWRY LONG RANGE PLwMMG 01EPMIYFM N v! 0 Mill .?ki 111111 WM inn s MN aid oilli M rem mos Tuns war mem umr ammo 01=10 .011166 it' fE RNG 26 RNG 27 I 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 TWP 48 TWP 49 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD ' 9 10 11 12 0 7 8 p—_ • CD -n r o 0 o_ o . 18 17 16 15 14 13 -yE �+ n c 0 4 c a 1"=4300' a u 19 20 21 22 0 23 24 c0 _� I QP` CP mow+ 30 ` 29 `'� 28 27 26 25 �R231 INTERSTATE 75 34 •CR230 31 32 33 35 36 I-75 CR 856 (RADIO ROAD) - TWP 49 V 1 TWP 50 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 SR. 84 (DAVIS BLVD.) _ o rill Tr) XU 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 Mill LEGEND ? INDICATES AREAS OF HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROBABILITY * INDICATES HISTORIC STRUCTURE (NOT TO SCALE) BELLE MEADE NW QUADRANGLE • INDICATES ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE (NOT TO SCALE) AREAS OF HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROBABILITY 1--r-11 INDICATES HISTORIC DISTRICT O MEAOENM.OMG 3/23/113 COWED COUNTY LONG PNGE PLANNING OEPMTNENE EXHIBIT H-1 CONSULTANT SUMMARY - 4/23/13 In March, 2013, the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. (AHC) conducted a reconnaissance cultural resource assessment for the Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc., located in Collier County. The parcel is located in Township 48S, Range 27E, Sections 31 (Figure 1). The parcel was surveyed to locate and assess any sites of archaeological and/or historical significance. This assessment was conducted to fulfill historic resource requirements in response to the State of Florida historic preservation guidelines. The work and the report conform to the specifications set forth in Chapter IA-46, Florida Administrative Code. The 553.7 acre parcel encompasses a golf course and undeveloped woodlands. The natural areas are characterized with a mosaic of pinewoods and remnant cypress. Exotic trees have been increasing in population in recent years as well as expanding communities of cabbage palms as a result of drier conditions. A site search with the Florida Division of Historic Resources determined that no previously recorded archaeological sites occur in the subject parcel. This reconnaissance cultural resource assessment indicated that the parcel has an overall low to medium probability for cultural resources based on a review of vintage and modern aerial photographic imagery and an extensive field reconnaissance of the parcel. The cultural resource assessment included a vehicular and pedestrian survey as well as judgmental shovel testing. A total of 49 shovel tests were excavated in low to medium probability areas for archaeological sites. All other project areas were either heavily disturbed or were considered to have a low probability for archaeological resources. One archaeological site was recorded as a result of this assessment. The site is characterized by two non-local chert flakes found on the disturbed surface. These flakes are consistent with the Archaic Period (ca. 7000 to 3000 BP), and likely represents a small prehistoric camp. The paucity of the material and the disturbances associated with the site indicate that, based on available data, the site is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. It is recommended that an archaeologist conduct intermittent monitoring of ground- disturbing activities during development. If any archaeological materials or features are encountered they should be fully documented. _r t•i Z i 1 A A RECONNAISANCE CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT OF THE OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL CONSERVANCY, INC. �y , :• _E_.. r►•s ��,,: "n"`.•r ` tr y ,-, / ..` �r c� e s . fir, : ; . ,.. YLL; e ' i I mo` t .tl / X '1 AHC TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 982 APRIL 2013 Exhibit H-2 A RECONNAISANCE CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT OF THE OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB PARCEL COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Robert S. Carr, M.S. John Wesley White, B.A. Michael Grady, B.A. John Beriault, B.A. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL CONSERVANCY, INC. 4800 SW 64th Avenue, Suite 107 Davie, Florida 33314 954-792-9776 archlgcl@bellsouth.net For: OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB, INC. AHC PROJECT NO. 2013.29 AHC TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 982 APRIL 2013 .. j TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES u CONSULTANT SUMMARY 1 PROJECT SETTING 3 PREVIOUS RESEARCH 11 CULTURAL SUMMARY 17 METHODOLOGY 27 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 30 SUMMARY OF SITE 31 REFERENCES CITED 33 APPENDIX I: FLORIDA SURVEY LOG 43 APPENDIX II: FLORIDA SITE FORM 8CR1305 45 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. USGS map of the Olde Florida Golf Club parcel 2 Figure 2. 1874 plat map for Township 48S, Range 27E, with the project parcel boundaries superimposed 5 Figure 3. 1943 Copeland map Township 48S, Range 27E, with the project parcel boundaries superimposed 6 Figure 4. 1953 black &white aerial photograph of the project parcel 7 Figure 5. 1991 color aerial orthophotograph of the project parcel 8 Figure 6. Map showing soil types found in the project parcel 9 Figure 7. Shovel testing in a newly emerging cabbage palm hammock 10 Figure 8. Road trail crossing an oak ridge 10 Figure 9. USGS map showing previously recorded sites within one mile of the project parcel 16 Figure 10. 2011 aerial photograph showing the location of probability areas and shovel tests 29 Figure 11. Oak Grove site 8CR1305 looking north 32 Figure 12. Closeup of 8CR1305 and lithic flake 32 ii CONSULTANT SUMMARY In March,2013,the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. (AHC) conducted a reconnaissance cultural resource assessment of the Olde Florida Golf Club parcel located in Collier County. The assessment was conducted for the Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. The parcel is located in Township 48S, Range 27E, Sections 31 (Figure 1). The parcel was surveyed to locate and assess any sites of archaeological and/or historical significance. This assessment was conducted to fulfill historic resource requirements in response to State of Florida and Collier County historic preservation guidelines. The work and the report conform to the specifications set forth in Chapter IA-46, Florida Administrative Code. The 553.7 acre parcel encompasses a golf course and undeveloped woodlands. The natural areas are characterized with a mosaic of pinewoods, oak forest, and remnant cypress ponds and sloughs. Exotic trees have been increasing in population in recent years. Communities of native cabbage palms also have expanded due to drier conditions. A site search with the Florida Division of Historic Resources determined that no previously recorded archaeological sites occur in the subject parcel. This reconnaissance cultural resource assessment indicated that the parcel has an overall low to medium probability for cultural resources based on a review of vintage and modern aerial photographic imagery and an extensive field reconnaissance of the parcel. The cultural resource assessment included a vehicular and pedestrian survey as well as judgmental and systematic shovel testing. A total of 70 shovel tests were excavated in low to medium probability areas for archaeological sites. Untested were wetlands and areas that had been previously cleared and developed,all of which are considered to have a low probability for significant archaeological resources. Nonetheless, all of these areas were subject to a pedestrian survey. One archaeological site, 8CR1305, was recorded as a result of this assessment. The site is characterized by two non-local chert flakes found on the disturbed surface. These flakes are consistent with the Archaic Period(ca. 7000 to 3000 BP), and likely represent a small prehistoric camp. The paucity of cultural material and the disturbances associated with the site indicate that, based on available data, the site is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Because of the large size of the parcel and the existence of at least one Archaic Period site, it is recommended that an archaeologist conduct intermittent monitoring of ground- disturbing activities during development. If any archaeological materials or features are encountered they should be fully documented. 1 ((�yyyy °a I ti1. • V • + Y yew' 4 .r �w 25 4 - � • I •. i . i ...�... _. .y i,. r n FeY9 a0 ••` • V....•- '.... tl •s. • 4,, _•y- in y -- 14 8.+ti^ 4. 4, + +a- 4 �Y. w. f rw.. t +�- M. "Y• s- a ♦ M A .*r . 4�R Anfl.r . .s . w s - . - -+- ..-. • . •. o- t. 6,. 4 f dry• rt r!" •V r a m,° a + ..y - .r„tea..,— ..... •71 4.�+. .3f ' er a, ,•- 4 St • 1 a lllI k, ... - ' I •. • � : • n • { • • • ! . ., I • I G 1114! v♦ E i d. • Figure 1. USGS Map of the Olde Florida Golf Club parcel. TOWNSHIP 48S,RANGE 27E.SECTION 31 1 USGS Map: CORKSCREW SW REV 1987 0 1/4 1/2 1 Mile approx. 0 .4 .8 1.6 Km. approx. 2 PROJECT SETTING The project parcel is located in Section 31 in Township 48S, Range 27E ten miles northeast of the City of Naples in northwest Collier County(Figure 1). The parcel lies east of County Road 951 (Collier Boulevard) approximately one mile south of the Immokalee Road (CR846). The parcel, totaling 553.7 acres, is irregular in shape with the straight borders oriented to the cardinal points.The relevant USGS map is Corkscrew SW,Fla. The project area largely consists of southern slash pine/saw palmetto flatwoods, oak communities,low pond cypress forests, and linear cypress sloughs. Although much of the area is natural woodland a considerable portion of it has been impacted by a golf course. There are expanding communities of invasive exotic plants such as meleleauca (meleleauca quinquenervia) and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), propagated in disturbances along the edges of the golf course where rocks and piles of sediment have been mechanically pushed up. Bird Rookery Slough drained the area to the north and west of the project area while to the south water drained southwesterly through a series of cypress sloughs. To the west between the coast and the interior are a series of linear sand hills that were remnant Pleistocene marine terraces shaped by subsequent wind activity. Vintage color and black and white aerial photographs of the project parcel depict two prominent linear ridges of higher ground with oak and pinewoods running southeast/northwest. Between them is an area of lower ground that may be a remnant prairie. The ridges may be Pleistocene in origin and be similar to the north-south linear ridges observed running in parallel bands inland from the coastline. These areas of higher elevation are often associated with archaeological sites. These ridges are prominently depicted in the 1943 Graham Copeland map(Figure 3). Historically, the general area was part of a dense slough running south as an extension of the Corkscrew Swamp/Bird Rookery Slough. The first state surveyors encountered "impracticable" conditions as they approached the seven-mile-wide swath of low-lying swamps. Surveyor W.L. Apthorp describes conditions 80 chains along the south border of Township 48S, Range 27 East on April 26th, 1872 as: "Heavy cypress swamp and tall boggy sawgrass with water a foot deep even at this dry season—wide deep sawgrass slough ahead surrounded by dense cypress swamp. Impracticable to go farther,Relinquish line..." Another line being run into the slough had the notation: "To round pond surrounded by bay and cypress swamp, impracticable. Pond full of monstrous alligators. Control 50 and stopped—relinquish line." Consequently,parts of Township 48S Range 26 East and Township 48S,Range 27E were not surveyed until modem times (Figure 2). The vegetative communities that dominate much of the project parcel are cabbage palm 3 (Sabal palmetto) hammocks, cypress (Taxodium distichum) strands and solution ponds and a community of succulent marsh plants such as fire flag (Thalia geniculata), arrowhead (Sagittaria spp.), and pickerelweed (Pontederia lanceolata). Small stands or groves of pop ash (Fraxinus caroliniana) and buttonbush (Cephalthanthus occidentalis) provide a woody midstory growth along marsh edges. In the cabbage palm hammocks are remnants, alive and dead, of large slash pine (Pinus elliotii var. densa). In the eastern portions of the parcel are portions of a large strand system of bald cypress and pond cypress (Taxodium ascenders). Throughout the parcel the cabbage palms occur in dense, low canopy formations. Many appear to be immature and emerging from what may have been grass prairies or clearings. Toward the north and western areas of the tract the cabbage palms form a dense and mature hammock with a canopy height of 20+feet. The geology of the area is characterized by solutioned and chalky limestone caprocks lying exposed or overlain to various depths by sands 2or shelly marls. In cypress sloughs, but particularly in cypress dome/solution ponds there are potentially deep deposits of muck or peat. A fine gray to tan sand found extensively in the district is Immokalee fine sand which usually overlies relict marine deposits of shelly marl and limestone caprock that are part of the Pleistocene Caloosahatchee formation. These marine marls contain lenses and deposits of clay intermixed with varying percentages of sand. These clays may have been a source for ceramic manufacture by the Formative period Native Americans. Both the Caloosahatchee marls and the associated limestone caprock contain the index fossil bivalve, Chione cancellata in quantity. Depths of sand or marl overburden seldom exceeded 60 centimeters. Many higher ground formations in the area appear to be bedrock unconformities that consist of fully exposed tabular slabs of limestone caprock containing numerous rounded solution holes. 4 P"'\ T !8S ]Z27T s .__gin: ti.tiT A t 4 k , P a mss.`.' t.. tkiw w,�♦ �tif+�;SDI .. . 1 lf. MvrR fuw :wvVrR.sie 1 i . l 1 »a 'as_ 1 ,. .. W+wbf R aVm .nn+=.......exn.. ' 5..l.HO l'Lu�.4.j l...l i , �y / �,� A•.•2 RA11 Bf A..u. H.AW.lu4f�4`aa'AA :WAWAjeT7 ..�:."1.t Zit Jtrif` -`7IA -stit,}' Z' Th.. �tof'Lbim.aa.rat'Zw..UI S RYAJ i.dr..lif. �.` 1' N...... the 1• �n «u o� lrnaf f.'f9' wO lW ..•�u1 ! b.u.in f4.. ' 'A '6' n- h 1 oa ro Www»fLn..., Figure 2. 1874 plat map for Township 48S,Range 27E with the project parcel boundaries superimposed. 5 V �_ Cam' a v. --\\:9,1) .... b D. oss "sw#1., 4 G y p R 6 S .s t r'� p t. iu� 1,.. 6. R,� i ACS �� ,. ss C y7° o ill • rd 1 04 5, 8s! 1 . i$ 4 17 h b ss�•,45�--...� $% 1 e 1. ! ey�r vya" to G C;' q 4/ii i, 76% I i P.t \ ti l t X4°1` Q° 4 so , �` 20 R''i . r }f`• k�` p�`rii 6y1 13 1 G t _w r • C Y P Fe QE S s. ■ t GVP t. t ,i r° �1 30 n2• 4: �atfi z8 / 4�i tl/A,' 4 0, , 0 41 I)4 ps0 f/au. c, y Cyfrers • /Q ono r i `�- P1q.i k / k % 11111k4ks\ _. 32 p. Cyf.. resS �� a ` r I -a _ r ti Scrrcb C • rest •1 .scb CYprb••E o 1 Figure 3. 1943 Copeland map of Township 48S, Range 27E, with project parcel superimposed. 1 ■ 0 1/2 1 2 Miles approx. 0 .8 1.6 3.2 Km.approx. 6 *-- r,r . . . ,,. . 'j y t ,,,,,,, ..., 4 el a + i 14:: .,.„,-,..., ti yr 11,t. it • c"^5 _ ,, •� s rte' f ,- 1 rt 1 ivn. Y s }}€ �--I _ ii 6�.Y, J' i7f ` g'- H , Figure 4. 1953 black and white aerial photograph of the Olde Florida Golf Club parcel. . - # 0 1/8 1/4 1/2 Mile approx. 0 .2 .4 .8 Km.approx. 7 1�/'7 1 TA ay??4,:,,,,,P'isi,.:.:..,..1:".:1,..c.:,::.:it'l';''''' ,. ,'''.7,,,,A;;;?..,:i..,.foi,',:.,';ri'',i'-'''..,',...:','" i -,..' r• t ' i, I. ' `, 1 -4 r rnn.i / + i. • 4 ' i 1 Figure 5. 1991 color aerial orthophotograph of the Olde Florida Golf Club parcel. 1 1 0 1h6 1/8 114M 4prx 0 .1 .2 .4 14Moc 8 MaII f • if k� -.pi , 1 .f.",.. a. 1 1.* .. R . k CI � tS' •' / F ' ■ • ■ o I, { . a en , ti w l :t , Figure 6. Map showing soil types found in the Olde Florida Golf Club parcel. 10-Oldsmar Fine Sand, limestone substratum 11 -Hallandale fine sand 18-Riviera fine sand, limestone substratum 21 -Boca fine sand 99-Hallandale and Boca fine sands SOURCE:USDA WEB SOIL SURVEY 9 r ,•I \ t; --,,\--,' �" llP \ . t,F4`.. y:ha&. i'. ' p!•i tt, 7 JJ - i f I s .N 1. S t1 ! rr `S �Y` Figure 7. Shovel testing in a newly emerging cabbage palm hammock. i ».. .- _ - dF _ ,,., -yam : r os — -- , - ' ''•7t3'. 7 ry p' .4 fit} ._ • .. Figure 8. Road trail crossing an oak ridge. 10 PREVIOUS RESEARCH Southwest Florida has been a focus of archaeological investigations since the 1880s, although much of the early work was directed toward the recovery of museum quality artifacts rather than understanding cultural processes. Griffin (1988:48-50) discussed some of the very early references to archaeological sites in South Florida. He noted that these early reports were mostly casual observations, and few appear to refer to southwest Florida,but rather refer to the southeast and Key West areas. Kenworthy's (1883) informal report on shell mounds and ancient canals was one of the first reports on southwest Florida archaeological sites. At about the same time as Kenworthy's investigations, Simons (1884) gave a narrative account of some of the very large coastal shell middens, and Douglass (1885) provided further information about prehistoric canals (although he did not accept that they were prehistoric). One account described a canal near Gordon's Pass that is probably the Naples Canal (8CR59), and another further north may be the Pineland Canal. Douglass' diaries record excavations of a post-contact era site (8CR41) on Horrs Island, as evidenced by the presence of European artifacts (Griffin, 1988:50-51). Douglass visited Lostman's River and other areas in the Ten Thousand Island area including Horrs Island(1890). In 1895 Durnford reported that cordage and other artifacts were recovered from a mangrove muck pond on Marco Island (8CR49). The material was shown to Cushing, who mounted a major project to recover more material from the site. Cushing (1897) reported recovering wood and other perishable artifacts from the muck pond on Marco Island, adjacent to a large shell works and midden village site. Publication of illustrations of the spectacular fmds generated a great deal of subsequent interest. Wells M. Sawyer, a young artist accompanying the expedition, produced an excellent and presumably accurate contour map for the entire Key Marco Shell Midden. This map is valuable to present-day efforts in understanding many of the now obliterated features and interpreting(reconstructing)the"architecture"of the shell midden. Widmer(1983)notes that Cushing also focused attention on the nonagricultural chiefdom level of social organization supported by the rich estuary and marine resources, although his anthropological observations have remained overshadowed by the wealth of artifacts. Moore (1900, 1905, 1907) investigated a number of sites along the Collier/Lee County coast, apparently attempting to find material comparable to Cushing's fmds. Although Moore provided information about site locations and general contents, most of his work was extremely crude and uncontrolled, by both contemporary archaeological standards, and by modem standards. The first attempt to systematically survey and investigate archaeological sites was initiated by Ales Hrdlicka, who visited a number of sites along the coast and tidal mangrove estuaries in 1918, focusing on the Ten Thousand Island region (Hrdlicka 1922). Hrdlicka noted that southwest Florida was a distinct region within south Florida and made an attempt to type sites by function. 11 Matthew Stirling's (1931, 1933) excavation of a burial mound on Horrs Island represents one of the first controlled excavations in Collier/Lee Counties (although he attempted stratigraphic control, Cushing had little success in his wet site excavation). The site was named the Blue Hill Mound, but it is not recorded under that name in the FMSF (either as a primary or secondary name), so it is unclear exactly which site he excavated, although it was probably site 8CR41 (McMichaels, 1982). These reports by Stirling are preliminary, and apparently neither a final report nor a skeletal analysis has been published. John M. Goggin was the first to define a south Florida cultural area (Glades Area), and describe south Florida ceramics (Glades ware), establishing a basis for later archaeological work. He published an analysis of the ceramic sequence in south Florida (Goggin, 1939, 1940). In later reports (Goggin, 1947, 1949a, 1949b), he formulated a basic framework of cultural areas and chronologies that is still current (although modifications with additional data have been made, see further discussion below). Goggin (1949b) summarized much of this information in an unpublished manuscript, which Griffin(1988)thoroughly described. In passing, one unfortunate aspect of Goggin's work was a dependence on informant information for location of sites (especially interior sites) and he had a real concern that existing sites would be looted. This concern resulted in his either deliberately or incidentally reporting vague locational data for many sites. Some of these sites have never been satisfactorily relocated, although a few have undoubtedly been re-recorded by later investigators. It is rumored that Goggin had a"gentleman's agreement" with many of the other leading practicing Florida archaeologists of the time that the South Florida area was his exclusive province to investigate. If this rumor is correct, it might explain the neglect shown the southwest Florida area in the archaeological arena from the end of World War II to Goggin's death in 1964. For several decades, much of the subsequent archaeological investigations in the region took place in the Cape Haze, Charlotte Harbor and Pine Island areas. Arlene Fradkin and other investigators from the University of Florida began an ongoing involvement with the Pine Island Sound/Sanibel Island area in the 1970s. Her first investigation was at the Wightman site on northern Sanibel Island(Fradldn 1976). In 1983, Marquardt began a series of investigations at Josslyn Key, Useppa Island, Pineland, Buck Key, Galt Island in Lee County, and at Big Mound Key in Charlotte County (Marquardt 1984, 1987, 1988, 1992). Marquardt and Russo have investigated Horrs Island in Collier County. A number of the large shell midden sites they excavated appear to be late Archaic, where they documented a more elaborate social organization at and larger sedentary or semi-sedentary population sizes than previously known for that period(Russo, 1990,and pers. comm.). 12 Most of the recent studies focused on the coastal sites, as have subsequent summaries and discussions. Recent work on the interior has made significant advances in documenting the extent of inland sites, especially in the Big Cypress and Everglades parks (Ehrenhard et al., 1978, 1979; Ehrenhard and Taylor 1980; Ehrenhard et al., 1980; Taylor and Komara 1983; Taylor, 1984, 1985). Griffin's (1988) synthesis of the Everglades Park data is the defining work on south Florida archaeology to date. Athens (1983) summarized some of the results of the Big Cypress survey. Beriault and colleagues (1981) reported on salvage excavations at Bay West Nursery (8CR200). Their description of the site includes a well known but rare and infrequently documented Early and Middle Archaic use of ponds for cemeteries. In the last two decades the pressure of development as well as a recognized need for preservation or mitigation of prehistoric sites has led to a number of reports by cultural resource management consultants. While most of these reports are limited in scope due to restriction to a small tract of land, many have produced useful summaries of regional archaeology, as well as insightful analysis of the relationship between site types and location and ecotypes(Almy and Deming 1982, 1986a, 1986b, 1986c, 1987,Austin 1987, Carr and Allerton 1988a, 1988b, Deming and Almy 1987, 1988, Fay and Carr 1990, Fuhrmeister et al. 1990, Martinez 1977,Miller and Fryman 1978, Swift and Carr 1989). Arthur W. Lee, John Beriault and others in the Southwest Florida Archaeological Society (SWFAS) have recorded and investigated a large number of archaeological sites in Collier and Lee Counties. It is an ongoing effort of the Society to publish and disseminate reports (Lee et al., 1993, 1997, 1998; Beriault, 1973, 1982, 1986, 1987; Beriault and Strader, 1984). Many of these reports deal with small interior seasonal sites. In addition, Beriault has provided several unpublished manuscripts regarding site types and archaeological areas(Beriault 1982, 1987). Most recently, archaeological investigation has been done in the area of the subject parcel by AHC at the Piper's Grove Parcel (now called Twin Eagles) to the immediate north (Carr et. Al. 1994), to the west between Moulder and Rivers Roads on the 20-acre Hunt Parcel (Beriault 1998) and on the four-square mile SR 846 Parcel (Beriault 2001). In 2002 AHC investigators conducted a Phase I investigation of a 500-acre area adjoining the present subject parcel to the north and east at the Immokalee Road South Parcel. Ten archaeological sites were assessed (Beriault et al. 2006). All of these projects resulted in the discovery of archaeological sites, reinforcing that the general area has a high concentration of archaeological features and sites. LITERATURE REVIEW A search was requested on 3/27/13 with the Florida Division of Historic Resources for relevant archives and literature associated with the project area. This included, but was not limited to, site forms from the Master Site File in Tallahassee concerning previously recorded archaeological sites within and immediately adjacent to the Olde Florida Golf Club parcel and reports for cultural resource investigations conducted within one mile of 13 the project parcel (Table 1). Table 1. Literature Review Summary Previously Recorded Sites: Within Project Parcel 0 Within One Mile of Survey Parcel 11 Previous Investigations: In Project Area 0 Within One Mile of Project Parcel 1 A review of Florida site files resulted in determining that no previously recorded archaeological sites occur within the project parcel. A total of eleven previously recorded archaeological sites occur within one mile of the project parcel. Table 2. _Previously Recorded Sites Summary' Site No. Site Type References In Survey Outside of Parcel Parcel Site Form on File, Little Rowdy Swamp Division of Historic 8CR00827 Midden Midden Resources, X Tallahassee, Florida Beriault A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the 8CR00830 Twinberry Midden Immokalee Road X South Parcel, Collier County, Florida,2006 Beriault, A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the 8CR00831 Colyott Midden/Mound Immokalee Road X South Parcel, Collier County, Florida,2006 Beriault; A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the 8CR00832 Centipede Midden Immokalee Road X South Parcel, Collier County, Florida,2006 Beriault, A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the 8CR00833 Caniphorwood Grove Midden Immokalee Road X South Parcel, Collier County, Florida,2006 Beriault, A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the 8CR00834 Psychotria Midden/Campsite Immokalee Road X South Parcel, Collier County, _ Florida,2006 14 Beriault, A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the 8CR00835 Coppice Interior Midden Immokalee Road South Parcel, Collier County, Florida,2006 Beriault, A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the 8CR00836 Great Circles Eartnworks Immokalee Road South Parcel, Collier County, Florida,2006 Benault, A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the 8CR00837 Serenoa Mound Sand Mound lmmokalee Road South Parcel, Collier County, Florida,2006 Beriault, A Phase I Archaeological Goodwin Site(Northern Assessment of the 8CR00841 Component) Midden lmmokalee Road South Parcel, Collier County, Florida,2006 Seriault, A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the 8CR01097 East Midden Midden lmmokalee Road South Parcel, Collier County, Florida,2006 Note: 'Based on sites within or adjacent to the project parcel. A review of the state report files conducted in the same area indicated one cultural resource assessment previously conducted within one mile of the project parcel (Table 3). Table 3. Previous Cultural Resource Assessments' Survey Date Author Title In Parcel Parcel A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the 17294 2006 Beriault,John G.,et al. lmmokalee Road South Parcel, Collier County, X Florida Note: 'Based on sites within one mile of the project parcel 15 — . l i_ _ I 1 rte + . „,,,,.,<..„' 1 ` - f=•7 I R�t2 a r--- �. 25 . ''�• a4R10i7 •.• T • :*C aaRU* facR`$33 .•' - 1 I 3 Y t ° C:rrr _ 1 �1L • -SCRIM V�`.Y°. iO / y,, ce. a _ � ; a 3s 45 I u. a.. ti _ , • •i 2 1 1 wy 6 6 _• ' . • —...... 1- ._ i ' . . [ • • Figure 9. USGS map of the Olde Florida Golf Club Parcel area showing all previously recorded sites within one mile of the project parcel. # , TOWNSHIP 48S,RANGE 27E,SECTION 31 �� 0 114 112 1 Mile approx. USGS Map: CORKSCREW SW,REV.1987 0 .4 .8 1.6 Km.approx. 16 CULTURAL SUMMARY Stirling was the first to distinguish the indigenous prehistoric cultures of southern Florida in 1936 by defining a Glades cultural area, including all of south Florida (Carr et al. 1994b:9; Milanich, 1994:5-6). Griffin (1988) pointed out that this was not formulated as a strict cultural area,but it was rather a geographic region with some common cultural traits. Kroeber (1939), in a review of North American prehistory, utilized a slightly different term,the"South Florida Area,'basing his definition on both environmental and cultural factors.Subsequently Coggin delineated more particular boundaries for southern Florida and divided the region into three sub-areas: "Okeechobee" around Lake Okeechobee, "Tekesta" for southeast Florida and the Fbrida Keys, and "Calusa" for Southwest Florida(Carr et al. 1994b:10; Goggin 1947:114-127). Following Goggin's study,subsequent researches have refined or altered the cultural distinctions attributed to southern Florida's prehistoric populations. There has been criticism that Goggin's names and definitions were based on historic accounts of the main(proto)historic groups found in the respective regions and not on the archaeobgical evidence of spatial, temporal,and cultural differences (Seas 1966; Griffin, 1974; Carr and Beriault 1984; Griffin, 1988). Griffin, in particular,questioned the distinctions. He believed that South Florida cultures varied only by local environmental conditions and ceramic exchange rates. Giffin believed the inhabitants of prehistoric southern Fbrida were mainly dwelling on the coast and that the interior was nearly uninhabited and under- - utilized. Griffin designated the entire southern Florida region as the "Circum-Glades" area(Eck 1997:5;Griffin 1974:342-346).This new designation for the area was furthered by a widely circulated book on Florida archaeology by Milanich and Fairbanks (1980). Griffin later(1988) retreated to some extent from his earlier position as further research (particularly by Ehrenhard,Carr,Komara,and Taybr in the Big Cypress and Carr in the eastern Everglades in the 1970s and 1980s)showed abundant sites (and concomitant use and habitation)in the interior and Everglades. Can: and Beriault, in particular,have taken issue with the concept of a Circum-Glades region. Cam's research in the Big Cypress and Everglades and his subsequent analysis demonstrating variation of key cultural markers (particularly in decorated ceramics) formed the basis for this contention. There is abundant evidence for cultural (and probably political or trbal) diversity in the various areas of south Fbrida. Carr and Beriault particularly noted and defined differences between the lower southwest Florida coast,which they termed the 'Ten Thousand Island" region,and the area to the north, which they called the "Caloosahatchee" region.This latter area they believed to be the seat of the historic Calusa chiefdomship, although previous (and some subsequent) researchers have called the entire southwest Florida from Cape Sable to the Cape Haze peninsula(and beyond)in Charlotte County"Calusa." Griffin, in his definitive 1988 synthesis on Everglades archaeology, attempted to reconcile and refine some of the conflict in the definition of south Florida prehistoric and historic culture areas.As stated by Carr and colleagues (1994b), "the ssue...appeas in part to be one of trying to determine the significance of regional and temporal variation, 17 rather than whether these differences are real." There is evidence that changes through time in regional political affiliations or realties makes any remodel not addressing this complex issue two-dimensional.The Calusa hegemony that was in place by the time of the arrival of Europeans may have begun as early as 800 AD in the Ten Thousand Island "district" or area (Giffin 1988:321; Carr et al. 1994b:12). There is currently ongoing research to further refine present thought as to cultural affiliations in south Florida. It would seem only a matter of time before new directions and emphases provide a more accurate sunzation of south Florida cultural affinities. Using the present models,the coastal zones of Collier County and southern Lee County contain three distinct culture areas. Indian Lill on Marco Island lies thirty miles from the projected interface by Carr and Beriault (1984) of the Caloosahatchee area (called the "the `heartland'of the Catrsa;' Carr et al. 1994b:12) to the north,and the Ten Thousand Islands area to the south.At a yet undefined point to the east lies the Okeechobee cultural area,but the boundary,if it is a definite,fixed one,is likely to occur in the vicinity of the Immokalee rise forty miles or more to the northeast of Indian Hrll. Further work is in progress by Can to address the issue of where the southwest boundaries of the Okeechobee culture area occur. TEMPORAL PERIODS In south Florida, the following periods and adaptations are generally accepted. Part of this chronobgy involving the later or For ative period is called the Glades sequence in honor of Goggin, the greater part of whose work in defining the ceramic sequence or markers has withstood the test of time and subsequent criticism (Goggin 1939, 1947, 1949c). From Goggin's day to present, pottery variability in form, substance, and decoration has proven useful for providing time markers, at least during the archaeologically-brief (± 3500 year) period spanning the late Archaic and Formative periods that it was produced. Other artifact types and their variations have,to present, proven somewhat less reliable as absolute indicants of prehistoric age. Radiocarbon dating, a phenomena of the last 30-plus years, provides, within the standard deviation expressed in plus-or-minus years BP (before present), a relatively absolute date for a given sample and provides a yardstick to measure traits or distinctions in provenienced artifacts. Detern>ining and adequately defining what traits we can discern against this absolute is part of the ongoing function of the regional archaeological effort. The following information is generalized and abbreviated. The dates are approximate; transitions between periods are in reality more gradual that the manner they are expressed for convenience. PALED PERIOD(14,000- 8,500 BP) During the Paleo Period,Native Americans began moving into the southeastern portion of North America into Florida.Most evidence of their presence in Florida can be reliably dated to about 10,000 BP. There are no known Paleoindian sites in Collier County. Several are documented from elsewhere in south Florida,including Warm Mineral Springs and little Salt Springs in 18 Sarasota County(Cockrell and Murphy 1978; Clausen and Gifford 1975),Harney Flats in Hillsborough County (Daniel and Wisenbaker, 1987) and the Cutler Fossil Site in Dade County(Carr 1986). During this period, the terminal Wisconsian ice age, the climate was probably less extreme, with cooler summers and warmer winters. The climate was also drier, and sea levels were lower(Carbone 1983; Carr 1986; Griffin 1988). One reason that possible Paleo period sites have not been discovered in Collier and Lee Counties is that the shoreline may have been as much as 100 miles further west due to lower sea levels. Drier conditions may have made the interior very inhospitable, and the shallow estuarine and littoral sites that existed were flooded by post-ice age Holocene sea rises. Any possible interior sites from the Paleo Period may be unrecognizable due to lack of diagnostic artifacts, low population density, and few permanent camps. These and other factors may help explain the absence to date of identifiable Paleo period sites in Collier and Lee Counties. ARCHAIC PERIOD (8,500 -2,500 BP) The Archaic period reflects a post-Pleistocene shift in adaptation marked by an increase in the seasonal exploitation of a broad spectrum of food resources, a more restricted use of territory due to regional specialization, and more semi-sedentary habitation sites. No ceramics are known until the Late Archaic. During the Archaic, regional specializations became more marked, not only with material culture but also with distinct local utilization of local plant and animal resources. As mentioned above, there is, as yet, no firm evidence of human presence in southwest Florida during the Paleo period. This apparently is also true for the Early Archaic (8500- 7000BP), as there is evidence of an environment too arid to support scrub oak, and the presence of shifting wind formed dunes (Watts 1975; Widmer 1983). No early Archaic sites are known from southwest Florida(Allerton and Carr 1988:14). By about 6500 BP mesic conditions began to spread, although localized xeric conditions continued (and still exist in some areas) through south Florida. Middle Archaic sites dating from this time are rare, although the Bay West Nursery site (8CR200) in Collier County and the Ryder Pond site (8LL1850) in Lee County near Bonita Springs provide evidence of occupation, as do several sites in southeast Florida. The Bay West site is a Middle Archaic cypress pond cemetery, associated with a lithic scatter. The Ryder Pond site is a similar mortuary pond site surrounded by pine flatwoods (Carr and Heinz 1996). Beriault has also recorded several aceramic shell scatters in coastal sand hills (paleo dunes), some of which may date to the Middle Archaic. Griffin (1988) summarizes evidence indicating that despite the rise of available surface water, brackish estuaries and other major modern landscape features had not formed, and population (or repopulation) was still sparse. 19 During the Archaic period sea levels began to rise at a fairly rapid rate,estimated at 8.3 cm. per 100 years 6000-3000 BP, and 35 cm per 100 yeas afterwards (Scholl et al. 1%9),although whether sea levels were steadily rising or oscillating is still unclear(see Griffin 1988; Allerton and Carr 1990 for recent reviews of the literature). Data is son whatdiffrcult to sort out as sea level rise was accompanied by both shore regression and transgression in places.As conditions became wetter (and warmer) in the interior, cypress swamps and hardwood sub-tropical forests established then-selves by about 5000 BP(Carbone 1983,Delcourt and Delcourt 1981). By late Middle or early Late Archaic times (4000 yeas BP) there were significant shell rounds and middens on Horrs island,Marco Island,and elsewhere in the coastal regions, suggesting that the estuary system had been established and was being utilized to provide the subsistence basis for denser populations and semi-sedentary settlements (Morrell 1%9; Cockrell 1970). At Useppa Island in Lee County, excavations have provided radiocarbon dates from pre-ceramic shell madders ranging between roughly 4900 BP and 5600 BP, suggesting that the Middle Archaic as well as Late Archaic periods saw a growing dependence on shellfish resources (Milanich et al. 1984). There are aceramic coastal sand hill and interior wetland sites as well,but these have not been demonstrated to be Archaic despite some investigators equating aceramic with preceramic. Radiocarbon dates for these sites would clarify this point. Allerton and Carr(1988) noted that a number of stratified sites in the wet mangrove and marsh areas of the Everglades,as well as on lion Island,contain Archaic preceramic horizons, although its unclear if aceramic was equated with preceramic. Additional supporting evidence of interior use by Archaic peoples will provide a new dimension to the archaeological understanding of Archaic resource utilization.Allerton and Carr point out that if the wet tree islands were initially used by Archaic people,then at least some of the hardwood hammocks in swamp environments were raised in elevation (with subsequent changes in vegetation) due to human activities. Post-Archaic people extensively utilized these hammocks and continued to advance their development as distinct geomorphic features.This is obviously an area where additional archaeological investigations have a potential to contribute to understanding the interaction of geomorphic and cultural evolution in southwest Florida. Toward the end of the Archaic fiber-tempered pottery appeals in southwest Florida,often used as a marker of the Orange Phase,commencing at about 4000 BP,either coincident with or soon after the development of the extensive shell middens. The Late Archaic Orange Phase subsistence strategy is characterized by intensive use of shellfish and marine resources, as well as being marked by an accelerated trend toward regional specializations. A number of the large shell maddens on Marco Island (Cbckrell 1970), Hons Island (Russo n41.),Cape Haze (Bullen and Bullen 1956),and elsewhere date from this period or earlier, as they contain fiber-tempered ceranics, although there are known aceramic (preceramic?) levels below the Orange Phase deposits that may date to the Middle Archaic. These shell middens are usually capped by deposits from later occupations as well. 20 FORMATIVE STAGE OR GLADES PERIODS (2500 BP -500 BP) The Formative or Glades adaptation,based on hunting, fishing, and the harvesting of shellfish and plants, was similar to the Archaic, but was characterized by increasing specializations in gathering strategies and tool-making. Earlier writers have typed this hunter-gatherer society as primitive or "low-level" (Kroeber 1939). However, there is certainly evidence from the specialization of tools, from the beautifully-executed wood carvings from Key Marco in Collier County and those from Fort Center near Lake Okeechobee (Cushing 1897; Sears 1982), and from the historic accounts of the Calusa hegemony,that the south Florida area had an advanced culture that Goggin (1964) has called a"stratified non-agrarian society." The preceding Late Archaic late Orange phase(also known as the transitional phase)was marked by changes in pottery,and terminated with the relatively rapid replacement of fiber-tempered pottery with sand-tempered,limestone-tempered,and chalky "temperless" pottery. It was also characterized by changes in ceramic style and often by reduction in the size of stone projectile points. The Formative Stage (beginning about 2500 BP) is divided in south Florida into the Glades Ieriods sequence. Subsistence adaptation is marked by a narrowing spectrum of resource use, as well as continued trends toward regional diversity and ecobgical speciali9tions, marked in part by the proliferation of inland resource extraction encampments. Formative Period cultural evolution eventually led to increased political sophistication, perhaps initially of modest dimensions, but culminating in broad regional political alliances and regulation of materials and goods (i.e. resources) between the coast and inland areas (Milanich and Fairbanks 1980). By protohistoric and contact times the Calusa were the dominant tribal group, galling broad political influence and at least partial control over much of south Florida as far north as central Brevard County. Historically, the main Calusa village has been regarded as "Calos" on Mound Key in Estero Bay in Lee County, although 50 to 70 large villages were under direct Calusa control by contact times (Griffin,1988). During the Formative Periods,village sites grew to the proportions of large multi-use complexes,particularly abng the coast and barrier islands of southwest Florida.Some of the projected intra-site functions of the elements of these complex shellworks were as temples, canals, causeways, temple and platform rounds, courtyards and watercourts. Current research involving the excavating of large contiguous areas of these shell moxmd complexes is beginning to establish demonstrable uses for the features of these large sites,upon which heretofore were merely speculated(Widmer 1996). Tidal estuary rivers and inland hammocks abng deep water sloughs, marshes, and permanent ponds were seasonally visited for extraction of natural resources,and are now marked by small to relatively large black dirt niddens,some of which may have been semi-permanent hamlets.The pine and cypress flatwoods appear to have supported few 21 sites, although areas around Lake Trafford and other rich interior areas developed substantial sites, including sand mounds, and may be more similar to the Okeechobee cultural area than to the coastal cultures. In 1992,Dickel and Carr excavated a Deptford Period burial round(the Oak Knoll Site) in the Bonita Bay Tract north of the Imperial River. Exotic trade hens and seventy or more human burials were among the material findings. The resulting conclusions and subsequent surveying and testing of the Bonita Bay Shell works (8LL717) suggest social stratification and complexity may extend further back into the past than the Fonmtive period(Dickel and Carr 1992). Coastal sites (shell middens)reflect a predominate dependence on fish and shellfish,wild plant foods and products,and larger inland game.The inland sites show a greater reliance on interior resources, including large, medium and small mammals, turtle, small freshwater fish,alligator,snap,frogs,and,sometimes,freshwater shellfish. Interior and coastal resource exchange can be documented by the consistent finds of moderate amounts of marine shell in many interior mmiddens,as well as interior resources in coastal middens. The Formative Stage (with a nod to Coggin)has been often termed the Glades cultural tradition. Much of this "tradition" is focused on decorated ceramics,the minority in the archaeological record, although the majority of recovered (rim) sherds are plainware. However, despite this, pottery (and its decorations) is usually utilized as the major temporal marker(s) for fitting sites into a temporal framework. Changes in pottery do not represent mere changes in artistic motifs, but reflect inter- and intra-regional trade contacts and outside cukumal influences (possibly through exogamy, shifting of populations, and even the through evolution of a culture through time). Whatever the influences,the Glades tradition is continuous from post-Archaic times to contact times. Despite the fact that exogamy is likely to have been practiced,traders or other specialists probably moved between major cultural areas in small numbers, and genetic flow probably accompanied cultural exchange,although perhaps not on the same scale.This may have increased in later times due to use of traditional obligations of kinship and intermarriage to stabilize alliances that were not codified into a formal legal system. The following table has been modified from several sources, but its predominantly based on Milanich and Fairbanks (1980), Griffin (1988),and Allerton and Carr(1990). Dates have been rounded somewhat and translated to Before Present (BP). There are some differences of opinion in the dates,particularly about the timing of the Glades Ia and lb division. Table 1:Glades Ciitural Sequence Glades Ia(2500 BP- 1500 BP) Appearance of sand tempered plan pottery, but little else to mark a difference and the preceding 22 late Archaic. Sand tempered plain remains a predominate type throughout the Glades sequence. Glades lb(1500 BP- 1250 BP) Appearance of decorated sand-tempered ceramic (Ft.Drum Incised,R.Drum Punctated,Cane Patch Incised, Turner River Punctate), plainware common. Pottery rim grooving and incision decorations become widespread. Glades Ha(1250 BP- 1100 BP) Appearance of Key largo Incised,Sanibel Incised, Miami Incised, and plainware is cone non. Distinction between ceramics of southeast and southwest Florida becomes apparent. Ten Thousand Island area distinct from Caloosahatchee area. First mound construction- increased social stratification? Population size may have approximated that at contact. Glades llb (1100- 1000 BP) Appearance of Matec umbe Incised; Key largo Incised common on east coast, Gordon's Pass Incised common on the west, and plaimware common throughout. — Glades He(1000 BP-800 BP) Appearance of Plantation Pinched, but few decorated wares with a preponderance of plainware (there is some evidence of population reduction- perhaps due to a cataclysmic event). Non-local pottery (e.g. St. Johns Plain and Check Stamped, Belle Glade Plain)appeals. Glades IIIa(800-600 BP) Appearance of Surfside Incised, increasing quantities of St. Johns pottery (especially on East Coast),and Belle Glade pottery. Glades nib (600 BP-500 BP) Glades Tooled rims appear (rare on West Coast), zoned punctate designs, but general decline in incised decoration. Belle Glade ceramics common on west coast. St. Johns ware present but rare on West Coast,common on East Coast. Glades Inc(500 BP-300 BP) Continuation of BM ceramics, with pronounced flaring of rips and embossing on Glades Tooled ceramics. Mound burial construction less common with intrusive burials into existing mounds, appearance of European goods,plainware common. 23 HISTORICAL PERIOD By European contact times (the first half of the 16th century), the southwest coast of Florida was maintaining a vigorous,possibly expanding political chiefdom with a broad network of affiances, as well as a rich and ancient cultural tradition without an agricultural base. However, direct conflict with Europeans and, more importantly, exposure to European diseases led to the rapid decline of the Catusa. By the mad 1700s their numbers had greatly diminished.The remnants of this once-powerful tribe may have left south Florida in the 1760s with the Spanish for relocation in Clrba. Othes may have become indistinguishable from Spanish Cuban fishermen who worked the great fishing "ranchos" in the Pine Island Sound region catching and salting fish for export to Cuba. Other groups of Native Americans may have fused with the Creek-derived Seminoles In the late 170(15,membes of the Creek tube were forced into Florida from Georgia and Alabama. They were later called Seminoles, possibly derived from the Spanish term "cim marones" Pressures from colonial (and later) white encroachment on their traditional territories forced them into the Big Cypress and Everglades area by the 1830s. By this time, most of the cultural identity of pre-contact times had been lost, akhough some of the Calusa subsistence strategies may have been partly adopted by Seminoles.A number of Seminole period sites have been documented on earlier Glades middens.This coincidence may in part reflect the paucity of high land in the interior(F hrenhard et al. 1978, 1979, 1980; E hrenhard and Taybr 1980; Taylor and Komara 1983; Taylor 1984, 1985). Older Hidden sites (particularly those called "black dirt" niddens) can be rich agriculturally as well as archaeobgically, making these foci for historic Seminole gardens and fruit groves. Seminole periods in south Florida are divided into I (1820-1860),II(1860-1900) and III (1900-1940) (Ehrenhard et al. 1978). Post-1940 Seminole camps are designated "Late Seminole" in some reports.These designations reflect the different stages of Seminole migration into south Florida, Seminole displacement and active conflict with the expanding American culture, and the eventual refuge by Seminole remnants in Big Cypress and Everglades regions. Military records,and,in particular,several sketch maps by military personnel done in the 1830s and 1840s and the Ives military map of South Florida (1856) shows evidence of investigations at and near"Malco Inlet, "Casimba," "Good Land,"and"Cape Romans." SEMINOLE WARS IN THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA AREA The advent of the Second and Third Seminole Was (1834-38, 1855-58) disrupted the peaceful settlement of the Southwest Florida region. There were several forts, "temporary"and permanent,established along the Caloosahatchee Riverduring this time. Fort Dulaney was established at Punta Rassa near the mouth of the Cabosahatchee in 1837 and was occupied intermittently through 1841,and again in 1855. After a hurricane destroyed R.Dulaney in 1841,Fort Harvie was established upriver.The name of this fort was changed in 1850 by its commander General Twiggs to honor his new son-in-law, Col. Abraham Myers. Fort Myers was thus created, and became the chief fort of the region. 24 From this central administrative point, a line of foils was established up the Caloosahatchee River. They were: Fort Denaud,Fort Adams,Fort Thompson,and Fort Center on Fsheating Creek leading into Lake Okeechobee. Other forts and"temporary depots" were established south into the Big Cypress Swamp such as Fort Simon Drum, Temporary Depot Number One,Fort Doane,Fort Simmons,Fort Keis,Fort Foster, Fort Shacklefoid,and others. A number of nlitary expeditions were sent south abng the coast during the Second and Third Seninole Wars with the objectives of interdicting trade in guns and ammunition between the Seminoles and the Spanish-Cuban fishing comity, and hunting and capturing Indians. General Thomas Lawson, who had just been appointed Surgeon General of the United States,commanded one of the early notable expeditions.Lawson's expedition left Fort Harvie (Fort Myers) in February 1838. Elements of Lawson's command explored the area in and around the Caxambas Point area, discovering two abandoned Indian villages n the Blackwater River/Palm Bay area. Other expeditions bivouacked at Cape Romano and Caxambas Point. Colonel Rogers, of the ill-fated Parkhill expedition,wrote several dispatches from Cape Romano in the Caxambas area in 1858, describing the ambush of Captain Parkhill's party at the headwaters of Turner River.The Collier County Museum is the repository for a collection of military artifacts purportedly found by a local collector near Indian Hill in the early 1960s.This material may have originated with one of the various military expeditions stopping at Caxambas Point. The present survey did not locate any Seminole period sites,although military records, and in particular several sketch maps by military pesonnel done in the 1830s and 1840s and the Ives military imp of South Florida(1856) indicate various Seminole sites such as "Fort Doane","Fort Keais","Billy's Town" and "Cholalapalka"in the general area. MODERN AREA HISTORY By the 1890s white settlers and homesteaders such as the Whiddens, Canolls, Smiths, and Kirida.nds had hunted, settled or ranched cattle in the area of Cerny Island immediately south of Bird Rookery Slough and Corkscrew Swamp. These early settles fanned the I ndeson Creek area and hunted northward into Rattlesnake Hammock.The advent of the Inmokalee Road (CR846) in the late 1950s further opened access to the area,and a sizable percentage of the region was cleared for large commercial fanning operations. The completion of the Atlantic Coastline Railway by 1928 also enabled logging of pine and cypress in the Big Corkscrew Island/Corlscrew Swamp area by the late 1940s as a series of logging trans allowed access by narrow-gauge logging locomotives into the surrounding country. By the late 1940s Bill and Lester Piper of Bonita Springs maintained a sizable ranching operation north of the Imrokalee Road with a corral and chutes for loading cattle at a hammock called the Mule Pens. By the late 1960s several sections south of the Immokalee Road were opened for purchase to individual landholdes,generally of 5 and 10-acre parcels. North-south roads constructed south from the Inmokalee Road include 25 Richards,Knape,Moulder,Rivets and Rock Roads. Many of the residents utilized early woods trails and old logging tram roads for access south into the northern-central blocks of Golden Gate Estates. In 1992 the Olde Florida Golf Club,a 300-acre 18-hole golf course,was built after access into the area was created by the construction of the Vanderbilt Beach Road (CR862). Many large planned unit devebpments such as Piper's Grove (Twin Fagles),the Bonita Bay Country club,the Quarry,and others were constructed north of hanokalee Road by the late 1990s. The Immokalee Road/Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension area today is experiencing increasing density of devebpment with condominium communities and upscale single family hone construction being created along the CR 951 (Collier Boulevard) corridor. 26 METHODOLOGY Prior to conducting fieldwork in the project parcel, relevant archives and literature were reviewed. This included, but was not limited to, studying previous archaeological reports for sites in Collier County, reviewing information from the Master Site File in Tallahassee concerning nearby sites, and examining USGS maps of the project area. Also,black and white as well as color aerial photographs of the project area, which could aid in revealing anthropogenic changes to the topography and floral communities, were interpreted. RESEARCH DESIGN The principal project goal was to locate and assess all historical or archaeological sites on the subject parcel. This cultural resource survey incorporated the use of certain predictive models. These models are based on topographic and vegetative attributes that are associated with prehistoric and historic sites in interior Collier County. These models postulate that live oak, tropical hardwood and cabbage palm hammocks in close proximity to drainage sloughs and marshes are medium to high probability targets for archaeological sites. The elevational information on the USGS quadrangle map for the area also was used. It was determined that the project parcel had a low to medium probability of associated archaeological sites. FIELDWORK All parts of the parcel were assessed by pedestrian survey. Areas previously identified on aerial photographs were ground truthed, including 12 areas identified from a review of vintage and modern aerial photographs. All of these identified areas were assigned target numbers and then subjected to ground truthing to determine their probability for containing archaeological or historic sites: low,medium,or high. All higher probability and some selected lower probability areas were shovel tested, including small and lower elevation tree islands (Figure 7). The wetlands, much of which was inundated at the time of this assessment, was not shovel tested, but was subject to a pedestrian survey. A total of 70 judgmental shovel tests were dug across the project parcel. All shovel tests were 50-cm diameter holes excavated to 100 cm depth where possible. If a hole was positive for cultural deposits,additional shovel tests were dug at 10-meter intervals on the cardinal directions from the positive hole. This delineation method was used to determine the extent of any site. All dug sediments were screened through 1/4"-mesh hardware cloth and all cultural materials were collected. 27 COLLECTIONS All collected material was placed in sealable plastic bags and transported to the AHC laboratory in Davie for conservation and analysis. These materials were assigned field specimen numbers. INFORMANTS The project biologist, Tom Trettis, was interviewed during the course of this assessment. He was not aware of any cultural resources or hardwood hammocks on the property. 28 -\• . 3 1 .. .' #1 ° _ o ,j f ;, #3� ° , ° ( ° / 0 A, .. .- 0 ..,.2 /...„... ° ° ° . #9 / -'.--- #13 ° ti 1 9j it• . 'i {� — 4: {i :,.1 #10 f , � 1 f a. ), .. 1 ° 0 #11 , ' • V, ° :,1 11 1 ■ w _ ., ° 5 I 1 • .. > ' n lye^`- •{ �..�� .F �--�.. .. - —�--� � ( , may", *k • -A -. y f -- V - .i. s •r '' y ..- L tv.• 263 C; It_ _ '4 Figure 10. 2011 color aerial orthophotograph of the Olde Florida Country Club parcel showing location of selected probability areas and shovel tests. o =SURFACE COLLECTION OF PREHISTORIC LITHIC MATERIAL IN PROBABILITY AREA#8 ® =NEGATIVE SHOVEL TEST =HIGH PROBABI LITY AREA INEMOMEM =MEDIUM PROBABILITY AREA =LOW PROBABILITY AREA 0 1/16 1/8 114 We appm c _ 0 .1 .2 .4 Km.approx 29 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS This reconnaissance cultural resource assessment of the Olde Florida Golf Club parcel resulted in the documentation of one previously unrecorded prehistoric site: 8CR1305. This site is a sparse chert lithic scatter on a discrete area of high ground(Probability Area #8).Additional shovel tests in the immediate vicinity of the finds uncovered no additional cultural material. A total of 70 shovel tests were dug across the parcel all of which were negative for archaeological material. Two field specimens were collected from the surface. Both are non-local chert flakes: percussion and pressure flakes, the byproduct of prehistoric stone tool manufacture or retouching. Four shovel tests were dug at and within 10 meters of the specimens but all were negative for cultural material. This assessment resulted in the documentation of one previously unrecorded prehistoric site, 8CR1305, on the project parcel. The overall cultural material assemblage is of particular interest because of the uncommon presence of exotic lithic material—the closest known sources of chert being north of Charlotte/Sarasota counties. The likely chronological provenience for the material is the mid to late Archaic Period, predating circa 500 B.C. (2500+ years BP) and likely represents an activity area at higher Probability Area#8,which is a sandy ridge. The large size of the parcel and its various vegetative/topographic changes adjacent to marshes and sloughs afford the likelihood that scattered cultural material may occur elsewhere on the parcel. If such materials are encountered during development activities then the consultant archaeologist and the State's Division of Historic Resources should be notified. If human remains are found Florida Statute 872.05 will apply. It is recommended that an archaeologist conduct intermittent monitoring of ground- disturbing activities, particularly in the area of site 8CR1305 and its associated ridge, during development. If any archaeological materials or features are encountered they should be fully documented. 30 SUMMARY OF SITE Site Name: Oak Grove State Site Number: 8CR1305 Environmental Setting: Higher ground oak grove Location: Township 48S,Range 27E, Section 31 Site Type: Lithic scatter Site Function: Habitation?, resource extraction, tool manufacturing Description: The site is identified based on two pieces of chert lithic debitage material found in the north-central portion of a sandy ridge(Figure 10). The ridge is about 50 cm above the surrounding area. The two chert flakes were found where a prominent sandy woods trail crosses the high area. Bioturbation from off-road vehicles likely redeposited them from their original in situ location. The specimens were 4 meters apart. The chert is patinated white and likely is part of a lithic tool processing location. Chronology: Prehistoric: likely mid to late Archaic Collections: Two pieces of percussion and pressure flaked patinated chert debitage(FS-1) Previous Research: None Preservation Quality: Very Good Ownership: Private Significance: The site is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places because of the sparse occurrence of lithic artifacts and lack of other cultural material. 31 /"•■ 1 r • •" jr '' fda„ r • Y.tin 5 Y. T Figure 11. Oak Grove site 8CR1305 looking north.4.• , 4. t) . awl s' � +l am A F'07,51.10 �r i' , �, ' ....,1 ,. ,, 7...:„.....,;.,,,,,), .,..c.c,t.,„_ A , t t a --,-Ap,%; ;-. ' , .-x,' -', ' . . . 't , a•9k. ;; .* , t s ,.n'. .s: M t Figure 12. Closeup of 8CR1305 and lithic flake. 32 REFERENCES CITED Almy,Marion M. 1993 A Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of U.S.41 (SR 90) from CR31 to East of SR951, Collier County, Florida. Report #3465 on file, Division of Historic Resources, Tallahassee, Florida. 2000 A Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of State Road 84 (Davis Boulevard) from Santa Barbara Boulevard to CR 951/Sr 951, Collier County, Florida. Report #5950 on file,Division of Historic Resources,Tallahassee, Florida. Almy, MM and JG Deming 1982 Cultural Resources Survey of the Emerald Lakes Tract in Northwest Collier County,Florida. Archaeological Consultants Inc., Sarasota FMSF#902. 1986a Archaeological Assessment Survey of Twelve Lakes, Collier County,Florida. Archaeological Consultants Inc., Sarasota. 1986b Archaeological Assessment of Bretonne Park, Collier County, Florida Archaeological Consultants Inc., Sarasota. 1986c Archaeological Assessment of City Gate Commercial Park, Collier County, Florida.Archaeological Consultants Inc., Sarasota. 1987 Archaeological Assessment Survey of Designated Potions of the Woodlands in Collier County,Florida.Archaeological Consultants Inc., Sarasota. Athens,WP 1983 The Spatial Distribution of Glades Period Sites within the Big Cypress National Preserve, Florida. Masters thesis on file, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida. Beriault,JG 1973 A Preliminary Report on the Area Known as the Collier-Coral Ridge Tract, Southwest Florida. Unpublished Ms, on file at FMSF, Tallahassee and AHC, Miami. 1982 A Preliminary Report on Stratigraphic Excavations at Addison Key, Collier County,Florida. Unfinished MS. 1986 Report and Recommendations Concerning the Barron Collier Company Tract on Chokoloskee Island, Collier County, Florida, MS on file,AHC. 1987 Suggestions for a Collier County site Model, a report submitted to the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, December 15th, 1987. MS on file, AHC. 33 1998 An Archaeological Survey of the Standerfer Parcel, Lee County, Florida. AHC Technical Report #226. 1999 An Archaeological Survey of the Winding Cypress Property, Collier County, Florida. Report#7248 on file,Division of Historic Resources,Tallahassee,Florida. Beriault, JG,RS Carr,J Stipp,R Johnson,and J Meeder 1981 The Archaeological Salvage of the Bay West Site, Collier County, Florida. In Florida Anthropologist 34(20):39-58. Beriault,JG and RS Carr 1998 An Archaeological Survey of the Winding Cypress Parcel, Collier County, FL. AHC Technical Report#221. Beriault, JG and C Strader 1984 A Preliminary Report on Stratigraphic Excavation on Chokoloskee Island, Florida. Southwest Florida Archaeological Society, MS on file,AHC. Beriault,John G. and Craig A. Weaver 2002 A Phase One Archaeological Assessment of the Toll-Rattlesnake Parcel, Collier County, Florida. Report #13377 on file, Division of Historic Resources, Tallahassee, Florida. Beriault, John G.;Joseph Mankowski,John Crump 2006 A Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the Immokalee Road Parcel, Collier County,Florida.AHC Technical Report#755. Bullen,RP and AK Bullen 1956 Excavation on Cape Haze Peninsula, Florida. Contributions of the Florida State Museum. Social Sciences I, Gainesville,Florida. Carbone,VA 1983 Late Quaternary Environments in Florida and the Southeast. The Florida Anthropologist 36:3-17. Carr,RS 1981 Salvage Excavations at two prehistoric Cemeteries in Dade County, Florida. Paper presented at the 45th Annual Meeting of the Florida Academy of Sciences. Winter Park. 1986 Preliminary Report on Excavations at the Cutler Fossil Site (8DA2001) in Southern Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 39:231-232. 1989 An Archaeological and Historical Survey of Part of the Williamson Property, Collier County, Florida. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Miami. FMSF 2458. 34 2002 "The Archaeology of Everglades Tree Islands" in Tree Islands of the Everglades. Edited by Fred H. Sklar and Arnold Van der Valk. Kluther Academic Publishers, 187-206. Carr,RS and D Allerton 1988a An Archaeological Survey of North Keewaydin Island, Collier County, Florida. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy,Miami, Florida. 1988b An Archaeological and Historical Assessment of the Goodland Marina Project Tract, Collier County, Florida. MS on file, Archaeological and Historical Conservancy,Miami, Florida. Carr,RS and JG Beriault 1984 Prehistoric Man In South Florida. In PJ Gleason (ed), Environments of South Florida:Present and Past II. Coral Gables:Miami Geological Society,FL.pp. 1-14. Carr,Robert S. and Richard Haiduven 1990 An Archaeological Assessment of the Arete Golf Course Property, Collier County, Florida. Report #2605 on file, Division of Historic Resources, Tallahassee, Florida. Carr,RS and K Heinz 1996 Archaeological Excavations at the Ryder Pond Site, 8LL1850, Lee County,FL. April, 1986. Carr,RS and W Steele 1993 An Archaeological Survey and Assessment of the Lely Resort Properties, Collier County,FL. AHC Technical Report#70. Carr, RS, W Steele and J Davis 1994a A Phase I Archaeological and Historical Assessment of the Piper Tract, Collier County,Florida. April, 1994. 1994b A Phase II Archaeological and Historical Assessment of the Piper Tract, Collier County, Florida. June, 1994. Clausen, C and J Gifford 1975 Florida spring confirmed as 10,000 year old early man site. The Florida Anthropologist 8(3),Part 2. Cockrell,WA 1970 Glades I and Pre-Glades Settlement and Subsistence Patterns on Marco Island (Collier County, Florida). M.A. thesis of file, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida. Cockrell,WA and L Murphy 1978 Pleistocene Man in Florida. Archaeology of Eastern North America Vol. 6. Newark,Delaware: Eastern States Archaeological Federation. 35 Cushing,FH 1897 Exploration of Ancient Key-Dwellers' Remains on the Gulf Coast of Florida. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia 35 (153): 1-329-448. Daniel,RI and M Wisenbaker 1987 Harney Flats. Baywood Publishing Company,Farmingdale,New York. Delcourt,PA and HR Delcourt 1981 Vegetation Maps for Eastern North America: 40,000 Years B.P. to Present. In R.C. Romans(editor)Geobotany IL New York: Olenum Publishing Press. Deming,JG and M Almy 1987 A Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Audubon Country Club Tract in Northwest Collier County, Florida. Archaeological Consultants Inc., Sarasota, Florida. FMSF 1487. 1988 Mitigative Excavation at Selected Portions of Site Complex 8CR860 in Northwest Collier County, Florida. Archaeological Consultants Inc., Sarasota, Florida. FMSF 1813. Dickel,D and RS Carr 1992 Archaeological Investigations at Bonita Bay Properties,Phase II. Lee County, FL. AHC Technical Report#49. Douglass,AE 1885 Ancient Canals on the South-west Coast of Florida American Antiquarian 7:227-285. 1890 Mounds in Florida.American Antiquarian 12:105-107. Durnford, CD 1895 The discovery of aboriginal netting,rope,and wood implements in a muck deposit in west Florida. American Naturalist 29: 1032-1039. Eck, CR 1997 An Archaeological Survey of the Pembroke Center Parcel DRI, Broward County, Florida.AHC Technical Report#198. Ehrenhard,JE, RS Carr, and RC Taylor 1978 The Archaeological Survey of Big Cypress National Preserve: Phase I National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee,Florida. 1979 The Big Cypress National Preserve: Archaeological Survey Season 2. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee,Florida. Ehrenhard,JE and RC Taylor 1980 The Big Cypress National Preserve: Archaeological Survey Season 3. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee, Florida. 36 Ehrenhard,JE,RC Taylor, and G Komara 1980 Big Cypress National Preserve Cultural Resource Inventory Season 4. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee, Florida. Fay,P and RS Carr 1990 An Archaeological Review Of Select Sites of Impact in the National Panther Refuge, Collier County, Florida.AHC Technical Report#22. Fradkin,A 1976 The Wightman Site: A Study of Prehistoric Culture and Environment on Sanibel Island, Lee County, Florida. M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville. Fuhrmeister,C,RJ Austin,and H Hansen 1990 Cultural Resource Assessment Survey of the Collier Tract 22 Development Site, Collier County, Florida. Piper Archaeological Research Inc. St. Petersburg, Florida. FMSF 2423. Glowacki,Mary 2003 Inventory and Assessment of Cultural Resources in the Picayune State Forest, Collier County, Florida. Report #8929 on file, Division of Historic Resources, Tallahassee,Florida. Goggin,JM 1939 A Ceramic Sequence in South Florida.New Mexico Anthropologist 3:36-40. 1940 The distribution of pottery wares in the Glades Archaeological Area of South Florida. New Mexico Anthropologist 4:22-33. 1947 A Preliminary Definition of Archaeological areas and Periods in Florida. American Antiquity 13:114-127. 1949a Cultural Occupation at Goodland Point, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 2(3- 4): 65-91. 1949b The Archaeology of the Glades Area. Unpublished MS on file, SE Archaeological Research Center,NPS,Tallahassee,Fl. 1949c Cultural Traditions in Florida Prehistory. In J.W. Griffin (editor) The Florida Indian and his Neighbors. Winter Park, Florida: Rollins College. Goggin,JM and WC Sturtevant 1964 The Calusa: A Stratified, Nonagricultural Society (with notes on sibling marriage). In W Goodenough (editor) Explorations in Cultural Anthropology: Essays in Honor of George Peter Mc rdock New York McGraw Hill.Pp.179-291. Griffin, JW 37 1974 Archaeology and Environment in South Florida. In P.J. Gleason (ed.), Environments of South Florida: Present and Past II. Coral Gables: Miami Geological Society,pp 342-346. 1988 The Archaeology of Everglades National Park: A Synthesis. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center,Tallahassee,Florida. Hrdlicka, A 1922 The Anthropology of Florida. Deland, Florida: Publications of the Florida State Historical Society 1. Hutchinson,Dale L. 2002 Osteological Analysis of the Aqui Esta Mound Population. Florida Anthropological Society Publication 15, Tallahassee,FL. Kenworthy, CJ 1883 Ancient Canals in Florida. Smithsonian Institution Annual Report for 1881: 105-109. Kroeber,AL 1939 Cultural and Natural Areas in Native North America. Berkeley: University of California Press. Laxson,DD 1966 The Turner River Jungle Gardens Site, Collier County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 19: 125-140. Lee,AR,JG Beriault, W Buschelman,J Belknap 1993 A Small Site - Mulberry Midden, 8CR697 - Contributes to Knowledge of the Transitional Period. The Florida Anthropologist 46:43-52. Lee,AR,JG Beriault,J Belknap,WM Buschelman,AL Snapp and JW Thompson 1997 Salvage Excavation of an Archaic Period Special-Purpose Site in Collier County. The Florida Anthropologist 50:11-24. 1988 Heineken Hammock, 8CR231: A Late Archaic Corridor Site in Collier County. Southwest Florida Archaeological Society.Naples,Florida. Luer,George M. 1980 The Aqui Esta Site at Charlotte Harbor: A Safety Harbor-Influenced Prehistoric Aboriginal Site. Paper Presented at the32nd Annual Meeting of the Florida Anthropological Society, Winter Park. 2002 The Aqui Esta Mound: Ceramic and Shell Vessels of the Early Mississippian- Influenced Englewood Phase. Florida Anthropological Society Publication 15, Tallahassee, FL. McMichaels,A 38 1982 A Cultural Resource Assessment of Horrs Island, Collier County, Florida. MA thesis, Department of Anthropology University of Florida,Gainesville. Mankowski,Joseph F. 2006 Archaeological Investigations at the Lely Sites: Prehistoric Occupations on Southwest Florida Tree Islands. Master of Arts Dissertation. University of Leicester. Marquardt, WH 1984 The Josslyn Island Mound and its Role in the Investigation of Southwest Florida's Past. Gainesville: Florida State Museum,Department of Anthropology, Miscellaneous Project Report Series 22. 1987 The Calusa Social Formation in Protohistoric South Florida. In T.C. Patterson and C.W. Galley(editors) Power Relations and State Formation. Washington,D.C.: Archaeology Section,American Anthropological Association,pp.98-116. 1988 Politics and Production Among the Calusa of South Florida. In T. Ingold, D. Riches, and J. Woodburn(editors) Hunters and Gatherers 1:History, Evolution, and Social Change. London: Berg Publishers,pp. 161-188. 1992 Recent Archaeological and Paleoenvironmental Investigations in Southwest Florida. In W.H. Marquardt (editor), Culture and Environment in the Domain of the Calusa. Gainesville: Institute of Archaeology and Paleoenvironmental Studies. Monograph 1,University of Florida,pp. 9-58. Martinez, C 1977 Archaeological and Historical Survey and Assessment of the Proposed Collier County 201 Waste Water Management Facilities, Collier County, Florida. Russell &Axon Inc. and Smally, Welford&Nalven Inc. FMSF#257. Milanich, JT 1994 Archaeology of Precolumbian Florida. Gainesville:University Press of Florida. Milanich JT,J Chapman,AS Cordell, S Hale,and R Merrinan 1984 Prehistoric Development of Calusa Society in Southwest Florida: Excavation on Useppa Island. In D.D. Davis (editor) Perspectives on Gulf Coast Prehistory. Gainesville: University Presses of Florida,pp. 258-314. Milanich,JT. and CH Fairbanks 1980 Florida Archaeology. New York:Academic Press. Miller,JJ and ML Fryman 1978 An Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Collier Bay Tract, Marco Island. Cultural Resource Management Inc., Tallahassee,Florida. FMSF#3124. Moore, CB 39 1900 Certain Antiquities of the Florida West Coast. Journal of the Academy of Natural Science, Philadelphia 11:369-394. 1905 Miscellaneous Investigations in Florida. Journal of the Academy of Natural Science, Philadelphia 13:299-325. 1907 Notes on the Ten Thousand Islands. Journal of the Academy of Natural Science, Philadelphia 13:458-470. Morrell,RL 1967 Florida site form for site 8CR107. 1969 Fiber-tempered Pottery from Southwestern Florida. Abstract of presented paper, American Anthropological Association Annual Meeting, New Orleans, on file at AHC. Russo,M 1990 Report I on Archaeological Investigations by the Florida Museum of Natural History at Horrs Island, Collier County,Florida. FMSF 2353. Scholl,DW,FC Craighead, and M Stuiver 1969 Florida Submergence Curve Revisited: Its Relation to Coastal Sedimentation Rates. Science 163: 562-564. Sears, WH 1956 The Turner River Site, Collier County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 9(2):47-60. 1966 Everglades National Park Archaeological Base Mapping Part I. Unpublished, FMSF MS# 1009. 1967 Archaeological Survey of the Cape Coral Area at the Mouth of the Caloosahatchee River. The Florida Anthropologist 20: 93-102. 1982 Fort Center:An Archaeological Site in the Lake Okeechobee Basin. Gainesville: University of Florida Press. Simons,MH 1884 Shell Heaps in Charlotte Harbor, Florida. Smithsonian Institution Annual Report for 1882: 794-796. Stirling, MW 1931 Mounds of the Vanished Calusa Indians of Florida. Smithsonian Institution Explorations and Field Work for 1930: 167-172. 1933 Report of the Chief.Bureau of American Ethnology Annual Report 48:3-21. 40 1936 Florida Cultural Affiliations in Relation to Adjacent Areas. In Essays in Anthropology in Honor of Alfred Louis Kroeber. Berkeley: University of California Press,pp 351-357. Swift,A and RS Carr 1989 An Archaeological Survey of Caxambas Estates, Collier County, Florida. Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Miami, FL. AHC Technical Report #13. Taylor,RC 1984 Everglades National Park Archaeological Inventory and Assessment Season 2: Interim Report. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee, Florida. 1985 Everglades National Park Archaeological Inventory and Assessment Season 3: Interim Report. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee, Florida. Taylor,RC and G Komara 1983 Big Cypress Preserve Archaeological Survey: Season 5. National Park Service, Southeast Archaeological Center, Tallahassee,Florida. Van Beck,JC and LM Van Beck 1965 The Marco Midden,Marco Island,Florida The Florida Anthropologist 16:1-20. Widmer, RJ 1974 A Survey and Assessment of Archaeological Resources on Marco Island, Collier County,Florida. Ms on file,FMSF#265. 1983 The Evolution of the Calusa, a Non-agricultural Chiefdom on the Southwest Florida Coast. Ph.D. thesis, Pennsylvania State University, distributed by University Microfilms International,Ann Arbor, Michigan. 1996 Recent Excavations at the Key Marco Site, 8CR48, Collier County, Florida. The Florida Anthropologist 49:10-26. Williams,JL 1837 The Territory of Florida. Gainesville:University Press of Florida. 41 APPENDIX I: SURVEY LOG 42 Page 1 Ent D(FMSF only) / / , Survey Log Sheet Survey#(FMSF only) Florida Master Site File y l' Version 4.1 1/07 Cc,.,,, .•VYIYp.o the Survey Log Sheet for detailed instructions. Identification and Bibliographic Information Survey Project(name and project phase)Olde Florida Golf Club 2013.29 Report Title(exactly as on title page)A Reconnaissance Cultural Resources Assessment of the Olde Florida Golf Club Parcel, Collier County, Florida Report Author(s)(as on title page—individual or corporate;last names first)Carr,Robert S.;White,John Wesley; Grady, Michael; Beriault,John G. Publication Date(year) 2013 Total Number of Pages in Report(count text,figures,tables,not site)41 Publication Information(Give series and no.in series,publisher and city.For article or chapter,cite page numbers.Use the style of American Antiquity.) AHC Technical Report#982 Supervisor(s)of Fieldwork(whether or not the same as author[s];last name first)Carr, Robert S. Affiliation of Fieldworkers(organization,city)Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. Key Words/Phrases(Don't use the county,or common words like archaeology,structure,survey,architecture. Limit each word or phrase to 25 characters.) - Survey Sponsors(corporation,government unit,or person who is directly paying for fieldwork) Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. Address/Phone Recorder of Log Sheet Beriault,John G. Date Log Sheet Completed 4-24-13 Is this survey or project a continuation of a previous project? X No 0 Yes: Previous survey#(§)(FMSF only) Mapping Counties(List each one in which field survey was done-do not abbreviate;use supplement sheet if necessary)Collier USGS 1:24,000 Map(s): Map Name/Date of Latest Revision (use supplement sheet if necessary): Corkscrew SE, rev. 1987 Description of Survey Area Dates for Fieldwork: Start 4-20-13 End 4-24-13 Total Area Surveyed (fill in one) hectares +540 acres Number of Distinct Tracts or Areas Surveyed 1 If Corridor(fill in one for each): Width meters feet Length kilometers 4 miles HR6E066R0107 Florida Master Site File,Division of Historical Resources,Gray Building,500 South Bronough Street, Tallahassee,Florida 32399-0250 Phone 850-245.6440,FAX 850-245-6439,Email:SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us Page 2 Survey Log Sheet Survey# Research and Field Methods Types of Survey(check all that apply): X archaeological 9 architectural X historical/archival 9 underwater 9 other. Preliminary Methods(4Check as many as apply to the project as a whole.) 0 Florida Archives(Gray Building) 9 library research-local public 9 local property or tax records X other historic maps 9 Florida Photo Archives(Gray Building) 0 library-special collection-nonlocal 9 newspaper files X soils maps or data X Site File property search X Public Lands Survey(maps at DEP) X literature search X windshield survey X Site File survey search X local informant(s) 9 Sanbom Insurance maps X aerial photography X other(describe)Excavation of 70 shovel tests Archaeological Methods(4Check as many as apply to the project as a whole.) 9 Check here if NO archaeological methods were used. 9 surface collection,controlled 0 other screen shovel test(size:_) 0 block excavation(at least act M) X surface collection,uncontrolled 0 water screen(finest size:_) 0 soil resistivity Xshovel test-1/4'screen 0 posthole tests 0 magnetometer 9 shovel test-1/8'screen 0 auger(size:_) 0 side scan sonar 9 shovel test 1/16'screen 0 coring 9 unknown 9 shovel test-unscreened 0 test excavation(at least 1x2 M) 0 other(describe) HistoricaVArchitectural Methods(4Check as many as apply to the project as a whole.) 9 Check here if NO historicaVarchitectural methods were used. 9 building permits 0 demolition permits 9 neighbor interview 0 subdivision maps 9 commercial permits X exposed ground inspected 0 occupant interview 0 tax records 9 interior documentation 0 local property records 0 occupation permits 9 unknown 9 other(describe): Scope/Intensity/Procedures Review of vintage and recent aerials, literature review, pedestrian survey,then excavation of 70 shovel tests across •arcel. Survey Results (cultural resources recorded) Site Significance Evaluated?X Yes 0 No If Yes,circle NR-eligible/significant site numbers below. Site Counts: Previously Recorded Sites 0 Newly Recorded Sites) 1 Previously Recorded Site#'s with Site File Update Forms(List site#'s without"8." Attach supplementary pages if necessary) Newly Recorded Site#'s (Are you sure all are originals and not updates? Identify methods used to check for updates,i.e.,researched Site File records. List site#'s without"8." Attach supplementary pages if necessary CR1305 Site Form Used: X Site File Paper Form 0 SmartForm II Electronic Recording Form REQUIRED: ATTACH PLOT OF SURVEY AREA ON PHOTOCOPIES OF USGS 1:24,000 MAP(S) DO NOT USE SITE FILE USE CNLY DO NOT USE BAR Related BHP Related 9 872 91A32 # 0 State Historic Preservation Grant 9 CARL 0 UW 9 Compliance Review: CRAT# HR6E066R0107 Florida Master Site File,Division of Historical Resources,Gray Building,500 South Bronough Street,Tallahassee,Florida 32399-0250 Phone 850-245-6440,FAX 850-245-6439,Email:SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us •VT Nom" }••3� 3 J ri•. �7.. o.- s e(Yg r^ r r' .i (ate ... ti' - '!' _b ..+` .411.'* • •- a...4 ■ �,�• '" 4 ... -, t °°' I, • •.. -t .. s �.y AH .. "I I • - y 1 •b r `� p o• •-S_ y s _• • • 9. 4 • •II, . IL... ,,,, ..«, 4... •• • •••••- I• a,•-• • 2s ,__,ate-,_ .11. a . a ._ .,A, w -h a C- • . . ..p. +M1.-a ,yy, .. .y Ht w 1 b w- -- K- - w OaW nar...1 " •• •, a ....•S-•• •- •Y..° .. •44 Y - •...-� •a •• .r- Q• •!w. , r •v �- t 4 w A y ,,,b,^. Y. ,� .. +'N' W �.Mt 4rt•:. 1 s .• :a y. ° ) n rs N • .a. r.y ie •h. ,yam _ • .r„y, _ y, h.••. •Y. �" # �. . '" {I a SS .a.. '•� of ..w +T.µr. �. ."� ♦ ,..� » -1,. „ q y -.. 41 3 ` 1 M Z. # • A-- ?6, - - _ . .31 •. • __ • •• • .� J - r. R • 9Ma { 1 I l L - USGS Map of the Olde Florida Golf Club parcel. TOWNSHIP 48S,RANGE 27E,SECTION 31 �� II USGS Map' CORKSCREW SW,REV.1987 0 1/4 1/2 1 Mile approx. 0 .4 .8 t6 Km. approx. APPENDIX II: FLORIDA SITE FORM 46 Page 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM Site#8CR1305 FLORIDA MASTER SITE FILE Field Date X Original _4 _22_/_13 ❑Update Version 4.0 1/07 Form Date Consult Guide to Archaeological Site Form for detailed instructions. _4_/_25 / 13 Recorder# Site Name(s)Oak Grove Site Multiple Listing(DHR only) Project Name Reconnaissance CR Assessment of the Olde Florida Golf Club Parcel Survey#(DHR only) Ownership:Xpnvate-profit ❑private-nonprofit ❑private-individual Oprivate-nonspecific ❑city ❑county ❑state ❑federal ❑Native American Oforeign ❑unknown I.O(' \ I'IO\ a. \I,V'I'I\(: USGS 7.5 Map Name&Date Corkscrew SE,rev. 1987 Plat or Other Map City/Town(within 3 miles)Naples In City Limits?oyes )(no ❑unknown County Collier Township 483 Range_27E Section 31 1/4 section:XNW oSW OSE ONE ❑Irregular-name: Landgrant Tax Parcel# UTM Coordinates:Zone 016 X17 Easting 0 Northing 0 Other Coordinates: X: Y: Coordinate System&Datum Address/Vicinity/Route to Parcel is south on Krape Road off Immokalee Road(CR846)then south on woods trail from end of Krape 1/4 mile.Site was discovered in sand trail at north edge of higher ground oak grove. Name of Public Tract(e.g.,park) •l l PI. OF SITE (check all that aripl■) SETTING* STRUCTURES OR FEATURES* FUNCTION* X Land(terrestrial) ❑Wetland(palustrine) ❑log boat ❑fort ❑road segment X campsite ❑Lake/Pond(lacustiine) ❑usually flooded ❑agriclfarm building X lithic scatter ❑shell midden X extractive site ❑River/Stream/Creek(nverine) ❑usually dry ❑burial mound ❑mill ❑shell mound X habitation(prehistoric) ❑Tidal(estuarine) ❑Cave/Sink(subterranean) ❑building remains ❑mission ❑shipwreck ❑homestead(historic) ❑Saltwater(marine) ❑terrestrial ❑cemetery/grave ❑mound,nonspecific ❑subsurface features ❑farmstead ❑aquatic ❑dump/refuse ❑plantation ❑surface scatter ❑village(prehistoric) ❑earthworks(historic) ❑platform mound ❑well ❑town(historic) ❑Other settings,structures,features or functions ❑quarry (.1'L'FIilth: PERIODS (check:Ill III:u appl∎) ABORIGINAL* ❑Englewood ❑Manasota ❑St Johns(nonspecific) ❑Swift Creek(nonspecific) NON-ABORIGINAL* ❑Alachua ❑Fort Walton ❑Mississippian ❑St Johns I ❑Swift Creek,Early ❑First Spanish 1513-99 X Archaic(nonspecific) ❑Glades(nonspecific) ❑Mount Taylor ❑St Johns II ❑Swift Creek,Late ❑First Spanish 1600-99 ❑Archaic,Early ❑Glades I? ❑Norwood ❑Santa Rosa ❑Transitional ❑First Spanish 1700-1763 ❑Archaic,Middle ❑Glades II? ❑Orange ❑Santa Rosa-Swift Creek ❑Weeden Island(nonspecific) ❑First Spanish(nonspecific) ❑Archaic,Late ❑Glades Ill ❑Paleoindian ❑Seminole(nonspecific) ❑Weeden Island I ❑British 1763-1783 ❑Belle Glade ❑Hickory Pond ❑Pensacola ❑Seminole:Colonization ❑Weeden Island II ❑Second Spanish 1783-1821 ❑Codes Pond ❑Leon-Jefferson ❑Perim Island ❑Seminole:1 st War To 2nd ❑Prehistoric(nonspecific) ❑American Territorial 1821-45 ❑Caloosahatchee ❑MalabarI ❑Safety Harbor ❑Seminole:2nd War To 3rd ❑Prehistoric non-ceramic ❑American Civil War 1861.65 ❑Deptford ❑Malabar II ❑St Augustine ❑Seminole:3rd War&After ❑Prehistoric ceramic ❑American 19th Century ❑American 20th Century ❑Other(List less common phases or specific sub-phases. For historic sites,give specific dates if known.) ❑American(nonspecific) ❑African-American S Consult Guide to Archaeological Site Form for preferred descriptions not listed above(data are coded fields). OI'I\lO\ 01 IZh:501 U.( I., Sit:\IFICA\( I•: Potentially eligible individually for National Register of Historic Places? Oyes x no ❑insufficient information Potentially eligible as contributor to a National Register district? Oyes X no ❑insufficient information Explanation of Evaluation(required if evaluated;use separate sheet if needed)Based on current data site is a sparse lithic scatter. Recommendations for Owner or SHPO Action Monitoring during ground-disturbing activities. DHR USE ONLY OFFICIAL EVALUATION DHR USE ONLY NR List Date SHPO—Appears to meet criteria for NR listing: Oyes Ono ❑insufficient info Date_____/ / Init. ___/__/ KEEPER—Determined eligible: Oyes Ono Date__/_/ ❑Owner Objection NR Criteria for Evaluation: ❑a ❑b ❑c ❑d (see National Register Bulletin 15,p.2) Page 2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE FORM Site#8CR1305 I Ill I) \iI Y Hums (check all that a 1 lit 1 _ SITE DETECTION• SITE BOUNDARIES* ❑no field check x exposed ground ❑screened shovel x bounds unknown ❑remote sensing ❑unscreened shovel ❑literature search ❑posthole digger ❑none by recorder ❑insp exposed ground x screened shovel ❑informant report ❑auger–size: ❑literature search ❑posthole tests ❑block excavations ❑remote sensing ❑unscreened shovel ❑informant report ❑auger–size: ❑estimate or guess Other methods;number,size,depth,pattern of units;screen size(attach site plan) `II I: 1IFti( Rll'I1(i\ Extent Size(m ) Depth/stratigraphy of cultural deposit sparse lithic debitage. Temporal Interpretation-Components(check one): X single component ❑multiple component? ❑uncertain Describe each occupation in plan(refer to attached large scale map)and stratigraphically. Discuss temporal and functional interpretations: Integrity-Overall disturbance*: ❑none seen ❑minor X substantial ❑major ❑redeposited ❑destroyed-documentl ❑unknown Disturbances/threats/protective measures Bioturbation by ATV activity,future development Surface collection: area collected m2 #collection units Excavation: #noncontiguous blocks tRIIF\(,.I.y Total Artifacts # (C)ount or(E)stimate? Surface# (C)or(E) Subsurface# (C)or(E) COLLECTION SELECTMTY• ARTIFACT CATEGORIES*and DISPOSITIONS• (example: A bone-human) ❑unknown X unselective(all artifacts) Pick exactly one code from Disposition List b b a b Disposition List• ❑selective(some artifacts) _bone-animal exotic-nonlocal A-category always collected ❑mixed selectivity bone-human —glass S-some items in category collected SPATIAL CONTROL' bone-unspecified A_lithics aboriginal .0-observed first hand,but not collected X uncollected ❑general(not by subarea) bone-worked _metal-nonprecious R-collected and subsequently left at site ❑unknown ❑controlled(by subarea) _brick/building debris _metal-precious/coin I -Informant reported category present ❑variable spatial control ceramic-aboriginal shell-unworked U-unknown ❑Other ceramic-nonaboriginal shell-worked daub Other Artifact Comments DIAGNOSTICS (type or mode,and frequency:e.g.,Suwanee ppk,heat-treated chert,Deptford Check-stamped,ironstonehvhiteware) 1.chert flakes N= 2 4. N=_ 7. N= 2. N=— 5. N=_ 8. N= 3. N= N=_ 9. N= I \VIIL(1\il1:\ Nearest fresh water type*&name(incl.relict source)marsh slough Distance(m)/bearing N 300 E Natural community(FNAI category or leave blank) surrounding cypress and pine flatwoods,emerging oak hammock Local vegetation oak hammock Topography Mesic Min Elevation_3-4 meters Max Elevation_3-4_meters Present land use wooded but slightly cleared by presence of sand trails SCS soil series Riviera fine sand,limestone substratum Soil association DO( l \II \t ,illO\ Accessible Documentation Not Filed with the Site File-including field&analysis notes,photos,plans,other important documents that are permanently accessible: For each separately maintained collection,describe(1)document type(s),'(2)maintaining organization,*(3)file or accession nos.,and(4)descriptive information.Report,Photographs and field notes repose at Archaeological and Historical Conservancy„4800 S.W.641h Avenue,Suite 107,Davie,Florida 33314 Manuscripts or Publications on the site(use separate sheet If needed,give FMSF#if relevant A Reconnaissance Cultural Resource Assessment of the Olde Florida Golf Club Parcel,Collier County,Florida,ANC Technical Report#982(AHC Project#2013.29) 10.1 OI M It IN (tI \l \\ I I\FU11\lAFION Informant Information(name/address/phone/affiliation) Recorder Information(name/address/phone/affiliation)Beriault,John G; Archaeological and Historical Conservancy;954-792-9776; archlgcl@bellsouth.net i .__ Required 0 PHOTOCOPY OF 7.5' USGS QUAD MAP WITH SITE BOUNDARIES MARKED and SITE PLAN Attachments Plan at 1:3,600 or larger. Show boundaries,scale,north arrow,test/collection units,landmarks and date. t a di .e: tin a- ., -- _ • •4 d -e- —....:17 r • +4<..,= .•,y R And Y1 • R , • . S • I N .�. c.11+ i M i.• • a • • ..,,.nit «..�.. �+. • < .. a-:� .«- 255 ° 1` ra • M • err. k,e: yy y • _. �, +. mat- ^r • u ,yV • .._fir .r •� +4 5... .wM�•• , ....° Y - ._ - • ..-a'. 1+. �y e yin OAK'GROVE SITE, . » 4, _ - "'•8CR1305 .. .., w = - • A, H • ,a, ,.. .....r. .., T e• r w 9 .r+ww 4r .A + ..4 ' 1 i . . 1, •. E ' t � p• • 9 8Mb3 j 1 USGS Map of the Olde Florida Golf Club parcel showing location of the Oak Grove Site, 8CR1305. TOWNSHIP 48S,RANGE 27E,SECTION 31 61■11 !TIMIINI■=11.1111 USGS Map: CORKSCREW SW,REV.1987 0 1/4 1/2 1 Mile approx. 0 .4 .8 1.6 Km. approx. PUBLIC FACILITIES REPORT 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following pubic facilities: Category , LOS Impact from this Application3 Potable Water 170 gal per capita per day Future potable water demand: 554 single family units x 2.5 persons/unit x 170 gpcd = 235,450 gpd Sanitary Sewer-2 Currently N/A (100 gal per There is no sanitary sewer capita per day for future service available to the proposed NEWRF) project at this time. The project will construct and utilize a package plant until the NEWRF is constructed and online. Projected sanitary sewer flows based on the existing LOS for the future NEWRF = 554 single family units x 2.5 persons/unit x 100 gpcd = 138,500 gpd Arterial and Collector Roads; Reference Traffic Impact Reference Traffic Impact Study Name specific road and LOS Study Drainage Water quantity and quality No impacts anticipated. All water standards as specified in management state and federal Collier County Ordinances 74- permits will be obtained from the 50, 90-10, 2001-27, and 2007- applicable state and federal 11 agencies. Additionally, the potential proposed development will result in a positive effect on the pollutant loading rates. Stantec Exhibit I-1 Solid Waste Ten years of permitted landfill Future solid waste for 10 capacity at previous three years of Permitted Landfill years average tons per capita Capacity = 554 single family disposal rate. units x 2.5 persons/unit x 0.52338 (tons per capita Two years of lined cell disposal rate) = 725 annual capacity reflecting at previous tons disposed three years average tons per capita disposal rate. Future solid waste for 2 years of Lined Cell Capacity = 554 single family units x 2.5 persons/unit x 0.52338 (tons per capita disposal rate) = 725 annual tons disposed No impacts anticipated. Based on the calculations above, the current landfill has adequate capacity for the proposed development. Community Parks 1.2 acres per 1,000/population The potential increase in population (554 single family units x 2.5 persons/unit = 1,385 persons) increases the required Community Park acreage by 1.66 acres (1.2 acres x 1.385). The available inventory exceeds the required inventory as of 9/30/17. Therefore, the proposed project poses no impact on the Community Parks in Collier County. Regional Parks 2.7 acres per 1,000/population The potential increase in population (554 single family units x 2.5 persons/unit= 1,385 persons) increases the required Community Park acreage by 3.74 acres (2.7 acres x 1.385). The available inventory exceeds the required inventory as of 9/30/17. Therefore, the proposed project poses no impact on the Regional Parks in Collier County. 4:; Stantec Exhibit 1-2 County Jail 2.79 beds per The potential increase in 1,000/population population (554 single family units x 2.5 persons/unit = 1,385 persons) increases the Jail Bed requirement by 3.86 beds (2.79 beds x 1.385). The available inventory exceeds the required inventory as of 9/30/17. Therefore, the proposed project poses no impact on the County Jail and Correctional Facilities in Collier County. County Emergency Medical 1 EMS per 16,400 population The potential increase in Service population (554 single family units x 2.5 persons/unit = 1,385 persons) increases the required EMS units requirement by 0.08 units (1 EMS x (1,385/16,400)). The minimal required increase in EMS units will not change or have an impact on available inventory. Therefore, the proposed project poses no impact on the County Emergency Medical Services. Notes: 1. Project is located within the North County Water Treatment Plant service area for potable water. 2. Project is located within the future Northeast Water Reclamation Facility service area for sanitary service. 3. The existing RFMUD neutral designation allows up to 110 units. By changing to RFMUD receiving designation and using TDR's, up to 554 units could be realized; a potential increase of 444 units. 2. Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools, and emergency medical services). Please reference Exhibit 1-5 3. Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency services. Please reference the table above for the proposed public facilities and the impact the proposed change will have on those facilities. l Stantec Exhibit 1-3 The proposed development is within the Collier County Water and Wastewater Service Area. Solid Waste services are provided by Collier County Waste Management. Fire Protection is provided by Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District. Please reference Exhibits 1-9 through 1-19 for the letters of request for service availability for the other miscellaneous service providers for the subject project, their respective approvals. This project proposes minimal impact to schools as the population is directed toward and is assumed to be primarily seasonal retirees. Fire protection and Emergency Medical Services are currently serving the existing Olde Florida Golf Club. The proposed development will have minimal impacts on these services. Stantec Exhibit 1-4 in MEM w MO N.n- z fir' Q Q W N c z G m gy' r .. ' I- th • M W 0 g e _J e 5 r `l .tiYr: d .X J D_'J X= - . its ...' is -- d` 0 cc l.L W D e r -- N° o . I N J •- - _ O 111�� WO 'M+n 4. }'1�Y may. t-44 :P. - °�,_ _ .1 4...............%-.1 0 711— J � ! y ry — yam+ L'4 t - ti y 41_ �--y CPS �Y . - mss;: t, t' -"' t ,:„.......4,4-, -- • Cdt 4 t "° Fi -$.14L I Ii _ t ,. t r _ iL: VA x � F - t 'w -f s i� 1 � 4 t,' e g y.,.� • Z �' in•1 y . ' N m W In N N j� !; ydjy �7 + ' C O J p m Clt (n ro Z PO I— t.,- 3 r . i .m 1 G 0 0 sl}J nl 'woJ}s)IDf :A8 Yid 9 4 OL/40/£ OZ 6MP-Z—IX—0L0—LL£L L9GLZ\sai}!Ii3Dj3ilgnd—IX\s;iq qxa\dDw—old—L 00\ u MDJp\�IA!3\LL£l l9GLZ\aAi}DD\99LZ\:A .,. .. �4 f t• I vx. r ,t_4 L, 1' ` x• I *; t1 Legend ij Olde Florida Golf Club and - "' Address Poi`s Roads the DFIRM eff. 5-16-12 i Parcels LI ' 4 100yrpkstg t❑ GGEST 660Grids s_bfe • _ S_FIRM_PAN lj '' $ s_fld haz a N _ { y FLD_ZONE VE Li 0 AE AH o X500 o' X I • c q 1.._. o ' a il g SM �r R iti __t.X363 x3,01.1 3 { • ', a o �, f I 0 o O 0 0 V 0 O V O o 4 v O O u lx.yr � � < p C et c t' s„ n » O R ll Ilav I- xsoo Special flood hazard areas(SFHA)within the Olde Florida Golf Club property Property boundary identified above Olde Florida Gulf Club FIRM DATA (FEMA) MAP ✓" Stantec Exhibit 1-6 N A 0 25 5 Norco ■ Miles '�� NEEWTP Wellfield Ares Eastern t $R$� Collier , ` ` County Sha WSRB4 ` ,,,! ' ,/j,. +-101de Florida Gulf Club CR86e Heritage 13a, 'Twin-60e r — Well Sites ........—Well Sties o Ftktax LLEE RD r 2 SR-29 SRC t kcRVTP© -± I Foka Union Canal GOLDEN GATE BLVD Well Sites Gx Q G o 0 ACfiW7P w 1.75 ns .Vo *SER`,NTP We116e1d Area 4 . r ��/ 1 ::.FRW1pt FS 4 _ G 9jF-. 4 Legend p Los.,was • V V.B BB Conrxeao,.no6 -DtarD DNA.AO.Peers CDM Figure 7-7 2008 Water Master Plan Update Potential Future Wellfield Areas The map illustrated above is an excerpt from the 2008 Water Master Plan Update prepared by CDM, and it identifies the approximate locations of all existing and proposed wells, cones of influence and potential future wellfield areas adjacent to the Olde Florida Golf Club property boundary Olde Florida Gulf Club LOCATIONS OF WELLS, FUTURE WELL FIELDS & CONES OF INFLUENCE Stantec Exhibit 1-7 A -.CR-846 0 1.25 2.5 � -�� Miles f` Proposed G 1 NERWTP M,p116e _ I p lif w fF_ E f.. . — NERWTP CR4853 _ f ( 1 1 1!! N.— ■ WC•Ide Florida Guff Club id- L.,... IM KALEE • �F r S Gil ice_ I _■I� i•11111111l__ NERWTP I X. .`_ GOLDEN GATE BLVD • C I �.:« iirniii . a a _ ..,, 'aII man — nil « 4.«°. , Legend `1,, 6.sony Walls EnsOn9 Raw Wata.PpNine:.. j.. COM Figure 7-8 2008 Water Master Plan Update NERWTP Wellfield and WTP The map illustrated above is an excerpt from the 2008 Water Master Plan Update prepared by CDM, and it identifies the approximate locations of all existing and proposed wells and cones of influence adjacent to the Olde Florida Golf Club property boundary Olde Florida Gulf Club LOCATIONS OF WELS & CONES OF INFLUENCE Stantec Exhibit 1-8 Olde Florida Gulf Club Utility Provider Availability of Service Approval Requests/Approvals: • Collier County Request and Approval • Florida Power& Light Request and Approval • Comcast Request and Approval • CenturyLink Request and Approval • Golden Gate Fire Control & Rescue District Request and Approval Exhibits 1-9 thru 1-19 1 Stantec Stantec Consulting Services,Inc. 3200 Bailey Lane,Suite 200 Naples FL 34105 - Tel:(239)649-4040 Stantec Fax: (239)643-5716 February 21,2013 Project No:215611377 Mr. Nathan Beals, PMP Project Manager Collier County Public Utilities 3339 East Tamiami Trail, Suite 303 Naples, Florida 34112 Subject: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Request for Availability of Service Approval Letter Dear Mr. Beals, On behalf of our Client, Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. and in accordance with Collier County Land Development Code, we are requesting an availability of service approval letter from your department for the subject Project. To assist in your review and written approval, we are enclosing a Public Facility Map (Exhibit I). The application proposes the re-designation of the 554-acre site from Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Neutral to Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving, which would include the potential of up to 554 single family residential units. Based on preliminary per capita calculations for this project, the potable water demand is approximately 235,450 GPD average daily demand (647 GPM peak hourly demand) and wastewater flow is approximately 138,500 GPD average daily flow (385 GPM peak hourly flow). Please note, the existing Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Neutral designation allows up to 110 units, and by changing to "Receiving" and using TDR's, up to 554 units could be realized, which is a potential increase of 444 units. The GPD and GPM numbers noted above represent the demands and flows in support of a total of 554 total units. The property is predominantly surrounded by receiving lands and due to the change in the environmental condition of the property, changing the designation to receiving lands is appropriate. In addition, designating additional lands as receiving lands provides additional lands for owners of TDR's to transfer their TDR's, furthering the goal of converting sending lands to a conservation use. As you are aware, your approval letter is required for the Collier County applications and we would appreciate a response at the earliest time possible. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (239)-649-4040. Sincerely, Consulting Seri/ s:lnc. Ra mond J. Piacente, Ill, PMP, LEED AP Senior Project Manager, Urban Land Engineering Associate Enc. C: William Barton,PE,Olde Florida Golf Club,Inc.,w/o enc. Margaret Perry,AICP,Stantec,w/enc. v:21561active1215611377\sha red\docu menu\esbm_Itr_utility_availabi lity_of_servi ce_approval_letters_for_ofgc_gmp_amendment_and_rezone.doc Exhibit 1-9 Co per County Public Utilities Division Planning & Project Management February 21, 2013 Raymond J. Piacente, Ill, PMP, LEED AP WilsonMiller Stantec 3200 Bailey Lane,Suite 200 Naples, FL 34105 Subject: Olde Florida Golf Club Parcel#'s: 00219160003 and 00219400103 Water and Wastewater Availability Dear Mr. Piacente: Water service is available for the above referenced project via existing lines along Vanderbilt Beach Road at the corner of the property. Wastewater service is available for the above referenced project via existing lines at the corner of Collier Blvd. and Vanderbilt Beach Road (approximately two miles to the west) or along Immokalee Road (approximately one mile to the north)from the corners of the property. Connection to the Collier County Water-Sewer District is required when the property is located within 200 feet of an existing main. Specific connection points for the system tie-ins to water and wastewater lines may be made after submission and approval of the hydraulic calculations by the Planning and Project Management Department, validating that the up/downstream systems are adequate to handle the increase in flow. This letter implies no guarantee that other developments throughout the District will not have an impact on the quantity of potable water and sewage treatment and disposal capacity available to this property until the project has received a commitment for service. Should water supply or sewage treatment and disposal capacity not be available, the Developer would be required to provide an interim means of water supply and treatment and sewage treatment and disposal until the District's facilities have the adequate capacity to serve the project. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at (239) 252-2583. Since - y Nathan Beals, Project Manager Planning and Project Management Department cc: Aaron Cromer, Principal Project Manager Craig Callis, Engineering Review Steve Nagy, Wastewater Collections Manager Pam Libby, Water Operations Manager Cheri Rollins, Supervisor Revenue GOl' F_� Vanessa Soriano, Fiscal Technician Chris Johnson, Accounting Technician . . Gary Morocco, Supervisor Revenue Planning&Project Management Department•3339 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 303 •Naples,Florida 34112-5361.239-252-4285•FAX 239-25 Exhibit I-10 ~ Stantec Consulting Services,Inc. 3200 Bailey Lane,Suite 200 Naples FL 34105 Tel: (239)649-4040 Stantec Fax: (239)643-5716 February 21,2013 Project No:215611377 Mr.Jim Merriam Florida Power& Light 26430 Old US 41 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Subject: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Request for Availability of Service Approval Letter Dear Mr. Merriam: On behalf of our Client, Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. and in accordance with Collier County Land Development Code, we are requesting an availability of service approval letter from your department for the subject Project. To assist in your review and written approval, we are enclosing a Public Facility Map (Exhibit I). The application proposes the re-designation of the 554-acre site from Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Neutral to Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving, which would include the potential of up to 554 single-family units. The property is predominantly surrounded by receiving lands and due to the change in the environmental condition of the property, changing the designation to receiving lands is appropriate. In addition, designating additional lands as receiving lands provides additional lands for owners of TDR's to transfer their TDR's,furthering the goal of converting sending lands to a conservation use. As you are aware, your approval letter is required for the Collier County applications and we would appreciate a response at the earliest time possible. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (239)-649-4040. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Ra and J. Piacente, Ill, PMP, LEED AP Senior Project Manager, Urban Land Engineering Associate Enc. C: William Barton,PE,Olde Florida Golf Club,Inc.,w/o enc. Margaret Perry,AICP,Stantec,w/enc. v:t21561active\215611377\shared\documents\esbm_Itr_utility_availability_of_service_approval_letters_for_ofgc_gmp_amendment_and_rezone.doc Exhibit I-II 0/0 Florida Power&Light Company FPL April 11, 2013 Lucia Martin 3200 Bailey Lane Suite 200 Naples, FL 34105 Re: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Dear Lucia: Thank you for contacting FPL early in your planning process. This will help you to achieve your desired schedule for your project at(property location). At the present time FPL has sufficient capacity to provide electric service to your property. Please fill out the notification of new construction form enclosed with this letter. This information will help us to provide you with the best service in accordance with applicable rates, rules and regulations. You may also respond to us through www.fpl.com. Once we have received the new construction form, I will be contacting you to schedule a pre-design meeting. Enclosed is my business card if you should have any questions about your project. I look forward to developing a good working relationship with you. Sincerely, J es Lillie ssociate Engineer an FPL Group Company Exhibit 1-12 Stantec Consulting Services,Inc. 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples FL 34105 Tel: (239)649-4040 Stantec Fax: (239)643-5716 February 21,2013 Project No:215611377 Mr. Mark Cook Project Coordinator Comcast 12600 Westlinks Drive,Suite 4 Fort Myers, FL 33913 Subject: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Request for Availability of Service Approval Letter Dear Mr.Cook: On behalf of our Client, Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. and in accordance with Collier County Land Development Code, we are requesting an availability of service approval letter from your department for the subject Project. To assist in your review and written approval, we are enclosing a Public Facility Map (Exhibit I). The application proposes the re-designation of the 554-acre site from Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Neutral to Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving, which would include the potential of up to 554 single-family units. The property is predominantly surrounded by receiving lands and due to the change in the environmental condition of the property, changing the designation to receiving lands is appropriate. In addition, designating additional lands as receiving lands provides additional lands for owners of TDR's to transfer their TDR's,furthering the goal of converting sending lands to a conservation use. As you are aware, your approval letter is required for the Collier County applications and we would appreciate a response at the earliest time possible. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (239)-649-4040. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Ray and J. Piacente, Ill, PMP, LEED AP Senior Project Manager, Urban Land Engineering Associate Enc. C: William Barton, PE,Olde Florida Golf Club,Inc.,w/o enc. Margaret Perry,AICP,Stantec,w/enc. v:12156\active\215611377 shared1documents\esbm_Itr_utiIity_availability_ot_service_approvaI_Ietters_for_ofgc_gmp_amendment_and_rezone.doc Exhibit 1-13 omcast 12600 Westinks Drive Suite 4 Fort Myers, Fl. 33913 Phone: 239-432-1805 April 10, 2013 Re: Olde Florida Golf Club Utility Easement Approval and Letter of Availability Dear Lucia Martin, Comcast can provide its services to the above referenced property upon the execution of Cable Television Installation and Service Agreement. You will need to contact Nikki Mello at 239-415-4775. Comcast has reviewed the proposed plat for the above referenced property and found the easements provided to be adequate for the placement of our broadband facilities. If you have any further concerns, please contact me at (239)432-1805. Sincerely, Mark Cook, Project Coordinator Exhibit 1-14 4.---- Stantec Consulting Services,Inc. 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples FL 34105 .-Stantec Tel: (239)649-4040 Stantec Fax: (239)643-5716 February 21,2013 Project No:215611377 Mr. Walter Alvarez Century Link PO Box 2469 Naples, Florida 34106 Subject: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Request for Availability of Service Approval Letter Dear Mr.Alvarez, On behalf of our Client, Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. and in accordance with Collier County Land Development Code, we are requesting an availability of service approval letter from your department for the subject Project. To assist in your review and written approval, we are enclosing a Public Facility Map (Exhibit I). The application proposes the re-designation of the 554-acre site from Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Neutral to Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving, which would include the potential of up to 554 single-family units. The property is predominantly surrounded by receiving lands and due to the change in the environmental condition of the property, changing the designation to receiving lands is appropriate. In addition, designating additional lands as receiving lands provides additional lands for owners of TDR's to transfer their TDR's,furthering the goal of converting sending lands to a conservation use. As you are aware, your approval letter is required for the Collier County applications and we would appreciate a response at the earliest time possible. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (239)-649-4040. Sincerely, c Consulting Sery* es, Inc. R and J. Piacente, Ill, PMP, LEED AP Senior Project Manager, Urban Land Engineering Associate Enc. C: William Barton,PE,Olde Florida Golf Club,Inc.,w/o enc. Margaret Perry,AICP,Stantec,w/enc. • v:\2156\active\215611377\shareddocuments\esbm_Itr_utility_availability_of_service_approval letters_for otgc_gmp_amendmem_and_rezone.doc Exhibit 1-15 14 OP CenturyLink- February 22, 2013 Lucia Martin Permit Coordinator Stantec 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, Florida RE: Availability of Service/Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment SEC 31, TWP 48, RNG 27 Collier County, FL Dear Ms. Martin, In response to your letter dated February 21, 2013 Centurylink Corporation will provide telephone service, upon request, to Olde Florida Golf Club located in Golden Gate, Florida. Telephone service will be provided based on the rules and regulations covered in our Local and General Exchange Tariff, approved and on file with the Florida Public Service Commission. In order for us to meet your service expectations and provide for the timely installation of access facilities,we need your cooperation on the following items: 1. Sufficient utility easements, as agreed to by Centurylink for construction of communication facilities must be recorded either through incorporation with the recorded plat of the Pine Air Lakes Promenade Shopping Center, or in a manner as may be recorded in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. A minimum 10' wide utility easement along the cable route to be provided by developer and a 40'X 40' easement may be required for switching equipment. 2. Provide a full set of construction plans and diskette (DGN format or AUTOCAD)furnished to us at the same time as plans are sent to Florida Power& Light Company. 3. All utility easements, rights-of-way, roadways, etc., over which communications construction is necessary must be within six inches of final grade, clear of debris and lot lines properly staked and identified prior to communication facility construction. NOTE: Staking to include grade elevation. 4. Clearing, grading and staking is to be maintained by the developer during Centurylink construction activity. 5. Deviations to our standard construction procedures from the above, resulting in additional expense to Centurylink, either during or after communication facility construction, will be appropriately billed to and borne by the developer. 6. Road crossings provided and placed by developer at locations indicated by a Centurylink representative. Centurylink will provide markers. 7. Centurylink Corporation shall not be responsible for seeding/mulching disturbed areas of the utility easements. 8. Notify Centurylink engineering a minimum of 90 days in advance when telephone service will be required within this area. Exhibit 1-16 DATE Page 2 RE: Old Florida Golf Club The following criteria must also be met for any multi-family or commercial building: 1. Entrance conduit to be run from the property corner or utility easement into the mechanical room with no more than one 90-degree sweeps. Size and location to be determined by an Centurylink representative. 2. Access to the power ground (MGN)within five feet of our terminal or placement of a No. 6 Insulated copper ground wire. 3. A single run conduit(3/4 inch suggested)or access route from each unit to the location of the telephone termination point. 5. Conduit and equipment room to be completed 30 days prior to Certificate of Occupancy date. These requirements are necessary due to the tremendous growth within our serving area and Centurylink's use of advance technology. Failure to comply with the above mentioned could result in service delays to this development. Please sign and date the acknowledgments provided below and return it in the self addressed stamped envelope included. If you should require additional information, please contact me at(239) 263-6304 Sincerely, Shelley L. Boy 6e Network Engineer II—E&C SB/nkr cc: Chron File I hereby acknowledge receipt of this letter and agree with the provisions contained herein. Date Title Exhibit 1-17 J Stantec Consulting Services,Inc. 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples FL 34105 Tel: (239)649-4040 Stantec Fax:(239)643-5716 February 21,2013 Project No:215611377 Mr. Bill Silvester Fire Marshall Golden Gate Fire Control& Rescue District 14575 Collier Boulevard Naples, FL 34119 Subject: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Request for Availability of Service Approval Letter Dear Mr. Silvester: On behalf of our Client, Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. and in accordance with Collier County Land Development Code, we are requesting an availability of service approval letter from your department for the subject Project. To assist in your review and written approval, we are enclosing a Public Facility Map (Exhibit I). The application proposes the re-designation of the 554-acre site from Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Neutral to Rural Fringe Mixed Use District — Receiving, which would include the potential of up to 554 single-family units. The property is predominantly surrounded by receiving lands and due to the change in the environmental condition of the property, changing the designation to receiving lands is appropriate. In addition, designating additional lands as receiving lands provides additional lands for owners of TDR's to transfer their TDR's, furthering the goal of converting sending lands to a conservation use. As you are aware, your approval letter is required for the Collier County applications and we would appreciate a response at the earliest time possible. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (239)-649-4040. Sincerely, S c Consulting Servers, Inc. R and J. Piacente, Ill, PMP, LEED AP Senior Project Manager, Urban Land Engineering Associate Enc. C: William Barton, PE,Olde Florida Golf Club,Inc.,w/o enc. Margaret Perry,AICP,Stantec,w/enc. • v:12156 1active12156113771sharecMocu mentslesbm_I tr_utility_availability_of_service_approval_letters_for_ofgc_gmp_amendment_and_rezone.doc Exhibit 1-18 / GOP/ ( « GOLDEN GATE FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT I j 14575 Collier Boulevard•Naples,FL 34119•(239)348.7548•(239)348-7546 FAX a scu / / htto:llwww.acdire.com April 11,2013 Stantec Consulting services, Inc. Attn: Raymond Piacente, Senior Project Manager. 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples,Florida 34105 Subject: Fire Service Availability for Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Dear Mr. Piacente: This letter is to confirm that the Golden Gate Fire Control&Rescue District will provide fire protection and rescue services, for Olde Florida Golf Club of the re-designation of the 554-acre site from Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Neutral to Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Receiving, which would include the potential of up to 554 single-family units. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at(239) 348-7450. Sincerely, iJ.Zolan Sapp Interim Fire Chief JNS/sm Our Family Protecting Yours Exhibit 1-19 T/51- Stantec OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT PREPARED FOR: OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB, INC. 9393 VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION NAPLES, FLORIDA 34120 PREPARED BY: STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC. 3200 BAILEY LANE, SUITE 200 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34105 FEBRUARY 2013 EXHIBIT J OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 2 TRIP GENERATION 3 TRIP DISTRIBUTION &ASSIGNMENT 4 STUDY AREA DETERMINATION 6 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 7 2012 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 8 2022 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 8 CONCLUSION 9 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: Project Location 3 FIGURE 2: Percent Project Trip Distribution 5 FIGURE 3: Trip Assignment 6 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1: Trip Generation 4 TABLE 2: Study Area Determination 7 TABLE 3: Background Traffic 7 TABLE 4: Existing Conditions 8 TABLE 5: Future Conditions 8 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A 10 1 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to document the transportation impact analysis for the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment of the Olde Florida Golf Club from Rural Fringe Mixed- Use District - Neutral to Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District - Receiving. The 554-acre subject property is located east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) on the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension. The project location is shown in Figure 1. The proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map does not change the underlying use of the land or otherwise alter the existing A-Agricultural zoning. The proposed change would allow for an increase in residential density when acquired through the use of transfer of development rights (TDRs). The existing and proposed conditions analyzed herein are as follows: The existing FLUE designation and A-Agriculture zoning currently allows: • Golf Course, and/or • A maximum of 110 Single Family Residential Units The proposed FLUE designation and A-Agriculture zoning would permit: • Golf Course, and/or • A maximum of 110 Single Family Residential Units; or a maximum of 554 Single Family Residential Units (when acquired through the use of TDRs). A TIS Methodology Meeting was held on Wednesday, February 20, 2013, and pursuant to the approved methodology(attached as Appendix A), existing 2012 conditions as well as the future year 2022 conditions were analyzed to identify any potential impacts due to the land use change. Impacts were evaluated during the p.m. peak hour. Initially, due to the nature of the requested land use change, no intersection analyses were required. Staff reserved the right to require such analysis following a review of the initial TIS submittal. 2 . �...IMNIOKALEE RD' 4r„---,i -- - r 1 it i : - ; " < 0 '.. ;;r iC'Y k'" . IP 4000. "�� `�..•w- , 3i+ `r Sift r °' 1 i si." ..,pw,,...... =7" N.....,..4,41 A„..,,,, ,,., ? t° —.‘,-‘.°*" ..;:e4-II.At-,i,t i 1, — r •NDERBILTBEACH ii , A !> :11T.may .,,_ ( � • T i o' s 2 i u i d'� ` i !, ''# r . ,, i t , ~e try 1 * S v it � ` . s, z 1E 3r'• a' 'C. ._i' 4' # S. 1 i :t,,,,,,.-s w -.1,- 1 7' °":', "i. { -zr .I''. ^1 t — ::° .1,-i 0110 `7,: F `�.�ijro': ::GOLDEN GATE BLVD`,„ r r _ ' I , r. FIGURE 1: Project Location TRIP GENERATION Trip generation rates were estimated for the p.m. peak-hour. The p.m. peak-hour was used in this analysis because it yields the higher trip generation rate when compared to the a.m. peak- hour. The estimated net increase in external trips by the proposed amendment, assuming the maximum utilization of TDRs at final build-out, is 377 p.m. peak-hour two-way trip ends. The p.m. peak hour trip generation is summarized in Table 1. Because golf course use is allowed under current and proposed conditions, it was not necessary to analyze the golf course trips since they would not affect the net external traffic results. All trip rates/equations for the analysis have been based upon the information contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9rh Edition. 3 Table 1: Trip Generation in Land PM Peak PM Peak Total Trips External Trips Future Land Use Use Units Size Hour Trip Enter Exit Internal Pass-by Map Designation Category Rate t Split Split Total Enter Exit Capture% % Total Enter Exit Equation Single Rural Fringe Mixed Family Per In(T)_ Use District- Detached Unit 110 .901n(x)+ 63% 37% 114 72 42 0%% 0% 114 72 42 Neutral Housing- .51 210 Single Rural Fringe Mixed Family Pef In(T)= Use District- Detached Unit 554 .90In(x)+ 63% 37% 491 309 182 0% ON 491 309 182 Receiving Housing- 51 210 - - - Net New Trips 377 238 139 377 238 139 TRIP DISTRIBUTION &ASSIGNMENT The traffic generated by the proposed project was distributed and assigned to the adjacent roadway network using a manual distribution. All project traffic will enter/exit the site via the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension. Project traffic was distributed once hitting the Collier Boulevard intersection based on turning movement data. The project traffic was assigned to all subsequent segments in which the peak-hour peak-direction project traffic exceeds two (2) percent of the level of service (LOS) standard. The Percent Project Trip Distribution is shown in Figure 2. The assignment of net new directional trips is shown in Figure 3. 4 Immokalee Rd 25% 35% - 42% 10% a 0 is a a = m m 3 m m in co en I.- JO V J 12% 3% 52% Site 25% 25% Vanderbilt Beach Rd 36% 103% 8% 12% 2% Golden Gate Blvd 10% I Alik Legend•Figure 2 Existing Roadway 00% Distribution Percentage N Figure 2: Percent Project Trip Distribution 5 Immokalee Rd 60 83 10C 24 I, o . i cr CO CO o A ,, N v a n O O U 3 238 29 7 12t Site _..''. 60 60 Vanderbilt Beach Rd 8F 2,° 19 29 5 Golden Gate Blvd 2A I Legend-F gure 3 _ Existing Roadway 00 Trips Assigned N Figure 3: Trip Assignment STUDY AREA DETERMINATION The extent of the roadway network to be studied was based upon the Collier County Traffic Impact Study (TIS) Guidelines and Procedures. The study area consists of significantly impacted roadway segments and major intersections at the termini of the significantly impacted roadways. Significantly impacted segments are defined as roadway segments for which project traffic is expected to consume at least two (2) percent of Collier County's peak-hour peak- direction level of service. The results of the study area determination are provided in Table 2. The segment of Vanderbilt Beach Road east of Collier Boulevard is not listed in the Collier County Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR). The maximum service volume equivalent to LOS E was obtained from the 2012 FDOT Generalized LOS Tables. Per Collier County's TIS criteria, one segment is significantly impacted. An analysis of Vanderbilt Beach Road from the Site to Collier Boulevard — as well as the Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard intersection will be analyzed. 6 Table 2: Study Area Determination #of 'Lanes Directional %Project Directional Exceeds Each LOS Service 2%of Traffic Project Trips 2% Segment From To Div* Std Volume LOS Assigned Assigned Threshold Collier Blvd Immokalee Rd Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3 ' E 3,000 60 52% 124 Yes Collier Blvd Vanderbilt Beach Rd Golden Gate Blvd. ' 3 E 3,000 60 12% ' 29 No Immokalee Rd Collier Blvd Wilson Blvd 3 E 3,300 66 , 10% 24 No Immokalee Rd Collier Blvd Logan Blvd i 3 E ( 3,200 42 % ` 100 Yes Immokalee Rd Logan Blvd 1-75 3 E 3,500 70 35% 1 83 Yes Imm_okalee Rd 1-75 Livingston Rd ' 3 E 3,500 _ 70 25% 60 No Vanderbilt Beach Rd Site Entrance Collier Blvd I 1 E 720 14 100% 238 Yes _ Vanderbilt Beach Rd Collier Blvd Logan 3 E 3,000 60 36% 86 Yes Vanderbilt Beach Rd Logan Blvd Livingston Rd 3 E 3,000 60 25% 60 r No BACKGROUND TRAFFIC Background traffic was obtained from the 2012 Collier County AUIR. A two (2) percent annual growth rate was used to grow existing traffic volumes to 2022 traffic volumes. Trip bank volumes from the AUIR have been assumed in the 2% background traffic volumes growth. Table 4 summarizes the background traffic growth. Table 3: Background Traffic 2012 2022 Growth Road Name • From To PHPD Rate PHPD Volume Volume Collier Blvd Immokalee Rd Vanderbilt Beach Rd 1285 lil 2% 1,566 Immokalee Rd Collier Blvd Logan Blvd 1647 in 2% 2,008 Immokalee Rd Logan Blvd 1-75 1647 in 2% 2,008 Vanderbi't Beach Rd Site Entrance Collier Blvd 141 (21 2% 186 Vanderbi t Beach Rd Collier Blvd Logan Blvd 1089 (n 2% 1,327 (1) 2012 AUIR (2) 2008 Traffic Counts 7 EXISTING CONDITIONS Since the Collier County AUIR does not provide information for Vanderbilt Beach Road from the Site to Collier Boulevard, the Generalized FDOT service volumes were used. Based on the distribution to/from the site, the p.m. peak-hour peak-direction of project traffic is traveling westbound away from the site. The results of the 2012 existing conditions level of service analysis are summarized in Table 4 and indicate that all roadway segments within the study area are operating within Collier County's adopted level of service standard. Table 4: Existing Conditions Directional 2012 Road Name From To LOS Service Exisiting V/Std Ratio LOS Volume(1) Volumes(1) Immokalee Rd :ier;,ilt Beach Rd E 3000 1285 a 43 t. Immokalee Rd Collier Blvd Logan Blvd E 3200 1647 0.51 C Immokalee Rd Logan Blvd I-75 E 3500 1647 0.47 C Vanderbilt Beach Rd Site Entrance Collier Blvd E 720 141 0.20 4 Vanderbilt Beach Rd Collier Blvd Logan Blvd E 3000 1089 0.36 B (1) 2012 AUIR 2022 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The future traffic consists of the existing traffic adjusted by a two (2) percent annual growth rate to the year 2022 as described in Table 3, plus 100% of the potential site-generated project traffic. Future traffic conditions are illustrated in Table 5 and indicate that all roadway segments within the study area are operating within Collier County's adopted level of service standard. Table 5: Future Conditions LOS Directional 2022 2022 2022 VIStd Road Name From To Std Service Background Project Estimated Ratio LOS Volume(1) Volumes Trips Total Collier Blvd win,:,F..,,,,al-e `.-anclethilt Be.r,I,Rd 300 1`60 124 1090 Immokalee Rd Collier Blvd Logan Blvd E 3200 2008 100 2108 Immokalee Rd Logan Blvd I-75 E 3500 2006 83 2091 Vanderbilt Beach Rd Site Entrance (oilier Blvd E 720 186 238 424 Vanderbilt Beach Rd Collier Blvd Logan Blvd E 3000 1327 86 1413 •■•■ (1) 2012 AUIR 8 CONCLUSION This analysis has been performed as part of a request to amend the Growth Management Plan. Based on the link-level capacity analysis documented in this report, all study area links examined as part of this analysis meet Collier County's adopted level of service standards for both the current and future conditions. If required, a more detailed analysis will be performed at such future time as a rezone, plat or similar application is submitted. 9 APPENDIX "A" 10 APPENDIX A INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply. Date: 02.20.13 Time: 11:00 a.m. Location: DSC 2800 North Horseshoe Drive People Attending: Name, Organization, and Telephone Numbers 1)Jeff Perry, SCSI 2)John Podczerwinsky 3) Reed Jarvi 4) 5) Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title: Jeff Perry, AICP, Senior Transportation Planner Organization: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (SCSI) Address &Telephone Number: 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200, Naples,FL 34105 239-649-4040 Reviewer(s): Reviewer's Name & Title: John Podczerwinksy Collier County Transportation Planning Department Reviewer's Name &Title: Organization&Telephone Number: Applicant: Applicant's Name: Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc., Attn: William Barton Address: 9393 Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Telephone Number: Proposed Development: Name: Olde Florida Golf Club Location: Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Land Use Type: Single—family &Golf Course ITE Code#: #210&#430 Proposed number of development units: 554 (maximum) Other: Description: C Usersulperryloeskiopi215611377 Gide Florida Golf Club GMPAmendmenlplannmcispeciiicationlagercy ouidancelCollier County TlS Methodology meeting checklisl.dot Zoning Existing: A- Agricultural Comprehensive plan recommendation: Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District-Neutral Requested: Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District-Receiving Findings of the Preliminary Study: Study Type: Small Scale TIS [ Minor TIS ❑ Major TIS X Study Area: Boundaries: Include links where project traffic at B/O exceeds 2%-2%-3% of adopted LOS standards on area roads Additional intersections to be analyzed: No intersections to be analyzed during initial study, to be determined following a sufficiency review of the initial TIS submittal Horizon Year(s): 2 y0)-'7— Analysis Time eriod(s): p.m. peak hour Future Off-Site Developments: Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITE 9th Ed. Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None: X Pass-by trips: Internal trips (PUD): Transit use: Other: Horizon Year Roadway Network Improvements: E+C Assume Vanderbilt Beach Road is NOT extended by time of B/O Methodology &Assumptions: Non-site traffic estimates: Site-trip generation: Full build-out assumed to be 2 ZaZ-2 Trip distribution method: Based upon current turning movements (VBR @ Collier Blvd) Traffic assignment method: Manual Traffic growth rate: 2%background C.:WserstilpergyUesktogn21561137 Ode Florida Golf Club GMPAmendmenlblanningisoecilicationiagency_guidancelCoffer County TIS Methodology meetingcheck lis.doc Special Features: (from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations: NA Sight distance: NA Queuing: NA Access location & configuration: NA Traffic control: NA Signal system location &progression needs: NA On-site parking needs: NA Data Sources: NA Base maps: NA Prior study reports: TIS for Rezone from GC to A, 2008 Access policy and jurisdiction: NA Review process: NA - - Requirements: Miscellaneous: Small Scale Study—No Fee Minor Study - $750.00 Major Study - $1500.00 X Includes 2 intersections Additional Intersections - $500.00 each All fees will be agreed to during the Methodology meeting and must be paid to Transportation prior to our sign-off on the application. SIGNATU' S :yP . er --i Re ewers Applicant n C'iUser iperryiDesklop27 567 1377 O1de Florida Golf Club GMPAme ndmenflPanning+specificationkgenc+_guidanceiCollier Count'775 Math000logy meeting check/ioc ^ EXHIBIT A Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule Fees will be paid incrementally as the development proceeds: Methodology Review, Analysis Review, and Sufficiency Reviews. Fees for additional meetings or other optional services are also provided below. Methodology Review- $500 Fee Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement, including review of submitted trip generation estimate(s), distribution, assignment, and review of a "Small Scale Study" determination, written approval/comments on a proposed methodology statement, and written confirmation of a re-submitted, amended methodology statement, and one meeting in Collier County,if needed. "Small Scale Study"Review-No Additional Fee(Includes one sufficiency review) Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study. The review includes: a concurrency determination, site access inspection and confirmation of the study compliance with trip generation,distribution and maximum threshold compliance. "Minor Study Review"-$750 Fee(Includes one sufficiency review) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: optional field visit to site, confilination of trip generation, distribution, and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled, review of off-site improvements within the right-of-way, review of site access and circulation, and preparation and review of"sufficiency"comments/questions. "Major Study Review"-$1,500 Fee(Includes two intersection analysis and two sufficiency reviews) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, special trip generation and/or trip length study, distribution and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled, review of traffic growth analysis,review of off-site roadway operations and capacity analysis, review of site access and circulation, neighborhood traffic intrusion issues, any necessary improvement proposals and associated cost estimates, and preparation and review of up to two rounds of "sufficiency" comments/questions and/or recommended conditions of approval. "Additional intersection Review"-$500 Fee The review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the"Major Study Review" and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the"Major Study Review" "Additional Sufficiency Reviews"-$500 Fee) Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. C.UsersllpenyiDesktop2 i5F11377 ade Floods Golf Cott GMP.4 mendmen tlplannino'opecificat,on'agenry o id;nce;CWNe,County TIS Methodology meeting check's!doc Memo Stantec To: John Podczerwinsky, Project From: Matt Crim, P.E., PTOE Manager Stantec Collier County Transportation Planning File: 215611377 Date: April 1, 2013 Reference: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard Intersection Analysis The Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Traffic Impact Statement, submitted February 2013, evaluated the existing and future roadway network conditions to identify any potential impacts due to the land use change. The initial Traffic Impact Statement submitted did not evaluate any intersections. Per your request, this memo serves to supplement the Traffic Impact Statement by analyzing the AM and PM peak-hour conditions at the Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard intersection. Vehicle turning movement counts were conducted at the Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard intersection on Tuesday March 19, 2013. The turning movement counts were taken during the AM peak period (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and the PM peak period (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) to quantify existing peak-hour conditions. The turning movement counts at the intersection were adjusted by an FDOT peak-season conversion factor of 0.97. The peak-season conversion factors, turning movement counts, and existing signal timing are attached in Appendix A. The existing traffic conditions at the Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard intersection were evaluated using the Synchro Software. As part of the analysis, existing lane geometry and signal timing was used at the intersection. Each movement and approach was analyzed to ensure that vehicles did not experience excessive delay and that the volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c ratio) was less than 1.0. The intersection One Team.Infinite Solutions. EXHIBIT J-1 Stantec April 1, 2013 Page 2 of 4 Reference: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard Intersection Analysis volume tables used to obtain the existing peak-season AM and PM peak-hour traffic volumes are provided in Appendix B. The results of the existing traffic Synchro intersection analysis are summarized in Table 1 and indicate that the Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard intersection currently operates at an acceptable level-of-service with all movements and approaches having a v/c ratio less than 1.0. The 2013 existing peak-season Synchro intersection worksheets are provided in Appendix C and electronic versions of the files are attached on the accompanying CD. Table 1: Vanderbilt Beach Rd/Collier Blvd 2013 Existing Traffic Intersection Conditions Overall Intersection LOS Delay Max v/c Approach LOS Intersection Time Period Standard Existing (sec/veh) Ratio EB WB NB SB Vanderbilt Beach Rd AM Peak-Hour E C 25.6 0.85 D C C C—MEW& Collier Bkd PM Peak-Hour E 30.5 0.76 C C D The Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard intersection was again evaluated for the background traffic conditions in 2022. The background traffic conditions consist of the existing peak-season volumes grown at a two percent annual growth rate. The intersection volume tables used to obtain the background AM and PM peak-hour traffic volumes are provided in Appendix B. The results of the background traffic Synchro intersection analysis are summarized in Table 2 and indicate that the Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard intersection will continue to operate at an acceptable level-of-service with all movements and approaches having a v/c ratio less than 1.0. The 2022 background traffic Synchro intersection worksheets are provided in Appendix D and electronic versions of the files are attached on the accompanying CD. Stantec April 1, 2013 Page 3 of 4 Reference: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard Intersection Analysis Table 2: Vanderbilt Beach Rd/Collier Blvd 2013 Background Traffic Intersection Conditions Overall Intersection LOS Delay Max v/c Approach LOS Intersection Time Period Standard Background (sec/veh) Ratio EB WB NB SB Vanderbilt Beach Rd AM Peak-Hour E D 39.0 0 98 D D D &Collier Bled PM Peak-Hour E D 0 85 C D D The Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard intersection was lastly evaluated for the total traffic conditions in 2022. The total traffic conditions consist of the existing peak- season volumes grown at a two percent annual growth rate plus the project traffic. Project traffic was distributed and assigned to the roadway network in the same manner as the Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Traffic Impact Statement. However, unlike the Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Traffic Impact Statement, 100% of the project traffic (not the net increase above the current entitlement) was analyzed. The estimated project traffic generated by the project based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation — the 9`h Edition (2012) is shown in Table 3 and Table 4. Table 3: AM Peak-Hour Trip Generation Development PM Peak Trip Ratel AM AM AM Peak Total Trips ITE Land Use Category Units Enter Exit Size Equation Total Enter Exit Split Split Single-Family Detached Per Unit 554 T=0.70(x)+9.74 25% 75% 398 100 298 Housing-210 Table 4: PM Peak-Hour Trip Generation Development PM Peak Trip Ratel PM PM PM Peak Total Tri p s ITE Land Use Category Units Enter Exit Size Equation Total Enter Exit Split Split Single-Family Detached Per Unit 554 In(T)=0.901n(x)+0.51 63% 37% 491 309 182 Housing-210 The results of the total traffic Synchro intersection analysis are summarized in Table 5 and indicate that the Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard intersection will continue to operate at an acceptable level-of-service with all movements and approaches having a v/c ratio less than 1.0. The 2022 total traffic Synchro intersection worksheets are Stantec April 1, 2013 Page 4 of 4 Reference: Olde Florida Golf Club Growth Management Plan Amendment Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard Intersection Analysis provided in Appendix E and electronic versions of the files are attached on the accompanying CD. Table 5: Vanderbilt Beach Rd/Collier Blvd 2013 Total Traffic Intersection Conditions Overall Intersection LOS Delay Max v/c Approach LOS Intersection Time Period Standard Total (sec/veh) Ratio EB WB NB SB Vanderbilt Beach Rd AM Peak-Hour E D 42.5 0.99 E D D D & Collier Blvd PM Peak-Hour E D 41.1 0.93 D D D D As the operational analysis documented in this memo indicates, the Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Boulevard intersection is currently operating at an acceptable level-of- service with all movements and approaches having a v/c ratio less than 1.0. It is anticipated that the intersection will continue to operate at an acceptable level-of- service with all movements and approaches having a v/c ratio less than 1.0 with the addition of project traffic in 2022. STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC. Matthew Crim, P.E., PTOE Transportation Engineer Ph: 832-523-9111 matt.crim( stantec.com cc: 215611377-220 Attachments: Appendix A: FDOT Peak-Season Conversion Factors, Turning Movement Counts and Existing Signal Timing Appendix B: Existing & Future Intersection Volumes Appendix C: 2013 Existing Traffic Synchro Summary Worksheets Appendix D: 2022 Background Traffic Synchro Summary Worksheets Appendix E: 2022 Total Traffic Synchro Summary Worksheets APPENDIX A FDOT PEAK-SEASON CONVERSION FACTORS TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS EXISTING SIGNAL TIMING 2011 PEAK SEASON FACTOR CATEGORY REPORT - REPORT TYPE: ALL CATEGORY: 0300 COLLIER COUNTYWIDE MOCF: 0.86 WK DATES SF PSCF 01/01/2011 - 01/01/2011 1.01 1.18 2 01/02/2011 - 01/08/2011 0.98 1.14 3 01/09/2011 - 01/15/2011 0.96 1.12 4 01/16/2011 - 01/22/2011 0.93 1.08 * 5 01/23/2011 - 01/29/2011 0.91 1.06 * 6 01/30/2011 - 02/05/2011 0.89 1.04 * 7 02/06/2011 - 02/12/2011 0.87 1.01 * 8 02/13/2011 - 02/19/2011 0.84 0.98 * 9 02/20/2011 - 02/26/2011 0.84 0.98 *10 02/27/2011 - 03/05/2011 0.84 0.98 *11 03/06/2011 - 03/12/2011 0.83 0.97 *12 03/13/2011 - 03/19/2011 0.83 0.97 *13 03/20/2011 - 03/26/2011 0.84 0.98 *14 03/27/2011 - 04/02/2011 0.85 0.99 *15 04/03/2011 - 04/09/2011 0.86 1.00 *16 04/10/2011 - 04/16/2011 0.87 1.01 *17 04/17/2011 - 04/23/2011 0.89 1.04 18 04/24/2011 - 04/30/2011 0.92 1.07 19 05/01/2011 - 05/07/2011 0.95 1.11 20 05/08/2011 - 05/14/2011 0.97 1.13 21 05/15/2011 - 05/21/2011 1.00 1.16 22 05/22/2011 - 05/28/2011 1.02 1.19 23 05/29/2011 - 06/04/2011 1.05 1.22 24 06/05/2011 - 06/11/2011 1.07 1.25 25 06/12/2011 - 06/18/2011 1.10 1.28 26 06/19/2011 - 06/25/2011 1.10 1.28 27 06/26/2011 - 07/02/2011 1.11 1.29 28 07/03/2011 - 07/09/2011 1.11 1.29 29 07/10/2011 - 07/16/2011 1.12 1.30 30 07/17/2011 - 07/23/2011 1.13 1.32 31 07/24/2011 - 07/30/2011 1.13 1.32 32 07/31/2011 - 08/06/2011 1.14 1.33 33 08/07/2011 - 08/13/2011 1.14 1.33 .a.k 08/14/2011 - 08/20/2011 1.15 1.34 08/21/2011 - 08/27/2011 1.16 1.35 08/28/2011 - 09/03/2011 1.16 1.35 37 09/04/2011 - 09/10/2011 1.17 1.36 38 09/11/2011 - 09/17/2011 1.18 1.37 39 09/18/2011 - 09/24/2011 1.16 1.35 40 09/25/2011 - 10/01/2011 1.15 1.34 41 10/02/2011 - 10/08/2011 1.13 1.32 42 10/09/2011 - 10/15/2011 1.12 1.30 43 10/16/2011 - 10/22/2011 1.10 1.28 44 10/23/2011 - 10/29/2011 1.09 1.27 45 10/30/2011 - 11/05/2011 1.07 1.25 46 11/06/2011 - 11/12/2011 1.06 1.23 47 11/13/2011 - 11/19/2011 1.04 1.21 48 11/20/2011 - 11/26/2011 1.03 1.20 49 11/27/2011 - 12/03/2011 1.02 1.19 50 12/04/2011 - 12/10/2011 1.01 1.18 51 12/11/2011 - 12/17/2011 1.01 1.18 52 12/18/2011 - 12/24/2011 0.98 1.14 53 12/25/2011 - 12/31/2011 0.96 1.12 * PEAK SEASON 14-FEB-2012 14:41:17 830UPD [1,0,0,1] 10300 PKSEASON.TXT FTE FTE(Florida Transportation Engineering) Count Name:Vanderbilt Beach Rd Fax#(941)639-4851 at Collier Blvd 8250 Pascal Drive Site Code: Punta Gorda,Florida,United States 33950 Start Date:03/19/2013 Ph#(800)639-4851 Page No:1 Turning Movement Data Collier Blvd Collier Blvd Vanderbilt Beach Rd Vanderbilt Beach Rd Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Start Time u- App. U- App. U- App. U- App. Int. Turn Left Thru Right Peds Total Turn Left Thru Right Peds Total Tum Left Thru Right Peds Total Tum Left Thru Right Peds Total Total 7:00 AM 0 77 78 4 0 159 4 12 179 153 0 348 0 22 6 24 0 52 0 5 14 6 0 25 584 7:15 AM 0 104 97 3 0 204 9 8 187 146 0 350 0 28 16 21 1 65 0 4 12 8 0 24 643 7:30 AM 0 136 118 5 0 259 8 6 163 216 0 393 0 29 9 18 0 56 0 2 37 12 0 51 759 7:45 AM 0 124 118 9 0 251 4 11 163 193 0 371 0 31 13 34 0 78 0 3 24 8 0 35 735 Hourly Total 0 441 411 21 0 873 25 37 692 708 0 1462 0 110 44 97 1 251 0 14 87 34 0 135 2721 8:00 AM 1 116 127 4 0 248 7 9 141 182 0 339 0 63 17 28 1 108 0 3 27 9 0 39 734 8:15 AM 0 116 134 7 0 257 11 14 142 166 0 333 0 73 45 29 1 147 0 8 23 21 0 52 789 8:30 AM 0 87 148 7 0 242 10 11 149 154 0 324 0 48 14 22 1 84 0 1 13 14 0 28 678 8:45 AM 0 96 109 9 0 214 10 12 154 144 0 320 0 59 23 19 0 101 0 2 12 9 0 23 658 Hourly Total 1 415 518 27 0 961 38 46 586 646 0 1316 0 243 99 98 3 440 0 14 75 53 0 142 2859 •"BREAK"' - 4:00 PM 1 66 172 6 0 245 27 24 182 104 0 337 0 126 18 93 0 237 0 10 20 13 0 43 862 4:15 PM 0 56 147 4 0 207 24 13 158 80 0 275 0 142 16 77 0 235 0 8 23 10 0 41 758 4:30 PM 1 68 158 6 0 233 31 18 196 72 0 317 1 157 12 82 0 252 0 9 20 11 0 40 842 4:45 PM 0 71 168 5 0 244 37 19 172 57 0 285 0 146 22 113 1 281 0 4 18 4 0 26 836 Hourly Total 2 261 645 21 0 929 119 74 708 313 0 1214 1 571 68 365 1 1005 0 31 81 38 0 150 3298 5:00 PM 0 63 160 6 0 229 24 15 129 80 0 248 0 162 17 109 0 288 0 4 22 5 0 31 796 5:15 PM 0 59 205 1 0 265 21 17 177 67 0 282 0 204 5 110 0 319 0 7 22 13 0 42 908 5:30 PM 0 60 168 1 0 229 45 25 152 90 0 312 0 213 28 92 0 333 0 7 31 26 0 64 938 5:45 PM 0 52 147 5 0 204 34 17 132 77 0 260 0 188 11 78 0 277 0 8 25 15 0 48 789 Hourly Total 0 234 680 13 0 927 124 74 590 314 0 1102 0 767 61 389 0 1217 0 26 100 59 0 185 3431 Grand Total 3 1351 2254 82 0 3690 306 231 2576 1981 0 5094 1 1691 272 949 5 2913 0 85 343 184 0 612 12309 Approach% 0.1 36.6 61.1 2.2 - - 6.0 4.5 50.6 38.9 - - 0.0 58.1 9.3 32.6 - - 0.0 13.9 56.0 30.1 - - - Total% 0.0 11.0 18.3 0.7 - 30.0 2.5 1.9 20.9 16.1 - 41.4 0.0 13.7 2.2 7.7 - 23.7 0.0 0.7 2.8 1.5 - 5.0 - Car 3 1305 2141 77 - 3526 299 217 2468 1931 - 4915 1 1652 270 925 - 2848 0 75 333 179 - 587 11876 %Car 100.0 96.6 95.0 93.9 - 95.6 97.7 93.9 95.8 97.5 - 96.5 100.0 97.7 99.3 97.5 - 97.8 - 88.2 97.1 97.3 - 95.9 96.5 Truck 0 46 113 5 - 164 7 14 108 50 - 179 0 39 2 24 - 65 0 10 10 5 - 25 433 %Truck 0.0 3.4 5.0 6.1 - 4.4 2.3 6.1 4.2 2.5 - 15 0.0 2.3 0.7 2.5 - 2.2 - 11.8 2.9 2.7 - 4.1 3.5 Ped - - - - 0 0 - %Ped • - - - - 100.0 - - TE FTE(Florida Transportation Engineering) Count Name:Vanderbilt Beach Rd Fax#(941)639-4851 at Collier Blvd 8250 Pascal Drive Site Code: Punta Gorda,Florida,United States 33950 Start Date:03/19/2013 Ph#(800)639-4851 Page No:2 _ Collier Blvd[N] Out In Total 4271 4915 9186 164 179 343 0 0 0 4435 5094 9529 1 I _ I I 1931 2468 217 299 0 50 108 14 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 1981 2576 231 306 0 R T L _ U P N 4 re W eo L 3 mW a N 943 7:00 AM E r 2 o _ Ending At r o o w O a a 4 03/19/2013 6:00 PM p P.ui $ ° e —W N ° 3 Truck C o 0 0 0— o w z w m > Ped —0 0 Le .n a -00000— +1 h t r► U L T R P 3 1305 2141 77 0 0 46 113 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1351 2254 82 0 1 1 I 1 I 3471 3526 6997 142 164 306 0 0 0 3613 3690 7303 Out In Total Collier Blvd[S] Turning Movement Data Plot L., FTE i■ FTE(Florida Transportation Engineering) Count Name:Vanderbilt Beach Rd Fax#(941)639-4851 at Collier Blvd 8250 Pascal Drive Site Code: Punta Gorda,Florida,United States 33950 Start Date:03/19/2013 Ph#(800)639-4851 Page No:3 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (7:30 AM) Collier Blvd Collier Blvd Vanderbilt Beach Rd Vanderbilt Beach Rd Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Start Time U- App. U- App. U- App. U- App. Int. Turn Left Thru Right Peds Total Turn Left Thru Right Peds Total Turn Left Thru Right Peds Total Turn Total Thru Right Peds Total Total 7:30 AM 0 136 118 5 0 259 8 6 163 216 0 393 0 29 9 18 0 56 0 2 37 12 0 51 759 7:45 AM 0 124 118 9 0 251 4 11 163 193 0 371 0 31 13 34 0 78 0 3 24 8 0 35 735 8:00 AM 1 116 127 4 0 248 7 9 141 182 0 339 0 63 17 28 1 108 0 3 27 9 0 39 734 8:15 AM 0 116 134 7 0 257 11 14 142 166 0 333 0 73 45 29 1 147 0 8 23 21 0 52 789 Total 1 492 497 25 0 1015 30 40 609 757 0 1436 0 196 84 109 2 389 0 16 111 50 0 177 3017 Approach% 0.1 48.5 49.0 2.5 - - 2.1 2.8 42.4 52.7 - - 0.0 50.4 21.6 28.0 - - 0.0 9.0 62.7 282 - - - Total% 0.0 16.3 16.5 0.8 - 33.6 1.0 1.3 20.2 25.1 - 47.6 0.0 6.5 2.8 3.6 - 12.9 0.0 0.5 3.7 1.7 - 5.9 - PHF 0.250 0.904 0.927 0.694 - 0.980 0.682 0.714 0.934 0.876 - 0.913 0.000 0.671 0.467 0.801 - 0.662 0.000 0.500 0.750 0.595 - 0.851 0.956 Car 1 471 454 23 - 949 29 33 570 745 - 1377 0 187 84 103 - 374 0 14 107 47 - 168 2868 %Car 100.0 95.7 91.3 92.0 - 93.5 96.7 82.5 93.6 98.4 - 95.9 - 95.4 100.0 94.5 - 96.1 - 87.5 96.4 94.0 - 94.9 95.1 Truck 0 21 43 2 - 66 1 7 39 12 - 59 0 9 0 6 - 15 0 2 4 3 - 9 149 %Truck 0.0 4.3 8.7 8.0 - 6.5 3.3 17.5 6.4 1.6 - 4.1 - 4.6 0.0 5.5 - 3.9 - 12.5 3.6 6.0 - 5.1 4.9 Ped - - - - 0 - - - - - 0 - %Ped - - - - 100.0 - - 4 FTE FTE(Florida Transportation Engineering) Count Name:Vanderbilt Beach Rd Fax#(941)639-4851 at Collier Blvd 8250 Pascal Drive Site Code: Punta Gorda,Florida,United States 33950 Start Date:03/19/2013 Ph#(800)639-4851 Page No:4 Collier Blvd[N] Out In Total 717 1377 2094 56 59 115 0 0 0 773 1436 2209 I I I t t 745 570 33 29 0 12 39 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 757 609 40 30 0 R T L U P N 1 4 -o 0 o o 7 ± At D Q o W J- EF � 0oA JS Peak Hour Data 4 -. ; oaV_ e ° �° oR ° K a L a m 5 n o F.,-1 . 02 , _ 03/19/2013 7:30 AM r o n o m m 5 m Ending At r w a—� w m a 03/19/2013 8:30 AM 9. `o xi j p' N P- o n _O m 0 0 . Z Truck c o 0 0 0— 5 o m a m —o o N N a -0 o 0 0 0- i 41 h t r► U L T R P 1 471 454 23 0 O 21 43 2 0 O 0 0 0 0 1 492 497 25 0 I I 1 I I 688 949 1637 47 66 113 0 0 0 735 1015 1750 Out In Total Collier Blvd[S] Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot(7:30 AM) FTE FTE(Florida Transportation Engineering) Count Name:Vanderbilt Beach Rd Fax#(941)639-4851 at Collier Blvd 8250 Pascal Drive Site Code: Punta Gorda,Florida,United States 33950 Start Date:03/19/2013 Ph#(800)639-4851 Page No:5 Turning Movement Peak Hour Data (4:45 PM) Collier Blvd Collier Blvd Vanderbilt Beach Rd Vanderbilt Beach Rd Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Start Time U- App. U- A U- U- A Int. Tum Left Thru Right Peds Total Tum Left Thru Right Peds Total Turn Left Thru Right Peds Total Turn Left Thru Right Peds Total Total 4:45 PM 0 71 168 5 0 244 37 19 172 57 0 285 0 146 22 113 1 281 0 4 18 4 0 26 836 5:00 PM 0 63 160 6 0 229 24 15 129 80 0 248 0 162 17 109 0 288 0 4 22 5 0 31 796 5:15 PM 0 59 205 1 0 265 21 17 177 67 0 282 0 204 5 110 0 319 0 7 22 13 0 42 908 5:30 PM 0 60 168 1 0 229 45 25 152 90 0 312 0 213 28 92 0 333 0 7 31 26 0 64 938 Total 0 253 701 13 0 967 127 76 630 294 0 1127 0 725 72 424 1 1221 0 22 93 48 0 163 3478 Approach% 0.0 262 72.5 1.3 - - 11.3 6.7 55.9 26.1 - - 0.0 59.4 5.9 34.7 - - 0.0 13.5 57.1 29.4 - - - Total% 0.0 7.3 20.2 0.4 - 27.8 3.7 2.2 18.1 8.5 - 32.4 0.0 20.8 2.1 12.2 - 35.1 0.0 0.6 2.7 1.4 - 4.7 - PHF 0.000 0.891 0.855 0.542 - 0.912 0.706 0.760 0.890 0.817 - 0.903 0.000 0.851 0.643 0.938 - 0.917 0.000 0.786 0.750 0.462 - 0.637 0.927 Car 0 247 688 13 - 948 127 75 617 289 - 1108 0 720 72 416 - 1208 0 20 91 48 - 159 3423 Car - 97.6 98.1 100.0 - 98.0 100.0 98.7 97.9 98.3 - 98.3 - 99.3 100.0 98.1 - 98.9 - 90.9 97.8 100.0 - 97.5 98.4 Truck 0 6 13 0 - 19 0 1 13 5 - 19 0 5 0 8 - 13 0 2 2 0 - 4 55 Truck - 2.4 1.9 0.0 - 2.0 0.0 1.3 2.1 1.7 - 1.7 - 0.7 0.0 1.9 - 1.1 - 9.1 2.2 0.0 - 2.5 1.6 Ped Ped - - - - 100.0 - - TE FTE(Florida Transportation Engineering) Count Name:Vanderbilt Beach Rd Fax#(941)639-4851 at Collier Blvd 8250 Pascal Drive Site Code: Punta Gorda,Florida,United States 33950 Start Date:03/19/2013 Ph#(800)639-4851 Page No:6 Collier Blvd[N] Out In Total 1583 1108 2691 18 19 37 O 0 0 1601 1127 2728 289 617 75 127 _ 0 5 13 1 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 294 630 76 127 0 R T L U P N 1 4 Lt ` A t o o m- E$^ �p S Peak Hour Data m N O — YI o ^ J 4 W o N 1- o + WO 0 K m t � m N N 03/19/2013 4:45 PM N N + + sm ° 5 1 ° ° r- Ending At r N o ro v 0 A 3 m 03/19/2013 5:45 PM d m p � o - Car Truck a > Ped —0 0 — a v 0 0 0 0- rl h t r► U L T R P 0 247 688 13 0 0 6 13 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 253 701 13 0 1 1 1 1 I 1053 948 2001 23 19 42 O _ 0 _ 0 1076 967 2043 Out In Total Collier Blvd[S] Turning Movement Peak Hour Data Plot(4:45 PM) Programmed EPAC Data 03/27/2013 8:24:08 am Intersection Name: Collier @ Vanderbilt Beach Rd Intersection Alias: 951 @VandBch Q•oess Code:9999 Channel:46 Address: 75 Revision:3.33e Access Data Port 2 Comm:19200 Baud r ease Data Port 3 Comm:19200 Baud Vehical Basic Timings Vehical Density Timings Time B4 Cars Time To Phase Min_Gm Passage Maxl Max2 Yellow All Red Added Initial Max_Initial Reduction Before Reduce Min Gap 1 3 1.0 15 20 4.5 2.1 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 2 10 1.0 30 40 4.5 2.1 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 3 3 1.0 25 35 4.0 2.3 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 4 7 1.0 25 30 4.0 2.3 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 5 3 1.0 10 15 4.5 2.1 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 6 10 1.0 30 40 4.5 2.1 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 7 3 1.0 10 15 4.0 2.3 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 8 7 1.0 25 30 4.0 2.3 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Pedestrian Timing Extended Actuated General Control Miscellaneous No Ped Flashing Ped Rest Non-Act Veh Ped Recall Non Dual Last Car Conditional Simultaneous Phase Walk Clear Walk Clear in Walk Initialize Response Recall Recall Delay Lock Entry Passage Service Gap Out 1 0 0 No 0 No Inactive None None None 0 Yes No No No No 2 7 32 No 0 No Green NonActl Soft None 0 Yes Yes No No No 3 0 0 No 0 No Inactive None None None 0 Yes No No No No 4 7 32 No 0 No Inactive NonActlI None None 0 Yes Yes No No No 5 0 0 No 0 No Inactive None None None 0 Yes No No No No 6 7 31 No 0 No Green NonActl Soft None 0 Yes Yes No No No 7 0 0 No 0 No Inactive None None None 0 Yes No No No No 8 7 32 No 0 No Inactive NonActII None None 0 Yes Yes No No No Special Sequence Vehical Detector Phase Assignment fault Data Assigned Switched Phase Mode Phase Extend Delay Vehical Detector Channel:1 1 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel:2 2 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel:3 3 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel:4 4 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel:5 5 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel:6 6 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel:7 7 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel:8 8 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel:17 1 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel:33 0 Veh 0 0.0 15 Vehical Detector Channel:34 0 Veh 0 0.0 30 Vehical Detector Channel:35 0 Veh 0 0.0 10 Vehical Detector Channel :36 0 Veh 0 0.0 25 Vehical Detector Channel :37 0 Veh 0 0.0 15 Vehical Detector Channel:38 0 Veh 0 0.0 30 Vehical Detector Channel:39 0 Veh 0 0.0 10 Vehical Detector Channel :40 0 Veh 0 0.0 25 Pedestrian Detector Special Detector Phase Assignment Default Data Assign Switched Phase Mode Phase Extend Delay Default Data Page 1 of 7 Unit Data General Control Remote Flash Flash Flash Startup Time:6sec Startup State:All Red Red Revert:4sec Test A=Flash No Channel Color Alternat 1 Red No 'to Ped Clear:No Stop Time Reset:No Alternate Sequence:0 Flash Flash 2 Yellow No Entry Exit .d3C connector Input Modes:0 Input Output Phase Phase Phase 3 Red Yes ABC connector Output Modes: 0 Ring Respons Selection 2 No Yes 4 Red Yes 1 Ring 1 Ring 1 4 Yes No 5 Red No D connector Input Modes:0 2 Ring 2 Ring 2 6 No Yes 6 Yellow No D connector Output Modes: 0 3 None None 8 Yes No 7 Red Yes 4 None None 8 Red Yes Overlaps I Overlaps A B C D E F I G H I J K L M N O P Phase(s) A BC D E F G H I J K L M N O P Trail Green 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trail Yellow 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Trail Red 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Plus Green 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minus Green 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ring Phase(s) Next 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Phase Ring Phase 1 2 3 4 1 1 3 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 1 2 ; 5 5 7 7 2 2 4 4 3 1 4 o a . 6 6 8 8 5 6 7 8 �.� U 4 1 1 5 2 6 6 2 7 7 2 8 8 2 5 Alternate Sequences Port 1 Data Alternate Sequences BIU Port Message Addr Status 40 0 Used No 1 Used No Phase Pair(s) 8 Used No 9 Used No 16 Used No No Alternate Sequences Programmed Channel Assignment Control Channel Hardware Pin Set Control Channel Hardware Pin Set Control Channel Hardware Pin Set Ph.1 Veh 1 1 -Ph.1 RYG 1 Ph.2 Veh 2 2-Ph.2 RYG 2 Ph.3 Veh 3 3-Ph.3 RYG 3 Ph.4 Veh 4 4-Ph.4 RYG 4 Ph.5 Veh 5 5-Ph.5 RYG 5 Ph.6 Veh 6 6-Ph.6 RYG 6 Ph.7 Veh 7 7-Ph.7 RYG 7 Ph.8 Veh 8 8-Ph.8 RYG 8 Ph.2 Ped 9 10-Ph.2 DPW 10 Ph.4 Ped 10 12-Ph.4 DPW 12 Ph.6 Ped 11 14-Ph.6 DPW 14 Ph.8 Ped 12 16-Ph.8 DPW 16 Ph.1 OLP 13 17-Ph.1 RYG 17 Ph.2 OLP 14 18-Ph.2 RYG 18 Ph.3 OLP 15 19-Ph.3 RYG 19 -----'h.4 OLP 16 20-Ph.4 RYG 20 Ph.1 Ped 17 9-Ph.1 DPW 9 Ph.3 Ped 18 11 -Ph.3 DPW 11 h.5 Ped 19 13-Ph.5 DPW 13 Ph.7 Ped 20 15-Ph.7 DPW 15 Page 2 of 7 Coordination Data DiaUSplit Cycle General Coordination Data Operation Mode:O=Free Offset Mode:0=Beg Gm Manual Dial: 1 ^dination Mode:O=Permissive Force Mode:0=Plan Manual Split: 1 1.__simun Mode:2=Max 2 Max Dwell Time:0 Manual Offset: 1 Correction Mode:( Dwell Yield Period:0 Split Times and Phase Mode Dial / Split Ph. Splits Ph.Mode Ph. Splits Ph.Mode Ph. Splits Ph.Mode Ph. Splits Ph.Mode Traffic Plan Data plan:// Offset Time: Alt.Sequence: Mode: Rg 2 Lag Time: Rg 3 Lag Time: Rg 4 Lag Time: Local TBC Data Source Equate Days Start of Daylight Saving Month:3 Week:2 Cycle Zero Reference Hours:24 Min:0 Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 End of Daylight Saving Month: 11 Week: 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 0 0 Traffic Data PHASE FUNCTION Event Dav Time D/S/O flash 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 1 1 0:1 0/0/4 C ❑ D❑ ❑ ❑ C ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 2 0:1 0/0/4 DEEMED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ D ❑ CI ❑ 3 2 6:30 1/0/1 F ® ® 1311 © ® ® CI ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ fl El 4 2 9:0 0/0/4 CI ❑ ❑ ❑ CI ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 5 2 15:30 1/0/1 F ® © IMO 1"1 ® ® CI ❑ CI ❑ ❑ L 6 2 19:0 0/0/4 ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1 ■7 7 0:1 0/0/4 E CI LI CIE C CI CI E AUX.Events Det. Det. Det. Program Aux Ouputs Diag. Rpt. Mult100 Special Function Outputs Event Day Hour Min. 1 2 3 D1 D2 D3 Dimming 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2 1 8 30 — — — _ _ _ — X 3 1 13 15 4 7 0 1 _ _ 5 7 15 30 X _ _ _ _ _ 6 7 16 15 Default Data-No Special Day(s)or Week(s)Programmed Special Functions Function SF1 SF2 SF3 SF4 SF5 SF6 SF7 SF8 Passage 3&Max 3 �{ ❑ Page 3 of 7 Phase Function Phase Function Map PFl PF2 PF3 PF4 PF5 PF6 PF7 PF8 PF9 PF10 PF11 PF12 PF13 PF14 PF15 PF16 Phase 1 Max2 X ❑ ❑ 0 n ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 3e 2 Max2 D X ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 3 Max2 E ©n ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 4 Max2 0 D x n E1 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 5 Max2 ❑D❑ © ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 6 Max2 0 ❑n❑ x E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 7 Max2 ❑❑ n© ❑ ❑ n ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 8 Max2 EOM ❑❑ © ❑ ❑ Dimming Data Channel Red Yellow Green Alternate LI El El El Default Data-No Dimming Programmed Preemption Data General Preemption Data Ring Min Grn/Walk Time 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 Flash>Preepmt 1 Preepmt 2=Preempt 3 Preepmt 4=Preempt 5 Preepmt 1>Preempt 2 Preepmt 3=Preempt 4 Preepmt 5=Preempt 6 a Preempt Timers Select f Return y F I Track u Non- Link to Ped Dwell Ped - Locking Preempt Delay Extend Duration MaxCall Lock Out Clear Yel Red Grn Ped Yel Red Green Clear Yel Red 1 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 2 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 3 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 4 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 5 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 6 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 Page 4 of 7 Preempt 1 Preempt 2 Preempt 3 Preempt 4 Preempt 5 Preempt 6 Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls /"."'N 1 No Yes 1 No Yes 2 No Yes 2 No Yes 3 No Yes 3 No Yes 4 No Yes 4 No Yes 5 No Yes 5 No Yes 6 No Yes 6 No Yes 7 No Yes 7 No Yes 8 No Yes 8 No Yes Priority Timers Priority Non-Locking Delay Extend Duration Dwell Max_Call Lock-Out Skip Phases 1 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0=Do not Skip Phases 2 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0=Do not Skip Phases 3 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0=Do not Skip Phases 4 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0=Do not Skip Phases 5 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0=Do not Skip Phases 6 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0=Do not Skip Phases Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls Preempt l Vehical Phases Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Ph Track Dwell Cycle Ov1p Track Dwell Cycle Default Data Default Data ,....Refault Data eempt 2 Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Vehical Phases Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Ovlp.Track Dwell Cycle Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Default Data Default Data Default Data Preempt 3 Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Vehical Phases Ph Track Dwell Cycle Ovjp. Track Dwell Cycle Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Default Data Default Data Default Data Preempt 4 Vehical Phases Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Ovlp. Track Dwell Cycle Default Data Default Data Default Data Preempt 5 Vehical Phases Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Ovlp. Track Dwell Cycle Default Data Default Data Default Data Preempt 6 Vehical Phases Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Ovip. "Track Dwell Cycle Default Data Default Data Default Data Page 5 of 7 System/Detectors Data Local Critical Alarms Revert to Backup: 15 1st Phone: Local Free:No Cycle Failure:No Coord Failure:No Conflict Flash:No Remote Flash:No 2nd Phone: :al Fash:No Cycle Fault:No Coord Fault:No Premption:No Voltage Monitor:No Special Status 1:No Special Status 2:No Special Status 3:No Special Status 4:No Special Status 5:No Special Status 6:No Traffic Responsive System Detector Average Occupancy Min Queue 1 System Weight Queue 2 System Weight Detector Channel Veh/Hr Time(mins) Correction/10 Volume% Detectors Detectors Factor Detectors Detectors Factor I 17 1,500 2 10 30 2 18 1,500 2 10 30 Default Data Default Data 3 19 1,500 2 10 30 4 20 1,500 2 10 30 5 21 1,500 2 10 30 6 22 1,500 2 10 30 7 23 1,500 2 10 30 8 24 1,500 2 10 30 Sample Interval: Queue: 1 Input Selection:O=Average Queue: Detector Failed Level:0 Level Enter Leave Dial/Split/Offset Queue:2 Input Selection:O=Average / / Detector Failed Level:0 Default Data Vehical Detector Vehical Detector Special Detector Diagnostic Value 0 Diagnostic Value 1 Diagnostic Value 0 Max No Erratic Max No Erratic Max No Erratic Detector Presence Activity Count Detector Presence Activity Count Detector Presence Activity Count 1 30 180 60 1 30 180 60 2 30 180 60 2 30 180 60 Default Data- No Diag 0 Valu 3 180 180 60 3 30 180 60 4 30 180 60 4 30 180 60 5 180 180 60 5 30 180 60 6 30 180 60 6 30 180 60 7 30 180 60 7 30 255 60 8 30 180 60 8 30 180 60 9 30 180 60 9 30 180 60 21 30 180 60 21 30 255 60 22 30 180 60 22 30 0 60 23 30 180 60 23 30 255 60 Pedestrian Detector Pedestrian Detector Special Detector Diagnostic Value 0 Diagnostic Value 1 Diagnostic Value 1 Max No Erratic Max No Erratic Max No Erratic Detector Presence Activity Count Detector Presence Activity Count Detector Presence Activity Count 1 5 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 5 0 0 2 5 0 0 Default Data-No Diag 1 Values 3 5 0 0 3 5 0 0 4 5 0 0 4 5 0 0 5 5 0 0 5 5 0 0 6 5 0 0 6 5 0 0 7 5 0 0 7 5 0 0 8 5 0 0 8 5 0 0 Default Data-No Diag 0 Values Default Data-No Diag 1 Values Speed Trap Data Speed Trap Speed Trap Speed Trap: Dial/Split/Offset Low Treshold High Treshold Measurement: // Detector 1 Detector_2 Distance: Default Data Default Data Page 6 of 7 Volume Detector Data Report Interval Volume Controller �-, Detector Detector Number Channel 1 17 2 18 3 19 4 20 5 21 6 22 7 23 8 24 9 25 21 29 22 30 23 31 Page 7 of 7 APPENDIX B EXISTING AND FUTURE INTERSECTION VOLUMES CO r- o co m co O) o F m CD o m N- o F co fA N CO CO a M H Q, r H r ° LO CO I- F CO CD m o o C) m a) a) p O CO o o m p p O co co o Lo Cl) °. I- ti U) U) r- r- O O o co m rn CCO m ( °� 00 r o m N m CO H CN() r N O V) N N V) o _CD N m N N CO N 0 0 N m ,- m N U) Z O Z N Z Z z > O m m rn a) co m co rn o co m O o m co CD co Z o z N co Z Z U o w 0 a U) m co m N. rn p `� i CO p o 03 i p i �/ Z v O Tr Z v N O) co Z z so CD w I— a o Z mm CD m0) rnCO ° 0 m � � re LO t • C7 N r ' N U CC 1 P. m m O CO CO CO 0 0 ' N CO 0 O m N O co p j C7 O N r .- r N -- rN . N CO v o a \° J J CO caa m m rn m , p a co °> m CO CD m . CO N Q I— N > ` ' o N r CO M M CO O w 0 ce 'O • m O °. O m O O 0 N N m 0 O m N O N CO W p W .- W W .- O L N J CL O ca > d o / N m m 00 m O 0 0 O m CO M m CD M r M ao W p W N W W U — M d LL. N a0 C J CO r` 0 J p o N. J J (` ti LL ", - O CO CO CO O C) W m O) O OO (j N CO 0 0 Cl] N O N Q O co--- M a) > W O W N W W > O r- o re =F O o g o m @J c.) N L N o d R 7 •+ o = 0 O V E At +; p V • a C 7 a ` = O O cc .a � Q ` O O C m o cYY U c -0 c > U c a a o H O m o s U I- co O H ~ d C O _ a s g a, o 7 a o o o' CO a) v y rn m n r m E. o o a .o o 5 �a x — x i N (xi Q w r •W a) o a 0 c Y a o▪ co Z 0 1- 3 0 O N m N Ce in N p co m N CO 0 ° M m O 0 CO M O co u) m N Cl) TS > . m F O C` T I- T ° O) O I- F O O m co O T CO <- CA ° M m O O m M O M m co p co N CD N h m V) n N. O U 0 , J M ti N. J N ° 1A J T T J LC) T CD N N c. O (m ' O) O M N (m co T N CO e"C)) N T CO co ch co M O ea O t` M CL c .3 CL CL CO CO T c T Z T O N co Z C7 M CO T CO CA Z > O CO I- T ti co O ° CO M I CO CO — '- CO O D? CO m CO CO ° CO a- m O O m T O r d Z N. ° CC Z CD N T CO Z Z C70 CO () .o w U ■ CO N N Z .4- O O N CO O 0 Z N O N Ce Z N w • re rt a- Z O, m N- p 1A m O) mj LO CO a- L.) • '' ' > , CO 0 -a ) co F n H o co I- H co co j CA • Of j (A O N 0 CO m CD CCD m O ,,^—^ 9 V/ O d Q m to m c\I rn r' m T rn ° v to m N N m C N ti N • N N N N N N N N Tr O W0_YY ��// /�y/ W "0 LL r LL T 0 r T T CL CO ft N CO CO T D) ° ° a) m o o m 0) CD C) as L W er O W '� N ° Tr W W J w U O a) o eu m m N ° o m ° ° ° w m .- m .- LO m a W o W O W T r W T r U en N v ea LL Q) T `;) C J N. co J co N. O J J O 0 � "a °) m N a? o m o co co et CO o o m v o a Q > W ti o h W N N - CO W W co co > 0 v o Ce 1— o 1-4 4; 0 O Cn r+ 0 C) c.) c N L H d R c d C d 11 O O N c V roEa 0 a u o o „ o a . •Q R �_ . o c 5 U 2 as E LL 0 v 2 c to I- I- m • m cLI co eYa .s-" > o 0 1- a m o fO 0 F a0i d H I•- I- c ru d o CO o) U I- a) +r N O a s c = o, c7 a a) a 3 a�i U rn o (n N S L To a O n- o io a W c m K (i .-- aa))as c ° -ir a m �o ~ L n o W ~ M W } Q O N Z H ti CO o CO m N C CC APPENDIX C 2013 EXISTING TRAFFIC SYNCHRO SUMMARY WORKSHEETS Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 ;C.,.,:: to.f'!.. . ,,,t1;i SLxis. ..,.,.". 1 x...,.:... .�U.-,..P�_'"§s.,.E.WBT .-„��.: ,,...N , . 3 N�,.,....,, R,- :.'' �.f& :. : . Lane Configurations tt r 'i +14 r ' +++ r )1 14+ r Volume(vph) 190 81 106 16 108 49 478 482 24 68 591 734 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 500 0 500 325 300 475 300 425 Storage Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Taper Length(ft) 100 100 100 100 Lane Util.Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(prot) 3335 3610 1524 3099 4988 1524 3367 4759 1495 3155 4893 1583 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(perm) 3335 3610 1524 3099 4988 1524 3367 4759 1495 3155 4893 1583 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd.Flow(RTOR) 194 194 136 561 Link Speed(mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance(ft) 1265 799 774 926 Travel Time(s) 28.8 18.2 17.6 21.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 0% 6% 13% 4% 6% 4% 9% 8% 11% 6% 2% Adj.Flow(vph) 198 84 110 17 112 51 498 502 25 71 616 765 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 198 84 110 17 112 51 498 502 25 71 616 765 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split(s) 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.6 45.6 45.6 9.6 45.6 45.6 Total Split(s) 14.2 49.6 49.6 9.9 45.3 45.3 24.9 56.9 56.9 13.6 45.6 45.6 Total Split(%) 10.9% 38.2% 38.2% 7.6% 34.8% 34.8% 19.2% 43.8% 43.8% 10.5% 35.1% 35.1% Maximum Green(s) 7.9 43.3 43.3 3.6 39.0 39.0 18.3 50.3 50.3 7.0 39.0 39.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All-Red Time(s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s) 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None Min Min Walk Time(s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green(s) 8.0 18.5 18.5 3.6 7.8 7.8 18.5 44.8 44.8 6.7 30.0 30.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.20 0.20 0.04 0.09 0.09 0.20 0.50 0.50 0.07 0.33 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.67 0.11 0.24 0.14 0.26 0.17 0.72 0.21 0.03 0.30 0.38 0.85 Control Delay 54.5 35.1 1.2 48.4 42.5 1.2 42.3 13.6 0.1 46.2 23.1 17.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 54.5 35.1 1.2 48.4 42.5 1.2 42.3 13.6 0.1 46.2 23.1 17.3 --- 2013 Existing Traffic Synchro 8 Report AM Peak-Hour Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR LOS DD A D D A D B A D C B Approach Delay 35.4 31.4 27.2 21.2 Approach LOS D C C C Queue Length 50th(ft) 60 21 0 5 23 0 145 60 0 21 95 102 Queue Length 95th(ft) #117 48 0 17 43 0 #232 83 0 45 128 291 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1185 719 694 846 Turn Bay Length(ft) 500 500 325 300 475 300 425 Base Capacity(vph) 294 1748 838 124 2176 774 689 2678 900 247 2135 1006 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.67 0.05 0.13 0.14 0.05 0.07 0.72 0.19 0.03 0.29 0.29 0.76 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 130 Actuated Cycle Length:90.4 Natural Cycle: 130 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.85 Intersection Signal Delay:25.6 Intersection LOS:C Intersection Capacity Utilization 81.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min)15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:Collier Blvd&Vanderbilt Beach Rd \*01 102 1.03 —PIA 05 06 07 08 OM IIII -- 2013 Existing Traffic Synchro 8 Report AM Peak-Hour Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd I 3/29/2013 - T I ~ A ' 4\ t f \t' t d Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Vi +T r vi) ttt r I' +++ 1 vivi ft+ r Volume(vph) 703 70 411 21 90 47 245 680 13 197 611 285 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 500 0 500 325 300 475 300 425 Storage Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Taper Length(ft) 100 100 100 100 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(prot) 3467 3610 1583 3213 5085 1615 3433 5085 1615 3467 5085 1583 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(perm) 3467 3610 1583 3213 5085 1615 3433 5085 1615 3467 5085 1583 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd.Flow(RTOR) 251 178 175 306 Link Speed(mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance(ft) 1265 799 774 926 Travel Time(s) 28.8 18.2 17.6 21.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 0% 2% 9% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% 1% 2% 2% Adj.Flow(vph) 756 75 442 23 97 51 263 731 14 212 657 306 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 756 75 442 23 97 51 263 731 14 212 657 306 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split(s) 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.6 45.6 45.6 9.6 45.6 45.6 Total Split(s) 32.0 67.2 67.2 10.1 45.3 45.3 16.0 47.0 47.0 15.7 46.7 46.7 Total Split(%) 22.9% 48.0% 48.0% 7.2% 32.4% 32.4% 11.4% 33.6% 33.6% 11.2% 33.4% 33.4% Maximum Green(s) 25.7 60.9 60.9 3.8 39.0 39.0 9.4 40.4 40.4 9.1 40.1 40.1 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All-Red Time(s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s) 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None Min Min Walk Time(s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7,0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green(s) 25.8 36.1 36.1 3.8 7.7 7.7 9.4 20.7 20.7 9.1 20.4 20.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.29 0.40 0.40 0.04 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.23 0.23 0.10 0.23 0.23 v/c Ratio 0.76 0.05 0.56 0.17 0.22 0.17 0.73 0.62 0.03 0.60 0.56 0.51 Control Delay 35.6 19.6 13.1 46.5 40.3 1.2 52.6 33.1 0,1 47.2 32.3 6.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 35.6 19.6 13.1 46.5 40.3 1.2 52.6 33.1 0.1 47.2 32.3 6.7 2013 Existing Traffic Synchro 8 Report PM Peak-Hour Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 —l• c ~ k 4\ t ► 1 4/ Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR LOS D B B D D A D C A D C A Approach Delay 26.9 29.5 37.7 28.3 Approach LOS C C D C Queue Length 50th(ft) 195 12 65 6 18 0 74 134 0 59 119 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) #323 33 209 21 38 0 #148 179 0 #106 161 62 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1185 719 694 846 Turn Bay Length(ft) 500 500 325 300 475 300 425 Base Capacity(vph) 1001 2470 1162 137 2229 808 362 2309 828 354 2291 881 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.76 0.03 0.38 0.17 0.04 0.06 0.73 0.32 0.02 0.60 0.29 0.35 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length:89.3 Natural Cycle: 140 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.76 Intersection Signal Delay:30.5 Intersection LOS:C Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.8% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min)15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:Collier Blvd&Vanderbilt Beach Rd Di to I'D --4o4 15,7s I I 47s I LA 1o,11_ I 67,2s I I 4\ . IT - II-- 16 s - I-746.7s I—I 32s n 45,3s I-I- 2013 Existing Traffic Synchro 8 Report PM Peak-Hour Page 2 APPENDIX D 2022 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC SYNCHRO SUMMARY WORKSHEETS Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 f - C 4- k- 4\ t , \* 1 4/ Little.Group,, ESL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR ,. „u . NBT NOR BBL $BT BM Lane Configurations 'Pill tt r II) 414 r ii) 14+ r 'l ttt r Volume(vph) 227 97 127 19 129 59 571 576 29 81 706 877 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 500 0 500 325 300 475 300 425 Storage Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Taper Length(ft) 100 100 100 100 Lane Util.Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(prot) 3335 3610 1524 3099 4988 1524 3367 4759 1495 3155 4893 1583 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(perm) 3335 3610 1524 3099 4988 1524 3367 4759 1495 3155 4893 1583 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd.Flow(RTOR) 168 168 118 *438 Link Speed(mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance(ft) 1265 799 774 926 Travel Time(s) 28.8 18.2 17.6 21.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 0% 6% 13% 4% 6% 4% 9% 8% 11% 6% 2% Adj.Flow(vph) 236 101 132 20 134 61 595 600 30 84 735 914 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 236 101 132 20 134 61 595 600 30 84 735 914 _ Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split(s) 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.6 45.6 45.6 9.6 45.6 45.6 Total Split(s) 16.0 48.6 48.6 12.7 45.3 45.3 30.0 70.1 70.1 18.6 58.7 58.7 Total Split(%) 10.7% 32.4% 32.4% 8.5% 30.2% 30.2% 20.0% 46.7% 46.7% 12.4% 39.1% 39.1% Maximum Green(s) 9.7 42.3 42.3 6.4 39.0 39.0 23.4 63.5 63.5 12.0 52.1 52.1 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All-Red Time(s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s) 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None Min Min Walk Time(s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green(s) 9.7 19.6 19.6 6.0 8.6 8.6 23.4 67.0 67.0 8.5 52.1 52.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.20 0.56 0.56 0.07 0.44 0.44 v/c Ratio 0.87 0.17 0.34 0.13 0.37 0.23 0.90 0.23 0.03 0.38 0.34 0.98 Control Delay 85.0 46.1 5.6 56.5 55.9 2.0 65.7 13.8 0.1 57.7 23.1 42.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 85.0 46.1 5.6 56.5 55.9 2.0 65.7 13.8 0.1 57.7 23.1 42.3 ^ 2022 Background Traffic Synchro 8 Report AM Peak-Hour Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 Laro Group EL EST EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL .,_NBT NBR BBL .SBT SBR LOS F D A E E A E B A E C D Approach Delay 54.3 40.7 38.7 34.9 Approach LOS D D D C Queue Length 50th(ft) 94 33 0 7 36 0 233 81 0 32 135 439 Queue Length 95th(ft) #171 67 32 21 59 0 #343 112 0 58 172 #776 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1185 719 694 846 Turn Bay Length(ft) 500 500 325 300 475 300 425 Base Capacity(vph) 270 1276 647 165 1626 610 658 2664 889 316 2131 936 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.87 0.08 0.20 0.12 0.08 0.10 0.90 0.23 0.03 0.27 0.34 0.98 M�.a ..1" tta, Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 150 Actuated Cycle Length: 119.6 Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.98 Intersection Signal Delay:39.0 Intersection LOS:D Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.7% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 * User Entered Value # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:Collier Blvd&Vanderbilt Beach Rd? 01 Ip2 CO3 04 05 06 07 08 S -- 2022 Background Traffic Synchro 8 Report AM Peak-Hour Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 s -• C ~ k- 4\ t P ♦ d Lane Grrop EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Vi 44 r vii +ft- r rr vri +ft r Volume(vph) 840 84 491 25 108 56 293 813 16 235 730 341 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 500 0 500 325 300 475 300 425 Storage Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Taper Length(ft) 100 100 100 100 Lane Util.Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(prat) 3467 3610 1583 3213 5085 1615 3433 5085 1615 3467 5085 1583 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(perm) 3467 3610 1583 3213 5085 1615 3433 5085 1615 3467 5085 1583 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd.Flow(RTOR) 267 166 164 367 Link Speed(mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance(ft) 1265 799 774 926 Travel Time(s) 28.8 18.2 17.6 21.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 0% 2% 9% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% 1% 2% 2% Adj.Flow(vph) 903 90 528 27 116 60 315 874 17 253 785 367 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 903 90 528 27 116 60 315 874 17 253 785 367 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split(s) 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.6 45.6 45.6 9.6 45.6 45.6 Total Split(s) 39.0 74.0 74.0 10.3 45.3 45.3 19.0 47.2 47.2 18.5 46.7 46.7 Total Split(%) 26.0% 49.3% 49.3% 6.9% 30.2% 30.2% 12.7% 31.5% 31.5% 12.3% 31.1% 31.1% Maximum Green(s) 32.7 67.7 67.7 4.0 39.0 39.0 12.4 40.6 40.6 11.9 40.1 40.1 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All-Red Time(s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s) 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None Min Min Walk Time(s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green(s) 32.9 42.8 42.8 4.0 9.4 9.4 12.5 27.7 27.7 11.9 27.1 27.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.40 0.40 0.04 0.09 0.09 0.12 0.26 0.26 0.11 0.25 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.85 0.06 0.67 0.23 0.26 0.21 0.79 0.67 0.03 0.66 0.62 0.55 Control Delay 45.5 23.3 19.0 58.8 48.4 1.6 63.1 38.7 0.1 56.9 38.0 6.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 45.5 23.3 19.0 58.8 48.4 1.6 63.1 38.7 0.1 56.9 38.0 6.6 2022 Background Traffic Synchro 8 Report PM Peak-Hour Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 oup EBL EBT EBR WBL 111/BT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT .:iis LOS D C B E D A E D A E D A Approach Delay 35.0 35.9 44.5 33.2 Approach LOS C D D C Queue Length 50th(ft) 290 21 153 9 27 0 107 194 0 85 171 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) #523 44 323 27 51 0 #222 265 0 #165 237 73 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1185 719 694 846 Turn Bay Length(ft) 500 500 325 300 475 300 425 Base Capacity(vph) 1058 2282 1098 120 1852 693 397 1927 714 385 1904 822 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.85 0.04 0.48 0.23 0.06 0.09 0.79 0.45 0.02 0.66 0.41 0.45 Ems. ,;� ► Su!!1� n �< .. Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 150 Actuated Cycle Length: 107.9 Natural Cycle:150 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.85 Intersection Signal Delay:37.1 Intersection LOS:D Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min)15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:Collier Blvd&Vanderbilt Beach Rd No01 t02 1-03 —4'04 • • fl El ■ F 05 06 J 07 08 M • • -- 2022 Background Traffic Synchro 8 Report PM Peak-Hour Page 2 APPENDIX E 2022 TOTAL TRAFFIC SYNCHRO SUMMARY WORKSHEETS Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 f -0 z c ~ k- "N t P `► l 1 Lar*:rAmP ,.„. :. ~EBL ...., BT ERR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR. ,,.:tt. t>,;°` Lane Configurations 44 r vi) +14 r viii 14+ r vil +14 r Volume(vph) 227 133 127 55 236 214 571 576 41 133 706 877 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 500 0 500 325 300 475 300 425 Storage Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Taper Length(ft) 100 100 100 100 Lane Util.Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(prot) 3335 3610 1524 3099 4988 1524 3367 4759 1495 3155 4893 1583 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(perm) 3335 3610 1524 3099 4988 1524 3367 4759 1495 3155 4893 1583 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd.Flow(RTOR) 168 223 118 *438 Link Speed(mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance(ft) 1265 799 774 926 Travel Time(s) 28.8 18.2 17.6 21.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 0% 6% 13% 4% 6% 4% 9% 8% 11% 6% 2% Adj.Flow(vph) 236 139 132 57 246 223 595 600 43 139 735 914 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 236 139 132 57 246 223 595 600 43 139 735 914 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split(s) 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.6 45.6 45.6 9.6 45.6 45.6 Total Split(s) 16.0 48.6 48.6 12.7 45.3 45.3 30.0 70.1 70.1 18.6 58.7 58.7 Total Split(%) 10.7% 32.4% 32.4% 8.5% 30.2% 30.2% 20.0% 46.7% 46.7% 12.4% 39.1% 39.1% Maximum Green(s) 9.7 42.3 42.3 6.4 39.0 39.0 23.4 63.5 63.5 12.0 52.1 52.1 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All-Red Time(s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s) 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None Min Min Walk Time(s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green(s) 9.7 18.1 18.1 6.3 12.2 12.2 23.4 65.1 65.1 10.4 52.1 52.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.08 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.19 0.53 0.53 0.08 0.42 0.42 v/c Ratio 0.90 0.26 0.36 0.36 0.50 0.64 0.93 0.24 0.05 0.52 0.36 0.99 Control Delay 91.5 49.2 5.7 64.0 56.1 15.2 71.7 16.4 0.1 61.6 25.0 46.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 91.5 49.2 5.7 64.0 56.1 15.2 71.7 16.4 0.1 61.6 25.0 46.9 - 2022 Total Traffic Synchro 8 Report AM Peak-Hour Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR LOS F D A EE BE B A E C D Approach Delay 57.6 39.6 42.5 39.1 Approach LOS E D D D Queue Length 50th(ft) 97 53 0 23 69 0 242 91 0 55 143 467 Queue Length 95th(ft) #181 86 31 47 98 77 #368 127 0 91 187 #815 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1185 719 694 846 Turn Bay Length(ft) 500 500 325 300 475 300 425 Base Capacity(vph) 262 1239 633 160 1579 634 639 2516 845 307 2069 922 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.90 0.11 0.21 0.36 0.16 0.35 0.93 0.24 0.05 0.45 0.36 0.99 Sa „„ ., Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 150 Actuated Cycle Length: 123.2 Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.99 Intersection Signal Delay:42.5 Intersection LOS:D Intersection Capacity Utilization 92.7% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 * User Entered Value # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:Collier Blvd&Vanderbilt Beach Rd 01 t02 1-03 X04 05 06 07 1-- 08 --- 2022 Total Traffic Synchro 8 Report AM Peak-Hour Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 } r f LitWOrcluP ...,A11, .BBT,..BBR; u:WBL. , .WBT MB. .: 1 ,. . _,.>"teaL4BR Lane Configurations VI ++ r' Vi +t4 r "pi 1+t r "pi +44 r Volume(vph) 840 195 491 47 173 151 293 813 53 396 730 341 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 500 0 500 325 300 475 300 425 Storage Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 Taper Length(ft) 100 100 100 100 Lane Util.Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(prot) 3467 3610 1583 3213 5085 1615 3433 5085 1615 3467 5085 1583 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow(perm) 3467 3610 1583 3213 5085 1615 3433 5085 1615 3467 5085 1583 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd.Flow(RTOR) 289 166 164 367 Link Speed(mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance(ft) 1265 799 774 926 Travel Time(s) 28.8 18.2 17.6 21.0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles(%) 1% 0% 2% 9% 2% 0% 2% 2% 0% 1% 2% 2% Adj.Flow(vph) 903 210 528 51 186 162 315 874 57 426 785 367 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 903 210 528 51 186 162 315 874 57 426 785 367 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Pemi Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 7.0 7.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 3.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split(s) 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.3 45.3 45.3 9.6 45.6 45.6 9.6 45.6 45.6 Total Split(s) 37.0 70.1 70.1 12.2 45.3 45.3 20.7 46.7 46.7 21.0 47.0 47.0 Total Split(%) 24.7% 46.7% 46.7% 8.1% 30.2% 30.2% 13.8% 31.1% 31.1% 14.0% 31.3% 31.3% Maximum Green(s) 30.7 63.8 63.8 5.9 39.0 39.0 14.1 40.1 40.1 14.4 40.4 40.4 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 All-Red Time(s) 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s) 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None None None None None None None Min Min None Min Min Walk Time(s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green(s) 31.0 39.0 39.0 5.9 11.2 11.2 14.2 27.5 27.5 14.5 27.8 27.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.28 0.35 0.35 0.05 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.25 0.25 0.13 0.25 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.16 0.71 0.30 0.36 0.52 0.71 0.69 0.11 0.93 0.61 0.55 Control Delay 55.7 26.7 20.4 58.6 48.6 13.0 57.3 40.7 0.4 76.9 38.7 6.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 55.7 26.7 20.4 58.6 48.6 13.0 57.3 40.7 0.4 76.9 38.7 6.7 -- 2022 Total Traffic Synchro 8 Report PM Peak-Hour Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 1: Collier Blvd & Vanderbilt Beach Rd 3/29/2013 f 4— 4\ t t \* l d r , ,., , x z ": _. .._ ..NPR . f ._ BR LOS E C C E D B E D A E D A Approach Delay 40.6 35.4 43.0 41.6 Approach LOS D D D D Queue Length 50th(ft) 307 54 148 17 45 0 107 199 0 150 175 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) #582 94 317 44 76 60 #215 280 0 #321 248 75 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1185 719 694 846 Turn Bay Length(ft) 500 500 325 300 475 300 425 Base Capacity(vph) 974 2108 1044 173 1815 683 443 1867 696 457 1881 816 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.93 0.10 0.51 0.29 0.10 0.24 0.71 0.47 0.08 0.93 0.42 0.45 A Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 150 Actuated Cycle Length: 110.3 Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.93 Intersection Signal Delay:41.1 Intersection LOS:D Intersection Capacity Utilization 78.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min)15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:♦Collier Blvd&Vanderbilt Beach Rd �^ 01 I 02 • 03 -0'04 • • M • 05 ir 06 07 08 -- 2022 Total Traffic Synchro 8 Report PM Peak-Hour Page 2 f;.,k" > r Exhibit K 0 o l 139590 le3SEP 13 AN 908 1 864 000840 COLLIER COUNTY RECORDED OR BOOK PAGEI R!r�iveJ j/3r 8/(e bb°eotrry Strap lag 3,00 00 ReteiveJ $ ,1�� CISIS •C' Intangible las v Panel m x )19 00 160003 DWIGHT E. Per PrnpertY ttVT�.- if (ND _ Goethe/I•IN: (Space Above This Line For Rcco to • Special Warranty Deed 9 This Indenture, Made this 7 day of September,1993 A.D.. Between OFC OF NAPLES, INC., a corporation existing under the laws of the state of FLORIDA ordreCoaotyof COLLIER snreor Florida ,grantor, and OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB, INC., a corporation existing under the laws of the state of FLORIDA whosssesenaln 3800 Airport-Pulling Rd., NAPLES, Florida 33942 of the County or COLLIER , sew or Florida ,grantee. Wltnesseth dui the GRANTOR,for and in consideration of she mm of DOLLARS, TEN & NO/100($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration to GRANTOR in band paid by GRANTEE, rite receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged,has glinted,bargained and sold to the said GRANTEE and GRANTEE'S successors and assigns forever, the following described land, situate,lying and being in the county of Collier State of CO wic (LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONTAINED IN EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY REFERENCE MADE A PART HERE.- SUBJECT TO: th. <OR. C0tj 1. Grantee's =— rption of that .in mortgage dated . October 31, 1989, re .rded in O.R. Book 1• :0, ommencing at Page 1789, Public Re .rd- .% o -_ Cou . , F1••ri.-, as modified by a certain Loan M..•fi ' '. A•reem- date. J ne 15, 1992 and recorded in O.''. 17 -- cammenC n. at Pa•e 1749, Public Records of Col ier 2. Zonin• 40,r r =•Eons •os-d y governmental authorities; ,-- -, 3. Taxes in the year of t'.,.• sf'r .. all subsequent years; . ' ' 0 4. All righ.= claims exist' of the time of ■ •ntinue• -ched) Together with all tenements.berediumc.. .i, In amrvise appemining. ` ii. i,,,: To Have and to Hold, the same in(ee ••°7 ' r . And the grantor hereby covenants with said ginlee that : , awfully seized of said land in fee simple; that grantor has good right end lawful authority to sell and convey said land: that graotor hereby hilly warrants the chic to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons claiming by, through or under emilor. In Witness Whereof, the smear has hereamto set his hand and seal the day and year first above written. Sig t/ysgd/,�sealed and delivered in our presence: OFC OF NAPLES, INC. M.tGWfW"' K K., / d v' �'�7' _ e (Seal) Printed Name:' .Q„e/eft/ .T/904 j By CLYDE C. QS}INBY, President Witness #1� I P.O.Adelina 31300 Airpon•Pullimg Rd.,NAPLES.FL 33942 Prin�ante: A/they MARNELA- Witness #2 STATE OF FLORIDA (Corporate Seal) COUNTY OF COLLIER day of September, 19 93 by The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this CLYDE C. QUINSY, President of OFC O NAPLES, IHCORIDA corporation, on behalf of the corporation.He is personally known to no eaho.pndor"-hir nn / i �l�A1�tQ �. c�l9U � This Document Prepared Hy: Mazy A.MarndA se. Printed Name: I�l.EYi,Tz,A r4f�day YOUNG,VAN AR DRIVE,S IA 304•- &BffiiTON,P.A. Y PUBLIC 1301 LAUREL OAK DRIVE.SUITE 30 ,, K.,pIDREY IY( ivnoo Fapites: NAPLES.FL 339634771 / 1 1001 ass S• OLDE FL—BANCFLA I E7DIP&Master 25,1595 1 • •'Sped�ial Warranty Deed - Page 2 1 8 8(} 0 0 0 8 4 I n ~ UR BOOK P014 • conveyance pertaining to access to, or the use of, the Phase I Club Facilities or to membership in the Olde Florida Golf Club; 5. Any and all encumbrances or liens, easements, dedications, agreements, licenses, restrictions, rights-of-way and other matters now applicable to the Phase I Real Property or hereafter granted, imposed, or suffered to be placed upon such property by predecessors in title in connection with the use of the Phase I Real Property as recreational facilities; 6. Any mortgagels) that may encumber or be placed upon the Phase I Real Property in connection with the acquisition thereof and/or the construction of the Phase I Club Improvements thereon; 7. Reservation of oil, gas and mineral rights originally reserved in those certain Deeds recorded in Deed Book 30, page 91 and Deed Book 41, page 2456; and conveyed to Oleum Corporation, a Florida corporation in O.R. Book 160, page 11 and O.R. Book 160, page 39, all of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. 8. Any lien of claim of lien for services, labor or material which may take priority by reason of the Notice of Commencement recorded in O.R. Book 1824, page 1632, of the Public Records of Collier C orida. .‘0,1Z, CqU cam' ■ • IF I 8 6 k 0 0 0 8 k 2 • *• WILSON,MILLER,BARTON&PE$A •�L'K PACE4 Engineers PWner&Surveyors,Liner-ape Amithecto,Environmental Consuaanu•Communion Mangers thaw,PnarnenaY cm Rene)m.)ton Raley Lame Almou Reid N.$n,Rene.3)N1•P in Meroae Fax(el))M}33Ie Description of Old Florida Golf Club Phase I being a put of Section 31,Township 48 South, Range 27 East,Collier County,Florida All that part of Section 31,Township 48 South,Range 27 East,Collier County,Florida,being more particularly described as follows; BEGINNING at the southwest corner of Section 31,Township 48 South,Range 27 East; thence along the west line of said Section 31,North 01'09'24'West 171.66 feet; thence leaving said west line North 8870'36'East 127.49 feet; thence North 68.11'27'East 312.23 feet; • thence South 8377'40'East 1074.79 feet; thence North 12.78'39'East 90.52 feet; thence North 74.34'44'West 439.84 feet; thence North 8979'36'West 536.03 feet; ' thence North 47.32'40'West 324.00 feet; thence North 29'27'34'Wens 131.44 feet; thence North 06•47•28'West 278.30 feu; thence North 85.09'12'East 1615.99 feet; thence North 04'50'48'West 250,00 feet; thence North 89'57'58'East 940.00 feet; thence North 22'40'09'Eau 580.00 feet; thence North 32.24'35'West 831.83 feet; thence North 07'23'02'West 1884.92 feet; thence North 24•30'12'East 230.40 feet; thence North 63.03'47'East 78.78 feet; thence South 60'24'49'East 68.67 feet; thence South 6975'20'East 178.33 feet; thence South 66'45'54'East 103.57 fees; thence South 41'21'25'East 58.77 feet; thence South 09'23'59'East 146.74 feet; i. thence South 6076'19'East 161.95 feet; ..-. ._,_,. - thence South 86'10'30'East 169.68 feet; thence South 65.47'35'East 108.59 feet; y7 thence South 61•42'19'East 160.73 f,• < AV,R C OP T thence South 51'09'20'East 246.90 -- vv- C.f"t/iVr thence South I7'08'46'East 135 ; r� thence South 05'30'20'East 1 thence South 36°22'19'East.. .3' • thence South 0178'39'W 193. Cr:- \ thence South 20.43'56'W_.57. fee;, _ _.Vf-- thence North 8971'53' ;_113•.49 feet; thence South 00'313'07' . t•, --• / \ thence North he.ast00' t i .7 3 ••-•p9�p3 e3 s oust 1; thence along the 87'0'00' of t 1• ec-on 3 , a 39'3 - ,� - 17. t ion t 'x.-• corner of said Section 3; l thence along the south It�lh�• •S.,r• S u 7'•5'1 eat 513).: .- I.t •l at of Beginning of the part�be - n/ containing 254.84 acres more or uses; �"4 subject to easements and result ord; j bearings are based on the south lin qj��i.Section 31,being South 87.5 ..:•!... V (^ WILSON,MILLER,BARTON&P' \,/ :.-: BY c -ti_ DAT _ w--7X e) . x/1 ,9 �� Michael C. ure,P.L.S.14247 •.r'sV 'ii c \Or S if_ Not valid unless embossed with the Professional's seal. 1;!,:;.9";;.=‘,/..4..;:.•,:;...,<'•'..•'f W.O. 15775 '''k dF..r�'.L' Ref: 4L-1097 (KB:kjd) EXHIBIT "A" . • , Date: August 27,1993 Recorded and Verified to Orr hclsl Records of COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA i DWIGHT E. SItOG:, CLERK 1 1177193-0107M1041 Fort Myers Sarasota j6 4lend 3 Nobler 11113)929.1030 ne 11013)37146 lal)161940tD Fu1ah3)1.3640r F phN6N-0R7 F (aI319.4040 F lel3)e)0.3a1e ; tf s t ; f L t I 4 .c'h;", t y c,+ d b' o q c .wSQrS , •• 1 � M Y )�� . .j Y X ){3 r f• LLL, ' rrr g p ` } ��4, f :y $. � r ' R-.• v. ti e t 1"ice ,,Zi. kfi r '3 ° 3 '1�J am r w.s.. ,r r. as„ ,� [. a FR i• '"CC 4>• ., K .ac# 1,lt h'° + h Y x '+cv �Fe. h" ' I ;i::xc' y :' ° f rs a +y G-P�i: s s .; g-�Ptzet Tv3 "t .•:.: ::''5.;:•:;t-41'7.:;: fr'l ' cv , fi-k�x aX 1 5e st. iti:ti 1 +6 ).i.'.Y t;�,-•' o r T tt t: �` 5 1SJ • xo. ;t a . � 2o'C5'2+1'ltr K �- `6 x _ y" [ 4Yf f"3-c+•j Y% f'v 1:41.*:::: f n { 2221583 OR: 2343 PG: 1152 110:110 18 /RICUL UCOUI of own aeon, R 2 It/13/17 at H:S11M ISIM 1. MI, Cue D ma�{X I2SI115.101.1$PREPARED BY AND RETURN TO: 0088!µ 1U 1S,N Doug Marek,Esq. IOC-,T1 1S1Se.N Gunster,Yoaktey.Valdes-Fault&Stewart,P.A. iota:Phillips Point,Suite 500 East iotal1! mat !t u 777 South Flagler Drive 7TanstTLQ1p001 Ili?S�Nyl��p�7 {� Post Palm BOX 4587 MUti �1Tas �+7(� 11 ! —i F 903 3 West Palm Beach,Florida 33402-4587 ME 21 1997 OR 9948 P9 1 4 I.$ 1t111I1111I11I11111I t111 Parcel ID CCM 2,2501000.00 Dui. . .75G.32 Grantee's SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED is made this1 flay of August 1997,by OFC OF NAPLES, INC., a Florida corporation ("Grantor"), to OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB, INC., a Florida corporation("Grantee"),the mailing address of which is 9393 Vanderbilt Road Ext.,Naples, Florida 34120. 1R CO ® • TNES • That Grantor, for anin o 'era I, ' e tun o DOLLARS ($10.00)and other good and valuable consi.- : o the tees t • 'eh is ereby : swledged,grants,bargains and sells to Grantee all of 1 . ce ; ier ounty, Florida ("Premises„), which is more particular! de •-• - f 11 . ! • SEE EXHIBIT"A' t` I ACHED HERET'•f• D • If - PART HEREOF. TO HAVE AND TO •�� ••e same in f _ orever, subject to all restrictions, reservations,covenants and easeme'' • �y� : ', _ to;taxes and assessments for the year 1997 and years subsequent thereto; :' Mtn,. , ations and restrictions imposed by any governmental authorities,and matters which would be disclosed by a current and accurate survey and inspection of the Premises, GRANTOR does hereby covenant with Grantee that at the time of delivery of this Deed the Premises were free from all encumbrances made by Grantor, and that Grantor will warrant and defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons,claiming by,through or under Grantor,but against none other. • Note: This document was erroneously recorded in Palm Beach County,Florida [ , . . - ' ORB 9948 Ps 1419 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,Grantor has caused these presents to be executed the day and the year first above written. Signed,sealed and delivered in the presence of: OFC OF NAPLES, INC., a Florida corporation 644,-- By: --- S of W'' Ts • • , J. ukk,President p \'' ,1.0-ert F � �N a of Wits (CORPORATE SEAL) ■ _Signature of jiness ,.).---"' Printed Name of Witness State of Ohio �� " , County of Sutton The foregoing instn/m was ac '.. . be re me ' 'id day of 1,•i:- 1 1997,by Toomas J.Kukk,the Presi. it . t A 3 •N' il' a ri' corporation,on behalf of the corporation and who is •-, •.. y .. _ . _. o ,P!L"' as identification. r ::.L r L_ `Lk /;_�__. No" � 'c-State of Ohio �' Q� ,, , ., •fires w 4C1-1 - . ,s• .'onNo. a ry 276229.1 SETH A YAKS 1 .�.+� Mdse,Pvbils.Sass d OW . , ,..``. �.r+ Cu w a- 'ss Oa ii X001 w 1 .- ORB 9948 P9 1420 • DOROTHY H. W11.1.11.41 CLERI; PE �:OU1r`T' e r" . EXHIBIT"A" Legal Description All of Section 31,Township 48 South, Range 27 East, less the East half of the Northeast quarter thereof,Collier County,Florida, And Less: Afl that part of Section 31,Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. being more panicululy described as follows; BEGINNING at the southwest corner of Section 31,Township 48 South,Range 27 East; thence along the west line of said Section 31, North 01'09'14'West 171.66 feet; thence leaving said west Ilne North 11'50'36'East 127.49 feet; thence North 61.11'27'East 312.23 feet; thence South 13'37'40'East 1074.79 feet; thence North 12.38'39'East 90.32 feet; thence North 74.34'44'West 439.14 feel; I thence North$9•59'36'West 531.03 feet; • thence North 47'32.40'West 324.00 f= R C�Tr thence North 29'27.34'West 131. t; Vh r thence North 06•47'21'West 2 E'►.et• thence North$S•09'12'East •i T CO; �, thence North 04'50'41'W-• : 't feet; thence North 19•57'5$ • • ,.'. -, thence North 22'40'09' • •• $ 11: .. thence North 32'24'35' est 1.13 feet; sm Mertes North 07'23'02'west thensNorth 24'30'12 Eastia. 0f--; V* thence North 63'03'47 East t I. feet thence South 60'24'49' . 6 r, l (-r co thence South 69'35'20' • , . 78. set; ' thence South 66.45'54' '�•• , .57 feet; ,___• 1 tiV thence South 41'21'25' D• . feet; = W thence South 09'23'W • ,-. 4 feet; thence South 60.$6'19'East • .• G CAP thence South$6•10'30'East t• .4_r .• (\- ,y thence South 65.47'35'East 10$. G7 thence South 61'42'19'East 160.73 7�E CI RC. • • thence South 51.09'20'East 246.90 feet; thence South 17'01'46'East 135.69 feet; P. ~a+ San thence South 05'30'20'East 174.19 feet; thence South 36'22'19'East$5.39 feet; Alva thence South 01'2$'39'West 193.59 feet; so thence South 10'43.56'West 57.31 feet; >i thence North 19.21.53'East 132.49 feet; » thence South 00•3$'07'East 600.72 feet; thence North 17'40'00'East 1319.77 feet to a point on the east 1/4 corner of said Section 31; thence along the east line of said Section 31,South 00.39'23'East 2612.53 feet to the southeast corner of said Section 31; thence along the south line of said Section 31, South 17•35'34'West 5136.0$feet to the Point of Beginning of the parcel herein described; containing 254.14 acres more or less; subject to easements and restrictions of record; bearings are based on the south line of said Section 31,being South$7'55'34'West. Rtt;,,,tni:. . '.'' ;;-y 9,;.r.:of document tai.. .. .. ./J.,.cilrecetVed. li ir.....■•■•■•ImmoimmimmiNININ Exhibit L — Olde Florida Golf Club EQUITY MEMBERS (209) as of 2/13/13 Last Name First Name Mbr# ANDERSEN GARY 162 ARNOLD L. MICHAEL 321 ARNOS RICHARD 43 BAG LEY JOHN 176 BAIRD DONALD "RICK" 86 BAIRD JAMES 206 BARRETT TOM 45 BARTON WILLIAM 6 BAUGHMAN JOSEPH 271 BAUMAN WILLIAM 261 BEATTY JAMES 269 BENDER ESTATE OF ROBERT 67 BERINGER JOHN 170 BEVEVINO FRANK 243 BIBBO JOHN 336 BLANCATO JOSEPH 87 BLATZ KARL 198 BLICKLE JOHN 49 BOUCHARD JAMES 327 BOWLIN JOHN 296 BREEDEN DANIEL 286 BRENNAN MICHAEL 128 BRENNAN DAVID 226 BROCKSMITH JR JAMES 164 BUNGERT MICHAEL 311 BUTLER BERNARD 64 CASTELLANO WILLIAM 62 CHERNEY EDWARD 14 CLOSE KIM 376 COLEN DR STEPHEN 267 COLLINS JOHN 297 COX CHARLES 252 COX JOHN 355 CRAIG DICK 95 CRAIG TOM 137 CULLIGAN ELIZABETH 293 D'ANTONI DAVID 330 DELANEY CHRIS 24 DELUCA JAMES 157 DEROMEDI ROGER 333 DIDION JAMES 147 DILLON DONALD 309 — Olde Florida Golf Club EQUITY MEMBERS (209) as of 2/13/13 Last Name First Name Mbr# DITKA MICHAEL 4 DITKA DIANA 55 DONAHUE THOMAS 133 DUNLAP STEPHEN 189 DURKIN WILLIAM 369 DUSTHIMER THOMAS 188 EATON,JR EDWIN 365 ELKIN TOM 357 ENOCH JR PAUL 132 FAGA ANTONIO 88 FAHEY THOMAS 359 FERGUSON THOMAS 20 FLODEEN WENDALL(BUD) 306 FOX WILLIAM 182 FREEMAN ESTATE OF J RICHARD 201 FRENCH STEPHEN 368 FRITZ WILLIAM 352 FULLER JON 145 GARVIN DAVID 216 _ GILLETT WILLIS 263 GOLDSTONE STEVEN 292 HAAG ESTATE OF JOHN 249 HAIMBAUGH ESTATE OF CONSTANCE 85 HARDING JOHN 364 HARRISON EDWIN 367 HARTMAN JAMES 233 HAYES ROBERT 275 HENRY FRANK 108 HINDMAN BARRY 103 HIPP RAYMOND 58 HOLDEN JAMES 299 HOLMES JOSEPH 254 HOPP DIETMAR 300 HOUSE E. MICHAEL 350 HUDSON CRAIG 192 JANOSEK JAMES 172 JARVIS FREDERICK 81 JOHNS THOMAS 278 JOHNSON JR DR VINCENT 48 JONES DANIEL 34 JOSEPHSON LYNN 1 JUOZAITIS AL 97 JURGENSEN SONNY 186 Olde Florida Golf Club EQUITY MEMBERS (209) as of 2/13/13 Last Name First Name Mbr# KAMMER ECKHARD 251 KAUFMAN DR KEITH 114 KELLY PATRICK 121 KELLY JOHN 361 KENOST ROBERT 344 KERRIGAN PATRICK 308 KHAYYAT DR GHASSAN 126 KILTS JAMES 212 KING THOMAS 310 KINSEY KENNETH 207 KLEIN PETER 343 KROL JOHN 257 KUKK TJ 19 LAHAIE MICHEL 371 LASPROGATA VINCENT 214 LEAHY JAMES 181 LEMMON RON 259 LENNY RICHARD 291 LETTL ERICH 194 — LIPMAN DAVID 160 LIVNEY ROLAND 127 LOCKWOOD STEPHEN 130 LOMBARDO FRED 51 LOTT EDWARD 134 MAGEE MICHAEL 322 MAGEE DON 323 MALLOY III MALCOLM 94 MARK RANDY 375 MATHIAS DR. PHILLIP 223 MAYNARD MARK 366 MCCARTHY,JR. ROBERT 314 MCGAVICK MICHAEL 347 MCGLINN, II JOHN 313 MCGLINN, JR. TERRANCE 312 MCGLOTHLIN JAMES 255 MCHUGH JAMES 73 MCHUGH JAMES 74 MCINTOSH BARREN 213 MCINTYRE RICHARD 295 MCNAMARA JOHN 163 MEYER KENNETH 222 MICHELSON RICHARD 144 MILLER DOUGLAS 331 Olde Florida Golf Club EQUITY MEMBERS(209) as of 2/13/13 Last Name First Name Mbr# MONSEES TULL 115 MOORE PHILLIP 237 MORLEY FRANCIS 231 MOSIER FRANK 52 MURRAY THOMAS 339 MYNHIER M H 96 NELSON RONALD 190 NOWAK(USAF, RET) LT GEN JOHN 305 NUGENT MARK 345 O'NAN LESLIE 307 OSMOND MARTIN 341 PALMER JOHN 360 PALU M BO SEBASTIAN 362 PARENTE CHARLES 66 PATRICK SCOTTY 274 PETITTI CECIL 370 PICCIONE ANDREW 328 PIPER GEORGE 63 POLING ESTATE OF HAROLD 196 POLLOCK JOHN 332 PONTIKES NICHOLAS 9 PONTIKES WILLIAM 110 POWELL JEFFREY 285 PULTE WILLIAM 287 QUINBY CLYDE 5 RHATIGAN RAYMOND 109 RINGLER JAMES 346 ROBISON WILLIAM 232 ROGERS JOHN 61 ROLAND E. EARL 42 ROSE KELLY 304 ROSS JR ALTON 185 RUED SCOTT 372 RUED JOSEPH 373 RYAN NORMAN 140 SARRAZINE DOUGLAS 264 SCOTT JAMES 318 SCURTO RUSSELL 353 SHEPHERD DAVID 363 SHERMAN D MICHAEL 258 SIMPSON DAVID 298 SIMPSON LISA 340 SLEVIN JOHN 68 — Olde Florida Golf Club EQUITY MEMBERS(209) as of 2/13/13 Last Name First Name Mbr# SMEDS EDWARD 155 SMIGEL ROBERT 166 SOBOLESKI JAMES 342 SOFOS ANTHONY 294 SOKOLIS WILLIAM 325 SOKOLIS MARK 358 SOMERVILLE ROBERT 245 SORDONI ESTATE OF GEORGE 242 STEADMAN DON 319 STEERE JR WILLIAM - 220 STEINHAUER JOHN ,.�..__ 60 STEVENS MICHAEL 208 STRANG DONALD 290 STULTS G. RAY 227 STULTS LINDSEY 326 SULLIVAN WILLIAM 354 SWIGLO DANIEL 320 TAMRAZ PAUL 8 THOMAS MICHAEL 151 TONDURY FIAMMETTA 120 TOW ELL DAVE 154 TRIGONY NICHOLAS 225 TUCKER JOHN 262 VAN METER WILLIAM 210 VAN PELT JAMES 44 VINING DR DONALD 12 WADSWORTH BRENTON 3 WEBB JOHNNY 315 WEEKLEY JOHN 374 WEINBERG RONALD 234 WELCH GERALD 156 WELLS GIFFORD 50 WESTOL LOUIS 98 WINDFELDT GENE 161 WINDFELDT TOM 349 YANKE MARK 338 ZACHO DENNIS 247 ZELLER CHARLES 253 CCPC ADVERTISEMENT PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF MEETING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER RESOLUTIONS Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on September 19,2013,at 9:00 A.M.in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room,Third Roor,County Government Center,3299 Tamiami Trail East,Naples. �. The purpose of the hearing is to consider recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity(DEO), the transmittal of the 2013 Cycle 1 Growth Management Plan amendments to the Future Land Use Element and the Future Land Use Map and Map Series(FLUE/FWM).The RESOLUTION titles are as follows: RESOLUTION 13-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05,AS AMENDED,SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO ALLOW THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE PORTION OF THE NAPLES RESERVE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO UTILIZE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FROM ANY LANDS DESIGNATED AS SENDING WITHIN THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT,AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT 668 ACRE PROPERTY IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1-1/2 MILES EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD AND ONE MILE NORTH OF US 41 IN SECTION 1,TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST,COLUER COUNTY,FLORIDA.[PL20120000139/CP-2013-1] RESOLUTION 13- A RESOLUTION OFTHE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05,AS AMENDED,SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO REVISE THE BUCKLEY MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT OF THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT TO REMOVE THE OFFICE AND RETAIL CAPS AND ALLOW UP TO 7,500 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF COMMERCIAL USES PER ACRE OR 15 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE,TO MAKE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPTIONAL,TO PROHIBIT COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE SAME PARCEL,TO LIMIT MULTI-TENANT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS TO NO MORE THAN 50%OF THE COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE,TO REVISE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS INCLUDING THE CAP ON THE SIZE OF THE FOOTPRINT OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS,AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY.THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 21.70 ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF AIRPORT ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY 330 FEET NORTH OF ORANGE BLOSSOM DRIVE IN SECTION 2,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20120002909/CP-2013-3] RESOLUTION t3- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLUER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN,ORDINANCE 89.05,AS AMENDED,SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF THE OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB PROPERTY FROM RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT (RFMUD) NEUTRAL LANDS TO RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT (RFMUD) RECEIVING LANDS, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY.THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION,TWO MILES EAST OF COLDER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 31,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA.[PL20130000365/CP2013-4] I ! r" * II Celle Courtly i( Florida lit7- \ i All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard.Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment will be made available for inspection at the Planning& Zoning Department,Comprehensive Planning Section,2800 N.Horseshoe Dr.,Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M.and 5:00 P.M.,Monday through Friday.Furthermore the materials will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office,Fourth Floor,Collier County Govemment Center,3299 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 401,Naples,one week prior to the scheduled hearing.Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section of the Planning&Zoning Department. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Thursday,September 19,2013,will be mad and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing,he will need a record of that proceeding,and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceeding is made,which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. �'1‘. it you area person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate In this proceeding,you are entitled,at no cost to you,to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department,located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 101,Naples,FL 34112-5356,(239)252-8380,at least two days prior to the meeting.Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Mark P.Strain,Chairman Collier County Planning Commission No 231 merge Auaust 10.0015 Co er Cou-nt y Comprehensive Planning Memorandum April 12, 2013 Sent Via E-Mail Mr. R. Bruce Anderson, Esq. Roetzel and Andress Law Firm 850 Park Shore Drive Naples, FL 34103 and Mr.Tim Hancock Davidson Engineering, Inc. 3530 Kraft Road,Suite 301 Naples, FL 34105 RE: Sufficiency Review of Growth Management Plan Amendment Petition PL20120002909/CP- 2013-3, a Growth Management Plan amendment to the Future Land Use Element(Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict) of the Growth Management Plan to allow for the removal of the physically integrated residential/commercial component, removal of certain development standards, and the addition of up to 3 new drive-through uses. Dear Mr.Anderson and Mr. Hancock: Pursuant to Paragraph B.2. of Resolution #12-234, this letter is to inform you that the referenced application is not sufficient. Below is the list of deficiencies that need to be corrected/addressed. APPLICATION AND EXHIBITS: Each deficiency below corresponds to the application numbers and letters. Generally Revise all text/exhibits/maps to include page numbers I.A. Provide disclosure of interest and authorization documentation for the McGuire Development Company II.D. Provide disclosure of interest and authorization documentation for Celtic Capital II.D. Provide documentation that authorizes F. James McGuire to act on behalf of the Airport Pulling Orange Blossom, LLC III.H. Revise to read, "Urban (Urban Mixed Use District, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict)" V.A.1 Revise to read, "Please see Exhibit "D" (Location Map) and Exhibit "F" (Zoning Map)" Sufficiency/Substantive Adoption Memorandum CP-2013-3 Page 2 of 4 r� V.A.3 Revise to read, "Please see Exhibit "F" (Zoning Map) and Item III.G. of this application" V.C.2 Insert reference to Exhibit"H" (Historical and Archaeological Probability) V.D.4 The proposed change in project scale (from a pedestrian oriented -work, live, play- mixed use development) may potentially increase intensity on the site. As a result, provide a quantitative analysis comparing the existing Subdistrict build- out scenario to the proposed build-out scenarios (commercial only project and commercial w/proposed residential unit reduction) V.E.1.c Revise Exhibit reference to read, "See Exhibit "N" for the Traffic Impact Statement" V.E.I.d Drainage: Revise narrative to include level of service standard V.E.1.e Solid Waste: Include calculations for existing and proposed conditions (cy/yr) and document proposed change. V.E.1.f Parks: Community and Regional-Provide calculations for existing conditions (326 residential) and proposed conditions (15 residential), and document proposed change. V.E.3 Schools,Sheriff, Fire Protection and EMS Services • Schools: Provide public school locations/addresses intended to serve project - elementary, middle and high - provide calculations (based on student generation rates) for existing conditions (326 residential) and proposed conditions (15 residential), and document proposed change. • Sheriff Services: Provide substation location/address intended to serve project, provide calculations for existing conditions and proposed conditions, and document proposed change. • Fire Protection and EMS Services: Provide facility location/address intended to serve project,and provide applicable calculations for proposed conditions. V.F.3 Insert "N/A" and delete reference to "Airport Pulling Rd." as the Traffic Congestion Boundary was eliminated with the adoption of the recent EAR-based amendments to the Future Land Use Element/map Exhibit C Subdistrict Text Please note that text modifications will be proposed by staff as part of the substantive review of the petition Exhibit I Proximity to Public Services Map: Revise map & map legend to differentiate between public and private schools, and revise map/legend to reflect correct locations of fire,sheriff and EMS facilities (e.g. Pine Ridge, east of Goodlette Rd. is a fire station, not sheriff facility) 2 G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\COMP PLANNING GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2013 Cycles& Small Scale Petitions\2013 Cycle 1 -February\CP-2013-3,Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict\Sufficiency Reviews\PL20120002909_CP-2013-3,Sufficiency Letter.docx �� Sufficiency/Substantive Adoption Memorandum CP-2013-3 Page 3 of 4 Exhibit 0 Public Facilities • Potable Water: Include calculations for existing conditions (70,525 sf.shopping center, 46,113 sf. medical-dental office, 46,112 general office bldg. and 326 residential-gpd) and document proposed change. • Sanitary Sewer: Include calculations for existing conditions (70,525 sf.shopping center, 46,113 sf. medical-dental office, 46,112 sf. general office bldg. and 326 residential-gpd) and document proposed change. • Schools: Provide public school locations/addresses intended to serve project - elementary, middle and high - provide calculations (based on student generation rates) for existing conditions (326 residential) and proposed conditions (15 residential),and document proposed change. Data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use: The existing Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict was approved to be developed as a pedestrian-friendly, small scale, mixed use development. The development criteria and mix of land uses established within the Subdistrict were specific to achieving the goal of creating a pedestrian oriented, live/work/play community. The proposed amendment changes the original intent, character and design/scale of the approved project. As a result, the following data and analysis should be provided to determine the suitability of the site for the proposed request. • Explain and document how the site is or is not viable as a residential only project • Explain and document how the site is or is not viable for community facility uses and other uses generally allowed in the Urban Mixed Use designation • Provide a market study to justify a commercial only development (since the proposed amendment does not require mixed use development and changes the intent,scale, dev.criteria,etc.) Additional Staff Comments Stephen Lenberaer, Senior Environmental Specialist, Surface Water and Environmental Planning: According to the 1975 aerial on the Property Appraisers website, the subject property was entirely cleared and in agricultural use (row crops) in 1975. The property would therefore qualify for,an exemption for agricultural clearing permit pursuant to 10.02.06 D.1.f LDC. Therefore no native vegetation, if present, would be required to be retained on-site. The property was later converted to a plant nursery. Given the location and present condition of the subject property,listed species are not likely to occur on site. The letter received from the Florida Master Site File, lists no previously recorded historic structures for the subject property. The project would be subject to the accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites, as required by Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 11.1.3. The provision is also included in Subsection 2.03.07 E of the Land Development Code (LDC). 3 G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\COMP PLANNING GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2013 Cycles& Small Scale Petitions\2013 Cycle 1 -February\CP-2013-3,Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict\Sufficiency Reviews\PL20120002909_CP-2013-3,Sufficiency Letter.docx Sufficiency/Substantive Adoption Memorandum CP-2013-3 Page 4 of 4 Given the above, the proposed GMP amendment will have no affect on the Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and therefore can be found to be consistent with the CCME. John Podczerwinsky, Dev. Review Project Manager,Transportation Planning Section: The Traffic Impact Study, dated 2/22/13, is sufficient for staff review. Aaron Cromer, Principal Project Manager, Public Utilities Engineering: Public Utilities staff has no issues with the application at this time. The original application is available for pick-up. Once the petition has been modified to address the above items, please re-submit the original plus four copies, all properly assembled, for a second sufficiency/substantive review. Resolution #12-234 provides 30 days (May 13, 2013) for you to respond to this letter with supplemental data. Should you have questions and/or wish to schedule a meeting with staff to discuss the sufficiency comments, please contact me at 239.252.2466 or via email at michelemosca @colliergov.net. Regards, •ichele R ; •sca, ICP Principal--anner cc: Michael Bosi, AICP, Interim Planning and Zoning Director David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Plan Manager,Comprehensive Planning Section CP-2013-3 File 4 G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\COMP PLANNING GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2013 Cycles& Small Scale Petitions\2013 Cycle 1 -February\CP-2013-3,Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict\Sufficiency Reviews\PL20120002909_CP-2013-3,Sufficiency Letter.docx Co er Coi.rnt y Comprehensive Planning Memorandum July 22,2013 Sent Via E-Mail Mr. R. Bruce Anderson, Esq. Roetzel and Andress Law Firm 850 Park Shore Drive Naples, FL 34103 and Mr.Tim Hancock Davidson Engineering, Inc. 3530 Kraft Road,Suite 301 Naples, FL 34105 RE: Substantive Review of Growth Management Plan Amendment Petition PL20120002909/CP-2013-3, a Growth Management Plan amendment to the Future Land Use Element (Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict) of the Growth Management Plan to eliminate the physical integration of residential development within commercial buildings; establish a ratio of 15 residential units or 7,500 square feet of commercial activity for each acre of land in the Subdistrict and prohibit the development of both uses on the same parcel; revise certain development standards; limit multi-tenant commercial buildings to no more than 50 percent of the built square footage; eliminate the maximum size of the footprint for commercial buildings; and, combine the existing office (4,250 sq. ft.) and retail (3,250 sq. ff.) square feet per acre-cap to allow for up to 7,500 sq. ft. per acre or up to 162,750 sq. ft. of Commercial Professional /General Office (C-1), Commercial Convenience (C-2) and Commercial Intermediate (C-3) uses. Dear Mr.Anderson and Mr. Hancock: The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the following substantive items should be addressed prior to staff's analysis and formulation of a recommendation to the Collier County Planning Commission. DATA AND ANALYSIS TO SUPPORT THE SUITABILITY OF LAND FOR THE PROPOSED USE: Staff's initial Sufficiency comments and data request are noted below in bold text, followed by the agent's response in italicized text, and further followed by staff's second /follow-up request for supporting data in bracketed [bold] text, which is based on the May 14, 2013 meeting with both of you and the June 18,2013 responses from Tim. The existing Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict was approved for a pedestrian-friendly, small scale, mixed use residential/commercial project. The development criteria and mix of land uses Substantive Transmittal Memorandum CP-2013-3 Page 2 of 4 established within the Subdistrict were specific to achieving the goal of creating a pedestrian oriented, live/work/play community. The proposed amendment changes the original intent, character and design/scale of the approved project. As a result, the following data and analysis should be provided to determine the suitability of the site for the proposed request. (1) Staff's request, dated April 12, 2013: Explain and document how the site is or is not viable as a residential only project. Applicant's response, dated June 18, 2013: The property dimensions, having a significant amount of frontage on Airport Road with a minimal amount of depth (500') make the site difficult from a site development perspective to create a high quality residential development in this location. Conversely, the site dimensions lend themselves very well to commercial development. A low density residential project in this area would be unable to buffer itself adequately and would represent a substantial devaluation in comparison to the existing approved level of development. [Staff's follow-up request: Provide justification for a high density residential only development on the subject site, as the proposed Subdistrict allows for up to 15 dwelling units per acre, and is not limited to low density residential as noted within the June 18, 2013 response.] (2) Staff's request, dated April 12, 2013: Explain and document how the site is or is not viable for community facility uses and other uses generally allowed in the Urban Mixed Use designation Applicant's response, dated June 18, 2013: While the site could physically accommodate some Community Facility Uses such as a church or an assisted living facility, both uses would represent a devaluation in comparison to the existing, approved level of development. What distinguishes the proposed plan of development from the existing one is the opportunity to respond to the current market conditions which supports commercial land uses that cater to 'end users' as opposed to retail space in a traditional shopping center. Requiring that the property be developed for only CF type uses would significantly limit the potential development scenarios well beyond what is already permitted on the site. [Staff's follow-up request: Quantify the "devaluation" resulting from the development of a community facility use or other uses allowed in the Urban Mixed Use designation in comparison to the existing approved uses within the Subdistrict, i.e. if the existing Subdistrict uses, development standards, and commercial sq. ft. allocations are not currently viable on the site, then quantify how a potentially viable CF use results in a "devaluation."] 2 G:\CDESPL-1\COMPRE-1\COMPPL-1\COMPPL.-1\2013CY-1\2013CY-1\CP-201-2\SUBSTA-1\PL20120002909_CP-2013- 3,Sufficiency_Substantive Review Letter.docx Substantive Transmittal Memorandum CP-2013-3 Page 3 of 4 (3) Staff's request, dated April 12, 2013: Provide a market study to justify a commercial only development(since the proposed amendment does not require mixed use development and changes the intent, scale, development criteria, etc.) Applicant's response, dated June 18, 2013: In lieu of a market study, the applicant has chosen to limit the commercial development opportunities by requiring that nor more than 50% of the developed commercial square footage be located within multi-tenant space. Unlike traditional shopping centers which have current vacancies in the immediate area, there is a lack of supply of 'pad ready' development for newcomers to the commercial market. For example, within one mile of the subject property (please see Exhibit 'Q' Commercial and PUD properties map), there are no undeveloped parcels available that would allow for stand-alone commercial development of C-3 or C-4 intensity. Few opportunities exist even extending out to three miles from the subject property and no such undeveloped parcels exist currently along the Airport Road corridor. Many national retailers look to either own or enter a long term land lease in order to establish new locations. While ample opportunities may exist with respect to potential sites for churches, ALF's and residential-only projects in the immediate area, a lack of pad-ready commercial sites exists. [Staff's follow-up request: (1) provide a market study to demonstrate the need for up to an additional 92,225 sq. ft. of retail uses within the surrounding area (retail uses are presently capped at 70,525 sq. ft. in the approved Subdistrict); (2) provide a listing of national retailers with a commercial intensity of no greater than the County's C-2 and C-3 — commercial zoning districts that are stand-alone developments; (3) substantiate the assertion that there is a "lack of pad-ready commercial sites" and "lack of supply of'pad ready' development for newcomers to the commercial market" i.e. if there's a lack of supply then there's an associated demand figure - accordingly, please provide the demand figure and supporting data specifically for these types of uses; and, (4) revise Exhibit "Q" to include all vacant commercial sites within the 1 to 3-mile radial distance from the subject site -for example, staff has identified that the Pine Ridge Commons site was not included within the Exhibit.] Additional Staff Comments: John Podczerwinsky, Dev. Review Project Manager,Transportation Planning Section: Review has not yet been completed as of the date of this letter. Kris VanLenc7en, Principal Project Manager, Public Utilities Engineering: The subject property is located within the Collier County Water Sewer District. These services are available in sufficient quantity and at a location to accommodate development. Moreover,the change in the intensity of uses as allowable through this Growth Plan Amendment does not create a significant impact to either the water or the wastewater system. 3 G:\CDESPL-1\COMPRE-1\COMPPL-1\COMPPL-1\2013CY-1\2013CY-1\CP-201-2\SUBSTA-1\PL20120002909_CP-2013- 3,Sufficiency_Substantive Review Letter.docx Substantive Transmittal Memorandum CP-2013-3 Page 4 of 4 After the petition has been modified to address the above items, please re-submit two copies, all properly assembled, for a final substantive review. The resubmittal must be received no later than August 9, 2073 in order to meet the current hearing schedule deadlines. Should you have questions and/or wish to schedule a meeting to discuss staff comments, please contact me at 239.252.2466 or via email at michelemosca colliergov.net. Regards, ...., 'ele,os_• _ _• / Princi• Planner c . Michael Bosi, AICP, Planning and Zoning Director David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Plan Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section CP-2013-3 File 4 G:\CDESPL-1\COMPR E-1\COMPPL-1\COMPPL-1\2013CY-1\2013CY-1\CP-201-2\SUBSTA-1\PL20120002909_CP-2013- 3,Sufficiency_Substantive Review Letter.docx PL201300003 65/CP-2013-4 CCPC STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 9.B. y -.�. STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/PLANNING AND REGULATION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 19, 2013 RE: PETITION CP-2013-4/ PL20130000365, Growth Management Plan Amendment (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) APPLICANTS/AGENTS: Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. William Barton, Corporate Secretary 9393 Vanderbilt Beach Road Naples, Florida 34120 Margaret Perry, AICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34105 Naples, Florida 34103 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The ±554 acre subject property is located on north side of [the eastern terminal end of] Vanderbilt Beach Road, in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. The Cypress Canal abuts the southerly boundary, and the northern terminal ends of 17th St. NW thru 23rd St. NW are across this stormwater management canal to south. REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan to re-designate the subject site from Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District (RFMUD) Neutral Lands to RFMUD Receiving Lands, affecting approximately 553.7 acres. This re-designation would allow for an increase in residential density from 1 dwelling unit/5 acres to 1 dwelling unit/acre for non-Rural Village development, through participation in the TDR program; allow for development of a Rural Village (density of 2- 3 dwelling units/acre; commercial, civic and recreational uses; greenbelt on the project perimeter), also through participation in the TDR program; and, decrease the native vegetation retention requirement from 60% to 40% of the native vegetation present on site. - 1 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Site: The subject site is zoned A-MHO-RFMUO, Neutral Lands (Rural Agricultural District-Mobile Home Overlay, Rural Fringe Mixed Use-Neutral Lands Overlay) and designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Neutral Lands on the Future Land Use Map. The subject site is partially developed with a golf course and is elsewhere wooded lands. Surrounding Lands: North: Lands to the north of the subject site are zoned A-MHO-RFMUO, Receiving Lands and designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map. Conservation Collier lands and an adjacent Wildlife Corridor lie immediately north of the "Existing Conservation Easement" located at the northeast corner of the subject site. With the exception of scattered large-lot single-family residences built on Richmond Street, Krapke Road, Rivers Road and Moulder Drive, this area is also a portion of undeveloped TwinEagles AGR South. There are some nursery and land care businesses, horse stables and equestrian facilities, and other rural businesses in this area. The southern terminal ends of [all but one of] these rural roads do not reach as far south as the subject site. The maximum density achievable for non-Rural Village Receiving Lands' development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through participation in the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. West: Lands to the west of the subject site are zoned A-RFMUO, Receiving Lands and designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map. They are currently developed with a golf course (Golf Club of the Everglades). This neighbor has approached the County with the prospect of combining their property with the subject site to develop a unified residential community. The maximum density achievable for non-Rural Village Receiving Lands' development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through participation in the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. South: Lands to the south of the subject site are zoned E-Estates, and designated Estates on the Future Land Use Map. This area is developed with single-family residences in the antiquated Golden Gate Estates subdivision. Residential density for residential estates is 1 dwelling unit per 2.25 acres, or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record. East: The zoning on lands to the east of the subject site is split between A-MHO-RFMUO, Sending Lands -designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands on the Future Land Use Map (southerly portion), and A-MHO-RFMUO, Receiving Lands - designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map (northerly portion). A 300-foot wide linear Wildlife Corridor lies between the subject site and developable lands to the east. With the exception of a few residences, this area is undeveloped. This neighbor has submitted the preliminary plat plans to the County to develop a residential community, as TwinEagles Phase III. Density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres, or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record, in Sending Lands. The maximum density achievable for non-Rural Village Receiving Lands' development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through participation in the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. In summary, the existing land uses in the area immediately surrounding the subject site are predominantly undeveloped or sparsely developed rural-type residential. The Receiving Lands FLUM designation allows the same land uses in these areas as proposed on the subject site, - 2 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. except to the south and except on Conservation Collier lands, the adjacent Wildlife Corridor and the Sending Lands to the north and east. STAFF ANALYSIS: Background and Considerations - History of the Rural Fringe GMP Amendments: The Governor and Cabinet issued a Final Order on June 22, 1999, pertaining to GMP amendments adopted in 1997 pursuant to the 1996 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). The Final Order required the County to conduct a Rural and Agricultural Assessment for the Rural and Conservation Designated lands within the County, and then adopt measures to protect natural resources such as wetlands, wildlife and their habitats, and prevent the premature conversion of unique agricultural lands to other uses. This was to be accomplished while directing incompatible land uses away from these sensitive lands by employing creative land planning techniques. The Final Order allowed the County to conduct this Assessment in phases. Accordingly, the County divided the Assessment into two geographical areas, the Rural Fringe Area and the Eastern (Rural) Lands Area. Relevant to this petition, the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) was established. The RFMUD represents a transitional area between Golden Gate Estates and the County's urban area, and between the urban area and vast agricultural lands and agricultural operations farther to the east. The RFMUD consists of approximately 73,222 acres and is divided into three distinct designations: Sending Lands (±41,535 acres originally; ± 41,414 acres now), Receiving Lands (± 22,020 acres originally; ± 22,373 acres now), and Neutral Lands (± 9,667 acres originally; ± 9,427 acres now). Allowable uses, density, and preservation standards vary by designation. Note: If Olde Florida Golf Club amendment is adopted, acreage figures would be closer to: Sending Lands (± 41,414 ac.) - no change, Receiving Lands (± 23,128 ac.), and Neutral Lands L 8,873 ac.). Sending Lands are those lands that have the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant wetlands, uplands, and habitat for listed species. The preservation standard for non-NRPA (Natural Resource Protection Area) Sending Lands is eighty percent (80%) of the native vegetation on site while the standard for NRPA Sending Lands is ninety percent (90%). Density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record (created on or before June 22, 1999). Transfer of development rights from Sending Lands may occur at a rate of 1 dwelling unit credit per five acres (0.2 du/ac.) or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/ parcel of record - or as much as 4 dwelling unit credits per five acres or lot of record with use of density bonus credits. Permitted non-residential uses are limited to: agricultural uses, consistent with the Florida Right to Farm Act; habitat preservation and conservation uses; passive parks and other passive recreational uses; sporting and recreational camps; limited essential services; and oil extraction and related processing. 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. The preservation standard for Receiving Lands, except for the North Belle Meade Overlay, is forty percent (40%) of the native vegetation present, not to exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the total site area to be preserved. The base residential density (non-Rural Village development) is - 3 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du/ac.) or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record. The maximum density achievable for non-Rural Village development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through the Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs). The minimum and maximum density for Rural Village development within Receiving Lands is 2 dwelling units per acre and 3 dwelling units per acre, respectively, except that the minimum density for Rural Village development on Receiving Lands within the North Belle Meade Overlay is 1.5 dwelling units per acre. Permitted non-residential uses are primarily the same as those uses permitted in the agricultural zoning district prior to the Final Order in 1999 (e.g. full range of agricultural uses, community facilities, recreational uses, etc.). Neutral Lands are those lands suitable for semi-rural residential development. Generally, Neutral lands have a higher ratio of native vegetation than lands designated as Receiving Lands, but do not have values approaching those in the Sending Lands. The preservation standard for Neutral Lands is sixty percent (60%) of the native vegetation present, not to exceed forty-five percent (45%) of the total site area to be preserved. The maximum residential density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du/ac.) or legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record. These lands are "neutral" to the TDR program and do not generate or receive residential density. Permitted non-residential uses are primarily the same as the uses permitted in the agricultural zoning district prior to the Final Order in 1999 (e.g. full range of agricultural uses, community facilities, recreational uses, etc.). Considerations Specific to the Olde Florida Golf Club: The Olde Florida Golf Club property lies within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD), Neutral Lands, as depicted on Collier County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Neutral Lands designated areas allow golf courses and single-family residential units by right. Olde Florida Golf Club was approved by Conditional Use in 1999, and in November 2001, by Site Development Plan (AR-1383). The 18-hole golf course, its clubhouse and maintenance facilities occupy the developed portions of the subject site. An existing conservation area comprising approximately 51 acres would remain unchanged. The County's Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program provisions were not applicable at the time of Olde Florida original approval. TDR program provisions apply only to extent that they presently prohibit the transfer of development rights into or out of Neutral Lands. If approved, the Olde Florida development would be eligible to utilize not only the base density entitlements generated by developing property located in Receiving Lands but also the TDR entitlements accompanying the new FLU designation, as the transfer of development rights into the development would no longer be prohibited. Environmental Impacts: Collier County Department of Natural Resources personnel reviewed this petition and provided the following analysis: The GMP amendment proposes to change the FLUM designation of Olde Florida Golf Club from RFMUD Neutral Lands to RFMUD Receiving Lands. The applicant states that adoption of the amendments would allow the petitioner to utilize TDRs from RFMUD Sending Lands and add residential density in the Olde Florida Golf Club. Environmental information submitted with the application, are as follows: 1. FLUCFCS Code map with standard modifiers identifying percent exotic and nuisance vegetation coverage — 4 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4,Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. 2. Native vegetation retention calculations based on the updated FLUCFCS Code map, and information in accordance with Ordinance No. 10-08 3. Listed species survey for the site, dated October 15, 2008 4. A list of state and federal listed species know to inhabit biological communities similar to those fond on site 5. SFWMD and USACOE wetland jurisdiction determinations 6. Cultural resource summary and assessment for the site According to the application submitted, the subject property is 553.7 acres in size. The FLUCFCS Code map provided identifies 88.4 acres of native vegetation within the golf course, 51 acres of native vegetation in existing conservation easement and 246.8 acres of native vegetation outside the golf course, for a total of 386.2 acres of native vegetation on subject property. Exotic vegetation within the native vegetative communities on site are primarily in the E2 (25-49%) range, with some areas of El (0-24%) and E3 (50-74%). The same is true of the level of exotic vegetation in the existing conservation easement. According to the Property Appraisers website, the Olde Florida Golf Club is divided into two parcels. The golf course parcel (parcel No. 00219400103) is 254.84 acres and future development parcel (parcel No.00219160003), 299.16 acres. The approved site plans for the Olde Florida Golf Club Clubhouse Facility Expansion (SDPA-2010-1104) required exotic vegetation to be removed from the golf course parcel and for it to be maintained free of exotic vegetation in perpetuity. The Olde Florida Golf Club occupies most of Section 31 and falls within one of two Sections of land in Sections 31 & 32, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, both of which were designated as Neutral Lands when the RFMUD was created. These two Sections of land are surrounded by RFMUD Receiving Lands and Estates (Golden Gate Estates). Growth Management Plan amendment number CP-2004-2 for the TwinEagles South property changed the FLUM designations of land immediately to the east of Olde Florida Golf Club, from Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands (153 acres) and Sending Lands (79 acres). The 79 acres of Sending Lands approved with the GMP amendment are located at the southern terminus of the property, adjacent to Vanderbilt Beach Road and the golf course at Olde Florida Golf Club. Although not part of the application package, there is a verbal agreement between the owners of TwinEagles South and the local wildlife special interest groups to retain a 300 foot wide wildlife corridor along the west side of TwinEagles South. This wildlife corridor starts by the wildlife underpass at Immokalee Road and terminates at the Sending Lands along Vanderbilt Beach Road, at the southern end of TwinEagles South. This wildlife corridor runs alongside the east side of the existing conservation easement and golf course on Olde Florida Golf Club. There are also approximately 76.74 acres of Conservation Collier land (Rivers Road Preserve) in the area, abutting the north side of Olde Florida Golf Club and west side of the 300 foot wide wildlife corridor. The listed species survey identified gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), American alligator (Aligator mississippensis) and several listed species of wading bird on subject property. Seventeen active and inactive gopher tortoise burrows were found in the undeveloped area on the west side of the property, in the future development parcel. The listed wading birds and American alligator were observed in the gold course stormwater management lakes. Listed species of wading bird were also located in the scraped down (created) wetlands on the south-west portion of the site. — 5 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. Undeveloped land within the Olde Florida Golf Club and in Sections 31 & 32, are within the USFWS Panther Secondary Zone. No panther or signs of panther were observed on the subject property during the listed species survey. According to the Listed Species Survey Report, two collared panthers have occurred within 1.3 mile of the subject property (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) telemetry data). Panther and black bear telemetry points provided in the Listed Species Survey Report show most panther and black bear activity beyond two miles from the subject property, primarily on undeveloped lands adjacent to and within RFMUD lands to the north and south, and in the Golden Gate Estates along Everglades and Desoto Boulevards. Panthers have been documented utilizing the underpass for TwinEagles South, at Immokalee Road. The wetland jurisdictional determinations provided, show wetlands on site being drained by the major canals in the area and converting to uplands. According to the Formal Determination of Wetlands and Surface Waters received from the State, 30.88 acres of jurisdictional wetlands occur on the property, within the future development parcel. The Determination also states that habitats within the existing 38.71 acre conservation easement on site were excluded from the application, and thus not included in the Formal Determination. The loss of jurisdiction wetlands on the property is documented by the jurisdictional wetland determinations provided with the application. Pursuant to the Supreme Court ruling, USACOE jurisdiction wetlands on site are no longer jurisdictional since they are not connected to waters of the United States. Wetlands on site are also not within flowways or connected to wetlands off-site. In March, 2013, the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. conducted a reconnaissance cultural resource assessment of the site, in accordance with the specifications set forth in Chapter IA-46, F.A.C. One archaeological site, 8CR1305, was recorded as a result of the assessment and can be characterized by two non-local chert flacks found on a disturbed surface. These flacks are consistent with the Archaic Period (ca. 7,000 to 3,000 BP (before .-- present)), and likely represent a small prehistoric camp. According to the assessment, the site is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places due to the paucity of the material and disturbances associated with the site. The cultural resource assessment also states that the parcel has an overall low to medium probability for cultural resources, based on the field reconnaissance and aerial imagery. The consultant's site review with the Florida Division of Historic Resources determined no previously recorded archaeological sites on the subject property. In summary, the lands within Sections 31 & 32, Township 48 South, Range 27 East are surrounded by RFMUD Receiving Lands and Estates (Golden Gate Estates). These designations allow for a greater percentage of land to be developed and will, in time, reduce use of the subject property by larger free roaming listed species of wildlife such as panther and black bear. Other lands designated Neutral in the RFMUD abut at least on one side land designated either Sending or Conservation, thus providing greater protection for native habitat in those areas and for viability of corridors for the movement of wildlife. The agreement between the wildlife special interest groups and owners of TwinEagles South does provide a wildlife corridor linking Olde Florida Golf Club to undeveloped land to the north, within Bonita Bay East Golf Club. Conservation Collier lands in the immediate area, also provide additional long term protection of native habitat in the area. One of the major purposes of the RFMUD is to preserve higher quality habitat for listed species, flowways and corridors for the movement of wildlife, in particular that for Florida panther and black bear. When the RFMUD was created, lands within the RFMUD were afforded greater protection based on the quality of habitat and location within the landscape. Although currently - 6 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. surrounded by native vegetation, areas around Sections 31 & 32 are allowed to be developed more intensely with less or, in the case of single-family residences in the Estates, no native vegetation required to be retained on individual lots. This will, in time, decrease the habitat value of the land and use of the subject property by larger free roaming listed species of wildlife. Creation of a 300 foot wide wildlife corridor on the neighboring TwinEagles South property, coupled with adjoining Conservation Collier lands and higher native vegetation retention requirement for Neutral and Sending Lands within Section 31 & 32 will benefit wildlife, but may not be suitable for long term use by listed species such as panther and black bear, particularly when the adjoining properties are all developed. Given the environmental efforts which have occurred in the area, along with the level of development allowed for the area, allowing density to be transferred into Olde Florida Golf Club while retaining the Neutral Designation and therefore greater requirement for retention of native vegetation, may be an option for the Neutral Lands within Section 31 & 32. [Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist] [Refer to Exhibits E through G-8, FLUCCS Map, Soils Map, Listed Species Survey and Table, and Wetland determinations, of the GMP amendment exhibit package.] Historical and Archaeological Impacts: Historic or archaeological resources have not been identified on the subject property, based on a review of the Collier County Index of Historic/Archaeological Maps, and the site is not identified on County Historical and Archaeological Probability Maps. A reconnaissance assessment team led by Robert Carr, M.S. of Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc., has since surveyed the subject site and identified one archeological site. [Refer to AHC Technical Report No. 982, dated April 2013, of the GMP amendment exhibit package.] Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Impact Analysis, Including Transportation Element Consistency Determination: Capital Improvement Element (CIE) Policy 1.2 sets forth that the County Board shall not approve any such petition or application which would directly access a deficient roadway segment or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient, or which significantly impacts either: (1) a deficient roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment; This language is mirrored in Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element (TE) and adds, [the Board] 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. CIE Policy 1.2 states, "Significant impact is hereby defined... as generating potential for increased countywide population greater than 2% of the population projections for parks, solid waste, potable water, sanitary sewer, and drainage facilities, or as generating a volume of traffic equal to or greater than 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume of an impacted roadway." TE Policy 5.1 provides for same, and allows certain petitions and applications to be approved with "specific mitigating stipulations". — 7 - CP-2013-4/ PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club:changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the 5 year planning period. Staff recommends that the subject application can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Vanderbilt Beach Road Impacts: The first link of Vanderbilt Beach Road East of CR-951 is a Public roadway, but is not listed on the County AUIR as an Arterial or Collector roadway and as such is not reviewed by staff for consistency with policy 5.1 of the Transportation element. However, the applicant has identified a significant (though not adverse) impact on this roadway. At such time that the applicant proposes a plat or site plan that will create operational impacts on this local roadway, staff will analyze operational impacts and determine any operational mitigation for the 238 Peak Direction trips, if warranted. The first [concurrency] link that is impacted by this project is Link 112.0, between Collier Boulevard and Logan Boulevard. The project generates 86 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 2.87% impact. This segment of Vanderbilt Beach Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,684 trips, and is currently at LOS "B" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. The next link that is impacted by this project is Link 111.1, between Logan Boulevard and Airport Road. The project generates 60 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 2.00% impact. This segment of Vanderbilt Beach Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,137 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. County Road 951 (Collier Boulevard) Impacts: The first link that is impacted by this project is Link 30.1, between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road. The project generates 72 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 2.40% impact. This segment of Collier Boulevard currently has a remaining capacity of 1,067 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. The next link that is impacted by this project is Link 30.2, between Golden Gate Boulevard and Vanderbilt Beach Road. The project generates 17 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 0.57% impact. This segment of Collier Boulevard currently has a remaining capacity of 921 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. lmmokalee Road Impacts: The first concurrency link Immokalee Road that is impacted by this zoning amendment is Link 43.2, between Logan Boulevard and Collier Boulevard. The project generates 100 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a significant 3.13% impact. This segment of Immokalee Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,223 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. The second concurrency link lmmokalee Road that is impacted by this zoning amendment is Link 43.1, between 1-75 and Logan Boulevard. The project generates 83 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a significant 2.37% impact. This segment of Immokalee Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,142 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. - 8 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. No subsequent links beyond these segments are found to be significantly impacted by this project. [John Podczerwinsky, Transportation Planning Project Manager] [Refer to Exhibit J, Traffic Impact Statement, of the GMP amendment exhibit package.] Public Facilities Impact: This petition will result in increased impacts on certain Category "A" public facilities (potable water, wastewater treatment, stormwater management, solid waste disposal, and community parks), but these impacts will not be significant (generating potential for increased countywide population greater than 2% of the BEBR medium range growth rate population projections for parks, solid waste disposal, potable water, wastewater treatment and stormwater management facilities, per CIE policy 1.2) as defined in the Capital Improvement Element. • Planning Community = Rural Estates • Population density = 2.15 persons/DU* • x number of additional DU's = 444 new units maximum for non-Rural Village (955 population increase) OR 1,552 new units maximum for Rural Village (3,337 population increase) • BEBR-based population projection = 371,914 (2018) • x .02 = ±7,438 • based upon 2010 Census population and housing unit figures for Tract 104.12 The Collier County Sheriff's Department will provide police protection/law enforcement services. The Sheriff's Golden Gate Substation, District No. 2 is located at 4741 Golden Gate Parkway; and the temporary Golden Gate Estates Substation, District No. 4 is located on Oil Well Road. The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District Station 73, located at 14575 Collier Boulevard, will provide fire protection. (There is also a Sheriff's Department presence at Fire Station No. 10.) The [Zone 10] EMS station [Medic 10, located at 14756 lmmokalee Road; OR, the [Zone 42] EMS station [Medic 42, located at 7010 Immokalee Road; OR, Medic 71, located at 95 13th Street SW] will provide emergency medical services. The Public Utilities and Engineering Department has no objection to the proposed re- designation. WATER& SEWER DEMAND Water (gallons/day) Sewer (gallons/day) PROPOSED (Receiving Lands) 235,450 138,500 CURRENT (Neutral Lands) 46,750 27,500 Appropriateness of Change: The table below identifies potential changes in density, use of TDR Credits, and preservation standards, resulting from the proposed re-designation of the subject site from Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands (±554 acres). If this amendment were approved as proposed, the required native vegetation preservation amount would decrease by±111 acres. Neutral Lands Proposed Receiving Lands (554 acres) (554 acres) Eligible Density ± 110 dwelling units ±554 dwelling units — 9 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club:changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. (@ ldu/5ac.) (@ 1du/ac.) Preservation ± 249.3 ac. (60%, ± 138.5 ac. (40%, presume presume 45% w/100% 25% w/100% native native vegetation) vegetation) • Neutral Lands native vegetation retention standard is 60%, not to exceed 45% of the site. • Receiving Lands native vegetation retention standard is 40%, not to exceed 25% of the site. Approximately 88.4 acres of native vegetation are identified within the Olde Florida golf course, 51 acres of native vegetation in existing conservation easement and 246.8 acres of native vegetation outside the golf course, for a total of 386.2 acres of native vegetation on subject property. [Source: FLUCFCS Code mapping] Much of these areas remain undisturbed. As proposed by this amendment, residential density will be allowed to increase in the proposed Receiving Lands. The present designation allows residential density at 1 du/5 acres or a total of + 110 dwelling units, while the proposed Receiving Lands re-designation will allow density at 1 du/1 acre or + 554 dwelling units for non-Rural Village Development and 3dus/acre or± 1,662 dwelling units for Rural Village development. Based upon cluster development requirements, and property sizes-which afford flexibility in site design and provision of buffers, staff believes the development patterns allowed by the proposed amendment could generally be considered compatible with surrounding development as it exists and is allowed. The native vegetation preservation requirements, however may not. The destruction of more than 110 acres of preserved vegetation and habitat on the subject property will have the result of interrupting/disrupting a long development history, during which time adjacent lands have been configured and reserved for uses typical to and interconnections among open space and habitat preserved in the immediate area, if not ending it entirely. The practicality of the application's proposed Subdistrict was established through an evaluation of environmental characteristics predominantly, and other relevant factors, to ascertain insufficient need for retaining the Neutral Lands designation and the appropriateness of the Receiving Lands designation. The intent of the RFMUD is to direct development away from properties with high environmental values. Re-designating the property to Receiving will direct higher intensity land uses into an area that warrants semi-rural development and environmental protection. While the open space, environmentally sensitive and preservation areas of the Olde Florida Golf Club property may now have a lesser degree of environmental or listed species habitat value, their value has not been disturbed through development, agricultural operations or other factors relative to how values are determined. The aggregation of on-site and off-site environmentally sensitive areas should be recognized and maintained at the highest possible retention or preservation levels. [Refer to Exhibits 1 through 1-9, Public Facilities Report and supporting exhibits, of the GMP amendment exhibit package.] NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by LDC Section 10.03.05 F was [duly advertised, noticed andj held on Tuesday, July 16, 2013, 5:30 p.m. at the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District Headquarters, located at 14575 Collier Boulevard, Naples. Approximately seven persons other than the applicant's team and County staff attended, and heard the following information: - 10 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. The applicant's agent provided a full description of the proposed amendment to the group, including the two-step GMPA process, the Rural Fringe Mixed Used designation and the TDR program. Also overviewed was the history of the Olde Florida property. The presentation indicated that natural vegetation preserve areas already exist on the site-and they would not change as a result of residential development. The present golf course and proposed residential uses were described, particularly abandoning earlier plans to expand the 18-hole golf course to 36 holes. Although no firm plans are in place, residential development would be limited to a specific development sub-area. The Olde Florida Golf Club was more recently approached by the neighboring Golf Club of the Everglades with the prospect of combining the two properties to provide a unified residential community. Questions generated during the subsequent discussion focused on the nature of the changed environmental characteristics [progressively dryer conditions], how the existing on-site preserve area would be affected [not by new residential areas], and if future development would include different or additional access to Vanderbilt Beach Road [none are contemplated]. Also questioned was the County's timetable for extending Vanderbilt Beach Road eastward [not in its present financially feasible planning schedule] and the possibility of aggregating additional large tracts to establish a Rural Village [extremely improbable]. An "unrecorded" conservation easement located along the northeast side of the Olde Florida Golf Course property was questioned. [This is the 300-foot wide wildlife corridor discussed in the Environmental Impacts section above.] It was explained that this easement does exist and would remain in place, while any further recordation would be the responsibility of another party. At least one party in attendance expressed opposition to the proposal. The meeting was completed by 6:10 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The following findings and conclusions result from the reviews and analyses of this request: • The present designation on the subject site allows development consistent with the surrounding development patterns, both existing and proposed. • Development allowed by the proposed amendment is generally compatible with development existing and allowed on surrounding lands. • Original RFMUD designations were based upon landscape scale analysis. Since then, proposals for re-designation have relied on site-specific environmental findings in order to demonstrate different property characteristics. The application provides data and analysis that the subject site's specific environmental condition supports the re- designation. • The subject site is reported to have approximately 70% native vegetation on site and no longer contains jurisdictional wetlands. • The re-designation of the subject site as proposed would allow for a loss of approximately 111 acres of native vegetation. • This property will be subject to all GMP requirements and limitations of the Receiving Lands designation, including the native vegetation preservation/retention requirements of the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). - 11 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. • The history of preserving native vegetation and wildlife habitat in this area through Collier County and non-governmental organizations are important aspects to consider. • The Receiving Lands in this area now are characterized by the presence of 300 ft. wide wildlife corridor, 150 ft. wide golf course buffer, established native vegetation Preservation acreage on Olde Florida Golf Club property, Conservation Collier lands, wildlife passage crossing under Immokalee Road. • Utility of the adjacent wildlife corridor and its interconnecting habitat areas may be reduced over the long term by the loss of native vegetation from Olde Florida Golf Club property; a drainage canal, future Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension, and Estates development to the south; a future roadways through the lands to the east of the property and, Receiving Lands to the north. • Although currently surrounded by native vegetation, areas around Sections 31 & 32 are allowed to be developed more intensely with less or, in the case of single-family residences in the Estates, with no native vegetation required for individual lots. This will, in time, decrease the habitat value of the land and use of the subject property by listed species. • Impact upon the TDR program could be noteworthy. Potentially, this amendment could result in a new demand for over 400 TDR credits. • Subsequent zoning activity must include a request to modify ("rezone") the RFMU Overlay, changing the RFMU Overlay - Neutral Lands zoning overlay on the subject site to RFMU Overlay - Receiving Lands zoning overlay. This request may be concurrent with the Adoption phase of this GMPA application. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council heard and vetted this application on August 7, 2013. Council members heard presentations from the petitioner's agent and environmental team, with emphasis placed on the changed conditions - of native vegetation retention areas specifically, and in the development market generally. By a 5-0 vote, the EAC recommended to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners to transmit this GMPA application to the DEO. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This staff report has been approved as to form and legality by the Office of the County Attorney. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP-2013-4 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve this petition for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. - 12 - CP-2013-4/PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Agenda Item 9.B. PREPARED BY: • ti/(• DATE: - :us 3 CORBY SCHM DT, AICP, PRIN IPAL PLANNER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DE-ART • NT REVIEWED B . '�Ji 1,41-�" DATE: r;?. Z 7- i y� DAVID WEEKS, AICP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT REVIEWED BY: DATE: (9---2-7 — ) 3 MIKE BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: t� L DATE: NIC CA ALANGUIDA DMINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION PETITION NO.: CP-2013-4/ PL-2013-0000365 Staff Report for the September 19, 2013, CCPC Meeting. NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 12, 2013, BCC Meeting. G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\COMP PLANNING GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2013 Cycles & Small Scale Petitions\2013 Cycle 1 -February\CP-2013-4,Olde Florida Golf Club\Sbstntv Rvws\2013-4 CCPC staff report_aug 21 DRAFT.docx - 13 - CP-2013-4/ PL20130000365 2013-4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands P120130000365/CP-2013-4 [AC STAFF REPORT CP-2013-4,Olde Florida Golf Club GMP Amendment—Transmittal Meeting AGENDA ITEM VII.A ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF AUGUST 7,2013 NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT Petition No's:CP-2013-4/PL-20130000365 Petition Name: Petition to amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan to re-designate land from the Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District(RFMUD)Neutral Lands Designation to the RFMUD Receiving Lands Designation. [TRANSMITTAL MEETING] Applicant/Owner: Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. William Barton,Corporate Secretary Agents: Margaret Perry,AICP Richard D.Yovanovich, Esq. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Coleman,Yovanovich&Koester,P.A. Engineering Consultant: Raymond Piacente, PMP,LEED AP Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Environmental Consultants: Thomas Trettis,PWS, CSE Stantec Consulting Services,Inc. II. LOCATION The ±554 acre subject property is located on north side of [the eastern terminal end of] Vanderbilt Beach Road, in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. The Cypress Canal abuts the southerly boundary, and the northern terminal ends of 17th St.NW thru 23rd St.NW are across this stormwater management canal to south. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES Subject Site: The subject site is zoned A-MHO-RFMUO, Neutral Lands (Rural Agricultural District-Mobile Home Overlay, Rural Fringe Mixed Use-Neutral Lands Overlay) and designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Neutral Lands on the Future Land Use Map. The subject site is partially developed with a golf course and is elsewhere wooded lands. Surrounding Lands: North: Lands to the north of the subject site are zoned A-MHO-RFMUO, Receiving Lands and designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map. With the exception of scattered large-lot single-family residences built on - 1 - CP-2013-4,Olde Florida Golf Club GMP Amendment—Transmittal Meeting AGENDA ITEM VII.A Richmond Street, Krapke Road, Rivers Road and Moulder Drive, this area is also a portion of undeveloped TwinEagles AGR South. There are some nursery and land care businesses, horse stables and equestrian facilities, and other rural businesses in this area. The southern terminal ends of [all but one of] these rural roads do not reach as far south as the subject site. The maximum density achievable for non-Rural Village Receiving Lands' development is 1 dwelling unit per acre,through participation in the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)program. West: Lands to the west of the subject site are zoned A-RFMUO, Receiving Lands and designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map. They are currently developed with a golf course (Golf Club of the Everglades). This neighbor has approached the County with the prospect of combining their property with the subject site to develop a unified residential community. The maximum density achievable for non-Rural Village Receiving Lands' development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through participation in the Transfer of Development Rights(TDR)program. South: Lands to the south of the subject site are zoned E-Estates, and designated Estates on the Future Land Use Map. This area is developed with single-family residences in the antiquated Golden Gate Estates subdivision. Residential density for residential estates is 1 dwelling unit per 2.25 acres, or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record. East: The zoning on lands to the east of the subject site is split between A-MHO-RFMUO, Sending Lands—designated Agricultural/Rural,Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands on the Future Land Use Map (southerly portion), and A-MHO-RFMUO, Receiving Lands — designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map (northerly portion). A 300-foot wide linear Wildlife Corridor lies between the subject site and developable lands to the east. With the exception of a few residences,this area is undeveloped. This neighbor has submitted the preliminary plat plans to the County to develop a residential community, as TwinEagles Phase III. Density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres, or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record, in Sending Lands. The maximum density achievable for non-Rural Village Receiving Lands' development is 1 dwelling unit per acre,through participation in the Transfer of Development Rights(TDR)program. In summary, the existing land uses in the area immediately surrounding the subject site are predominantly undeveloped or sparsely developed rural-type residential. The Receiving Lands FLUM designation allows the same land uses in these areas as proposed on the subject site, except to the south and except on the Sending Lands to the east. IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This Petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan to re-designate the subject site from Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District (RFMUD) Neutral Lands to RFMUD Receiving Lands, affecting approximately 553.7 acres. This re-designation would allow for an increase in residential density from 1 dwelling unit/5 acres to 1 dwelling unit/acre for non-Rural Village development, through participation in the TDR program, and would decrease the native vegetation retention requirement from 60% to 40%. -2 - CP-2013-4,Olde Florida Golf Club GMP Amendment—Transmittal Meeting AGENDA ITEM VII.A V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY Background and Considerations— History of the Rural Fringe GMP Amendments: The Governor and Cabinet issued a Final Order on June 22, 1999, pertaining to GMP amendments adopted in 1997 pursuant to the 1996 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). The Final Order required the County to conduct a Rural and Agricultural Assessment for the Rural and Conservation Designated lands within the County, and then adopt measures to protect natural resources such as wetlands,wildlife and their habitats, and prevent the premature conversion of unique agricultural lands to other uses. This was to be accomplished while directing incompatible land uses away from these sensitive lands by employing creative land planning techniques. The Final Order allowed the County to conduct this Assessment in phases. Accordingly, the County divided the Assessment into two geographical areas, the Rural Fringe Area and the Eastern Lands Area. Relevant to this petition, the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) was established. The RFMUD represents a transitional area between Golden Gate Estates and the County's urban area, and between the urban area and vast agricultural lands and agricultural operations farther to the east. The RFMUD consists of approximately 73,222 acres and is divided into three distinct designations: Sending Lands (± 41,535 ac. orig.; ± 41,414 ac. now), Receiving Lands (± 22,020 ac. orig.; ± 22,373 ac. now), and Neutral Lands ( 9,667 ac. orig.; + 9,427 ac. now). Allowable uses, density, and preservation standards vary by designation. Note: If Olde Florida Golf Club amendment is adopted, acreage figures would be ^ closer to: Sending Lands (± 41,414 ac.) —no change, Receiving Lands (+23,128 ac.), and Neutral Lands (+ 8,873 ac.). Sending Lands are those lands that have the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant wetlands, uplands, and habitat for listed species. The preservation standard for non-NRPA (Natural Resource Protection Area) Sending Lands is eighty percent(80%) of the native vegetation on site while the standard for NRPA Sending Lands is ninety percent (90%). Density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record (created on or before June 22, 1999). Transfer of development rights from Sending Lands may occur at a rate of 1 dwelling unit credit per five acres (0.2 du/ac.) or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record— or as much as 4 dwelling unit credits per five acres or lot of record with use of density bonus credits. Permitted non-residential uses are limited to: agricultural uses, consistent with the Florida Right to Farm Act; habitat preservation and conservation uses; passive parks and other passive recreational uses; sporting and recreational camps; limited essential services; and oil extraction and related processing. 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. The preservation standard for Receiving Lands, except for the North Belle Meade Overlay, is forty percent (40%) of the native vegetation present, not to exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the total site area to be preserved. The base residential density(non-Rural Village development) is 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du/ac.) or 1 dwelling unit per legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record. The maximum density achievable for non-Rural Village development is 1 dwelling unit - 3 - CP-2013-4,Olde Florida Golf Club GMP Amendment—Transmittal Meeting AGENDA ITEM VII.A per acre, through the Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs). The minimum and maximum density for Rural Village development within Receiving Lands is 2 dwelling units per acre and 3 dwelling units per acre, respectively, except that the minimum density for Rural Village development on Receiving Lands within the North Belle Meade Overlay is 1.5 dwelling units per acre. Permitted non-residential uses are primarily the same as those uses permitted in the agricultural zoning district prior to the Final Order in 1999 (e.g. full range of agricultural uses, community facilities,recreational uses,etc.). Neutral Lands are those lands suitable for semi-rural residential development. Generally,Neutral lands have a higher ratio of native vegetation than lands designated as Receiving Lands, but do not have values approaching those in the Sending Lands. The preservation standard for Neutral Lands is sixty percent (60%) of the native vegetation present, not to exceed forty-five percent (45%) of the total site area to be preserved. The maximum residential density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du/ac.) or legal non-conforming lot/parcel of record. These lands are "neutral" to the TDR program and do not generate or receive residential density. Permitted non-residential uses are primarily the same as the uses permitted in the agricultural zoning district prior to the Final Order in 1999 (e.g. full range of agricultural uses, community facilities, recreational uses, etc.). Considerations Specific to the Olde Florida Golf Club: The Olde Florida Golf Club property lies within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD), Neutral Lands, as depicted on Collier County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Neutral Lands designated areas allow golf courses and single-family residential units by right. Olde Florida Golf Club was approved by Conditional Use in 1999, and in November 2001, by Site Development Plan (AR-1383). The 18-hole golf course, its clubhouse and maintenance facilities occupy the developed portions of the subject site. An existing conservation area comprising approximately 51 acres would remain unchanged. The County's Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program provisions were not applicable at the time of Olde Florida original approval. TDR program provisions apply only to extent that they presently prohibit the transfer of development rights into or out of Neutral Lands. If approved, the Olde Florida development would be eligible to utilize not only the base density entitlements generated by developing property located in Receiving Lands but also the TDR entitlements accompanying the new FLU designation, as the transfer of development rights into the development would no longer be prohibited. Environmental Impacts: Collier County Department of Natural Resources personnel reviewed this petition and provided the following analysis: The GMP amendment proposes to change the FLUM designation of Olde Florida Golf Club from RFMUD Neutral Lands to RFMUD Receiving Lands. The applicant states that adoption of the amendments would allow the petitioner to utilize TDRs from RFMUD Sending Lands and add residential density in the Olde Florida Golf Club. Environmental information submitted with the application, are as follows: -4- CP-2013-4,Olde Florida Golf Club GMP Amendment—Transmittal Meeting AGENDA ITEM VII.A 1. FLUCFCS Code map with standard modifiers identifying percent exotic and nuisance vegetation coverage 2. Native vegetation retention calculations based on the updated FLUCFCS Code map, and information in accordance with Ordinance No. 10-08 3. Listed species survey for the site, dated October 15, 2008 4. A list of state and federal listed species know to inhabit biological communities similar to those found on site 5. SFWMD and USACOE wetland jurisdiction determinations 6. Cultural resource summary and assessment for the site According to the application submitted, the subject property is 553.7 acres in size. The FLUCFCS Code map provided identifies 88.4 acres of native vegetation within the golf course, 51 acres of native vegetation in existing conservation easement and 246.8 acres of native vegetation outside the golf course, for a total of 386.2 acres of native vegetation on subject property. Exotic vegetation within the native vegetative communities on site are primarily in the E2 (25-49%) range, with some areas of El (0-24%) and E3 (50-74%). The same is true of the level of exotic vegetation in the existing conservation easement. According to the Property Appraisers website, the Olde Florida Golf Club is divided into two parcels. The golf course parcel (parcel No. 00219400103) is 254.84 acres and future development parcel (parcel No.00219160003), 299.16 acres. The approved site plans for the Olde Florida Golf Club Clubhouse Facility Expansion (SDPA-2010-1104) required exotic vegetation to be removed from the golf course parcel and for it to be maintained free of exotic vegetation in perpetuity. The Olde Florida Golf Club occupies most of Section 31 and falls within one of two Sections of land in Sections 31 & 32, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, both of which were designated as Neutral Lands when the RFMUD was created. These two Sections of land are surrounded by RFMUD Receiving Lands and Estates (Golden Gate Estates). Growth Management Plan amendment number CP-2004-2 for the TwinEagles South property changed the FLUM designations of land immediately to the east of Olde Florida Golf Club, from Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands (153 acres) and Sending Lands (79 acres). The 79 acres of Sending Lands approved with the GMP amendment are located at the southern terminus of the property, adjacent to Vanderbilt Beach Road and the golf course at Olde Florida Golf Club. Although not part of the application package, there is a verbal agreement between the owners of TwinEagles South and the local wildlife special interest groups to retain a 300 foot wide wildlife corridor along the west side of TwinEagles South. This wildlife corridor starts by the wildlife underpass at Immokalee Road and terminates at the Sending Lands along Vanderbilt Beach Road, at the southern end of TwinEagles South. This wildlife corridor runs alongside the east side of the existing conservation easement and golf course on Olde Florida Golf Club. The listed species survey identified gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), American alligator (Aligator mississippensis) and several listed species of wading bird on subject property. Seventeen active and inactive gopher tortoise burrows were found in the undeveloped area on the west side of the property, in the future - 5 - CP-2013-4,Olde Florida Golf Club GMP Amendment—Transmittal Meeting AGENDA ITEM VII.A development parcel. The listed wading birds and American alligator were observed in the gold course stormwater management lakes. Undeveloped land within the Olde Florida Golf Club and in Sections 31 & 32, are within the USFWS Panther Secondary Zone. No panther or signs of panther were observed on the subject property during the listed species survey. According to the Listed Species Survey Report, two collared panthers have occurred within 1.3 mile of the subject property (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) telemetry data). Panther and black bear telemetry points provided in the Listed Species Survey Report show most panther and black bear activity beyond two miles from the subject property, primarily on undeveloped lands adjacent to and within RFMUD lands to the north and south, and in the Golden Gate Estates along Everglades and Desoto Boulevards. The wetland jurisdictional determinations provided, show wetlands on site being drained by the major canals in the area and converting to uplands. According to the Formal Determination of Wetlands and Surface Waters received from the State, 30.88 acres of jurisdictional wetlands occur on the property, within the future development parcel. The Determination also states that habitats within the existing 38.71 acre conservation easement on site were excluded from the application, and thus not included in the Formal Determination. The loss of jurisdiction wetlands on the property is documented by the jurisdictional wetland determinations provided with the application. Pursuant to the Supreme Court ruling, USACOE jurisdiction wetlands on site are no longer jurisdictional since they are not connected to waters of the United States. Wetlands on site are also not within flowways or connected to wetlands off-site. In March, 2013, the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. conducted a reconnaissance cultural resource assessment of the site, in accordance with the specifications set forth in Chapter IA-46, F.A.C. One archaeological site, 8CR1305, was recorded as a result of the assessment and can be characterized by two non-local chert flacks found on a disturbed surface. These flacks are consistent with the Archaic Period (ca. 7,000 to 3,000 BP (before present)), and likely represent a small prehistoric camp. According to the assessment, the site is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places due to the paucity of the material and disturbances associated with the site. The cultural resource assessment also states that the parcel has an overall low to medium probability for cultural resources, based on the field reconnaissance and aerial imagery. The consultant's site review with the Florida Division of Historic Resources determined no previously recorded archaeological sites on the subject property. In summary, the subject property and land within Section 31 & 32, Township 48 South, Range 27 East are surrounded by RFMUD Receiving Lands and Estates (Golden Gate Estates). These designations allow for a greater percentage of land to be developed and will, in time, reduce use of the subject property by larger free roaming listed species of wildlife such as panther and black bear. Other lands designated Neutral in the RFMUD abut at least on one side land designated either Sending or Conservation, thus providing greater protection for native habitat in those areas and for viability of corridors for the movement of wildlife. The agreement between the wildlife special interest groups and owners of TwinEagles South does provide a wildlife corridor linking Olde Florida Golf Club to undeveloped land to the north, within Bonita Bay East Golf Club. - 6 - CP-2013-4,Olde Florida Golf Club GMP Amendment—Transmittal Meeting AGENDA ITEM VII.A One of the major purposes of the RFMUD is to preserve higher quality habitat for listed species, flowways and corridors for the movement of wildlife, in particular that for Florida panther and black bear. When the RFMUD was created, lands within the RFMUD were afforded greater protection based on the quality of habitat and location within the landscape. Although currently surrounded by native vegetation, areas around Sections 31 & 32 are allowed to be developed more intensely with less or, in the case of single-family residences in the Estates, no native vegetation required to be retained on individual lots. This will, in time, decrease the habitat value of the land and use of the subject property by listed species. Creation of a 300 foot wide wildlife corridor on the neighboring TwinEagles South property, coupled with the higher native vegetation retention requirement for Neutral Lands on the subject property will benefit wildlife, but may not be suitable for long term use by listed species such as panther and black bear, particularly when adjoining properties are all developed. Given this staff do not have strong evidence to support retaining the higher native vegetation retention standard for Neutral Lands on the subject property and find the subject property more consistent with the intent of RFMUD Receiving Lands. [Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist] VI. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING(NIM) SYNOPSIS A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by LDC Section 10.03.05 F was [duly advertised, noticed and] held on Tuesday, July 16, 2013, 5:30 p.m. at the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District Headquarters, located at 14575 Collier Boulevard, Naples. Approximately seven persons other than the applicant's team and County staff attended, and heard the following information: The applicant's agent provided a full description of the proposed amendment to the group, including the two-step GMPA process, the Rural Fringe Mixed Used designation and the TDR program. Also overviewed was the history of the Olde Florida property. The presentation indicated that natural vegetation preserve areas already exist on the site - and they would not change as a result of residential development. The present golf course and proposed residential uses were described, particularly abandoning earlier plans to expand the 18- hole golf course to 36 holes. Although no firm plans are in place, residential development would be limited to a specific development sub-area. The Olde Florida Golf Club was more recently approached by the neighboring Golf Club of the Everglades with the prospect of combining the two properties to provide a unified residential community. Questions generated during the subsequent discussion focused on the nature of the changed environmental characteristics [progressively dryer conditions],how the existing on-site preserve area would be affected [not by new residential areas], and if future development would include different or additional access to Vanderbilt Beach Road [none are contemplated]. Also questioned was the County's timetable for extending Vanderbilt Beach Road eastward[not in its present financially feasible planning schedule] and the possibility of aggregating additional large tracts to establish a Rural Village[extremely improbable]. An "unrecorded" conservation easement located along the northeast side of the Olde Florida Golf Course property was questioned. [This is the 300 foot wide wildlife corridor discussed in the Environmental Impacts section above.] It was explained that this easement does exist and -7 - CP-2013-4,Olde Florida Golf Club GYP Amendment—Transmittal Meeting AGENDA ITEM WI.A would remain in place, while any further recordation would be the responsibility of another '1 pAY• At least one party in attendance expressed opposition to the proposal. The meeting was completed by 6:10 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt,AICP, Principal Planner] VII. RECOMMENDATION That the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council forward Petition CP-2013-4 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve this petition for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. PREPARED BY: r l' A .�1/tt DATE: ,7-4 ' CORBY SC •T,A CP, P CIPAL PLANNER COMPREHEN`IVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTME T REVIEWED BY: '" DAl DAVID WEEKS,AICP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION,PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT REVIEWED BY: DATE: 7 _`` `1 r ) MIKE BOSI,AICP,DIRECTOR, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: / ,..ry.,. , �--•,. DATE: - 2 - 1�3 NICK CASAL° GUII7A,ADMINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION PETITION NO.: CP-2013-4/PL-20130000365 Staff Report for the August 7,2013,EAC Meeting NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the September 19,2013,CCPC Meeting and November 12,2013, BCC Meeting. - 8 - P120130000365/CP-2013-4 RESOLUTION & EXHIBIT `A' RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF THE OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB PROPERTY FROM RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT (RFMUD)NEUTRAL LANDS TO RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT (RFMUD) RECEIVING LANDS, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTING OF 554± ACRES IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION, TWO MILES EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. 1PL20130000365/CP2013-41 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985,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, Petitioner, Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc., has initiated this amendment to the Future Land Use Element; and WHEREAS, on September 9, 2013, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, F.S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, on November 12, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184,F.S.; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have Words underlined are additions; Words strusk-threugh are deletions 1 *** *** *** *** are abreak in text PL20130000365/CP-2013-4 Rev.9/04/13 thirty(30)days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing,to Collier County its comments within said thirty(30)days pursuant to Section 163.3184,F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty(180)days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.;and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this day of ,2013. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk GEORGIA A. HILLER,ESQ. Chairwoman Approved as to form an 1 ity: DRAF Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit"A" CP\13-CMP-00902\8 Words underlined are additions; Words strusl eugh are deletions 2 *** *** *** *** are a break in text PL2013 0000365/CP-2013-4 Rev.9/04/13 1 1 T 48 S 1 T 47 S 1 T 48 8 1 T 49 S 1 Tgg50 ggS 1 gg ggT 51 S 33 1 T 522 S 1 T 59 S z >i m R _ S S = R R R R 8 $ g R R i R i K o cl U ab > . I I � ii xieg3 zz; 31; # n5R5RgR8R00 -; g 8i : 5„ 4R -7 z a! w °_ gp o g 1 °e a ° ° ° g W ° aQ gaoagg & a a a & ffi _& g ._ a N S g W < g 2 a e;:� d 8 2 4 2 4 2 € 3 gv `Y--.--.--8--g--g gga 0a 1--a—'- p1 3 e i s < 3g 3 3 3 / 3 3 3 3 3 3 / 3v a 3 8 3 3 3 3 / 3v 3”3 3 3 „ . * 11.7E i s b $ g 8. ;� A1Nf100 a vMON9 A1Nf100 30tl0 — ' z < W S j h :§k w 41 3i a 3 / 011110 om0 ' I '1 0.1 \ I + �d'` "' W !7 ¢ ¢ E w [ i S. Y J 5 g - w g 00 a I '. -6 g a tl ,_°Eg a s 0I'� z !' 3 a2 L'' 5 c sa W! a�1 ate€ az $ € xg u' 2 1 ,'s€5 Vi=e= $ial � ',tira b§i ;��5 Ag —dal a l Eft4 s 30 g is 1 a rh e� ¢ ¢ 1 li_ a a>a a=agu: Is 1100 8,1 g ' y. s 3 ■a■�s■❑i■D■ I ❑i• 1 • : g$ .. — § Z gd 0w V gbia - y W N W .� 2oa: Z y 2 N •w E E � zm S W o /y ao M U a oa 9 a B o =K Ea m Z a I ¢ E S a i t 5 e On Y' 5 1 g IN $ S$ ! a s if rIgl 'Ifeamz0 :z4®w�o 3 � � <a. a y wo x !If ii;; a E ; a�� u'gi;ing 71 ¢ OM MY 117•Ill I �. o , w ¢ .., w i W N N • 111116/Cdr(if- a VS VA 1 I— 3 11111111111111111 m W p I' i I I S .y II - IIIIII i�r . �N ¢¢ II' I ?ill 1111 3 a gg 1, -m�zz ° N a 4 Boa ° -� L�.,•e3. c� N cc s IIi ;OO! . - d m ` - gar/ /O LL Wch !`k s `/\ � 4 ' T ��awoo � `ggg 11,11 W u 2 7 N N 7 W CO N �v 011.' g — ILA U 'i,1"A<22 it\ ItilrgrellraW. '#/ :,,.., --%'/ i 4., Cr." ' VP, U W U /� s F BB N '""- 8i, gis„- dm= 31 Gulf °f S 94 1 1 S Lt 1 i s e4 1 1 S 84 1 1 s o5 1 I s to 1 1 S ao 1 s E5 1 Item #9C CP-2013 -3 BUCKLEY MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT PETITION PL20120002909 DE DAVIDSON ENGINEERING Proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment Prepared For: McGuire Development Co 560 Delaware Avenue Buffalo,NY 14202 Application to Amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan Growth Management Plan Objectives and Policies Justifications Prepared By: Roetzel & Andress Law Firm R. Bruce Anderson 850 Park Shore Drive Naples, FL 34103 (239) 649-2708 banderson(&,ralaw.com and Davidson Engineering,Inc. Tim Hancock, AICP 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, FL 34104 239-434-6060 tim(a,davidsonengineering.com August 19, 2013 DE ,. DAVIDSON ENGINEERING LIST OF EXHIBITS Application to Amend the Growth Management Plan Exhibit A and Supporting Documents Professional Qualifications Sheet Exhibit B Proposed GMPA Text Amendment Language Exhibit C Location Map Exhibit D Aerial Location Map Exhibit E Zoning Map Exhibit F Future Land Use Map Exhibit G Historical/Archaeological Probability Exhibit H Proximity to Public Services Map Exhibit I Property Deed Exhibit J Application Authorization Agreements Exhibit K Master Concept Plan Exhibit L Boundary Survey & Legal Descriptions Exhibit M Traffic Impact Statement& Additional Trip Generation Analysis Exhibit N Utility Provisions Statement Exhibit 0 Waste Generation Rates Exhibit P Commercial & PUD Properties Map Exhibit Q Bergstrom Report- Survey of Emerging Market Conditions Exhibit R National Retailers List Exhibit S 2 of 182 DE DAVIDSON ENGINEERING EXHIBIT "A" APPLICATION TO AMEND THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN 3 of 182 APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN — APPLICATION NUMBER DATE RECEIVED PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE DATE SUFFICIENT This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Comprehensive Planning Department, Suite 400, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252-2400 (Fax 239-252-2946). The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient,the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97-431 as amended by Resolution 98-18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239- 252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFOMRATION A. Name of Applicant McGuire Development Company Company McGuire Development Company Address 560 Delaware Avenue City Buffalo State NY Zip Code 14202 Phone Number (716) 829-1980 Fax Number (716) 885-1319 B. Name of Agent * R. Bruce Anderson &Tim Hancock, Co-Agents • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company Roetzel &Andress Law Firm/ Davidson Engineering, Inc. Address 850 Park Shore Drive, Third Floor/3530 Kraft Rd#301 City Naples State FL Zip Code 34103/34105 Phone Number(239) 649-2708/434-6060 Fax Number(239) 261-3659/434-6084 C. Name of Owner(s) of Record Airport Pulling Orange Blossom, LLC D. Address 560 Delaware Avenue E. City Buffalo State NY Zip Code 14202 F. Phone Number (716) 829-1980 Fax Number (716) 885-1319 G. Name,Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. Response: Please see Exhibit"B"(Professional Qualifications Sheet.) I a of 182 Exhibit A II. Disclosure of Interest Information: 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. (Use additional sheets if necessary). N/A B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. N/A C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. N/A 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 Percentage of Ownership • Airport Pulling Orange Blossom, LLC 560 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, NY 14202 owned by Celtic Capital • F.James McGuire 16.67% • Michael McGuire 16.67% • Kathleen McGuire 16.67% • Jeannie Marie McGuire 16.67% • Jackie McGuire Gurney 16.67% • Kelly McGuire 16.67% • Celtic Capital • F.James McGuire 16.67% • Michael McGuire 16.67% • Kathleen McGuire 16.67% • Jeannie Marie McGuire 16.67% • Jackie McGuire Gurney 16.67% • Kelly McGuire 16.67% 5 of 182 2 Exhibit A 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. N/A F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. N/A G. Date subject property acquired (Aug 15, 2010) leased ( ): Term of lease yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: , or anticipated closing: H. 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. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Please see attached Exhibit "M"for legal description B. GENERAL LOCATION 7501 Airport Pulling Road North, Naples, FL 34109; Section 02,Township 49, Range 25 C. PLANNING COMMUNITY North Naples D.TAZ 114 E. SIZE IN ACRES +J-21.7 acres F.ZONING MPUD G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN: Within a 500' radius, lying immediately north of the subject property is the Brighton Gardens PUD, a 5.14 acre project with 133 ALF beds/units and is built out. Lying further to the North and also adjacent to a portion of the Emerald Lakes PUD is the Fountain Park PUD, a 10.14 acre developed retail, restaurant and office development consisting of 71,400 sq. ft. To the east lies Airport Rd, across which lies a multi-family development within the Vineyards PUD, Lakeside of Naples (396 multi and single family units on 98.6 acres), St Katherine's Greek Orthodox Church and an undeveloped portion of the Longview Center, approved for 143,500 sq. ft. of commercial development with 15 residential units on 14.73 acres. To the south is the headquarters of the Collier County Library system and the North Collier Government Services Center, an assembly of local and state government service providers in one building. Further south across Orange Blossom Road is the Italian American Club which is developed as a social club but has been rezoned to permit 34,000 sq. ft. of commercial development on 5 acres. To the west is the Emerald Lakes PUD, which is built out with 525 single and multi-family units on 148 acres. Exhibit A 6 of 182 H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S) Urban ( Urban Mixed Use District, Buckley Mixed Use Sub- district) IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S)TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Recreation/Open Space Traffic Circulation Sub-Element Mass Transit Sub-Element Aviation Sub-Element Potable Water Sub-Element Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element NGWAR Sub-Element Solid Waste Sub-Element Drainage Sub-Element Capital Improvement Element CCME Element X Future Land Use Element Golden Gate Master Plan Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) 40 &41 OF THE Future Land Use ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike Ito identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: This application proposes the modification of an existing sub-district. The proposed sub-district will allow for a mix of uses but will not require the physical integration of residential units with commercial square footage. A forced integration of residential and commercial uses on a site of this size has no comparison in the market place. As currently structured,the existing GMP language forces a style of development that has no or limited financial viability and as such, leaves the property undevelopable. The proposed sub-district will allow for similar uses and intensities compared to what is permitted today, but in a different physical configuration. A PUD rezone will be submitted for concurrent review with the GMP application to address additional site specific design considerations. C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM No Map Amendment will be required. TO D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S)AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name& Page#) None E. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL CHANGES REQUESTED: None V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE:ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN l"=400'. At least one copy reduced to 8-1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE X Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning)with subject property outlined. Response: Please see Exhibit"D"(Location Map)and Exhibit"F"(Zoning Map). X Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries,source, and date. Response: Please see Exhibit"E"(Aerial Plan). X Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. Response: Please see Exhibit"F"(Zoning Map)and Item III.G. of this application. 7 of 182 4 Exhibit A B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION X Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. Response: Please see Exhibit"G"(Future Land Use Map). The entire+/-21.7 acres is designated Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict C. ENVIRONMENTAL NA Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT- FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN "A" ABOVE. Response: The site is historically impacted and is a single FLUCCS Code of 240 for a Nursery Operation, so a map depicting this would be extraneous. No native habitat exists on site, however a tree count will be done prior to site development to ensure compliance with Land Development Code requirements for preservation of native vegetation. NA Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.),Identify historic and/or archaeological sites on the subject property. Response: This site has been historically impacted and has been the subject of numerous Protected Species Surveys(PSS)over the years with no presence indicated. Since an updated P55 will be required prior to either rezoning or site development, based on the history of use and approvals for this site, a PSS is unnecessary at this time. Please see Exhibit"H"(Historical and Archaeological Probability). D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J-11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element-Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). 1. INSERT"Y" FOR YES OR "N" FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: NO Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)(5), F.A.C.). IF so, identify area located in ACSC. NO Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) NO Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? (Reference 9J- 5 Exhibit A 8 of 182 11.006(1)(a)7.b, F.A.C.) Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County-wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. NO Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference Rule 9J-5.006(5) F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J-11.007, F.A.C.) Response: The proposed subdistrict seeks to modify the existing land use designation without increasing the amount of developable square footage or residential units. The removal of the required physical integration of residential and commercial uses may actually result in a lower intensity at build-out than what was previously approved. No environmental, ground water or natural resources are anticipated to be impacted. Please see the response below for a more complete analysis of the potential impacts of the proposed amendment. E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: X Potable Water Response: The subject property will be served by the existing potable water system serving the area (Collier County Public Utilities). Please see Exhibit "0" for additional information. X Sanitary Sewer Response: The subject property will be served by the existing sanitary sewer system serving the area (Collier County Public Utilities). Please see Exhibit "0" for additional information. X Arterial &Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS Response: See Exhibit"N"for the Traffic Impact Statement. X Drainage Response: Collier County does not enforce a Level of Service Standard beyond complying with South Florida Water Management District standards for water quality and off-site of discharge of storm water. The project will be designed in accordance with current South Florida Water Management District standards for design and will be permitted through the Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) process for compliance with these standards. X Solid Waste Response: The subject property shall be served by the existing solid waste provider serving the area (Waste Management). Please see Exhibit "P" (Waste Generation 9 of 182 6 Exhibit A Rates). The proposed amendment will not result in an increase in solid waste being generated from the project. — N/A Parks: Community and Regional Response: The maximum number of allowable residential units is not changing and will therefore not result in increased impacts on the Community and Regional park system. If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment.(Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. X Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services. Response: Please see attached Exhibit"I"(Proximity to Public Services). 3. X Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. Response: The proposed project will have no significant effect on the existing public services. The result may be a reduced impact on schools,fire protection and emergency medical services since each developed acre must be either residential OR Commercial but may not be utilized for both as currently permitted under the existing GMP language. Service Provider Change Schools: Collier County Public Schools N/A Elementary Pelican Marsh Elementary School 9480 Airport Rd. N Naples, FL 34109 Middle Pine Ridge Middle School 1515 Pine Ridge Rd. Naples, FL 34109 High Barron Collier High School 5600 Cougar Dr. Naples, FL 34109 Fire Protection: North Naples Fire Control N/A & Rescue District 6495 Taylor Rd. Naples, FL 34109 7 Exhibit A 10 of 182 EMS Service: Collier County EMS N/A Medic 46 3410 Pine Ridge Road/I-75 Naples, FL 34109 Sheriff Service: Collier County Sheriff's Office N/A North Naples Substation, District 1 776 Vanderbilt Beach Road Naples, FL 34108-8707 F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: AH Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). ST/W-4 Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable N/A Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable N/A High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION © $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) © Credit of$250.00 from the pre application meeting fee ❑ $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) © Proof of ownership (copy of deed) (See Exhibit"J"for the Proof of Ownership) © Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) (See Exhibit "K" for the Letter of Authorization) © 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1"=400' or at a scale as determined during the pre-application meeting. 11 of 182 8 Exhibit A DE DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "B" PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS SHEET 12 of 182 Exhibit`B"-Professional Qualifications • Roetzel & Andress, LPA R. Bruce Anderson Project Attorney Mr. Anderson is a partner in the Roetzel & Andress law firm and has thirty years' private and public sector experience in land use, zoning and environmental law in Southwest Florida. He graduated from Stetson University College of Law and is admitted to practice in Illinois and Florida. Mr. Anderson has an AV rating from the Martindale- Hubbell Law Directory. He has been recognized in "The Best Lawyers in America" for Land Use & Zoning from 2007 — present and was named by them as Land Use and Zoning Law Attorney of the Year for the Naples-Ft. Myers region. Davidson Engineering Tim Hancock,AICP Director of Planning Mr. Hancock has a Bachelor's Degree in Geography with emphasis in Urban Planning from the University of South Florida and has practiced planning in Southwest Florida since 1990. He has been a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners since 1994. Mr. Hancock has been tendered and accepted as an expert in land planning in cities and counties throughout Florida as well as being tendered as an expert witness in the area of Planning in both State and Federal court proceedings. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA (Transportation Consulting) Norman J. Trebilcock,AICP, P.E. President Mr. Trebilcock has a Bachelor's Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Miami and a Master's Degree in Engineering, with an emphasis in Public Works from the University of Florida. Mr. Trebilcock is also a graduate of the US Army Engineer Officer Basic Course. Mr. Trebilcock has practiced transportation planning and engineering in Southwest Florida since 1990. Mr. Trebilcock produces plans, designs, and permitting efforts on public works and private sector projects. His primary area of expertise is in transportation engineering, including highway design, utility relocation, drainage design, street lighting, signalization, access management and permitting. He prepares and reviews traffic impact statements and related reports. In addition to being a registered Professional Engineer and holding a certification from the American Institute of Certified Planners, Mr. Trebilcock holds an FDOT Advanced Work Zone Traffic Control Certification. 13 of 182 DE , DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "C" PROPOSED GMPA TEXT AMENDMENT LANGUAGE 14 of 182 Proposed GMPA Text Amendment Language Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict is to allow for limited retail, office and residential uses while allowing for the development of a_mixed-use development. The Activity Centers to the North and South provide for large-scale commercial uses, while this Subdistrict is intended to promote convenience and intermediate commercial development to serve existing and future residential development in the immediate area. This Subdistrict will serve to reduce_existing trip lengths for convenience and intermediate commercial services. Commercial uses for the purpose of this section area limited to those allowed in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Zoning Districts except as noted below. The development of this Subdisctrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. A unified planned development with common architectural theme, which utilizes shared parking and cross accesses. c. Commercial uses will be capped at a maximum of 7,500 square feet per acre for the total project. d. Residential development for multi-family dwelling units will be subject _ to a maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre for the total project. e. Maximum lot coverage for buildings is capped at 35% for the total project. f. No more than 50% of the commercial square footage may be constructed as multi-tenant buildings. g. Residential units may be located throughout the Subdistrict, as stand- alone development. h. For each acre of land utilized for residential purposes, 7,500 square feet of commercial buildable square footage will be eliminated for the total square footage allowable. For each acre of commercial square footage built, 15 residential units will be eliminated from the maximum allowable number of residential units. i. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties. j. No building shall exceed three stories in height with no allowance for under building parking. k. Drive-through establishments will be limited to a maximum of 4. Banks shall have no more than three drive- through lanes; these drive- through lanes must be architecturally integrated into the main building. I. No gasoline service stations will be permitted. m. All buildings will be connected with pedestrian features. n. A twenty-foot wide Type C landscape buffer shall be required along all perimeter property lines adjacent to residential use. Exhibit C 15 of 182 Proposed GMPA Text Amendment Language This amendment will modify an existing sub-district in the Collier County GMP as follows (Strike throughs are proposed language deletions and underlines are proposed language additions: Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict is to allow for limited email scale retail, office and residential uses while requiring that the project result in a true allowing for the development of a mixed-use development. The Activity Centers to the North and South provide for large-scale commercial uses, while this Subdistrict is intended to promote small scale convenience and intermediate commercial development mixed use development with pedestrian orientation to serve existing and future residential development in the immediate area. This Subdistrict is intended to be an example for future mixed use nodes, providing residents with a pedestrian scale development while also reducing will serve to reduce existing trip lengths for convenience and intermediate sma':-sGa„e commercial services. Commercial uses for the purpose of this section area limited to those allowed in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Zoning Districts except as noted below. The development of this Subdisctrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. A unified planned development with common architectural theme, which utilizes shared parking and cross accesses. c. Commercial Retail uses will be capped at a maximum of 7,500 30 square feet per acre for the total project.•- - - -. e e - . - - - ' - -- - - - - -- . - - for the total project. e. Residential development for multi-family dwelling units will be subject to a maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre for the total project. f. Maximum lot coverage for buildings is capped at 35% for the total project. g. No more than 50% of the commercial square footage may be constructed as multi-tenant buildings. _°. _ -- _ - _ . _ - - - Road will provide secondary accesses facing the street. e . - - - - - - - • - - - • - -:•• ••e • architectural theme. 16 of 182 Exhibit C •lF £ - - ' - -- • -- - - -°• - - - maximum density must be constructed before completion of an aggregate total of 40,000 square feet retail or office uses. I. Residential units may be located throughout the Subdistrict, as stand- alone development. m. Integration of residential and office or retail uses in the same building is pored encouraged. A minimum of 40% of the commercial square footage shall be within mixed use buildings (residential and commercial). For each acre of land utilized for residential purposes, 7,500 square feet of commercial buildable square footage will be eliminated for the total square footage allowable. For each acre of commercial square footage built, 15 residential units will be eliminated from the maximum allowable number of residential units. n. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties. e- No building footprint will exceed 15,000 square feet. Common stairs, p. No building shall exceed three stories in height with no allowance for under building parking. q. Drive-through establishments will be limited to a maximum of 4. bBanks shall have with no more than three drive- through lanes; these drive-through lanes must be architecturally integrated into the main building. r. No gasoline service stations will be permitted. s. All buildings will be connected with pedestrian features. t. A twenty foot wide landscape Type D buffer shall be required along Airport Pulling Road. A twenty-foot wide Type C landscape buffer shall be required along all ether perimeter property lines adjacent to residential use. any properties adjacent to this Subdistrict. 17 of 182 Exhibit C DE DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "D" LOCATION MAP 18 of 182 Ire ..,,...,,,, • . •• ,T)k' - .;..1 - _--", ..- ic, TT I 1 jo. •' t ,- 4- ft;. -.it_ ,7_' .,, ;, f-------------- II* - _...-----• .,„/„..„ _ A., . I..jr. .-.__ ._ ..;‘,.-- . .. A..4-.., , ; kT} .• s z y� 16,00(or I,441,4444-' _A,' * ,.. - 4.441 i 1-.* -_. *' - ----.!Lji141 -,, \\,° -1'4-- ' .0 v`: : .7 ,10 / . ulgt. V - ,-. _4:- '. . ' ` 1 `erg - 1 S ,- Ilk ' s; r !! r t t. . l ``; < ;r . ....7 „. . Ai-.- . - . , rilpfl." Aii . ! i .. :'3 , ,. k,_.... — 0'4;'`' ,.•:.''. • :‘ .", r .., .,.. .• ..„,,,,......T.„. .„.._....., .,,,, z, , . . - y L. ; ., . .„:„,, L.e ... - ,_.• ,,,,___:-: CZ',ti,•:;i.,21.116:..41° ,''./ ., - A -. ' 't- ".1 ' . - 4:I' it . _ Yom^ •-,.. • ✓it - . a ..... _ 1 .:... .. ..."x. 1441 A E vi •!.. 1111110111414 _ liC• ,,I 1„.„•. ° '>r • _) - ' 4 ' LEGEND . t„ SUBJECT PROPERTY i L I Di' ■LLIER COUN ig R H1C IN Ij.`'�'_ L, ° MS(290$); k-,-;„,] 1 _ i RAPHIC DA 1 l ' (012) ■ 2 ”- DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. BUCKLEY GMPA O 4365 RADIO 341 ROAD,SUITE 201 DAVIDSON NAPLES, FL 34104 EXHIBIT D: LOCATION MAP 19 of 182 ENGINEERING PHONE: 239-434-6060 DE , DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "E" AERIAL LOCATION MAP 20 of 182 pgr it, 1 ' �EMEl L-94.1 R 'rL6 y�� t� � . h'wry ' . — i6 t 1 ' �_ a r�.. �r yi... R r ' 1 sue° F• 2 , ,III-~.._. , ,' 4 jilt: yi ,, -.Ts,_ "7-"' ' '''. .... -.;,; -- • 9', ‘ii 1 i , . _4.__ ... 0/114b7- ,7 -,iftr 1.k,:11 .. 1.4.;01,, II 11. 7117 -...:;i•#RtaLllk'•1:1;41:4: '44-1 ' LA'. a 4,10. , , ,r. ' -N„.... to 1 fi . • ,,, r _ • I ft I. , : •. ir _ . '440 w.- ! -IT ^ te{ . . . . *It , . i f f1 A , . . A. 4 ,. ,. .. „.. ,... ...-4-zjiet 4, ... 4 it Ib �. f. L . , 1 411' " :Is g .c, ,tt s d f` -_ C s_# i , a w. z.. *- _ .e LEGEND '^, ..—.. _,; SUBJECT PROPERTY FEET 4�' 0 FLUCCS - 174 DISTURBED LAND '_ .. si COLLIER CO 13C43APHIC NM- '7.1t, Q 4� TE •;- , . �i R , OEDAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. BUCKLEY GMPA 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 DAVIDSON NAPLES, FL 34104 EXHIBIT E: AERIAL WITH FLUCCS EXHIBIT 21 of 182 ENGINEERING PHONE: 239-434-6060 DE , DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "F" ZONING MAP 22 of 182 • 'VANDERBILT BEACH ROAR ._ .. c.-., _ . ---* :r is a ----- ,, ,... is 4 � r� " '' PUD , .- •+M�f„! - L 13 N kk "x 5 , ��M� B. >` r PU II � PUD; -%.__. ,,s IL..- .E R .'--'-'1'.'---','''' '..y�s — , i f, � _ ✓ f� � s IOC Tr,' � = PUD x � ,. t ■ , ! ` � , r • -k I, A R ,� } g. k. , PUD w �i = ;� , �J'�4.t PUD Atiti ° ,..•. , I g '� • w d .•a „' iE� I4-„' k r‘.47 ,tip_ t =y r Cu _, ,,. irk A LEGEND ORA. GE BLOSSOM DRIVE - "':: SUBJECT PROPERTY �� ZONING 1.,, PUD 1" CPU " } PU aA �CF : - - - RPUD CFPUD x. - " A ®CPUD ', CI pup & I . r ` . ffi DRPUD PUD ,,, No ®RPUD and CFPUD _ r=IRPUD-BM d ATER SQURCES.LOLL COUNTY GEOGRA IC t. 0141•■11.J;Fleyr7 +1,AIII • 1 g FG RIDA GEOGRAPhFfC DAT L1 X 0{ - q^= 4 PUD 1 n -- OEDAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. BUCKLEY GMPA 4365 RADIO ROAD,SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 EXHIBIT F: ZONING MAP 23 of 182 DAVNDSON PHONE: 239-434-6060 DE , DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "G" FUTURE LAND USE MAP 24 of 182 _s . — - — VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD y t....1,7., 11-_- .--3 i„ir, Vir, 4 o M UA , 1 Imo W - .I = d .'4 �- s ! ; i , _ . .,. .,.. _ . ' . et ; , - i' ir , _� t I, o k ,y; R 4 F, '"- s ,a _ y SSA* / 0 14y iir 1 x A. f `-_ 1114- BSUB . o re f5,1 l -3 � Y : -_ ---rwe- -, M r - a#�y I. , i l I 1 I=- ....41 ' 0i '4 LEGEND W�7 E - - D MUA: MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT .` a. QBSUB: BUCKLEY MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT , S QOSUB: ORANGE BLOSSOM MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT 0 600 1,200 FEET Ell UR: URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT SOURCES COLLIER COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2008); 1 FLORIDA GEOGRAPHIC DATA LIBRARY(2012) "'" DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. BUCKLEY GMPA 4365 RADIO ROAD, SUITE 201 DAVIDSON NAPLES, FL34104 EXHIBIT G: FUTURE LAND USE MAP 25 of 182 EN,GiNEERiNG PHONE: 239-434-6060 DE , DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "H" HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROBABILITY 26 of 182 \ This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a STOP project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333 for project review information. January 16, 2013 - Florida Master Site Tocia Hamlin File Davidson Engineering 3530 Kraft Road, Suite#301 Naples, FL 34105 Phone: 239.434.6060 Email: Tocia@davidsonengineering.com Dear Ms. Hamlin, In response to your inquiry of January 15, 2013,the Florida Master Site File lists no previously recorded historic structures at the current address of 7501 Airport Road, in Naples, Collier County, Florida. • When interpreting the results of this search,please consider the following information: • This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. • Federal, State and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws,you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Kind Regards, Sarah Liko Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Sarah.Liko(a,DOS.MyFlorida.com n 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee,FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph I 850.245.6439 fax I SiteFile @dos.state.fl.us 27 of 182 DE _ DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "I" PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC SERVICES MAP 28 of 182 O NCH North Naples Hospital - od CO 11190 Health Park Boulevard 111TH AVE. IMMOKALEE RD/CR 84( LEGEND BUCKLEY PROPERTY 0 2 MILES r Schools North Naples Fire and Rescue Station 45 1885 Veterans Park Drive ''/'—��---------�```` * COLLIER COUNTY SHERRIFF FACILITY OHospital O ∎I , + Medical 0 COLLIER COUNTY FIRE STATION / m / FIRE DISTRICT ' m I I City of Naples Fire m Golden Gate Fire n Pelican Marsh n Z 9480 Airport Pulling Road N North Naples Fire a. / / A • ill North Naples Substation Dist 1 ° 1 MILE �` 776 Vanderbilt Beach Road �...- ` �ANDERB1 T'. I' ■.... ` North Na les Fire and Rescue Station 44 / 8970 Hammock Oak Drive / `• z • rn / / \ O / VANDERBILT BEACH RD I.Z ; 1 I 1 ° 1 I -§ I 1- I c I � I w I g 1 D First Baptist Christian Academy I rS ORANGE -4 3000 Orange Blossom Drive a \GE BLOSSOM OR O (private`,) I \ -t : I n I ; 1 p 1 j 0 / Iz / 1J, / / 1�• / / 0\ / North Naples Fire(Control District) \\ / / , • 6 95 Taylor Road ■ '// / • ■■ ■■ . . . i0 Osceola Elementary / .. 5770 Osceola Trail / • Pine Ridge Middle School 6 / • 1515 Pine Ridge Road J g Community School / C.m 13275 Livingston Rad Q \.1,41• rn Barron Collier High School 1 • 5600 Cougar Drive (private) Q. •EAGATE DRIVE Q PINE RIDGE RD r / O 1 '��rrr o North Naples Fire and Rescue Station 40 North Naples Fire and Rescue Statiion�6 �1441�.Pine Ridge Road w Sea Gate Elementary IX ♦ O 3410 Pine Ridge Road N 650 Seagate Drive z ■�∎` 0 ��' tV.n._ w ��♦ w cG i�� W —911-- E ' I- w w S J 0 O p r----- -------_____----1 0 3,000 6,000 SOURCES:COLLIER COUNTYIGEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2012) •:"Z I FEET I DAVIDSON ENGINEERING,INC. BUCKLEY GMPA 4365 RADIOROAD,SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 EXHIBIT I: PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC SERVICES 29 of 182 DAVIDSON PHONE:239-434-6060 E N G I N E E R I N G DE , DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "J" PROPERTY DEED 30 of 182 INSTR 4729036 OR 4826 PG 2603 RECORDED 8/15/2012 4:06 PM PAGES 4 DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA DOC @.70 $51,879.10 REC $35.50 CONS $7,411,235.35 • • Exhibit J After recording return to: CYa e e Si;ia✓- cf'✓rdz The Business and taw Building 27911 Crown Lake Blvd#101 Bonita Springs,FL 34135 Tfil tb {) 'S This space reserved for Recorder's use only. 00--3c1.cc'=i 00 �.3&3l0c0o Ll- . R co Documentary stamp tax in the am unt , •10 is being p. d simultaneously with the recording of this Special Warranty Deed in th Pu• is of ColliiireHInty,Fl ida.,\ • THIS SPECIAL W4' ' • � uE • is �? . •f,,, lday of > , 20/L, by BUCKLEY D t�� C • '.id . ited :13 lit C„,(? pany, having its principal place of business at 1 3o ex ,by is- r 7J erei, referred to as "Grantor"), and AIRPORT PULLING ' GE BLOSSOM, C a ' a limited liability company, having its principal place of'■ . . -ss located at Sl ,,:;-�►. lave .5.44e 400 (hereinafter referred to as the"Grantee"). �j i3c�' •• r- �, 142c L (Wherever used herein the terms - u , -• `Grantee" include all the parties to this instrument and the heirs, legal representatives and assigns of individuals, and the successors and assigns of business entities.) WITNESSETH, that the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten and No/100ths Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, by these presents does hereby grant, bargain, sell, convey, remise, release and transfer unto the Grantee all that certain land situate in Collier County,Florida,more fully described as follows(the"Property"): See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof TOGETHER with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining. This conveyance is made and accepted subject to (a) zoning, building codes, bulkhead laws, ordinances, regulations, rights or interests vested in the United States of America or the State of Florida, (b) real estate taxes and other taxes for the year of conveyance and subsequent years including taxes or assessments of any special taxing (including assessments related to 5951434.9 31 of 182 OR 4826 PG 2604 • capital improvements and bonds),(c)utility easements,sewer agreements,telephone agreements, cable agreements, telecommunications agreements, monitoring agreements, restrictions and reservations common to any plat affecting title to the Property, (d) any acts done or suffered by Grantee and any mortgage obtained by Grantee for the purchase of the Property,(e)any laws and restrictions, covenants, conditions, limitations, reservations, agreements, easements, and other matters or record, and (f)that certain Mortgage recorded May 23, 2005 in Official Records Book 3804, Page 3065 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida (the "Public Records"), that certain Mortgage recorded May 30,2007 in Official Records Book 4236,Page 0504 of the Public Records, that certain Mortgage recorded April 17, 2008 in Official Records Book 4350, Page 3461 of the Public Records, that certain Mortgage and Consolidation Agreement recorded May 30, 2007 in Official Records Book 4236, Page 0515 of the Public Records, and that certain Mortgage and Consolidation Agreement recorded April 17, 2008 in Official Records Book 4350, Page 3473 of the Public Records, which - ure_aj.,�oo■■an in the original principal amount of $10,000,000.00 (the "Loan"), and,. (kt cG xj that evidence or secure the Loan (collectively,the "Permitted Exc. ' '' ' . ?• �, r TO HAVE AND TO HO subject the, Permitted Exceptions, unto Grantee and Grantee's succe sor an assi_i s'• ee sim le fore er. Grantor hereby cove(lan fig, i ra to t .t i ' , h s n t done or suffered anything whereb the Pro a has )?fie . .x . i . w.;, .h tse ver, except the Permitted Y Property P Exceptions, (b) Grantor has o+ right and lawful aJ,ority to se d convey the Property, and (c) Grantor is lawfully seize , .e Property in fee ` le, aWerireby warrants the title to the Property, subject to the Permitcdd eptions, and will de 1,ie/Same against the lawful claims of all persons claiming by, throag der the Grar�tetOai to no other, subject only to the Permitted Exceptions. \--- ' 1.:11 C C�` IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed in its name by its proper officers duly authorized,as of the day and year first above written. GRANTOR: SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF: BUCKLEY DJMC,LLC,a Florida limited ) i liability company •.. By:gi `ea- 6 4`.66'L- aft 4 Name: c/iz a h-c..Flc A .�.1-i ettoZ- . Print Name: El -fE Title: .VJ"11.ir-44 J Print Namerr...Anr( 60 ckc4 6.J. 5951434.9 32 of 182 OR 4826 PG 2605 STATE OF )LL!/JO LS ) COUNTY OF C'_aa t/ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this�day of ,2010 J �{ �`` oo fill c.VIL� 1°i of BUCKLEY DJMC, LLC Florida by�1l 2��c1 v� 1�.�, �s' � � , limited liability company,on behalf of such entity. He/she is'check o, • personally known to me or f has produced rL Tfi J,ps L c as''. 'ficatibn. ` 0 " �j�. • • . . e: LIS+ fit, LEV1N-SO0 • .�.LIC / 10`� yG y Comtn� . . Aires: (O�1 6 1 [Notary Seal . --.. *0 2(CCV OFFICIAL SEAL I 0 LISA M LEVINSON ��•/ NOTARY ILLINOIS 0� � MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 10l16l15 5951434.9 33 of 182 *** OR 4826 PG 2606 *** EXHIBIT"A" Legal Description That part of the Eastl/2 of Section 2, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Section 2; thence along the East line South T 13' 05" East 1,589.69 feet; thence North 89° 59' 01" West 100.08 feet to the West right of way line of State Road 31 (Airport-Pulling Road) and the Point of Beginning of the parcel herein described; Thence along the West right of way line of State Road 31, South 2° 13' 05" East 1,989.05 feet; thence South 89° 51' 40" West 500.33 feet; thence North 2° 13' 05" West1,990.41 feet; thence South 89' 59'01"East 500.38 feet to the Point of Beginning, less and excepting the West 10 feet of the East 25 feet thereof and the East it -= as described in Order of Taking recorded in Official Records Book 2445,pa 155,$,^° , kI _ +� .f Collier County,Florida. \\\ 34of182 DAVIDSON _ DE E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "K" APPLICATION AUTHORIZATION AGREEMENTS 35 of 182 Exhibit "K" Authorization Documentation LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize R. Bruce Anderson (Name of Agent) to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application. Signed: Celtic Capital Date: `7 (ZO1:S (Name of Owner(s) of Record) I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. fi Si n ure of A p lipr�t • Mes - aC--sre ice. Name-Typed or Printed STATE OF ( tJ,�/, COUNTY OF ( FR 1E Sworn to and subscribed before me this 9 day of M 20 13 "`f by f �. o L MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Notary Public PHYLLIS E.LEWANDOWSKI Notary Public,State of New York CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: Qualified in Erie Co.,No.4835482 Commission Expires April 30,1 ✓ who is personally known to me, who has produced as identification and did take an Oath did not take and Oath NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of%500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail term." 36 of 182 Exhibit "K" Authorization Documentation LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize R. Bruce Anderson (Name of Agent) to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application. Signed: McGuire Development Company Date: 3141 (zct3 (Name of Owner(s) of Record) I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. Sign ure of Applicant Lames HC-3u,xe._ Name-Typed or Printed STATE OF I ?JAI COUNTY OF ( ER lE Sworn to and subscribed before me this 9 day of Ma 20 l3n p by P H �• O� ak\OLat i k-I MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: otary Public PHYLLIS E.LEWANDOWSKI Notary Public,State of New York CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: Qualified in Erie Co.,No.4835�482 Commission Expires April 30,12 faro ✓ who is personally known to me, who has produced as identification and did take an Oath did not take and Oath NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement In writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of%500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail term." 37 of 182 Exhibit "K" Authorization Documentation LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN 1 hereby authorize Tim Hancock, AICP (Name of Agent) to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application. Signed: McGuire Development Company Date: 6 ki (aCt3 (Name of Owner(s) of Record) I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. Sign, Lure of Applicant JwviC.5 ��'�( ►� Name- Typed or Printed STATE OF ( N•V. COUNTY OF ( ERiE Sworn to and subscribed before me this g day of Ma 20 (3 0 by P -. AwomeGruisie.. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: otary Public PHYLLIS E.LEWANDOWSKI Notary Public,State of New York CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: Qualified in Erie Co.,No.F18354g Commission Expires April 30,szCGt� who is personally known to me, who has produced as identification and ✓ did take an Oath did not take and Oath NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the Intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of%300.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day]ail term." 38 of 182 Exhibit "K" Authorization Documentation LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize Tim Hancock, AICP (Name of Agent) to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application. to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application. Signed: Celtic Capital Date: 51 cl ( i. (Name of Owner(s) of Record) I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. Signa ure of Applicant Name-Typed or Printed STATE OF ( 14,Y COUNTY OF ( ERIF Sworn to and subscribed before me this 91 day of 11 4y. 20_13 by PkultiA tOC�-��oo WaMOt.ou.1S0 -1 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Votary Public PHYLLIS E.LEWANOOWSKI Notary Public,State of New York CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: Qualified in Erie Co..No.4835g82 Commission Expires April 30, dG is ✓ who is personally known to me, who has produced as identification and did take an Oath did not take and Oath NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that: "Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of 70500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail term." 39 of 182 2013 FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ANNUAL REPORT FILED DOCUMENT# L11000144202 Feb 08, 2013 Entity Name: AIRPORT PULLING ORANGE BLOSSOM, LLC Secretary of State Current Principal Place of Business: 7501 AIRPORT PULLING RD N NAPLES, FL 34109 Current Mailing Address: 560 DELAWARE AVENUE SUITE 400 BUFFALO, NY 14202 US FEI Number: 45-4181327 Certificate of Status Desired: No Name and Address of Current Registered Agent: INCORPORATING SERVICES,LTD. 1540 GLENWAY DRIVE TALLAHASSEE,FL 32301 US The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent,or both,in the State of Florida. SIGNATURE: Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date Manager/Member Detail Detail : Title MGRM Name MCGUIRE, F.JAMES Address 560 DELAWARE AVENUE,SUITE 400 City-State-Zip: BUFFALO NY 14202 I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report or supplemental report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under oath;that lam a managing member or manager of the limited liability company or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 608.Florida Statutes;and that my name appears above,or on an attachment with all other like empowered. SIGNATURE: F. JAMES MCGUIRE MANAGER 02/08/2013 Electronic Signature of Signing Manager/Member Detail Date 40 of 182 Exhibit K DE DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "L" MASTER CONCEPT PLAN 41 of 182 niC lei.53c - - - NY1d Id30N00 2131SVW e LO El rN11 zoz>lAN'011/ 19 11181HX3 L.a∎a5>e°ao.,rnsx> `- 033.173N0 ooc 3LNS 3 LL i33,c NAVRINa 033 3NN3O139YMY13O095 _ -_._.- -_. O erx�rao 1N3WdOl3A3O 3NIN•JoW c -- - - "'1 VdW°A31)10f19 AEI 1713149630 SNOISIn321 w3n> 103roee i..., D 0 Z U W a a a a a w Z x o � p Q F O W O O N o a rf a o S, _ Q N N I-o m f ^ z Z 0 0l D Q U —I 7- — _ _ -77--- ---.1-1 J U 1- CC 1 I 1 Z V) N W W I W w W 00 LL J 1 11J w LL a UDQ I 0 U) m Ji 0 w o o M V= 1 I 1 W Z a _ NCO— I" 'I I WQ� J g 3 a & a 1- g� 1 I �pLL Z=1 )I ' I o g m N I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I1 II 0 I ! C~.) I � I I- I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I mvw I , I wz J iii I ' I <11E ..701Hw9 o I p p LL 0 w I I - - 1 0 ao0 .--. o I w . I i I cacti D of I w , I Z 5Q 0 d � I z l 1 J W 1 I d n,.. I 3 , U I 0 1 I d I CL I . II Q 1 I I 1 Ii 1 11 — I 1 , (' I � 1 , II Q I1 1 -T- c0 1, % I zy I I DU I I 1 s oo I 1 v o I I 7 - - - - - - - - _=1_/ Uw arx a0_ Ci)IL o4Zm p W W Q N r 0 0U' Z a 0 U J DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "M" BOUNDARY SURVEY & LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS 43 of 182 • ■ MATCHUNE SHEET 2 ` H t ! T tt u ' •I t t I I. `� I �' _ \ ,I� , :il t i i��alIi ; I i, @ \ . • ;I \ 1 s.Eli t eR i rilqe Op NI iiIN till 1\I l'i:I;fr iii! ti .1 ¢oP I 1 .', 1 t 1.%gal S. I i t En , 4 . :ii t ii 1,:, t•H' w \ ': s i k III ! S. Ei fl i \ -- ., 1 3 w a € l t 7i$ 11141111110 s !1! :!2 I 1lig 1 F '51 Ihi 1 I 11 01 I � 2� Io �I11I �I I i� 2 t �Ii�H� 1/4., i iii •\I i i `;i, 1 •i i_..`� i i i.1 •1 •i i 1 .,i• ••—• --_..ti l•i •�.__ 1 ,. . N.1,,,i ' :gip 1il# i iiiflhjIjiiUjii t ii,, I. iE! 1 C E h �� 't.3s:alaeissdegai NI 0 i 4 - • X 2 I�1I1II �1�II�°2 "t s� :tae I e1 e2 _ , ' 3 ••'" STOUT RAMER ...........................,,..........A.••• ..� . i gNow ...,>.sam '. Boundary&Topographic Survey °la"""' 7501 Airport Pulling Road,Collier County,Florida MOON M A_ l3I W. M,v.9aa.,C.fi.l,R 31911 — a.rno.L.ownson n,wag vx Irn.ab.o ---. N*l�.]-fN w®9ltlulel ._`...®'s:1_S:w. .e ••.Ware • T • a $ PARCEL ID.00236800003 ^ a 0.0.965,PG.899 ”.... tt:-..: pg " •11' ' hi II I a 1 mI rI 1:---: . au . i ' 4 m H 111.11111a1111, a } '4 I\ 4. I 7 I 1 .'Di I I/ �. II I• / 4 en l j ;Xa o lii .-*.:, i 1 1 , I I •I\ i g •!i'l 1 I " / �/ ££. 4I ° / it G / /�I32t vI � / � I I • I • I I II s 4 g I 111 1 1 1 1 le 1 j k8 \ 6 4' ,. I 1 _I i 1 .. 4 I ■ 1 s. II Boote%oosix. 1 I ♦• II 11111i11111111111111 ! d VIII a1 3111 1 _ I 1 i w il I l e MATCHLINE SHEET 1 8 8 iG35EasaRalh&a,1A! m X to 1 m CT P III i g 1 3 MUMMY. ISI7S0.1 MI. UW ,.,. — Boundary&Topographic Survey P0.0 oRS `a04 o++wMmsrm.n".on'swa°ijberssnrosar�n•u.e�. wan.. 7501 Nzpmt Pulling Road,Collie Cmmly.Florida CBILIVICATB.Ss sz9.a P ,oV wm ss m ISMS F.cyscw.0 FL 5499! - _ secoon ownav automat m I moor.motto ee-°-• weaes:039)•73-95as eu:R79)42 I8) DE , DAVIDSON ENGINEERING EXHIBIT "N" TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT & ADDITIONAL TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS 46 of 182 Trebilcock alenninu•enuineerine Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) Buckley Farms GMPA Collier County, FL 7/12/2013 Prepared for: Prepared by: Davidson Engineering, Inc. Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 4365 Radio Rd., Suite 201 1205 Piper Blvd., Suite 202 Naples, FL 34104 Naples, FL 34110 Phone: (239) 434-6060 Phone: (239) 566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock @trebilcock.biz 47 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Analysis 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. crL-- 1,\C) 1 Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Blvd., Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 2 14B Lr" I8cj• Buckley Farms GMPA TIS -July 2013 Table of Contents Page Project Description 4- 6 Trip Generation 7- 9 Trip Distribution and Assignment 10 Background Traffic 11 Existing and Future Roadway Network 12 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network--Roadway Link Analysis 13-14 Intersection/Turn Lane Analysis 15-16 Improvement Analysis 16 Mitigation of Impact 16 Appendix A: Project Methodology Meeting Notes (5 Sheets) Appendix B: Project Master Site Plan (1 Sheet) Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Calculations (2 Sheets) Appendix D: ITE Trip Generation —Approved TIS (1 Sheet) 3 49 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS -July 2013 Project Description The Buckley Farms GMPA project is located in north Naples, Collier County, on the west side of Airport Pulling Road (CR 31), just north of the Collier County Orange Blossom Drive Regional Library. The project is an existing approved Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (Buckley MUPUD - Collier County Ord. # 05-5) and has a total site area of approximately 21.7 acres. The project is located in Section 2, Township 49S, Range 25E, Collier County, FL. Refer to Fig. 1 - Project Location Map, which follows and Appendix B - Project Master Site Plan. Fig. 1—Project Location Map 4 2 1 ik 411L , em 1 ti c s * t, as r Vondowtyit Beach Rd County Rd 862 Va,dorbih Bead,Rd r. PROJECT LOCATION + A 2 Z a ( ene Buss.....0, ;Il o Orange Bbtszm� o„ •Rr:p. : c 4 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 The proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) for Buckley MUPUD is comparable to the density and intensity contained in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) language which currently permits: - Residential - 15 du/ac - Commercial – 7,500 sf/ac (Retail – 3,250 sf/ac; Office – 4,250 sf/ac) Based on above referenced criteria, the maximum allowable projected Intensity/Density is illustrated in the Table 1A. Table 1A—Maximum Allowable Development Program Land Use ITE Land Use Code Total Size Build-Out Year COMM . .,. 111111111111111166 Retail 820—Shopping Center 70,525 sf .= s: 720—Medical-Dental Office Bldg. 46,113 sf 441 441 46 46,E RESIDENTIAL*** 326 du 2018 Notes: * -Commercial Maximum Allowable=21.7 ac x 7,500 sf/ac= 162,750 sf; ** -Office—Medical = 50%-General= 50%; *** - Residential Maximum Allowable= 21.7 ac x 15 du/ac=326 du. The primary difference in the proposed GMPA language is the removal of the differentiation between Office and Retail commercial and the removal of the requirement to build a minimum number of residential units in a physically integrated manner within the development – as shown in the Table 1B. Table 1B—Proposed Development Program Land Use ITE Land Use Code Total Size Build-Out Year Retail 820—Shopping Center 127,750 sf O 720—Medical-Dental Office Bldg. 20,000 sf RESIDENTIAL 15 du 2018 5 51 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 The approved 2004 TIS called "Traffic Analysis And Issues Buckley Parcel" by Vanasse Daylor (PUDZ-2004-AR-5220) refers to approved Intensity/Density as described in the Table 1C. Table 1C—Approved Buckley MUPUD Development Program Land Use Approved Intensity/Density Retail wow Office* 97,070 sf Residential s Notes: * -Office—Medical = 25%-General = 75%. 6 52 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Trip Generation The project's site trip generation is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The software program Otiss — Online Traffic Impact Study Software (Version 2.1.0.15) is used to create the trip generation for the project. The ITE equations — best fit were used to generate the unadjusted project trips. Trip reductions— internal capture and pass by - have been applied per ITE and Collier County Guidance. The internal capture accounts for a reduction in external traffic because of the interaction between the multiple land uses in a site. The internal capture for the project is limited by the Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures. For this project, the software program Otiss was used (The process follows the trip balancing approach as recommended in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th — Edition —Volume 1: User's Guide and Handbook, Chapter 7 procedure for estimating multi-use trip generation internal capture aka "triangle method"). The resulting internal capture rates are below the county limits — 20% of the total project trips. The pass-by trips account for traffic that is already on the external roadway network and stops at the project on the way to a primary trip destination. Per Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, pass-by trips are limited to 25% of total external project trips for shopping center land use. The maximum allowable project trip generation is illustrated in Table 2A, while Table 2B reflects the trip generation based on the new proposed development - GMPA. The net new proposed trip generation shown in Table 2C shows GMPA— proposed conditions versus maximum allowable (the difference between Table 2B and Table 2A). The detailed results of the trip generation calculations can be found in Appendix C— ITE Trip Generation Calculations. 7 53 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Table 2A—Project Trip Generation (Maximum Allowable)—Average Weekday 24 Hour Two- PM Pk Hour Way Volume Land Use Size OF Shopping Center 70,525 sf 5,412 227 247 474 Medical-Dental Office Bldg. 46,113 sf 1,67r General Office Bldg. 46,112 sf 729 22 108 130 Multi-Family Residential 326 du 1,798 Total Driveway 9,610 394 513 907 Internal Capture* Total External 314 433 747 Pass-By Trips** M , Total to adjacent streets 265 382 647 Notes:* Internal Capture—up to 20% max; ** Pass-By Trips—up to 25%for Shopping Center. Table 2B—Project Trip Generation (Proposed Development)—Average Weekday 24 Hour Two- PM Pk Hour Way Volume Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Shopping Center 127,750 sf 7,963 338 368 706 Medical-Dental Office Bldg. 20,000 sf 603 19 49 68 General Office Bldg. 15,000 sf 310 16 79 95 Multi-Family Residential 15 du 123 8 5 13 Total Driveway 8,999 381 501 882 Internal Capture* -31 -31 -62 Total External 350 470 820 Pass-By Trips** -80 -89 -169 Total To Adjacent Streets 270 381 651 Notes:* Internal Capture— up to 20% max; ** Pass-By Trips—up to 25%for Shopping Center. 8 54 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS -July 2013 Table 2C—Project Trip Generation (Net New Proposed)—Average Weekday 24 Hour Two-Way PM Pk Hour Volume Land Use Size Volume Enter Exit Total Total To Adjacent Streets Total 5 -1 4 The net new proposed trip generation shown in Table 2C reveals a minimal increase in the PM Peak Hr volumes – reflects 0.6% increase in the maximum allowed Total PM Peak Hr, which is negligible. The Table 2C–Total To Adjacent Street - net new values are what will be used for the trip distribution and assignment in the link analysis. The Table 2B–Total external values (PM – Enter– 350 and PM – Exit – 470) are to be used for the intersection / turn lane analysis. For informational purposes the approved 2004 TIS by Vanasse Daylor (PUDZ- 2004-AR-5220) trip generation was updated with the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The software program Otiss – Online Traffic Impact Study Software (Version 2.1.0.15) is used to create the trip generation for the project. The PM Peak Hour volumes are as follows: - Total Driveway – Enter-369; Exit-491 –Total - 860 - Total to Adjacent Streets – Enter-241; Exit-360 –Total - 601 Approved TIS updated trip generation calculations can be found in Appendix D – ITE Trip Generation –Approved TIS. 9 55 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Trip Distribution and Assignment The traffic generated by the development was assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and as coordinated with previously approved TIS. The net new proposed site-generated trip distribution is graphically depicted on the next page - Fig. 2—Project Distribution By Percentage. A minimal increase of 0.6% in the maximum allowed trip generation is considered a non-impact traffic increase for adjacent roadway network. All recommendations consistent with the approved TIS would be applicable and adjusted to account for the updated trip data, as applicable. A more detailed trip analysis would be performed at the time of a Site Development Plans application, as applicable. Fig. 2—Project Distribution By Percentage T C / C- C vmde . 15% 15% V/ 15961 42-A H H x V.*rh1?*teS Beach Rd Cody Rd 862 Vnndcrtal Beach Rd PROJECT 1 LOCATION W 45% / al iv t 55% ovie B nse sm c v wed' tl n 5 d ditgr Bv,ss Nne 1249e 0" • 10% )10% I z — Trip Distribution By . t 35% 6. Percentage =`� a 10 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS -July 2013 Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates were estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Transportation Planning Staff Guidance of a minimum 2% growth rate, or the rate from 2008 thru 2012 AUIR data, whichever is greater. Table 3 – Background Traffic without Project, illustrates the application of projected growth rates, or trip bank data to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the year 2018. Table 3—Background Traffic without Project (Horizon 2018) 2012 AUIR Projected 2018 Projected Peak Hr, CC Peak Dir Traffic Peak Hr, Peak Roadway AUIR Roadway Link Background Annual Trip Growth Dir Background Link Link Location Growth Bank Factor Traffic Volume Traffic ID# Rate w/out Project Volume (%/yr) (trips/hr) (trips/hr) Airport 1 0 North of Vanderbilt 1,247(SB) 2.00% 156 1.1262 1,404 Pulling Rd. Beach Rd Airport 2 1 Project to 1,857 (NB) 2.00% 345 1.1262 2,202 Pulling Rd. Immokalee Rd Airport Project to Orange o Pulling R 2.1 1,857(NB) 2.00% 345 1.1262 2,202 Airport South of Orange Pulling Rd. 2.2 Blossom Dr 1,709(NB) 2.00% 188 1.1262 1,924 Vanderbilt West of Airport o Beach Rd 110.2 Pulling Rd 1,785(EB) 2.00% 392 1.1262 2,177 Vanderbilt 111.1 East of Airport 1,644(WB) 2.00% 219 1.1262 1,863 _ Beach Rd Pulling Rd Orange .: a Blossom Dr 142.0 Pulling Rd 645 (WB) 2.00% 0 1.1262 726 Orange 143.0 East of Airport 645 (WB) 2.00% 0 1.1262 726 Blossom Dr Pulling Rd Table Note: Growth Rate =from 2008 to 2012 traffic count data, or 2%,whichever is greater. Growth Factor= (1+Annual Growth Rate) ^6. 2018 Projected Volume=2012 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor,or 2012 AUIR+AUIR Trip Bank,whichever is greater. N/A= not applicable, not available. 11 57 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the 2012 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and the 2018 roadway conditions are based on the current FDOT and Collier County 5 Year Work Program. The roadways evaluated are anticipated to remain the same thru 2018. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 4– Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 4—Existing and Future Roadway Conditions CC Exist Peak Future Roadway Link AUIR Roadway Link Location Exist Exist Min Dir, Peak Hr 2018 Link Roadway LOS Std Capacity Roadway ID# Volume Airport Pulling Rd. 1.0 North of Vanderbilt 4D D 2,200 4D Beach Rd Airport Pulling Rd. 2.1 Project toRdmmokalee 6D E 3,000 6D Airport Pulling Rd. 2.1 Project to Orange p g Blossom Dr 6D E 3,000 6D Airport Pulling Rd. 2.2 South of Orange 6D E 3,000 6D Blossom Dr Vanderbilt Beach 110.2 West of Airport Pulling 4D/6D D 2,500 6D Rd Rd Vanderbilt Beach 111.1 East of Airport Pulling 6D E 3,000 6D Rd Rd Orange Blossom 142.0 West of Airport Pulling 2U/4D D 1,200 4D Dr Rd Orange Blossom 143.0 East of Airport Pulling 2U D 1,000 2U Dr Rd Table Notes: 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D =4-lane, 6-lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS= Level of Service. N/A= not applicable, not available 12 58 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network--Roadway Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project were evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future (2018). The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link adjacent to the project; 3% for other 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 and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. The project PM Pk Hr volumes are added to the network volumes to coincide with the network peak time and peak direction. Table 5 — Roadway Link Level of Service, on the next page, illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the roadway network closest to the project. None of the adjacent links are projected to be operating below the adopted level of service with, or without the project. All conclusions from approved 2004 TIS remain in effect and are outlined as follows: the project's impacts are significant on Orange Blossom Drive —west of Airport Pulling Road westbound; Orange Blossom Drive — east of project; Airport Pulling Road — north of project; and Airport Pulling Road — south of Orange Blossom Drive southbound. 13 59 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Table 5—Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS)—With Project in the Year 2018 2018 CC Link 2018 Min LOS Min LOS CC Peak Volume Peak Dir, Peak Dir, exceeded exceeded Roadway AUIR Roadway Link Direction Capacity Peak Hr Peak Hr without with Link Link Location (Project Impact ID# Capacity Vol Volume By Project? Project? Volume Added) w/Project Project Yes/No Yes/No Airport 0 North of Vanderbilt 2,200 0 1,404 0.0% No No Pulling Rd. Beach Rd Airport 1 Project to 3,000 0 2,202 0.0% No No Pulling Rd. Immokalee Rd Airport 1 Project to Orange 3,000 0 2,202 0.0% No No Pulling Rd. Blossom Dr Airport 2 South of Orange 3,000 0 1,924 0.0% No No Pulling Rd. Blossom Dr Vanderbilt 110.2 West of Airport 2500 0 2,177 0.0% No No Beach Rd Pulling Rd Vanderbilt 111.1 East of Airport 3,000 0 1,863 0.0% No No Beach Rd Pulling Rd Orange West of Airport Blossom 142.0 Pulling Rd 1,200 0 726 0.0% No No Dr Orange Blossom 143.0 East of Airport 1,000 0 726 0.0% No No Dr Pulling Rd 14 60 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Intersection/Turn Lane Analysis As outlined in the 2004 approved TIS, the project will be developed with three (3) access points to remain the same: 1) the right-in/right —out north access; 2) the right-in/right-out/left-in main access and 3) the right-in/right-out south access. Airport Pulling Road is an urban six-lane divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction and has a posted speed limit of 45 mph. Based on FDOT Index 301, the minimum turn lane length is 185 ft (which includes a 50 ft taper) plus required queue. Orange Blossom Drive is an urban two-lane undivided collector under Collier County jurisdiction and has a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Based on FDOT Index 301, the minimum turn lane length is 145 ft (which includes a 50 ft taper) plus required queue. All recommendations and results outlined in the previously approved TIS will remain in effect as follows: A) Intersections: 1. Airport Pulling Road & Orange Blossom Drive — dual left turn lanes on the west and northbound approaches. 2. Airport Pulling Road & Vanderbilt Beach Road — eastbound dual left turn lanes. 3. Airport Pulling Road & J&C Boulevard —southbound and eastbound dual left turn lanes and additional southbound U-turn lane. B) Project Accesses: 1. Project Main Entrance: Full-movement signalized intersection. Maintain existing northbound left turn and addition of a 185 foot (including a 50 foot taper) southbound exclusive right turn lane. 2. Project North Access: A 185 foot (including a 50 foot taper) southbound exclusive right turn lane. 15 61 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 No changes to the project accesses are proposed with this GMP amendment. A more detailed evaluation of applicable access points, to determine turn lane requirements and signalization — as they are warranted, will be performed at the time of a Site Development Plan application, as applicable. Improvement Analysis Based on this link analysis and operational analysis and consistent with previously approved 2004 TIS, the project impacts to the Collier County adjacent roadway network are significant; however, none of the segments in the vicinity of the project are adversely impacted. In conclusion, additional site and offsite improvements as required would be addressed at the time of Site Development Plans permitting. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project, as well as fulfilling prior PUD commitments. 16 62 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Appendix A: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) (5 Sheets) 17 63 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 APPENDIX A INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not apply. Date:February 20.2013 Time: N/A Location:via email People Attending: Name,Organization,and Telephone Numbers 1) John Podzerwinsky,CC Growth Mgmt.Div 2) Norman Trebilcock,TCS Study Preparer: Preparer's Name and Title:Norman Trebilcock Organization:Trebilcock Consulting Solutions Address&Telephone Number: 1205 Piper Blvd., Suite 202, Naples. Fl 34110:ph 239- 566-9551 Reviewer(s): Reviewer's Name&Title:John Podczerwinsky.Proiect Manager Collier County Transportation Planning Department Organization&Telephone Number:CC Growth Mamt Division:239-252-5890 Applicant: Applicant's Name:Davidson Engineering,Inc.(Tim Hancock) Address: 3530 Kraft Rd.,Suite 301;Naples,FL 34105 Telephone Number:239-434-6060 Proposed Development: Name: Buckley Farms PUD Location: west side of Airport Pulling Rd,.just north of Collier County Regional Library Land Use Type: Retail;Office:Residential Multi-Family ITE Code#: 820(Shopping Center); 720(Medical-Dental Office Bldg.); 710(General Office Bldg.);230(Residential Condominium/Townhouse) Proposed number of development units: 820 (Shopping Center) — 136300 sf; 720 (Mediacal-Dental Office Bldg.)—20,000 sf;710(General Office Bldg.)— 15,000 sf:230 (Residential Condominium/Townhouse)—15 du. Other: n/a Description: Page 1 of 5 18 64 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Zoning Existing:GMP—Residential,retail and Office are allowed uses. Comprehensive plan recommendation:N/A Requested:GMPA.to allow new proposed developmept Findings of the Preliminary Study: N/A Study Type: Small Scale TIS ® Minor TIS ❑ Maior TIS ❑ Study Area: Boundaries:Airport Pulling Road Additional intersections to be analyzed:N/A Horizon Year(s):2018 Analysis Time Period(s): Future Off-Site Developments:NLA Source of Trip Generation Rates:ITE LUC Data Reductions in Trip Generation Rates: None:N/A Pass-by trips: Per ITE, CC Guidance,40%for restaurant, and up to 25%for other land uses Internal trips(PUD):Per ITE,CC Guidance,up to 20% Transit use:N Other: Link Analysis - Net impact - proposed minus maximum allowed; Operational — total external trips. Horizon Year Roadway Network Improvements: 2018 Page 2 of 5 19 65 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Methodology&Assumptions: Non-site traffic estimates:CC.AIR Site-trip generation:I1EE Trip distribution method: per approved TIS-refer to Man— Project Trin Distribution by Percentage Traffic assignment method:per previously approved TIS Traffic growth rate:growth rate 2°o minimum or Traffic Counts Map—Project Trip Distribution by Percentage "4t •r, hii 15%1 �.,+ - H H • a� e` Vu8e80ae Beam Rd Co a,Rd 8E7 w,dnw Be..R<1 PROJECT 1.45% 1►1 neak j LOCATION 55% ti7 il .._Riepe T> v F> 1 Z ' 10% . 110%1 Trip Distribution By . ?� 35% Percentage w g tr = Page 3 of 5 20 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Special Features:(from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations:N/A Sight distance:N/A Queuing:N/A Access location&configuration:SAME previously approved TIS Traffic control:MUTCD Signal system location&progression needs:N/A On-site parking needs:per LDC Data Sources:CC AUIR Base maps:N/A Prior study reports:N/A Access policy and jurisdiction:CC/FDOT Review process:PUDA Requirements:N/A Miscellaneous:N/A Small Scale Study—No Fee x Minor Study-$750.00 Major Study-$1500.00 Includes 2 intersections Additional Intersections-$500.00 each .4II fees will be agreed to during the Methodology meeting and must be paid to Transportation prior to our sign-off on the application. SIGNATURES 11mmaa 7aeddreaeh Study Preparer Reviewers Applicant Page 4 of 5 21 67 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 A EXHIBIT A Collier County Traffic Impact Study Review Fee Schedule Fees will be paid incrementally as the development proceeds: Methodology Review, Analysis Review, and Sufficiency Reviews. Fees for additional meetings or other optional services are also provided below. Methodology Review-$500 Fee Methodology Review includes review of a submitted methodology statement,including review of submitted trip generation estimate(s), distribution, assignment, and review of a "Small Scale Study" determination, written approval/comments on a proposed methodology statement, and written confirmation of a re-submitted, amended methodology statement, and one meeting in Collier County,if needed. "Small Scale Study"Review-No Additional Fee(Includes one sufficiency review) Upon approval of the methodology review, the applicant may submit the study. The review includes: a concurrency determination, site access inspection and confirmation of the study compliance with trip generation,distribution and maximum threshold compliance. "Minor Study Review"-$750 Fee(Includes one sufficiency review) Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes:optional field visit to site,confirmation of trip generation,distribution,and assignment, concurrency determination,confirmation of committed — improvements, review of traffic volume data collected/assembled, review of off-site improvements within the right-of-way,review of site access and circulation,and preparation and review of"sufficiency"comments/questions. "Maior Study Review"-$1,500 Fee(Includes two intersection analysis and two sufficiency reviews Review of the submitted traffic analysis includes: field visit to site, confirmation of trip generation, special trip generation and/or trip length study, distribution and assignment, concurrency determination, confirmation of committed improvements,review of traffic volume data collected/assembled,review of traffic growth analysis,review of off-site roadway operations and capacity analysis,review of site access and circulation,neighborhood traffic intrusion issues, any necessary improvement proposals and associated cost estimates,and preparation and review of up to two rounds of"sufficiency" comments/questions and/or recommended conditions of approval. "Additional intersection Review"-$500 Fee The review of additional intersections shall include the same parameters as outlined in the"Major Study Review"and shall apply to each intersection above the first two intersections included in the"Major Study Review" "Additional Sufficiency Reviews"-$500 Fee) Additional sufficiency reviews beyond those initially included in the appropriate study shall require the additional Fee prior to the completion of the review. Page 5 of 5 22 68 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Appendix B: Project Master Site Plan (1 Sheet) 23 69 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 A Q g R b _ gig qiuce 5 co X Nm co ow 0 W < oII I I 1 K u) W ii c.»Q 1 1 i 1 Y Y Y e < < < 8 w°°3, /\/ I^�I��^\/fa IS g P g W m I` 1 'o x n bO 1I/ , 1�i_w W € E k V. Y Y 111 �i �o� LL < r ry 1 II Ngm U i5 a g i 1 : I� I I I 0 it, i �g w 1'' II ' I II sn 8 f � '. zix " R 1 U I1 p 8Vg g Q g s 3 t rc Q I 11 ■ W III A ' I I I 22 a vz-ii o; 1 V' ._ . - - JI I �° gogl 5 — �� ow'n 1 N_ 6211g MOg will' s< og1Q iV II 2 wgo 1 . I II 1 �y 1 dill i 1148 ill ffi III I a. wr WgLL knit Z< S °VgLL 1 F � I m II I- aw�ag *z a 11 + '5 I' 2 g II cc Z i 1 I NS � �'8 �. i 44 �j y� _° �I II o P§za.w 68$8 ' .giq I 1 8 0��3_ °_off= ..Iwo . If I a. II II g ! ,„ 4 - $ w 1 I I� 00 ° NU LL ti II J 1 1 igs ggl--? ? 'i a w o $^ 5 m—rf—.y II U o 0.. win tiJK 1 v I ! - I .. , - - _ —� �J_, Zzg= pg w N¢¢ zz w wire W Z w, g a O O J ° �LL Ire O g Lu 2 Rw. ¢ i 1:H ° < aW,. <4 c'LL 0 gin C ° 24 70 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Calculations (9t" Edition) (2 Sheets) 25 71 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Project Name: Buckley Farms PUD-Max.Allowed No: Date: 2/20/2013 City: Naples State/Province: Zip/Postal Code: Country: Client Name: Analyst's Name: Edition: 9th i Land Use Size Dally-2 Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Entry Exit Entry Exit Entry Exit 820-Shopping Center 70.53 r') 2706 2706 78 48 227 247 Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 30 44 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 49 51 Non-pass-by 2706 2706 78 48 148 152 720-Medical-Dental Office 46 12 al 835 836 86 24 40 105 Building Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 8 8 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 835 836 86 24 32 97 710-General Office 46.11 ar 364 365 90 13 22 108 Building Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 8 8 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 364 365 90 13 14 100 230-Residential 326 ' 899 899 22 111 105 53 Condom IniumlTownhouse Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 34 20 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 899 899 22 111 71 33 Total 4804 4806 276 196 394 513 Total Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Internal 0 0 0 0 80 80 Total Pass-by 0 0 0 0 49 51 Total Non-pass-by 4804 4806 276 196 265 382 (f) f000 Sq Feet Gross Leasable Area (2) 1000 Sq Feet Gross Floor Area (3) Dweking Units 26 72 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS -July 2013 Project Name: Bucidey Farms PUD-Proposed No: i Conditions I Date: 2/20/2013 City: Naples State/Province: Zip/Postal Code: Country: Client Name: Analyst's Name: Edition: 9th Daily-2 Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Size Entry Exit Entry Exit Entry Exit 820-Shopping Center 127.75/'l 3981 3982 112 69 338 368 Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 internal 0 0 0 0 17 13 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 80 89 Non-pass-by 3981 3982 112 69 241 266 720-Medical-Dental Office 20 m 301 302 37 11 19 49 Building Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 7 7 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 301 302 37 11 12 42 710-General Office 15 0 155 155 36 6 16 79 Building Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 5 8 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 155 155 36 6 11 71 230-Residential 15(3) 61 62 1 10 8 5 Condominium/Townhouse Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 2 3 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 61 62 1 10 6 2 (Total 4498 4501 186 96 381 501 Total Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Internal 0 0 0 0 31 31 Total Pass-by 0 0 0 0 80 89 Total Non-pass-by 4498 4501 186 96 270 381 (1) 1000 Sq Feet Gross Leasable Area (2) 1000 Sq.Feet Gross Floor Area (3) DreThng Units 27 73 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 Appendix D: ITE Trip Generation — Approved TIS (9th Edition) (1 Sheet) 28 74 of 182 Buckley Farms GMPA TIS-July 2013 4 Project Name: Buckley Farms PUD-Approved No: Conditions Date: 2/20/2013 City: Naples State/Province: Zip/Postal Code: Country: Client Name: Analyst's Name: Edition: 9th Land Use Size Daily-2 Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Entry Exit Entry Exit Entry Exit 820-Shopping Center 74.23 nl 2797 2798 80 50 235 256 Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 31 41 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 51 54 Non-pass-by 2797 2798 80 50 153 161 720-Medical-Dental Office 24.27 2r 388 389 45 13 22 59 Building Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 8 7 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 388 389 45 13 14 52 710-General Office 72.8 21 515 516 130 18 27 133 Building Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 9 8 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 515 516 130 18 18 125 230-Residential 251 13) 716 716 18 90 85 43 Condominium/Townhouse Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Internal 0 0 0 0 29 21 Pass-by 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-pass-by 716 716 18 90 56 22 Total 4416 4419 273 171 369 491 Total Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Internal 0 0 0 0 77 77 Total Pass-by 0 0 0 0 51 54 Total Non-pass-by 4416 4419 273 171 241 360 (1) 1000 Sq.Feet Gross Leasable Area (2) 1000 Sq.Feet Gross Floor Area (3) Dwelling Units 29 75 of 182 DE Exhibit N Additional Trip Generation Analysis DAVIDSON ENGINEERING MEMORANDUM TO: Michele Mosca,AICP,Principal Planner John Podczerwinsky, Transportation Review Via-e-mail FROM: Tim Hancock,AICP RE: Buckley GMPA -Summary of Additional Trip Generation Analysis. August 16, 2013 This memo and the associated attachments are in response to an e-mail from Michele Mosca dated August 13, 2013 which contained the following questions posed by John Podczerwinsky: In brief our previous assessment still stands. The traffic study that is submitted does not seem to cover the most intense/highest trip generation scenario(s) that could be proposed within the project. Staff preference would be that one of the three following options be adopted by the applicant: 1) Analyze the highest potential trip generation scenario that would be allowed under the proposed scenario; 2) Impose a trip generation cap; 3) Create better-defined limitations on the land uses that would be allowed and update the traffic analysis to reflect the most intense of the defined scenarios. After discussing these comments in more detail with both John P. and Reed Jarvi, the primary concern centered around whether a single or a small number of`big box' retailers could occupy the site since the size limitation for retail uses is proposed to be removed from the current GMP language. Based on that conversation, the applicant has endeavored to analyze the highest potential trip generation scenario that would be allowed and compare that to the highest potential trip generation scenario permitted under the existing GMP language in order to provide an equitable analysis. The attached spreadsheet contains that analysis which is summarized here below: Existing Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict The existing GMP allows for the following combination of uses: 92,225 sq. ft. of office, plus 70,525 sq. ft. of retail, plus 326 multi-family units. 4365 Radio Road,Suite#201 • Naples, Florida 34104 Phone:239.434.6060 Fax:239.434.6084 www.davidsonengineerinq.corn Davidson Engineering, Inc. 76 of 182 The attached spreadsheet assigns specific land uses with LUC's as provided for in ITE's Trip Generation Manual, 9th edition. The scenario presented is intended to provide a `worst case scenario' utilizing land uses and associated square footages that are within the normal operation parameters of the uses shown. In other words, while a Discount Supermarket may produce a higher trip generation, they are typically larger than the maximum footprint allowed (15,000 sq. ft.) and would therefore not be appropriate for inclusion in this particular analysis. Each use is broken down by LUC and shows the corresponding square footage or unit count. Each use shown utilized a 17.6% internal capture rate which is consistent with the TIS for this property that was approved at the rezone level in 2006. Pass-by reductions were utilized at the maximum allowed by Collier County TIS Guidelines. In summary, the table provides many of the highest generators, utilizing high internal capture and pass-by reduction rates, therefore resulting in a more conservative adjusted trip count when analyzing the potential traffic impacts from the existing GMP language. The resulting adjusted external PM Peak Hour trip count for the existing GMP language is shown as 1,018 trips. Proposed Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Focusing on the `big box' retail concerns stated by staff, a single big box user was first analyzed. As contained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Ed. and confirmed based on local development, a single retail super-store (i.e. Super Wal-Mart or Super Target) is typically in excess of 200,000 sq. ft. Since the subject property is limited to 162,750 square feet, a single big box end-user is highly improbable in this location. Nonetheless, an analysis was performed (Potential Build-out Scenario B) using LUC 813 for a Free-Standing Discount Superstore at the maximum 162,750 sq. ft. and yielded 708 PM Peak Hour trips, 30% LESS than the existing land uses permitted by the GMP would allow. The subject property COULD, however, under the proposed GMP Amendment, accommodate two big box retailers, each being 81,375 sq. ft. in size. While this would be an unlikely occurrence at a mid-block site without a traffic signal, it is nonetheless POSSIBLE. An analysis was prepared (Potential Build-out Scenario A) using LUC 854, Discount Supermarket (one of the highest retail trip generators found in this size range) as well as LUC 863, Electronics Superstore as examples at the high end of the spectrum. The result of having these two high trip- generating big box stores in this location was a total number of 1,045 PM Peak Hour trips, or 2.6%more than the analysis of impacts permitted under the existing GMP language. The petitioner performed an additional study, using four(4)of the highest trip generators for `big box' retailers in the area of 40,000 square feet per land use (Potential Build-out Scenario C). This analysis included LUC's 863-Electronics Superstore, 864-Toy Superstore, 854-Discount Supermarket and 816-Hardware/Paint Store. With all four (4) stores totaling the maximum 162,750 sq. ft. of retail development possible, the result was 711 PM Peak Hour trips, or 30% LESS than the existing GMP language allows. This analysis of the `worst case scenario' for trip generation based on the existing GMP language versus the proposed GMP language shows at worst, a 2.6% potential increase in PM peak hour trip generation and in the other two scenarios,a potential reduction in the area of 30%. This type 77 of 182 of analysis could potentially have limitless combinations, but is intended to address specifically the potential for an increase in traffic due to the removal of the 15,000 square foot cap on each building footprint. As evidenced by the attached analysis, it is potentially the mix of land uses in this case and not the size of the building footprint alone that will determine the future traffic impacts. End of Memo Exhibit N Additional Trip Generation Analysis 78of182 0 0 T a1 A F 2 ro o .+ 0 0 A u H .0•0 C b 0 G �m N M M N 0 O .D m O l 1h n 0N m I- "1,;,. m M .N n o N-I N O s a M Ol M N Ol 1 N v N N 0) J J J 3 J ✓ w v v v * o o 3 e o f6 0° ' a° 0 ae a° m o 0 0 > o O ? in La > �n ? in In in In .n N r '6 N o N N o N o N N N N o N m m m m m a a a a a To o m m To 0 0 0■ 0 0 — 0 N o o 0 ae 0 0 0 0 U U U U 3 3 3 3 M rl o `o Ol .O '^ m .--i N O tV ' N a M in N of .-I _ N .D _ O N lD m .D _ Vl a lO N M N l0 M N F ,`-`-1 .--I N .--I F a N N v v v w m v m c c 3 > > > 3 a 3 a ¢ a a O ¢ 0 T T ° ° C °. cJ▪ 2 ,--� a J 2 as .O 2 00 2 M M T N S N a en G y N N VI N .O 0 , OO O rn e Y VI a .D N a N .o no M no N , N M N a N 'v 0 a 0 a a a a m a M no a a a n a a a ¢ a LL 19 ■l .n 0 vl vl Ur vl l9 CO CO N N 0 VI VI in 0 01 N vl l0 C v M M O! N . %",8 °,8 `,8 y N N N < L N O M 0 a ti d e -0 0 0 0 0 _ 4 4 4 r? Ol N g CO CO 2 .-I •? a a a a m 40 m @ > > > > > a In m in in in in c m ±± c o z x x � ¢ a ¢ a v d m -j -j co N tr Y m '. °� m °' `n m m 000, �'' m '^ co cc m y ,NO o z oo a v c a a od a oo a v VI en ¢ a 0 a, v v N N , C II II en N m m m 1Nn VI 0 i- I- N N d G! o S5 .NO ¢' a' ¢' ' h. a > > S _ 5 0 VI VI ul 0 V1 In 0 o 0 0 so 0o N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL N N 1p N N N N LL N LL co 00 00 00 n LL .n Vt of n N VI N N M M .D .O .O .O N N N Q N O M O 0 ri .-i 0000 ,0 `� a a a 0l'011 N N N CO CO N 01 , v a a Cr a ,y Ol LO Vt .n N V N N iN W O 0 J d W W W N 0) ° d d N d L ` Y J 0 Y O N `° c N y v '^ m v li9 - m v¢ n 8' s $ .n n �a@ ¢ �V, i ¢u _ C u N u 0 u Y N VI ` @ u .n i m° v c v g" p ° r ocn o ° o 3 a = ° 3 1°- • 2 .c b a ° t m a u t- ~ ,°, v C ° t 12 0 c .2 �_+ w ° .2 v 0 `m o 0 v `m I N o 0 111 c vl c w D 2 'C O w 0 o e c e c ul V1 0) 0) LL u N u N N N H N N N N J ~ on 0 J J �� Ol O a ''- T O O O v 0. v v 3 co co co U 9 v° - � O O r — U M U In a s .O A U I a M .O 2 ' 2 en V .-1 D .1 .° em Y 'C G _ C I C N 00 N C N C CO OO 00 00 C J CO CO 00 N i= W 6 E 0/ 01 0) N O w a a° 0. a a. 0. a° a Page 79 of 182 DE DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "0" UTILITY PROVISIONS STATEMENT 80 of 182 Exhibit "O" Co er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION (239)252-2400 FAX (239)252-6358 www.collierqov.net STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST APPLICANT INFORMATION NAME OF APPLICANT(S) McGuire Development Company ADDRESS 560 Delaware Avenue CITY Buffalo STATE NY ZIP 14202 TELEPHONE # 716-829-1980 CELL# FAX # 716-885-1319 E-MAIL ADDRESS: jfd @mcguiredevelopment.com ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY (IF AVAILABLE): 7501 Airport Road N. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Section/Township/Range 02 / 49 /25 Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page#: Property I.D. #: 00238120008 & 00238360004 Metes & Bounds Description: see attached exhibit M boundary survey & legal description TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED (Check applicable system): COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM a. ID b. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM PROVIDE NAME c. PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANT ❑ (GPD capacity) d. 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) fl February 4,2011 81 of 182 Collier County Exhibit "O" COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.colliergov.net TOTAL POPULATION TO BE SERVED: N/A;See attached Water&Wastewater Impacts Table. PEAK AND AVERAGE DAILY DEMANDS: A. WATER-PEAK 391.200 AVERAGE DAILY 97800 B. SEWER-PEAK 391,200 AVERAGE DAILY 97800 IF PROPOSING TO BE CONNECTED TO COLLIER COUNTY REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM, PLEASE PROVIDE THE DATE SERVICE IS EXPECTED TO BE REQUIRED 10/2014 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. COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY DEDICATION STATEMENT: If the project is located within the services boundaries of Collier County's utility service system, written notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate to Collier County Utilities the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at the at 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 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 that there is adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. Exhibit"K"Authorization Documentation February 4,2011 82 of 182 Exhibit 0 _..... Water and Wastewater Impacts DAVIDSON ENGINEERING Existing per GMP Total GPD Quantity Rate (Average) Neighbor hood Shopping Center' 70,530 .1 GPD/sf 7,053 Restaurant 150 seats 40 GPD/seat 6,000 Office (Low Rise) 46,113 15 GPD/100 sf 6,917 Office (Medical) 46,112 See Note2 11,210 Residential 326 300 GPD/unit3 97,800 128,980 Proposed GMP Language Quantity Rate Total lbs. Neighbor hood Shopping Center' 122,750 .1 GPD/sf 12,275 Restaurant 150 seats 40 GPD/seat 6,000 Office(Low Rise) 15,000 15 GPD/100 sf 2,250 Office (Medical) 20,000 See Note2 5,015 25,540 OR Residential 326 300 GPD/unit3 97,800 'Square footage reduced 5,000 sq.ft. to permit a restaurant 2Assumes One practicioner per 1200 sf and 3 non-physician staff per MD. 3 3 bedroom units,greater than 1200 sf each 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201. Naples, FL 34104. Phone: 239.434.6060 Fax: 239.434.6084 www.davidsonengineering.com 83 of 182 Exhibit "0" Co ie-r County Public Utilities Division Planning & Project Management January 18, 2013 Tocia Hamlin Davidson Engineering 3530 Kraft Road,Suite 301 Naples, FL 34105 Subject: Buckley Mixed Use Parcel's 44: 00238120008 and 00238360004 Water and Wastewater Availability Dear Ms. Hamlin: Water and Wastewater services are available for the above referenced project via existing lines along Airport Pulling Road North. Specific connection points for the system tie-ins to water and wastewater lines may be made after submission and approval of the hydraulic calculations by the Planning and Project — Management Department, validating that the up/downstream systems are adequate to handle the increase in flow. This letter implies no guarantee that other developments throughout the District will not have an impact on the quantity of potable water and sewage treatment and disposal capacity available to this property until the project has received a commitment for service. Should water supply or sewage treatment and disposal capacity not be available, the Developer would be required to provide an interim means of water supply and treatment and sewage treatment and disposal until the District's facilities have the adequate capacity to serve the project. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at (239) 252-2583. Sincerely, athan Beals, Project Manager Planning and Project Management Department cc: Aaron Cromer, Principal Project Manager Craig Callis, Engineering Review Steve Nagy, Wastewater Collections Manager Pam Libby, Water Operations Manager Cheri Rollins, Supervisor Revenue Vanessa Soriano, Fiscal Technician Chris Johnson, Accounting Technician Gary Morocco, Supervisor Revenue G&Lit c..a • 84 of 182 Planning&Project Management Department•3339 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 303 •Naples,Florida 34112-5361.239-252-4285.FAX 239-252-5378 DE DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "P" WASTE GENERATION RATES 85 of 182 DE Exhibit P Waste Generation Rates DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G Existing per GMP Quantity Rate Total lbs. Neighbor hood Shopping Center 70,530 6.1 lbs/sf/year* 430,233 Office (Low Rise) 46,113 3.7 lbs/sf/year* 170,618 Office (Medical) 46,112 4.08 lbs/sf/year* 188,137 Residential 326 4,139 lbs/res./year** 1,349,314 2,138,302 Proposed GMP Language Quantity Rate Total lbs. Neighbor hood Shopping Center 127,750 6.1 lbs/sf/year* 779,275 Office (Low Rise) 20,000 3.7 lbs/sf/year* 74,000 Office(Medical) 15,000 4.08 lbs/sf/year* 61,200 914,475 or Residential 326 4,139 lbs/res./year** 1,349,314 *1995 Commercial Generation Study, Palm Beach County, Florida **Calculated at 4.43 lbs/day/person at 2.56 persons per dwelling unit 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201. Naples, FL 34104. Phone: 239.434.6060 Fax: 239.434.6084 86 of 182 DE DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "Q" COMMERCIAL & PUD PROPERTIES MAP 87 of 182 )` !r 1. J v-1 '4 ems- :- .a t= 'r --_..-,--.... .a-- 1 wi,, ____!� 4,U ' 13 Y�' t.4 Z \fe- •' 'jf ipf1 = ,.:1."4.I� 't':� • e +��1.I' A'I IMMOKALEE ROAD• _ a.� t"`- . ii 01 t" 1 ■��•° I!--!��', ' t ..�� - �� ■ �� ■■■■III■ ■ ' I `. Irnmiiinirni- ■ Ns -C # b. �', _`ti ate`_ =� 1 1111111 IIII11111 .∎ =IN ow • '" , -- iiiii�_'- `-� ,w■ I1101111101111N1111 2/ S' •,..;, -_ '=f `.`. i *'.. '_=111111111 NNNI��VIII } s E:= °'° ,.iir '- -== . . IIrINVIIIIIIIIINI • 1•11111111111111111111111;� :.r li. ,4 i .. ' ,'': �s ni 1 '....£_� --� t r ( ♦♦ �; !■s'11111N11b1111N11N1 J -j 1111111111111`,' =— E �;:= _ '� ;' M■■I�:7;:'- "I=IIINIIII NI1i-NPIII ► 's = yH- a�' �' _i I � 2 MI — Lt %�t 1111N1111111L '�:: —; ' - ;{ I - __ _ ■■IIIIIIIIIIII II :zit" I ��Y:h., i ,rn a _ s`I_ ''I'z �} -Zg " �r C�"r i __ �ti !■ I11111111111- i , ,.,,� 1S_ii .� ' �T.( MI ^ '� w '��1t .- VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD 1 1. III, _ - i- 1:),, I 17 ' 9111111 titi i €- ' .fit .;, F; W l.:r' I] Qrt ,_ 2'? rr -i',r. �4q.•' -;i O,II I1p "r .�C I.L _ 3111,x- __ —�C�_ - _��. -'h;in1l..�d�i+" , I 11.11ihOMII■■III�11■ IG■II1 IINIII 0 i', :> ' j - 1 �lt�,. z 1 1111111 1111IIIINWJI! 0 1 ti '� 0 7., =i �' I°i. . ,J ii:II 'III1I' I;r1u 1111I1y =I , :r ;:, ;: �; ' 5 ,().,;::::, -.�� •r ■= y ' :111111111 IIIIlil9111 in \, \ Oki0r-1 . Oil INIIIIIINIPAIIIIIIIII Lam.. I !' l"``1 , .-.� 1 . �I ■IIIIII�I�!!��IIIIIIIN' Imo .1 - Z I. > I 'I �I�� l PINE RIDGE.ROAD ,,,, { - 7N,1 ,11.1 o i i� � IIillIllt ¢4 = T� E ti I. ' Z ' ' •: aril I IIIP51I111111P111111111111 _ ? - r; .a _ , - six J„ r=:1 - _ : ` .AII11111I111111111�111111111111111 Iiii I ' . j i• �'y. a xf T.1 . -a • ~/�/ ,y LEGEND ' },f O' . \L_.. ''S"' '' �ISUBJECT PROPERTY• _ �� I ----1` %� ^� ""'Q ` �,�`. s . IPII +��DISTANCE RINGS mpup Ail. .1 j 1 _ _ —MILES � 11.;1■ I_ :I' :>r= 'N MPU ...URCES:COLLIER • NTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS(2008); [=� 1 ` +i 4�%s '4 ®C-4 '� ORIDAGEOGRA'•-�`D T 'i RARY(2012) -A SI - �1 OL Wit- ' • tip l r: DEDAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC. BUCKLEY GMPA 4365 RADIO ROAD.SUITE 201 NAPLES, FL 34104 EXHIBIT Q: VACANT COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES 88 of 182 DAVNDE I N PHONE: 239-434-6060 ZONED C-3, C-4 & PUD (WITHIN 3 MILES) DE DAVIDSON E N G I N E P R i N G EXHIBIT Q - COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES UNDEVELOPED C-3, C-4 and PUD ZONED PROPERTIES WITHIN 1 MILE RADIUS ZONING PUD/DEVELOPMENT NAME PARCEL NUMBER ACREAGE N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A UNDEVELOPED C-3, C-4 and PUD ZONED PROPERTIES WITHIN 2 MILE RADIUS 1 CPUD PINE AIR LAKES 66760010345 1.09 2 CPUD PINE AIR LAKES 66760001723 8.89 3 CPUD PINE AIR LAKES 66760013025 4.68 4 CPUD PINE AIR LAKES 66760013041 11.36 CPUD CAMBRIDGE SQUARE 38450040006 5 CPUD CAMBRIDGE SQUARE 38450041005 10.56 CPUD CAMBRIDGE SQUARE 38451000003 6 MPUD BRADFORD SQUARE 00203042108 9.04 7 PUD PINE RIDGE COMMONS 00240280101 3.94 UNDEVELOPED C-3, C-4 and PUD ZONED PROPERTIES WITHIN 3 MILE RADIUS 1 CPUD CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK 29331190725 1.33 2 CPUD CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK 29331193201 1.61 3 CPUD CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK 29331193188 2.04 4 CPUD CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK 00168044005 21.94 5 CPUD GASPAR STATION 34595001027 12.07 6 CPUD CLESEN 38456200002 4.19 CPUD PINE VIEW 00287560004 7 5.65 CPUD PINE VIEW 00287160006 8 MPUD MALIBU LAKES 24745000545 1.50 9 PUD PINE RIDGE CORNERS 38455040001 4.22 10 PUD ANGILERI 38454000000 2.24 11 PUD RAGGE 76715000028 3.60 PUD RAGGE 76715000044 12 PUD NAPLES GATEWAY 61789000043 1.85 13 PUD PINE RIDGE CENTER WEST 76720001546 4.15 14 C-4 NAPLES TWIN LAKES 63400040005 1.32 89 of 182 4365 Radio Road,Suite 201 •Naples, Florida 34104 •Phone:239.434.6060 •Fax:239.434.6084 DE DAVIDSON E N G I N E E R I N G EXHIBIT "R" BERGSTROM REPORT- SURVEY OF EMERGING MARKET CONDITIONS 90 of 182 Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Warrington College of Business Administration • University of Florida Survey of are Conditions • Quarter 4 20 .. Published Marcl 013 Lead Researche = Dr. IVavne R. Archer, Executive Director Uni-oersit o Florida Beat trout Cent'a". of P . . researcher and Analyst imothv S. Becker, CCIM, Dir=e University of Florida Rert rornr -. ; Editorial :oa Mr. Le Goodkt'�, ' Dr. Hank Fishkind, Presid='. .. _, Fishkir Mr. Ja Ram Realty Services, Palm Roach Garde • UF UNIVERSITY of FLORIDA Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Table of Contents Investment Outlook 9 Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Warrington Cap Rates 10' 1 College of Business Administration•University of Yields 10 Florida 1 Section 6: Retail 10 Table of Contents 2 Expected Occupancy 10 Executive Summary&Conclusions 3 Expected Rental Rates 11 Highlights 3 Investment Outlook 11 The Survey 3 Cap Rates 11 General Investment Outlook 3 Yields 12 Single Family&Condominium Development 3 Section 7: Outlook for Investment in Undeveloped Apartments 4 Land 12 Industrial 4 Land Without Entitlements or with Residential Office 4 Entitlements 12 Retail 4 Land with Office or Retail Entitlements 12 Land Investment 4 Land with Hospitality Entitlements 12 Capital Availability 4 Land with Entitlements for Warehouse or R&D 12 UF Commercial Real Estate Sentiment Index 4 Land for Urban Renewal 13 Section 1: Investment Outlook 5 Section 8: Business and Capital Availability Outlook 13 Section 2: Residential Development 5 Capital Availability 13 Expected Absorption Rates 5 UF Commercial Real Estate Sentiment Index 13(Th Expected Price Changes 5 Section 9: Dominant Investors 14 Investment Outlook 6 Section 10: Characteristics of Survey Respondents....15 Section 3:Apartments 6 Profession of Respondents 15 Expected Occupancy 6 Markets of Familiarity 15 Expected Rental Rates 6 Property types of Familiarity 16 Investment Outlook 6 Section 11: Details of Cap Rates, Yields and Expected Cap Rates 7 Changes 17 Required Yields 7 Section 12: Local Markets 19 Section 4: Industrial 7 Expected Occupancy 7 Expected Rental Rates 8 Investment Outlook 8 Cap Rates 8 Yields 8 Section 5: Office 9 Expected Occupancy 9 Expected Rental Rates 9 92 2182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Executive Summary a continue. We look for a positive 2013, with a strong increase in investment in Florida real estate. Conclusions Highlights Despite the political theater that was the fiscal cliff, • The OF Commercial Real Estate Sentiment optimism in Florida real estate markets continued to Index increased this quarter and is at its grow in the fourth quarter of 2012. UF's Commercial highest level since the 3`d quarter of 2007. Real Estate Sentiment Index,an outlook on our • The outlook for occupancy and rents declined respondents' own businesses, increased again this slightly across most property types with the quarter,continuing a long steady climb from its low in exception of apartments. the fourth quarter of 2008. • Cap rates remained stable across most While there is still concern from respondents about property types. Expectations are for continued government spending and the lack of leadership in stabilization at current levels over the next Washington,a majority of the comments point toward a year. recovering economy in Florida that is having a positive • Yields have declined slightly across most impact on the real estate market. property types with the exception of industrial property where yields have increased. Florida continued to improve on the job front,ending Expectations are for stability in most sectors the year at 8%unemployment, down from 8.7%at the with decreasing yields in most retail end of the third quarter. Florida has steadily closed the properties. gap with the U.S. unemployment rate and most of the • The outlook for investment remained positive major Florida markets are tracking with the U.S.rate. across all property types. For the year,Florida added over 217,000 jobs while • Respondents' outlook for capital availability increasing the labor force by over 44,000 people. We remained stable this quarter with most are still over 270,000 jobs short of our employment expecting it to increase in the future. high water mark,but the trend continues to be favorable,which will continue to have a positive impact The Survey on real estate markets. Our quarterly survey,conducted by the Bergstrom Florida consumer confidence has declined slightly in Center for Real Estate Studies, Warrington College of the fourth quarter but remains higher than throughout Business Administration, University of Florida is in its twenty-first recession. The decline can be attributed to the first fielding. The total number of participants, uncertainty surrounding the fiscal cliff negotiations in at 161, is the most extensive survey of Florida Washington. Despite the agreement that kept income professional real estate analysts and investors conducted tax rates the same for most Floridians,there will be on an ongoing basis. It includes respondents some continuing uncertainty as the increase in payroll representing thirteen urban regions of the state and up to taxes has an impact on spending. However,as fifteen property types. consumers get used to the change in their paycheck,the General Investment Outlook continued improvement in the job market will provide Our general index of real estate investment outlook, more certainty for them to spend money and help the weighted 40 percent for single family and condo economy. development,40 percent for apartments and commercial Tourism continues to be a strong driver for the state rental property and 20 percent for developable land, with over 89 million visitors in 2012,the highest level increased this quarter to a survey high.More recorded. That is a 2.3%increase from 2011 according respondents indicate that the outlook is improving to Visit Florida. The main driver of the increase is driven by an improved outlook across all property coming from overseas visitors which reached a new types. record of 10.2 million. That's almost a million more Single Family&Condominium Development visitors than in 2011. The increases are driving The outlook for new single family development investment in real estate in this sector across the state. improved this quarter reaching survey highs as Optimism continues to define the real estate markets in improving employment trends,net positive migration Florida.Assuming that our representatives in into Florida and shrinking housing inventory levels Washington don't provide another shock to the boost the outlook for builders. Historically low levels of economy,we expect that the positive news will new product development have resulted in a low supply of new single family homes.Positive growth will occur © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 93oi1e2 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 in markets with limited supply in or near urban areas as driving respondents' opinions. Debt financing will rental housing is becoming more expensive and there is continue to be the regulator to new development, but a limited supply of homes for sale. equity is readily available for most any project. Apartments OF Commercial Real Estate Sentiment Index Multifamily properties continue to be the preferred Formerly called the Own Business Outlook,the property type. Rents are rising and are projected to Sentiment index increased slightly this quarter to its continue that trend as new development comes online highest level since the 3`d quarter of 2007. Each group and pushes rents higher.Cap rates continue to be low at of respondents improved on their outlook with other 6.4%with strong fundamentals. service provides having the biggest positive jump. Industrial Owners reached their highest level since the survey The outlook for industrial properties continues to be started. positive as investors look for growth sectors that will deliver higher yields. The investment outlook for Warehouse space has reached survey highs as continued strong trade with South America has increased demand for quality space. Occupancy and rental rate expectations continue to be positive with a stable outlook for cap rates. Office The outlook for the office market improved this quarter. With fundamentals improving the investment outlook continues to be positive for both Class A and Class B properties.An improving job market is having a positive impact;however,employers are continually looking for ways to fit more employees in smaller spaces.Cap rates remain stable at 7.7%and 8.7% respectively for Class A and Class B space. Yields have declined to 9.4%and 10.1%. Retail The outlook for retail properties improved this quarter across all sectors. This is driven by a large increase in expectations for occupancy across all sectors with each reaching survey highs. Rental rate growth continues to lag inflation. The improved fundamentals have pushed cap rates and yields slightly lower this quarter. Land Investment The outlook for investment in land increased this quarter across all property types with most reaching survey highs. Improving fundamentals and cap rate compression are starting to drive development particularly in the multi-family sector.Land with residential entitlements and land for urban renewal reached the highest levels. We are now at a level where more respondents believe that now is a good time to buy land than don't across all land sectors. Capital Availability The outlook for capital availability remained strong this quarter with most respondents believing that capital will be more available a year from now.An improving economy and increased lending activity by banks is 94 of 182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 4 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Section 1 : outlook in Florida along with a declining resale inventories are boosting builder expectations. Investment Outlook Additionally,low mortgage rates are making it easier The investment outlook for Florida continued to be for qualified Outlook for Residential positive and grow in the fourth quarter of this year. The a licants 1 Absorption Rates outlook reached yet another survey high as respondents pp Eapec„ng " indicated that this is a to afford Increase Investment Outlook: Florida new OA good time to buy in 0.2 Real Estate construction EapecangL1 Good lime 2 Florida.As stated in No Change - �,v. .. T°e'" 1.S ' the last paragraph 50 versus , ,•= M gir' percent of the outlook resale. V 0.5 Markets Decrease O8 is driven by that have S eF4n Development Mined lime n, To Buy e a a 6 residential ,..:.:toodon,e i„,„Development D i i i a a development which seen a big s 1 continues to improve increase in Bad Tense 1.2 every quarter. employment will lead the way in the new home market. To Buy Apartments continue Orlando, in particular,is a bright spot as the continued to be a sought after improvement in tourism is driving additional demand as investment and the outlook for new single family and well as the impact of Lake Nona's medical city condo development has improved tremendously complex. In addition,most of southern Florida is in the remaining new survey highs.Additionally,the outlook height of the snowbird season which should drive more for investment improved for every commercial demand for new construction as part time residents look to lock in at current prices. property. p The improved outlook for investment follows the Expected Price Changes improvement in the Florida economy with increasing —s employment a record tourism year and stabilizing The increasing absorption of new construction is having consumer confidence.As long as our representatives in a positive impact on prices.Respondents' outlook on Washington don't do anything to impact the economy, prices increased to the highest level since the start of the the state's economy will continue to improve. This will survey drive future investment in Florida real estate. with a Outlook for Prices majority Rte„,F , of New Residences This investment index is weighted 40 percent on single believing Th."in11e„°n 0:6 family and residential condominium development,40 that prices ,,,„„,e percent on rental property of all types,and 20 percent will rise "°'°°° on Vs 99992209 on undeveloped land. Thus, it is at least fifty percent with 0:6 s s s n s s .. z w sw ° , .”r. � `. driven by the residential development outlook. inflation. oteof Inaete m ,:; Section 2: This is the •,b ; Declining •16 first 2 Residential Development quarter -Smgle Family Development unDevelopment that slightly more respondents believe that prices will Expected Absorption Rates increase slightly faster than inflation since the start of the survey.Demand is certain the primary driver, but The outlook for residential absorption increased this building costs are starting to increase as well. Buyers quarter,reaching survey highs for both single family will continue to push to build now in an effort to lock in and condominium development. The large jump in those prices today. Additionally,the continuation of the condo absorption is driven mostly by the south Florida low interest rate environment is also pushing those that market where there nearly 16,000 new units proposed. can be approved for a loan to purchase now. The tremendous demand from international buyers is The real question we are faced with is how long this driving the resurgence. will continue. Certainly an increasing population will On the single family side,builders continue to purchase demand new housing but increasing commodity costs lots ready for development to feed their production along with increasing interest rates may work to curb a machine and drive revenues. The improving economic 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 95of 1s2 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 little of the enthusiasm that is starting to build for this with a significant amount of new development planned. sector. The addition of these units will impact overall absorption in those markets. Demographics continue to Investment Outlook be favorable and occupancy is expected to remain strong.However,as the economy improves, look for The outlook for investment in residential cooled slightly more apartment dwellers to transition into buyers in the this quarter but remains strongly in the good time to buy single family or condo market,particularly while rates category. Improving fundamentals and a positive are at all-time lows. outlook on Florida's Outlook for Investment: economy is driving the Expected Rental Rates Residential Development increasingly positive outlook for investment in Expectations for rental rates increased slightly this Good Time ' new residential quarter for market rent apartments and condo To Buy ,,, `l P development. It's conversions as respondents continue to expect rental important to note rates to 0,, however,that despite the increase with Outlook for Rental Mixed yTime o optimism,housing starts inflation. R,.lnv Faster Rates-Apartments To Than Inflation 0.a 0' $ t are still less than half the Demand 06 historical annual average continues to 0.41 V., -15 since 1980. outweighs o C C ■ . TO art -2 j supply which o-0.4 3 o $ $ r. The outlook for -0.s —StaveF uSyow.bpnent—.Condominiumpeveloprtwut has driven both investment in anc and " ' occupancy r I P y s.R.t.d condominium a aeon -1.2 ''. rents higher. -1.4 ': development also cooled slightly this quarter but This trend will -1.8 - remains near survey highs. The outlook is driven mostly oar o . i,+n2 —Apartments-Market Rent by south Florida where foreign investment has driven a continue as —Apartments-Fan Condo Conversion renewed boom in condo development to the tune of demographic almost 116,000 planed units. In other areas of Florida, preferences lean toward rental living in urban areas. condo sales and development continue to be sluggish as Respondents indicate that while new development is obtaining loans remains challenging. having an impact on occupancy at older units, it is also driving overall rental rates higher. This should continue over the near future. Section 3: Apartments Investment Outlook Expected Occupancy The outlook for investment in Apartments remains high this quarter. Despite a growing perception that this The outlook for occupancy declined this quarter for market is both condo conversion and market rate apartments but "frothy" Outlook for Investment: remains positive. respondents Apartments Outlook for Occupancy: Most responds believe that Good Time 2 1 Apartments again believe that it is a good To Buy 1.5 Expecting occupancy will time to buy. Increase 0.8 increase over the This 0.6 0.s 0.6 ' next year. The apartment Mixed Time 0 outlook reflects the market has To Buy a & 0.2 , -0.5 .n .§ o o ' Expecting & ` impact of new units good . g o 0 No Change 0 f+V -, 1. a -1 coming to the fundamentals -0a = - 6 v4 . market. The and is the Bad Time t5 -0 w apartment sector most liquid To Buy 2 Its-Market Rent _bps lbe -0.6 1 has transitioned in terms of -021 ti �Ap tm.nts-For Condo Conversion D from an investment capital -1 -_ Apartments-Market Rent sales focus to a availability particularly on the debt side. Continued r. Apartments-Condo Conversion development focus, support from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is driving 96 of 182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 6 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 the investment in this sector. However, investment in mortgage rates and support from Fannie Mae and /"� this sector is not for the faint of heart as cap rates on Freddie Mac. Respondents expect yields to remain at core properties have compressed tremendously. In current levels markets that have constraints on the availability of new over the next Required Yields-Apartments development land,these prices will continue. year, but a lot Investment in other parts of the state that have a ready will depend on Z;� supply of new opportunities for development will not the amount of Zoe have the same cap rate compression and thus will be new supply 16.0% 0 having better pricing. With reasonable underwriting, coming on line. 74 12.0% investment in this sector will be a good bet for the Excessive 10.0% foreseeable future. building would 6.� 4.016 increase the risk 2.0% Cap Rates in this sector and 0'0N 8 & a a a & a a a 3 drive yields t t s t t t a " " Cap rates decreased this quarter for both sectors in this higher. —Apartments-Market Rent market with rates at 6.3%. This reflects the fact that --Apartments-Condo Conversion Current Cap Rates- this sector continues to see a substantial amount of Expected Change in Required 160% Apartments interest from capital. Yields-Apartments 14.096 Additionally,more Expecting ' Increase 10%- investors are looking at the 0.5 8_ox , condo conversion option 6.0% for their investments to try Expecting t 4.0% No Change li+ 2.0% and capture projected 3 3 a - - a 4: 3 0.0% _ future demand for that -0.5 " a 3 a a 8 3 a a a a property type.As more Expecting Decrease ° 8 " " " mortgage debt becomes Apartments•Market Rent available for condo Apartments Market Rent ----Apartments-Condo conversion purchase,we will see a Apartments Condo conversion bigger investment in this Expected Change in Cap property type. Rates-Apartments Expecting e Section 4: Industrial jivmf increase 0.5 Expected Occupancy No Change 0 .... -_..._.T a 3 8 a a 1 a The outlook for occupancy rebounded this quarter with -0.s $ $ expectations for warehouse occupancy reaching a new Decrease survey high. Decrease ane Outlook for Occu -t - Improvements P Y' �a�Apartments Market Rent in the Florida ' Industrial Expecting 0.8 ....rApartments Condo conversion economy,the increase 0.6 improved 0.4 employment 0.2 , Required Yields environment Expecting 0 1r _ and continued NO ChanQe _ Required yields declined this quarter for both sectors trade with t t S i. • `.- a '-ii v. with yields at 8.2%for market rent apartments and South -0.4 9.2%for condo conversions. These yields reflect the America are Expecting -0.6 r competition for apartment investment and the lower driving Dec -0.8 perceived risk with this property type versus others in occupancies. 1 ft •Warehouse and Distribution:Class A the survey. The fundamentals will continue to drive Exports to Flex space,R&0,Office-Warehouse:Class A �� investment to this sector along with the record low South 97 of 182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 7 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 America continue to drive demand for warehouse space market These factors along with an improving Florida in south Florida. Additionally,the opening of the economy and a growing bio-technology and medical /–** Panama Canal expansion next year is projected to have technology sector will help drive additional demand in a big impact on the industrial market going forward. the near future to industrial space.Look for research In addition,the state continues to focus on bringing new from Florida universities to drive additional investment companies to the state and continued investment in as companies incubate new inventions and ideas to technology and bio-technology will grow demand for market. industrial space as companies take ideas and products Cap Rates from labs to the market place. These impacts will be seen around major research corridors including medical Cap rates for both industrial segments remained city at Lake Nona, UCF,and UF. relatively stable this quarter at Current Cap Rates- Industrial Expected Rental Rates 7.9%and 8.8% Rental rate expectations were mixed this quarter with a respectively. 12.0% slight decline in Flex Space properties and a slight These are the l00% lowest levels to% increase in since the fourth e.0% i Outlook for Rental Warehouse and quarter of 2008. 4.0% j Rates- Industrial Distribution. Mt.Fasts 1 This sector 2.0% 1 Tam Yttiawrt 04 Overall,however, 0.6 ' continues to 00% Y_- respondents' a a s a o a o a R,.na at the D.2 IA a benefit from Rate or 0 continue to believe $ $ a .. Innaton -0.2 '� improving --Warehouse and tkstributan a:6 $ ei that rents will fundamentals and o - Flex,R&D,Office Warehouse increase with -0.8 4 an inflow of Rising Slower than the Rate .2 inflation. With or Inflation 1.2 s capital looking 4.4 - rates still below -1.1.6 1 for higher yields. Expected Change in Cap Declining -Ii j previous levels, Additionally, Rates-Industrial —Warehouse and Distribution:Class A limited new i debt financing is xp.ct p l -Flee space,R a D,office-Warehouse:Gass A development, Increase starting to open except in supply 0.5 constrained markets,will continue to benefit this sector. up in this sector I■ which is making Expecting , In supply constrained markets we are seeing new No Charge 0 a a .a, develo ment activity,particularly in the Miami market. investment more M - p Ty'p y attractive. Vii§ � $ � � � � As long as the supply is not overbuilt we will continue Respondents' 0 S to see improvement in rental rates over the next year. Expecting expectations for Decrease Investment Outlook future rates —Warehouse and Distribution remain at no Flex,R&D,Office-warehouse The outlook for investment improved this quarter in change. both sectors with warehouse and distribution reaching a new survey high. Improving fundamentals continue to Yields influence Outlook for Investment: respondents' view of Required yields increased slightly again this quarter 0 Industrial investment in this reaching 11/o e ■ Good Time sector.Continued and 11.4% Required Yields- Industrial To Buy 1.5 respectively. positive trade with 16.0% 1 1 /J�► South America and There is still a `�/ ' 14.0%- o.s the expected positive lot of uncertainty Mixed r •A ! I 1 in this sector 10.0% o impact of the To guy about the inpacts 8-0% o.s a q o a g b Panama Canal 6.0% 1 .- a ° g ° ° expansion along of the Panama 6A% .1 p g Canal expansion ....-Warehouse and Distribution: with a limited 2.0% -1 Bad Tim61.5 Class A and investors are To Buy amount of new 0.0% 4 z hedging their 4 3 3 a d 8 a 4 o i, Flex Space,R&D,orrice- supply coming to Warehouse $ $ a■Warehouse and Distribution:Class A Flex Space,R&D,Office Warehouse eaot 18 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies . Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 bets by bumping yields. This sector will continue to Improvements in occupancy are allowing owners to benefit from the improved economy in Florida and the reduce concessions which are raising the effective rental expanding biotechnology and medical development. rates. However,companies continue to look for ways to Expected Change in Given these positive be more efficient with existing space,thereby not Required Yields Industrial factors,respondents' needing to Espech,g q expect yields to remain expand their Outlook for Rental Increase stable at current levels space needs. Rates-Office Rising Faster 1 0.5 over the next year. Than rnrtation 0.8 As the state 0.6 Dynan,� ,, 0 economy timing at O:2 5 g a a $ S e 7-1 M continues to of Matron -00 a 3 a8 8 u a a a -0.5 improve 'U.• li t o f o t .di Expecting -06 0.w.s. respondents �� -0.8 expect a the Rata of -1 Warehouse and Distribution Inflation -12 larger flex,R&D,Office-warehouse d.6 demand for -1" Oildhang -2 trw■Ktass A Office space which ,ass B Office will help Section 5: Office drive rents in the future.A lack of new development in most markets will allow the recovery to continue. Expected Occupancy Investment Outlook The outlook for occupancy improved slightly this Our respondents' outlook for office investment quarter as respondents' continue to believe that occupancy will improved again this quarter reaching a new survey high. Outlook for Occupancy: grow over the next Florida continues to experience one of the highest job Office year.The growth rates in 1 improving the country Outlook for Investment: Expecting 0 8 which is Increase employment 2 Office 0-t' a,. , environment is reducing the Good Time 0_4 state's To Buy 1.5 having a positive 1 0.2 impact on this unemployment 0.5 Expecting N • rate'closing the No Change 0 v sector. Companies Mixed Time 0 • -0.2 „ Y_ ' d are starting to add gap with the To Buy 0 5 & d a a d O' & -0.4 new employees and national S o 0 o s average. This is Expecting -0.6 / new companies are .,.5 Decrees -08 taking advantage of having a Bad Time A Office g , g positive impact To Buy 2 a�Class A Office 1 the state's ....Class B Office a.0assBOflice competitive tax on our ea structure by moving respondents' view on investment in this sector. While here. However, companies continue to be very cautious their view continues to be positive,this sector is not about the amount of space they need per worker. without its' problems. Debt capital is still scarce Therefore the impact of new jobs is tempered by more compared to other sectors which will limit the upside in efficient use of existing space. Office space in desirable the short run.Additionally,companies are becoming locations which are clustered with complementary users more efficient with existing space which is holding will continue to perform stronger than their competitors. back the improvement in occupancy and driving If the national and state economies continue to expand building costs higher with more demand for services we should expect this trend to continue. and parking.However,as employment growth continues we will see more capital come to this sector. Expected Rental Rates Expectations for rental rates increased slightly this quarter,however,respondents' continue to believe that rents will increase slightly over the next year. 9 1182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 9 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Cap Rates Cap rates remained mostly stable this quarter with Class Expected Change in p A cap rates at 7.7% Expecting Required Yields-Office Inc e Current Cap Rates-Office and Class B rates "" decreasing to 8.6%. (1 5 7 2.096 Continued Expecting 70096 improvement in the No Change 0 $ d 8.0% employment o g g t g l .. v. z z 6.0% environment will -o.s Expecting 4.0% improve fundamentals, Decrease 1 2A% reducing the risk in this —class AOffice -OassBOffice 0.0% _, sector.This will drive g a a 8 8 8 8 a 8 u more equity and debt capital to this sector Section 6: Retail •■ Class A Office - Class B Office over the next year.This ? is reflected in the Expected Occupancy Expected Change in Cap respondents' Rates-Office expectation for rates The outlook for occupancy increased this quarter in all Expecting 0.8 over the next year retail sectors as more respondents believe that Increase 0.6 0.4 •, which continued its occupancy will increase. In fact,each sector reached a 0 2 trend toward lower new survey Es Outlook for Occupancy Change 0 . - �- rates. high this 1 -0.2 8 a l e 0 • •�• 'vt, quarter. Retail .0.4 g t e - - ., Ewan. 0.8 E Retailers `bane Expecting 0 0.6 Decrease 0 R continue to 0.4 i, 1 •• class A Office expand within 0.2 - i , , , ■ W- .Class B Office the state as Expecting J • ■•i NO Florida's Change 0 : : 1 Y . �, v.2 1,� economy is : e j - V. V• 74 OA ■‘ x;Yields outperforming factlttg Required yields declined this quarter with Class A the national Decrease 0.8 -t,rgeeMtets economy. yields at 9.4%and Class B yields at 10.1%. This Florida's -' —Neighbor1ioodC"'"" reflects the declining unemployment --sho t*. Required Yields-Office risk in this sector as rate declined to -`reeSta d1n` the Florida economy 8%in December,its lowest level since November of 16.0% - continues to add jobs 14.0% - and little new office 2008. The improved job numbers is having a positive 1.2.0% - impact on consumer confidence. The University of lo.o% development occurs. Florida Bureau of Business and Economic Research's 8.0% These factors are consumer confidence index was 75 in December improving 6.0% slightly lower than the October number.These 4096 _ fundamentals which improved ecomonic numbers are having a positive 2.0% ' will have a positive impact on retail sales and are attracting more retailers to 0.0% Cl .. .___ impact on yields. expand in Florida. This is driving occupancy levels and g 8 8 8 $ 8 8 Equity looking for our respondents' outlook.Without any major negative higher yields will impacts to the state economy,look for this trend to -Class A Office Class B Office continue to flow to continue as Florida attracts more new residents and this sector. continues its job growth through 2013. 100 of 182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 10 Pi NI Survey of Emerging Market Conditions `°'' -- , °° _ . ....K U- . . February 2013 Expected Rental Rates Retailers are continuing to look for ways to increase /'N efficiency while decreasing store size.Additionally, While the economy in Florida continues to improve and online retailing continues to exert pressure on retailers occupancy expectations increase,there are still risks to particularly in the electronics and book sectors as we the consumer and will see continuing change from the best in class stores Outlook for Rental to the retailers. in those sectors. Grocery anchored centers continue to Rising Faster 1 Rates- Retail These risks are be the favored investment option for investors Than Inflation 0.8 preventing investors, 0.6 particularly best in class grocers in primary locations. 0.4 owners from Continued improvement in the Florida economy over Rising at 0.2 •, P Y the Rate o , , --T driving up rents. the next year along with a continued influx of new of Inflation -0.2 - 1. 3 3 3 8 Additionally, -0.4 ±. . , $ $ - Yt residents will have a positive impact on the retail sector. -0.6 - 4 , retail centers that Rising Slower -0.8 than the Rate -1 t • were acquired Cap Rates of Inflation -1.2 / through -ie foreclosure or The improvement in property fundamentals as well as Declining -12 —Large Centers note purchases the improved outlook for the Florida economy had a Neighborhood Centers are setting rental positive Strip Centers rates at lower impact on Free Standing Current Cap Rates- Retail levels. These cap rates this trends are reflected in our respondents' expectations for quarter. 12.0% rental rates which were mixed this quarter and still Rates 10.0% indicate that rates will grow slower than inflation. dropped 20 8.0% Continued improvement in the Florida economy, basis points 6.0% particularly the job market will ease some of the risks on average 4.0% and will help push rents higher in the future. However, across the 2.0% any shock to the economic system would have a four property 00% n negative impact on rents. Respondents continue to types as our indicate that concessions are down and rents are respondents Larger Centers Neighborhood Centers improving for quality properties in the right locations. see less risk --Strip Centers —Free Standing Retailer expansion and competition for the best in the sector. locations will continue to have a positive effect on The rates for large centers,neighborhood centers, strip rental rates. centers and free standing Expected Change in Cap Rates Investment Outlook retail were 7.2%, 7.4%, 1 -Retail Improving property fundamentals along with an 8.8%and Eapecarq 0.8 7.6%improved Florida economy have helped to improve our o Increase 0.6 respondents' outlook for investment in retail. The respectively. 0.4 1 / �' S respondents' Another Ea n1;e 0.0 Outlook for Investment: Retail continue to be \4 i` indication that -0.2 a i7 � i7 � cautiously t s o 0 0 respondents' -0 4 2 optimistic about have a o -0.6 Good limo To Buy 1.5 the retail sector -0.8 ...a-larger Centers positive , -Neighborhood Centers I with an uptick outlook in Strip Centers 0s ` in traffic from this sector is Free Sending �' national their Mixed Time 0 i •�' ,- retailers -0s S 0 _ e D ° looking to expectation that cap rates will continue to decline over g the next few quarters. More respondents moved toward -1 expand in that expectation this quarter. This indicates a decline in -1s Florida. risk in this sector. Time m. -Large Centers However,there To Buy -2 imeneMeighborhood Centers ......Strip Centers continue to be Free Standing risks in this property sector. 101 of 182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 11 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Yields however more respondents are starting to believe it is a good time to buy. Builders' outlook continues to Another indication of lower risk in this sector is the improve but there are a tremendous amount of continued decline in developed lots that need to be absorbed before raw land Required Yields - Retail required yields. Yields becomes a viable investment. However, given the time declined across all four to plan and permit new communities,expect more 16.0% property types within builders to invest in unentitled land to get ready for an 14.0%- retail with the largest . uptick in demand. ,zox _ drop occurring in free g - standing retail,which Land with Office or Retail Entitlements 60% - dropped 120 basis 4.ox - points to 9.8%. As The outlook for investment in land with office or retail 20% with cap rates,more entitlements increased slightly this quarter with 007 T a 3 i7 8 d 3 a a a a respondents now respondents still believing it is a mixed time to buy. * t s ' $ o v believe that rates will While office and retail fundamentals are improving, ...■largeCen[ers �NeightxxhoodCenters start moving lower current demand and rent levels don't warrant new .Strip Centers -Free Standing across all retail development for most of the state. This trend will property types. This continue over the next year. Markets like downtown Expected Change in indicates increased Miami will see more growth due to an influx of Required Yields- Retail optimism about the residents into downtown and under developed retail. Bapeellem 1 outlook for retail and Imam the fundamentals at Land with Hospitality Entitlements 0.5 the roe level. +� property rty The investment outlook for land with hospitality fixpeelle.°• 0 (1 i:_� entitlements improved a.ain this quarter,however 1 $ g respondents Outlook for Investment ° -0s still believe in Land:Hospitality, Industrial, r■larger Centers it is a lime 2 Urban Renewal Expeetim Neighborhood Centers mixed time i t.s 1 Strip Centers to buy. _ Free Standing Tourism in as Florida TS e a a a a s improved as * g s Section 7: Outlook for throughout lemellwe the year Tolley -ts Investment in Undeveloped Land with ., -tandWita Hospitably/WM[111,dt Vvaeh Warehouse/II&o Entitlements visitations .Foe(Mean Rtne.at Land Without Entitlements or with up 2.3%to Residential Entitlements record levels. This trend is driving improved fundamentals at hotels across the state which is The outlook for investment in land continues to generating renewed interest in hospitality development. Outlook for Investment improve. The Miami and Orlando with see the biggest impact from in Land: outlook for these trends. 2 No Entitlements, Residential, land with Goo"im Commercial residential Land with Entitlements for Warehouse Te guy ''s entitlements or R&D , 0.s and no Mixed Ilene ° _ _ _ entitlements The investment outlook for land with warehouse or To Buy o s a " .-g o ' q increased this R&D entitlements improved this quarter but continues g - quarter. Both to be mixed. Investment in warehouse projects is Bad Tare .1.5 segments picking up in port areas,particularly Miami,where To Buy Land Without Entitlements remain in the exports to South America are up and require additional With ReSlden tial Entitlements warehouses ace. Ports throughout Florida continue to With Office/Retail Entitlements mixed time to P g /'-N buy category, focus on expansion in preparation for the expansion of 102 of 182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 12 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 the Panama Canal. Additionally, a greater focus by the UF Commercial Real Estate Sentiment state on attracting high tech and bio-tech companies Index along with a renewed focus by state research universities is driving the need to R&D space. This will The UF Commercial Real Estate Sentiment Index be a big area of growth for the state going forward. improved slightly again this quarter. Respondents remain optimistic about the improving fundamentals of Land for Urban Renewal most property types along with the continued expansion of the Florida The outlook for investment in urban renewal increased economy. The UF Commercial Real Estate this quarter with more respondents starting to believe improvement 8.5 Sentiment Index this is a good time to buy. As more people move toward in the overall 8 urban areas land for urban renewal will increase. We index was 7.5 %Nyco. are starting to see more projects,particularly in Miami, driven by all but projects in small cities like Gainesville, with classifications. 6.5 Innovation Square, are leading the state in urban Other service 6 renewal. This is a trend that will continue over the next providers s.s several years. provided the 5 a.s biggest a positive jump a 3 0 8 8 3 8 8 8 & Section 8: Business and Capital which is a $ g o o $ $ V Availability Outlook precursor to more development projects on the drawing oo boards. Capital Availability 8.5 UF Commercial Real Estate The outlook for capital availability increased this Sentiment Index quarter with respondents continuing to believe that there 7.s , (by profession) will be an ,` Capital Availability increase in 6.5 ,\•• _64., I capital over 'NI' , �� y Expecting o� the next year. 5.5 ` +� 0.6 r The 4.5 f, 0.4 improvement 0.2 in economic 3.5 Clamp Expiable P tio 0 . activity and -0.z p. t e 3 employment 2s -0.4 o .. 74., el 06424 07-Q3 08-02 09 421 09-04 10-03 tt-qz 12-Q1 tz•ge is driving E, ,,,,o -0.6 ■o .nstori Mamas As improving _ -1 Capital for Development fundamentals -&p`r' -oeKwper capital for Acquisitions , which is _�„� -ak.sm.p, ,.lc«,su .krother) attracting capital to real estate. An increase in the debt availability is also impacting the flow of equity into real estate. In addition to the improved fundamentals and capital situation,the potential for inflation and the feds low interest rate policy is pushing investors to look for higher yield. With the potential for inflation in the future more investors are seeking investment in hard assets like real estate. 103 of 182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 13 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Section 9: Dominant Investors Respondents were asked to indicate which of five investor groups they perceived to be the most active for each type of property they analyze. Not surprisingly, REITs and Institutions are increasingly becoming more active as they have access to capital and are actively investing that capital. Foreign investment is still a critical part of the market along with private investment. Investors Q4-12 Free-standing-net leased Hospitality- Economy Hospitality-Business Strip Retail Neighborhood Centers Large Retail f> Office-Class B Office-Class A Flex Space,R&D Warehouse and Dist. Condo Conversions Apartments-Mkt Rent Apartments-Low Inc. Condominiums SF Development 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% •Private •RE Co.s REITs •Institution •Foreign 104 of 182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 14 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Section 10: Characteristics of Survey Respondents Profession of Respondents Survey responses declined slightly this quarter to 161 12-Q4 ill 68 22 4 27 respondents. Approximately 56 percent of the 12-Q3 72 33 10 23 respondents reported being an appraiser; over 76%with designations of 12-Q2 63 20 4 21 MAI, SREA or SRPA. The next largest groups 12-Qi were other service providers and brokers. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 •Owner/Investor •Lender •Broker •Developer •Appraiser: MAI,SREA,SRPA ■Appraiser: Other Designation Other Appraiser/Consultant •Other Service Provider Markets of Familiarity Each respondent was asked to select up to four regional markets with which they are familiar. In the latest survey, these choices 12-Q4 accumulated to 234 observations. The �� , highest number of responses was for the 12-Q3 14 Orlando market,which RAW//'//// `'- had 33 observations. The lowest respondent 12-Q2 support came from Treasure Coast with 7. VEIL `��_"`� 12-Q1 •Dade •Broward •Palm Beach •Treasure Coast •Southwest coast •Daytona Beach •Orlando •Lakeland-Winter Haven •Tampa-St Petersburg •Sarasota-Bradenton •Jacksonville •Gainesville-Ocala Pensacola-Tallahassee 105 of 182 © 2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 15 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Property types of Familiarity Each respondent was asked to select up to three property types with which they were familiar. Altogether, 345 selections were made in the latest survey round. •Single Family Development Single family 12-o ■Condominium Development development was ■Apartments-Lowlncome selected by 35 ■Apartments-Market Rent respondents while •Condo Conversion condominium 12-03 r 22 ■Warehouse&Dist. development was •Flex Space,R&D selected by 21. The ■Office:Class A largest response for •Office:Class 8 commercial property was 12-Q2 9 ■Retail-Urge in Office: Class B with ■Neighborhood Centers 52 responses. The lowest •Strip Centers response was for Hospitality-Business Hospitality-Economy 12.41 -. Hospitality-Economy with 6. Four property Free Standing types were selected by at Not a Property Type Specialist least 30 respondents. o so 100 150 20o 250 300 350 400 450 soo 106 of 182 ©2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 16 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Section 11: Details of Cap Rates, Yields and Expected Changes Table 1 summarizes estimates of cap rates and yields for twelve property types over the last four quarters of the survey.In addition,this table shows the distribution of expectations for changes in each reported cap rate and yield.In particular,the table reports the percent of respondents expecting each cap rate and yield to either rise or fall in the future.Excluded from this table is the percentage of respondents whom are expecting no change. This third percentage can be computed as 100 less the two percentages reported.Since prior sections discuss the content of Table 1,further comment is not given here.The table is simply provided as a reference to facilitate application of the survey results. 107 of 182 ©2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 17 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Table 1: Detailed Cap Rates,Yields and Expectations for Change Florida Apartments- Condo Warehouse Flex Office: Office: Retail- Neighbor- Strip Free Market Rental Conversion and Dist. Space, R Class A Class B Large hood Centers Standing Cap Rates Q4-12 Cap Rate 6.4% 6.3% 8.0% 8.8% 7.8% 8.7% 7.2% 7.4% 8.8% 7.6% Percent Expecting Rise 17.2% 28.6% 6.3`% 0.0% 11.8% 4.0% 0.0% 5.0% 8.9% 0.0% Percent Expecting Fall 17.2% 28.6% 25.0% 0.0% 23.5% 20.0% 42.9% 25.0% 22.2% 27.3% Q3-12 Cap Rate 7.1% 6.5% 8.0% 8.7% 7.4% 8.6% 7.5% 7.8% 8.9% 7.9% Percent Expecting Rise 18.8 20.0 7.4 8.7`, 5.3% 8.9% 12.5% 7.4% 8.0% 10.0% Percent Expecting Fall 15.6't: 0.0% 18.5% 13.0% 36.8% 12.5% 37.5% 18.5% 14.0% 20.0% Q2-12 Cap Rate 6.4% 7.6% 8.0% 8.6% 8.1% 8.8% 7.3% 7.6% 8.7% 8.0% Percent Expecting Rise 8.3 40.0-.- 12.0°. 19.0'. 4.3% 5.8% 6.3% 9.7%_ 5.4% 10.5% Percent Expecting Fall 12.5% 40.0% 28.0% 33.3% 26.1% 32.7% 31.3% 22.6% 35.1% 21.1% Q1-12 Cap Rate 7.0% 10.0% 8.1%. 8.7% 7.6% 8.7% 8.0% 7.6% 9.0% 7.5% �� Percent Expecting Rise 14.7% 0.0', 13.6 7.4`. 13.6% 8.5% 0.0% 7.4% 7.3% 5.3% Percent Expecting Fall 23.5% 0.0>. 13.6: 22.2% 31.8% 18.6% 33.3% 25.9% 36.6% 15.8% Yields Q4-12 Yield 8.2% 9.2% 11.0% 11.4% 9.4% 10.1% 8.9% 9.3% 11.4% 9.8% Percent Expecting Rise 18.5', 14.3', 0.0 21.4 5.9'., 14.0% 0.0% 11.1°% 12.2% 0.0% Percent Expecting Fall 14.8% 0.0% 25.0 0.0 23.5; 20.9% 42.9% 16.7% 17.1% 12.5% Q3-12 Yield 10.1% 9.5% 9.7% 11.0% 10.2% 10.9% 9.8% 9.3% 11.8% 11.0% Percent Expecting Rise 17.2% 20.0% 8.7°% 9.1'. 20.0' 13.7% 0.0% 3.7% 8.2% 10.5% Percent Expecting Fall 10.3% 20.0% 8.7% 18.2. 26.7-:, 11.8% 18.8% 7.4% 10.2% 5.3% Q2-12 Yield 9.3% 7.0% 9.6% 10.8% 10.3% 10.6% 10.0% 9.4% 10.7% 9.1% Percent Expecting Rise 22.7%% 20.0% 5.0d 5.9% 15.8% 12.8% 6.3% 3.6% 21.2% 5.6% Percent Expecting Fall 13.6% 40.0% 20.0_ 17.6 5.3% 21.3% 31.3% 10.7% 12.1% 16.7% Q1-12 Yield 10.7% 16.5% 10.7% 10.9% 9.5% 11.3% 11.8% 9.7% 11.2% 9.3% Percent Expecting Rise 10.3% 0.0% 20.0% 33.3% 29.4% 18.9% 11.1% 19.0% 13.9% 20.0% Percent Expecting Fall 17.2% 0.0% 20.0 8.3% 17.6% 9.4% 22.2% 9.5% 11.1% 13.3% ©2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 18 10801182 Survey of Emerging Market Conditions February 2013 Section 12: Local Markets Starting with the 3rd quarter of 2011,we have changed the presentation of the local market data to a more graphical format.This makes it easier,at a glance,to get a sense of what is happening in each market.As part of the transition you will notice that each report is broken up into property types. Additionally,you will see a table with indicating the direction of our respondents'expectations for the various indicators.Please use the following legend to interpret the results. For future expectations you will see the following symbols.Please refer to their definition for interpretation: At An upward pointing arrow indicates an increasing trend. /� ONAn upward but diagonal pointing arrow indicates a slightly positive or increasing trend. A side pointing arrow indicates a neutral trend. SA downward but diagonal pointing arrow indicates a slightly negative or slightly declining trend. IA downward pointing arrow indicates a decreasing or negative trend. ©2012-13 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies 19 109 or182 n Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Dade Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 8IX. 12.00- bn 0 24 10.00 1 T s.n -- `]8 _-_ a.525-.... --__. 6.2W 03-12 Q4-12 02-12 0.312 04-12 ∎Apartments-Market mamCOndO Conversions apartments-Market a...vCOndo Convenbns H GJ Future Expectations +-' Apartments Condo Comers=?.. L W Cap Rates CL Yields O /".3/4,Investment Outlook 'I /".3/4,a >s Occupancy •.- Rents R tL +0 Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion Z i:_ 110 of 182 02011-12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Canditlons December 2012 Regional Market Report for Dade Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.00- __.. _ ___.......__..... 8.30.. .. 1200- ]00 8.00 ]0.61 ]'75.. ___—____.- 10.00. 2.O1) 2.32 �] _. ... 6.00. __.... C83 .. 208 8.59 SOD........____.. ._._..._.... 6.00... 0.00 300—. __ 4.00. 2.00- 200 1.00. O.OD - _ 0.00 02-12 .. Q312 04-12 02-12 03-12 0412 aaeeyy2are0owce ■neo Space �Marehoue �Fex Space to Future Ex ctations Y Cap Rates CU �' 3♦ O. Investment Outlook ra Rents : rn Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 111 of 182 0 2011-1 2 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Dade Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend • 9.0D 6.10. 8.10 __. 10.00 991 ].P am 9. 9-76 .... _. J.16 7.30 6.m_t_. .__...-...... 6..61.. 9.00 9.20- 0.m -_................ _._.._.._ 9.21 9.m Lm- 8.80.. .... .. _ 8.80... 8.m Lm---- 8.00 OM. Q2-12 43-12 Q4-12 820 . • Q2-12 Q3-12 Q0.12 ∎Ofrce.QassA .....UxkeCnssB .-QfRce:ClassA Off rGms8 Future Expectations H Office:Class A ' Office:Class 8 41 Cap Rates Yields ♦ ♦ /".".."` 41 Investment Outlook r JPI a O Occupancy t ` a Rents CU u w 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 111 110 112 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies /'.*\ Survey of Emitting Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Dade Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 8.50 600 ].50 1000 7.00 9p0 650 8.00 _...... 600 _..____ 7.00 ...___...._.___._..__._.. 5.50 __.—. __.__ _.._.... 600 --_. —... 5.00 5.00 42-12 0312 38-12 Q2-12 0312 0412 •••••••Iletail-Loge 6.92 673 682 . .Retail-large 9.53 9.27 8.60 --- �NeighborhoodRetail 6.78 684 7.01 Neighborhood Retail 807 8.67 8.92 ■Strip Centers 8.03 8.16 622 Strip Centers 9.61 11.13 10.70 -Free Standing 7.20 695 ].04 Fee Standing 661 .. I 9.19 _. Future Expectations Retail-Large Neighborhood Centers Strip Centers Free Standing v Cap Rates 4 ♦ <y 4 i Yields ♦ ♦ 4 aInvestment Outlook 01 44 0 0 Occupancy It 411 47 f d Rents f 42 y -a 4-r C/ ce Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers 4 • Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center REITS BON l,h3) �liti �tit ; L3 rl F� REITS,l3v, 113 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Broward Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 8A0 ____.... 12. ].00 ....... 6.67 6.48 .._..._... 10.00 6AD 800 9 —� 5.76 5.49 5.74 8 )98 795 4.00-....... _ - _.. 000- 686 100 2.00- 1.00 0A0 0.00 02-12 03-12 04.12 02-12 0312 0432 —Apartments-Market —Condo Conversems Apartments-Market ■eCOndn Conversions N G1 Future Expectations +� Apartments Condo Conversion L Cap Rates o Yields Investment Outlook �0 Occupancy t t Rents ld_ Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 7 114 of 182 :2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Broward Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 8.40 ________ _. _. 816 12.02 830 _._ _ _. 10.36 10.]3 B.m 7.86 ._.. 30.00 9,99 8.00. _.. 8.6E 8.)4 7211 zoo----___ _._.... .__. _..___... 630 200- ].oe 6.40 _. erns- _ • 02-12 0•12 Q4-12 0202 Q312 Q1-32 w,rmome wia,s„��e �warehoise yam space y1 Future Expectations Warehouse ^ - Flex Sp Cap Rates 4 4 Yields 4 Investment Outlook Occupancy 4 m Rents• Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 115 of 182 0 2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Broward Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 8:07. 8.01 8,10 10.20 10.07 8.00-. 10.00- 9.88 9.80- ].40- 7.30 7.00... _- 7.12_.__- __-._ 9.20- 9.33 6.80 6.85 6.60___.. 9.00 8.80 6.10 8.60 6.20- 02-12 0312 418-12 02-12 03-12 04-12 4..=O1fire:0asA ==.00.00essB ce:ClassA ■401ficClas8 Future Expectations ....Office.Doss A.. Gl Cap Rates i Yields ♦ �� a Investment Outlook Oy Occupancy 0. Rents y 4 N 1 w 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 116 of 182 0 2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Broward Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9A0 12.00 --.. 8.50 11.00 8.00 1000 ].50 9.00 . 7.00 6.50 6.00 ..... )00 _...... 5.50 6.00 ..... 600 02.12 4312 QO-12 SOD 42 12 Q3-32 6/0-17 �Relail-Ix8 - 6.89 6.97 6]8 �Ret,l-1 rge 9.40 - 9.03 8 73 . ,. �Neighb«hood Retail 6.14 7.09 6.97 -Neighborhood Reed - -795 8.82 901 $' �S1riP Centers ].99 8.00 618 Strip Centers Y 9.48 11.29 10 83 -free Standing 7.17 7.19 7.00 =Free Standing 8.48 9.56 9.31 Ai Future Expectations to 11-Large Neighborhood Centers Strip.--raters Free Standing 41 Cap Rates ♦ 11 ♦ Yields 6. 41 Q Investment Outlook 0 Occupancy it A 01 t 0. Rents it ♦ y r Investor Profile-Strip Centers CC Investor Profile-Retail-Large P Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center 410 110 117 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditims December 2012 Regional Market Report for Palm Beach Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 10.00- _... . 6.73 9.52 6:30-. 9.11 6.00 - 7.00- 7.85 I.57 5.82 5.00- 535 5.71 5.98 1.00 3.00-... 3.OJ 100- 1.00- 0.00 — 000 02-11 03-12 01-12 02-12 0312 COI 12 Apartments-Market Condo Conversions ■dpanmmts-Market Condo Conversions N 47 a-a N Cap Rates O. atiL Investment Outlook >5 o . : iii Rents LL 'y^,r Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 118 of 182 2011-12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies r-. Survey of Emerging Market Conditloro December 2012 Regional Market Report for Palm Beach Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 600 _792.... —..---).85 __—_ 1200- 7.80- 10.23 ]O.OD- 7.60_. _.. 8.26 9.61 8.00- .862.. a0 65 6.00- 7.00 7.04 am 880— --_..... _..__... 694 2.00- 660 -..... _... _.. _... __.. 640 _ 0.00 ........ _.... ..--_.- —. 0242 0312 0412 02-12 43-12 ¢412 ∎Warehouse *lea Space �Varelnue ilea Space V1 Future Expectations i Cap Rates Q. j ' ♦ '� ;? Investment Outlook ea Rents Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 119 of 182 0 2011.12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Enrerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Palm Beach Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend ---- 1020- 8.13 ).82 8.10 9.90 1000 7 00 7.18 >.30 9.50 6.00- 6.]1 9.00- 500- .._...-. -..... 9.20- _ .... 9.00 3.00 8.95 8.0 8.8] 8.60.. _.......... 800 8.20- Q00 W 12 03-12 00-12 8.00 Class 02-12 4312 04-12 �Ofrce:Cb �03344lass B ∎Orfice:Class A .00.40.vO ture • •.•ons Q ZI =M‘ Q Investment Outlook O` 1 f Ll Rents N 0 O Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 11/0 120 of 182 m 2011-12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Palm Beach Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 8.50 .._.. --... ._ 1200 __.. 8.00 _. _ 18.10 730 _. 10.00 7.00 ._ 980 630 __. ___.- 8.00 .._...__. 6.00 - -.._ -_--. 7.00 .. 5.50 _ __ ---_ 6.00 5.00 5.00 02-12 Q3-12 04-12 02-12 0.312 _-_ 04-12 1 -Retail-large 6.95 683 an ∎RetaiFlar6e 8.51 _ 9.31 8.35 ■-Neigttho.00E534a0 ..._--680 605 697 -Neidrba1n06 Retail 7.06 8.70 8.66 -S6.9 444095 8.05 8.26 8.18 �SaIR Centers 8.59 1117 10.44 -Free Standing 7.23 7.05 200 Free StaMmH 7.60 9.44 ,_- 8.93 Future Expectations Retail-Large Neighborhood Centers Strip Centers Free Standing-„ N Cap Rates y ♦ 4 4 L YIeI 41 Q Investment Outlook O Occupancy ♦ ♦ It CI. Rents ♦ ♦ ♦ 4 co L.r N ce Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center 110 • 121 of 182 02011-12 university of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Treasure Coast Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.00- 1000- )J) 900 8.00 6.69 800- 895 `J6 .. 8 11 �— 6.8) 5.11 �i""'� ).56 6.00- --- sioo Sag )2 669 6.81. 5. 5.00 3.00 2.OD- 2.00 y- LCO 0.00 0.00 • 02.12 0.3-12 0.0.12 02-12 0.3-12 CM-12 a•■•apartments•Market Condo Conversions Apartments-Market Condo Conversions N Future Expectations • L Apartments Condo Conversion a Cap Rates p Yields aInvestment Outlook ♦ ♦ P"'", >+ 3Ilstq! ♦ T Rents LL Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 122 of 182 ®2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Treasure Coast Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 10.00 —8%__ _—--- 10.50- 9.00 1 'gg 9.90 8.00 1000- B.a4 2.00 9.50- ... ].08 ]02 8 bm .92 5.00 0.00 —.- 00_—__— -._ _— .... .. 8.50- 0.85 3. 800 _._. 8.36. a33 2.00. __.. _... _. _... _.. 1.00 __.... ..._.._--— .._._...._.._ _._.._._._...-.. _... 0.00 -—. 7.50 _" __ —__, 02-12 03-12 04-12 02-12 03-12 00.12 ■Warelnuse ....Rex Space ■WareMUe anew Space V] Future Expectations I N Warehouse Flex Space-'T i N Cap Rates 0.Z Yields 0 Investment Outlook a It CO Rents i+ h 7 Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 123 of 182 0 2011.12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditloel December 2012 Regional Market Report for Treasure Coast Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 1000, __9.17 ---_ 1000- 9 9.00 .65 600- 8. 600 _._ -. 6.86 72) 9.00- 8)5 SAO 1-. ,3001.-.. -. _.. -_-_._- 8.58 3.00 8.00-. 8,19 2.00 1.00 I 0.00 1 02-12 0312 03.12 7'0 ∎Olf e:ClassA �ffkeClassB 01-12 0312 Q412 ∎Of6se:ClassA ∎0668:81aaB Future Ex cations C/ Cap Rates Yields Investment Outlook 0. O Occupancy ♦ t ti Rents Cl u w O Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 124 of 182 ©2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Treasure Coast Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.00 50 .._.....- 12.00 8. -...... 1100 1000 r: 8.00 7.50 - .... 9.00 850 8.00 ........_-1�� -.._......... ._--_.... _.._.._... 5.50 800 5.00 0212 Q3-12 I Qe-12 5.00 Q2-12 Q312 Q412 0Oetaa-large 7.99 6.97 e% ∎eeaiFlsge 022 9.02 7.59 • NeigMalmd ReaN 780 ---�— 7.09 891 Neighborhood Retail 7.77 8.81 7.90 —Strip Centers 8.41 Strip Centers 1088 free Sanding 8.27 7.20 898 Free Sanding 8.30 9.15 8.18 Future Ex, Ctattons H = Retail-Large WIM = -., • W =BIM 11 :i1MMIZM i C. Investment Outlook i' ♦ iM o . ♦ f �M Rents ' CO a+ 41 44 Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center • 125 of 182 02011.12 university of Flonda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Condition December 2012 Regional Market Report for Southwest Coast Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 1300- 7.15 7.20- zOS 1000 10" m 7.00.1 8.00 8.75 817 6.60 6.01 600 1 ........_6.26._.... 6.01 2.00 6.00 5.80 0.00 ■ 02.12 03-12 Q4-12 02.12 0312 Q0-12 ∎Apartments-Market Condo Conversions ..Apartments-Market Condo Conversions H N Future Expectations +' Apartments s aCap Rates p Yields 0- Investment Outlook ♦ f �� a A Occupancy •.- Rents f fO u- .1.7 Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 7 I) . 126 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies • Survey of Emerging Market Conditions Deoember2012 Regional Market Report for Southwest Coast Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 10.00-...._....... .. 8.93 3200 10.92 11.53 0.A5 8.55 8.50-.... 8.3] _. 1n00..... JB 9.89 8.00- 8.00_...... __-...__.__ I85 use __, 0.00 - - -- - 02-12 Q3-12 CO-12 02.12 Q3-12 Q0.12 �Varehoise telex Space �yarehouse Hex space VI 1111111.11111171=2 . a, a`, Q MINIM fl 4 O. Investment Outlook f rts •L Rents a+ us 3 TS C — Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 1110 „ 127 of 182 0 2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Reat Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Southwest Coast Cap Rate Trend I Yield Trend 9.00--- g.)) 11.50- 8.SB H.BJ �.......-■ 10 1100 1,. 10.63 10.68 8.00- ' 10.50- _•� C 10.00 1010 763 I 41 9.50 1 956 Q2-12 Q3-12 Q4.12 850 -- Q3-12 43,12 Q4-12 ce:Class A .....Off AA Class ∎Orfre:ClassA ,■22,0reClzs8 Future Expectations N Office:Class A Office:Class B a) Cap Rates Q �` t Yields ♦ 4 L O. Investment Outlook f f O Occupancy ♦ t a Rents ♦ y a) u w 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B "7nnre1,or 128 of 182 02011.12 Urnversity of Elands Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Southwest Coast Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.50 ................... -.....- _ 13A0 .. 9.00 1200 8.50 11.00 goo 10.00 9.00 _..__..._.._....._. ZOO 6.50 8.00 6.00 )'00 5.50 600 5.00 5 00 0201 0312 _ Dan 02-12 0312 W-12 ■ftetail-large 2.40 2.53 1 •••■•Retall-Large 10.71 9.99 I -NeOBMnrhood RAAOR ).25 7.65 7.64 1 --■Neip.barhood Retail 9.25 9.39 994- -strip Centers 8.50 8.96 895 . 51rip Centers 10.71 11.85 1862 -Free Standing 7.68 ).)5 ).6) Free Standin8 9.78 10.13 10.11 Future Expectations yl >. rvt71 C>Fr: , .. 7 a - Free Standing N QIIIM'M='©0 iall..ii1111.i� W Investment Outlook .1.11=WIIIMC i O IZ Rents y ♦ 4 FS cc Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center 111 • 129 of 182 0 2011.12 Universty of Ftonda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate 5tudies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Daytona Beach • Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 14.00__-_... _-_._-_... 12.00- 7.20 -..--. -.. 7.00 1000 8.00- 9.05 -. 8.6•fi.60- 6)) 600 6.40 1 6.20 H 6.31 9.00 6.00 9 200 J.... 580: 5.60 0.00 02-12 03-12 04-12 02-12 03-12 09.12 Apartments-Market •■Condo Conversions ■■partments-Market Condo Conversions H N Future Expectations Apartments Condo Conversion L CD Cap Rates 0 Yields dInvestment Outlook t ♦ �� Rents r0 LL }, Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 130 of 182 0 2011.12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Daytona Beach Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 900- ......&86___—__—_—_--8:80..... _.____ 582 _...... 14.00- 12.46 880 12.00 �-- 42 860- _ _ _.. 10.3] �'..n� 8.00 - _ _ _._- 1000- 10.84 10.61 8.20. ...................... SOD 800 _. 7.80.——.— __ — .7.92 7.60 7.40 ____--7,61_ 7.20. _ __.._. —____..__.. _. __ _._ _._— 300 700 _.—___ __.... ____....._ 1 640 nos�. —. 02-12 0312 04-12 0212 0312 40.12 Warebose X018 Space •Narelase �rlex Space IA Future Expectations N Warehouse Fig illintaxi N Cap Rates a Yields 0 Investment Outlook Cl. Occupancy re 'C Rents ✓ 3 . Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 131 of 182 0 2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Daytona Beach Cap Rate Trend ! Yield Trend 9.02 44.4.3 9.00 8.86 12.16 8.80 1200- ]0.24 10.52 `tee 810---- _ 10.00— ]0.89 640-.. 10.02 8.00-__ 8.1E _- _-_- 600 2.80 2.86 0.00 .._.... 2.40-... 2oo 7.20 02-12 03-12 04-12 000 Offre 02-12 Q312 04-12 — :classA �tkCUass 1 Off..e:Class A 4■Qf1ke:Class B Future Expectations Office: in N Cap Rates ` Yields N Investment Outlook f it 1 IZ O Occupancy ♦ ,I d Rents ♦ y 01 U 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B • • 132 of 182 02011-12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Malilet Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Daytona Beach Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.50 9.00 -_..... 8.50 12.00 000 - _ 11.O0 - ].50 100D /-- 7.00 ---. 9.00 6.50 - _-- ---- 8.00 .-_.. 6.00 ..-... 7.00 --_ ........ .__._.-.. 5.50 --.... 6.00 5.00 01212 03-12 04-12 5.00 x-12 4312 _ 04-12 e404-Ise 7.89 7.82 7.35 I ∎RetiIlarge 10.56 11.53 9.41 -Neighborhood Retail 7.74 7.93 - -�� 7.53 -NelWlbarhmd Retail 9.11 1092 9.73 -Strip Centers 8.99 9.25 8.755 ■Strip Centers 1064 1139 1151 -..-_ ]5] Free Standing 9.64 11.66 10.00 ghee Standing 8]7 8.01 Future Expectations Retail-Large Neighborhood Centers Strip Centers Free Sta , W Cap Rates Yields 4! Investment Outlook f O Occupancy O. Rents 8 r+ cu cc Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center 1110 fa 133 of 182 ©2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging market Condition December 2012 Regional Market Report for Orlando Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 2.00- - __- -_._- ----_---_ 12.00, 6.99 6.80. -_.. 10.00 10.25 10. 21 6.40 1 fi - 8.00- 8 g) 600 8.26 6.00- 6A0 610. _ 5.60- _--_ 5 29.. 200_ 5.40- -..... - _.. 5.20' 0.0D 02-12 00-12 04-12 02.12 0312 M-12 Apartments-Market tondo Conversions -Market �COndo Conversions vs N Future Expectations Apartments Condo Conversion aJ Cap Rates 0. p Yields --ft. CL Investment Outlook >+ Occupancy ♦ t Rents co LL .I, Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 7 re 10 m Buye„ oforeign 8uvers. 100% 134 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Condlliors December 2012 Regional Market Report for Orlando Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 8.80 E.50 8 61 11.50 11.25 _. 11.11 11.00 gq0. 8.29 1100 8.00 10.50 B. .. 10.50 __. _... ).60 10.00- 10.30 d0 9.50 9.60 660 8.50 02-12 03-12 0412 52-12 03-12 04-12 Warelnuse -flex Space Warcloice ■Rex Space yl Future Expectations Warehouse FleASfrate'°s Cap Rates Yields Investment Outlook d Occupancy 4 to Rents 7 Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 135 of 182 2011.12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Reat Estate Studies tTh Survey of Emerging Market Condit ions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Orlando Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend lam -_ -.. —_. _.. ,�- T_ 8.78 9.00 i _.. 8.31 8.06 _._. 1200- 11.50 10.96 e.m- ................. ... __.__. 10.19 ).m- J86. _ _....... 11.W 6.00- 7.19 9.89 9.60 8.00 3.00 _ __.... 200_.. 0.00. _... _—_.. _.... _. 100- 21X1 0.00• 02-12 03-12 Mat am, 0242 0312 061-12 ol6ce618ss A Doff,o,"8 ∎Cflice:aassA ■.OffkeClmsB Future Expectations Office:Class A Office:Clots B aJ Cap Rates L Yields CV Investment Outlook 1 Q 2 Occupancy f t O. Rents 4 a) u 9- w 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 1111 1110 136 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Condition December zolz Regional Market Report for Orlando Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.00 13.00 8.50 12.00 8.00 11.00 1.50 10.00 1.00 -�� 9.00 . 650 8.00 600 1.00 5.50 600 5.0D 02-12 03-12 I a-12 5.00 02-12 0312 0412 6eta4-Inge 7.61 ].2] - ].Id •■Retai4large 11.36 1033 - 9.144 *Ieighbalwod Retail 7.46 7.39 L_-- 7.31 -NeIW.bahmd RAM 9.91 9.72 9.35 -53rip Centers 8.11 010 i.. 653 ■Strip Centers 1144 12.19 11.14 �kee Rand.% 729 7.50 -7.35 . keg Standing 10.05 1646 9.62 Future Expectations an .4Mb Retail-Large Neighborhood Centers Strip Centers Free Standing al Cap Rates ♦ ♦ 4 1 4 i Yields ♦ ♦ 4 4 al Q Investment Outlook 0 Occupancy t f ♦ f A: Rents ra a) N = Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing fl.k Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center `° "" 10 137 of 182 0 2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Lakeland Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 1300- 8 00 8.03- 1000 662 10.x2 10,,5 =0.20 6.00 J J.06 9.18 6.55 6.63 __.._.. B.00 8.25 4.00—.._ ..... ......._._. 3.00--. a.ao-._ ZOO- lAD-. 0.09 000 i 02-12 03-12 04-12 02-12 03-12 04-12 Apartments-Market 9...Cnndo Conversions •partmmts-Market condo Cmvenons N N Future Expectations _- — L Apartments Condo COnversion N Cap Rates CL p Yields d Investment Outlook f f >, Occupancy Rents •.- 11 }, Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 138 of 182 02011-12 University of Honda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Lakeland Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 12.00 T--. -. 12.00- 1155 10.00 ---- 9,55 _..9.-14. 1150 -.. 1127 ---- - -. --. 8.64 11 03 8.00—._. __. e.54 _. 11.O13 8.17 7.93 1030- ---... ]0.66. _-...... _ _.... _..-. 4.00 --...- 1000-_ - __..... .. -.-___ 10 29 ....----. xss 9.50. 0.00 1 — T 9.00 ---— --r- 02-12 03-12 04-1Z 02-12 51-12 54-12 Warehouse �rlex Space ....rehouse ...lee Space in Future Expectations aJ Warehouse Flex Space tr L- Cap Rates 14 cv a Yields o Investment Outlook CL — Occupancy Q is CIS.i Rents 4 til 7 - Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space I) ' R61is,100% 139 of 182 0 2011-12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Lakeland Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend lzai ii 1 1600 .. 9.57 11. 8.85 899 __._.... 11.50- 11.1J 8.00 1100 7 90 B.tl 10.50- 0.18 10.00.. __._ 1020 zm— —- 0.00 02.12 03-12 Q8-12 9.20 02-12 03-12 00.11 .■Office:ClasA •••■■•OffkeCIas8 Off e:ClassA ■990FkrClas8 Future Expectations H rce: ass N Cap Rates a r Yields N Investment Outlook 1 C. O Occupancy a Rents a) U w w 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 140 of 182 0 2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Lakeland Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 11.00 __-.. 13.00 _... 10.00' 0.00 12.00 11.00 .. ___..__.. 9.00 10.00 _... _......__. 8.00 ,--.. 9.00 -._.. 2.10 -_ _.___.-_.. __._____ _. __ 600 7.00 6.00 600 ..._ . 300 5.00 Q2-12 03-12 c14-12 02-12 0}12 54.12 i �Reteillar8e — 053 ],6] —BNail-large 10.64 --- 9.03 I �xeighbothond Retail ].52 8.65 2.85 �xeighbabmd Retell 10.02 1003 934 e■e-Strip Centers 8.77 096 9.07 ■5019 Centers 11.61 1250 11.13 —Free Standing 7.95 075 7.89 —Fee Standng 10.61 10.77_. 9.61 Future Expectations Ln -. Retail-Large Neighborhood Centers Strip Centers Free Standing C) Cap Rates 4 4 4 4 i Yields ♦ ♦ 4 4 IU Investment Outlook t t t _t G- O0 Occupancy t t t - 4 a Rents 4 co 4r = Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center ID 10 REI 141 of 182 ¢2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Tampa Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend amz --_— _.- _.__.- - �-04—_—.. 1200. -.. fi91 10.00- 606 9,�y�� ,' ' 6.00 0) 6.00 6.3) 9.� 5.00 --_.. ).98 __...... 8.00 8.12 600- 3.00 J 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 02 32 Q3-12 0412 02-12 Q3.12 Qd 12 '... ■Npar•ments-Market Condo Conversions impartments-Market tondo Conversions N 4) Future Expectations L Apartments Condo Conversion aCap Rates ♦ r o Yields k♦ dInvestment Outlook ♦ ♦ �� Occupancy t Rents to Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 142 of 182 2011-12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Tampa Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.50 11.50- 8.96 8.89 1100 10.02. 10.91 8.50___ 1050. 10.26 8.10 10.00- 10 16--... 8.05 9'50 9.65 ].5J J.68 9.00. 9,20 700 ...-....._ --..- ........ 850 6.50 r 3 800 _— -_. ._ 02-12 012 4412 02-12 0312 0412 Warehouse telex Space Warehouse ..Rex Space in Future Expectations N v Q 0. Ol Investment Outlook ii f a MIIIC' f s Rents 4, 3 -o - Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 143 of 182 91 2011-12 University of Honda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Tampa Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend tom- s.9s _. u CO -._ 8.73 . - 9.00 8.30 :o. 0.53 8.00 1 10.50- _. 2.82 793 7.36 10.06 6.00 5.00 i..____ 4.00 100 2. 9.45 9.50 00 1.00 11 0.00 —_- 42-12 43-12 Q4-12 8.50 , Offce.ClassA OIfke.Clase 0212 Q3-]2 40-]1 � ■Office:Class ∎011keClss13 Future Expectations V1 '`'°" Office:Class Office:Class B C1 Cap Rates ♦ * L Yields ♦ ♦ t''..Q. Investment Outlook f t di a Rents a, 1 w w 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 144 of 182 02011-12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Tampa Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 10.00 _._.. __. 13.00 __.__ _ 9.50 12.00 11.50 ...... _.......___ 8.50 __.........__. 800 _...._....__ 10.00 _.. 750 i -_ _. 9.00 ).00 8.00 _..... 6.50 7.00 _... ... 6.W i .. 6.00 --__. ___......__.___.___ ._ 5.00 -- ____ _-.. 500 02-12 0.3.12 04-12 02-12 a312 03-12 Retail-large 7.13 7.94 7.42 •■■Retall-large 10.51 9.89 1 090 -Neightahood Retail 6.98 8.06 7.60 -...NNghborhood Retail 9.06 9.28 9.22 -SO..,Centers 823 9.37 8.81 -Strip Centers 10.59 11.75 11.88 I -Free Standing 7.41 8.16 ■■•Rret Standing 9.60 _ 10.02 1 Future Expectations Retail-Large Neighborhood Centers Strip Centers Free Standing N Cap Rates 4 4; 4.4." Yields 4/ Investment Outlook si O Occupancy A f 1 4. Rents 11 ra a) ce Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center 4111 145 of 182 0 2011-12 Urgversity of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging market Conditioev December 2012 Regional Market Report for Sarasota Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend )AO- _-- 226 12.00 2.20- _.._. 10.00 zao _. __..... 1o.2a 9a1 6.80 661 &W 8.82 6.60{ &29 640- 6.62 6.00- 6.20 .00- 6.00 6.24 _... .-— -..... 2.00 a 5.80 5.60 0.00 02-12 03-12 04-12 02-12 03-12 04-12 eaardpartments-Market —Condo Conversions ■Apartments-Market —Condo Conversions VI alFuture Expectations -a L Apartments Condo Conversion O Cap Rates a O Yields 4 L- to—.Outlook f f to—.a >+ Occupancy f •.- Rents di Li- ..- Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 7 • 146 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Sarasota Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.30_.... _......... 12.00- 11.01 9 11 moo 9.82 9.00-. 8.)6 10.33 9.6fi 8.50. ...._834 __._........ ....... 820 600- 8.00-. _... 4.00 782 85 2.93 1.50- 2.00- 1.00 _ _ __ _-. 000 02-12 Q3-12 Q0.12 Q2-12 Q3-12 4112 WWmehouce �Iex Space �warelause telex Space Future Expectations 41 Warehouse Flex Space i Cap Rates a>► • 3 Q Yields C Investment Outlook f Occupancy 1* 4 Rents Y z Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space SLITS 33% TEITS,33% ill!`ti:',, 11'h �.3A 147 of 182 2011.12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Sarasota Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.50 12.00 8 98 10.71 10.23 9.00 8.78. 10.00 �i�� 9.52 8.50 9 _._... _. _ 400 8.45 8.00 6.00 7.50! 7.63 4.00- _.......__.. _._ .._. 7.00--._... _...... _.... ..._.... ___. 2.00. _.... 450 02-12 03-12 04-12 0.00 ∎4301m41888A �08144ClassB 02.12 03-12 04-12 ■xBfe-Class A 4.9440840assB uture xpectatlons H f, ,, r /^\L 1<' a—s°- Q. Investment Outlook ° ♦ t O. Rents ♦ GJ u 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 148 of 182 02011.12 University of Honda Bergstrom Center for Rea I Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Sarasota Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.50 _ 1200 9.00 11.00 8.50 10.00 _. am 7.50 9m --- 7.00 8.00 _ 650 )AO _— 600 600 ____ 5.50 600 02-12 0312 46-12 6W 02-12 03-12 00-12 '—-- _ �8Nai41ar8e 1052 8.89 9.07 ].37 ].]4 ].66 _ _ ■ 444■NeiBMahood Redd 7.22 ).86 ).85 —Neighborhood Retail 9.07 B28 9.38 ,4■Stoip Centers 847 9.17 9.06 ••■•StripCenters 10.60 1075 11.17 —Fee Sanding 7.65 _ 7.97 — 7.88 Free Sanding 9.60 9.02 9.66 Future Expectations H Retail-Large Neighborhood Centers Strip Centers Rye ding GJ Cap Rates ♦ ♦ li Yields 4. 4 L. N Investment Outlook it It t Q O Occupancy ♦ t it it A.- Rents ♦ ♦ ♦ It ar GJ cc Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center • 110 149 of 182 ©2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Condi0ons December 2012 Regional Market Report for Jacksonville Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 12.00 7.02 laao- Sm 6.02 G42 8.00. 9.�j,��"'- 908 8.10 8.25 4.00 _.. _.. _. __. 600 4.00 2.00-......._...._._._.._. 2.00 ace - am- H • 02-12 03-12 04-12 02-12 03-12 04-12 Apart meets-Marker Condo Conversions Apartments-Market -Condo Conversions 0 O Future Expectations L Apartments Condo Conversion 0. Cap Rates 4v 4 O Yields 4 d Investment Outlook f f ,„.•■.„ >• Occupancy Rents all f as L- Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 7 I) I) 150 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Jacksonville Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.50 1200- 11.x6 8.94 11.50 _.... _.... _._ 900 8.)] 11.03 8.53. 11.00- 850 - 1039 10.50 _... _... _ 8.00. ._..8.35 10.00 _..... 1 211 I.SO- 7.I3 9.50- __._9]8 9.84 7.61 7.00 ...._ _.... ... 900 _.. __...... 6.50- _._... 8.50 -- 01-12 03-12 0412 02.12 0312 111412 �yararnne Flex Space �lyarelwiae 001 Space to Future Expectations G1 Warehouse Flex Space a- Cap Rates 4 et Yields C L Investment Outlook d Occupancy f 4 CD Rents 'L N 3 t i £ Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 4111 1110 151 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of EmerDn6 Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Jacksonville Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 10.00- 8.98 S.N 11.50- 9.00 �...i,... 8.5a -.. 11.16 1100 110 2 8.03 1.98 -_ l0. 739 6.00 -. 10.50- ----. 0.18 10.00 10.09 3.00 -.... -. 9.50_. 2.00 -..._ - 9.62 1031 - 9.00- 0.00 02-12 03.12 Q8.12 8.50 ---,-----,-- ∎OrF e:ClassA �Offir.ClassB 02-12 Q3-12 06112 osimoOffce:ClassA ∎OfOce:ClassB uture •-ctat ons in InliiiiIMIL. 41 QInvestment Outlook aOccupancy f 41 Rents ♦ y 1 w w 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 4110 11, 152 of 182 c 2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Condition December 2012 Regional Market Report for Jacksonville Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.50 -_.___-___. -__ 13.00 -.__.. 9.00 12.00 650 11.00 6RR MOO 7.50 9.00 _. 6.00 _._. 650 600 5.50 600 -.__ ...._. ..... ......... 5A10 ___ i 5.00 02-12 0312 04-12 02-12 • 03.12 0412 Retail-1a68 7.80 7.50 _ - ee■6etail-large 10.60 1033 ...-0.1041a600d 8eta11 7.65 7.62 7.65 -Neighborhood Retail 9.19 9.92 9.36 -strip Center 8.90 894 8.86 Strip Centers _ 10.72 12.39 11.12 -kee Standing am 7.73 - 7.65 ■Free Sf010e. 9.72 10.66 9.61 ■ Future Expectations Retail-Large Neighborhood Centers Strip Centers Free Standing 5) Cap Rates Yields ♦ ♦ ♦ 4 O Investment Outlook f ♦ t lt O Occupancy f ♦ 4 a Rents ♦ 4 it Y QI cc Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center 110 • 153 of 182 o 2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Gainesville/Ocala Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 2.801.. 7.59 12.00, 7'60 4 7.43 • 7.40-■... ....._.. 10.00 JM_ 1019 10 1 12 ].Ol 8.00' 8.]6 8.]9 00- 8.]) 7.02 6.00 1 6.60 66s am_ 6.20 i... 643 2.00 6A0 6.�r 0.00.1. 02-12 03.12 04-12 02-12 03-12 04-12 Apartments-Market ■COedo Conversions ^4partments-Market Condo Conversions In Future Expectations L Apartments Condo Conversion 4/ Cap Rates CL 0 Yields 4 L d Investment Outlook , P--- >■ Occupancy T f •E Rents ms Ll_ +a Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion 7 1 • 154 of 182 4)2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Cooditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Gainesville/Ocala Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 9.00 l 8.93 11.50 11.17 .]] 1109 8.80 8 - -- 860 8 40 1043 8.20 _ _.._8 3] 10.00. 8.25 8.00- 8.02 9.50 9.55 9.00 7.40 8.50 .02-12 03-12 44-12 02-12 43-12 04-12 —Warehoue ■•••■Flex Space ■Nowarehouse .Flex Space to Future Expectations 01 Warehouse Flex Space Cap Rates C. Yields a- Investment Outlook Occupancy ra Rents 3 13 Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 155 of 182 0 2011-12 University of Ronda Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Gainesville/Ocala Cap Rate Trend I Yield Trend 1000- 898 8.95 9.38 14.00- -- 9.00 8.00 _ 12.00- 11.a8 0.88 8 8 1011 7.00 9 8.03 7,79-- 1000 11 6.00 5.00 1 9.81 .....9.55 8.00 300 Y 6.00- 3.00 2W 300 1.00 000 02-12 03-12 Q312 0.00 �orrira:CWss A -oRke,Class6 x1-11 0.312 0112 ■Cffice:Class ∎Offlce:ClassB Future Expectations yl Office:Class A Office:ClasaB N Cap Rates 11 s♦ r. i Yields ♦ ♦ �� QInvestment Outlook JR JI O` Occupancy f 4 NRents 4 v w 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 110 1110 156 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Gainesville/Ocala Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 1100 9.50 _.... 12.00 9.00 11.00 650 8.00 _. �� .. 10.00 7.50 9.00 7.00 8.00 _ 650 7.00 600 5.50 _... _. _ 600 _ 5.00 5.00 02-12 Q3-12 04-12 Q2.12 293-12 04-12 . .Oeteil-large 7.80 7.91 606 ■eetail-Large 11.30 1024 8.95 -Neighborhood Retail 7.65 603 625 • NeighbOrhood Retail 9.84 9.64 9.27 Strip Centers 11.38 1210 1105 -AriP Centers 8.90 934 9.46 -Free Standing 8.08 8.13 -Free Standing 1090 10.38 Future Expectations _ Retail-Large Neighborhood Centers Strip Centers Free Standing vi CD Cap Rates 4 ♦ ,1 i Yields CI.C Investment Outlook r 01 Ji 41 O Occupancy t 4 r a Rents t ro 4.a cc Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center 110 157 of 182 a 2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Tallahassee/Panhandle Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend ioao 8.76 -... 12.00.. i 9.00 a.OD— - 7.48 =.. 000 1103 8.00{ 9.15 6.08 6.00-.... .... 648. 7.05 7.73 5.011-_... -._-_ _. 6.00 ].ap 0.00 3.00 4.00- OO 1.00.. ___.... -..._. _.... 000 02-12 03-12 04-12 02-12 03-12 04-12 ∎Rpartments-Market Condo Conversions 4■kpartments-Market *Ondo Conversions h Future Expectations L Apartments Condo Conversion Cap Rates oYields L �\ CL Investment Outlook • Occupancy Rents LL Investor Profile-Apartments Investor Profile-Condo Conversion • • • • 158 of 182 0 2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging 0221401 Conditions December 2012 Regional Market Report for Tallahassee/Panhandle Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 30.00- - 1<.00 9.57 12.26 9.50 -. ///�''''``` -..- 12.00 - --..-. -.-.-..... ///� 9.70 11 51 8.� 0.00- 9.00 8.00 8.50 -_-. _..- ---... --.-. 8.37 -6 600 8.00 8.07 0.00- 250 -._. _.. 200. 7.00 _ 0.00--_._.- 02-12 0312 0a-12 02-12 03-12 04-12 �Nareho�se Flex Space -Vareho1ne ....Space N Future Expectations N 1 ..saa d Cap Rates a r YiiiWIW- - ♦ a► o s— Investment Outlook 4 O. Occupan -- fa Rents a+ us 3 £ Investor Profile-Warehouse Investor Profile-Flex Space 159 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market CaMinom December 2012 Regional Market Report for Tallahassee/Panhandle Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend u.m- 12.00- - 11.41. 10.16 10.14 1000 _. rte— .. 900.. 9.41 1085... &CO- 9.21 ___... 8.61 &00 &a2 7 84 600-. 600 4.OD- zm......__ _.-___ 0.00 02-12 0}12 0412 0.00 ,Off eC1x s6 �Offi0asB 02-12 0}12 04-12 ■Offce-Class A ∎Offie.ClmsB Future Expectations H 4111110ffiffiginielialiKa Office:Voss 8 Cap Rates Yields ♦ ♦ ^ aInvestment Outlook ♦ ♦ OL Occupancy a Rents ♦ y Gl V w 0 Investor Profile-Office:Class A Investor Profile-Office:Class B 160 of 182 02011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies Survey of Emerging Market Conditi ons December 2012 Regional Market Report for Tallahassee/Panhandle Cap Rate Trend Yield Trend 11.00 -. 1100 ]200 ]000 9.00 moo B.00 9.00 —_ 700 , 7.00 600 600 .._..__... __—__.. ..._.. ._ 5.00 5.00 02-12 Q3-12 04.12 02-12 00312 04-12 III Iletall-tree 898 7.96 �R a e1.119r 1026 8.86 •■■NeIptborbood Reba 883 8.08 ...—Nei®*bOrhood Recd 8.81 8.25 ■■•Strlp Centers 1008 9.39 049 Strip Centers 1034 1072 12.35 — Free Standee' 9.26 8.19 8.31 —Free Handing 9.34 099 104 Future Expectations in 0) Cap Rates y Yields ♦ 4 41 a Investment Outlook O Occupancy 4 4I a Rents 4- y to 4+ 01 cc Investor Profile-Retail-Large Investor Profile-Strip Centers Investor Profile-Free Standing Investor Profile-Neighborhood Center 111 161 of 182 5;2011-12 University of Florida Bergstrom Center for Real Estate Studies DAVIDDE SON ^ ENGINEERING EXHIBIT "S" NATIONAL RETAILERS LIST 162 of 182 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results Exhibit S RLTrac Home Search Results Search Again To view details for a retailer,dick on the corresponding 'Retailer Name' hyperlink.If more than one entry is found in the database for a particular retailer that fit your search Logout criteria,the following page will display a list and allow you to choose between them. Total records found =sedPilw Search took 0.43325 seconds. Retailer Name Login:Ipc 1-800-Flowers.com Cust. No. 146876 123 Fit 16 Handles 1st United Bank Quick Search? 24 Hour Fitness Active Record ID# 24 Hour Fitness Signature 1 ] 24 Hour Fitness Snort 24 Hour Fitness Super-Sport Go l 24 Hour Fitness Ultra-Sport 50 East Shoes 7-Eleven A&W Restaurants A Pea In The Pod Abbott's Frozen Custard Abe&Loule's Abercrombie&Fitch Abercrombie Kids' Store Academy Sports&Outdoors Access Fitness Ace Cash Express Ace Hardware Advance America Al's Italian Beef Alamo Drafthouse Cinemas ALDI Alfred Angelo Bridal All American Ice Cream&Frozen Yogurt Shop Allcare Medical Alliance Laundry Systems Alipets Emporium AMC Theatres America's Incredible Pizza Company w......:..�.. 11..1; 163 of 182 www.rltrac.cordsearchlsearch-results_php?load counter=l 1/20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results "111110114.1:111 vcn AmericInn Exhibit S Arn_eriHost Inn Ammscot Angel's Great Food and Ice Cream Ann Sacks Anna's Linens Annie Sez Anthony's Coal Fired Pizza Any Lab Test Now Agoiebee's AauaKnoic Arby's Arden B Art of Shaving Arthur Treacher's Fish&Chips Ashley Furniture HomeStore, City Furniture Ashley Stewart Aspen Dental AT&T Mobility Atlanta Bread Company Bakery Cafe Atlantic Fish ir.Miew Aveda Avenue Azhar's Oriental Rugs Azteca Mexican Restaurant baby Gap Back Yard Burgers Bad Ass Coffee Badcock Home Furniture&More Bag'n Baggage Bahama Breeze Bahama Buck's Original Shaved Ice Co. Baja Bistro Baja Fresh Mexican Grill Baker Interiors Gaily Total Fitness Banana Moon Banana Republic Banco Popular North America Bang&Olufsen/B1 Bank of America BankUnited Baskin Robbins Bass Pro Shops Outdoor World/Sportsman's Center Bassett Furniture Batteries Plus ^ Battery Giant Bailers Fashion Eyewear 164 of 182 www.rltrac.comisearch/search-results.php?load courier=I 2/20 8/513 Retailer Search Results rsaymont rtozers Exhibit S BB&T bd's Mongolian Barbeaue Bealls Beauty Systems Group Besl_Bath&Beyond Bedrosians Beef O'Bradv's Ben&Jerry's Benihana Berlitz International Best Buy Biaggi's Ristorante Italiano Big League Barbers Bi BizCard Xpress BJ's Restaurant&Brewhouse BJ's Wholesale Club $lackfinn Ameripub Blackhawk Grille Blanco Tacos&Teaulla Blimoie Subs&Salads Blitz Total Fitness Blue C Sushi Boardwalk Fresh Burgers&Fries Bob Evans Farms Bob's Big Boy Bob's Carpet Mart Botangles' Bond Jewelers Bonefish Grill Boneheads Grilled Fish* Piri Piri Chicken Boost Mobile Borsheim's Boston Market Boston's The Gourmet Pizza Bottom Dollar Food BrandsMart USA Bravo/Brio Restaurants Brenner Bridals Brick House Tavern&Taa Brides By Demetrios Bright Horizons Family Solutions Brookstone Brothers Bar&Grill Bruegger's Baked Fresh Bruster's Old Fashion Ice Creamer.Yoaurt Bubba Gump Shrimp Company Buca di Beopo Buddy'siiome Furnishings Buffalo Exchange Buffalo Wild Wings 165 of 182 www.ritrac.corni search/search-results.php?load_courder=l 3/20 8/5113 Retailer Search Results Buffalo Wings and Rings Buffalo's Southwestern Cafe Exhibit S Builders FirptSource Burger King BurgerFl BuroerRoom Ourke's Burlington Coat Factory Burro Loco BuyBuv Baby C2 Educate Cabela's Cafe del REY Cajun Cafe California Cafe California Dreaming Restaurant and Bar California Pizza Kitchen California Tortilla Calvin Klein Camp Bow Wow Candy Bouquet Cantina Laredo Captain D's CareSpot Carino's Italian Grill Carmel Cafe&Wine Bar Carolina Roadhouse Carrabbas Italian Grill Cartridge World Carvel Cash America Pawn Cash Store Casual Male XL Casual Male XL Outlet CCS CD Warehouse Cell Phone Repair(CPR) Cellular Connection Cellular Sales Central Bark Donny Day Care CH Carolina Herrera Champps Americana Champs Snorts Charley's Grilled Subs Charming Charlie Chase Bank CHATIME Bubble Tea CHeBA Hut Toasted Subs Check'n Go CheckSmart Cheddar's Casual Cafe Cheeburger Cheeburaer 166 of 182 wMw.rltrac.cornisearchlseach-results.php?load cou,ter=1 4/20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results Exhibit S Cheeseburger In Paradise Chick-F11-A Children of America Children's Courtyard Children's Lighthouse Children's Orchard Childtime Learning Centers Chili's Bar&Grill China Max Chinese Gourmet Express Chipotle Chocolate Martini Bar Chophouse New Orleans Chophouse'47 Christian Brothers Automotive Christmas Tree Shops Chuck E.Cheese's Church's Chicken Chuv's Cici's Pigza Cinema Cafe Cinemark USA Circle K Clix Coach Grill Coach House Gifts Cobb Theatres Coffee Beanery Coldwater Creek Cole Haan Complete Nutrition Coney Beach Congo River Adventure Golf Conn's Consolidated Theatres Cooper's Hawk Winery&Restaurants C Deland's of New Orleans Corner Bakery Cafe CORT Furniture Center Cost Plus World Market Costco Wholesale Coltman Transmission Center Country Kitchen Cracker Barrel Crate and Barrel Crazy Shirts Crewcuts Crocs Crown Wine&Spirits Crowne Plaza Hotels/ Hotel Indigo CruiseShipCenters __ 167of182 wwwrltrac.camisearch/search-results.php?ioad cotarter=1 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results Crumbs Bake ShOP Exhibit S Culinary Drop Out C ulver's Cumberland Farms Cupini's Fresh Pasta &Panini CVS/Pharmacy Cycle Gear Pally Grill /The Grill on the Alley Daily's paraue Tan Data Doctors Dave&Buster's David's Bridal Days Inn DealS (Dollar Tree) Del Frisco's Double Eagle Steak House Del Taco Del's Lemonade Denny's Destination Maternity Destination XL Dick's Sporting Goods Dickey's Barbecue Pit Dickinson Theatres Diet Center pippin' Dots Discount Tire Co. Disney Store Dixie Cream Donut Co. Pot Green's Gourmet_Salads Doctors Express Dollar Castle Dollar General Dollar Tree Domino's Pizza Pon Pablo's Donatos Doodle Bugs! Children's Centers Double Quick Dover Saddlery DO Grill&Chill DQ Orange Julius Treat Center Dr.G's Weight Loss&Wellness Drexel Heritage Furniture Drury Inns DSW Dunkin' Brands Combo Stores Dunkin' Donuts Dunkin' Donuts Non-Traditional Eagle Tax service East Coast Winos&Grill 168 of 182 www.rltrac.com'search/search-results.php?load_counter=l 6/20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results Exhibit S Easy Rental Edwards Theatres Einstein Bros Bagels El Chico El Dorado Furniture El Polio Loco El Torito Elegant Beauty Supply Elephant Bar Restaurant Emerald City Smoothie r EPIC Theatres Equinox Fitness Ethan Allen Exhale Mind&Body Spa Express Express Car Wash Extreme Pita Eyeglass World EZ Money/Loan Services EZPawn Fallas Discount Stores Family Christian Stores Family Dollar Family Video Famous Dave's famous Famiglia Fatburger Fazoli's Fed Meyer/ Littman FedEx Office Ferguson Fifth Third Bank firebirds Wood Fired Grill Firehouse Subs Firestone Complete Auto Care First Coast Energy,LLP First Watch fit For Her Fit Zone for Women Fitness 19 Five and Dime General Stores Five Guys Famous Burgers and Fries fixtures Living Flamers Grill flat Top Grill Fleming's Prime Steakhouse&Wine Bar FlIopin' Pizza Floor&Decor 169 of 182 wmw.rItrac.comisearchtsearctrresults.php?load counter=l 7/20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results Exhibit S riuyu S oOl WWI al WM Flying Biscuit Foco de Chao Food Lion Footection Fox Sports Grill Fractured Prune Frazee Paint&Wallcoverinq Freebirds World Burrito Fresh Fresh!! Friendly Confines Sports Restaurant Friendly Ice Cream Friendly's Express Frullatl Cafe&Bakery Fry's Electronics Furniture Brands Games Workshop Gander Mountain Company Gap Gap Body Gap Kids Galt Maternity Garbanzo Mediterranean Grill Garden Ridae Garfield's Restaurant&Pub — Gate Post/Gate General Nutrition Center-GNC Genghis Grill georgios Oven Fresh Pizza GFS Marketplace Gillv Hicks G000s Greek Grill Gold Max Gold's Gym Golden Corral Golden/Crust Caribbean Bakery&Grill Golf Galaxy Golf USA,Inc. Golfsmith Goodwill of Central Florida Goody's GoodYear Gordon Biersch Graffiti]unktion Graham Central Station Grand Lux Cafe Grandy's Great Steak&Potato Company _ Great Wraps Greers 170 of 182 www.rltrac.corn'searchrsearch-results.php?load counter=1 8/20 S/5/13 Reviler Search Results Exhibit S Grille 54 Grillsmith Restaurant Guess. Marciano Guitar Center Gulfstream Cafe H Mart Hallmark Halloween City Halloween Express Halloween Meaastore Hancock Fabrics Happy Feet Plus Harbor Freight Tools H ardee's Harmon Discount/ Harmon Face Values Harris Teeter Hartmann Luaaaue Ham Harvey's Havertys Hawthorn Suites HHGreug Appliances Hobby Lobby HobbyTown Holiday's Fashions Hollister Co. Home Depot HomeGoods HomeTown Buffet Hoops Sports Bar&Grill Hooters Houlihan's telmssealleadassein Howl At The Moon Huddle House Huey Luey's Hunan(Howie's Pizza&Subs Hurricane Grill and Wings IKEA IM X Pilates Studio IMAX iMobile Intercontinental Hotels&Resorts International House of Pancakes-IHOP IO Metro iParty 171 of 182 www.rltrac.com/search/searchrresults.phOload_counter=l 9/20 815/13 Retailer Search Results Exhibit S Iron Tribe Fitness Islands Fine Burgers&Drinks Gumbo's J.Alexander's Restaurant J.Crew Factory Stores Jackson Hewitt Tax Service Jackson Hospitality Jake's Wayback Burgers Jared The Galleria of Jewelry Jason's Deli Java Detour JC Penney Jeremiah's Italian Ice Jersey Mike's Sub Jimmy John's Jo-Ann Super Stores Joe Fresh Joe's American Bar&Grill Joe's Crab Shack Joey D's Oak Room Johnnie's New York Pizzeria Johnny Rockets Jon' Ric International Salon&Day Spa Jos.A.Bank Clothiers Journeys Journeys Kidz Juice Zone Juiceblendz Juicy Couture Justice K&G Fashion Superstore Kauffman Tire Kay Jewelers Ker's Wino/lousy Bar&Grill Key West In KFC Kiddie Academy Child Care Learning Center JCldfresh KinderCare Learning Center Kings Super Markets IGrkiand's Home Kmart Knockouts Haircuts For Men Knowledge Beginnings KnowledgePoints Learning Center Knuckleheads Gym Kohl's Kolache Factory Kona Grill Kona Ice 172 of 182 www.rltrac.carWYsearch/search rresults.php?load_courtex=1 10/20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results Exhibit S Krispv Kreme Donuts K�sl LA Boxing LA Fitness la Madeleine Country French Cafe La Petite Academy La Salsa La Salsa Express La-Z-Bov Furniture Galleries Lakeshore Learning Materials Lane Bryant Lane Home Furnishings Laser Quest Laundromart Le Gourmet Chef learning Express Ledo Pizza Legal Sea Foods Legends Tavern&Grille Lennv's Sub Shop Lenox Sauare Grill Leslie's Swimming Pool Supplies Liberty Fitness Liberty Tax Service Liberty Weight Loss Clinic Lifetime Fitness Lifewav Christian Stores Linksters Tap Room Little Caesars Pizza Little Greek Restaurants little Tokyo Logan's Roadhouse Lone Star Steakhouse&Saloon Long John Silver's Long Tall Sally/Tall Girl Shop Longhorn Steakhouse Love's Travel Stops Lowe's Lucille's Smokehouse BBC) Lumber Liquidators LUSH Fresh Handmade Cosmetics Macgray Laundromat Malco Theatres Mandee Shoos Marathon Petroleum Marco's Pizza Marie Callender's Restaurant&Bakery Marshalls Martinizina Dry Cleaners Marvins Home Centers 173 of 182 vwrvw.rttrac.cornWsearchfsearch-resulis.php?loadcaunter=l 11/20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results Exhibit S Mattress 1. One Mattress Firm Mattress Mall Mattress Warehouse Maui Tacos Max-Wellness Maxwav/Bargain Town McAlister's Deli McDonald's Medkap Pharmacy Medicine Shoppe Mellow Mushroom Melting Pot Men's Wearhouse Merle Norman Cosmetics Miami Subs Michaels Arts &Crafts Miller's Ale House Mimi's Cafe' Mitchell's Fish Market Modern Steak Moe's Southwest Grill Monkey Joe's Montessori Unlimited Morton's Steakhouse Motherhood Maternity Motherhood Maternity Outlet Movie Tavern Mr.Alan's Shoes&Sportswear Mr.Clean Car Wash Mr. Pith Murphy USA Muscle Maker Grill MW Tux My Food Dept NAKEDPizza Nancy's Pizzeria Napa Valley Grille Nationwide Natural Body Spa and Shoo Natural Grocers Navarro Discount Pharmacies Neiman Marcus New York Prime _ Nike.Converse Noah's Bagels Noble Roman's /Tulscano's 174 of 182 www.rltrac.corNsearchi search-results.php?load_cnunter=l 12/20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results Noodles&Company Exhibit S North Fattoria Italiano North Modern Italian Cuisine Northern Tool &Equipment Ii L L I Mellglg O'Charley's O'Reilly Auto Parts o2b Kids! Ocean Cinemas Office Depot OfficeMax Old Chicago Old Florida National Bank Old Navy Old Spaghetti Factory O d Time Pottery Olive&Ivy Restaurant&Market Place Olive Garden Omaha Steaks On The Border OneMain Financial Original Penguin Clothing Original SoupMan Origins Outback Steakhouse 0)0(0 Care Cleaners P.F.Chang's China Bistro Paciugg Packaging and Shipping Specialists Paladar Palais Royal Panda Express Panera Bread Papa Johns Pizza Papa Murphy's Papa Razz" Papa Romano's Papaya Clothing Pappa's Seafood House Papoadeaux Seafood Kitchen Pappas Bar-B-O Pappas Bros.Steakhouse Pappas Burger Pappas Grill Pappasito's Cantina, Paradise Bakery&Cafe Party City Pary City Peach Valley Cafe Peebles Department Store Pep Boys Auto e......,.�J.... e�_�. 175 of 182 w m.rltrac.corn'search/search-results.php?load_carter=1 13/20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results ravvc� lug=ra. Exhibit S Perkins Restaurant&Bakery Pet Supermarket Pet Supplies Plus Petco Animal Supplies Petro Stopi ina Center PetSmart PGA Tour Superstore Phantom Firework Philly's Best Physicians Immediate Care Piccadilly Cafeteria Pier 1 Imports Pilot Flying J pittsburuh Paints Pizza Fusion Pizza Hut Pizza Hut/Wino Street Combo Pizza Inn Buffet Pizza_Inn Express Pizza Patron Pizza Rus$ica Pizzeria Cucina PJ`s Coffee Planet Fitness Planet Smoothie — planet Smoothie. Planet Smoothie Cafe Play it Again Sports Polio Campero Polio Tropical Popeves Chicken&Biscuits Popular Community Bank Porter Paints PostNet Pottery Barn Kids Powerhouse Gym Prairie Life Fitness Prime Communications Primrose Schools PRO Physical Therapy Publix Pump It Up Pvroarill Ouaker Steak&Lube Quality Oil Company Q uikTrip Quiznos RA Sushi Bar RadioShack 176 of 182 wwwsltrac.corNsearch/search-results_phOload counter=1 14/20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results Rainbow PJ_us Exhibit S Raising Cane's Ramada Ranch I. Grilled Chicken Red Lobster Red Robin Gourmet Burners Red Wing Shoe Reebok Regal Cinemas Regency Beauty Institute Regions Bank Regis Corporation Regis Salons REI Rejuvenate Fitness Center&Spa Relax The Back Rent-A-Center Rex's Chicken Richard's Foodporlum Ricky's Halloween Rickv's NYC Rip Curl Rita's Italian Ice Rita's Water Ice jotters Legendary Ice Cream Robeks Fruit Smoothies&Healthy bats Rochester Big and Tall Rock Bottom Restaurants Rockier Woodworking Rocky's Ace Hardware Rolierz Rolled Sandwiches Romano's Macaroni Grill Room&Board Rooms To Go Rooms To Go Outlet Rosa Mexican Rose's Ross Dress For Less Rov's Hawaiian Fusion Ruby Tuesday Ruby's Diner Rumbi Island Grill Ruth's Chris Steak House Ryan's Family Steak House I Fire Mountain Rvuu Japanese Dining Safeway Salad Creations Saladworks Sally Beauty Salonz Beauty Suites Salt Life 177 of 182 www.rltrac.corn/search/search-resulta.phP?load counter=l 15/20 815/13 Retailer Search Results Sam Ash Music Exhibit S Sam's Club Samurai Sam's Teriyaki Grill Sandella's Flatbread Cafe Sanaster's Health Centers Sapporo Sarku japan Sauce Pizza &Wine Save-A-Lot Savers Saxbys Coffee Schakolad Chocolate Factory Scheels Schlotzskv's Sears Sears Hometown Store Seasons 52 Second Cup Sedano's Supermarkets Sedona Fitness for Women See's Candies Select Comfort/Sleep Number Store Serious Teddy Bear Sertinos Shane's Rib Shack ShapeXpress — Sherwin-Williams Shoe Show Shoe Woo Shoney's Shop Rite Shoppers World Department Store ShotCakes Skin Biz Simply Fashions Simply Self Storage Sir Pizza Restaurants Sizzler Skechers Sleep City Sleep Number Sleepy's The Mattress Professionals S mashburger SmileBest Dental Smokev Bones Smoothie King Snap Fitness Sobik's Subs Sola Salon Studios Sonic Sonny's Real Pit Bar-B-Oue Cnm&hnrn Maid nnnr*chews 178 of 182 winw.rltrac.cocrVsearchisearch-results.php?loed counter=1 16/20 81513 Retailer Search Results SpeeDee Oil Change&Tune-Up Exhibit S Speedmatic Stores Spirit Halloween Superstores Spoon Me Sport Clips Haircuts Sports Authority Stage Stores Staples Starbucks Coffee Company Steak N Shake afi �iil8 Strike Studio Movie Grill Subway Sullivan's Steakhouse Sun Trust Bank Sunbrook Academy Sunglass Hut Sunny Street Cafe Super 8 Sur La Table Surf City Squeeze Surf-Style Sweet By Holly Sweet Frog Premium Yogurt Sweetbay Supermarket T.G.I. Friday's T.7.Maxx Taco Bell Taco Bueno Taco Del Mar Taco Maker Tacone TacoTime Takorea Talbots Talk of the Walk Taauerla Canonita Target Tasti D-Lite Taziki's TD Bank Texas Land&Cattle Steak House Texas Roadhouse The Arrogant Butcher The Brass Tap The Cellular Connection The Cheesecake Factory The Container Store The Counter The Egg&i 179 of 182 www.rltrac.comrsearch/search-results.php?load_cou ter=1 17/20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results The Flame Broiler Exhibit S The Fresh Market The Goddard School The Greene House The Greene Turtle Sports Bar B.Grille The Learning Experience The Lemon Tree The Original Mattress Factory The Pantry The Shoe Dept The Shoe Show The Tavern At Phipps The Tile Shop The UPS Store The Vitamin Shoppe The Wow Factory Thomasville Furniture Thorntons Tibbv's New Orleans Kitchen TigerDirect.com Tiivana Flats Tildismoirsolknisaaslionemossesisior Tilted Kilt Tim Hortons Timoano Annelle Toby Keith's I Love This Bar&Grill TOGO's Great Sandwiches Tony Roma's Tony Sacco's Coal Oven Pizza TooJay's Orlalnal Gourmet Deli Topper's Creamery Total Wine&More Total Woman Gym&Day SPA Toucan Tropical Grill&Bar Toys'R`Us/ Babies'R' Us TovZa m! PIPPP Trader Joe's Traveiodae Trevi Italian Restaurant Trick Shots Tropical Smoothie Cafe True Food Tubbv's Grilled Submarines Tucanos Brazilian Grill TSlesday Morning Tunie's Tutor Time 180 of 182 www.rltrac.coan/searcIVsearctrresults.php?load_courter=1 1820 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results Twin Peeks Restaurants Exhibit S Ultra Tan Uncle Julio's Fine Mexican Food United Artists Theatres United Check Cashinq United Financial Group United Rentals United Skates of America Uno Chicago Grill Urban Active Urban Flats Flatbread Co. Urban Trust Bank US Bank Value City Furniture Value Village Valvoline Instant Oil Change Variety Wholesalers,Inc. Verizon Wireless Village Roadshow Gold Class Cinemas VillaSport Athletic Club and Spa Vino 100 Voseilj Pizza Volcom Waffle House Wal-Mart W aigreens Wascomat Laundry Equipment Wash Club Watermill Express Wawa Wells Fargo Bank W endv's West Elm West Marine Western Beef Supermarket Western Sizzlin Wet Seal W hataburoer Wheel Works Which Wich Whole Foods Market Wild Birds Unlimited Wildflower American Cuisine Williams-Sonoma Williams-Sonoma Home Wino Zone Wlnaat@ In Winn-Dixie Wolfganq Puck Pizzeria Cucina Wood Ranch BBQ &Grill 181 of 182 wnw.rltrac.corrmsearch/search-results.php?load counter=l 1W20 8/5/13 Retailer Search Results WOFKOUE Anytime Exhibit_ S Worldwide Sportsman Wyndham Hotels&Resorts Yia Yia Mary's Yoger1 Fri Yogurt Mountain Yoaurtland Yolk tales Jewelers Zaxby's ZfD4S1 Zero's Subs Zinburger Wine&Burger Bar Zoo Health Club ZZZ's by Ashley Previous Page i.4 Search Again Home I Search I Contact Manager ; Export I Print Book I Contact Us 182 of 182 www.rIlrac.com+search/search-results.php?load canter=1 20/20 P120120002909/CP-2013-3 CCPC STAFF REPORT CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. Cc, e-r Covt-rtt y STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/PLANNING AND REGULATION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 19, 2013 RE: PETITION NO. PL20120002909/CP-2013-3, BUCKLEY MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT—GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) AGENTS/APPLICANT/OWNER: Agent: Tim Hancock,AICP Davidson Engineering 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34103 Agent: R. Bruce Anderson, Esq. Roetzel &Andress Law Firm 850 Park Shore Drive, Third Floor Naples, Florida 34104 Applicant: McGuire Development Company 560 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, New York 14202 Owner: Airport Pulling Orange Blossom, LLC 560 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, New York 14202 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject site contains approximately 21.7 acres and is located at 7501 Airport Road (CR 31), on the west side of Airport Road, north of Orange Blossom Drive, approximately .23 miles south of Vanderbilt Beach Road (and approximately 1.55 miles north of Pine Ridge Road), in Section 2, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (See aerial map on the following page.) - 9 - CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. 110111101% — 1 rte. 4 Ce i lime .-i,.;.„,,,c,, i it 45,01. qi 7111 r- _a_.„...4 •....y a. w � 5 ,_ � s i .. i< I --i --y --1 RTtJ ` ti ,� 4' j ' , ' n .!' tce.-r L... IF1L °:t. . .1:...... ,„.....__......," _. . , ,.4 .., " < " ,' 1 ,r 47x7' !�l . ;'"�'4r 4 r �# � t ti 1 1 'ai.Me e r. e w =., VP +Jvt • .N y , i a ,�..4 . t ��:.�1a ^ i � ab r o 41,.. 06.1-f-' .,a. r ! ai+ � � r y I , ' ►r* t ij a g It r \ 4 4'4.'111 Ci%-.4 M I ' ce Y im■ REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) text by amending the Urban Mixed — Use District, specifically the existing Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict to remove the office and retail square feet caps; allow up to 7,500 square feet of gross floor area of commercial uses per acre or 15 residential dwelling units per acre; to make residential development optional; to prohibit commercial and residential uses on the same parcel; to limit multi-tenant commercial buildings to no more than 50% of the commercial square footage in order to provide for stand-alone commercial development; and, to revise development standards, including the elimination of the cap on the size of commercial building footprints. The petitioner's proposed text changes, shown in strike-through/underline format (words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted.), are as follows [This text is reflected in the Resolution Exhibit A; staff-recommended alternative text is located at the end of this Report.]: Proposed Future Land Use Element Text Amendment: [page 41] C. Urban Mixed Use District 12. Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict is to allow for limited small scale retail, office and residential uses while requiring that the project result in a true allowing for the development of a mixed-use development. The Activity Centers to the North and South provide for large-scale commercial uses, while this Subdistrict is intended to promote small scale convenience and intermediate commercial development mixed use - --••-- . • --- •-• - •-• - •e• to serve existing and future residential development in the immediate area. This Subdistrict is intended to be an example for future mixed use nodes, providing - --• . • - 1-c- '- -- - -- e- •-• • • - - e -e- e will serve to reduce existing trip lengths for °"'^�„�a„sea;e convenience and intermediate commercial services. Commercial uses for the purpose of this section are limited to those allowed in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Zoning Districts except as noted below. The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: —. a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. - 2- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. b. A unified planned development with common architectural theme, which utilizes_shared parking and cross accesses. c. Retail Commercial uses will be capped at a maximum of 3,250 7,500 square feet per acre for the total project. e. Residential development for multi-family dwelling units will be subject to a maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre for the total project. f. Maximum lot coverage for buildings is capped at 35% for the total project.• g. No more than -0, - - - e.• --- - -- - - - - - - e.. -- - - 50% of the commercial square footage may be constructed as multi-tenant buildings. interior of the site. Buildings fronting on Airport Ro i. secondary acce-ses facing the street. A - . ' . o e . - . •••-•• - • . USCS. I. Residential units may be located throughout the Subdistrict, as stand-alone development. minimum of 40% of the commercial square footage shall be within mixed use buildings (residential and commercial) For each acre of land utilized for residential purposes, 7,500 square feet of commercial buildable square footage will be eliminated for the total square footage allowable. For each acre of commercial square footage built, 15 residential units will be eliminated from the maximum allowable number of residential units. n. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties. o. No building footprint will exceed 15,000 square feet. Common stairs, breezeways or olcvators may join individual buildings. p. No building shall exceed three stories in height with no allowance for under building parking. q. Drive-through establishments will be limited to a maximum of 4. Bbanks with shall have no more than three drive-through lanes; these drive-through lanes must be architecturally integrated into the main building. r. No gasoline service stations will be permitted s. All buildings will be connected with pedestrian features. t. A twenty foot wide landscape Type D buffer shall be required along Airport Pulling Road. A twenty- foot wide Type C landscape buffer shall be required along all other perimeter property lines adjacent to residential use. u. Parking areas must be screened from Airport Pulling Road and from any properties adjacent to this Subdistrict. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION: Subject Site: The subject site is zoned PUD, Buckley Mixed Use Planned Unit Development zoning district, and designated Urban (Urban Mixed Use District, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict) on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. The subject site is vacant and mostly cleared. The existing Subdistrict requires integrated residential and commercial mixed use development; allows a maximum density of up to 15 dwelling units per acre; allows up to 3,250 sq. ft. per acre or up to 70,525 sq. ft. of retail uses and up to 4,250 sq. ft. per acre or up to 92,225 sq. ft. of office uses; and contains specific project development standards. -3- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. Surrounding Lands: North: Brighton Gardens PUD; assisted living facility development; Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict West: Emerald Lakes PUD; single-family residential development; Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict South: A, Rural Agricultural zoning district, with a Conditional Use for essential service uses; Collier County Headquarters Library and other governmental uses; Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict East: Across Airport Rd. (C.R.31), Lakeside of Naples at Citrus Gardens PUD; and, A, Rural Agricultural zoning district, with a Conditional Use for a church; single-family residential development and St. Katherine's Greek Orthodox Church; Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict In summary, the current zoning and existing and planned land uses in the immediate area surrounding the subject property are residential, institutional and community facility uses. BACKGROUND and PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Establishment of the Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict (GMP amendment — CP-2001-2, adopted 5/14/02 by Ord. No. 2002-24) Prior to the establishment of the Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, the subject property was zoned Agricultural and used as a plant nursery. The property at that time was eligible for up to 3 dwelling units per acre (without density bonuses) and a variety of community facility uses and institutional uses, e.g., child care facilities, churches and places of worship, assisted living facilities, adult care facilities, nursing homes, social and fraternal organizations; public and private schools; recreation and open space uses; a variety of agricultural uses; and, essential services. In 2001, the property owner submitted a Growth Management Plan amendment application for a residential and commercial integrated mixed use project. The owner established specific development criteria, a residential density cap of 15 dwelling units per acre, and retail and office caps to ensure the development of a traditional mixed use project on the site. County staff recommended approval of the Subdistrict to the Board of County Commissioners, despite the substantial supply of commercial acreage within the nearby Activity Centers and within other commercial Subdistricts proximate to the subject site, based solely on the premise that the project would provide a bona fide mixed use development that was consistent with County residents' vision for `new' development as detailed in the County's Community Character Plan. The Board of County Commissioners subsequently approved the Subdistrict as a live-work-play development which promotes walkability, provides for housing opportunities at various price points, and includes provisions for small-scale neighborhood-serving commercial at a pedestrian scale. Proposed Project The proposed amendment to the Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict changes the project entirely from its original form. Foremost, the amendment eliminates the required residential and commercial mixed use component from the Subdistrict by making residential development on the site optional, and eliminates the various design elements integral to developing a mixed use project. The proposed project promotes strip and/or big-box shopping center development — typically characterized by oversized parking lots, excessive signage, and total dependence on the automobile for access and circulation. -4 - CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. The table below provides a summary of the existing and proposed Subdistrict regulations. Buckley Mixed Use Existing Proposed Subdistrict Regulations Regulations Density 326 units (15 DU/A) 326 units (15 DU/A) Integrated Residential & Commercial Development Required Eliminated Residential Development Required Optional Zoning Intensity C-1, C-2, C-3 C-1, C-2, C-3 Retail sq. ft. CAP 3,250 sq. ft./ac. or 70,525 sq. ft. Eliminated Office sq. ft. CAP 4,250 sq. ft./ac. or 92,225 sq. ft. Eliminated Total Commercial Sq. Ft. 162,750 sq. ft. 162,750 sq. ft. Development Standards 75% of the total built sq. ft. must Multi-story buildings be multi-story buildings Eliminated Access must be interior to the Primary Retail and Commercial site; secondary accesses Eliminated Entrances required for buildings fronting Airport Road. Building Height 3-stories 3-stories Maximum Building Footprint 15,000 sq. ft. Eliminated All sides must have common Eliminated — Now subject to Building (Sides) architectural theme LDC requirements Drive-through Establishments Banks only Maximum of 4 drive-through establishments Landscape buffer along Airport Eliminated — Now subject to Road 20 ft., Type D buffer LDC requirements Buffering along perimeter Eliminated — Now subject to property lines, except Airport Rd. 20 ft., Type C buffer LDC requirements Screening of parking areas Required (Airport Rd. and from Eliminated — Now subject to properties adj. to Subdistrict) LDC requirements Mixed-use projects, including the traditional residential over commercial development, and those with office over retail and stand-alone residential on the same site, provide a desirable lifestyle for residents. These developments promote active living, provide housing opportunities at varying price points, provide accessibility to shopping and leisure activities without the dependence on automobiles, and provide a focal point and sense of place for its residents. There are many examples of mixed use developments working throughout the country. Locally, there are varying types of mixed use developments — town centers (Village Walk), village centers (Island Walk and Verona Walk), main streets (5th Ave. South and 3rd Street South) and mixed use residential over commercial (Mercato, Bayfront, and Ave Maria). These sites are larger than the proposed subject site; however, the mixed-use concept can be creatively applied to infill properties such as the approved Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict (refer to the approved Buckley Mixed Use PUD building sketch and conceptual master plan on page 7). - 5- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. Examples of Local Mixed-Use Development Mercato, Naples 3rd Street South (retail/office), Naples . ; � 1 a � f� r :14r , . 1 , . ...,- - 1 er{II i l" r I1 1 ! A j . ` � 111 :l ..1:41-111..1:41-111 w•• ttt a_ Mixed Use-Mercato,Digital Image.FL Commercial.Mon.26 August 2013. Mixed Use-3rd,Digital Image.Voices.yahoo.Mon.26 August 2013.<voicesyahoo.com> <flcommercial.com> Coconut Point, Estero Bayfront, Naples -tea ........ Ft j 1 _ }T i � L _ v. 4 1 IIII S x t.,r! g. Mixed Use-Coconut Point,Digital Image.Sellingestere.Mon.26 August 2013. Mixed Use-Bayfront,Digital image.Loopnet.Web.26 August 2013.<loopnet.corn> <sellingestero.corn> Ave Maria, Naples I" I.a''..... .i 1$ II II 14 , ,. i ...71:, - • I '• L-' Mixed Use—Ave Maria,Naples.Digital image.The Valentines Projects.Non.26 August 2013.<thevalentinesweb.com/projects/avemaria.php> - 6- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9. C. Approved Buckley PUD 1, ........ Et I. _ 7:_.7,__._7.__ 1 t__0110-0-19111#- '- • - .7.44„,,, . . 1, 411k 1 , I , ,-, !,,,,,ary,, — T. , 41.7.,---..—., i, ,••_,&leelii,;:if, . - . 0 -,-, * " -"‘"' '. - a l*y-. I r - - -•••'''' '',. - ' — " - --':I , . , i - . A i I 0 ,,. ... ., , o ' I ile.- -. . 11 1111b. , ■ ----' 1 'ii ni • • ' : 1 - - : mosomm ' 1 amoom• . w _ IT'. r '. MI ......._._ la :. h , r 1 pr am— .1. 1 "z-- 41116 ,....--, ..... 1 1 ,._ INIMINI ,-..... li Iiiii 2 i * , istio,..„ „siiimisi.-.1 1 - - ••-. At4NIMNISISP9RD 11, CHNIMilffle r - 1 . , ' 1 . lei :. lir I . Amia 11, 1 : i P _ I. . a Ali ININOMMIR ja; li) - I ......4-- "0 - IIIII 1 I 1 .1 ' - 1 aki ., : ? „ • ' '1 : _ ...Ir. 1 a . ' --M111......■.:-..........' ..... i i . .......—.. .1 z - ternii iiiii ••, , • 1 1 - ., --- , • , ....., . _ , ...., W..... , 0,,711% _ , • , I ' ''W___ __ ' . S. ' •. iI I iomy,t, ift■6...1- ,.......„ $ka i -7- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. STAFF ANALYSIS: Appropriateness of Change If approved as submitted, this Growth Management Plan amendment will potentially result in the introduction of varying types of commercial development— big-box, fast-food, 24-hour convenience, etc., and other activities — to an area not contemplated for these uses. Consequently, the proposed amendment has the potential for impacting the stability of residential and other established uses within the immediate area. The suitability of the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment to accommodate the petition's request is to be established through an evaluation of relevant and appropriate data for population growth, commercial inventory, infrastructure development, and other considerations in the surrounding area. The compatibility of potential big-box development, fast-food restaurants, 24-hour convenience commercial development, etc. with its surrounding land uses will need to be addressed in the consideration of the companion Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment request. Density Allowances pursuant to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Density Bonus Provisions Base Density(applicable to subject site) • Urban Mixed Use District, Residential Subdistrict— Up to 4 dwelling units per acre Bonus Densities • Activity Center— Up to 16 dwelling units per acre • Proximity to a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center (Residential Density Band) — Up to 3 additional dwelling units per acre • Affordable Housing — Up to 8 additional dwelling units per acre • Roadway Access — Up to 1 additional dwelling unit per acre • Residential Infill development— Up to 3 additional dwelling units per acre • Conversion of Commercial Zoning — Up to 16 dwelling units per acre • Transfer of Development Rights —variable unit count • Transportation Concurrency Management Area — Up to 3 dwelling units per acre The proposed amendment to the Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict allows for the retention of the project's residential density of up to 15 dwelling units per acre without developing a mixed use project or complying with the various FLUE density bonus provisions identified above. It should be noted that the density approved for this mixed use development was deemed compatible with other densities in the area; however, those projects with similar high densities complied with the provisions of the FLUE (density bonuses or clustering). Commercial Development and Analysis Commercial development is not planned or approved adjacent to the subject site. However, there is a substantial amount of commercial development planned or developed within a 1-mile and 2-mile radius from the subject site. The subject project is located within the segment of Airport Road (CR 31) between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Pine Ridge Road (CR 896), anchored at each of these intersections by Mixed Use Activity Center Commercial Subdistricts. The Activity Centers (see red squares on page 9 map) were comprehensively planned to provide sufficient commercial development opportunities. These planned locations are purposely sized and spatially arranged to encourage and support the business environment and to discourage and avoid over commercialization and strip development throughout the County. - 8- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. Activity Centers Proximate to the Subject Site \ lip thillato ...■-en , WA 'Cr;„ _ - - ill.1Prig , � _ 11R p ,r�1.�. `l` =1 `±r �I11101.., c'C_ioJ W. as ,„ lm� k.9IeV R.D �■ ,,..,_. 7,1---- - 446, ',.... r."',— Nrc-r, I id 1 , If \ 9�1�iw.i. (jam° h i t7 y L3..1,-., L� : Oili 1 iN, ..°!'i►=1 '' r Or t,Aet j11 A `oc`` erbilt-6ea. h� D ` + - l }■r�� CL.j� r�ll��ll��►�`� i (,��®�J}. R 44 Fati no 01. g r mow. ta C - ....rt► , �a dr m aa A Agri rillin il - ,17, it t...4.14.,,,t ' lli.ic.I r4i P ine Rid y• RU Activity Center # 11 (Airport Rd. and Vanderbilt Beach Rd.): The mid-point of this Activity Center is located approximately 1/4 mile north of the subject site (refer to green area on above map) and the closest commercial zoning and development is ±500 feet north of the Subdistrict. The Center consists of approximately 188 acres and is permitted for up to ±1,249,600 square feet of commercial development. The range of uses includes, but is not limited to: restaurants, retail, and office — situated on stand-alone sites and within the traditional shopping center configuration. Below is a summary of developed and undeveloped commercial acreage within Activity Center 11: • Southwest Quadrant of Airport Rd. & Vanderbilt Beach Rd. —Walgreen's PUD (15.68 ac./156,800 sq. ft, with 78,904 sq. ft. undeveloped); Fountain Park PUD (10.14 ac./71,400 sq. ft.); and, Venetian Plaza PUD (6.02 ac./90,000 sq. ft., with 15,000 sq. ft. undeveloped) • Northwest and Northeast Quadrants of Airport Rd. & Vanderbilt Beach Rd. — Pelican Marsh PUD/DRI (80 ac./331,400 sq. ft.) • Southeast Quadrant of Airport Rd. & Vanderbilt Beach Rd. — Vineyards PUD (75.86 ac./600,000 sq. ft, with approximately 82% of sq. ft. developed.) Activity Center # 13 (Airport-Pulling Rd. and Pine Ridge Rd.): The mid-point of this Activity Center is located approximately 1-mile south of the subject site (refer to green area on above map) and the closest commercial zoning and development is ±2/3 mile south of the Subdistrict. The Center consists of 306 acres and is permitted for up to ±2,275,017 square feet of commercial development. The range of uses includes, but is not limited to: Big-box development such as "category killers" (PetCo, Sports Authority, Bed, Bath and Beyond, Toys R Us, Staples and more), grocers, restaurants, general retail, and office —situated on stand-alone sites and within the traditional shopping center configuration. - 9- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. Below is a summary of developed and undeveloped commercial acreage within Activity Center 13: • Southwest Quadrant of Airport Pulling Rd. & Pine Ridge Rd. — Falls PUD (32.50 ac./280,000 sq. ft.) • Southeast Quadrant of Airport Pulling Rd. & Pine Ridge Rd. — Carillon PUD (24.01 ac./319,000 sq. ft., with 16,641 sq. ft. undeveloped) • Northwest and Northeast Quadrants of Airport Pulling Rd. & Pine Ridge Rd. — Pine Air Lakes PUD/DRI (148.99 ac./1,075,000 sq. ft., with 308,453 sq. ft. undeveloped); and approximately 100 acres of non-PUD commercial zoning and with over 601,017 sq. ft. of commercial development within these two quadrants. Commercial Subdistricts outside of Activity Centers 11 & 13: In addition to the commercial acreage within Activity Centers 11 and 13, there are other site-specific commercial subdistricts located proximate to the subject site that provide commercial development opportunities. These include, but are not limited to, the following: • Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict — Longview Center PUD (14.75 acres/143,500 sq. ft of commercial) located across Airport-Pulling Rd., and southeast of the subject site — Undeveloped • Orange Blossom/Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict — Two 5-acre parcels (10 acres/74,000 sq. ft. of C-1 commercial and other uses) located across Orange Blossom Dr., south of the subject site — Undeveloped (except existing Italian American clubhouse facility) The above-listed commercial sites (Activity Center and non-Activity Center) provide a total of over 3,742,117 square feet of commercial use opportunities in all commercial category ranges, including but not limited to, professional and general office, convenience, intermediate or neighborhood serving, general or community serving, and, etc. Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Amendment: The proposed changes to this Subdistrict could "- potentially add up to 162,700 sq. ft. of community serving commercial land uses, including big-box development (e.g. large scale sporting goods, auto supply, office supply, pet supply, discount supermarket, etc.), 24-hour convenience and/or strip-style neighborhood shopping, banks, fast-food restaurants, etc., in an area already saturated with these same uses, and on a transitional infill site suitable for lower intensity commercial development. Conversely, development of a mixed use project would provide housing opportunities at varying price points, shopping and employment opportunities for the residents within the community, and provide a development that is complimentary and of a scale consistent with the surrounding land uses — Emerald Lakes single-family development (west of site), Brighton Gardens assisted living facility (north of site), County Library and other government services (south of site), and residential development across Airport-Pulling Road (Lakeside and the future development of the Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict). Staff Summarization of the Data Submitted in Support of the GMPA Request The GMPA application package includes the narrative (dated August 9, 2013) in response to staff's request for data and analysis, Exhibit Q "Commercial Properties," and Exhibit R, a Bergstrom Center report titled Survey of Emerging Market Conditions, to support their requested amendment. The commercial support documentation submitted with this GMP amendment petition does not describe a "market area," but instead consists of a listing of vacant commercial lands within a 3-mile radial distance from the subject site that would potentially accommodate stand-alone or "pad ready" commercial development, similar to what is being proposed by the subject Growth Management Plan Amendment. The table on page 11 is a summary of those commercial lands that may be suitable for national retailers (see Exhibit "S" of the GMPA submittal for retailer listing) potentially looking to enter the Collier County commercial market. - 10- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. Undeveloped properties within 2-miles Undeveloped properties within 3-miles Zoning Location Acreage Zoning Location Acreage CPUD Pine Air Lakes 1.09 CPUD Creekside 1.33 CPUD Pine Air Lakes 8.89 CPUD Creekside 1.61 CPUD Pine Air Lakes 4.68 CPUD Creekside 2.04 CPUD Pine Air Lakes 11.36 CPUD Creekside 21.94 CPUD Cambridge Sq. 10.56 CPUD Gasper Station 12.07 MPUD Bradford Sq. 9.04 CPUD Clesen 4.19 PUD P. Ridge Commons 3.94 CPUD Pine View 5.65 MPUD Malibu Lakes 1.50 PUD P.R. Corners 4.22 PUD Angileri 2.24 PUD Ragge 3.60 PUD Naples Gateway 1.85 PUD P.R. Center West 4.15 C-4 Naples Twin Lakes 1.32 49.56 acres or 67.71 ac. or the the equivalent of equivalent of TOTAL 371,700 sq. ft. TOTAL 507,825 sq. ft. (assuming 7,500 (assuming 7,500 sq. ft./ac.) sq. ft./ac.) Note: This listing does not include stand-alone properties within the 3-mile radius of the subject site that are built, — but vacant (such as available building space in Galleria located in the northwest quadrant of Vanderbilt Beach Rd./Airport Rd., and in Pine Air Lakes PUD/DRI); nor does the listing include commercial lands that have the potential to be redeveloped with stand-alone commercial uses, e.g. acreage within the Activity Centers. The applicant's "Commercial Properties" listing indicates that there is approximately 49.56 acres of vacant commercial land with the potential for up to 371,000 square feet of stand-alone commercial development within 2-miles of the subject site, and another 67.71 acres of vacant commercial land with the potential for up to 507,825 square feet for stand-alone commercial development within 3-miles of the subject site. The total acreage and potential square feet for stand-alone commercial development is 117.27 acres and 879,525 square feet, respectively. This potential developable square feet, combined with the projected commercial square feet within the Activity Centers and commercial subdistricts, provides ample commercial opportunities proximate to the surrounding residential areas for all commercial categories in both stand-alone and shopping center configurations. The Bergstrom Center Report generally describes the outlook on the residential and commercial markets within the southwest coast of Florida as positive and further describes that these markets are trending upwards. However, this information is not specific to the Naples' area market or the subject site. Information from local sources, such as the Naples Area Board of Realtors, confirm that residential inventory in the Naples area is decreasing while demand is strong, and interest in multi-family (apartments) is increasing. Additionally, office and retail rents are on the rise due to vacant inventory slowly being absorbed. However, demand for new commercial development will continue to be slow, except for the occasional end-user. Finally, all market sectors appear to be improving as the health of the local economy improves. - 11 - CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. Environmental Impacts: The subject property was previously cleared and used for row crops in 1975, according to an aerial on the Property Appraiser's website. As a result, the property qualifies for an agricultural clearing permit exemption pursuant to Section 10.02.06 D.1.f. of the Land Development Code. Native vegetation present on-site would not be required to be retained. Given the location and present condition of the property, listed species would not likely occur on site. Base on these findings, the subject proposal was found to be consistent with the applicable provision of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Historical and Archaeological Impacts: Historic, archaeological or other cultural resources have not been identified as being present on the subject property, based on a review of the Florida Master Site File by the Division of Historical Resources of the Florida Department of State. The Master Site File is the State of Florida's official inventory of historical and cultural resources. The project will be subject to the accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites, as required by Policy 11.1.3. of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and Section 2.03.07 E of the Land Development Code. Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Analysis and Impact: A Traffic Impact Statement, dated July 12, 2013, was prepared by Trebilcock Consulting Solutions and submitted with this petition. Transportation Planners with the County's Transportation Planning Section reviewed the impact analysis and provided the following comments: The analysis provides a comparison between the existing development allowed within the approved Subdistrict and the proposed land uses allowed by the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Based on the analysis, staff determined that there is the possibility for an increase in total net new trips of 58. Directionally distributed there would be approximately 17 additional trips in any given direction, which would have an insignificant impact on the adjacent roadway network. As a result, there are no anticipated adverse impacts to the existing level of service on Airport Road or Orange Blossom Drive expected to occur with the approval of this Plan amendment. It should be noted that project impacts will be analyzed again for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan at the time of request for zoning change, and concurrency and operational impacts will be evaluated at the time of request for local development orders (SDP, Plat, etc.). Public Facilities Impacts: The petitioner prepared Public Facilities calculations, which were submitted with this petition. In summary, the proposed project (based on the land uses identified below) results in a reduction of impacts on certain Category A public facilities (potable water, sanitary sewer, drainage, and solid waste), while potentially resulting in an increase in vehicle trips on adjacent roadways (refer to TIS and transportation summary above). Existing Subdistrict Proposed Subdistrict Land Use Water/Sewer Solid Waste Land Use Water/Sewer Solid Waste (Total GPD) (Total lbs.) (Total GPD) (Total lbs.) Neighborhood Neighborhood Shopping Center 7,053 430,233 Shopping Center 12,275 779,275 (70,530 sq. ft.) (122,750 sq. ft.) Restaurant Restaurant (150 seats) 6,000 Not provided (150 seats) 6,000 Not provided Office—Low Rise Office—Low Rise (46,113 sq. ft.) 6,917 170,618 (15,000 sq. ft.) 2,250 74,000 - 12- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. Office—Medical Office—Medical (46,112 sq. ft.) 11,210 188,137 (20,000 sq. ft.) 5,015 61,200 Residential (326 DUs) 97,800 1,349,314 Total 128,980 2,138,302 Total 25,540 914,475 OR Residential (326 DUs) 97,800 1,349,314 Total 97,800 1,349,314 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: The Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by Land Development Code Section 10.03.05 F was [duly advertised, noticed and] held on July 30, 2013, in the Sugden Room of the North County Library Headquarters, located at 2385 Orange Blossom Drive. Approximately 21 persons other than the applicant's team and County staff attended the NIM, and heard the following information: Tim Hancock, the applicant's agent, provided a full description of the proposed development to the group gathered, including discussion about the maximum residential density of 15 dwelling units per acre and the commercial cap of 7,500 sq. ft. per acre. Mr. Hancock described the differences between the existing Growth Management Plan Subdistrict and the proposed Subdistrict. The public speakers' questions are noted in italicized text, followed by the agent's [Tim Hancock] responses in bold text. Question#1. How many stories will the building be? Two stories are being proposed from the currently approved three stories, however that change is not part of the growth management plan amendment and will occur during the zoning process. Question #2. How far will the setback be from Airport Pulling Road? Toys R Us was built so close to Airport Pulling Road and had to provide plants and trees to soften the look. The growth management plan does not deal with setback requirements and this will be addressed during the zoning process. He explained that the minimum setback requirement is 25 feet and current architectural standards and the land development code would apply to this project. Question #3. What will the traffic impact be on Orange Blossom and Airport Pulling Road? Collier County Transportation issued a traffic study and our property at the Naples Italian American Club was required to expand the left turn lane. The uses being proposed are equal to or less intense than what is currently approved. Tim explained that the Naples Italian America Club could contact him after the meeting or the County Transportation department to discuss questions regarding their development contribution agreement. Question #4. If the proposed changes are approved will there only be commercial or could there also be residential? It is possible for both residential and commercial but they would have to be on separate parcels and there is the possibility for 100% residential. Question#5. Would a big box store be allowed? There is no size limitation but that larger stores like Home Depot or Target are nearly impossible on a site of this size and configuration. Tim pointed out that the majority of big box stores prefer to be at a signalized major intersection which this property will not have. Question #6. We have 15-20 houses in the back of Emerald Lakes, how far are they going back with this property. How much room are they going to leave for the people back there? They could end up with dumpsters or big lights at the back of their houses. - 13- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. The current zoning for this property requires a 100 foot setback and that no one can be closer than 100 feet to the rear property line. The setback requirement will be determined at the time of zoning and there is no intention of putting the building closer than 100 feet of the property line. In reference to the second part of the question, the PUD does not currently limit the location of dumpsters and will be further addressed during the zoning process. The lighting requirements will also be addressed during the zoning process. The growth management plan amendment does not address those requirements. The next neighborhood information meeting being held for the zoning process will address those items and will be held approximately around November to December of this year. Question #7. Do you have commercial buildings committed to the project? There are a couple of prospects but there are currently no letters of intent or commitments. Question #8. Do you have any idea what the square footage will be of the individual residential units? It is not the intent to build residential units but if maximum density were built the approximate square footage would be 1,000 -1,200 s.f. Question #9. You say maximum commercial is going to be a C-3? Yes,the proposed land uses are consistent with C-1 thru C-3 zoning. Tim further explained that there are 5 commercial zoned categories, C-1 being the least intensive and C-5 being almost industrial. C-3 is intermediate and allows for retail and office such as restaurants and banks, and C-4 is more typical of a shopping center. Question #10. Those three arrows that are there, those are the access and whatever that other word is? The only reason Lakeside is concerned about this is that this is our only way out, we only have one entrance, one exit, most other places have at least two and have tried to get a traffic light in the past. Those are consistent with what is currently approved and explained the location of the main access points. Tim agreed that a traffic light would be preferred and explained that because the access is divided the projects turning movements would not affect Lakeside's left in turning movements nor cause any additional back up or make it unsafe. A traffic signal at the entrance however, is very unlikely. Tim stated that at the time of zoning they will propose an interconnection to the library and having this interconnection could keep people going to the library off the intersection. Due to security reasons interconnection to the assisted living facility are not allowed. Question #11. I live right on Milpond Circle across the street from the Buckley property, when you say 25 feet do you mean from the street? Clarified the 25 feet he was referring to is the setback from Airport Pulling Road could be as close to as 25 feet. The total distance from homes to buildings across the lake would be approximately 200 feet and this will be clearly identified during the zoning process. [Tim again reviewed the Exhibits and the proposed Development Plan.] Question#12. That set back is from the right of way not the edge of the road. That is correct,from the edge of the right of way,the setback is another 25 feet beyond that. Question#13. If the master plan is successful when do you intend the start of construction? The growth management plan process would need to be completed along with the zoning and platting of the property. Once the property has been platted construction of the infrastructure, water, sewer and internal roadways could commence with the earliest being the first or second quarter of next year. The building would commence at best, in approximately a year to 18 months. Question #14. You can't really start anything without commitment from the people moving in there, whether commercial or residential, can you? The intent is to put the infrastructure in allowing the property to be "developer ready" as soon as possible. - 14- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. Question #15. I do not have a question but you eloquently said at the last meeting "something is going to be built here" and what you are building there and are proposing to build there is the least offensive to everybody....is that not correct? Yes, ideally, we all want to live next to a park, but what is being proposed is less intensive than what is currently approved. Tim again referred to exhibits showing the currently approved development and what could be built vs. the proposed development. Question#16. Will the parking be facing Airport Pulling Road? The development has not reached the point of the parking design but generally speaking, the parking will surround the building. Because of the 100 foot setback there will be some parking in the rear but most commercial businesses want to have some parking between the road and their business to show activity and livelihood. Question #17. Will the fagade of the building be facing Airport Pulling Road? The design intent is to have access from the rear of the property and the building façade to primarily face Airport Pulling Road and explained again that this would be further discussed during the zoning process. Question #18. The architectural ordinance states that the nice face of the building has to face the road. Correct and because Airport Pulling Road is a collector or arterial road, the building has to meet architectural standards along Airport Pulling Road. Tim further explained these are considered outparcels with other sides being secondary facades. All four facades of the building will have a degree of architecture but the primary façade has to be the one facing Airport Pulling Road. The agent encouraged representatives from the public to contact him with any additional questions or concerns. The meeting was completed by 6:15 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by T. Hamlin, Senior Project Manager with Davidson Engineering, with edits provided by M. Mosca,AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The following are findings and conclusions as a result of the review and evaluation of this GMPA request: • The subject property was originally approved for mixed use development only — not stand-alone commercial and residential development. The approved density of up to 15 dwelling units per acre was approved in order to incentivize the development of a traditional residential over commercial mixed use project. Additionally, the square feet caps placed on office (92,225 sq.ft.) and retail (70,525 sq.ft.) development along with the stringent development standards approved for the Subdistrict further ensured the development of a mixed use, pedestrian scale project with low intensity commercial uses. • Based on the total existing and potential commercial development within a 3-mile radius of the subject site, there is no additional need for the proposed commercial uses contemplated by this amendment to serve the surrounding residential areas. In addition to commercial opportunities within the Activity Centers, there are over 117 acres of vacant, documented commercial lands available for the stand-alone/pad ready commercial uses proposed. Further, existing commercial acreage is adequate to meet the demand for all types of commercial development, including those proposed by the subject amendment. • The petition's data and analysis attempts to substantiate the need for stand-alone or "pad ready" development for potential national retailers wanting to enter the Collier County commercial market, but fails to do so. - 15- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. • Any expansion of commercial development should be driven by the policies and provisions of the _ Future Land Use Element, not by speculative development attempting to meet a perceived demand. • Local indicators suggest that new commercial development will continue to be slow within the County, except for the occasional end-user. • Local indicators suggest that residential inventory is decreasing while demand is strong, and interest in multi-family (apartments) is increasing. • As a result of this amendment, there are no significant impacts to public facilities, as defined in the Capital Improvement Element, with respect to Transportation, Potable Water, Sanitary Sewer, Stormwater Drainage and Solid Waste facilities. Staff finds that the data and analysis for the subject Growth Management Plan amendment does not support the proposed changes to eliminate the mixed use development requirement within the Subdistrict and replace it with a high density residential option and/or big-box and/or stand-alone commercial and/or strip-style commercial development. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report has been reviewed by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP-2012-2, as submitted, to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation not to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. However, staff would recommend transmittal of either of the following two alternatives: ALTERNATIVE 1: MIXED USE 12. Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict, which comprises approximately 21.7 acres, is to provide for a mixed-use development consisting of residential uses and limited small-scale retail, office and personal service uses, built at a pedestrian scale and with pedestrian orientation. The allowable commercial uses are intended to serve existing and future residential development in the immediate area thereby reducing existing trip lengths for small-scale commercial services. The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. Residential uses are allowed at a density of 10 dwelling units per acre, calculated based upon the entire Subdistrict acreage, yielding a maximum of 217 dwelling units. c. Commercial uses are limited to those permitted and conditional uses allowed in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Zoning Districts, except as further restricted herein. d. Commercial uses shall be capped at a maximum of 162,750 square feet of gross floor area. e. Individual commercial users shall not exceed a maximum gross floor area of 15,000 square feet. f. Drive-through establishments shall be limited to a maximum of two, and no such establishment shall have more than three drive-through lanes. All drive-through lanes shall be architecturally integrated into the main building. g. Gasoline service stations, convenience stores, and fast food restaurants are prohibited. - 16- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. h. A residential component equal to at least 25% of the allowable maximum density (i.e. 54 dwelling units) must be constructed before completion of an aggregate total of 40,000 square feet of retail, office or personal service uses. i. Residential uses may be in stand-alone buildings or may be integrated into mixed use buildings with commercial uses. Integration of residential and office, retail or personal service uses in the same building is encouraged. j. The Subdistrict shall be developed with a common theme for architecture, signage, lighting and landscaping. k. All buildings shall be connected with pedestrian pathways. I. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties. ALTERNATIVE 2: RESIDENTIAL/COMMUNITY FACILITY 12. Buckley Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict, which comprises approximately 21.7 acres, is to allow for medium density residential development and the non-residential uses as generally allowed in the Urban designation. The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. The base density allowed is seven (7) dwelling units per acre, by right, calculated based upon the entire Subdistrict acreage, yielding a maximum of 152 dwelling units. c. Other than the base density, the Density Rating System shall be applicable. d. All residential unit types are allowed except mobile homes. e. Non-residential uses are allowed as generally provided for in the Urban designation, e.g. community facilities, essential services, parks, recreation and open space, etc. f. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties. However, IF the CCPC should determine that this petition, as submitted, provides appropriate data and analysis that warrant a recommendation to approve for transmittal, staff recommends minor modifications to the proposed Subdistrict language as shown below. (Note: single underline text is added, and single strike through text is deleted, as proposed by petitioner; double underline text is added, and double sAfike tiswough text is deleted, as proposed by staff.) • In the intent (first) paragraph, insert text (Commercial uses for the purpose of this section are limited to those permitted and conditional uses allowed in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Zoning Districts except as noted below.) • In existing paragraph g., insert text (No more than 25% of the total built square footage will be devoted to single story buildings 50% us to 81 375 s.. ft. of the commercial s•uare footase ma be constructed as multi-tenant buildings.) • Re-letter paragraphs as necessary to correlate with paragraph deletions. - 17- CP-2013-3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. PREPARED BY: DATE: - 3 a - i 3 Mi6hele R. Mosca,AICP, rincip"al-Planner Comprehensive,Planning Section Planning and Zoning Department REVIEWED BY: ° c- L14.11 DATE: 5/367/3 bavid Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager Comprehensive Planning Section Planning and Zoning Department REVIEWED BY: DATE: 9- 3 - I 3 Michael Bosi, AICP, Director Planning and Zoning Department Growth Management Division APPROVED BY: , j DATE: Nk(k salan! ; finis `---' Growth Management Division PETITION NO. CP-2013-3 NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 12, 2013 BCC Meeting. - 18- P120130002909/CP-2013-3 RESOLUTION & EXHIBIT `A' RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO REVISE THE BUCKLEY MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT OF THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT TO REMOVE THE OFFICE AND RETAIL CAPS AND ALLOW UP TO 7,500 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF COMMERCIAL USES PER ACRE OR 15 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, TO MAKE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPTIONAL, TO PROHIBIT COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE SAME PARCEL, TO LIMIT MULTI- TENANT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS TO NO MORE THAN 50% OF THE COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, TO REVISE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS INCLUDING THE CAP ON THE SIZE OF THE FOOTPRINT OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 21.70 ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF AIRPORT ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY 330 FEET NORTH OF ORANGE BLOSSOM DRIVE IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20120002909/CP- 2013-3] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985, 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, Petitioner, McGuire Development Company, has initiated this amendment to the Future Land Use Element; and WHEREAS, on September 9, 2013, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, F.S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions 1 *** *** *** *** are a break in text P L2 0120002909/CP-2013-3 7/23/13 WHEREAS, on November 12, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners at a public �. hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing,to Collier County its comments within said thirty(30) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty(180) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this day of , 2013. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQ. Chairwoman Approved as to form and le ality: . 4 Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit"A" CP\13-CMP-00901\1 -7/15/13 Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions 2 *** *** *** *** are a break in text PL20120002909/CP-2013-3 7/23/13 Exhibit A CP-2013-3 I. URBAN DESIGNATION [Page 40] A. Urban Mixed Use District 12. Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict is to allow for limited small scale retail, office and residential uses while -e- e - •- - - -- - - •• - .- allowing for the development of a mixed-use development. The Activity Centers to the North and South provide for large-scale commercial uses, while this Subdistrict is intended to promote convenience and intermediate commercial development mixed use development with pedestrian orientation to serve existing and future residential development in the immediate area. This Subdistrict is intended to be an while also reducing will serve to reduce existing trip lengths for small scale convenience and intermediate commercial services. Commercial uses for the purpose of this section are limited to those allowed in the C-1, C-2 and C-3 Zoning Districts except as noted below. The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. A unified planned development with common architectural theme, which utilizes shared parking and cross accesses. c. Retail Commercial uses will be capped at a maximum of 3,250 7,500 square feet per acre for the total project. project. e. Residential development for multi-family dwelling units will be subject to a maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre for the total project. f. Maximum lot coverage for buildings is capped at 35% for the total project. g. No more than -°, - - - --• - -- - -- - -- -• - - - - - buildings 50% of the commercial square footage may be constructed as multi-tenant buildings. h. Primary entrances to all retail and commercial uses shall be designed for accc-s from the interior of the site. Buildings fronting on Airport Road will provide i. secondary accesses facing the street. j. All four sides of each building must be utilized in a common architectural theme. must be constructed before completion of an aggregate total of 40,000 square feet retail or office uses. I. Residential units may be located throughout the Subdistrict, as stand-alone development. buildings (residential and commercial) For each acre of land utilized for residential purposes, 7,500 square feet of commercial buildable square footage will be eliminated for the total square footage allowable. For each acre of commercial 1 (Words underlined are added, words stf-IJskct#rough are deleted) square footage built, 15 residential units will be eliminated from the maximum — allowable number of residential units. n. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties. o. No building footprint will exceed 15,000 square feet. Common stairs, breezeways or p. No building shall exceed three stories in height with no allowance for under building parking. q. Drive-through establishments will be limited to a maximum of 4. Blanks with shall have no more than three drive-through lanes; these drive-through lanes must be architecturally integrated into the main building. r. No gasoline service stations will be permitted s. All buildings will be connected with pedestrian features. t. A twenty foot wide landscape Type D buffer shall be required along Airport Pulling Road. A twenty-foot wide Type C landscape buffer shall be required along all ether perimeter property lines adjacent to residential use. u. Parking areas must be screened from Airport P. .-e 'e__ 2 (Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted) C . H\2012\2012103\131V\EXHIBICS\TSR_Aerlol dwg lob AERIAL Feb 19.2013-10 Morn Plotted by JonSrnith EXHIBIT 'D' AERIAL OF COLLIER COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT RFMUD / URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE AREA T".:;,.. " 'Mr ' .v* .,*- "C *''.".' ' ' ''.' ' .".' r .„. ,.... _ .i,,,,, cc• C-) 0 0 CC : L "' ' ' . NORTH cc w .., D = CO CO ' CC t 0 ' 0 BELLE MEADE NRPA < , .0 c4 UJ Ui .4.1■01, --,., /A(TEL,,,,,.), 4% T,47-., /•75 1-u '112 N '7- „ . RADIO ROAD , INTERSTATE I-7 ,-.-•-•---- Atip, .P ,--- _11"2 1 i 7, i ro 4 , 1 -.1. i#,' , , s, . I . , ..... :,_2 ■.„, ,-, z j , 04, $1,04101.1.4-#*,,, ... 4 ''' , BOUNDARY1 - _ --a, '- - ■ I *".:4!...' ''' '' tii,ciENDA L ' ■ES RATTLESNAKE _ -. mptin , . „ HAMMOCK ROAD I POD ., L41:',;1 L.00V"rer ,t _ ir U AN 4' lit 3• U DAIRY BELLE MEADE _ 0 SABAL PALM ROAD , .. = LLI CC • VERONAWALK P.U.D. , — 0 ; ,. L U -' '''''' ' itLE,-.3- i:E.,,Lt\ L ,,, . . „ • ...„ .. CLl= CLUL ..,.- , LL', , t. ,,,,,4 --- 1 - 1' =---,.....it..... 1 __pUn- :” ,, :. , ,,' .., ,- 117 f kri mat 5,..., Iii, ) , ,-." r,,..,,, i ,..... .., f -.. z- : ""*1- ''''' ,`f'W • - At4,-,_ ,'N• ,.. - 4... ' 1 4ifir-7,4‘,. . .,. . : ,..-,,...., -,,,,, ,- - . , — ‘ > z , 0 cn _ _1 w , Lu "_--J _, O 2400 0 2400 4800 0 laTaffaTEMMTMI • SCALE IN FEET 4 , SCALE 1".. 2400' MAPLES RESME 20.■03 1 C . H\2012\2012103\131V\EXHIBICS\TSR_Aerlol dwg lob AERIAL Feb 19.2013-10 Morn Plotted by JonSrnith EXHIBIT 'D' AERIAL OF COLLIER COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT RFMUD / URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE AREA T".:;,.. " 'Mr ' .v* .,*- "C *''.".' ' ' ''.' ' .".' r .„. ,.... _ .i,,,,, cc• C-) 0 0 CC : L "' ' ' . NORTH cc w .., D = CO CO ' CC t 0 ' 0 BELLE MEADE NRPA < , .0 c4 UJ Ui .4.1■01, --,., /A(TEL,,,,,.), 4% T,47-., /•75 1-u '112 N '7- „ . RADIO ROAD , INTERSTATE I-7 ,-.-•-•---- Atip, .P ,--- _11"2 1 i 7, i ro 4 , 1 -.1. i#,' , , s, . I . , ..... :,_2 ■.„, ,-, z j , 04, $1,04101.1.4-#*,,, ... 4 ''' , BOUNDARY1 - _ --a, '- - ■ I *".:4!...' ''' '' tii,ciENDA L ' ■ES RATTLESNAKE _ -. mptin , . „ HAMMOCK ROAD I POD ., L41:',;1 L.00V"rer ,t _ ir U AN 4' lit 3• U DAIRY BELLE MEADE _ 0 SABAL PALM ROAD , .. = LLI CC • VERONAWALK P.U.D. , — 0 ; ,. L U -' '''''' ' itLE,-.3- i:E.,,Lt\ L ,,, . . „ • ...„ .. CLl= CLUL ..,.- , LL', , t. ,,,,,4 --- 1 - 1' =---,.....it..... 1 __pUn- :” ,, :. , ,,' .., ,- 117 f kri mat 5,..., Iii, ) , ,-." r,,..,,, i ,..... .., f -.. z- : ""*1- ''''' ,`f'W • - At4,-,_ ,'N• ,.. - 4... ' 1 4ifir-7,4‘,. . .,. . : ,..-,,...., -,,,,, ,- - . , — ‘ > z , 0 cn _ _1 w , Lu "_--J _, O 2400 0 2400 4800 0 laTaffaTEMMTMI • SCALE IN FEET 4 , SCALE 1".. 2400' MAPLES RESME 20.■03 1 C . H\2012\2012103\131V\EXHIBICS\TSR_Aerlol dwg lob AERIAL Feb 19.2013-10 Morn Plotted by JonSrnith EXHIBIT 'D' AERIAL OF COLLIER COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT RFMUD / URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE AREA T".:;,.. " 'Mr ' .v* .,*- "C *''.".' ' ' ''.' ' .".' r .„. ,.... _ .i,,,,, cc• C-) 0 0 CC : L "' ' ' . NORTH cc w .., D = CO CO ' CC t 0 ' 0 BELLE MEADE NRPA < , .0 c4 UJ Ui .4.1■01, --,., /A(TEL,,,,,.), 4% T,47-., /•75 1-u '112 N '7- „ . RADIO ROAD , INTERSTATE I-7 ,-.-•-•---- Atip, .P ,--- _11"2 1 i 7, i ro 4 , 1 -.1. i#,' , , s, . I . , ..... :,_2 ■.„, ,-, z j , 04, $1,04101.1.4-#*,,, ... 4 ''' , BOUNDARY1 - _ --a, '- - ■ I *".:4!...' ''' '' tii,ciENDA L ' ■ES RATTLESNAKE _ -. mptin , . „ HAMMOCK ROAD I POD ., L41:',;1 L.00V"rer ,t _ ir U AN 4' lit 3• U DAIRY BELLE MEADE _ 0 SABAL PALM ROAD , .. = LLI CC • VERONAWALK P.U.D. , — 0 ; ,. L U -' '''''' ' itLE,-.3- i:E.,,Lt\ L ,,, . . „ • ...„ .. CLl= CLUL ..,.- , LL', , t. ,,,,,4 --- 1 - 1' =---,.....it..... 1 __pUn- :” ,, :. , ,,' .., ,- 117 f kri mat 5,..., Iii, ) , ,-." r,,..,,, i ,..... .., f -.. z- : ""*1- ''''' ,`f'W • - At4,-,_ ,'N• ,.. - 4... ' 1 4ifir-7,4‘,. . .,. . : ,..-,,...., -,,,,, ,- - . , — ‘ > z , 0 cn _ _1 w , Lu "_--J _, O 2400 0 2400 4800 0 laTaffaTEMMTMI • SCALE IN FEET 4 , SCALE 1".. 2400' MAPLES RESME 20.■03 1 C . H\2012\2012103\131V\EXHIBICS\TSR_Aerlol dwg lob AERIAL Feb 19.2013-10 Morn Plotted by JonSrnith EXHIBIT 'D' AERIAL OF COLLIER COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT RFMUD / URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE AREA T".:;,.. " 'Mr ' .v* .,*- "C *''.".' ' ' ''.' ' .".' r .„. ,.... _ .i,,,,, cc• C-) 0 0 CC : L "' ' ' . NORTH cc w .., D = CO CO ' CC t 0 ' 0 BELLE MEADE NRPA < , .0 c4 UJ Ui .4.1■01, --,., /A(TEL,,,,,.), 4% T,47-., /•75 1-u '112 N '7- „ . RADIO ROAD , INTERSTATE I-7 ,-.-•-•---- Atip, .P ,--- _11"2 1 i 7, i ro 4 , 1 -.1. i#,' , , s, . I . , ..... :,_2 ■.„, ,-, z j , 04, $1,04101.1.4-#*,,, ... 4 ''' , BOUNDARY1 - _ --a, '- - ■ I *".:4!...' ''' '' tii,ciENDA L ' ■ES RATTLESNAKE _ -. mptin , . „ HAMMOCK ROAD I POD ., L41:',;1 L.00V"rer ,t _ ir U AN 4' lit 3• U DAIRY BELLE MEADE _ 0 SABAL PALM ROAD , .. = LLI CC • VERONAWALK P.U.D. , — 0 ; ,. L U -' '''''' ' itLE,-.3- i:E.,,Lt\ L ,,, . . „ • ...„ .. CLl= CLUL ..,.- , LL', , t. ,,,,,4 --- 1 - 1' =---,.....it..... 1 __pUn- :” ,, :. , ,,' .., ,- 117 f kri mat 5,..., Iii, ) , ,-." r,,..,,, i ,..... .., f -.. z- : ""*1- ''''' ,`f'W • - At4,-,_ ,'N• ,.. - 4... ' 1 4ifir-7,4‘,. . .,. . : ,..-,,...., -,,,,, ,- - . , — ‘ > z , 0 cn _ _1 w , Lu "_--J _, O 2400 0 2400 4800 0 laTaffaTEMMTMI • SCALE IN FEET 4 , SCALE 1".. 2400' MAPLES RESME 20.■03 1