The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 12/12/2017 Item #17B12/12/2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to approve the single PL20160001100/CP-2016-2, 2016 Cycle 2 Growth Management Plan Amendment specific to the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict. (Adoption Hearing) (This is a companion to Agenda Item 17.A and Agenda Item 16.D.15) OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners (Board) to approve (adopt) the single petition in the 2016 Cycle 2 of amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) and approve said amendment for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. CONSIDERATIONS: Petition CP-2016-2/PL20160001100 seeks to establish a new Subdistrict in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) text, and Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), to allow 100,000 square feet of commercial development comprised of uses allowed in the C-3, Commercial Intermediate, zoning district. (As submitted, the petition included some uses from the C-4, General Commercial, zoning district, and data and analysis pertaining to the C-4 range of uses. However, just prior to, and at, the Collier County Planning Commission hearing, the list of requested uses was restricted to only certain C-3 uses.) Note: A companion PUD rezone petition is scheduled for this same hearing. Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government’s adopted Growth Management Plan. County Resolution 12-234 provides for a public petition process to amend the Collier County GMP. For this Adoption Hearing, the sole petition in the 2016 Cycle 2 of GMP amendments being considered is CP-2016-2/PL20160001100. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), sitting as the “local planning agency” under Chapter 163.3174, F.S., held its Transmittal hearing for the subject petition on April 6, 2017. The Board held its Transmittal hearing on May 9, 2017. Their respective transmittal recommendations/actions are contained in the CCPC Adoption Hearing Staff Report. After review of the Transmitted amendment within each reviewing agency’s authorized scope of review, the DEO rendered its Comment Letter indicating “no comment” as did the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) conducted a planning level analysis and rendered comments within their authorized scope of review. FDOT commented specifically, as follows: The segments of I-75 from CR-896/Pine Ridge Road to Lee/Collier County Line are expected to operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS) under existing (2016) and short -term (2022) conditions. However, these segments are projected to exceed LOS Standards in the long-term (2040), without the project. The Collier 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) identifies I-75 from north of Golden Gate Parkway to the Collier/Lee County Line as a Needed Highway Improvement for new 4-Lanes (Express (Toll) Lanes with slip ramp locations connecting to general purpose lanes). Resulting from the planning level analysis, FDOT offered three technical assistance comments, which are not grounds for objection. Please refer to the FDOT letter of June 5, 2017 for the full technical assistance comments. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) reviewed the Transmitted 12/12/2017 amendment and provided recommendations. These recommendations are not applicable to the GMP amendment however, but are pertinent parts of the companion PUD rezone. Find them incorporated into the review of, and recommendation on, companion item PL20160001089. The Comment Letters received are located within materials provided to the CCPC. The remaining reviewing agencies did not provide a Comment Letter. All review agency Comments Letters received are contained in the back-up materials. The CCPC held its Adoption Hearing on November 16, 2017. The staff and CCPC Adoption Hearing recommendations are presented further below. This Adoption Hearing considers amendment to both the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) text and Future Land Use Map series. Staff analysis of this petition is included in the Transmittal CCPC Staff Report. Several public speakers addressed the CCPC in the Adoption public hearing, but not expressly to this amendment, with their remarks focusing on the companion PUD amendment. No opposition was voiced to the adoption of this amendment. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment is authorized by, and subject to the procedures established in, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, he Co mmunity Planning Act, and by Collier County Resolution No. 12-234, as amended. The Board should consider the following criteria in making its decision: (1) consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, including analysis of impact on public infrastructure; (2) consistency with the Land Development Code, including compatibility analysis; and, (3) review of data and analysis to support the proposed amendment. This item is approved as to form and legality. It requires an affirmative vote of four for approval because this is an Adoption hearing of the GMP amendment. [SAS] FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impacts to the County result from this amendment if it is adopted. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This is an Adoption public hearing for the single petition in the 2016 Cycle 2 of amendments to the GMP. Based upon statutory changes that occurred during the 2011 Florida Legislative session, this GMP amendment is presumed to be “in compliance” with applicable Florida Statutes. After Adoption, the DEO and other applicable review agencies will have 30 days (from the date DEO determines the Adoption packages are complete) to review the adopted Plan amendment and, should they believe the amendment is not “in compliance,” file a challenge [appeal] to the presumed “in compliance” determination with the Florida Division of Administrative hearings. Similarly, any affected party also has 30 days (from the date of Board Adoption) in which to file a challenge. If a timely challenge is not filed by DEO or an affected party, then the a mendment will become effective. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The subject property is 18.6 acres in size and vegetated with pine, cypress, and cabbage palm type environments. Portions of the site, particularly at the north end, are significantly invaded with exotic vegetation, while the canopy of native vegetation on site is dominated with that of slash pine. No listed wildlife species were observed during the survey conducted in June, 2016. One state listed plant, the cardinal airplant, was identified in several locations on site, including that within the preserve identified on the master concept plan (proposed PUD Master Plan) provided with the application. Specific requirements for retention/relocation of protected plants are contained in the Land Development Code. 12/12/2017 The subject property is within the primary range of the Big Cypress population of the Florida black bear and in the South Bear Management Unit identified in the 2012 Bear Management Plan. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) received 96 reports of human‒bear contact within roughly a one-mile radius of the subject property since 2011, and the potential for contact exists within and around the area. The FWC provided recommendations toward preventing or reducing conflicts with bears by incorporating best management practices. These are not applicable to the GMP amendment however, but are pertinent parts of the companion PUD rezone. HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: According to the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, the proposed project is unlikely to affect historic properties but includes a provision for unexpected finds of prehistoric or historic artifacts. Similar provisions concerning accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites are included in the GMP’s CCME and in the LDC. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: That the CCPC modify Subdistrict provisions to reference the C-3 zoning district, add or remove certain uses that better define an upscale project, and to “categorically” omit uses not allowed, and forward the single, 2016 Cycle 2 petition to the Board with a recommendation to adopt and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and reviewing agencies that provided comments. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission held its required Adoption public hearing on November 16, 2017. The CCPC recommended that the Board adopt petition CP-2016-2, as recommended with staff modifications (vote:6/0) Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner presented revised GMPA text at the meeting to reflect minor formatting and organizational changes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS: Same as to the CCPC - To adopt and transmit petition PL20160001100/CP-2016-2, as recommended with staff modifications, to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. Prepared by: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner, and David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section, Zoning Division ATTACHMENT(S) 1. Adoption Staff Report (PDF) 2. [Linked] Logan_Immokalee_Petition_#3506 (PDF) 3. Ordinance - 111617(1) (PDF) 4. Transmittal_Ex_Summary (PDF) 5. Transmittal_Staff Report (PDF) 6. Transmittal_CCPC_Stff_Rprt_Addendum (PDF) 7. Transmittal_March_6_17 NIM_Minutes (PDF) 8. Transmittal_Adopted_Resolution_2016-87 (PDF) 9. Legal Ad - Agenda ID 3506 (PDF) 12/12/2017 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 17.B Doc ID: 3506 Item Summary: Recommendation to approve the single PL20160001100/CP-2016-2, 2016 Cycle 2 Growth Management Plan Amendment specific to the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict. (Adoption Hearing) (This is a companion to Agenda Item 17.A and Agenda Item 16.D.15) Meeting Date: 12/12/2017 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Senior – Zoning Name: Marcia R Kendall 11/07/2017 9:26 AM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 11/07/2017 9:26 AM Approved By: Review: Growth Management Department David Weeks Additional Reviewer Completed 11/07/2017 10:48 AM Zoning Michael Bosi Additional Reviewer Completed 11/08/2017 9:54 AM Growth Management Department Judy Puig Level 1 Reviewer Completed 11/09/2017 10:13 AM Growth Management Department Thaddeus Cohen Department Head Review Completed 11/17/2017 1:01 PM County Attorney's Office Scott Stone Level 2 Attorney Review Completed 11/20/2017 10:01 AM Growth Management Department James French Deputy Department Head Review Completed 11/27/2017 7:32 AM Office of Management and Budget Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 11/27/2017 10:08 AM County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 11/28/2017 10:22 AM Budget and Management Office Mark Isackson Additional Reviewer Completed 11/28/2017 3:23 PM County Manager's Office Leo E. Ochs Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 11/29/2017 11:50 AM Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 12/12/2017 9:00 AM ‒ 1 ‒ STAFF REPORT ON THE ADOPTION OF A SINGLE 2016 CYCLE TWO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 16, 2017 SUBJECT: 2016 CYCLE 2, SINGLE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [ADOPTION HEARING] ELEMENT: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (FLUE) Transmittal hearings on the subject amendment were held on April 6 and April 20, 2017 Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), and on May 9, 2017 Board of County Commissioners (Board). The Transmittal recommendations/actions are presented further below, following the petition number and title. Within CCPC materials provided you will find the Transmittal Executive Summary from the Board hearings, plus the Transmittal CCPC staff report for the petition, which provides staff’s detailed analysis of the petition. In accordance with Chapter 163.3184(3)(b)1., F.S., pertaining to the Expedited State Review Process, this Transmittal package was provided to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) and other reviewing agencies on May 16, 2017. REVIEW AGENCY COMMENT LETTERS After review of the Transmitted amendment within each reviewing agency’s authorized scope of review, the DEO rendered its Comment Letter indicating “no comment” as did the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) conducted a planning level analysis and rendered comments within their authorized scope of review. FDOT commented specifically, as follows: The segments of I-75 from CR-896/Pine Ridge Road to Lee/Collier County Line are expected to operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS) under existing (2016) and short- term (2022) conditions. However, these segments are projected to exceed LOS Standards in the long-term (2040), without the project. The Collier 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) identifies I-75 from north of Golden Gate Parkway to the Collier/Lee County Line as a Needed Highway Improvement for new 4-Lanes (Express (Toll) Lanes with slip ramp locations connecting to general purpose lanes). Resulting from the planning level analysis, FDOT offered three technical assistance comments, which are not grounds for objection. Please refer to the FDOT letter of June 5, 2017 for the full technical assistance comments. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) reviewed the Transmitted amendment and provided recommendations. These recommendations are not applicable to the ‒ 2 ‒ STAFF REPORT ON THE ADOPTION OF A SINGLE 2016 CYCLE TWO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT GMP amendment however, but are pertinent parts of the companion PUD rezone. Find them incorporated into the review of, and recommendation on, companion item PL20160001089. The Comment Letters received are located within materials provided to the CCPC. The remaining reviewing agencies did not provide a Comment Letter. Within CCPC materials provided is an Ordinance with Exhibit “A” text and maps for the petition. Those exhibits do not reflect the FLUE text and maps as approved by the Board for Transmittal however, as the recommendation provided herein reflects the alternative Subdistrict provisions, using discretion as provided in the CCPC motion. PROPOSED AMENDMENT PETITION PL20160001100/CP-2016-2, requesting amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and map series by changing the designation of property from the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, to Urban Commercial District, Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, to allow up to a maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for a limited selection of uses allowed by right and by conditional use in the C-3, General Commercial, zoning district. The subject property is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard in Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 18.6± acres. This petition seeks to establish the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict to allow up to 100,000 square feet of new commercial development. The Subdistrict allows development of a limited selection of permitted and conditional uses of the C -3 zoning district, with specific provisions for prohibiting certain uses. Each use is limited to no more than 45,000 square feet of building area. Note: A companion PUD rezone petition is scheduled for this same hearing. TRANSMITTAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To Transmit to DEO, with the specific revisions to the applicant’s proposed Subdistrict text to limit commercial uses to those for which supportable demand has been demonstrated by the petitioner’s data and analysis, would be characteristic of an “upscale” project, and for proper code language, format, clarity, etc. as contained i n the staff report to the CCPC. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Transmit to DEO (vote: 7/0). The CCPC forwarded this petition to the Board with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (vote: 7/0), per the staff recommendation and other items discussed. (The CCPC-recommended Subdistrict text is reflected in the Resolution Exhibit “A”.) Commissioners discussed the previously-recommended removal of Subdistrict provisions that reference the C-3 zoning district. Staff believed such reference is important to preparing the companion PUD provisions and implementing development within the Subdistrict, and should remain. Staff intends to address this matter in Adoption hearing. Commissioners asked staff to review again the uses allowed to ensure the applicant’s uses intended for this development are not omitted, and the exceptions and uses not allowed provide the proper support to the companion PUD. BOARD ACTION: Transmitted to DEO (vote: 5/0), as reflected in the Resolution Exhibit “A”. ADOPTION Following Transmittal, staff collaborated informally to review companion PUD rezone application materials. Those application materials were subsequently revised, in part, from their earlier versions. In turn, those PUD rezone revisions affected aspects of this GMP amendment. Together, the application team, staff, neighbors and other County personnel collaborated on ‒ 3 ‒ STAFF REPORT ON THE ADOPTION OF A SINGLE 2016 CYCLE TWO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT changes that would have the provisions of both requests consistent with each other as we reach Adoption consideration. The attached Ordinance with Exhibit “A” text and maps reflects the Board Transmittal , but the version of Subdistrict provisions here is different from the version Transmitted, as noted below. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the CCPC forward the single, 2016 Cycle 2 petition to the Board with a recommendation to adopt and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and reviewing agencies that provided comments, subject to modifying the Transmittal Subdistrict provisions to reference the C-3 zoning district, add or remove certain uses that better define an upscale project, and to “categorically” omit uses not allowed – all as shown below. Note: Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted – as proposed in Transmittal; words double underlined are added, words double struck through are deleted – as proposed for Adoption. Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict [page 67] This Subdistrict consists of ±18.6 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses derived from the permitted and conditional uses of the C-3 zoning district may be allowed, with a maximum of 45,000 square feet of building area for each use. The Subdistrict allows only those uses limited to the following:  Accounting, Auditing, and Bookkeeping services (SIC 8721),  Apparel & accessory stores (SIC 5611 – 5699),  Auto and home supply stores (SIC 5531, except tire dealers, and tire, battery, and accessory dealers – retail),  Banks, credit unions and trusts (SIC 6021 – 6062),  Barber shops (SIC 7241, except for barber schools),  Beauty shops (SIC 7231, except for beauty schools),  Computer and computer software stores (SIC 5734),  Dance studios, schools, and halls (SIC 7911 except dance halls and discotheques),  Drug stores (SIC 5912),  Drycleaning plants (SIC 7216 non-industrial drycleaning only),  Eating places (SIC 5812, except dinner theaters, drive-in restaurants, industrial feeding, contract feeding, food service, institutional, and theaters, dinner),  Food stores (SIC 5411 – 5499, except Convenience food stores),  Hardware stores (SIC 5251),  Health services, offices and clinics (SIC 8011 ‒ 8049), and home health care services (SIC 8082),  Home furniture and furnishings stores (SIC 5712 – 5719),  Household appliance stores (SIC 5722),  Insurance carriers, agents and brokers (SIC 6311—6399, 6411), ‒ 4 ‒ STAFF REPORT ON THE ADOPTION OF A SINGLE 2016 CYCLE TWO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT  Medical equipment rental and leasing (SIC 7352),  Musical instrument stores (SIC 5736),  Paint stores (SIC 5231),  Personal services, miscellaneous (SIC 7299),  Photographic studios, portrait (SIC 7221),  Physical fitness facilities (SIC 7991),  Radio, television and consumer electronics stores (SIC 5731),  Real Estate agents and managers (SIC 6531),  Record and prerecorded tape stores (SIC 5735),  Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores (SIC 5261),  Retail services ‒ miscellaneous (SIC 5921, 5941 – 5949, 5992, 5994 – 5999, except auction rooms, awning shops, fireworks, gravestones, hot tubs, monuments, swimming pools, tombstones and whirlpool baths),  Security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges and services (SIC 6211, 6282),  Schools and Educational services (SIC 8299 only), and  Wallpaper stores (SIC 5231). The following uses shall not be allowed:  Amusements and recreation services (SIC 7999),  Automotive vehicle and equipment dealers (SIC 5511),  Bowling centers (SIC 7933),  Coin operated amusement devices (SIC 7993),  Drinking places (SIC 5813),  Educational services (SIC 8221 and 8222),  Food stores (SIC 5411, Convenience food stores only),  Gasoline service stations, and other Facilities with fuel pumps (SIC 5541),  General merchandise stores (SIC 5331 – 5399, including warehouse clubs),  Homeless shelters,  Hospitals (SIC groups 8062 ‒ 8069),  Medical laboratories (SIC 8071),  Membership sports and recreation clubs (SIC 7997),  Motion picture theaters (SIC 7832),  Social Services (SIC 8322 ‒ 8399),  Theatrical producers and miscellaneous theatrical services (SIC 7922),  Used merchandise stores (SIC 5932), and  Vocational schools (SIC 8243 ‒ 8249). r Stantec LIST OF EXHIBITS Application to Amend the Growth Management Plan Exhibit A and Supporting Documents List of Subject Properties Exhibit B Disclosure of Interest Exhibit C Application Authorization Agreements Exhibit D Professional Qualifications Exhibit E Proposed GMPA Text Amendment Language Exhibit F Project Location Map Exhibit G Zoning Map Exhibit H Existing Future Land Use Map Exhibit I Proposed Future Land Use Map Exhibit J Proximity to Public Facilities Map Exhibit K Public Utilities Location Map Exhibit L FLUCCS Map Exhibit M FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Exhibit N Boundary Survey & Legal Descriptions Exhibit O Property Deed Exhibit P Traffic Impact Statement Exhibit Q Public Facilities Impact Analysis Exhibit R Public Utility Availability Letters Exhibit S Historic Resources Impact Assessment Exhibit T Commercial Market Assessment Exhibit U Environmental Assessment Exhibit V Neighborhood Compatibility Analysis Exhibit W Growth Management Plan Consistency Narrative Exhibit X (3 Stantec EXHIBIT "A" APPLICATION TO AMEND THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN 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 Kevin Ralferree Company _ Immokaiee Road Associates LLC Address ] 600 Saw rass Cor orate Parkwa Suite 400 City Sunrise State FL Zip Code 33323 Phone Number. - 1954). 796-4500 Fax Number B. Name of Agent * Tim Hancock / Bruce Anderson • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company .... Stantec Cheffy Passidomo_ P.A. Address: 5801 Peliocan Bay Blvd Suite 300 / 821 5th Ave South City Naples Naples State _FL / FL Zip Code Phone Number 239-649-4040 239-261-9300 _ Fax Number 239-649-57]6 C. Name of Owner (s) of Record Immokalee Road Associates LLC Address _....._.1600 ,Saw rass Corporate Parkway, Suite 400 City Sunrise State FL Zip Code 33323 Phone Number 954 796-450lFax Number 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 See Exhibit C 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 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 G. Date subject property acquired (X) leased (): Janua 2014 &Jul 2fl16 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 See Exhibit O Bounda!ySurvey and Legal Description B. GENERAL LOCATION 18.6f Acres located on the southeast career of the inferseation of Immokalee Road and Lo an Boulevard C. PLANNING COMMUNITY Urban Estates D. TAZ 184 E. SIZE IN ACRES 18.6± Acres F. ZONING: ARural Agriculture G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN: Please refer to Exhibit X. W. Nei hborhoad Compatibility Analysis _... H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S) Urban Residential Subdistrict. IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: Housing Element Traffic Circulation Sub -Element Aviation Sub -Element Sanitary Sewer Sub -Element Solid Waste Sub -Element Capital Improvement Element See Exhibit F Future Land Use Element Immokalee Master Plan 3 Recreation/Open Space Mass Transit Sub -Element Potable Water Sub -Element NGWAR Sub -Element Drainage Sub -Element CCME Element Golden Gate Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) —11,49,& 145 OF THE Future Land Use ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike --th rto identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: The ro ased GMF' amend ent is tp create a new commercial land use designation known as the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infi#I Subdistrict. The proposed language. is attached. as Exhibit F. C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM Urban Resdential Subdistrict TO _Logan BouleVOT'd Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) Add new Subdistrict as # 12 on Page 11 Add maP at end of the FLUE Map section and include on Page 141 of the FLUE E. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL CHANGES REQUESTED: Include the proposed new Subdistrict in Future Land Use Element Policy ].I B____. V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN I"=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 H Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI's, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. See Exhibit G Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. See Exhibit H 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 J 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 See Exhibit V_ 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 Exhibit V 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. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J-11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). I . 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(l)(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. 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 designallon 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 9-1-11.007, F.A.C.) E. PUBLIC FACILITIES I . Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: See Exhibit R Potable Water See Exhibit R _ Sanitary Sewer See Exhibit R _ Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS lmmokalee Road_ - LOSD Loga n Boulevar_d- LOS B See Exhibit R Drainage See Exhibit R Solid Waste See Exhibit R 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 K & L. 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. See Exhibit R 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. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: See EXHIBIT N Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable 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) $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 P Proof of ownership (copy of deed) See Exhibit D. 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. 6 Stantec Parcel ID STR 00195040001 28-48-26 00195480001 28-48-26 00194880000 28-48-26 00195440009 28-48-26 00195200003 28-48-26 00195000009 28-48-26 November --3,--201-7---- EXHIBIT B List of Subject Parcels Address N/A N/A N/A N/A 5470 Hidden Oaks Ln N/A Ownership Immokalee Road Associates LLC Immokalee Road Associates LLC Immokalee Road Associates LLC Immokalee Road Associates LLC Immokalee Road Associates LLC Immokalee Road Associates LLC (3 Stantec EXHIBIT "C" DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST 5 Stantec EXHIBIT C Disclosure of Interest lmmokolee Road Associates LLC GL Commercial, LLC - 100% Ownership G.L. Commercial LLC Itzhak Ezratti - 100% Ownership (directly or indirectly) November 2, 2017 (_ Stantec EXHIBIT "D" APPLICATION AUTHORIZATIONS LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize Tim HancockC Slonfec & R. Bruce AnderoI2 (Cheffy Passidomo (Name of Agents) to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application. Signed: lmmokalee Road Associates LLC Uc�tr; �I�06.- (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. Signature of Applicant Alan Fant, Vice President Name - Typed or Printed STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF BROWARD Sworn to and subscribed before me this .._._day of UY1 20� by MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Notary Public ;F " ► KATHLEEN K COFW CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: ,: ; MY COMMISSION# EE 852499 EXPIRES: March 18, 2017 ,,� pi Bonded Thru No* Pubric Undenvdlem 4 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." Stantee EXHIBIT "E" PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS Stantec Professional Otialifications Chef y Passidomo, P.A. R. Bruce Anderson Project Attorney Mr. Anderson is a partner in the Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. 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. Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Tim Hancock, AICP Senior Associate 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. Josh Philpott, AICP Senior Planner Mr. Philpott has a Bachelor's Degree in Natural Resource Management with a concentration in Urban Planning from Western Carolina University. Mr. Philpott has over 13 years of planning and zoning experience in southwest Florida and has been involved in over 300 zoning applications. Mr. Philpott has been accepted as an expert witness in planning and zoning related issues in multiple jurisdictions in the region. Passarella and Associates, Inc. Shane Johnson Senior Ecologist Shane received a Bachelor of Science degree in Zoology from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale in 1999 and joined Passarella & Associates, Inc. in 2004. Shane's environmental consulting experiences include state, federal, and local wetland jurisdictional determinations and permitting; environmental construction inspections; agency negotiations; presentations for planning, zoning, and board of county commissioner hearings; environmental impact assessments; ecological assessments; listed species surveys, permitting, and relocation; wetland mitigation assessments, design, permitting, monitoring, and construction observations; wetland mitigation banking management, design, permitting and construction observations; and environmental project management. Shane is a Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Authorized Gopher Tortoise Agent and has also completed a FWCC workshop focused on identifying and handling invasive exotic reptiles. He is a member of the Society of Wetland Scientists, Florida Association of Environmental Professionals, and the Southeast Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation. Shane served as President of the Caiusa Herpetological Society from 2009-2012. John Burns Real Estate Consultinci, LLC. Lesley Deutch Principal Lesley serves as Consulting Principal of John Burns Real Estate Consulting and is based in Florida, bringing more than 20 years of experience in real estate and economic research to the team. Previously, she was Vice President in the Global Real Estate division of Deutsche Bank in New York, where she authored reports on real estate and economic conditions in the major U.S. metropolitan areas, and wrote due diligence reports for RREEF (owned by Deutsche Bank) acquisitions across the country. Lesley also served as Senior Research Manager for Montecito Property Company's Strategic Market Intelligence Group, as well as a Principal of Focus Real Estate Advisors and President of Miles Research, Inc. Ms. Deutch holds a B.S. from the Wharton School and a B.A. in Economics from the University of Pennsylvania. Lesley is a full member of the Urban Land Institute. Kristine Smale Manager Kristine has over twelve years of experience in Residential and Commercial Real Estate and is based in Fort Myers, Florida. Prior to joining John Burns Real Estate Consulting in 2015, Kristine worked for two public home builders providing feasibility studies on current and future communities. She has also performed market and financial analyses on commercial projects throughout the U.S. during her work with several commercial Real Estate Investment Trusts while based in Chicago. Kristine has a B.B.A. in Finance and Marketing from the University of Iowa. She also has a certificate in Urban Real Estate from the University of Illinois - Chicago. Kristine is a full member of the Urban Land Institute. (_ Stantec EXHIBIT "F" PROPOSED GMPA TEXT AMENDMENT LANGUAGE Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict [Page 67] This Subdistrict consists of ±18.6 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed, with a maximum of 45,000 square feet of building area for each use. The Subdistrict allows only those uses limited to the following: • Accounting, Auditing, and Bookeeping services (SIC 8721) • Apparel & accessory stores (SIC 5611 - 5699), Auto and home supply stores (SIC 5531, except tire dealers, and tire, battery, and accessory dealers - retail), • Banks, credit unions and trusts (SIC 6021 - 6062), i Barber shops (SIC 7241, except for barber schools), • Beauty shops (SIC 7231, except for beauty schools), • Computer and computer software stores (SIC 5734), Dance studios, schools, and halls (SIC 7911 except dance halls and discotheques), • Drug stores (SIC 5912), • Drycleaning plants (SIC 7216 non -industrial drycleaning only), • Eating places (SIC 5812), not including dinner theatres, drive-in restaurants, industrial feeding and theatres, dinner, • Food stores (SIC 5411 - 5499, except Convenience food stores), Hardware stores (SIC 5251), ■ Health services, offices and clinics (SIC 8011 - 8049), and home health care services (SIC 8082), Home furniture and furnishings stores (SIC 5712 - 5719), • Household appliance stores (SIC 5722), • Insurance carriers, agents and brokers (6311-6399, 6411), • Medical equipment rental and leasing (SIC 7352), ■ Musical instrument stores (SIC 5736), ® Paint stores (SIC 5231), • Parsnnal services_ miscellaneous (SIC 7299) Photographic studios, portrait (SIC 7221), • Physical fitness facilities (SIC 7991), • Radio, television and consumer electronics stores (SIC 5731), • Real Estate agents and managers (SIC 6531), ■ Record and prerecorded tape stores (SIC 5735), • Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores (SIC 5261), • Retail services miscellaneous (SIC 5921, 5941 - 5949, 5992, 5994 - 5999 except auction rooms, awning shops, gravestones, hot tubs, monuments, swimming pools, tombstones and whirlpool baths), Security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges and services (SIC 6211, 6282), • Schools and Educational services (SIC 8299 only), and Wallpaper stores (SIC 5231), A The following uses shall not be allowed: ■ Amusements and recreation services (SIC 7999), April 6,2017-revl • Automotive vehicle and equipment dealers (SIC 5511), • Bowling centers (SIC 7933), ■ Coin operated amusement devices (SIC 7993), • Drinking places (SIC 5813), ■ Educational services (SIC 8221 and 8222), • Food stores (SIC 5411) Convenience food stores only, • Gasoline service stations, and other Facilities with fuel pumps (SIC 5541), • General merchandise stores (SIC 5331 — 5399, including warehouse clubs), • Homeless shelters, Hospitals (SIC groups 8062-8069), • Medical laboratories (SIC 8071), ■ Membership sports and recreation clubs (SIC 7997), • Motion Picture Theatres (SIC 7832) ■ Social Services (SIC 8322 — 8399), • Theatrical producers and miscellaneous theatrical services (SIC 7922), • Used merchandise stores (SIC 5932), and • Vocational schools (SIC 8243 — 8249). [Rem.wider of page In ten tionallyleft blank) April 6,2017_revl (_, Stantec EXHIBIT "G" PROJECT LOCATION MAP VA 0 91 r C• � •+ r i tied' 1 ti r- � is „�. I � � � c — ' � `` _ • tt r �'►tw y. _ yi r yJ �� r r � rlfl� 1� in Ck ok It •t4 Y �" ... ,: - _ .;'�,r *- : tilt ." _� ata► ul1l�] � :�, _tri } � . � ...i.v.-'r • a �- FF ..� �jiri� � �` �� .��ii�� •,�'' 76 { 1 � i .� ,{r . +'• iiirl+lWnq�•�. � ; ,� ►l+hu �'�i •5fY � •-',�'k� • % J � `w� kN'! �i5� �_. - r l ��fT!•4. �,yri� r _.i•rs.. ...., oft.. L E G E N !] @ Project Boundary ED •'ftr Me� — }} (3 Stantec EXHIBIT "H" ZONING MAP Stantec EXHIBIT "I" EXISTING FUTURE LAND USE I1/IAP AW ii"Itmvn,� -1. 1 10 ar I E G E N D !li (:� Stantec EXHIBIT "J" PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE MAP 4 Stantec EXHIBIT "K" PROXIMITY TO PUBLIC FACILITIES MAP 4 It A- i t i of t OIL 0 n f 4A 01 rep OF FA Aq. 6 , gptZ &'mt . Ip Olt 16 e At Rill . k L E G t N D Project Boundary Facilities r + EMS Fire 14 School 4 Stantec EXHIBIT "L" PUBLIC UTILITIES LOCATION MAP ka: I VM W -W ImIr 41,4 4z' tk �OF 4 - sr Witidle IL IL -i I 9L L E G E N D 40 - I nw- ;t 44 low - "Jim r M (3 Stantec EXHIBIT "M" FLUCCS MAP • - �: �f _ 530 +p' ' •rfy.. r v182 s 0. ti 47,40 y h S30 . r (6225 ✓314 • - a 91 619 �.. 530, a 1" U _ X62.5• 61.9 ? 14W Y 62.5 _ ;",� ; p 1i�r►+� + IN. 1 rr 11" U. •'r �� ; .iA go � L r � , FW E;;°� R•� saw 625 ekgo ova 1 J f} LEGEND } t ► 1.121 i 'jf1 ',121, Fixed Single Family .h Project Boundary 512, Channelized Waterway FLUCCS Code, Description 530, Reservoirs I 11, Fixed Single Fornily 617, Mixed Shrubs 619, Wet Melaleuca 170, Insfit,ti,n.1 182, 621, Cypress Gott Course 625, Wet Finelands Hydric 411, Pine 243, Ornamentals 630, Wetland Forested mix 310, Herbaceous (Dry Pra) 740, Disturbed Land 814, Roads . . — 53fl� (3 Stantec EXHIBIT "N" FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP X -s yy X 5 XX X A 1; jJ X A H AH LLJi1W:M311a1y {I.l"J 1.3.5 AH X AH F' X f Project Boundary X Base Flood Elevation = Contour 4 Flood Zone i�X500 AE X1 x AH X Logan/lmmokalee Commercial Subdistrict •�_�^ • =� `,J si FEMA FIRM Exhibit sx'wa;sa�o �- i_TJune 206 EXHIBIT "O" BOUNDARY SURVEY AND LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS f4MHM SGLE/N fFF = BO' NW DGtiNETr OF TRE Ensr 1/2 POC (OVERALL, EI, & E2) OF THE Nw 1/4 OF iNE NW 1/4 FCY 4'X4' L9 1772 Of TK NW 1/4 OF SECTIC44 29. . NW. Crim 1` _ -_. - .-.._. _ "" _-- .._.._-. _.._. ._ ._, �_ r.- .� w _ M?t LINE DF S qOt 21. T20017IIP 4M /�{ 2LM _ _ 589'S8'22"E 990.47' (B.O.B-I)E2) SECTION 28-485 16E %' S W'53'Z2" E 390,37' {BASIS OF SEARS NG) L NORTH UNE OF SECTION 24 TOMS0 49S RNM 258-. _- _ -_- 1 (OVERALL BOUNDARY) ! 1 1 - - - - - - -• io ! — - — - — - — - — — I I� I4IMQKALEEI RQ. i f 1 -- I o.R. saes Pc. Lbs ! P.O.B,ffiJ 89"58'22"' Qg o FL 'sraa r x ,a,l - - - D.R. X686 PG . t : AR. 3886 PG 1611 ! f G rr`WRE FENCE EASEMENT2 f 1 ) YI (E2) l I I QR 3aa8 PG. 1811 1 jN Ns9•se'zz^w V I L 9Oga_ { I I OAKWOM PARK WE !� I CR 4417 PG. I IN I 1 I EAZT 1/2 OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE K --f 1/2 OF ME HE 4 I I THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 1 1/4 OF TF£ " 1/4 OF 1HE - OF 5£LTL011 2$ i NW 1/4 OF SECTIC" 2a 14 i' 1 { k R -48!. i A v, I J i f j f AL1 I N 18.64; ACRES± m = I i 6 / ) ! OA1C11O1a7 PARR I I ? Ck 4421 PG I U P.O B (El) j 1 �1•@}•a1•E 203 ax 1f1i I 587°49'20�'E 1 EASEMENTI � 1 j f u FO (El) WIRE FENCE P 11/44 nV MW 1/4 of THE I 1/4 OfTHE�KWO1THE SE LO' OFFOf /4 OF 1HE 1 "87,4 4g 147.85' NW 14 OF / SW110!'1 21L I NW 1/4 OF "SECTION 2S I f I N87'49'ZV'W i 147.65' 1 i f s i r { � i l• ,qi 1. � 1 L I dr f}) EASEMENTS-� l J us IE (E3J 1 P -O -C. (a3J I 9![X.E59/[aT1ESi� Y Y ~ EASEl1EHT 0.R. 1189 PG. 2052 11 S19 caRER of THE _ _ �� aa}y..641.9Duns a Hw 1 4 OF n+E uw 1 4 OF s2CT1 - ! P A.B.(E3) NW 1/4 GF THE 14W 1 - I . _ _ SIR.�a >Ri"TE. sEcnoN OR, s94 PO 93 N89.58'fT0"W 660.43' M a sans w 71LA11'- 0_R 1�,P659_ _ _ _ GR 194 PQ 93 - - _ _ �.iL1E12-S4_ - - _ _ ^ "_ - ' - - - ` � - - .-. .- - L I OA 194 PG 93 OAKW000 PARK WEST LLC ) RR 11A PG 59 OR. 4424 Pa 730 I L FLQQQ 2DNE. LEAP HULA 9fk- PANEL NO. SUFFIX bfLiPJREVia17si'1= Afl 73: & 13°S; 12tl?1C 0214 H MAY 16. 2012 J LEGAL DESCRIPTION A TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF COLLIER, LYING IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, BEING A PORTION OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4313 AT PAGE 2422 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SAID COLLIER COUNTY AND FURTHER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION'28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; THENCE 589"58'22"E ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 28 ALSO BEING THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (150 FEET WIDE) FOR 390.37 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID NORTH SECTION LINE, SOUTH 00"01'38" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 166.85 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID IMMOKALEE ROAD AS DESCRIBED IN ORDER OF TAKING, OFFICIAL RECORD 3888, PAGE 1611 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY, SOUTH 89"58'22" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 606.56 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 114 AND WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 114 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 28, SOUTH 0211'25" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 1,169.86 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NW'/4 OF THE NW 114 OF SECTION 28; THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 28, NORTH 89"58'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 660.43 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 28. THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW '/4 OF SECTION 28, NORTH D2"l 1'D7" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 285.D8 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87"49'2D" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 147.65 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENTIAL CURVE, SAID POINT BEING ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF LOGAN BOULEVARD(RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH VARIES); THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY THE FOLLOWING SIX COURSES; COURSE ONE: NORTHERLY, 190.25 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,132.54 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05"06'42" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD THAT BEARS NORTH 1216'34" EAST, 190.19 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE; COURSE TWO: THENCE NORTHERLY, 328.45 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,461.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07"38'43" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD THAT BEARS NORTH 11 "00'33" EAST, 328.20 FEET; COURSE THREE: THENCE NORTH 17"32'26" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 52.62 FEET, COURSE FOUR: THENCE NORTH 05"21'54" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 53.61 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENTIAL CURVE; COURSE FIVE: THENCE 'o. -Stantec NORTHERLY, 209.81 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE WESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,471.50 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 04"51'50" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD THAT BEARS NORTH 02"18'18" EAST, 209.74 FEET; COURSE SIX: THENCE NORTH 00"0737" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 22.84 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45"37'16" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 49.26 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOGETHER WITH DESCRIPTION (EASEMENT 1) A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTIONS 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND BEING MORE PARTICUARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE ATTHE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; THENCE RUN ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION, SOUTH 02"10'58 EAST, A DISTANCE OF 964.50 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID WEST SECTION LINE, NORTH 87"49'02" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 203.41 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF LOGAN BOULEVARD (RIGHT OF WAY WIDTH VARIES) AND TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 87"49'20" EAST, A DISTANCE OF'l26.91 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02"11'07" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 90.26 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87"49'20" WEST, ADISTANCE OF 147.65 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENTIAL CURVE AND TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID LOGAN BOULEVARD; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIG ITT OF WAY, NORTHERLY, 91.07 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CIRCULAR CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,132.54 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02"26'49" AND BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD THAT BEARS NORTH 10"56'37" EAST, 91.06 FEETTOTHE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 12,385 SQUARE FEET OR 0.28 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. TOGETHER WITH DESCRIPTION (EASEMENT 2) A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTIONS 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND BEING MORE PARTICUARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; THENCE RUN ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION, SOUTH 89"58'22" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 990.47 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID NORTH SECTION LINE, SOUTH 021 1'25"E, A DISTANCE OF 166.97 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (150 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY) AND TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 0211'25" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89"58'22" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 90.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 02"11'25" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE SOUTH 89"58'22" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 90.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 13,490 SQUARE FEET OR 0.310 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. (3 Stantec TOGETHER WITH DESCRIPTION (EASEMENT 3) A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTIONS 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND BEING MORE PARTICUARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWESTER QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST; THENCE RUN ALONG,THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER QUARTER SECTION, SOUTH 891,58'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 879.64 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE DEPARTING SAID SOUTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER QUARTER, NORTH 43"551 FEAST, A DISTANCE OF 153.91 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02"1 1'25" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 1 11.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH SAID SOUTH LINE OF SAID QUARTER QUARTER; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, NORTH 89"58'00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1 11.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 6,156 SQUARE FEET OR 0.14 ACRES, MORE OR LESS OVERALL PARCEL CONTAINS 18.64 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. EXHIBIT "P" PROPERTY DEED NS $2,500,000.00 This instrument prepared by and after recording, return to: Immokalee Road Associates, LLC 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway Suite 400 Sunrise, Florida 33323 Attn: Clayton M. Ratliff, Esq, Parcel Identification Nos.: 00195440009, 00195040001,00194880000,0019548001 WARRANTY OFFEI THIS WARRANTY DEED is made and entered into as of the 24'h day of January, 2014 by WILLIAM A. LANYI ("Grantor"), whose m_aili re "5-�is�831 Atlantic Place, c/o Summer Beach, Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034, to IMM ��A C TES, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("Grantee"), whose maili �"� n 6 s5 is 1600 Saw�ra s r orate Parkway, Suite 400, Sunrise Florida 33323. Wherever used her in, tfj terms "Grantor" and " ar�la " shall include all of the parties to this instrument and their successg s ar9 �ssigns:L _ GRANTOR, for and in c�n 'd ati��le �er�n� valuable consideration paid by a I1'� t-� granted, bargained and sold, these presents Grantee's heirs, successors and i s forever, the fc (the "Property"), to -wit: Doll rs $10.00) and other good and c is hereby acknowledged, has ar in and sell, to Grantee, and cated in Collier County, Florida See Exhibit "A" att�id �dp_�..rqeto-andj 4l�P rt hereof. THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THE HOMESTEAD OF THE GRANTOR OR GRANTOR'S SPOUSE AND IT IS NOT CONTIGUOUS TO THE HOMESTEAD OF THE GRANTOR OR GRANTOR'S SPOUSE. TOGETHER with all tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining. THIS CONVEYANCE is subject to: (a) taxes and assessments for the year 2014 and subsequent years not yet due or payable; (b) all laws, ordinances, regulations, restrictions, prohibitions and other requirements imposed by governmental authority, including, but not limited to, all applicable building, zoning, land use and environmental ordinances and reguiations; and (c) easements, conditions, restrictions, matters, limitations and reservations of record, if any, but this reference shall not operate to reimpose same. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantee and Grantee's heirs, successors and assigns in fee simple forever. GRANTOR hereby warrants the title to the Property and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Deed as of the day and year first above written. Witnessed by: 1L STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrur WCC r ) V -P �NYI� 'freely My commission expires GRANTOR: nu cknowledged before a d _ oluntarity„ He is persoi V7 day of January, 2014 by nown to me or produced rte c, e - e 4 Y[Notarial Seal] TERRY L CRAIG MY COMMISSION a EE 828345 E XPi RES: November 12, 2018 BMW ?hm Natar Dubf c fterw Ken EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description The West 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, AND the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, LESS the North 100 feet thereof, Collier County, Florida; ALSO LESS the South Fifty (50') feet of the North 150 feet of the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 114 of the NW 114 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; ALSO LESS the property described in O(ficiai Records Book 3888, Pages 1611 and 1617. AND The East 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, LESS the North 100 feet thereof; ALSO Less the South Fifty (50') feet of the North 150 feet of the East 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florid ;ALSO -LES the property described in Official Records Book 3888, Pages 1611, 1613 and 1617. ��"R ( AND A � �' f The East 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of East, Collier County, Florida. All of the above being more Township 48 South, Range 26 Commencing at a Northwest c �r of SectionTp,n,n ,bip 4 Sp ange 26 East, Collier County, Florida, thence along the North rfe} f said Section 28, aubei g� orth right-of-way of Immokalee Road (150 wide), South 89.58'1 "� t, a distance of 3S67itj�t nce leaving said North line and along the West line of the East 1/2If t' . W 1/4 of the NW 1/ f 6 NW 1/4 of said Section 28, South 02 11 07 e East, a distance of 150.11 e .1 en leavin ..sa (i p rid along a line that is parallel and South 150 feet, measured at right angle t jI o h �tio fie, South 89058'22" East, a distance of 54.42 feet; thence leaving said parallel line Soouttt -09 1' 'est, a distance of 16.85 feet to the Point of Beginning of the parcel of land herein described; thence South 89°58'22" East, a distance of 606,50 feet to the East line of the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 and the West 1/2 of the SE 114 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 28; thence along said East line South 02011'33" East, a distance of 1,169.86 feet to the South line of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 28; thence along said South line North 89058'00" West, a distance of 660.44 feet to the West line of the East 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 114 and the East 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 114 of the NW 114 of said Section 28, thence North 02°11'07" West, a distance of 902.69 to a point on a non-tangential circular curve; thence Northerly, 209.81 feet along the arc of a circular curve, concave Westerly, having a radius of 2,471.50 feet; through a central angle of 04°51'50" and being subtended by a chord which bears North 02018'18" East, 209.74 feet; thence North 00°07'37" West, a distance of 22.84 feet; thence North 45037'16" East, a distance of 49.26 feet to the Point of Beginning. INS $2,500,000.00 This instrument prepared by and after recording, return to: Immokalee Road Associates, LLC 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway Suite 400 Sunrise, Florida 33323 Attn: Clayton M. Ratliff, Esq. Parcel Identification Nos.: 00195440009, 00195040001,00194880000,0019548001 WARRANTY DEED THIS WARRANTY DEED is made and entered into as of the 24'h day of January, 2014 by WILLIAM A. LANYI ("Grantor'), whose rn ili is_ 1831 Atlantic Place, c/o Summer Beach, Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034, to 1M 14r�A TES, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("Grantee"), whose mailin is 1600 Saw r orate Parkway, Suite 400, Sunrise Florida 33323. Wherever used her rn4 t terms "Grantor" and " nt� " shall include all of the parties to this instrument and their success s a 8 ssigns. GRANTOR, for and in c�n "d atiR �eryrl valuable consideration paid by a r c t'a granted, bargained and sold; these presents Grantee's heirs, successors and i s forever, the fc (the "Property"), to -wit: See Exhibit "A" attAc Tplrq to•and I, ($10.00) and other good and is hereby acknowledged, has in and sell, to Grantee, and cated in Collier County, Florida reof. THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THE HOMESTEAD OF THE GRANTOR OR GRANTTOR'S SPOUSE AND IT IS NOT CON r IGUVVJ I V 1111- r10�V1EJTEAD OC I s'" GDAA,TYR OR GRANTOR'S SPOUSE. TOGETHER with all tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining. THIS CONVEYANCE is subject to: (a) taxes and assessments for the year 2014 and subsequent years not yet due or payable; (b) all laws, ordinances, regulations, restrictions, prohibitions and other requirements imposed by governmental authority, including, but not limited to, all applicable building, zoning, land use and environmental ordinances and regulations; and (c) easements, conditions, restrictions, matters, limitations and reservations of record, if any, but this reference shall not operate to reimpose same. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantee and Grantee's heirs, successors and assigns in fee simple forever. GRANTOR hereby warrants the title to the Property and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. written. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Deed as of the day and year first above Witnessed by: GRANTOR: -,,/J �-N&'J'Fzz a ot//- (y STATE OF FLORIDA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF COLLIER ) The foregoing instrumenv N � M� A�NYf� Mfr efy�t c My commission expires: WILLIAM A. irANYI 3 "nowledged before btluntarily�, He Is Dersal _ day of January, 2014 by known to me or produced telof Florid (-F[Notarial Seal] TERRY L CRA10 MY COMMISSION 1 EE 82835 g EXPIRES: November 12, 2016 ''zk",H�•• Bonded T1n Nolan Public Urderwdlers EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description The West 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, AND the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, LESS the North 100 feet thereof, Collier County, Florida; ALSO LESS the South Fifty (50') feet of the North 150 feet of the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 114 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; ALSO LESS the property described in Official Records Book 3888, Pages 1611 and 1617. Nn The East 112 of the NW 114 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, LESS the North 100 feet thereof; ALSO Less the South Fifty (50') feet of the North 150 feet of the East 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florid rALSD-L-ES the property described in Official Records Book 3888, Pages 1611, 1613 and 1617. ��j�,IZ �y0� AND (J�' The East 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of East, Collier County, Florida. All of the above being more E--+ Township 48 South, Range 26 Commencing at a Northwest ckor of Section 28, Touvn�s ip 4 So#ange 26 East, Collier County, Florida, thence along the North '[r f said Section 28, a ei g� orth right-of-way of Immokalee Road (150 ' wide), South 89°58'2 / t, a distance of 3A� vt;�t ce leaving said North line and along the West line of the East 1/2 tqe W 1/4 of the NW 11 f NW 1/4 of said Section 28, South 02011'07" East, a distance of 150.11 -I enaE leavi g_sgi ifi and along a line that is parallel and South 150 feet, measured at right ang��f�oh�dtio -Ifne, South 89058'22" East, a distance of 54.42 feet; thence leaving said parallel line S061h-00- 1' 'O' est, a distance of 16.85 feet to the Point of Beginning of the parcel of land herein described; thence South 89°58'22" East, a distance of 606,50 feet to the East line of the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 and the West 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 28; thence along said East line South o2°11'33" East, a distance of 1,169.86 feet to the South line of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 28; thence along said South line North 89058'00" West, a distance of 660.44 feet to the West line of the East 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 and the East 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 114 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 28, thence North 02011'07" West, a distance of 902.69 to a point on a non-tangential circular curve; thence Northerly, 209.81 feet along the arc of a circular curve, concave Westerly, having a radius of 2,471.50 feet; through a central angle of 04051'50" and being subtended by a chord which bears North 0201818" East, 209.74 feet; thence North 00°07'37" West, a distance of 22.84 feet; thence North 45037'16" East, a distance of 49.26 feet to the Point of Beginning. NS $Z,5UU,000.UU This instrument prepared by and after recording, return to: Immokalee Road Associates, LLC 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway Suite 400 Sunrise, Florida 33323 Attn: Clayton M. Ratliff, Esq. Parcel Identification Nos.: 00195440009, 00195040001,00194880000,0019548001 WARRANTY DEED THIS WARRANTY DEED is made and entered into as of the 24`h day of January, 2014 by WILLIAM A. LANYI ("Grantor'), whose m iii ra i1831 Atlantic Place, c/o Summer Beach, Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034, to IMMAl�. / ��- _ S G TES, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("Grantee"), whose maiiin a s� ss 1600 Saw- s� r orate Parkway, Suite 400, Sunrise Florida 33323. Wherever used her in tlj terms "Grantor' and" antd shall include all of the parties to this instrument and their successa sandassinn GRANTOR, for and in cgn 'd ratio df er� n HNo/1 0y of rs $10.00) and other good and valuable consideration paid byI'd', a e , r � t n s tcien �f jo is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold,these resents do � p gr nt, ar in and sell, to Grantee, and Grantees heirs, successors and i s forever, the follow' p p } toted in Collier County, Florida (the "Property"), to -wit: , r` See Exhibit "A" a"cedp rete -and d'q��p rt hereof. THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT CONS-rITUTE THE HOMESTEAD OF THE GRANTOR OR GRANTOR'S SPOUSE AND IT. IS NOT CONTIGUOUS TO THE HOMESTEAD OF THE GRANTOR OR GRANTOR'S SPOUSE. TOGETHER with all tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining. THIS CONVEYANCE is subject to: (a) taxes and assessments for the year 2014 and subsequent years not yet due or payable; (b) all laws, ordinances, regulations, restrictions, prohibitions and other requirements imposed by governmental authority, including, but not limited to, all applicable building, zoning, land use and environmental ordinances and regulations: and (c) easements, conditions, restrictions, matters, limitations and reservations of record, if any, but this reference shall not operate to reimpose same. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantee and Grantee's heirs, successors and assigns in fee simple forever, GRANTOR hereby warrants the title to the Property and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Deed as of the day and year first above written. Witnessed by: GRANTOR: I % r? Prin Name:. 1 �- 1rCflLLIAM A. LANYI Print Name:V STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing Instrum M A 1,ANYIJ fn,, My commission expires: ) ss: )n ' cknowledged beforea4d _ Voluntarilv, He Is per! �21ri CIV, 04 lle� Yv day of January, 2014 by known to . me or produced I�Q [Notarial Seal] 7EWiY L CRAIG :._ MY COMMISSION 1 EE 828345 EXPIRES: November 12, 2016 Bw,&d Thru Nofay Pubk fterwrftm EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description The West 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, AND the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, LESS the North 100 feet thereof, Collier County, Florida; ALSO LESS the South Fifty (50') feet of the North 150 feet of the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; ALSO LESS the property described in Official Records Book 3888, Pages 1611 and 1617. AND The East 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, LESS the North 100 feet thereof; ALSO Less the South Fifty (50') feet of the North 150 feet of the East 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida;_AL-S&L-E the property described in Official Records Book 3888, Pages 1611, 1613 and 1617. (,() AND The East 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of East, Collier County, Florida. Township 48 South, Range 26 All of the above being more pa cul ly esc ibtd )s to sJ V Commencing at a Northwest c frdr of Section 28, Town dip 4 So ange 26 East, Collier County, Florida, thence along the North � f said Section 28, ar- ei g orth right-of-way of Immokalee Road (150 ' wide), South 89°58' t, a distance of 33 dti h nce leaving said North line and along they West line of the East 112 t W 1/4 of the NW 1/ f ih NW 1/4 of said Section 28 South 02 11 07 East, a distance of 150.11 e t •t era e leay n e{! lip nd along a line that is parallel and South 150 feet, measured at right angle �f 4f1po h �`�dioy�I' e, South 89058'22" East, a distance of 54.42 feet; thence leaving said parallel line South-:l0°01.est, a distance of 16.85 feet to the Point of Beginning of the parcel of land herein described; thence South 89°58'22" East, a distance of 606.50 feet to the East line of the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 and the West 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 28; thence along said East line South 02011'33" East, a distance of 1,169.86 feet to the South line of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 28; thence along said South line North 89058'00" West, a distance of 660.44 feet to the West line of the East 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 and the East 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 28, thence North 02011'07" West, a distance of 902.69 to a point on a non-tangential circular curve; thence Northerly, 209.81 feet along the arc of a circular curve, concave Westerly, having a radius of 2,471.50 feet; through a central angle of 04051'50" and being subtended by a chord which bears North 02018'18" East, 209.74 feet; thence North 00007'37" West, a distance of 22.84 feet; thence North 45037'16" East, a distance of 49.26 feet to the Point of Beginning- 1N5 $Z,50u,uuu.uu This instrument prepared by and after recording, return to: Immokalee Road Associates; LLC 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway Suite 400 Sunrise, Florida 33323 Attn: Clayton M. Ratliff, Esq. Parcel Identification Nos.: 00195440009, 00195040001 nn19488nnnn,nn1g548nn1 WARRANTY DEED THIS WARRANTY DEED is made and entered into as of the 24`h day of January, 2014 by WILLIAM A. LANYI ("Grantor'), whose m,aili a -is 1831 Atlantic Place, c/o Summer Beach, Fernandina Beach, Florida 32034, to IM r A 01,ATES, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("Grantee"), whose mailin aCt s is 1600 Saws rar orate Parkway, Suite 400, Sunrise Florida 33323. Wherever used her zn�t terms "Grantor' and " i6ts " shall include all of the parties to this instrument and their successq s arl assigns,__ GRANTOR, for and in c n 'd rat!} Vf �e n -No/ 0 of yrs, $10.00) and other good and valuable consideration paid by a , r r e`t -s fficie hj� is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold, � these presents d gr nt, ar in and sell, to Grantee, and Grantee's heirs, successors and �f ns forever, the follo p p sated in Collier County, Florida (the "Property"), to-wit:- �' �X\ See Exhibit "A" att c �d?heto-an �� rt hereof. 1: Cts' THIS PROPERTY DOES NOT CQNSVTUTE THE HOMESTEAD OF THE GRANTOR OR GRANTOR'S SPOUSE AND IT IS NOT rrnNTIM IOUS TO THE HOMESTFAn nF THE GRANTnR nR GRANTOR'S SPOUSE. TOGETHER with all tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining. THIS CONVEYANCE is subject to: (a) taxes and assessments for the year 2014 and subsequent years not yet due or payable; (b) all laws, ordinances, regulations, restrictions, prohibitions and other requirements imposed by governmental authority, including, but not limited to, all applicable building, zoning, land use and environmental ordinances and regulations; and (c) easements, conditions, restrictions, matters, limitations and reservations of record, if any, but this reference shall not operate to reimpose same. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantee and Grantee's heirs, successors and assigns in fee simple forever. GRANTOR hereby warrants the title to the Property and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. written. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Deed as of the day and year first above Witnessed by: —4&"' f-� STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrum WfLirr Maj t�6Nyl, ' rhe"y. My commission expires: R Co ;n(d. cknowledged before � gluntarily,, He is oersol rj t V-t��— T1 day of January, 2014 by known to me or produced /0I [Notarial Seal] 7EM L CRAIG MV COMMISSION / EE 52B345 EXPIRES: November 12, 2016 Barbed TM"Pubfic lhderwrikrs EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description The West 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, AND the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 114 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, LESS the North 100 feet thereof, Collier County, Florida; ALSO LESS the South Fifty (50') feet of the North 150 feet of the West 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; ALSO LESS the property described in Official Records Book 3888, Pages 1611 and 1617. aNn The East 1/2 of the NW 114 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, LESS the North 100 feet thereof; ALSO Less the South Fifty (50') feet of the North 150 feet of the East 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Floridg;.AI=S0LE-SS9 the property described in Official Records Book 3888, Pages 1611, 1613 and 1617. 'XiJR cl o(;` Y f `V AND The East 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of East, Collier County, Florida. All of the above being more Township 48 South, Range 26 Commencing at a Northwest cd or of Section 28, Town'spip 4 So ange 26 East, Collier County, Florida, thence along the North Iii.f4S f said Section 28, 46,bei g orth right-of-way of Immokalee Road (150 ' wide), South 89°581 t, a distance of 334. dt; nce leaving said North line and along the West line of the East 112 fft W 1/4 of the NW 11 f ih NW 1/4 of said Section 28, South 02°11'07" East, a distance of 150.11 e # ee lr avinQ s �h nd along a line that is parallel and South 150 feet, measured at right angle �qfc� jyo�h �icd`tia r e, South 89°58'22" East, a distance of 54.42 feet; thence leaving said parallel line So th M! 1'8" ' est, a distance of 16.85 feet to the Point of Beginning of the parcel of land herein described; thence South 8905822" East, a distance of 606.50 feet to the East line of the West 112 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 114 of the NW 1/4 and the West 1/2 of the SE 114 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 114 of said Section 28; thence along said East line South 02011'33`' East, a distance of 1,169.86 feet to the South line of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 28; thence along said South line North 89058'00" West, a distance of 660.44 feet to the West line of the East 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 and the East 1/2 of the NW 114 of the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 28, thence North 02°11'07" West, a distance of 902.69 to a point on a non-tangential circular curve; thence Northerly, 209.81 feet along the arc of a circular curve, concave Westerly, having a radius of 2,471.50 feet; through a central angle of 04051'50" and being subtended by a chord which bears North 02018'18" East, 209.74 feet; thence North 00007'37" West, a distance of 22.84 feet; thence North 45037'16" East, a distance of 49.26 feet to the Point of Beginning. IN-, .nv5J,vvv.vv This instrument prepared by and after recording, return to: Immokalee Road Associates, LLC 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway Suite 400 Sunrise, Florida 33323 Attn: Clayton M. Ratliff, Esq. Parcel Identification Nos.: 00195000009, and a portion of 00195200003 SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED is made and entered into as of the 6`h day of July, 2016 by OAKWOOD PARK WEST, L.L.C., a Florida li ited.-liability_ company ("Grantor"), whose mailing address is 2170 Logan Boulevard North, Naples Ff i fyy ' M � f j? -1 M. KALEE ROAD ASSOCIATES, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("9�i "f;�w ase�mallt ' dress is 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Suite 400, Sunrise Fl❑ri a � Wherever used �er 'in, he terms "Grantor" and "Grantee" shall include all of the parties to the ink umentapd their successots and assigns. GRANTOR, for and n o t rati n e - valuable consideration aid b 44 I granted, bargained and sold, y these presents Grantee's heirs, successors an ns forever, the falla�i (the "Property"), to -wit: See Exhibit "A ea c' a hero ars _n rf�li ��it� TOGETHER with all tenements, herebitements a anywise appertaining. ($10.00) and other good and is hereby acknowledged, has in and sell, to Grantee, and ated in Collier County, Florida �aereof. appurtenances thereunto belonging or in THIS CONVEYANCE is subject to: (a) taxes and assessments for the year 2016 and subsequent years not yet due or payable; (b) all laws, ordinances, regulations, restrictions, prohibitions and other requirements imposed by governmental authority, including, but not limited to, all applicable building, zoning, land use and environmental ordinances and regulations; and (c) easements, conditions, restrictions, matters, limitations and reservations of record, if any, but this reference shall not operate to reimpose same. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantee and Grantee's heirs, successors and assigns in fee simple forever. AND GRANTOR hereby covenants with Grantee that Grantor is lawfully seized of the Property in fee simple, that Grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey the Property, and that Grantor specially warrants the title to the Property subject to the foregoing matters and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons claiming by, through or under Grantor, but no others. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Deed as of the day and year first above written. Witnessed by: 1 Print N Print N me: 2e22 1) A STATE OF FLORIDA } } ss: COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument by Cullen Z. Walker, as Managi h company, on behalf of s4 d My commission zil GRANTOR: OAKWOOD PARK WEST, L.L.C., a Florida limited liability company alker�an�gember edged before me is NEIL MNRISONo�i 2016 day of /� �� 2016 3 L.L.C.; a Florida limited liability nown to or produced of Florida [Notarial Seal) EXHIBIT "A" Lec DIE -riOlion A TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF COLLIER, LYING IS SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, BEING A PORTION OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4313 AT PAGE 2422 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SAID COLLIER COUNTY AND FURTHER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, THENCE S89°58'22"E ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 28 ALSO BEING THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (150 FEET WIDE) FOR 330,16 FEET; THENCE S0201 1'07"E DEPARTING SAID NORTH LINE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE E.'/z OF THE N.W. Y. OF THE N,W. % OF THE N,W. %. OF SAID SECTION 28, A DISTANCE OF 150.11 FEET TO THE N.W. CORNER OF O.R. 3888, PAGE 1611, THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID O.R. 3888 PAGE 1611, S0201 0'56"E, A DISTANCE OF 158.04 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF O.R. 3888, PAGE 1613; THENCE ALONG THE SAID WE$LLIN OF O.R. 3888, PAGE 1613, S02-1 1'07"E, A DISTANCE OF 125.90 FEET TO THE PQJNTf G TH ] CJHENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST'/Z OF THE N.W. %4 OF Tff VI140--0i Tii 1IV/' F SAID SECTION 28, S0201 1'07"E, A DISTANCE OF 234.32 FEET TO T •- 110-1 ORNER OF TIT '/ OF THE S.W. Y, F 0 THE N.W. Y4 OF THE N.W. 1/4 OF SAI S ]ON 28; THENCE AL NG THE WEST LINE OF SAID Y< S02°11'07"E, A DISTANCE OF 83. 0 ��T; w'1�I1^NC�I� 7°49'2 "W, DISTANCE OF 147.65 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION W1TT E WES'1 RR IGHT OF -WA L EF LOGAN BOULEVARD (WIDTH VARIES) SAID POIN LY T E THE RIGHT CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST HAVING R I S F 1 2. C R E BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD THAT BEARS N12°1 T I T F 19 1 F THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID RIG F- Y HRU CE R" 4N LE OF 5°06'42" FOR 190.25 FEET TO A POINT OF A REVE URVE TO THE LEO C ❑ THE NORTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2461.50 FEET 3 1 CURVE BEING 'T BY A CHORD THAT BEARS N11°00'33"E, AT A DISTANCE 0 8. FEET, THENCE�C KU ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY THROUGH A C . Al, ANGLE OF �4 ' FOR 328.45 FEET; THENCE N17032'26"E ALONG SAID RIGHT- O AY" . R ��1= THENCE N05°21'54"E ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR 53.61 FEET TO TH `P F f NTNG. IYa .PVUJ,VVV.VU This instrument prepared by and after recording, return to: Immokalee Road Associates, LLC 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway Suite 400 Sunrlse, Florida 33323 Attn: Clayton M, Ratliff, Esq. Parcel Identification Nos,: 00195000009, and a portion of 00195200003 SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED is made and entered into as of the 6"' day of July, 2016 by OAKWOOD PARK WEST, L.L.C., a Floridalimd-iia itebility company ("Grantor"), whose mailing address is 2170 Logan Boulevard North, Napless ry> "'Jk1(9(1 fNQKALEE ROAD ASSOCIATES, LLC, a Florida limited liability company (" r` t��'w�iose roti a+ll ress is 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Suite 400, Sunrise Flori " 2T Wherever used rriin, he terms "Grantor" and "Grantee" shall include all of the parties to thA in yme d their successo an assigns. I T GRANTOR, for and in co id rat n f e o Do jars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration paid by ffici c f is is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold, y these presents s gr r:t, rain and sell, to Grantee, and Grantee's heirs, successors an 9 ns forever, the foilo p op cated in Collier County, Florida (the "Property"), to -wit: See Exhibit "A" aa�t cW"_ ee o and-RAQ Srt hereof. TOGETHER with all tenements, here-dilernents� appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining. THIS CONVEYANCE is subject to: (a) taxes and assessments for the year 2016 and subsequent years not yet due or payable; (b) all laws, ordinances, regulations, restrictions, prohibitions and other requirements imposed by governmental authority, including, but not limited to, all applicable building, zoning, land use and environmental ordinances and regulations; and (c) easements, conditions, restrictions, matters, limitations and reservations of record, if any, but this reference shall not operate to reimpose same. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto Grantee and Grantee's heirs, successors and assigns in fee simple forever. AND GRANTOR hereby covenants with Grantee that Grantor is lawfully seized of the Property in fee simple, that Grantor has good right and lawful authority to sell and convey the Property, and that Grantor specially warrants the title to the Property subject to the foregoing matters and will defend the same against the lawful claims of all persons claiming by, through or under Grantor, but no others. written. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Deed as of the day and year first above Witnessed by: GRANTOR: Print pi Print N me: OAKWOOD PARK WEST, L.L.C,, a Florida limited liability company �y alker anaging ember STATE OF FLORIDA ) COUNTY OF COLLIER j ss: ��>�� ! l The foregoing instrument a knowledged before me by Cullen Z. Walker, as Ma M ref QUI -WOOQ ARK' company, on behalf of sgfd Zompany'' _-Hs= is Wsor My commission expL,,%DNEIL ORNISON Wt M W4i JW 2C 2010W5-3- _ sem_ day of ti.�� 1� , 2016 L.L.C,; a Florida limited liability 'n own to M ) or produced D A, . to of Florida [Notarial Seal] EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description A TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF COLLIER, LYING IS SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, BEING A PORTION OF A PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4313 AT PAGE 2422 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SAID COLLIER COUNTY AND FURTHER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, THENCE S89°58'22"E ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 28 ALSO BEING THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (150 FEET WIDE) FOR 330.16 FEET; THENCE S0201 1'07"E DEPARTING SAID NORTH LINE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE E, 1/z OF THE N,W. Y. OF THE N.W. % OF THE N.W. % OF SAID SECTION 28, A DISTANCE OF 150.11 FEET TO THE N.W. CORNER OF O.R. 3888, PAGE 1611, THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID O,R. 3888 PAGE 1611, S02-1 0'56"E, A DISTANCE OF 158.04 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF O.R. 3888, PAGE 1613; THENCE ALONG THE SAID WEST—LIN•EOF O.R. 3888, PAGE 1613, S02°11'07"E, A DISTANCE OF 125.90 FEET TO THE P {Nrt �G G- THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST Y2 OF THE N,W. % OF TH ��a-(�F Thf F SAID SECTION 28, S0201 1'07"E, A DISTANCE OF 234.32 FEET TO T �r . CORNER OF T`I IF�'1, Yz OF THE S.W. Y< OF THE N.W. Y, OF THE N.W. 1/4 OF SAI S ION 28; THENCE AL NG THE WEST LINE OF SAID X S02°11'07"E, A DISTANCE OF 83, VV-` I�N=H'T�0F' 7°4'2 ' r DISTANCE OF 147,65 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WIT T E WESTIRJ.hF -WA L EOF LOGAN BOULEVARD (WIDTH VARIES) SAID POIN LY �- E THE RIGHT CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST HAVING R f S F 1 2. C R E BEING SUBTENDED BY A CHORD THAT BEARS N12o1 '" T I T � F 19 1 F I�,, THENCE CONTINUE ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID RIG F- Y - ROU H- CE - r$i LE OF 5°06'42" FOR 190.25 FEET TO A POINT OF A REVS �5, URVE TO THE LEF CO C 0 THE NORTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2461.50 FEET I CURVE BEING T BY A CHORD THAT BEARS N11°00'33"E, AT A DISTANCE 0 8. FEET, THENCE C NU ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY THROUGH A C ft,Ai,_ANGLE O�7 3� W FOR 328.45 FEET; THENCE N17 3226E ALONG SAID RIGHT-0A�IFf THENCE N05 21 54 E ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR 53.61 FEET TO TH-P - i9I I NTNG. EXHIBIT "Q" TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT Logan/Immokalee GMPA GMP Amendment and CPUD Rezoning Transportation Impact Statement (TIS) Prepared for: Immokalee Road Associates, LLC 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Suite 400, Sunrise, FL 33332 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Incorporated Wilson Professional Center 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, Florida 34105 June 23, 2016 TIS Methodology Meeting Fee - $500 Major TIS Application Fee - $1,500 Sta n to c Design with community in mind PURPOSE The following traffic impact statement (TIS) is intended to satisfy the applicable requirements associated with a Major Study to support the Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) and the associated CPUD Rezoning for the Logan/Immokalee GMPA project (hereafter "PROJECT") located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. The PROJECT is currently zoned A -Agriculture. The property is currently vacant. The applicant intends to construct a shopping center with a maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. A Methodology Meeting was held with County Staff on May 24, 2016. The Methodology Meeting Checklist is attached in the Appendices. STUDY AREA The 18.64 acre site is located in the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard, approximately 1.4 miles east of 1-75 and 1.9 miles west of Collier Boulevard (Figure 1). FIGURE 1: Site Location Site r .y►� 3p 1 �`M yy 1•r pr MA Wool 1 � -� 4 'r •1 1 I Page ACCESS CONNECTIONS The PROJECT site is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard, with frontage on both roadways. As shown on the Master Plan (Figure 2), access to the site is proposed to include a right-in/right- out (RI/RO) connection on Immokalee Road at the northeast corner of the site, and a full access connection on Logan Boulevard at the south west corner of the site, the latter being a shared ingress/egress connection with the adjoining nursery/landscape business immediately to the south. In addition to the shared access connection to Logan Boulevard, an internal connection to the adjoining parcel immediately to the east is being provided to satisfy the code requirements for accommodating interconnections to adjacent parcels. The PROJECT also provides an easement in the southeast corner that allows for an interconnection between the parcel to the east and the parcel to the south to accommodate future access to Logan Boulevard. PROJECT BUILD -OUT The PROJECT is expected to be built out by 2019. FIGURE 2: Master Concept Plan MASTER PLAN Site Data f 1—okal" Road 7a r►y w,i � � .. - QP w W � -� a ' V "°i. h 's1 _ e' A � � IR y • ♦ I eA% .4 • �� q y sol-►� NAPLES GARDEN SHOPS - COLLIER COUN FLORIDA GL 2 1 P a g e TRIP GENERATION The p.m, peak hour trip generation for the PROJECT is based upon ITE Trip Generation Manual, 91h Ed., and is shown below in Table 1. TABLE 1: PM Peak Hour Trip Generation 1 24 -Hr I ITE Land Use (LUI t ITE I Units I Unit of I Tris I I I Measure I p I Peak I I Hour 1 Pass -By I Pass By I I Rate Trips Net New Enter Rate Exit Rate Driveway VI cludin Pass -By Enter nter I ExitLUq I I Trips I Trips Trips II(2-WaV) rips Trips I I I Sq. Ft. Shopping Center 820 1100,000 I I I AM Pk Hr I 6,791 !-— — — -1 156 I _ — I— — _ 1 — —156 — — — — — 62% _ 38% — —sb — — 591 971 59 _ _ _ (GLFA) I I PM Pk Hr T 599 0.25 I 150 1 449 48% 52%1 _ _ 2881 311 2161 233 TRIP DISTRIBUTION The percent of project trips, and the resulting number of trips assigned to each roadway segment within the study area as provided for in the approved methodology is depicted below in Figure 2. FIGURE 2: Trip Distribution and Assignment 3 1 P a g e DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED LINKS Pursuant to the TIS guidelines an evaluation of the trips assigned to the network was conducted to determine which segments were significantly impacted by project traffic (i.e., PROJECT trips exceeding 2% of the peak directional service volume). Project traffic was traced along the network until the segments were no longer significantly impacted by the number of assigned trips. Table 2 depicts the evaluated links. Only three segments within the study area were found to be significantly impacted by project trips TABLE 2: Determination of Significantly Impacted Links EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing conditions were evaluated based upon the 2015 AUIR values available at the time of the preparation of the TIS. The existing conditions for the three significantly impacted roadway segments are shown in Table 3. TABLE 3: Existing Conditions 2015 Directional Exisiting Project LOS Peak Service Volumes V/Std Road Name From To Std Dir Volumefli Trips Ratio LOS Immokalee Road 1-75 Logan Blvd E EB 3,500 2,390 0,68 C Immokalee Road Logan Blvd. Collier Blvd. E EB Exceeds 1,960 0.61 C Logan Blvd Immokalee Road IV.nderbilt Bch Road (t1 2n1S AirIR #of NB 1,000 470 0.47 B Net New 2%-2%-3% Segment From To AUIR ID# Lanes Each Dir LOS Std Directional Service Volume lll Trips %Project Criteria %of %of Traffic Threshold LOS Assigned Directional Project Trips Assigned NB WB SB EB Threshold at Build Out alee Road �mmoka [11�le�Road Livingston 1-75 1-75 Logan Blvd 422 43.1 3 4 3/4 E E 3.500 3,500 2% 2% 70 70 40% 25%P43 54 86 No Yes aleLogan Blvd, Collier Blvd, 43,2 3 E 3,200 2% 64 40% 93 Yes Immokalee Road Collier Blvd. Wilson Blvd. 44,0 3 E 3,300 2% 66 20% 47 No Lo an Blvd (2) Immokalee Road North NA 1 D 1,000 2% 20 5% 11 No Lo an Blvd Ilmmokalee Road 'Vanderbilt Bch Road 50.0 1 D 1,000 2% 20 15% 35 Yes Lo an Blvd 'Vanderbilt Bch Road IPine Rid a Road 48.0 1 D 1,000 2% 20 5% 11 12 No Vanderbilt Bch Road IlLivinzston Road Lo an Blvd. 111.2 3 E 3,000 2% 60 5% 12 11 No Vanderbilt Bch Road Lo an Blvd. lCollier Blvd, 112.0 3 E 3,000 2% 60 591, 11I 12 No Collier Blvd (1) 2015 AUIR Immokalee Road 'Vanderbilt 30.1 3 E 3,000 2% 6p 15% 32 L 35 Nc (2) This segment of Logan is not in the AUIR; Characteristics borrowed from south of Immokalee Road EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing conditions were evaluated based upon the 2015 AUIR values available at the time of the preparation of the TIS. The existing conditions for the three significantly impacted roadway segments are shown in Table 3. TABLE 3: Existing Conditions 4 1 P a g e 2015 Directional Exisiting LOS Peak Service Volumes V/Std Road Name From To Std Dir Volumefli Iii Ratio LOS Immokalee Road 1-75 Logan Blvd E EB 3,500 2,390 0,68 C Immokalee Road Logan Blvd. Collier Blvd. E EB 3,200 1,960 0.61 C Logan Blvd Immokalee Road IV.nderbilt Bch Road (t1 2n1S AirIR D I NB 1,000 470 0.47 B 4 1 P a g e FUTURE CONDITIONS Background growth (traffic growth not associated with project trips) on the significantly impacted links was derived by comparing the 2015 AUIR annual growth rate (AGR) for each segment against the 2015 AUIR's +1/7th Trip[ Bank Total. As shown in Table 4, the 4% value was the larger of the two values for two segments, while the Trip Bank value was the larger value for one segment (the higher values shown in red). TABLE 4: Background Traffic Growth Determination Future traffic without project traffic was developed by adding the higher of the background growth values to the existing 2015 volumes (Table 5) , The analysis shows all three segments operating at an acceptable level of service in 2019. TABLE 5: Future Background Traffic Annual 2019 Net Bkgd 2019 2019 2019 Net Road Name 2015 Growth Bkgd Growth 2015 Estimate eak Directional Rate (AGR) Volumes Using 2015 Trip Road Name From To Dir Volume 4DN Il Using AGR AGR Bank Immokalee Road I-75 iLo an Blvd EB 2.390 4.00% 2,796 ,6 381 Immokalee Road Lo an Blvd. Collier Blvd. EB 1,960 400%2.293 333 527 Lo an Blvd Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Bch Road B 470 4.00% 550 80 30 (1) 2015AUIR (1) Total Ratio LOS Future traffic without project traffic was developed by adding the higher of the background growth values to the existing 2015 volumes (Table 5) , The analysis shows all three segments operating at an acceptable level of service in 2019. TABLE 5: Future Background Traffic Project trips on the significantly impacted roadways were combined with the higher background growth value identified in Table 4 to yield the future total traffic volume on each segment, shown in Table 6. The analysis shows all three segments operating at an acceptable level of service in 2019. TABLE 6: Future Total Traffic 2019 Net Bkgd 2019 2019 Road Name LOS From To Peak Growth 2015 Estimate Bkgd+ Directional V/Std Directional Using Exisiting 2019 Net Project Service LOSWir LOS Service Highest Volumes Estimate V/Std Growth Road Name From To StdVolume Ratio l'l Value (1) Total Ratio LOS ImmokaleeRoad 1-75 Logan Blvd E3,500 406 2,390 2.796 0.80 D Immokalee Road Lo an Blvd. Collier Blvd. E3,200 2,8&2 3,500 527 1,960 2,487 0.78 D LinBn Wvd Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Bch Road D1,000 520 2,580 80 470 550 f 0.55 C (1) 2015 AUIR 35 80 115 SSS 1,000 1 0,58 I C (1) 2015 AUIR Project trips on the significantly impacted roadways were combined with the higher background growth value identified in Table 4 to yield the future total traffic volume on each segment, shown in Table 6. The analysis shows all three segments operating at an acceptable level of service in 2019. TABLE 6: Future Total Traffic 5 1 P a g e 2019 Net Bkgd 2019 2019 Road Name LOS From To Peak Project t Growth Estimate Bkgd+ Directional V/Std Std Dir Trips (Pk Using Net Project Service LOS Dir) Highest Growth Volumes Volume Ratio Value Total Total Immokalee Road 1.75 {..e an Blvd E EB 86 406 492 2,8&2 3,500 0.82 D Immoka[" Road La n Blvd. Calller Slvd. E EB 93 527 520 2,580 .3,200 Q.81 D Logan Blvd ImmokaleeRoad Va nderbilt Bch Road D NB 35 80 115 SSS 1,000 1 0,58 I C (1) 2015 AUIR 5 1 P a g e OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS Vehicle turning movement counts were conducted at the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road intersection and at the existing driveway connection on Logan Boulevard on Thursday June 2, 2016. The turning movement counts were taken during the PM peak period (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) to quantify existing PM peak -hour conditions. It should be noted that no traffic used the existing driveway connection on Logan Boulevard that today serves as a gated exit only connection for the existing landscape nursery business to the south. We do not expect the nursery's use of the shared access to change in the immediate future. The turning movement counts at the intersections were then adjusted by FDOT's peak -season conversion factor of 1.19 published for Collier County for the week the data was collected. The peak -season factors, turning movement counts, and signal timing information are attached in Appendix B. The intersection analysis was performed using the Synchro Software. As part of the analysis, existing lane geometry was used at the intersection. An overall intersection level -of -service standard of E, corresponding with Collier County's adopted level -of -service for Immokalee Road, was used for the intersection. In addition to the overall delay, the approach level of service at the intersection was checked to make sure it was E or better with each intersection movement having a v/c ratio less than 1.0. Like the future roadway conditions, future intersection volumes were grown at a 4% annual growth rate to the year 2019 to establish the background traffic conditions. Prior to evaluating project traffic at the intersection, the necessary improvements to allow the intersection to operate at acceptable level -of -service standards were assumed to be in place. Chapter 163.3180 Florida Statutes and Chapter 2011-139, Laws of Florida as amended by HB 319 requires a developer to only correct those transportation deficiencies that are directly created by the addition of their project traffic. The following intersection improvements were identified to correct the background traffic deficiencies: • Add a fourth eastbound through lane • Add a second northbound right turn lane Once the improvements required to correct the background deficiencies were assumed to be in place, project traffic was then added to the improved background traffic conditions. The project traffic will not create any additional deficiencies, beyond what is required to correct the background traffic conditions. The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 7 and the Synchro output worksheets are summarized in Appendix C. 6 1 P a g e TABLE 7: Logan Blvd/Immokalee Rd Intersection Operating Conditions Intersection Scenario Overall Intersection LOS Delay Max v/c Approach LOS Standard Calc. EB WB NB SB 124 (sec/veh) Ratio 25% 4s% 2016 Existing E E 61.1 1.08 E C E C Logan Blvd & 2019 Bkgd E F 106.0 1.29 F D F D Immokalee Rd 2019 Bkgd w/Imp. E D 36.4 0.89 C C D E 2019 Total E D 43.9 0.97 D C E E SITE ACCESS ANALYSIS The development will utilize a full access connection to Logan Boulevard and a right- in/right-out connection to Immokalee Road. The need for turn lanes was based on Collier County's Construction Standards Handbook for Work within the Public Right -of -Way. Section III (A.) (1.) specify the threshold volumes for right and left turn lanes. During the PM peak -hour, it is estimated that 43 vehicles will make a northbound right turn and 72 vehicles will make a southbound left turn from Logan Boulevard. The 43 right turning vehicles exceed the threshold volume of 40 vehicles for constructing a right turn lane and the 72 left turning vehicles exceed the threshold volume of 20 vehicles for constructing a left turn lane. FIGURE 3: Total Traffic Volumes �5% 5% 14 16 58 20% 40% 124 58 20% 40% 115 - 11 1734Q°/n 124 60/ 124 100, 000 Sq Ft 25% 4s% 599 Total t40 288 Enter 311 Exit r During the PM peak -hour, it is estimated that 173 vehicles will make an eastbound right turn from Immokalee Road. For multi -lane divided roadways, Collier County requires right turn lanes regardless of the turning volume. The total traffic volumes entering the site (new external plus pass -by) are shown in Figure 3. Both Logan Boulevard and Immokalee Road have a posted speed of 45 mph. FDOT Standard Index 301 specifies a deceleration length of 185 feet for a speed of 45 mph; therefore, the right turn lanes need to be 185 feet. 7)P age The required unsignalized queue length for the left turn lane was calculated using procedures outlined in the AASHTO Green Book. The AASHTO Green Book specifies that at a minimum, queue storage for at least two vehicles (50 feet) be provided. The 72 southbound left turning vehicle will require 60 feet of queue storage; therefore, the left turn lane should be 245 feet (185 + 60) . The queue length calculation for the left turn lane is shown below: Southbound Leff Turn Lane Queue Length: veh i Its l 2 mint (252 f t 72 hr (60 t�ir \ 1 veh) — 60 f t CONCLUSIONS The Logan/Immokalee GMPA project, if built to the maximum 100,000 square feet, can be expected to generate 449 net new p.m. peak hour 2 -way trips that would be distributed to the surrounding roadway network. The link -level concurrency analysis indicates that the net new trips will not create any adverse LOS conditions. The operational analysis of the signalized intersection of Immokalee Road at Logan Boulevard indicates there may be adverse conditions as a result of background traffic growth (unrelated to the PROJECT); however, the net new trips generated by the PROJECT do not create any additional adverse impacts at buildout. The site impact analysis indicates that 185 -foot right turn lanes are warranted at the Logan Boulevard and Immokalee Road access points and a 2 45 -foot southbound left turn lane is warranted at the Logan Boulevard access point. Turn lanes should be constructed in accordance with the FDOT Plans Preparation Manual and Standard Index 301. 8 1 P a g e APPENDIX A 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: Tuesday. Mav 24.2016 Time: _2 30 p.m. Location: CDS Conf. Rm TBD People Attending: Name, Organization, and Telephone Numbers 1) Jeff Perry, Stantee Consu Iting, Services Incorporated 2) Michael Saw.. t�ject Manager 3) Stephen Baluch 4) Ch�- 5) Study Prepare Preparer's Name and Title: Jeff Perr . AICP Organization: Stanlec Consulting Services Incorporated Address & Telephone Number: 3200 Bailey Lane. Shite 240, Naples, FL, (239.64) 4040) Reviewer: Reviewer's Name & Title: Mike Sawyer Collier County Transportation Planning Department Reviewer's Name & Title: Organization & Telephone Number: Applicant: Applicant's Name: Immokalee Road Associates, LLC Address: 1690 Saw rass Corporate Parkway. Suite 400, Sunrise FI 33332 Telephone Number: Proposed Development: Name: Immokalee/Lo an Commercial Location: SE Comer Immokalee Road at Logan Blvd. Land Use Type: Commercial Shopping Center ITE Code #: 820 Proposed number of development units: +1- 100,000 Sq. Ft. Other: Description: ShopninP, Center with outnarcels lUV7561acliveL2156132601bansporlalionlspeci!¢adonlagency_gwdancelColliei Ccvnly PS MelhogtVag meeiiny checklisl doc Zonine Existing: A -Agricultural Comprehensive plan recommendation: GMPA to Requested: CPUD Findings of the Preliminary Study: No adverse impacts immediatelv identified Study Type: Small Scale TIS Nf llor lls Major TIS X ($1,500 + $500 Methodology Meeting Fee) Study Area: Boundaries Livingston Road on the West Wilson Blvd on the )vast. Piiie Ridge Road oil the South Additional intersections to be analyzed: Immokalee Road at Logan Blvd. Horizon Year(s): 2019 Analysis Time Period(s): B/O Future Off -Site Developments: Source of Trip Generation Rates: ITEr 91h Ed: Reductions in Trii2 Generation Rates: None: Pass -by trips: 25% reduction assumed Internal trips (PUD): None Transit use: No reductions assumed Other: Horizon Year Roadway Network Improvements: Collier County 5 -Year CIP FDOT 5 -Year Work Program Methodology, & Assumptions: Non -site traffic estimates: Erom the 2015 AUIR Site -trip generation: 100,000 sq- $. floor area Trip distribution method: Manual (see attached) Traffic assignment method: Manual (see attached) V:12156laclive[2]561J260Wansponalionlspecilicalionlaoency_guidance lCoNier Counly 11S h4elhodology meelinp checklrsl dor Traffic growth rate: Larger of AUIR Annual Growth for each segment vs. 2015 AUIR Trip Bank incl. Vth Special Features: (from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations: NA Sight distance: NA Queuing: NA Access location & configuration: Full access connection on Logan _Blvd, and RURn on Immokalee Road _ Traffic control: NA — Signal system location & progression needs: On-site parking needs: Per LDC Data Sources: Base maps: Prior study reports: Access policy and jurisdiction: Collier Count, Review process: Normal Requirements: Miscellaneous: Small Scale Study — No Fee Minor Study - $750.00 Major Study - $1,500.00 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. Applicant V..@ 1561aclive17156131601Uanspwlalronl pecilicalionlagency_guidancelCollier County TIS McUrodologynteOng ch-dUsl doc 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, c011firmation 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. "Ma for Study Review" - S1,500 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" - 1500 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. V L 1561acOvoIZ15613P6UIUansponal(onlspeci(cnlronlooenc}Lgwdnncel(:o;lier County IIS Melhodo)ngy meeting chzc4hsl doc ME Trip Generation Handbook 9th Ed. rTELand Use (W) I RE W# Units Unitof 124 -Hr Trips, sPeakHourl Pass -By Pass -By Net New Entering [xiting lle�volume ,Exdvdl Pass -E I e Measure (2 -Way) i Trips Rate I Trips Trips Rate I Rate Entering i Exiting Entering i E7dfin Trips Trips Trips Trip, Shopping Center 820 i lU i Sq. Ft, I 6,791 AM Pk Hr—I _ _ _156+ _ _ _ —I — _ _ - 156 AM Pk Hr _ _ 62'Ai_ 38%1 9971_ 59. 971 RIA P k Hr 1 599 0.25 I 150 449 PM Pk Hr _ .-. 48%1 52%1 _ _ _ 2881 3111 _ _ 2161 Distribution - Net New Trips Determination Signficantly Impacted Links Project Trips Se meet Immokalee Road Immokalee Road Immokalee Road Immokalee Road Logan Blvd (2) Logan Blvd Logan Blvd Vanderbilt Bch Road Vanderbilt Bch Road Collier Blvd (1) 2015 AUIR From Livin Ston 1-75 Logan Blvd. Collier Blvd. Immokalee Road ImmokaleeRoad Vanderbilt Bch Road Livingston Road ILogan Lo an Blvd. JCollier ImmokaleeRoad To 1-75 Logan Blvd Collier Blvd, Wilson Blvd. North Va nderbi It Bch Road Pine Ridge Road Blvd. Blvd. VanderbiltBeachRo AUIR ID# 42.2 43.1 43.2 44.0 NA 50.0 48.0 111.2 112.01 30.1 #of Lanes Each LOS Dir Std 3/4 E 3/4 E 3 E 3 E 1 D 1 1 D 1 D 3 E 3 E 3 E Directional Service Volume lll 3,500 3,500 3,200 3,300 1,000 1,000 1,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Criteria %of Threshold 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Trips %of LOS 70 70 64 66 20 20 20 60 60 60 % Project Traffic Assigned 25% 40% 40% 20% 5% 15% 5% 5% 5% 15% Net New Directional Project Trips Assigned NBJWB SB/EB 58 54 93 8h 86 93 43 47 12 11 32 35 11 12 12 11 11 12 32 35 Exceeds 29.-2%-3% Threshold at Build Out No Yes Yes No No Yes No No No No (2) This segment of Logan is not in the AUIR; Characteristics borrowed from south of Immokalee Road Existing Conditons Directional 2015 PHPD 2015 PHPD Road Name Directional Service 2015 PHPD Project Volume Remaining Peak Dir From To Volume Volume (1) Trip Bank Trips Total Capacity Immokalee Road Livingston 1-75 3,500 2,560 Ili 53 54 2,667 833 Immokalee Road 1-75 Logan Blvd 3,500 2,390 (lj 381 86 2,857 Immokalee Road Logan Blvd. Collier Blvd. 3,200 1,960 '(ll 527 93 2,580 643 Immokalee Road Collier Blvd, Wilson Blvd. 3,300 1,650 (1) 662 47 2,359 620 941 Logan 131W 2 ImmokaleeRoad North 1.000 NA (l) NA 12 #VALUE! #VALUE! Logan Bluff Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Bch Road 1,000 470 Ill 30 32 532 Logan Bl%d Vanderbilt Bch Road Pine Ridge Road 1.000 530 Ill 19 11 560 468 Vanderbilt Bch Road Livin Ston Road Lo an Blvd. 3,000 1,800 Ill 66 11 440 Vanderbilt Bch Road I Logan Blvd. Collier Blvd. 3,000 1,250 Ill 189 12 1,877 1,123 C011ierBlvd ImmokaleeRoad Vanderbilt Beach Road 3,000 1,480 Ill 461 32 t 1,451 1,549 (1) 2015 AUIR 1,973 1,027 Existing Conditions 2015 Directional Exisiting Road Name From To LOS Std Peak Dir Service Volume Ill Volumes (1) V/Std Ratio LOS Immokalee Road Livingston Immokalee Road 1-75 Immokalee Road Logan Blvd. Immokalee Road Collier Blvd. Logan Blvd 2) Immokalee Road Logan Blvd Immokalee Road Logan Blvd Vanderbilt Bch Road Vanderbilt Bch Road Livingston Road Vanderbilt Bch Road Lo an Blvd. Collier Blvd Immokalee Road til 201 S Alll R 1-75 Logan Blvd Collier Blvd. Wilson Blvd. North Vanderbilt Bch Road Pine Ridge Road Logan Blvd. Collier Blvd. Vanderbilt Beach Road E E E E D D D E E- _J_ E EB EB EB EB NB NB NB EB EB__L NB 3,500 3,500 3,200 3,300 1,000 1,000 1,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 2,560 2,390 1,960 1,650 NA 470 530 1,800 1,250 1,480 0.73 0.68 0.61 0.50 NA 0.47 0.53 0.60 0.42 0.49 C C C B NA B C C B B Future Conditions Growth Rate Determination (1) 2015 AUIR Net Bkgd 2020 Annual 2015 Growth 2020 Bkgd Net Road Name From To LOS Peak Directional Rate (AGR) Volumes Growth 2015 Trip Road Name From To Std Dir Volume Ill Ill Using AGR Using AGR Bank Immokalee Road Livingston 1-75 E EB 2,560 1 2.00% 2,771 211 53 Immokalee Road 1-75 Logan Blvd E EB 2,390 4.00% 2,796 406 381 Immokalee Road Lo an Blvd. Collier Blvd. E EB 1,960 4.00% 2,293 333 527 Immokalee Road Collier Blvd. Wilson Blvd. E EB 1.650 2.00% 1,786 136 662 Logan Blvd 2) ImmokaleeRoad North D NB NA NA NA NA NA Logan Blvd Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Bch Road D I NB 470 4.00% 550 80 30 Logan Blvd Vanderbilt Bch Road Pine Ridge Road D NB 530 2.00% 574 44 19 Vanderbilt Bch Road Livin stun Road Logan Blvd, E EB 1,800 2.74% 2,006 206 66 Vanderbilt Bch Road Logan Blvd. Collier Blvd, E EB 1,250 4.00% 1,462 212 189 Collier Blvd Immokalee Road VanderbiltBeach Road E NB 1,480 4.00% 1,731 251 461 (1) 2015 AUIR Net Bkgd 2020 2020 Bkgd Road Name From To LOS Peak 2020 Project Growth Estimate +Project DirectionalV/Std Std Dir ) Pk Trips Dir ( Using Net Volumes Service Ratio LOS Highest Growth Volume Value Total Total Immokalee Road _Livingston 1-75 E EB 54 211 265 2,825 3,500 0.81 D Immokalee Road I -7S Logan Blvd E EB 86 406 492 2,882 3,500 0.82 D Immokalee Road Logan Blvd. Collier Blvd. E EB 93 527 620 2,580 3,200 0.81 D Immokalee Road Collier Blvd. Wilson Blvd. E EB 47 662 709 2,359 3,300 0.71 C Logan Blvd (2) Immokalee Road North D NB 11 NA #VALUE! #VALUE! PiPMn11 #####R Logan Blvd Immokalee Road Vanderbilt Bch Road D NB 3S 80 115 S85 .1,000 1,000 0.58 C Logan Blvd Vanderbilt Bch Road Pine Rid a Road D NB 12 44 55 585 1,000 0.59 C Vanderbilt Bch Road Livingston Road Logan Blvd. E EB 11 206 216 2,016 3,000 0.67 C Vanderbilt Bch Road Logan Blvd. Collier Blvd. E EB 12 212 224 1,474 3,000 0.49 B Collier Blvd ImmokaleeRoad VanderbiltBeach Road E NB 35 461 496 1,976 3,000 0.66 (11 2015 AIJIR C APPENDIX B 2014 Peak_Se_ason_FaCtor Category Report -_ Repor_t_Type:_ALL Category: 0300 COLLIER COUNTYWIDE MOCF: 0.88 Week Dates SF PSCF s_1__--01/01/2014---01/04/2014--=-1=001 14'--'---=II�a==:a==-�=_-__-_'_ 2 01/05/2014 - 01/11/2014 0.98 1.11 3 01/12/2014 - 01/18/2014 0.96 1.09 4 01/19/2014 - 01/25/2014 0.94 1.07 * 5 01/26/2014 - 02/01/2014 0.92 1.05 * 6 02/02/2014 - 02/08/2014 0.90 1.02 * 7 02/09/2014 - 02/15/2014 0.88 1.00 * 8 02/16/2014 02/22/2014 0.86 0.96 * 9 02/23/2014 - 03/01/2014 0.86 0.98 *10 03/02/2014 - 03/06/2014 0.86 0.98 *11 03/09/2014 - 03/15/2014 0,.86 0.96 *12 03/16/2014 - 03/22/2014 0.86 0.98 *13 03/23/2014 - 03/29/2014 0.87 0.99 *14 03/30/2014 - 04/05/2014 0.88 1.00 *15 04/06/2014 - 04/12/2014 0,88 1.00 *16 04/13/2014 - 04/19/2014 0.89 1.01 *17 04/20/2014 - 04/26/2014 0.92 1.05 18 04/27/2014 - 05/03/2014 0.94 1,07 19 05/04/2014 - 05/10/2014 0.96 1.09 20 05/11/2014 - 05/17/2014 0.98 1.11 21 05/18/2014 - 05/24/2014 1.00 1.14 22 05/25/2014 - 05/31/2014 1.03 1.17 23 06/01/2014 - 06/07/2014 1.05 1.19 24 06/08/2014 - 06/14/2014 1.07 1.22 25 06/15/2014 - 06/21/2014 1.09 1.24 26 06/22/2014 - 06/28/2014 1.10 1.25 27 06/29/2014 - 07/05/2014 1.10 1.25 28 07/06/2014 - 07/12/2014 1.11 1.26 29 07/13/2014 - 07/19/2014 1.11 1.26 30 07/20/2014 - 07/26/2014 1.11 1.26 31 07/27/2014 - 08/02/2014 1.12 1.27 32 08/03/2014 - 08/09/2014 1.12 1.27 33 08/10/2014= 08/16/2014 1.12 1.27 34 08/17/2014 _ 06/23/2014 1.13 1.28 35 08/24/2014 - 08/30/2014 1.14 1.30 36 08/31/2014 - 09/06/2014 1.16 1.32 37 09/07/2014 _ 09/13/2014 1.18 1.34 38 09/14/2014 09/20/2014 1.20 1,36 39 09/21/2014 09/27/2014 1.17 1.33 40 09/28/2014 - 10/04/2014 1.14 1.30 41 10/05/2014 - 10/11/2014 1.11 1.26 42 10/12/2014 - 10/18/2014 1.0B 1.23 43 10/19/2014 - 10/25/2014 1.07 1.22 44 10/26/2014 - 11/01/2014 1.06 1.20 45 11/02/2014 - 11/08/2014 1.05 1.19 46 11/09/2014 - 11/15/2014 1.04 1.1B 47 11/16/2014 - 11/22/2014 1.03 1.17 48 11/23/2014 - 11/29/2014 1.02 1.16 49 11/30/2014 - 12/06/2014 1.01 1.15 50 12/07/2014 - 12/13/2014 1.01 1.15 51 12/14/2014 - 12/20/2014 1.00 1.14 52 12/21/2014 - 12/27/2014 0.98 1.11 53 12/28/2014 - 12/31/2014 0.96 1.09 w Peak Season Page 1 of 7 Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION: Logan Blvd N -- Dwy Connection QC JOB #: 13833402 CITYISTATE: Naples. FL DATE: Thu, Jun 42 2016 368 553 Peak -Hour: 4:45 PM -- 5:45 PM 103 25 0 368 0 Peak 15 -Min: 5:30 PM -- 5:45 PM a J 4 4 L 00 103 DO 0 «0 t 0« 0 L 00 «00 t 00 « 00 o « 0.90 « 0 00 00 > r • 0 0 * 0 00 ~ 00 7 h * �r00* 0.0 0 553 0 i aQuaLity Count00 25 00 360 553 -14 103 25 L 0 0 0 -1 o i 9.L J� 0 t o 11 o La « f7 « o 1 > r ° 0 0 0 F Nh L JJ ► L. NA t Jr i 4L © t NA � � « NA NA � « NA IIf(''�' ti t r► i NA f I 7A F Period main a00P 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 9:15 PM 5 3@ PIJ 5:45 Pto =r1 PUN Hourly Totals ja_Dry Right U R' Left Thr Ri ht U R. I L ft Thru Right U Left Thru Right U R' 0 105 0 0 0 0 75 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.80 0 92 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 162 0 102 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 202 0 1d i 0 0 0 0 79 0 0 0 ❑ 0 0 0 0 ❑ 8 0 0 ❑ 220 764 0 120 0 0 0{ 0 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 206 790 0 138 0 0 ❑ 0 102 - 0 0 ❑ 0 ❑ 0 0 0 0 ❑ 00 0 240 868 0 754. 0 1 — — — - D.._ `. — 251. 921 0 127 0 0 0 0 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0, 213 1 914 All venicles U b15 0 0 0 0 404 0 Hcavy Trucks 0 8 0 0 24 0 Pedestrians 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Stopped Buses Comments: Report generated on 6/15/2016 6:37 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 f 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 Type of peak hour being reported: Intersection Peak Method for determining Doak hour: Total Enterina Volume LOCATION: Logan Blvd N -- Immokalee Rd QC JOB #: 13833401 CITY/STATE: Naples, FL DATE: Thu. Jun 02 2016 235 242 + } 30 69 1 36 r ♦ ~d Peak -Hour: 5:00 PM -- 6:00 PM Peak 15 -Min: 5:15 PM -- 5:30 PM 04 a1 3 6 6 7 2 B L 1433« 152 1 i 37 *1294 i 4 52 4- 0 7 00 4. 5 2 2359 0.96 1161 33 -0 54 2724 13 .1 } !'F 98.~ 71T. 134 61 331 ¢• 35 .670 7 h ♦ 42~ 30 i } I + t1�L%l� �..0 t1 (�LJ 52 00 06I a 377 526 } 66 17 L 0 '. '• 1 LI0 •.T' 0 ' L S r ° h f r• ° 7 F0 0 OF -J. NA t4 NA ✓� ~ NA ) ,L y �■ % NA w w NA .0 r .► N' r h * f NA ♦ } R` = RTOR 16 -Min Count Logan Blvd N Period (Northbound) Logan Blvd N (Southbound) Immokalee Rd (Eastbound) j Immokalee Rd Total Hourty (Westbound) Totals Beginning At Le Thr i ht U R* Left Thru Ri ht U R* Left Thr Ri h U R* Left Thru Right U R. 4.00 PM 33 17 23 0 27 16 17 3 0 20 26 407 27 3 8 23 371 5 0 7 1033 4:15 PM 35 16 18 0 21 4:30 PM 31 19 10 0 22 15 9 10 5 0 13 1 0 16 45 398 29 5 31 26 446 44 1 14 28 268 5 1 5 934 13 24 313 4 0 1 1008 _ 4:45 PM 28 24 71 0 25 5 00 ='110 36 1.5 60 _0 169 14 19 5 0 23 15 0 32_ 1. 31 520 26 4 21 25 543 34 3 13 25 261 14 2 4 1118. 4093 17 17 311 7 0 1�04 y 3,1. 5d� S}—�° T 7 5:30 PM 31 16 95 0 17 8 1Z 5 - - 22 6 0 26 3 _$30. •:36 2' 14 312 8 Q 25 48 599 37 2 18 29 276 8 1 25.45 PM 34 15 45 0 22 12 - 7 6 D 26 36 587 37 1 20 21 262 4 0 5 Peak 15 -Min Flowrates Northbound Left Thru Rigbf U R* Southbound Left Thru Ri ht U Eastbound W Left Thru Right U Westbound R* Left Th L Ri ht U R' 7otal All Vehicles 132 60 216 0 88 Heavy Trucks 0 0 0 28 0 68 20 0 0 8 104 140 2520 144 8 4 80 32 56 112 1248 32 0 8 4 104 0 4981 232 Pedestrians 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 0 Railroad Stonoed. Buses Comments: Report generated on 6/15/2016 6:37 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212 TRAFFIC VOLUME AT STUDY INTERSECTIONS Intersection: Logan Boulevard & Immokalee Road Count Date: 06/02/16 P.M. Peak Time Period: 5:00 - 6:00 PM Peak Hour Factor: 0.96 Future Traffic Immokalee Rd Immokalee Rd EBR Logan Blvd WBT WBR Logan Blvd NBT Existing Traffic EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Raw Turning Movement Counts 152 2359 213 96 1161 37 134 61 331 36 69 130 Peak Season Factor 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 2016 Existing Conditions 181 2807 253 114 1382 44 159 73 394 43 82 155 Future Traffic EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Existing Conditions 181 2807 253 114 1382 44 159 73 394 43 82 155 Years to Build -out 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Annual Growth Rate 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% Background Traffic Growth 23 1 350 1 32 14 173 5 20 1 9 49 1 5 10 19 2019 Future Conditions 204 3157 1 285 128 1555 49 179 82 443 1 48 92 174 Project Traffic EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Project Trips 0 86 0 86 1 0 0 93 12 0 0 11 0 Total Project Traffic 0 86 0 86 0 0 93 12 0 0 11 0 Total Traffic EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Future Traffic 204 3157 285 128 1555 49 179 82 443 48 92 174 Project Traffic 0 86 0 86 0 0 93 12 0 0 11 0 2019 Total Conditions 204 3243 285 214 1555 49 272 94 443 48 103 174 Programmed EPAC Data Intersection Name: Immokalee @ Logan Bled Intersection Alias: IM127 -s Code: 9999 Channel: 48 Address: Revision: 3,334 Access Data 115 Pnase Data Vehical .Basic Timine Phase Min Gm 1 5 2 15 3 5 4 5 5 5 6 15 7 5 8 5 6.%13/2016 2:1 1:43PM Port 2 Comm :19200 Baud Port 3 Comm :19200 Baud Pedestrian Detector Default Data nit Data General Control Startup Time: 6sec Startup State: All Red Auto Ped Clear: No Stop Time Reset: No ABC connector Input Modes: 0 ABC connector Output Modes: 0 D connector Input Modes: 0 '1 connector Output Modes: 6 Page 1 of 9 Red Revert: 4sec Alternate Sequence: 0 Input Output Ring Respons Selection 1 Ring l Ring 1 2 Ring 2 Ring 2 3 None None 4 None None Special Detector Phase Assignment Assign Switched Phase Mode Phase Extend Delay Default Data Remote Flash Flash • Vehical Density Timings Time B4 Cars Time To Passage Maxl Max2 Yellow All Red Added Initial Max -Initial Reduction Before Reduce Min -Gap 2.0 20 0 4.8 2.2 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 4,0 60 0 4.8 2.2 0.0 0 0 0 0 0,0 2.0 20 0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 2.0 25 0 4.8 2,3 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 2.0 35 0 4,8 2,2 0,0 0 0 0 0 0.0 4.0 60 0 4.8 2.2 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0 2.0 30 0 4.8 2.3 0.0 0 0 0 0 00 2.0 20 0 40 40 00 0 0 0 Yes No Pedestrian Detector Default Data nit Data General Control Startup Time: 6sec Startup State: All Red Auto Ped Clear: No Stop Time Reset: No ABC connector Input Modes: 0 ABC connector Output Modes: 0 D connector Input Modes: 0 '1 connector Output Modes: 6 Page 1 of 9 Red Revert: 4sec Alternate Sequence: 0 Input Output Ring Respons Selection 1 Ring l Ring 1 2 Ring 2 Ring 2 3 None None 4 None None Special Detector Phase Assignment Assign Switched Phase Mode Phase Extend Delay Default Data Remote Flash Flash • Test A= Flash No Channel Color Altemat 0 0.0 Pedestrian Timing Flash Extended Actuated Gcneral Comrol Miscellaneous Yellow No Entry Exit Phase Phase Phase 3 Red Yes 2 No Yes 4 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 24 No 0 No Green None Min None 0 Yes No No No No 3 0 0 No 0 No Inactive None None None 0 Yes No No No No 4 7 37 No 0 No Inactive None 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 9 36 No 0 No Green None Min None 0 Yes No No No No 7 0 0 No 0 No Inactive None None None 0 Yes No No No No 8 10 36 No 0 No Inactive None None None 0 Yes Yes No No No Special Sequence Vehical Detector Phase Assignment hilt Data Assigned Switched Phase Mode Phase Extend Delay Vehical Detector Channel :1 6 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel :2 1 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel :3 7 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel :5 2 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel :6 5 Veh 0 0.0 0 Vehical Detector Channel :7 3 Veh 0 0.0 0 Default Data Pedestrian Detector Default Data nit Data General Control Startup Time: 6sec Startup State: All Red Auto Ped Clear: No Stop Time Reset: No ABC connector Input Modes: 0 ABC connector Output Modes: 0 D connector Input Modes: 0 '1 connector Output Modes: 6 Page 1 of 9 Red Revert: 4sec Alternate Sequence: 0 Input Output Ring Respons Selection 1 Ring l Ring 1 2 Ring 2 Ring 2 3 None None 4 None None Special Detector Phase Assignment Assign Switched Phase Mode Phase Extend Delay Default Data Remote Flash Flash Flash Test A= Flash No Channel Color Altemat ] Red No Flash Flash 2 Yellow No Entry Exit Phase Phase Phase 3 Red Yes 2 No Yes 4 Red Yes 4 Yes No 5 Red No 6 No Yes 6 Yellow No 8 Yes No 7 Red Yes 8 Red Yes Overlaps Overlaps A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Phase(s) Ring A B C 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 40 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 20 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 Port 1 Data Channel Alternate Sequences Phase(s ) Message 1 - Ph.I RYG 1 Next 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Phase Ring Phase 1 Used 1 2 3 4 1 1 3 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] 1 2 17 - Ph.1 RYG 17 5 5 7 7 2 2 4 4 2 1 1 3 a 6 6 8 8 5 6 7 8 3 11 4 U 4 1 1 5 2 6 6 2 7 7 2 g 8 2 3 Alternate Sequences Port 1 Data Channel Alternate Sequences BIU Port Message 1 - Ph.I RYG 1 Addr Status 40 4 - Ph,4 RYG 4 0 Used No Phase 1 l 1 Used No IS) 2 8 Used No 17 - Ph.1 RYG 17 16 Used No Channel Assignment Control Channel Hardware Pin Set Ph.l Veh 1 1 - Ph.I RYG 1 Ph.4 Veh 4 4 - Ph,4 RYG 4 Ph.7 Veh 7 7 - Ph.7 RYG 7 PhA Ped 10 12 - PhA DPW 12 Ph. l OLP 13 17 - Ph.1 RYG 17 PhA OLP 16 20 - PhA RYG 20 Ph.5 Ped 19 13 - Ph.5 DPW 13 Page 2 of 9 Control Channel Hardware Pin Set Ph.2 Veh 2 2 - Ph.2 RYG 2 Ph.5 Veh 5 5 - Ph.5 RYG 5 Ph.8 Veh 8 8 - Ph.8 RYG 8 Ph.6 Ped 11 14 - Ph.6 DPW 14 Ph.2 OLP 14 18 - Ph.2 RYG 18 M I Ped 17 9 -PhA DPW 9 Ph.7 Ped 20 15 - Ph.7 DPW 15 Control Channel Hardware Pin Set P10 Veh 3 3 - Ph.3 RYG 3 Ph,6 Veh 6 6 - Ph.6 RYG 6 Ph.2 Ped 9 10 - Ph.2 DP \A,' 10 Ph,8 Ped 12 16 - Ph.8 DPW 16 Ph.3 OLP 15 19 - Ph.3 RYG 19 Ph.3 Ped 18 11 - Ph.3 DPW 11 Coordination Data General Coordination Data Operation Mode: 1=Auto 'nation Mode: 2=Permissi\ e N,.—nun Mode: 0=Inhibit Correction Mode: 2=Short Way Page 3 of 9 Offset Mode: 0=13ea Gin Force Mode: 0=Plan Max M%ell Time: 0 Yield Period: 0 Manual Dial: 1 Manual Split: I Manual Offset: I Dial/Split Cycle 1/1 145 1;7 145 1/3 145 1A 135 2;1 135 2;2 145 213 135 3/1 135 3/2 145 3/3 135 3.4 180 4/1 160 4/2 160 4;3 180 Split Times and Phase Mode Dial 1 / Split 1 Ph, Splits Ph. Mode P11. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph, Mode Ph, Splits Ph, Mode 25 O=Actuated 2 78 1=Coordinate 3 18 O=Actuated 4 24 O=Actuated 25 O=Actuated 6 78 ]=Coordinate 7 24 O=Actuated 8 18 O=Actuated vial 1 / Split 2 Ph, Splits Ph, Mode Ph, Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode 1 23 O=Actuated 2 67 1—Coordinate 3 22 O=Actuated 4 33 O=Actuated 5 23 O=Actuated 6 67 1=Coordinate 7 30 O=Actuated 8 25 O=Actuated Dial l / Split 3 Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph, Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph, Mode Ph. Splits Ph, Mode 1 27 O=Actuated 2 63 ]=Coordinate 3 18 O=Actuated 4 37 O=Actuated 5 17 O=Actuated 6 73 ]=Coordinate 7 18 O=Actuated 8 37 O=Actuated Dial 1 / Split 4 Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph, Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode ] 21 O=Actuated 2 69 )=Coordinate 3 21 O=Actuated 4 24 O=Actuated 5 21 O=Actuated 6 69 1=Coordinate 7 21 O=Actuated 8 24 O=Actuated Dial 2 / Split 1 Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode 1 21 O=Actuated 2 71 ]=Coordinate 3 22 O=Actuated 4 21 O=Actuated 5 21 O=Actuated 6 71 ]=Coordinate 7 22 O=Actuated 8 21 O=Actuated Dial 2 / Split 2 Ph. Splits Ph, Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode 1 23 O=Actuated 2 74 1=Coordinate 3 25 O=Actuated 4 23 O=Actuated 5 23 O=Actuated 6 74 ]=Coordinate 7 25 O=Actuated 8 23 O=Actuated Dial 2 / Split 3 Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph, Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode 1 21 O=Actuated 2 69 1=Coordinate 3 21 O=Actuated 4 24 O=Actuated 21 O=Actuated 6 69 1=Coordinate 7 21 O=Actuated 8 24 O=Actuated 3 / Split l Ph, Splits Ph, Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode 1 21 O=Actuated 2 71 1=Coordinate 3 22 O=Actuated 4 21 O=Actuated 5 21 O=Actuated 6 71 1=Coordinate 7 22 O=Actuated 8 21 O=Actuated dial 3 / Split 2 Ph, Splits Ph, Mode Ph. Splits Ph, Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph, Mode 1 23 O=Actuated 2 74 1—Coordinate 3 25 O=Actuated 4 23 O=Actuated 5 23 O=Actuated 6 74 ]=Coordinate 7 25 O=Actuated 8 23 O—Actuated )ial 3 / Split 3 Ph, Splits Ph, Mode Ph, Splits Ph. Mode Ph, Splits Ph, Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode 1 21 O=Actuated 2 69 1=Coordinate 3 21 O=Actuated 4 24 O=Actuated 5 21 O=Actuated 6 69 1=Coordinate 7 21 O=Actuated 8 24 O=Actuated )ial 3 / Split 4 Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph, Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode ] 27 O=Actuated 2 95 1=Coordinate 3 29 O=Actuated 4 29 O=Actuated 5 32 O=Actuated 6 90 ]=Coordinate 7 29 O=Actuated 8 29 O=Actuated )ial 4 / Split 1 Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph, Splits P]L Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode 1 24 O=Actuated 2 84 ]=Coordinate 3 26 O=Actuated 4 26 O=Actuated 5 28 O=Actuated 6 80 1=Coordinate 7 26 O=Actuated 8 26 O=Actuated )ial 4 / Split 2 'h, Splits Ph. Mode Ph, Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph, Mode 1 27 O=Actuated 2 78 1—Coordinate 3 18 O=Actuated 4 37 O=Actuated 5 17 O=Actuated 6 88 ]=Coordinate 7 18 O=Actuated 8 37 O=Actuated 4 / Split 3 Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode Ph. Splits Ph. Mode 1 30 O=Actuated 2 88 1=Coordinate 3 20 O=Actuated 4 42 O=Actuated 5 19 O=Actuated 6 99 1=Coordinate 7 20 O=Actuated 8 42 O=Actuated Page 4 of 9 Trai'iic Plan Data Dav Time D/S/O flash 1 1 Plan: I/I/1 Offset Time: ] 02 All, Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Ug Time: 0 Plan: 1/2/1 Offset Time: 126 Alt. Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag'Fime: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 1/3/1 Offset Time: 4i AIL Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag'fime: 0 1/4/1 Offset Time: 87 Alt. Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 Plan: 2/1/1 Offset Time: 72 Alt. Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 Plan: 2/2/1 Offset Time: 64 All- Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg.33 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 Plan: 2/3/1 Offset Time: 87 Alt, Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 Plan: 3/1/1 Offset Time: 72 Alt, Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 Plan: 3/2/1 Offset Time: 72 Alt. Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Tinte: 0 Plan: 3/3/1 Offset Time: 87 Alt. Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 Plan: 3/4/1 Offset Time: 146 All. Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 Plan: 4/1/1 Offset Time: 116 Alt. Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 Plan: 4/2/1 Offset Time: 16 All. Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 Plan: 4/3/1 Offset Time: 27 Alt. Sequence: 0 Mode: O=Normal Rg 2 Lag Time: 0 Rg 3 Lag Time: 0 Rg 4 Lag Time: 0 Local 1730 Data Source Equate Days Stan of Daylight Saving Month: 3 Week: 2 Cycle Zero Reference Hours: 24 Min: 0 Da) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 End of Daylight Saving Month: 1 1 Week: 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 0 0 Traffic Data Event Dav Time D/S/O flash 1 1 0:1 0/0/4 2 1 6:0 0/0/4 3 1 9:0 3/1/1 4 1 10:0 3/2/1 Is+ 1 18:0 3/3/1 ❑❑ 1 20:30 0/0/4 7 2 0:1 0/0/4 8 2 6:0 ]/1/] 9 2 6:30 4/l/l 10 2 9:30 1/2/1 11 2 15:20 4'2/1 12 2 18:0 1/3/1 13 2 19:0 1/4/1 14 2 22:0 0/0/4 15 7 0:1 0/0/4 16 7 6:0 0/0/4 17 7 7:0 2/l/I 18 7 8:30 2/2/1 19 7 19:0 2/3/1 20 7 22:0 0/0/4 Page 5 of 9 PHASE FUNCTION ❑❑❑ 4 Ell 6 7 DE] 8 ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ 9 1rt 11 12 13 14 1= Is+ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ 11 El ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑ FIE ❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ 110 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ El" ❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 11 EJ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1711!] ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El LJ ❑ ❑ 110 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ LID ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ FIE] ❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑ Special Functions Function Special Function 1 SF1 x SF2 SF3 SF4 SF5 SF6 SF7 SF8 El F7 D E D F1 Special Function 2 El 0 El Special Function 3 ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Special Function 4 ❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Special Function 5 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ Special Function 6 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Special Function 7 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ F7 ❑ Special Function 8 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ se Function 1seFunction Map Phase 1 Max2 PFI PF2 PF3 PF4 PF5 PF6 PF7 PF8 PF9 PFIO PFI 1 El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1:11:1 ❑ ❑ 1:11:11:1 PF12 ❑❑ PF13 PF 14 ❑ PF15 ❑ PF16 ❑ Phase 2 Max2 ❑ EE ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 3 Max2 ❑ ❑ 0❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 4 Max2 ❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 5 Max2 ❑ ❑ ❑❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1-11:1 ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 6 Max2 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 7 Max2 ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 8 Max2 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1:11:1 ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase l Phase Omit ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 2 Phase Omit ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Phase 3 Phase Omit O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 4 Phase Omit 1:10 ❑ ❑❑ 1:11-1 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ F—x1 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 5 Phase Omit ❑ ❑ ❑❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ ❑ Phase 6 Phase Omit ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ E11-1 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ ❑ Phase 7 Phase Omit ❑ ❑ ❑= ❑ 1:11:10 ❑❑ ❑ ❑ 1:10 ❑ ❑ ❑ El ❑ 8 Phase Omit ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El Page 6 of 9 Dimming Data nnel Red Yellow Green Alternate E] E] F� El Default Data - No Dimming Programmed iteturn Ped Preemption Data 3eneral Preemption Data Ring Min GrnMIalk Time 1 7 2 7 3 7 4 7 lash = Preempt 1 Preepmt 2 = Preempt 3 Preepmt 4 = Preempt 5 'reepmt l = Preempt 2 Preepmt 3 = Preempt 4 Preepmt 5 = Preempt 6 L Preempt Timers Non- Link to Exit Exit Exit Exit Phase phase Calls Phase phase Calls Select 1'cd 2 Yes No Track 6 Yes No Dwell iteturn Ped 0 0 Locking Preempt Delay Extend Duration MaxCall Lock -Out Clrar Yel RedtGm 0 Ped Ye] Redl Green Clear Ycl Red 1 No 0 0 0 0 90 0 50 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 10 0 0.0 0.0 2 No 0 0 0 0 90 0 50 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 10 0 0.0 0.0 3 No 0 0 0 0 90 0 50 0.0 0.0 0 0 0,0 0.0 10 0 0,0 0,0 4 No 0 0 0 0 90 0 50 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 10 0 0.0 0.0 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4,0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 2,0 No 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4.0 2.0 10 8 4.0 20 10 8 4.0 2-0 Preempt 1 Exit Exit Phase phase Calls 2 Yes No 6 Yes No Preempt 2 Preempt 3 Exit Exit Exit Exit Phase phase Calls Phase phase Calls 4 Yes No 2 Yes No 8 Yes No 6 Yes No Priority Timers Priority Non -Locking 1 No 2 No 3 No 4 No 5 No 6 No Preempt 4 Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls 4 Yes No 8 Yes No Delay Extend Duration Dwell Max—Call Lock -Out 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Exit Exit Exit Exit ase Phase Calls Phase Phase Calls Page 7 of 9 Priority 3 Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls Priority 4 Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases 0—Do not Skip Phases Priority 5 Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls Priority 6 Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls Preempt 5 Exit Exit Exit Phase phase Calls 1 No Yes 2 No Yes 3 No Yes 4 No Yes 5 No Yes 6 No Yes 7 No Yes 8 No Yes Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases 0—Do not Skip Phases Priority 5 Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls Priority 6 Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls Preempt 6 Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls 1 No Yes 2 No Yes 3 No Yes 4 No Yes 5 No Yes 6 No Yes 7 No Yes 8 No Yes Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases O=Do not Skip Phases 0—Do not Skip Phases Priority 5 Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls Priority 6 Exit Exit Phase Phase Calls Preempt l Vehical Phases Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Ph, Track Dwell Qcle Ph Track Dwell Cycle Ovlp Track Dwell Cycle Red Green No Red Green No Default Data Default Data Preempt 2 ^ Vehical Phases Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Ph. Track Dwell Cycle ph Track Dwell Cycle OVID. Track Dwell Cycle 3 Red Green No Default Data Default Data 8 Red Green No Preempt 3 Vehical Phases Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Ph. Track Dwell Cvcle ph. Track Dwell Cycle OVID, Track Dwell Cycle 2 Red Green No Default Data Default Data 5 Red Green No Preempt 4 Vehical Phases Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Ph. Track Dwell Cycle Ph. Track Dwell Cycle OVID_ Track Dwell Cycle 4 Red Green No 2 Red Grit No 7 Red Green No Default Data Preempt 5 Vehical Phases Ph. Track Dwell Default Data Preempt 6 Vehical Phases Ph. Track Dwell Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Cycle Ph. Track Dwell Cycle OVID. Track Dwell Cycle Default Data Default Data Pedestrian Phases Overlaps Cycle Ph. Track Dwell Cycle OVID. Track Dwell Cycle fault Data Default Data Default Data - fstem/Detectors Data Local Critical Alarms Revert to Backup: 15 1st Phone: Local Free: No Cycle Failure: No Coord Failure: No Conflict Flash: Yes Remote Flash: No 2nd Phone: Local Fash: No Cycle Fault: No Coord Fault: No Premption: Yes Voltage Monitor: Special Status ]: Yes Ye P Special Status 2: Yes 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 Default Data Default Data Sample Interval: Queue: 1 Input Selection: O=Average Queue: Detector Failed Level : 0 Level Enter Queue: 2 Input Selection: O=Average Detector Failed Level : 0 Default Data Page 8 of 9 Default Data Leave Dial / Split / Offset Vehical Detector Diagnostic Value 0 Max No Erratic Detector Presence Activity Count 1 30 180 60 2 30 180 60 3 30 180 60 4 30 180 60 5 30 180 60 6 30 180 60 7 30 180 60 8 30 180 60 Pedestrian Detector 0 60 Diagnostic Value 0 Max No Erratic Detector Presence Activity Count 1 5 0 0 2 5 0 0 3 5 0 0 4 5 0 0 5 5 0 0 6 5 0 0 7 5 0 0 8 5 0 0 Default Data - No Diag 0 Values Speed Trap Data 4 5 Speed Trap: 0 5 Measurement: Detector 1 Detector—2 Distance Default Data Volume Detector Data Report Interval Volume Controller Detector Detector Number Channel Default Data Page 9 of 9 Vehical Detector Diagnostic Value 1 Max No Erratic Detector Presence Activity Count 1 30 180 60 2 30 0 60 3 30 0 60 4 30 180 60 5 30 180 60 6 30 0 60 7 30 0 60 8 30 0 60 Pedestrian Detector Diagnostic Value 1 Max No Erratic Detector Presence Activity Count 1 5 0 0 2 5 0 0 3 5 0 0 4 5 0 0 5 5 0 0 6 5 0 0 7 5 0 0 8 5 0 0 Default Data - No Diag 1 Values Dial/Split/Offset H Default Data Special Detector Diagnostic Value 0 Max No Erratic Detector Presence Activity- Count Default Data - No Diag 0 Valu Special Detector Diagnostic Value l Max No Erratic Detector Presence Activity Count Default Data - No Diag 1 Values Speed Trap Speed Trap Low Treshold High Treshold APPENDIX C Lanes, Volumes, Timings I -Logan Blvd & Immokalee Rd 6/17/2016 2016 Exisitng Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 1 -► A, 4., t �► 1 Lane Configurations 'i'i T?? r R'i ♦?T i' Vi) fT a 'f T P Traffic Volume (vph) 181 2807 253 114 1382 44 159 73 394 43 82 155 Future Volume (vph) 181 2807 253 114 1382 44 159 73 394 43 82 155 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 325 250 400 175 425 300 275 0 Storage Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 50 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 091 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 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 5036 1509 3367 4940 1615 3335 3610 1599 1752 1743 1553 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 1 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 3467 5036 1509 3367 4940 1615 3335 3610 1599 1752 1743 1553 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 136 184 177 177 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 1119 989 1262 561 Travel Time (s) 25.4 22.5 28.7 12.8 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 (%) 1 % 3% 7% 4% 5% 0% 5% 0% 1 % 3% 9% 4% Adj, Flow (vph) 189 2924 264 119 1440 46 166 76 410 45 85 161 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 189 2924 264 119 1440 46 166 76 410 45 85 161 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 6 2 8 4 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 3 8 8 7 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5,0 15.0 15.0 5.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 12.0 25.0 25.0 12.0 25.0 25.0 13.0 26.0 26.0 12.1 25.1 25.1 Total Split (s) 27.0 88.0 88.0 17.0 78.0 78.0 18.0 37.0 37.0 18.0 37.0 37.0 Total Split (%) 16.9% 55.0% 55.0% 10.6% 48.8% 48.8% 11.3% 23.1% 23.1% 11.3% 23.1% 23.1% Maximum Green (s) 20.0 81.0 81.0 10.0 71.0 71.0 10.0 29.0 29.0 10.9 29.9 29.9 Yellow Time (s) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.8 4.8 4.8 All -Red Time (s) 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.1 7.1 7.1 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 C -Max C -Max None C -Max C -Max None None None None None None Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 14.0 86.0 86.0 9.5 81.5 81.5 10.0 29.0 29.0 9.0 25.4 25.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.54 0.54 0.06 0.51 0.51 0.06 0.18 0.18 0.06 0.16 0.16 v/c Ratio 0.62 1.08 0.30 0.59 0.57 0.05 0.80 0.12 0.94 0.46 0.31 0.41 Control Delay 79.3 79.3 11.4 85.9 29.7 0.1 100.0 55.1 67.1 87.3 60.5 8.3 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 2016 Exisitng Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings -3: Logan Blvd & Immokalee Rd 6/17/2016 f1E f�llj? I_v_ EE3p i"V&L V57 vvEN NK NET NEE, SEL SBI SBR Total Delay 793 79.3 11.4 85,9 29.7 0.1 100.0 55.1 67.1 87.3 60.5 8 3 LOS E E B F C A F E E F E A Approach Delay 74.0 33.0 74 1 35.8 Approach LOS E C E D Queue Length 50th (ft) 100 —1309 72 63 398 0 90 35 259 46 77 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) 140 #1378 136 100 469 0 #151 61 #478 91 132 51 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1039 909 1182 481 Turn Bay Length (ft) 325 250 400 175 425 300 275 Base Capacity(vph) 433 2705 873 210 2515 912 208 671 441 119 325 434 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 0.44 1.08 0.30 0.57 057 0.05 0.80 0.11 0.93 0.38 0.26 0.37 �111Ef��"?ifli' :rJl'.IIl7r'� Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 160 Actuated Cycle Length: 160 Offset: 16 (10%), Referenced to phase 2:WBT and 6:EBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 140 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.08 Intersection Signal Delay: 61.1 Intersection LOS: E Intersection Capacity Utilization 101.2% ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 2016 Exisitng Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3. Logan Blvd & Immokalee Rd 6/17/2016 2019 Background Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 1 _1: ANNUM Lane Configurations VI) W r Vi' ??? r ?? r 't T Traffic Volume (vph) 204 3157 285 128 1555 49 179 82 443 48 92 174 Future Volume (vph) 204 3157 285 128 1555 49 179 82 443 48 92 174 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 325 250 400 175 425 300 275 0 Storage Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 50 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 0.850 0.850 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow (prot) 3467 5036 1509 3367 4940 1615 3335 3610 1599 1752 1743 1553 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow (perm) 3467 5036 1509 3367 4940 1615 3335 3610 1599 1752 1743 1553 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 136 184 177 177 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 1119 989 1262 561 Travel Time (s) 25.4 22.5 28.7 12.8 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 (%) 1% 3% 7% 4% 5% 0% 5% 0% 1% 3% 9% 4% Adj, Flow (vph) 213 3289 297 133 1620 51 186 85 461 50 96 181 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 213 3289 297 133 1620 51 186 85 461 50 96 181 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 6 2 8 4 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 3 8 8 7 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 12.0 25.0 25.0 12.0 25.0 25.0 13.0 26.0 26.0 12.1 25.1 25.1 Total Split (s) 27.0 88.0 88.0 17.0 78.0 78.0 18.0 37.0 37.0 18.0 37.0 37.0 Total Split (%) 16.9% 55.0% 55.0% 10.6% 48.8% 48.8% 11.3% 23.1% 23.1% 11.3% 23.1% 23.1% Maximum Green (s) 20.0 81.0 81.0 10.0 71.0 71.0 10.0 29.0 29.0 10.9 29.9 29.9 Yellow Time (s) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.8 4.8 4.8 All -Red Time (s) 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.1 7.1 7.1 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 C -Max C -Max None C -Max C -Max None None None None None None Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 15.1 81.3 81.3 9.7 75.9 75.9 10.0 33.3 33.3 9.2 29.9 29.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.51 0.51 0.06 0,47 0.47 0.06 0.21 0.21 0.06 0.19 0.19 v/c Ratio 0.65 1.29 0.36 0.66 0.69 0.06 0.89 0.11 0.98 0.50 0.30 0.42 Control Delay 79.2 165.6 13.5 89.0 35.2 0.1 113.0 54.1 73.7 89.5 58.9 10.8 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 2019 Background Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3° Logan- Blvd-& Immokalee Rd 6/17/2016 -A __11. "-V ' t 4\ t lb. ti 1 4/ Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 160 Actuated Cycle Length: 160 Offset: 16 (10%), Referenced to phase 2:WBT and 6: EBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.29 Intersection Signal Delay: 106.0 Intersection LOS: F Intersection Capacity Utilization 111.0% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 -- Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 2019 Background Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 2 E.' '(J ER N8L N67 NER 5E4 Total Delay 79.2 165.6 13.5 89.0 35.2 0.1 113.0 54.1 73.7 89.5 58.9 _SBR 10.8 LOS E F B F D A F D E F E B Approach Delay 148.9 38.2 81.4 37.0 Approach LOS F D F D Queue Length 50th (ft) 112 -1599 95 71 479 0 101 39 -359 52 88 4 Queue Length 95th (ft) 155 #1657 165 110 561 0 #177 66 #598 100 147 74 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1039 909 1182 481 Turn Bay Length (ft) 325 250 400 175 425 300 275 Base Capacity(vph) 433 2559 834 210 2343 862 208 751 472 119 325 434 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 0.49 1.29 0.36 0.63 0.69 0.06 0.89 0.11 0.98 0.42 0.30 0.42 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 160 Actuated Cycle Length: 160 Offset: 16 (10%), Referenced to phase 2:WBT and 6: EBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.29 Intersection Signal Delay: 106.0 Intersection LOS: F Intersection Capacity Utilization 111.0% ICU Level of Service H Analysis Period (min) 15 -- Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 2019 Background Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3: Logan Blvd & Immokalee Rd 6/17/2016 'A -. z 'or- '- t4\ t ti l 2019 Background with Improvements Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 1 _ - �R _kL'' -;JT- E __ _71 -��,�-1 Lane Configurations 'iii tttt r 'iii T?t r 4f rr T P Traffic Volume (vph) 204 3157 285 128 1555 49 179 82 443 48 92 174 Future Volume (vph) 204 3157 285 128 1555 49 179 82 443 48 92 174 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 325 250 400 175 425 300 275 0 Storage Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 50 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.97 091 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.88 1.00 1.00 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 6346 1509 3367 4940 1615 3335 3610 2814 1752 1743 1553 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow (perm) 3467 6346 1509 3367 4940 1615 3335 3610 2814 1752 1743 1553 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 169 130 252 136 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 1119 989 1262 561 Travel Time (s) 25.4 22.5 28.7 12.8 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 (%) 1% 3% 7% 4% 5% 0% 5% 0% 1% 3% 9% 4% Adj. Flow (vph) 213 3289 297 133 1620 51 186 85 461 50 96 181 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 213 3289 297 133 1620 51 186 85 461 50 96 181 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 6 2 8 4 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 3 8 8 7 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 12.0 25.0 25.0 12.0 25.0 25.0 13.0 26.0 26.0 12.1 25.1 25,1 Total Split (s) 22.0 94.0 94.0 18.0 90.0 90.0 22.9 32.5 32.5 15.5 25.1 25.1 Total Split (%) 13.8% 58.8% 58.8% 11.3% 56.3% 56.3% 14.3% 20.3% 20.3% 9.7% 15.7% 15.7% Maximum Green (s) 15.0 87.0 87.0 11.0 83.0 83.0 14.9 24.5 24.5 8.4 18.0 18.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.8 4.8 4.8 All -Red Time (s) 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.3 2.3 2.3 Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.1 7.1 7.1 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 C -Max C -Max None C -Max C -Max None None None None None None Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 14.3 92.9 92.9 10.8 89.4 89.4 13.4 21.9 21.9 7.9 13.8 13.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.58 0.58 0.07 0.56 0.56 0.08 0.14 0.14 0.05 0.09 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.69 0.89 0.31 0.59 0.59 0.05 0.67 0.17 0.77 0.58 0.64 0.70 Control Delay 82.5 34.0 8.6 83.0 25.1 0.1 83.1 62.0 38.9 100.2 89.2 34.7 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 2019 Background with Improvements Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings I Logan Blvd & Immokalee-Rd 6/17/2016 Lw,e vFr�JJU - G FL E E- EER L� S± 4AWSLIjW& E BR SEL VET �%BR S@L SCT »iR Total Delay 82.5 34.0 8.6 83.0 25.1 01 83.1 62.0 38.9 1002 89.2 34.7 LOS F C A F C A F E D F F C Approach Delay 34.8 28.6 52.8 60.8 Approach LOS C C D E Queue Length 50th (ft) 112 870 61 70 407 0 98 42 125 52 99 45 Queue Length 95th (ft) 159 968 128 109 486 0 142 69 193 #106 161 130 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1039 909 1182 481 Turn Bay Length (ft) 325 250 400 175 425 300 275 Base Capacity(vph) 333 3684 946 241 2761 960 310 559 649 91 196 295 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 0.64 0.89 0.31 0.55 0.59 0.05 0.60 015 0.71 0.55 0.49 061 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 160 Actuated Cycle Length: 160 Offset: 16 (10%), Referenced to phase 2:WBT and 6:EBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 120 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.89 Intersection Signal Delay: 36.4 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 83.8% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 3: Logan Blvd & Immokalee Rd 01 02 R 03 04 E As f'o5 --0-06R �7 5s �I 2019 Background with Improvements Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 2 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3. Logan Blvd & Immokalee Rd 6/17/2016 J z � '~ �4� t r �► 1 2019 Total Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 1 Lane Configurations vi) tilt r M TTT r 'iii Tt rr 'i f P Traffic Volume (vph) 204 3243 285 214 1555 49 272 94 443 48 103 174 Future Volume (vph) 204 3243 285 214 1555 49 272 94 443 48 103 174 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 325 250 400 175 425 300 275 0 Storage Lanes 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 Taper Length (ft) 100 100 100 50 Lane Util. Factor 0.97 0.86 1.00 0.97 0.91 1.00 0.97 0.95 0.88 100 100 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 6346 1509 3367 4940 1615 3335 3610 2814 1752 1743 1553 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.950 0.950 0.950 Satd.Flow (perm) 3467 6346 1509 3367 4940 1615 3335 3610 2814 1752 1743 1553 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd• Flow (RTOR) 164 130 252 131 Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30 Link Distance (ft) 1119 989 1262 561 Travel Time (s) 25.4 22.5 28.7 12.8 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 (%) 1% 3% 7% 4% 5% 0% 5% 0% 1% 3% 9% 4% Adj. Flow (vph) 213 3378 297 223 1620 51 283 98 461 50 107 181 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 213 3378 297 223 1620 51 283 98 461 50 107 181 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 3 8 7 4 Permitted Phases 6 2 8 4 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 3 8 8 7 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s) 12.0 25.0 25.0 12.0 250 25.0 13.0 26.0 26.0 12.1 25.1 25.1 Total Split (s) 22.0 94.0 94.0 18.0 90.0 90.0 22.9 32.5 32.5 15.5 25.1 25.1 Total Split (%) 13.8% 58.8% 58.8% 11.3% 56.3% 56.3% 14.3% 20.3% 20.3% 9.7% 15.7% 15.7% Maximum Green (s) 15.0 87.0 87.0 11.0 83.0 83.0 14.9 24.5 24.5 8.4 18.0 18.0 Yellow Time (s) 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.8 4.8 4.8 All -Red Time (s) 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.3 2.3 2.3 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) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.1 7.1 7.1 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 C -Max C -Max None C -Max C -Max None None None None None None Walk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 14.1 88.0 88.0 13.4 87.4 87.4 14.9 24.1 24.1 7.9 14.5 14.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.09 0.55 0.55 0.08 0.55 0.55 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.09 0.09 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.97 0.33 0.79 0.60 0.05 0.91 0.18 0.72 0.58 0.68 0.70 Control Delay 83.5 44.1 9.5 90.7 26.2 0.1 104.0 60.9 36.2 100.2 90.9 35.8 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 2019 Total Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 1 Lanes, Volumes, Timings 3. Logan -Blvd & Immokalee Rd 6/1712016 ' -'* 4e~ t 4\ t lb, ti 1 ne ur�ut ---- B� En- EER AIEL VVE7 SBR UP. AT B ,;ate u6i SBR Total Delay 83.5 44,1 9.5 90.7 26.2 0.1 104.0 60.9 36.2 _ 100.2 90.9 35.8 LOS F D A F C A F E D F F D Approach Delay 43.6 33.1 61.9 62.8 Approach LOS D C E E Queue Length 50th (ft) 112 977 69 119 418 0 154 48 123 52 110 50 Queue Length 95th (ft) 159 1022 131 #212 486 0 #243 78 193 #106 177 136 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1039 909 1182 481 Turn Bay Length (ft) 325 250 400 175 425 300 275 Base Capacity(vph) 328 3491 904 282 2698 941 310 583 666 91 196 290 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 0.65 0.97 0.33 0.79 0.60 0.05 0.91 0 17 0.69 0.55 0.55 0.62 In;ersS uG' umr,.ary { r Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 160 Actuated Cycle Length: 160 Offset: 16 (10%), Referenced to phase 2:WBT and 6:EBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type: Actuated -Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.97 Intersection Signal Delay: 43.9 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 85.9% ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 3: Logan Blvd & Immokalee Rd 01 02 (R) "\03 ♦ 04 9D 'sL 22.9 s I s �O5 --"6 R '*07 t06 Iss 945 ±5:55 32.5s 2019 Total Synchro 9 Report PM Peak -Hour Page 2 EXHIBIT "R" PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT ANALYSIS (3 star,tec Public Facilities impact Analysis Potable Water Potable water demand for the proposed commercial development is based on an estimate of 15 gpd per, 100 feet square for floor area. Using these assumptions, potable water demand for the development at buildout is projected to be approximately 15,000 gallons average daily demand. Based on the 2015 Annual Inventory and Update Report, sufficient capacity is available to provide Potable Water services to the proposed development. The development will provide a connection to the 24" water main located adjacent to the property along the north side of the Immokalee Road at the time of construction. Sanitary Sewer The subject property is located within the North Wastewater Service area. Since the ultimate mix of commercial uses which will occupy the site is not known at this time, an estimation of the wastewater generation for the project was completed using an assumption of approximately 20,000 square feet of restaurant uses, with the remaining 80,000 square feet calculated as a shopping center use. Based on the assumptions, the proposed project will generate approximately 28,800 gallons of wastewater per day. Based on the 2015 Annual Inventory and Update Report sufficient capacity is available to provide wastewater disposal services to the proposed development. The project will provide a connection to the 16" sewer force main located within the Immokalee Road right-of-way at the time of construction. Arterial and Collector Roadways A detailed Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) has been provided as part of this application which outlines the projected traffic generated by the proposed development. The project site is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard, with frontage on both roadways. Access to the site is proposed to include a right-in/right-out (RI/RO) connection on Immokalee Road at the northeast corner of the site, and a full access connection on Logan Boulevard at the south west corner of the site, the latter being a shared ingress/egress connection with the adjoining nursery/landscape business immediately to the south. In addition to the shared access connection to Logan Boulevard, an internal connection to the adjoining parcel immediately to the east is being provided to satisfy the code requirements for accommodating interconnections to adjacent parcels. (3 Stantec The proposed development of 100,000 square -feet of commercial uses will generate approximately 449 PM Peak hour trips. Based on the detailed analysis included in the TIS, the additional traffic generated by the proposed development on the adjacent roadways will not create a Level of Service standard deficiency. Drainage Prior to construction the project will be required to obtain a permit from the South Florida Water Management District illustrating the proposed water management system with a detailed analysis showing the proposed development will have no detrimental effect on the stormwater management for the surrounding area. Solid Waste The development will utilize dumpster containers for the storage of garbage and rubbish. Recycling containers will be used to store recyclables in the commercial and institutional areas. Collier County's contractor hauler, Waste Management, will collect solid waste and recycled materials generated from the proposed development. Solid waste collected will be hauled to the Collier County landfill. Using the waste generation rate of 6.1 pounds of waste per square -foot per year for commercial uses developed by Palm Beach County, Florida in the 1995 Commercial Generation Study, the development will generate. approximately 610,000 pounds of waste per year. This equates to an estimated 305 tons of solid waste per year. According to the 2015 Annual Update and Inventory Report (Collier County Government, Public Utilities Solid Waste Management Department) the Collier County Landfill has capacity through the year 2059. Parks The proposed commercial development will have no impact on the demand for Community or Regional park facilities. EXHIBIT "S" PUBLIC UTILITY AVAILABILITY LETTERS Comcast 12600 Westinks Drive Suite 4 Fort Myers, FI. 33913 Phone: 239-432-1805 June 20, 2016 Re: Southeast Corner of Immokalee and Logan BI, Utility Easement Approval and Letter of Availability Dear Lisa Colburn, 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, AK Mark Cook, Project Coordinator afCR X `taF assc� rxi GREATER NAPLES FIRE RESCUE DISTRICT FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY 2700 N Horseshoe Dr. • Naples, FL 34104 Phone;'(239)774-2800 Fax: (239)774-3116 Schaldr. Fsve 6/20/16 Ms. Lisa Colburn Stantec 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, Florid 341015 Dear Ms_ Colburn: This is to confirm that the Greater Naples Fire Rescue District will provide fire protection services to the following project: GL Commercial Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East If I can be of any further assistance, please don't hesitate to give me a call at 774-2800. Sincerely, 5haH•n M. Hanson Division Chief/Fire Marshal SMH/sap pt•ofessionalrsm - .neegrity Compassion 0 FPL June 20, 2016 Stantec % Lisa Colburn 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, Florida 34105-8523 Re: GL Commercial — Naples Dear Ms. Colburn: FIOI- da polver & Light Company 26430 Old 41 Rd Bonita Springs, Florida 3413S This is to confirm that, at the present time, FPL has sufficient capacity to provide electric service to the above captioned property. Electric service will be supplied by FPL to the customer, based on terms and conditions outlined in the General Rules and Regulations for Electric Service as approved by the Florida Public Service Commission. FPL will require easements for your project, usually a ten -foot perimeter easement that will have to connect to internal casements. Please review your plans for the proposed preserve areas; so you may address any mitigation concerns before permitting. - Please provide the final site plan, site survey and electrical load data as soon as possible so the necessary engineering can begin. Early contact with FPL is essential so that resources may be scheduled to facilitate availability of service when required. Sincerely, Jim Merriam FPL Senior Technical Specialist cc:file A NEXTera ENl?RGY Company CenturyUnk- Stronger Connected 06/22/2016 Lisa Colburn Administrative Assistant Stantec Consulting services Inc. 3200 Bailey Lane Suite 200 Naples FL 34105-8523 RE: Availability of Service / GL Commercial SEC 28, TWP 48 , RNG 26 — Collier County, FL Dear Lisa: In response to your request sent to this office and dated 06/17/2016 Centuryl-ink will provide communication service, upon request, to the parcel located on the SE corner of Immokalee Rd. and Logan Blvd. within Naples, Florida, as shown on your print. Communication service will be provided based on the rules and regulations covered in our Florida Local Terms of Service found at www.Cehturyl ink.com/tariffs. Should you have any questions, please contact me at the telephone number or email address shown above Sincerely, Walter Alvarez Engineer II Century Link Office: 239-263-6222 Fax: 239-261-0289 EXHIBIT "T" HISTORIC RESOURCES IMPACT ASSESSMENT FLORIDA DEPARTMENT (3 STATE RICK SCOTT Governor Mr. Josh Philpott Stantec 3800 Colonial Boulevard, Suite 100 Fort Myers, Florida 33965 RE: DHR Project File No.: 2016-2628 / Received by DHR: June 20, 2016 Project: Logan /b77mokalee C0771777e7-Cial Subdish•icf County: Collier Dear Mr. Philpott: KEN DETZNER Secretary of State June 22. 2016 Our office reviewed the referenced project in accordance with the applicable Collier County ordinances, for possible adverse impact to cultural resources (any prehistoric or historic district, site, building. structure, or object) listed, or eligible for listing; in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). It is the opinion of this office that the proposed project is unlikely to affect historic properties. However, unexpected finds may occur during ground disturbing activities, and we request that the permit. if issued, should include the following special condition regarding inadvertent discoveries: If prehistoric or historic artifacts, such as pottery or ceramics, projectile points, dugout canoes, metal implements, historic building materials, or any other physical remains that could be associated with Native American, early European; or American settlement are encountered at any time within the project site area, the permitted project shall cease all activities involving subsurface disturbance in the vicinity of the discovery. The applicant shall contact the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, Compliance Review Section at (850)-245-6333. Project activities shall not resume without verbal and/or written authorization. In the event that unmarked human remains are encountered during permitted activities, all work shall stop immediately and the proper authorities notified in accordance with Section 872.05, Florida Statutes. If you have any questions, please contact Mary Berman, Historic Site Specialist, by email at Uar y.Bermarrkdos.mrl orido.coin. or by telephone at 850.245.6333 or 800.847.7278. r, Sincerely. ff , L/ Timothy A. Parsons, Ph.D., RPA Director, Division of Historical Resources and State Historic Preservation Officer Division of Historical Resources Q R.A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street* Tallahassee, Florida 32399 �aatir 850.245.6333 • 850.245.6436 (Fax) FLHeritage.com EXHIBIT "U" COMMERICAL MARKET ASSESSMENT JOHN jt'--��BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING June 2016 GL Commercial Retail Market Analysis & Strategic Assessment 1900 Glades Road, Suite 205 1 Boca Raton, FL 33431 1561.998 5814 ,�i0HN BUF�NS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY LOCATION ANALYSIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT RETAIL DEMAND ANALYSIS CURRENT COMMERCIAL INVENTORY FUTURE COMMERCIAL INVENTORY DEMOGRAPHIC & EMPLOYMENT TRENDS LIMITING CONDITIONS APPE=NDIX 3 5 9 14 17 30 52 58 78 80 E ,JOHN �BUR,,NS IDEAL ESTATE CONSULTING PM www tealestateconsoifing com Background and Objectives JOHN 1�` BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING Background GL Commercial ("GL") is petitioning to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan to allow for a retail development on the southeast comer of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard ("Subject"). In order to consider this change, Collier Countj requires a comprehensive market study to demonstrate the change is warranted. Additionally, GL is applying to change the zoning from agricultural to a commercial planned unit development. The purpose of the study is to determine if there is a need for additional retail in the Trade Market Area. Objective The objective of this assignment is to analyze relevant real estate market conditions and economic and demographic trends influencing the Subject site in order to determine if there is a need for additional retail development at the location. Contact Information This analysis was prepared by John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC. Lesley Deutch, Principal, and Kristine Smale, Manager, co - managed the assignment. Mike Willinger (Senior Consultant) also contributed to this analysis. The internal peer review was conducted by Don Walker. Fallow -up questions should be directed to us at: 1900 Glades Road, Suite 205 Boca Raton, FL 33431 561.998.5814 Market Experts: Lesley Deutch Kristine 5male Mike Willinger Consulting Consulting Consulting ldeLitch@realestateconsulting.com ksmale@realestateconstilting.com mwillinger a@realestateconsuiti ng.com ,JOHN fj'�]BUPNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING www reaiestateconsulhnq nnm Demand We conducted a Retail Gap Analysis, which analyzes the total income in the Primary Market Area (PMA) compared to normal spending in the PMA. We determine the normal spending in the PMA by applying industry spending standards to the household incomes in the PMA. This analysis indicates demand for approximately 894,884 square feet of additional retail in the PMA today. Based on future population and household growth, this demand increases to approximately 1.4M SF in 2021 and 2.1M SF in 2026. • We surveyed all existing inventory and vacant parcels in the PMA that lie in a Commercial Subdistrict, according to the Collier County Future Land Use Map. • Current occupancy rates in shopping centers in the PMA range from 84% to 100%. The average occupancy across all shopping centers in the PMA is 98%. • The vacant parcels could add an additional 716,000 SF of retail to the PMA within the next several years. Retail Opportunity • We conclude that there is ample retail demand for the Subject. • The Subject is located in a rapidly -growing housing submarket, which is likely to continue to experience higher - than -average household growth. • There is insufficient current supply in the market to meet the demand today. In the future, the potential future commercial inventory, will meet some, but not all, of the future projected retail demand. Executive Summary ,JOHN 1j"BUf�NS kEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Based on the following calculation, which is detailed further in this report, there is excess demand for retail within the PMA today. This calculation accounts for the proposed development at the Subject, current vacancies in the market and potential future development on parcels that are currently zoned commercial or are located in a Commercial Subdistrict. This excess demand potential grows larger in 2021 and 2026 as additional households are added to the PMA, as demonstrated in the next slide. Total Demand in PMA (per GAP Analysis) Less: Current Vacancy in PMA (3 -mile radius) Less: Additional Vacancy (4 -mile radius) Less: Vacant Parcels - Future Retail Development (3 -mile radius) Remaining PMA Demand Less: SUBJECT Proposed Development Excess Demand Potential in PMA W99F.68MEW2 (27,851) SF (35,829) SF (701,082) SF 130,122 SF (100,000) SF 30,122 SF Notes: 1) Current vacancy in the PMA was calculated by totaling the square footage of all retail centers in the PMA and subtracting the current vacancies. We used information from LoopNet and verified all vacancies by conducting a physical market survey. 2) Additional vacancy in the 4 -mile radius was calculated by totaling the square footage of all retail centers in the 4 -mile radius (excluding those already accounted for in the PMA) and subtracting the current vacancies. We used information from LoopNet and verified all vacancies by conducting a physical market survey. A 50% discount factor was applied to this calculation as these centers lie outside of the PMA. 3) Vacant parcels for future retail development is a JBREC estimate based on data from the Collier County Appraiser's office. We reviewed all vacant parcels in the PMA that are part of a Commercial Subdistrict in the Future Land Use Map provided by Collier County Growth Management. For those parcels zoned commercial, we either 1) determined the maximum retail development permitted per approved county ordinances, or 2) Estimated retail development at 10, 000 SF/acre. From that amount, we assumed that 70% of those vacant parcels would be developed as retail, rather than other commercial uses such as office, medical office or multifamily. We assumed a high retail development rate as most of these parcels are located along well -trafficked roads or intersections. 4) We did not consider any additional rezoning of parcels outside of the Commercial Subdistricts in this analysis. Execu 'ive Summary The demand summaries for 2021 and 2026 arE: dei:ailed below. Total Demand in PMA (per GAP Analysis) Less: 10% Vacancy factor in PMA (3 -mile radius) Less: Additional Vacancy factor (4 -mile radius) Less: Vacant Parcels - Future Retail Development (3 -mile radius) Remaining PMA Demand Less: SUBJECT Proposed Development Excess Demand Potential in PMA Total Demand in PMA (per GAP Analysis) Less: 10% Vacancy factor in PMA (3 -mile radius) Less: Additional Vacancy factor (4 -mile radius) Less: Vacant Parcels - Future Retaif Development (3 -mile radius) Remaining PMA Fernand Less: SUBJECT Proposed Development Demand Potential in PMA 1444,967 SF (134,022) SF (29,439) SF (701,082) SF 580,424 SF (87,115) SF 493,309 SF 2,178,154 SF (134,022.) SF (29,439) SF (701,082) SF 1,313,611 SF (87,115) SF 1,226,496 SF ,JOHN 14. BUkNS f,EAL ESTATE CONSULTING Notes: 1) We adjusted the vacancy factor for the PMA to be 10% of the current inventory to allow for future market fluctuations. 2) We adjusted the vacancy factor for the 4 -mile radius to be 10% of the'current inventory to allow for future market fluctuations. We then applied a 50% allowance rate to this number. 3) Vacant parcels forfuture retail development is a JUREC: estimate based on data from the Collier County Appraiser's office. We reviewed all vacant parcels in the PMA that are part of a Commercial Subdistrict in the Future Land Use Map p►avided by Collier County Growth Management. For those parcels zoned commercial, we either 1) determined the maximum retail development permitted perapproved county ordinances, ort) Estimated retail development at 10.000 SRacm. From that amount, we assumed that 70% of those vacant parcels would be developed as retail, rather than other commercial uses such as office, medical office or multifamily. We assumed a high retail development rate as most of these parcels are located along well -trafficked roads or intersections. 4) We did not consider any additional rezoning of parcels outside of the Commercial Subdistricts in this analysis. ,JOHN (t-,-iBUR,,NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING m,iniw realestateconsultin7 con? Subject Location within Collier county ,JOHN Ij~=jBUF�NS i_EAL ESTATE CONSULTING The Subject is located in North Naples, just East of Interstate 75. It is approximately 10.0 miles from Downtown Naples and 5.9 miles from Bonita Springs. Source: Google Earth ►:a a! ;!� Longs lore Lake.? Olde Cypress ■�� soy, r a y r jol r dn—m Immokalee RD SUBJECT g, F't �yr��w e - - � .� ;]-� ■ . S �` "'ice F art,x r_, 'i Saturnia Lakes:.�: t4 *,year: Jb JOHN 11j, BURNS Subject Location -Parcels f�EAL ESTATE CONSULTING The! Subject consists of six parcels, totaling +/- 18.6 acres. We have identified those parcels, as well as the land surrounding the Subject. Source. Collier County Property Appraiser Subject Parcels Parcel Acreage 1 00195040001 366 2 00195480001 3.74 3 00195440009 5 4 00194880000 5 5 00195200003 2.25 (only a portion of this parcel is included in the Subject) 0 D0195000009 0.27 Adjacent Ownership I DOR Parcel Code Oakwood Park West LLC/ 1 0(1195360008 DOR: 69 Z 1 00195080003 Private.Owner / DOR: 99 Oakwood Park West LLC/ 3 00195600001 F DOR: 69 Royal P Nursery / DOR: 4 00194920009 99 Oakwood Park West LLC/ 5 00196680509 DOR: 69 Oakwood Park West LLC/ 6 00195680005 DOR: 69 JOHN li''-�BUPNS Traffic Counts (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING The Subject benefits from excellent accessibility to Interstate 75, which averages over 75,000 daily traffic counts. The Subject will have two entrances: 1) a right in, right out along Immokalee Road, which experiences nearly 22,000 daily traffic counts, and 2) a full access point along Logan Boulevard. Source: ESRI Average Dally Tralflc Volume Up to 6.000 vehicles per day 6,001 - 13,000 A 73,001- 30,000 •50,001- $0,000 •50,001- 100,000 *Mon than 100,000 per day Ch6a� .-3-mile radius ,•yn � W B" gsx.M�w V �.... �_.-. TUN h. r- Ra • .. — .... . � yy.ao? � l .F . Ar ._ .lam f i ti• les Source: ESRI Average Dally Tralflc Volume Up to 6.000 vehicles per day 6,001 - 13,000 A 73,001- 30,000 •50,001- $0,000 •50,001- 100,000 *Mon than 100,000 per day Ch6a� ,JOHN I �-�BURNS FZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING vvww.rraleF' ',consutting.cmn 14 Proposed Site Plan The proposed site plan is illustrated below. Master Plan 6/22/2016 Site Acreage 18.6 Outparcels 1-4* 22,716 SF Grocery 33,000 SF In -Line Retail 44,284 SF TOTAL 100,000 SF *It is assumed that 50% of the outparcel space will consist of restaurant uses. Parking Spaces Provided 655 1 space per 153 SF Lakes (acres) 2.12 11 40% of site Preserve (acres) 1.10 5.91 % of site Source: Stantec immo#"'Rc- Road f ,JOHN 14 .,BURNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING ffm IAW pmb.b n 26 du. Time 212.10. Wmc Ncft: T,c play i—.q*ai -d aA#� dam r --,F, � F -1 R �� L Proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment This amendment will create a new sub -district in the Collier County GMP as follows Logan Boulevard I Immokatee Road Connmercial Infill Subdistrict ,JOHN It,&BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING This Subdistrict consists of ±18.6 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. The Subdistrict allows those retail, office uses, medical uses and financial institutions permitted by'right and by conditional use within the C-4 Zoning Districts of the Collier County Land Development Code. It is preferred the property be rezoned as a Planned Unit Development. The following uses are prohibited Amusements and recreation services (7999, indoor- and outdoor) Automobile Parking, automobile parking garages and parking structures (7521) Automotive services (7549) Automotive vehicle and equipment dealers (5511 and 5599) Betting Information Services, Bath Houses, Billiard Parlors, Bookie, and Bookmakers, Cable lifts, Carnival Operation, Circus Companies, Fortune Tellers, Go-cart racing operation, Off-track betting, Ping Pong Parlors, Rodeo Animal Rentals, Rodeos, Shooting Ranges, Trapshooting Facilities (Group 7999) Bowling centers (7933) Communication towers Drinking Places (Group 5813) Drycleaning plants (7216) Escort Services, Massage Parlors, Tattoo Parlors, Turkish Baths, Wedding Chapels (Group 7299) Fuel dealers (5983-5989) Funeral services and crematories (7261) Homeless shelters Hospitals (8062-8069) Large Appliance repair service (Group 7623) Parole offices, Probation offices, Public welfare centers, refugee services, settlement houses (Group 8322) Passenger car leasing (7515) Passenger car rental (7514) Repair services - miscellaneous (7699) Soup kitchens Veterinary services (0741 & 0742, with outside kenneling) This Subdistrict is designed to serve the surrounding residential uses within a convenient travel distance to the sub.ect property. The maximum development intensity allowed is 100,000 square feet of building area with a maximum height of 3 stories, not to exceed 35 feet. Source: Stantec 17 Retail Market Ma - Prima and Secondary Areas JOHN �T BUf�NS Map Primary ' 7 REAL ESTATE CONSULTING The following map depicts our retail Primary (PMA) and Secondary (SMA) market areas. The Subject is defined as a community center per ULI classifications due to the size of the development (10+ acres). The PMA boundary represents a reasonable pool of residents who would shop at the Subject. The SMA represents a larger pool of residents that may shop within the PMA, although it would be a secondary choice given locational factors and competitive retail options. Bonita I� r e } N F CN, 81M M Pelican Pine Bay' RU dge - `— Worth Names n� f►arrw, 4e Source: ES'" Population 43,406 Households 18,579 Median Income $75,020 65,648 28,965 $73,278 -Cl jvr',,]:`�E'.,! Stone Creekowl - -.:F 600 homes P� Palazzo a' Naples Esplanade Gclf & CC 1 v ~ 'r 4 _• 80 homes 800 homes -;�• „` ; Bent Creek. Abaco Club l� :r F- - �'.k 450 homes ff 104 homes �•,, _'� y -- :,rnk. 3er•Rs1 ;� +Fe cr .. - f. �t hlee Rd� - L J 'F, La I'Vlorada Twin Eagles South ;t, =sem 343 homes 850 homes a '1. or Canopy jr 108 homes Mockingbird Crossing Mr ►'•. Raffia Preserve " r K. w 110 homes 363 homes _ - •, ;moi • Y, - Radius }Greyhawk Tuscany Pointe 116 homes 750_ homes "�'� �. . _jj r,. •�rr:Zr.. gel.^ 1fr —'-^L, Additional Residential / Logan Boulevard Extension ,JOHN 14` :BUFZNS 1ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING The Subject is located along Logan Boulevard, which is a north 1 south road that runs through the northern portion of Collier County. Collier County and GL Homes have come to an agreement regarding Logan Boulevard's extension to Bonita Beach Road, located in Lee County. Bonita Beach Road is approximately four miles north of Immokalee Road. Under the terms of the agreement, Collier County must complete the portion from the current entrance of Stone Creek to the Lee County line by September 2017 Thereafter, GL Homes must complete the road from the Lee County line to Bonita Beach Road within ❑ne year following the 297th certificate of occupancy at the Stonecreek residential project. Based on current sales numbers. It can be reasonably assumed that the connector road will be open by the end of 2918, which will draw additional residents to the Subject site. We have highlighted the currently -selling and future residential communities in Lee County that could create additional demand for the Subject once the Logan Boulevard extension is completed. GQ Increase in Households 2016-2026 ,JOHN � j` BUFZNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING ESRI forecasts a straight-line increase in households in the PMA over the next 10 years. JBREC believes these estimates may be conservative, due to the significant number of new home communities in the PMA, but we use ESRI projections in the report. The additional households that could affect demand at the Subject are illustrated below. Year Population Per ESRI Population Annual Increase ESRI New: StoneCreek (GL Homes) New: Esplanade (Taylor Morrison) Future: Abaco New: Raffia (WCQ New: Bent Creek (CalAtlantic) New: Compass (Mattamy) New: Palazzo (Toll Brothers) New: New: Tuscany La Morada (DR Horton) (WCI). I i i I I 2016 43,406 150 100 75 50 24 48 50 2017 44,439 1.033 200 100 25 75 65 65 24 32 75 2018 45,472 1.033 200 100 50 75 65 65 12 75 2019 46,505 1.033 50 100 29 15 65 65 75 2020 47,538 1.033 100 35 65 25 2021 48,571 1,033 100 13 2022 49,604 1,033 100 2023 50,637 1.033 100 2024 51,670 1,033 50 2025 52,703 1,033 2026 53,736 1,033 TOTAL 600 850 1 104 1 240 1 280 273 60 8o 300 Source: John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC 21 Retail Gap Analysis by Category - PMA ,JOHN (4, -BURNS FZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Our analysis compares total retail expenditures by residents living in the PMA with the amount of retail spending in the Primary Market Area (PMA). A positive "gap" indicates the potential need for more retail in the PMA. Retail Potential Spending potential by residents in PMA GAP Retail Saps Actual Potential Spending in Retail PMA Opportunity in PMA RETAIL GAP ANALYSIS BY CATEGORY Primary Market Area 2016 Data Note (per ESRI): Retail Potential estimates the expected amount spent by COMLImers at retail establishments_ Retail Sales estimates sales to consumers by establishments. Sales to businesses are excluded. 22 Retail Categiones Motor Vehicle Parts Retail P. $13,552,320 $1,055,695 $12,496,625 GAP , 02.2% Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores $26,772,513 $5,798,254 $20,974,259 78.3% Electronics and Appliance Stores $36,168,483 $6,456,867 $29,709,616 82.1% Building Material, Garden Equip Stores $44,721,093 $18,739,200 $25,981,893 58.1% Food and Bevera a Stores $155,405,645 $105,755,178 $49,650,467 81.9% DW, Health and Personal Care Stores $53,944,347 _$15,132,577 $38,811,770 71.9% Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores $45,256,255 $2,377,534 $42,878,721 04.7% Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book, Music Stores $20,707,847 $20,121,884 ^ $585,963 2.8% General Merchandise Stores $149,572,377 $200,313,205 ($50,74C,828) _ 33.9% Miscellaneous Store Retailers $39,212,647 $9,195,799 $30,016,848 76.5% Food Service and Drinkin Places Total $91,612,219 $676.923,746 $28,783,118 $413,729311 $62,829.101 $263,194,435 68.6% Data Note (per ESRI): Retail Potential estimates the expected amount spent by COMLImers at retail establishments_ Retail Sales estimates sales to consumers by establishments. Sales to businesses are excluded. 22 Retail Expenditures b Category PMA JOHN REAL BURNS Y g Y - REAL ESTATE CONSULTING We highlight retail expenditures by category and the percentage of household income attributed to each category. We determined the percentages based on the retail expenditures in the PMA (per ESRI) divided by the total per capita income in the PMA. 2016 PMA Population 43,406 2016 Per Capita Income $45,851 Persons Per Household 2.33 Source: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC RETAIL EXPENDITURES BY Pr!ndary Market 2016 TAIL C W? REF— ATEGO Area 'G of Expenditure Household Expendture Cateacry Expenditures f$1 Per Capita IUQ9me Automotive Pans/Accsrs, Tire Stores -4413 $13,552,320 $312 0.68% Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores -442 $26,772,513 $617 1.35% Furniture Stores -4421 515.572,028 $361 0.79% Home Furnishing Stores -4422 511,100,485 $256 0.56% Electronics and Appliance Stores -443 $36,166,483 $833 1.82% Appliances, Ns, Electronics Stores -44311 Computer and Software Slores-44312 Camera and Photographic Equipment Stores -44313 Building Material, Garden Equip Stores 444 $44,721,093 $1,030 2.25% Building Material and Supply Dealers -0441 $39,588.926 $912 1.99% Lawn, Garden Equipment, Supplies Stores -4442 $5,132,166 5118 0.26% Food and Beverage Stores -445 $155,405,645 $3,580 7.81% Grocery Slores-4451 $737,212,580 $3,161 6,89% Specially Food Stores -4452 $11,197,885 5258 0.56% Beer, Wine and Liquor Stores -4453 $6,995,180 $161 0.35% Health and Personal Care Stones -446 $53,944,347 $1,243 2.71% Pharmancies and Drug Stores -44611 Cosmetics, Beauty Supplies, Perfume Stores -44612 Optical Goods Slores-44613 Other Health and Personal Care Slores-44619 CI.Sh17B and Clothing Accessories Stores448 $45,256,255 $1,043 2.27% Clothing Stores -4481 $32,246,523 5743 1 62% Shoe Stores -4482 $5,398,512 $124 0.27% Jewelry, Luggage, Leather Goods Stores -4483 $7,611,219 5175 038% $pDrlBg Goods, Hobby, Book, Music Stores -451 $20,707,847 $477 1,04% Spoiling Goods, Hobby, Musical Inst Stores -4511 $15,086,683 $348 076% Book, Periodical, Music Stores -4512 $5,621,163 5130 0.28% tit Merchandise Stores -452 $149.572,377 $3,446 7.52% Department Slores Excl Leased Depts-4521 $108,962,831 $2,510 5,47% Olher General Merch Stores -4529 $40.609,546 $936 2.04% Mhii0FNWHl6u1 Store Retailers -453 $39.212,647 $903 1.97% Florists -4531 $1,726,950 $40 0.09% Office Supplies and Stationery Slores-4532 $7,533,997 5174 0,38% Used Merchandise Slores-4533 $3,605,010 $83 0.18% Other Miscellaneous Store Relailers-4539 $26,346,682 5607 1.32% Fop0MVVW&and Drinking Places -722 $91,612,219 $2,111 4.60% Full -Service Restaurants -7221 $51,642,614 S1 190 259% Limited -Service Ealing Places -7222 $33,854,614 $780 1 70% Special FoodserAces-7223 $1,429,673 $33 007% Drinking Places -A lcoholic Beverages -7224 $4,685,318 $108 024% Note This himAurOng excludes aulomolive dealers, 9wMations and non -store retailers fe.g , interne(). 23 Retail Gap Analysis by Category - SMA ,JOHN j4' :BUPNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING We highlight the retail gap analysis in the Secondary Market Area (SMA), which contains a larger percentage of retail stores. The model shows sufficient spending in Miscellaneous Store Retailers but opportunities in many other categories, such as Food Service and Drinking Places and Food and Beverage Stores. We use the SMA Gap Analysis only to calculate the potential inflow of spending from the SMA to the PMA. RETAIL GAP ANALYSIS BY CATEGORY Secondary Market Area 2016 Data Note (per ESRI): Retail Potential estimates the expected amount spent by consumers at retail establishments. Retail Sales estimates sales to consumers by establishments. Sales to businesses are excluded. 24 Retail CategoriesGAP Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers Potential $21 1601,462 $1,374,288 $20,227,174 93.6% Furniture and Horne Fumishirp9s Stores $42,712,345 $8,256,226 $34,456,119 80.7% Electronics and Appliance Stores _ 4 $57,638,905 $13,467,983 $44,170,922 76.6% Bondi! Material, Garden Equip Stores _ _ � $71,821,057 $35,214,875 $36,606,182 _ 51.0% Food and Beverage Stores $247:366,088 $187,293,241 W� $60,072,847TT 24.3% Dru , Health and Personal Care Stores_ $86,164,693 $35,284,728 $50,879,965 59.0%Y Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores $72,079,224 $7,621.988 $64,457,236 89,4% Spartinc,,Goods, Hobby,Book, Music Stores _ $32,983,621$22,619,068 $10,364,553 31.4% General Merchandise_ Stores _ $238,232,272 _ $206,571,921 $31,660,351 13.3% Miscellaneous Store Retailers $62,578,750 $435,302,284_ ($372,723,534) 7595.6% Food Service and Drinkin Places $145,564,005 $51,868,115 $94,095,890 64.50/n Total004 .% Data Note (per ESRI): Retail Potential estimates the expected amount spent by consumers at retail establishments. Retail Sales estimates sales to consumers by establishments. Sales to businesses are excluded. 24 SMA Inflow Calculation ,JOHN [jlk�BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING We highlight retail expenditures by category for the SMA and the percentage of household income attributed to each category. The SMA has similar income characteristics to the PMA. Source: ESRI, John Bums Real Estate Consulting, LLC 25 % of Expenditure Household Expenditure Caleom Expenditures 1$1 Per Capita Income Secondary Market Area Automotive PartslAccsrs, Tire Stores -0413 $21,601,462 $329 0.69% Fumituro and Home Furnishings Stores -442 $42,712,345 $651 1.37% 2016 SMA Population 65 648 Furniture Stores -4421 $25,011,098 $381 0.80% Home Furnishing Stores -4422 $17,701,246 $270 057% Electronics and Appliance -043 $57,638,905 $878 1.85% 2016 Per Capita Income $47,360 ces,Vs ,Stores Stores -44311 Computer dSoft Software Computer and Software Stores -44312 Camera and Photographic Equipment Slores-44313 Persons Per Household 2.26 Building Material, Garden Equip Stores -444 $71,821,057 $1,094 2.31% Building Matenal and Supply Dealers -4441 $63,622,010 $969 2.05% Lawn, Garden Equipment Supplies Stores -4442 $8,199,046 $125 026% Food and Beverage Stores -445 $247,366,088 $3,768 7.96% Grocery Stores -4451 $218.382,894 $3,327 702% Specialty Food Stores -4452 $17.814,022 $271 0.57% Beer, Wine and Liquor Stores -4453 $11,169,172 $170 0.36% Health and Personal Care Stores -446 $86,164,693 $1,313 2.77% Pharmandes and Drug Stores -44611 Cosmetics, Beauty Supplies. Perfume Stores -44612 Optical Goods Stores -44613 Other Health and Personal Care Stores -44619 OWN" Clothing Accessories Stores -448 $72,079,224 $1,098 2.32% Clothing Stores4481 $51,333,669 $782 1.65% Shoe Stores -4482 $8,587,588 $131 0.28% Jewelry, Luggage, Leather Goods Stores -4483 $12,157,968 $185 0.39% Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book, Music Stores -451 $32,983,621 $502 1.06% Sporting Goods, Hobby, Musical Inst Stores -4511 $24,053,386 $366 0.77% Book, Periodical, Music Stores -4512 $8,930,235 $136 0.29% General Merchandise Stores -452 $238,232,272 $3,629 7.66% Department Stores Ezcl Leased Depts-4521 $173,602,054 $2.644 5.58% Other GeneralMerchStores-4529 $64,630,219 $984 2..06% Miscellaneous Store Retailers -453 $62,578,750 $953 2.01% Florists -4531 $2,762,859 $42 0..09% Office Supplies and Stationer $12,018.981 $183 0.39% Used Merchandise Stores -4533 $5,742,728 $87 0,18% Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers -4539 $42,054,182 $641 1_35% Foodservla9 and Drinking Places -722 $145,964,005 $2,223 4.69% Full -Service Restaurants -7221 $62.274,730 $1,253 265% Limited -Service Eating Places -7222 $53.955,128 $822 174% SpecialFoodservices-7223 $2,269,314 $35 0.07% Drinking Places -Alcoholic Beverages -7224 $7,464.834 $114 024% Source: ESRI, John Bums Real Estate Consulting, LLC 25 Retail Gap Analysis: 2016 ,JOHN 14' BURNS REAL ESTA`E CONSULTING Our gap analysis indicates demand for approximately 182,000 square feet of space at the Subject, depending on the estimated 20% capture rate. JBREG_GAP ANALYSIS t2Mj_ EnpeMrttwe Cat rles PMA Retail Potential Estmated Retalt sales PMA Crap Gap {% of PMA E ores) SMA nfkm =actor SMA Spending Propensay Oy Use SMA Inflow S PMA Reconciliation lllifiew + OutfloWl Food ServiceJEating and Drinking Places $91,612,219 $28,783,118 $62,829,101 68-6% 13.50% 13.5% $7,344,513 $70,173,614 Food and Beverage Stores $155,405,645 $105,755,178 $49,650,467 31-9% 34.00% 22.9% $31!347,474 $80,997,941 Ciotl;:ng and Accessories Stores $45,256,255 $2,377,534 $42,878,721 94.7% 2.25% 6-7% $61)4,472 $43,483,193 Motor Vehicle Parts $13.552,320 $1,055,695 $12,496,625 922% 3-35% 2-0% $269,719 $12,766,344 Health and Personal Care Stores $53,944,347 $15,132,577 $38,811,770 71.9% 1190% 8.0% $3,821,728 $42,633,498 Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores $26,772,513 $5,798,254 $20,974,259 78.3% 9.30% 4,0% $1,480,539 $22,454,798 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip & Supply Stores $44,721,093 $18,739,200 $25,981,893 58-1% 17.50% 6.7% $4,684,609 $30,666,502 EntedainrnerTVElectronics/AppFances $36,166,483 $6,456,861' $29,709,616 82,1% 7,50% 5,3% _$1,611,241 $31,320,857 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Book/Music $20,707,847 $20,121,884 $585,963 2.8% 40.90% 3.1% $5,028,114 $5,614,077 Department Store $149,572,377 $200,313,205 $50,740,828) -33.9% 5700% 22-1% $50612,631 ($128,197) Office Su *SfGdlts/Used Merchandise/Olher $39,212,6e7 59,195-799 530,016,848 765% 1000% 58% $2.332,439 $32.349.287 Total $67'6,923,746 5473,729.311 $263,194,43517 38.914 1 AJ .84% 100% S10,137,478 5372,331,913 Sources: ESRI, ULI Dollars & Cents z The PMA Retail Demand is a calculation of the total population of the Primary Market Area, multiplied by the per I capita income (per ESRD, multiplied by the spending € propensity for various retail uses (per ESRI). The SMA Inflow is a caicutation of the total population of the The gap is positive, which indicates residents likely have Secondary Market Area (per ESRI), multiplied by the per capita more income to spend in the PMA than they are currently income (per ESRI), to equal total income for the SMA. After s ending. subtracting PMA total income (to isolate only the SMA), we p multiply the SMA total income by spending propensity for various retail uses (per ESRI) and use an inflow factor to keep total SMA Inflow to approximately 25%, per ULI. I OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL RETAIL SPACE AT SUBJECT SITE (PER J9REC GAP ANALYSIS) Sources: =SRI- ULI Dollars & Ce-,- EstimatE.d PMA Demand Estimated Subject Potential .� 26 SUEUF-CT PROJECT CAPTURE High PMA Reconc,ilatior Revenue PKA (lr1fiQW + Dulflowj Per Sr Avg Reconc iliation sub)ect Site 5ublecl Site iture callegories Oppo-tuni SF Capture _ Demand iSF C-apitire Demand SF Food Service/Eating and Drinking Places F $70,173,614 $378 185,777 150% 2.7,867 250% 46,444 Food and Beverage Stores $80,997,941 $559 144,887 20.0% 28,977 25.0% 36,222 Clothing and Accessories Stores $43,483,193 $416 104,652 15.0% '15,698 25.0% 26,163 Motor Vehicle Parts $12,766,344 $270 47,316 15.0% 7,097 25.0% 11,829 Health and Personal Care Stores $42,633,498 $558 76,409 150% '11,461 25-0% 19,102 Fumiture and Home Furnishings Stores $22,454,798 $486 46,236 150% 6,935 25.0% 11,559 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip & Supply Stores $30,666,502 $486 63,145 15.0% 9,472 25.0% 15,786 Entertainment/Electronics/Appliances $31,320,857 $378 82,918 15.0% 12,438 25-0% 20,730 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Book/Music $5,614,077 $237 23,645 150% 3,547 25.0% 5,911 Department Store ($128,197) $430 0 15.0% 0 25.0% 0 ,Office Su lies+GifLvUsed Merchandise/Other $32.349,287 $270 19,898 15.0% ;%.90 25,0°4 29-974 Total 5372,3315113 3406 894,1384 •- 14.1,477 -- 223,721 AVERAGE SUPPORTASLE 5LM FOR THE SUBJECT SITE ;SF) t 182,59$ Sources: =SRI- ULI Dollars & Ce-,- EstimatE.d PMA Demand Estimated Subject Potential .� 26 Retail Gap Analysis: 2021 ,JOHN BUR�,NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Utilizing ESRI's population forecast for the PMA, our gap analysis for 2021 shows an opportunity of over 288,000 square feet at the Subject site. JBREC GAP ANALYSIS Expenditure Ca es PMA Retail Potential Estmated Retail Sales PMA Gap 1 Gap (% of PMA Expenditures) SMA Inflow Factor SMA Spending Propensity QM-pl Use SMA Inflow $ PIMA Reconciliation (Inflow + Outflow) Food Service/Eating and Drinking Places $115,362.521 $31,012,702 $84,349,818 73 1% 13.50% 13.5% $17,230,560 $101,580,378 Food and Beverage Stores $195,694,277 $113,947,136 $81,747,141 41.8% 34.00% 22.9% $73,604,633 3155,351,774 Clothing and Accessories Stores $56,988,857 $2,561,701 $54,427,156 95-5%---2.25% 6.7% $1,419,636 $55,846,791 Motor Vehicle Parts $17,065,734 $1,137,471 $15,928,264 93.3% 3.35% 2.0/ $633,167 $16,561,431 Health and Personal Care Stores $67,929,321 $16,304,770 $51,624,552 76.0% 11 90% 810°/ $8,962,351 $60,586,903 Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores $33,713,239 $6,247,396 $27,465,843 81.5% 930% 4.0% $3,474,494 $30,940,337 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores $56,314,955 $20,190.767 $36,124,188 64.1% 1750% 6.7% $11,069,806 $47,193,994 Entertainment/Electronics,Appliances $45,542,578 $6,957,026 $38,585,552 84.7% 7.50% 5.3% $3,783,921 $42,369,473 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Book/Music $26,076,319 $21,680,556 $4,395,763 16.9% 4090% 3.1% $11,859,721 $16,255,483 Department Store $188,348,745 $215,829,773 ($27.481.028) -14.6% 57.00% 221% $118,904,455 $91,423,427 Office Supplies/Gifts/Used Merchandise/Other $49,378,455 $9,908.120 $39.470.335 4 799% 10.00% 58% $5,495,020 $44.965.355 Total $852,415,002 $445,777,418 $406,637,584 1 47.71/ 16.84% 1001! $256,437.762 $663,075.346 Sources: ESRI, ULI Dollars & Cents OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL RETAIL SPACE AT SUBJECT SITE (PER JBREC GAP ANALYSIS) The SMA Inflow is a calculation of the total population of the Secondary Market Area (per ESRI), multiplied by the per capita The PMA Retail Demand is a calculation of the total income (per ESRI), to equal total income for the SMA. After population of the Primary Market Area, multiplied by the The gap is positive, which indicates residents likely have more subtracting PMA total income (to isolate only the SMA), we per capita income (per ESRI), multiplied by the spending income to spend in the PMA than they are currently spending. multiply the SMA total income by spending propensity for propensity for various retail uses (per ESRI), Reconciliation various retail uses (per ESRI) and use an inflow factor to keep Conservative total SMA Inflow to approximately 25%, per ULI. 27 OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL RETAIL SPACE AT SUBJECT SITE (PER JBREC GAP ANALYSIS) SUBJECT PROJECT CAPTURE PMA Reconciliation Revenue Conservative Optimistic (Inflow + Outflow) Per SF Avg PMA Reconciliation Subject Site Subject Site les O rtun" SF Ca lure Demand (SF) Cat Demand SF Food Service/Eating and Drinking Places $101,580,378 $411 247.159 15.0% 37,074 25.0% 61,790 Food and Beverage Stores $155,351,774 $608 255,400 15.0% 38,310 25.0% 63,850 Clothing and Accessories Stores $55,846,791 $452 123,530 15.0% 18,529 25.0% 30,882 Motor Vehicle Parts $16,561,431 $294 56,415 15.0% 8,462 25X% 14,104 Health and Personal Care Stores $60,586,903 $607 99,798 15.0% 14,970 25.0% 24,950 Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores $30,940,337 $528 58,553 15.0% 8,783 25.0% 14,638 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores $47,193,994 $528 89,312 15,0% 13,397 25.0% 22,328 Entertainment/ElectronicsiAppliances $42,369,473 $411 103,091 15.0% 15,464 25.0% 25,773 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Book/Music $16,255,483 $258 62,923 15,0% 9,438 25.0% 15,731 Department Store $91,423,427 $467 195,618 15.0% 29,343 25.0% 48,904 Office Su lies/Gifts/Usec Merchandise/Other $44,965,355 $294 153 169 15.0% 22,975 250% 38.292 216,745 361.242 - _ - 288,993 Sources: ESRI, ULI Dollars & Cents Sources: ESRI, ULI Dollars & Cents 27 .[ JOHN 1j• BUF�NS Retail Gala Analysis. 2026 REAL ESTATE CONSULTING By 2026, with expected strong population growth, the estimated demand for the Subject grows to over 435,000 square feet. JBREC GAP ANALYSIS (2026) Sources. SSRI, ULI Dollars & Cents The PMA Retail VDemand is a calculation of the total population of the Primary Market Area, multiplied by the Outflow leakage is positive. which •ndicates the need for mo re per capita income (per ESRI), multiplied by the spending retail in 2626 as the population in the PMA increases. propensity for various retail uses (per ESRI). The SMA Inflow is a calculation of the total population of the Secondary Market Area (per ESRI), multiplied by the per capita income (per SSRI), to equal total income for the SMA. After subtracting PMA total income (to isolate only the SMA)I, we multiply the SMR total income by spending propensity for various retail uses (per ESRI) and use an inflow factor to keep total SMA Inflow to approximately 25%, per ULI. OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL RETAIL SPACE AT SUBJECT SITE (PER JBREC GAP ANALYSIS) Expenditure Categories PMA Retail Potential Estmated Retail Sales= PMA Gap Gap (% of PMA Ex enditures : SMA Inflow Factor SMA. Spending Propensity by Use SMA Inflow PMA Reconciliation (Inflow + Outflow) Food Service/Eating and (Drinking Places $144,449,731 $33.403,984 $111,045,748 769% 1350% 13.5% $32,352860 $143,398.608 Optimistic Food and Beverage Stores $2_45,036,131 5122,733,202 $122.302,929 49.9% 34.)0% 22.9°o $138,203,311 $260.506,240 Clothing and Accessories Stores $71,357,882 52,759,225 $68,1398,656 96.1% 2.25% 6.7% $2,665,570 $71,264,227 328,736 Motor Vehicle Parts $21.368,645 $1.225,177 $20,143,468 94.3"/o 3.35% 2.0% $1,188,862 $21,332,330 15.0% Health and Personal Care Stores $85,056,846 $17,561,9.73 $67,494,873 79A% 11.90% 8.0% $16,828,106 $84,322,979 22,278 Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores $42,213,608 $6,729,110 $35,484,498 84.1% 9.30% 4.0% $6,523,863 $42,008,361 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores $70,514,064 $21,747,607 $48,766,457 69.2% 17.50% 6.7% $20,785.156 $69.551,614 25.0% Entertainment/Electronics(Appliances $57,025,567 $7,493,458 $49,532,109 86.9% 7.50% 5.3% $7,104,856 $56,636,966 18,725 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Book/Music $32,651,13.5 $23,352,268 $9,298,867 28.5"i" 40.90% 3.1% $22,268.335 $31,567,202 Ertertainment/Electronics/Appliances Department Store $235.838,515 5232;47'1,652 $3,366,863 1,4% 57.00% 22.1% $223.260,257 $226,627,120 $31,567,202 Office Su lies/Gifts/Used Merchandise/Other $61,828,612 $10,672,100 $51,' 56,512 827% 10.00% 5.8% $10,317 692 $61,474,204 $496 Total $1,067,340,736 $480,149,756 7,190,980 1 55.0% 18.84% 100% $481,498,870 $1,068,689,850 Sources. SSRI, ULI Dollars & Cents The PMA Retail VDemand is a calculation of the total population of the Primary Market Area, multiplied by the Outflow leakage is positive. which •ndicates the need for mo re per capita income (per ESRI), multiplied by the spending retail in 2626 as the population in the PMA increases. propensity for various retail uses (per ESRI). The SMA Inflow is a calculation of the total population of the Secondary Market Area (per ESRI), multiplied by the per capita income (per SSRI), to equal total income for the SMA. After subtracting PMA total income (to isolate only the SMA)I, we multiply the SMR total income by spending propensity for various retail uses (per ESRI) and use an inflow factor to keep total SMA Inflow to approximately 25%, per ULI. OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL RETAIL SPACE AT SUBJECT SITE (PER JBREC GAP ANALYSIS) Sources: ESRI, ULI Dollars & Cents `�Mrm- In 2026 Dollars (Projected) 28 SUBJECT PROJECT CAPTURE Reconciliation (Inflow+ Revenue PMA Conservative Optimistic Outflow) Per SF Avg Reconciliation Subject Site Subject Site giWiture categories Opportunity (SF► Capture Demand SF Capture Demand (SF) _ . Food Service/Eating and Drinking Places $143,398,608 $436 328,736 15,0% 49,310 25.0% 82.,184 Food and Beverage Stores $260,506;240 $646 403,514 15.0% 60.527 25.0% 100,878 Clothing and Accessories Stores $71,264,227 $480 148,519 15.0% 22,278 25.0% 37,130 Motor Vehicle Parts $21,332.330 $312 68,465 15.0% 10,270 25:0% 17 116 Health and Personal Care Stores $84,322.979 $644 130.866 15.0% 19,630 25.0% 32 716 Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores $42,008,361 $561 74,902 15.0% 11.235 25,0% 18,725 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores $69,551,614 $561 124,012 15.0% 18,602 25.0% 31,003 Ertertainment/Electronics/Appliances $56,636,966 $436 129,838 15,0% 19,476 25.0% 32460 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Book/Music $31,567,202 $274 115,129 15.0% 17,269 25:0% 28,782 Department Store - $226,627.120 $496 456,877 15.0% 68,531 25.0% 114,219 Of5ee Supplies/Gifts/Used Merchandise/Other $61,474,204 $312 197,298 150% 29.595 250% 49 325 Total i - $1,068,689,850 $469 2,178,154 -- 326,723 -- 544,539 AVERAGE SUPPORTABLE SIZE FOR THE SUBJECT SITE (SF): 435,631 Sources: ESRI, ULI Dollars & Cents `�Mrm- In 2026 Dollars (Projected) 28 Hypothetical Retail Center at Subject (2016) ,JOHN f'' -BUF�NS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING Based on anticipated demand of retail stores in the PMA as measured by the income gap, we provide a hypothetical retail center at the Subject today. The conservative size of a retail center is approximately 144,000 square feet while the optimistic size of a retail center is just below 229,000 square feet. Hypothetical Retail Center Demand by Supportable SF - 2016 JBREC Conservative JBREC Optimistic Tenant Type Supportable SF (2016) Supportable SF (2016) Department -Store/ General Merchandise S.upennarket (Food and Drug) Grocery Drugs/Pharmacy Food Service Telephone Store/ Electronics Home bnprovement/ Furniturel_Garden ------ -- - -- Clothing afto ACcessories Sing �l Hobby / Book/ Music) Other Auto Fame!. dories/ Tire Stores O .SuppfiewGiRs/Used Merchandise/Other PSI. Service RETAIL SUBTOTAL 0 34y708 28,977 5,731 27;867 12,438 16.407 15.698 3,547 7,097 17,985 5,731 14'1.477 0 46,773 36,222 9,551 46,444 20,730 27,345 26,163 5,911 11,829 29,974 9,551 223,721 Other - Bank, 'Finaneial 2,500 5,000 TOTAL 143,977 228,721 29 30 pit 244 o , !�sD R • 75 Z - 14V1.. immokalpwRO;- •� -,7 ,. - _ 1mm p��l D _ Q ,moi � `] � � � �; • H Vnndeibnl 8rnr•h q[y" Al {$} ! Golden Gate ELVR w Pine Ridyv R❑ •� L'. is JOHN 1��.,,,BURINS Commercial Inventory- Primary Marker Area REAL ESTATE CONSULTING The following map illustrates the existing retail centers within the Primary Market Area of the Subject. These centers are well -occupied with an average vacancy of 98%. Sources: ESpatial i 3r[ Ave NW 1st Ave NW Golden G,,tP ANd W 1 st Ave SW I%L townuhah-e yid a SougainviMa Center 9 Cameron Commons 9 Insignia Center Mission Hills Shopping Center Northbrooke Plaza 9 Oaks Farms 9 Pebbiebrooke Center 9 Peiican Strand Shoppes of Pebbiebrooke 9 SUBJECT 9 Tarpon Say Plaza 9 uptown Center 9 Wal-Mart Anchored Center Commercial Inventory Summary - Primary Market Area ,JOHN 1_',: -:,,BURN S REAL ESTATE CONSULTING The following summary illustrates all retail centers within the Primary Market Area, or a 3 -mile radius, of the Subject. The total occupancy for the PMA is 98%, indicating a strong retail market that could absorb additional space. to S li�jet.l (miles) Parcels Vacant (SF) • Broker Included Cameron Commons 8855 Immokalee Road 2.0 32,000 III 1,728 95% Starbucks, Pelican Larry's Bar & Grill CRE Consultants 25118010103, 2511 Wal-Mart Anchored Center 5420 JULIET BLVD f 1.7 253,491 0 100% Wal-Mart, Verizon Wireless N/A 1196760005, 9 0 24745000529, 24745000545, 24745001065. Tarpon Bay Plaza 2415 TARPON BAY BLVD 12 302,223 2,807 1 99% Target, World Market, Staples, Panera Kite Realty 24745001609, 24745001625, Bread, Chili's, Burger King, City Matress 24745001641, 24745001683, 24745002022, 24745002048, 24745002064 Dunkin Donuts is anchor tenant; Oaks Farms 4835 IMMOKALEE RD 2.0 65,000 0 100% Commercial building under N/A rehabilitation/demolition for future Seed to 25540000668 Table b Oakes Farms. 60204200028, 60204200044, 60204200060, 60204200248, Mission Hills Shopping Center 14267 COLLIER BLVD 27 141,247 2,858 980/ Winn Dixie, Anytime Fitness, Subway, Mayhugh Realty 60204200280, 60204200329, AT&T 50704700345, 60204200361, 60204200400, 60204200442, 60204200484, Oa20 s � Uptown Center P 27001mmokalee Road 3.0 75,000 11,624 85% Jason's Deli Premier 78569500026, Commercial 78569500044, ,q oso„ 63944000022. 63944000488, 63944000527, 63944000543, 63944000569, Northbrooke Plaza 2545 NORTHBROOKE PLAZ DR 12 95,739 3,875 96% 7-11, L'Appetito, Bob Evans, Children's Equity, Inc. / AJS 63944000585, 63944000640, Montesorri, Reed Orthodontics Realty Group 63944000721, 63944000747, 63944000763, 63944000815, 63944000909- 63944000925, 63944nn0983 86261900022, Pebblebrooke Center 15235 COLLIER BLVD 1.9 80,663 1,141 99% Bank of America, Sun Trust Bank, Wells Welsh 66261901021.Fargo Bank, Christie's Flowers Companies 66261901225, P 66261901429, 66262004503 hoppes of Pebblebrooke 15289 COLLIER BLVD 1.9 117,621 0 100% Publix, Walgreens, BB&T, McDonald's Regency Centers 66263000027, 66263000069, 3 _ 66679700047, 66679700241. Pelican Strand 5610 STRAND BLVD 1.7 122,972 0 100% Publix, SuperCuts, Bank of America, Cushman & 66679700568, McDonald's, Fifthrrhird Bank, Wells Fargo Wakefield 66679700843, 66679700869, 66679700885, 6 7A7 Insignia Center 7765 PRESERVE LN 0.7 13,398 2,146 84% Dunkin Donuts TCG Commercial 68391446182 Bougainvillea Center 7740 PRESERVE LN 07 40,866 1,672 98% Zook's Sports, Waves of Wonder, Subway, CRE Consultants 68391446166, US Post Office 68391446108 Tcrtals., Primary Market Area 1,340,7201 27,851 98% Source: LoopNet, Collier Appraiser Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area ,JOHN 14` BURNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Cameron• 11 Address 8855 Immokalee Road Proximity to Subject 2.0 mi es Gross Leasable SF 32,000 SF Vacant SF 1,728 SF Occupancy % 94.6% Anchor Tenants Starbucks, Pelican Larry's, Tropical Smoothie Cafe, Allstate, NY Pizza Leasing Broker CRE Consultants Lis of Parcels inc uded 25118010103, 25118010080 Sources: LoopNet 34 Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area ,JOHN 14-`- BUF�NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Anchored Address Center 5420 Juliet Boulevard Proximity to Subject 1.7 miles Gross Leasable SF • r r ,JOHN 14-`- BUF�NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Anchored Address Center 5420 Juliet Boulevard Proximity to Subject 1.7 miles Gross Leasable SF 253,491 SF Vacant SF 0 SF Occupancy % 100% Anchor Tenants Wal-Mart, Verizon Wireless Leasing Broker N/A List of Parcels included 196760005, 199283000 Sources: LoopNet 35 Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area ,JOHN Ii. BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING Tarpon Bay Plaza Address 2415 Tarpon Bay Plaza Proximity to Subject 1.2 miles Gross Leasable SF 302,223 SF Vacant SF 2,807 SF Occupancy % 99% Target, World Market, Staples, Anchor Tenants Panera Bread, Chili's, Burger King, City Matress Leasing B, oker Kite Realty 24745000529,24745000545, 24745001065,24745001609, Lest of Pa, ---e s included 24745001625, 24745001641, 24745001683,24745002022, 24745002048,24745002064 Source: LoopNet 36 Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area This property is zoned commercial and is owned by Oakes Farms, Inc. There is an existing Dunkin Donuts building on an outparcel and the previous commercial building is under construction with plans for a Seed to Table store, which will open November 2016. Plans call for a 65,000 square foot store with a variety of retail service departments, including a market, food court, an outdoor cafe and a smoothie, juice and wine bar. - - ,JOHN 1i BURNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Carlton Lakes Address 4835 Immokalee Road Proximity to Subject 2.0 miles Gross Leasable SF 65,000 SF Vacant SF 65,000 Sf Occupancy % N/A Anchor Tenants Dunkin Donuts completed on outparcel Leasing Broker N/A List of Parcels included 25540000668 Source: LoopNet, Naples Daily News 37 Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area ,JOHN I4..BUI\NS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING Mission• • • • Center Address '14267 Collier Boulevard Proximity to Subject 2.7 miles Gross Leasab a SF 141,247 SF Vacant SF 2,858 SF Occupancy % 98% Anchor Tenants Winn Dixie, Anytime Fitness, Subway, AT&T Leasing Broker Mayhugh Realty 60204200028,60204200044, 60204200060,60204200248, List of Parcels included 60204200280, 60204200329, 60204200345,60204200361, 60204200400,60204200442, 60204200484,60204200523 Source: LoopNet 38 Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area Source: LoopNet ,JOHN 11 -BURNS f_EAL ESTATE CONSULTING Northbrooke Address 2545 Northbrooke Plaza Drive Proximity to Subject 1.2 miles Gross Leasable SF 95,739 SF Vacant SF 3,875 SF Occupancy % 96% 7-11, L'Appetito, Bob Evans, Anchor Tenants Children's Montesorri, Reed Orthodontics - Leasing Broker Equity, Inc. / AJS Realty Group 63944000022,63944000488, 63944000527,63944000543, 63944000569,63944000585, List of Parcels incWded 63944000640, 63944000721, 63944000747,63944000763, 63944000815,63944000909, 63944000925,63944000983 39 Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area Sources: LoopNet ,JOHN 14• BURNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Pebblebrooke Address 15289 Collier Boulevard Proximity to Subject 1.9 miles Gross Leasable SF 80,663 SF Vacant SF 1,141 SF Occupancy % 99/0 Bank of America, Sun Trust Bank, Anchor Tenants 'Wells Fargo Bank, Christie's Flowers Welsh Companies 'Welsh Companies 36261900022,66261901021, List of Parcels included 66261901225, 66261901429, 66262004503 This center has a mix of office K retail uses Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area aources: Loopmet, Hegency Centers JOHN 14' BURNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING /41 Address 15289 Collier Boulevard Proximity to Subject 1.9 miles Gross Leasable SF 117,621 SF Vacant SF 0 SF Occupancy % 100% Anchor Tenants Publix, Walgreens, BB&T, McDonald's Leasing Broker Regency Centers List of Parcels included 66263000027, 66263000069, 66263000085 /41 Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area ,JOHN 1'41 BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING Pelican Strand Address 5610 Strand Boulevard Proximity o Subject 1.7 miles Gross Leasable SF '122,972 SF Vacant SF 0 Occupancy % 100% Publix, SuperCuts, Bank of Anchor Tenants America, McDonald's, Fifth/Third Bank, Wells Fargo Leasing B oker Cushman & Wakefield (36679700047, 66679700241, List of Parols incl ided 66679700568, 66679700843, 66679700869,66679700885, 66679700908 Source: LoopNet 42 Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area Sources: LoopNet, TCG Commercial ,JOHN 14' -.BURNS HEAL ESTATE CONSULTING 43 Insignia Center Address 7765 Preserve Lane Proximity to Subject 0.7 mile Gross Leasable SF 13,398 SF Vacant SF 2,146 SF Occupancy % 84% Anchor Tenants Dunkin Donuts Leasing Broker TCG Commercial List of Parcels included 68391446182 43 Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area PRESERYEUiXE r j - R a ,JOHN 14• BUFNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Bougainvillea Center Address 7740 Preserve Lane Proximity to Subject 0.7 mile Gross Leasable SF 40,866 SF Vacant SF 1,672 SF Occupancy % 96% Anchor Tenants Zook's Sports, Waves of Wonder Montessori Leasing Broker CINE Consultants List of Parcels inc uded 68391446166 68391446108 Source: LoopNet 44 Local Retail Properties: Primary Market Area ,JOHN 14-=JBUF�NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Uptown Center Address 2700 Immokalee Road Proximity to Subject 3.0 miles Grass Leasable SF 75,000 SF Vacant SF 11,624 SF Occupancy % 85% Anchor Tenants Jason's Deli, CiCi's Pizza Leasing Broker Premier Commercial List of Parcels included 78569500028, 78569500044, 78569500060 Source: LoopNet 45 Commercial Inventory- SecondaryMarket Areas JOHN �T �,Bu�N G PEAL ESTATE CONSULTING In order to make reasonable assumptions regarding the demand for retail at the Subject, we also surveyed commercial properties within a 4 -mile radius of the Subject. These centers also have a high occupancy rate of 93% with 42,109 SF of available space. We accounted for 50% of this vacancy in our supply calculations. FIZ 11 t j 4 i Way 9 ,V,;L"Or Irrxnokalra atd &tEJr 1 ' mmpi l�&r 0 Ir[Mr0 il`i1pP� rrr ; nli.gr-1 kr{ a 03 ■ ♦ ■ I J v a ski" 6m FlrqrF $choo Wn aw m 'tapir! �I �. $ n• a� •a �� r vl h I� A► 'c Sun-PJBFur Lnown I s fk is4xniwrdY !tr AM— 001111 P. 10111111, A '00 r IL c br!! ariaah Rd eft[k Eleach ltd Wuidaib it Brach Rd - Vanderbilt Beach Rd 1-10 (kr '6l av Dr Mrug Hill .1r R .r. s - t Source: E:Spatial Q Greentree center Naples Walk 0 Pipers Crossing Q Shops at Vanderbilt Commercial Inventory Summary (4 -mile Radius) ,JOHN 14'" !BURNS I,EAL ESTATE CONSULTING The following summary chart details the current inventory within a 4 -mile radius of the Subject. In order to ensure reasonable assumptions regarding the current supply in the marketplace, we have factored 50% of this vacancy, or 21,055 SF, into the supply calculation. Center ...Occupancy Proximity Naples Walk 2450 Vanderbilt Beach Road 3.7 129,973 7.810 94% Publix, Hallmark TCG 63518000526, 63518000571, 3518063 Shops at Vanderbilt 2355 Vanderbilt Beach Road 37 226,000 49,148 78% Pei Wei, Starbucks, Naples Family Fitness Galleria Shoppes 3456950020 at Vanderbilt Pipers Crossing 1201 Piper Boulevard 3.2 47,800 1,775 Restaurants, Zoom Tan Jack Crifasi 67954000021, 67954000047, 67954000063, 96% 67954000089, 67954000102, 67954000128, 67954000144, 67954000351 Greentree Center 2302 Immokalee Road 1 3.2 1 185,000 1 12,924 93%CVS, NCH Healthcare Jack Cnfasi 4690000403 Totals: 4tplete Radius 5884773 74,657 no/. www realestateconsulting.com 47 Additional Local Retail ProlDerties (4--rnile radius) ,JOHN 1j" BUIF;��S REAL ESTATE CONSULTING Address Naples Walk 2450 Vanderbilt Beach Road Proximity to Subject 3.7 miles Gross Leasable SF 129,973 SF Vacant SF 7,810 SF Occupancy % 94% Anchor Tenants Publix, Hallmark, Massage Luxe Leasing Broker I TCG List of Parcels included 63518000525, 63518000571, 63518000623 Source: LoopNet 48 Additional Local Retail Properties (4 -mile radius) Source: LoopNet ,JOHN 111 � BURNS DEAL ESTATE CONSULTING The Galleria Shoppes at Vanderbilt Address 2355 Vanderbilt Beach Road Proximity to Subject 3.7 miles Gross Leasable SF 226,000 SF Vacant SF 49,148 SF Occupancy % 78% Anchor Tenants Pei Wei, Starbucks, Naples Family Fitness Leasing Broker Galleria Shoppes at Vanderbilt List of Parcels included 34569500020 .• Additional Local Retail Properties (4 -mile radius) Source: LoopNet JOHN II,- BUF�NS DEAL ESTATE CONSULTING 50 Pipers• • Address '1201 Piper Boulevard Proximity to Subject 3.17 miles Gross Leasable SF Vacant SF 47,800 SF 1,775 SF Occupancy % 96% Anchor Tenants Restaurants, Zoom Tan Leasing Broker Jack Crifasi List of Parcels included E37954000021,67954000047, (37954000063, 67954000089, (37954000102,67954000128, (37954000144, 67954000351 50 Additional Local Retail Properties (4 -mile radius) . GRMN TPfF 'rr CENTER CVS 1 phalrmlacy ; ,H wellness Center Rehabilitation "`" " Pedlatric Therapy Systrrn Source: LoopNet now ,JOHN li" -!BUFZNS FZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Greentree Center Address 2302 Immokalee Road Proximity to Subject 3.25 miles Gross Leasable SF 185,000 SF Vacant SF 12,924 SF Occupancy % 93% Anchor Tenants CVS, NCH Healthcare Leasing Broker Jack Crifasi List of Parcels included 46690000403 S� 52 Potential Commercial Inventory - Primary Market Areas ,JOHN l!. BURNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING The following map illustrates the vacant parcels within the 3 -mile Primary Market Area of the Subject. We have reviewed all of these parcels to determine the potential future retail supply given the Collier County Future Land Use plan. Vacant Parcel E&iA Commerical Subdistrict Project Boundary 3 mi Buffer Source: Stantec, Collier Appraiser Potential Commercial Inventory -- Primary Market Areas ,JOHN 14• BU NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING The fallowing chart is a summary of the vacant parcel analysis within the 3 -mile Primary Market Area, as well as our estimate of potential future retail supply. For those parcels that are vacant but are in a Commercial Subdistrict, we estimated 10,000 SP of developable retail space per acre. Since other uses, such as office, medical office or multifamily housing would be allowed in these subdistricts, we discounted the total retail potential by 30% to arrive at the total estimated retail development. Some parcels have already been approved for a set amount of retail development, which we accounted for as well. Vacant Parcels Summary Parcel Name Acrea a Total Estimated Retail Development Notes 49660084469 Cameron Partners II 1 (34 51,072 Total retail development for Cameron Commons is 1 x8,000 SF A 32,000 SF retail strip center. 13 000 SF CVS and 5.000 SF outparcel (Starbucks & Maftress Firm) are already completed. We also excluded an estimated 5.928 SF Race Trac store, which will be developed on parcel 49660084524. 49660084485 Cameron Partners II 1 42 49660084508 Cameron Partners 11 1 35 49660484524 Race Trac 1.74 49660084540 Piedmont Development 1.01 49660084566 Piedmont Development 49660084582 Cameron Partners II 49660084605 Cameron Partners II 0 95 25118010064 Fifth Third Bank 1.01 Cameron_ ntciqQz Fxcluded 66262002084 Pebblebrooke Master 0.00 N/A Conservation Area 66262002589 Pebblebrooke Master 8.04 N/A 00192920001 Tree Plateau 33.6 235.200 Commercial Subdistrict 00188040005 Tree Farm of SW FL LLC 14.5 101,500 Commercial Subdistrict 00188200007 Creekside West 7.3 51.100 Commercial Subdistrict 00190040802 Creekside West 10 70,000 Commercial Subdistrici 00203280009 Voila II LLC 15.97 60,000 Sonoma Oaks MPUD which allows 114 units of Residential, 456 units of ALF & a variety of commercial uses up to 120,000 SF 00203680007 Voila 11 LLC 8.71 00204520001 Voila II LLC 7.35 602:04200248 Tri -Management 1.03 7,210 Commercial Subdistrict 79271800167 Vanderbilt Commons 1.35 90,000 Vanderbilt Commons is a mixed-use commercial project allowing up to 90,000 SF of retail & 60,000 SF of office 79271800183 Vanderbilt Commons 1.16 79271800125 Vanderbilt Commons 3.43 79271800141 Midgard Self Storage Naples 2.37 79271800109 Vanderbilt Commons 1.51 79271800086 Vanderbilt Commons 1.59 60204200484 Autozone 1.49 N/A Auto Zone currently under construction. Square foota e is estimated. 00203042108 Bradford Square 9.04 N/A Bradford Square Retirement Living - Excluded 00201000003 Sandalwood Apartments 7.134 N/A Apartment Community - Excluded 68567000080 Northbrooke Professional 2.28 N/A Conservation Area 00162040005 Willoughby Drive LLC 5.0 35,000 Currently zoned Residential but in Commercial Subdistrict 'totals 27.82 701,082 JOHN I4' -.BURNS Potential Commercial Inventory - Immokalee & Collier Blvd. REAL ESTATE CONSULTING The intersection of Immokalee and Collier Boulevard has a high concentration of vacant parcels and is designated a Commercial Subdistrict in the Future Land Use Map. We have accounted for these parcels below. Source: LoopNet, Collier Appraiser Parcel Acreage Notes 1 49660082584 7.73 County Owned — Excluded 2 25118010064 1.0 Owned by Fifth Third Bank - Excluded 3 49660084540 1.01 Future Commercial 4 49660084566 1 Future Commercial 5 49660084582 1 Future Commercial 6 49660084605 0.95 Future Commercial 7 49660084524 1 74 Owned by Race Trac — Excluded 8 49660084508 1.35 Future Commercial 9 49660084485 1.42 Future Commercial '1® 49660084469 1.64 Future Commercial 11 00192920001 33.6 DOR Code: 69, Commercial Subdistrict 12 66262002084 66262002589 27.5 Owned by Pebblebrooke Lakes Association — Conservation - Excluded 13 00188040005 14.12 DOR Code: 99, Commercial Subdistrict 14 00190040802, 00188200007 17'3 DOR Code: 99, Commercial Subdistrict Total Potential Retail 523.800 SF Potential Commercial Inventory -- Vanderbilt Beach Road & Collier Blvd. JOHN 'BURNS R_EAL ESTATE CONSULTING The intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Collier Boulevard has several vacant parcels, as well as the Sonoma Oaks MPUD. The accounting of these parcels is detailed below. Source: LoopNet, Collier Appraiser Parcel A creage Notes, Sonoma Oaks MPUD which allows for 114 residential 00203280009, units and/or a maximum of 1 00203680007, 9.38 456 senior housing units, 00204520001 and a variety of commercial uses up to 120,000 SF and/or senior housing units. 2 60204200248 1.03 Vacant Commercial 3 60204200484 1.49 AutoZone under construction 4 79271800141 2.37 Owned by Midgard Self Storage Naples 5 79271800167 1.35 Vanderbilt Commons is a 6 79271800183 1.16 mixed-use commercial project allowing up to 7 79271800125 3.43 90,000 SF of retail & 60,000 8 79271800109 1.51 SF of office 9 79271800086 1.59 Total Potential Retail1'61,214 SF Potential Commercial Inventory - Other ,JOHN 1 ja= ,BUR, (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING The remaining vacant parcels within a 3 -mile radius of the Subject are accounted for below. None of these were determined to add to the future potential retail supply within the Primary Market Area. Source: LoopNet, Collier Appraiser vacant Parcel C"..omrnefical Subdistrict Project Boundary 3 mi Buffer Parcel Acreage Notes Bradford Square 1 00203042108 9.04 Retirement Living — Under Construction - Excluded Sandalwood Age -Restricted 2 00201000003 7.84 Apartment Community — Built Out - Excluded Conservation Area for 3 68567000080 2.285 Northbrooke Professional Village - Excluded 4 00162040005 5.0 Zoned Vacant Residential — Commercial Subdistrict i"e $tv%# 35,000 SF vacant Parcel C"..omrnefical Subdistrict Project Boundary 3 mi Buffer ,JOHN �BUPNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING �wvw.re<ale5' ~��orzs�iltiny � wr; 58 Naples MSA - Employment JOHN A Bins REAL ESTATE CONSULTING The Naples MSA has been adding jobs since 2011, with approximately 3,000 jobs currently being added (year -over -year). Job growth is expected to continue through 2018, with an average of 1,500 jobs to be added per year from 2016 through 2018. Annual Employment Growth vs. Unemployment: Naples, FL N C'7 a LO t-- W OO r N M L17 8r-- W M O N CO It W `F' 0- CL CI_a- O M O 6) O M O O 0 O O O CD O -r--e— -T- -r--� CD tk oa O �i Ci7 d� O O O O 47 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 C] O O O O a 0 O 0 ID r r r t r r r r r r r N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Cil O O 0 O :3 N N N N IiiiiiiiiiiiiiAnnual Job Growth (left axis) —Unemployment (right axis) U Sources: BLS; John Bums Real Estate Consulting, LLC 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Payroll Survey Total 111,300 111,200 114,900 118,700 123,300 129,900 135,100 140,300 137,600 139,100 139,600 139,100 1 -Year Change -10,200 -100 3.700 3,800 4,600 6,600 5,200 3,000 2,500 1,500 500 -500 1 -Year Growth Rate -8.4% -0.1% 3.3% 3.3% 3.9% 5.4% 4.0% 2.2% 1.90/0 1.1% 0.4% -0.4% Unemployment Rate 11.1% 11.6% 10.2% 8.5% 7.1% 6.0% 52% 4.1% JOHN 1k• :BURINS Naples MSA - Employment Sectors REAL ESTATE CONSULTING High income sectors inclusive of Professional and Business Services, Financial Activities, and Information account for a no net job losses or gains in the Naples MSA in the 12 month period between May 2015 and May 2616. Joh growth over the past 12 months has been heavily supported by Construction and Leisure R Hospitality industries. 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 -200 Current YOY Growth in High -Paying vs. Other Sectors: Naples, FL High Income Sectors 300 FM -400 1 -300 Q o u) N LL C ro o U Sources-. BLS; John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC 300 Financial Activities (FA) Information (Info) Professional & Business Services (PBS) Construction (Cons) Education & Health Services (EHS) Government (Gov) Leisure & Hospitality (LH) Manufacturing (Mfg) Other Services (OS) Trade. Transp. and Li ilifies (TTIJ) 200 0 -rr 0� O C� � F- Naples MSA -Top Private Employers ,JOHN 14- BURNS f,EAL ESTATE CONSULTING Top private employers for the Naples MSA are displayed below. Naples Community Hospital is the largest employer in the area, employing approximately 4,000 individuals. Source: Colliergov.net CompanyRank . . CompanyRank . . 1 Naples Community Hospital 4,000 2 Ritz-Carlton Naples 1,110 3 Garquillo, Inc. 1,110 4 Arthrex Inc. 1,056 5 Collier County's SherrifPs Office 1,029 6 Home Team Inspection Service 900 7 Publix Super Markets 800 8 Marriott 700 9 Naples Grande Beach Resort 700 10 Downing Frye Realty 550 11 Gulf Bay Group Co. 500 12 Moorings Park — Home Health 500 13 Continental Transportation Service 500 14 Bentley Village 470 15 John R. Wood Realtor 400 Source: Colliergov.net CompanyRank . . 16 U.S. Post Office 380 17 Finnegan Team 375 18 Naples Beach Hotel & Golf Club 350 19 Walmart 325 20 Cemex 301 21 Home Depot 300 22 Naples Lake Country Club 300 23 Nordstrom 300 24 Seminal Casino Immokalee 300 25 Commercial Concrete System 290 Demographic Analysis ,JOHN [4" BUFt,Js REAL ESTATE CONSULTING We closely analyzed the demographic characteristics in the PNIA, SMA, and Collier County, to further determine the potential for the Subject. The PMA has a total of 41,765 residents, which represents approximately 12% of Collier County total. Ares E¢tero Imm*aWe Population (2016) 354,203 65,648 43,406 SOLrces: ESRI, John Bu ns Real Estate Consulting, LLC 32_ Population Density 2016 ,JOHN 14" BUP\NS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING The population density in the PMA and SMA is relatively high when compared to Collier County, which is a positive attribute for future retail demand. Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC G3 Population Comparison - 2016. RMA represents approximately 12% of total residents in Copier County, while the SMA represents nearly 19%. Papulation Comparison (201 G) ,JOHN jj.:BUF�NS DEAL ESTATE CONSULTING 400,000 — l 354,203 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 55,648 50,000 43,406 0 Collier County 4k0 -Mile Radius 3.0 -Mile Radius Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC 64 Population Growth 2016-2021 ,JOHN 14k BUP,,_NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING According to ESRI, the PMA (3 -mile radius) population is forecasted to grow at 2.4% annually through 2021. This is higher than the population growth rate in Collier County, which is forecast to grow 2.1 % annually through 2016. Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC Expected Annual Population Growth (201 6 to 2021 ) 30,000 2.5% 25,000 2.40/6 • 2.3% 2.3% 20,000 2.2% 15,000 2.1% 2.1% 10,000 —0 --Annual % Increase 7,286 2.0% 5,000 1.9% 1,488 1,033 0 1.8% Collier County 4,0 -Mile Radius 3.0 -Mile Radius Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC Households 2016 ,JOHN('4'A . -7BUF�NS F�EAL ESTATE CONSULTING The PMA benefits from a strong concentration of households, relative to the County, owing to its available land and growing popularity. The strong concentration of households is an indicator of good demand for retail in the PMA. Sources: SSRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC Households - 2016 ,JOHN li— BURNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING There are over 18,000 households within the PMA (3 -mile radius), which is approximately 12.7% of all households in Collier County, Household Comparison X20'16] 160,000 '45,525 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 28,965 18,579 20,000 0 Collier County 4k0 -Mile Radius 3.0 -Mile Radius Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC Household Growth 2016-2021 JOHN lBu�Ns R_JOHN ESTATT E CONSULTING The following chart illustrates projected household growth in Collier County, the SMA (4 -mile radius) and the PMA (3 -mile radius of the Subject). The highest concentration of growth is within the PMA, where households are projected to grow at a 2.4% annual rate through 2021. Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC Expected A n n uaI H ouseho Id Growth (2 016 to 2021 ) 3,500 2.5% 3,009 2.4% 3,000 2.4% 72.3% Z500 2.3% 2,000 2.2% 1,5002 1% --91--Annual % Increase 2.1% 1,000 2.0% 664 500 450 1.90/0 0 1.8°/O Collier County 4,0 -Mile Radius 3.0 -Mile Radius Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC JOHNAge AT Bu�Ns Median A C� fZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING The median age in a 3 -mile radius surrounding the Subject is 50.2 years, which is slightly higher than the median for Collier County of 49.3, and significantly higher than the US average of 37.9, reflecting the large number of retirees in the surrounding area. 60.0 I 50.0 - — -- - I 40.0 37.9 30.0 20.0 r' Y 10.0 f 0.0 United States Source_ ESRI John Burns Real Estate Consulting Median Age (2016) 49.3 Collier County 52.7 50.2 4.0 -Mile Radius 3.0 -Mile Radius We Population Distribution by Age - 2016 ,JOHN 14' 1BUF�NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Collier County has a large portion of alder residents compared to the population distribution of the U.S. Nearly 43% of the PMA is comprised of those aged 55 or older, which reflects the region's popularity with retirees - 70 Population Distribution By Age (2016) 25•k_ 20% ' 15% 10% 5% 0% — - -- - --- - - <15 (Clfidren) 15-24 25-34 We4 45.54 55-64 65+ (Apartment (1st Home {Move -Up Home (2nd Move -Up (Pre -Retirees) (Retirees) Renters) Byers) Buyers) Horne Buyers} ■United States ❑Collier County 134.0 -Mile Radius 03.0 -!Mile Radius Source- ESRI, Jahn Burns Real Estate Consulting 70 JOHN I,4 BURNS Income Trends REAL ESTATE CONSULTING The median income in the PMA is high at $75,020. The Subject benefits from its location within one of the highest income areas in Collier Countv. $80,000 I $70,000 1— $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 $53,217 United States Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC Mediad Household Income (201 6) $56,400 Collier County $73,278 $75,020 4.0 -Mile Radius 3.0 -Mile Radius 71 Income Growth Trends ,JOHN BURNS FZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Due to a national trend of wage increases and the increase of high -paying jobs in Collier County, a majority of the household growth in the PMP is projected to be in high-income brackets of $100,000 and above. Household Growth by Income (2015 to 2421) 4.0% I 2.0% 1. 1� 0.0% -3.0%-- <$25K $25K -$34K $351K -$49K $50K -$74K $75K -$99K $100K -$149K $150K -$199K $200K+ ■ United States ■ Collier County t 4.0 -Mile Radius Ef 3.0 -Mile Radius Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC 72 Median Household Income - 2016 ,JOHN [A -Buf _ S FZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING The median household income surrounding the Subject is higher than the national average, which indicates a high level of purchasing power. Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC 73 Median Net Worth ,JOHN 14' -- BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING The median net worth in the PMA of $225,504 is nigher than the Collier County average of $164,303 in 2016. The net worth in the region is significantly higher than the national average of $84,518. $300,000 Median Net Worth (201 Bl $253,799 $250,000 $225,504 $200,000 $164,303 � ;I i $150,000 $100,000 $84,518 $50,000 $o United States Collier Count~/ 4.0 -Mile Radius 3.0 -Mile Radius Souroes: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC 74 Median Net Worth JOHN lo a BuF�Ns REAL ESTATE CONSULTING The median net worth surrounding the Subject is very high, which illustrates the wealthy retirement population. Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC 75 Tapestry JOHN 1�.-,!BURNS F(gAL ESTATE CONSULTING Tapestry segmentation provides an accurate, detailed description of America's neighborhoods ---U.S. residential areas are divided into fii distinctive segments based on their socioeconomic and demographic composition—then further classifies the segments into LifeMode and Urbanization Groups. LifeMode groups are markets that share a similar experience, such as year of birth, or demographic trait, such as affluence. Urbanization Groups are distinguished based on location only. The LifeMode Groups of the Subject's PMA include a large percentage of "Senior Styles" (63.6%n) and "Cozy Country Living" (15,3%) households. Sources: ESRI, John Burns Real Estate Consulting, LLC LifeMode Highest Affluent Estates: Established wealth -educated, Income 4 well -traveled married couples Q Upscale Avenues: Prosperous, married couples in higher density neighborhoods Uptown Individuals: Younger, urban singles on the move Family Landscapes: Successful younger families in newer housing GenXurban: Gen X in middle age; families with Fewer kids and mortgage Cozy Country Living: Empty nesters in bucolic Middle settings Ethnic Enclaves: I=stablishecl diversity—young, Income Hispanic homeowners with families Middle Ground: Lifestyles of thirty -somethings diQL Senior Styles: Senior lifestyles reveal the effects of saving for retirement Rustic Outposts: Country life with older families, o#der home Midtown Singles: Millennials on the move; single, diverse, and urban Hometown: Growing up and staying close to home; single householders Next Wave: Urban denizens: young, diverse, hardworking families Lowest Scholars and Patriots: College campuses and Income military neighborhoods Q Tapestry Segmentation - Clusters ,JOHN 14; ,BUP,,_NS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING The 67 distinctive segments of Tapestry are also known as "Clusters". The primary cluster groups of the Subject are "Silver & Gold" and "Golden Years", both which are included in the "Senior Styles' LifeMode Group. Source: ESRI Almost the oldest senior market (second to The Elders), the difference of 10 years in median age reveals a socioeconomic difference: This is the most affluent senior market and is still growing. The affluence of Silver and Gold has afforded the opportunity to retire to sunnier climates that feature exclusive communities and vacation homes. These consumers have the free time, ! stamina, and resources to enjoy I the good life. J I Independent, active seniors nearing the end of their careers or already in retirement best describes Golden Years residents. This market is primarily singles living alone or empty nesters. Those still active ; in the labor force are employed in professional occupations; however, these consumers are actively pursuing a variety of t leisure interests—travel, sports, I dining out, museums, and concerts. They are involved, focused on physical fitness, and enjoying their lives. This market 1 is smaller, but growing, and financially secure. 77 Limiting Conditions ,JOHN (,- BURNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on our analysis of the information available to us from our own research and from the client as of the date of this report. We assume that the information is correct and reliable and that we have been informed about any issues that would affect project marketability or success potential. Our conclusions and recommendations are based on current and expected performance of the national, and/or local economy and real estate market. Given that economic conditions can change and real estate markets are cyclical. it is critical to monitor the economy and real estate market continuously, and to revisit key project assumptions periodically to ensure that they are still justified. The future is difficult to predict, particularly given that the economy and housing markets can be cyclical, as well as subject to changing consumer and market psychology. There will usually be differences between projected and actual results because events and circumstances frequently do not occur as expected. and the differences may be material. We do not express any form of assurance on the achievability of any pricing or absorption estimates or reasonableness of the underlying assumptions. In general, for projects out in the future, we are assuming "normal" real estate market conditions, and not a condition of either prolonged "boom" or "bust" market conditions. We do assume that economic, employment, and household growth will occur more or less in accordance with current expectations. We are not taking into account major shifts in the level of consumer confidence; in the ability of developers to secure needed project entitlements, in the cost of development or construction; in tax laws that favor or disfavor real estate markets; or in the availability and/or cost of capital and mortgage financing for real estate developers, owners and buyers- Should there be such major shifts affecting real estate markets, this analysis should be updated, with the conclusions and recommendations summarized herein reviewed and reevaluated under a potential range of build -out scenarios reflecting changed market conditions. We have no responsibility to update our analysis for events and circumstances occurring after the date of our report. This analysis represents just one resource that the client should consider when assessing this development opportunity. Depth and Breadth of Experience CONSULTING Strategic Direction & Planning • Home Builder Operations Assessment • Demand Analysis • Consumer Research & Focus Groups • Economic Analysis & Forecasting • Litigation Support & Expert Witness • Financial Modeling • Project & Product Positioning RESEARCH • Exclusive Access to our Research & Consulting Executives • Metro Analysis & Forecast • Regional Analysis & Forecast • Home Builder Analysis & Forecast • Apartment Analysis & Forecast Exclusive Client Events • Public Builder Call Summaries Weekly Insight • Presentations & Webinars Consumer Research Proprietary Surveys 4 i i SACRAMENTO C■_'�,DE NVER ii Jo • '' i SAN DIEGO v • ■ CONSULTING & RESEARCH CONSULTING RESEARCH J13REC REGIONAL OFFICES ■ ■■ 4r DALLAS i WISCONSIN G• i i✓ ■ ■ i ,JOHN I '&_,-JBURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING NEW ENGLAND ■ rp I* WASHINGTON, DC �i ■ �... CHARLCT7E -T . ATLANTA BOCA RATON JOHN �BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING www. reale s+-.',^onsult n.i2.corn 80 JOHN 14' BUkNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 3 mile radii Population Summary 2000 Total Population 2010 Total Population 2016 Total Population 2016 Group Quarters 2020 Total Population 2016-2021 Annual Rate Household Summary 2000 Households 2000 Average Household Size 2010 Households 2010 Average Household Size 2016 Households 2016 Average Household Size 2021 Households 2021 Average Household Size 2016-2021 Annual Rate 2010 Families 2010 Average Family Size 2016 Families 2016 Average Family Size 2021 Families 2021 Average Family Size 2016-2021 Annual Rate Housing Unit Summary 2000 Housing Units Owner Occupied Housing Units Renter Occupied Housing Units Vacant Housing Units 2010 Housing Units Owner Occupied Housing Units Renter Occupied Housing Units Vacant Housing Units 2016 Housing Units Owner Occupied Housing Units Renter Occupied Housing Units Vacant Housing Units 2021 Housing Units Owner Occupied Housing Units Renter Occupied Housing Units Vacant Housing Units Median Household Income 2016 2021 Median Home Value 2016 2021 Per Capita Income 2016 2021 Median Age 2010 2016 2021 Prepared by Esri 3 miles 15,836 37,262 43,406 143 48,569 2.27% 6,487 2.43 15,957 2.33 18,579 2.33 20,827 2.33 2.31% 11,196 2.75 12,928 2.76 14,413 2.76 2.20% 8,271 67.5% 10.9% 21.6% 21,418 54.3% 20.2% 25.5% 24,507 52.3% 23.5% 24.2% 27,238 52.3% 24.2% 23.5% $75,020 $84,866 $398,595 $412,877 $45,851 $51,598 47.0 50.2 52.4 ata Note: Household population includes persons not residing in group quarters. Average Household Size is the household population divided by total households. 2rsons in families include the householder and persons related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. Per Capita Income represents the income received by all persons aged 15 years and over divided by the total population. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021 Esri converted Census 2000 data into 2010 geography. June 23, 2016 JOHN 14" BURNS Market Profile REAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 3 mile radii Prepared by E 3 miles 2016 Households by Income Household Income Base 18,579 <$15,000 6.8% $15,000 - $24,999 6.5% $25,000 - $34,999 9.8% $35,000 - $49,999 12.0% $50,000 - $74,999 14.9% $75,000 - $99,999 12.5% $100,000 - $149,999 20.4% $150,000 - $199,999 5.6% $200;000+ 11.6% Average Household Income $107,248 2021 Households by Income Household Income Base 20,827 <$15,000 6.2% $15,000 - $24,999 7.2% $25,000 - $34,999 5.5% $35,000 - $49,999 7.5% $50,000 - $74,999 17.2% $75,000 - $99,999 13.5% $100,000 - $149,999 22.5% $150,000 - $199,999 7.0% $200,000+ 13.2% Average Household Income $120,581 2016 Owner Occupied Housing Units by Value Total 12,81 <$50,000 1.6% $50,000 - $99,999 1.1% $100,000 - $149,999 3.4% 1150,000 -.t199,()99 4.7% $200,000 - $249,999 10.2% $250,000 - $299,999 7.4% $300,000- $399,999 21.9% $400,000- $499,999 14.8% $500,000 - $749.999 In coi L6.9% $750,000 - $999,999 $1,000,000 + Average Home Value $482,846 2021 Owner Occupied Housing Units by Value Total 14,239 <$50,000 0.6% $50,000 - $99,999 0.5% $100,000 - $149,999 2.0% $150,000 - $199,999 3.7% $200,000 - $249,999 11.2% $250,000 - $299,999 9.7% $300,000 - $399,999 20.5% $400,000 - $499,999 14.7% $500,000 - $749,999 21.4% $750,000-$999,999 8.0% $1,000,000 + 7.7% Average Home Value $500,119 Data Note: Income represents the preceding year, expressed in current dollars. Household income includes wage and salary earnings, interest dividends, net rents, pensions, SSI and welfare payments, child support, and alimony. Source: U.S. Census Bureau; Census 2010 Summary File 1. Fsri fnreractc fnr 7(116 and 2n21 Esri converted Census 2000 data into 2010 � _ yeCyrdr•.Y. June 23, 2016 JOHN lCk., BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING Market Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 3 mile radii Prepared by Esri 3 miles 20.10 Population by Age Total 37,264 0 - 4 4.6% 5 - 9 5.8% 10- 14 6.1% 15- 24 10.0% 25- 34 8.9% 35-44 11.8% 45-54 13.5% 55- 64 14.1% 65- 74 15.1% 75- 84 7.9% 85'+ 2.2% 18 + 79.5% 2016 Population by Age Total 43,405 0 - 4 4.1% 5- 9 5.1% 10- 14 5.6% IS- 24 9.7% 25-34 8.8% 35-44 10.6% 45- 54 12.1% 55- 64 14.8% 65-74 17.1% 75- 84 9.2% 85+ 2.8% 18 + 81.9% 2021 Population by Age Total 48,567 0 - 4 3.9% 5- 9 4.7% 10- 14 5,2% 15- 24 8.9% 25-34 8.7% 35-44 10.6% 45-54 10.8% 55- 64 14.9% 65-74 18.9% 75- 84 10.3% 85 + 3.0% 18+ 83.0% 2010 Population by Sex Males 17,799 Females 19,463 2016 Population by Sex Males 20,743 Females 22,663 2021 Population by Sex Males 23,296 Females 25,273 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021 Esri converted Census 2000 data into 2010 geography. June 23, 2016 JOHN BURNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Market 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 3 mile radii Prepared by E 3 miles 2010 Population by Race/Ethnicity Total 37,261 White Alone 91.3% Black Alone 3.2% American Indian Alone 0.1% Asian Alone 1.8% Pacific Islander Alone 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 2.1% Two or More Races 1.4% Hispanic Origin 14.2% Diversity Index 36.9 2016 Population by Race/Ethnicity Total 43,407 White Alone 89.7% Black Alone 3.7% American Indian Alone 0.1% Asian Alone 2.2% Pacific Islander Alone 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 2.4% Two or More Races 1.7% Hispanic Origin 16.4% Diversity Index 41.3 2021 Population by Race/Ethnicity Total 48,569 White Alone 88.3o�r Black Alone 4.31 American Indian Alone 0.1% Asian Alone 2.7% Pacific Islander Alone 0.1% Some Other Race Alone 2.7% Two or More Races 1.9% Hispanic Origin - 18.5% Diversity Index 45.4 2010 Population by Relationship and Household Type Tota 1 37,262 In Households 99.6% In Family Households 84.0% Householder 29.8% Spouse 25.0% Child 25.0% Other relative 2.7% Nonrelative 1.5% In Nonfamily Households 15.6% In Group Quarters 0.4% Institutionalized Population 0.0% Noninstitutionalized Population 0.4% Data Note: Persons of Hispanic Origin may be of any race. The Diversity Index measures the probability that two people from the same area will be from different racc ethnic groups. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary rife i. tsri forecasts for 2016 and 2621 tsn converted Census 2000 data into 2010 geography. June 23, 2016 JOHN BURNS Market Profile REAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 3 mile radii Prepared by Esri 3 miles 2016 Population 25+ by Educational Attainment Total 32,768 Less than 9th Grade 2.4% 9th - 12th Grade, No Diploma 2.7% High School Graduate 20.3% GED/Alternative Credential 2.1% Some College, No Degree 18.6% Associate Degree 9.5% Bachelor's Degree 27.6% Graduate/Professional Degree 16.9% 2016 Population 15+ by Marital Status Total 36,995 Never Married 23.8% Married 58.5% Widowed 6.8% Divorced 10.9% 2016 Civilian Population 16+ in Labor Force Civilian Employed 94.9% Civilian Unemployed 5.1% 2016 Employed Population 16+ by Industry Tota 1 17,218 Agriculture/Mining 0.6% Construction 7.2% Manufacturing 2.5% Wholesale Trade 3.0% Retail Trade 11.7% Transportation/Utilities 3.3% Information 1.5% Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 8.8% Services 59.1% Public Administration 2.4% 2016 Employed Population 16+ by Occupation Total 17,219 White Collar 68.6% Management/Business/Financial 22.2% Professional 19.9% Sales 12.9% Administrative Support 13.5% Services 21.2% Blue Collar 10.3% Farming/Forestry/Fishing 0.2% Construction/Extraction 3.7% Installation/Maintenance/Repair 1.5% Production 1.7% Transportation/Material Moving 3.2% 2010 Population By Urban/ Rural Status Total Population 37,262 Population Inside Urbanized Area 94.9% Population Inside Urbanized Cluster 0.3% Rural Population 4.7% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021 Esri converted Census 2000 data into 2010 geography. June 23, 2016 JOHN 14-,, BUI`�NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Market 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 3 mile radii Prepared by E 3 miles 2010.Households by Type Total 15,957 Households with 1 Person 24.0% Households with 2+ People 76.0% Family Households 70.2% Husband -wife Families 58.7% With Related Children 18.6% Other Family (No Spouse Present) 11.4% Other Family with Male Householder 3.1% With Related Children 1.9% Other Family with Female Householder R 4ei With Related Children 5.9% Nonfamily Households 5.9% All Households with Children 26.7% Multigenerational Households 2.2% Unmarried Partner Households 5.4% Male-female 4.7% Same-sex 0.7% 2010 Households by Size Total 15,957 1 Person Household 24.0% 2 Person Household 45.5% 3 Person Household 13.0% 4 Person Household 10.7% 5 Person Household 4.65 6 Person Household 1.6% 7 + Person Household 0.6% 2010 Households by Tenure and Mortgage Status Total 15,957 Owner Occupied 72.9% Owned with a Mortgage/Loan 48.33% Owned Free and Clear 24.5% Renter Occupied 27.1% 2010 Housing Units By urban/ Rural Status Total Housing Units 21,418 Housing Units Inside Urbanized Area 94.5% Housing Units Inside Urbanized Cluster 0.3% Rural Housing Units 5.2% Data Note: Households with children include any households with people under age 18, related or not. Multigenerational households are families with 3 or more parent- child relationships. Unmarried partner households are usually classified as nonfamily households unless there is another member of the household related to the householder. Multigenerational and unmarried partner households are reported only to the tract level. Esri estimated block group data, which is used to estimate polygons or non-standard geography. Source: U.S. Census Bureau. Census ?nln c;ummary File 1 Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021 Esr converted Census' 0 data L t -o M."'.y2ograGiiy. June 23, 2016 JOHN f*_;:BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 3 mile radii Top 3 Tapestry Segments 1. 2. 3. 2016 Consumer Spending Apparel & Services: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Education: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Entertainment/Recreation: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Food at Home: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Food Away from Home: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Health Care: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index HH Furnishings & Equipment: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Personal Care Products & Services: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index .Shelter: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Support Payments/Cash Contributions/Gifts in Kind: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Travel: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Prepared by ESrl 3 miles Silver & Gold (9A) Golden Years (913) Green Acres (6A) $50,066,754 $2,694.80 134 $35,155,959 $1,892.24 134 $75,355,746 $4,055.96 139 $124,802,064 $6,717.37 135 $77,801,932 $4,187.63 135 $143,658,226 $7,732.29 146 $45,815,471 $2,465.98 140 $19,490,157 $1,049.04 143 $398,349,187 $21,440.83 138 $65,047,739 $3,501.14 151 $50,398,605 $2,712.67 146 $26,767,621 $1,440.75 139 Data Note: Consumer spending shows the amount spent on a variety of goods and services by households that reside in the area. Expenditures are shown by broad fidget categories that are not mutually exclusive. Consumer spending does not equal business revenue. Total and Average Amount Spent Per Household represent annual jures. The Spending Potential Index represents the amount spent in the area relative to a national average of 100. ,ource: Consumer Spending data are derived from the 2013 and 2014 Consumer Expenditure Surveys, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Esri. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021 Esri converted Census 2000 data into 2010 geography. June 23, 2016 I= JOHN BURr o _ o d Income Profile Number Percent 18,579 REAL ESTATE CONSULtvii 1,257 6,8% 1,207 6.5% 1,818 7165 Immokaiee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 2,229 12.0% Prepared by Er ' 14.9% 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 12.5% 3,781 20.4% 1,040 Ring: 3 mile radius 2,150 11.6% 2016-2021 2016-2021 Summary 2016 2021 Change Annualltate Population 43,406 48,569 5,163 2.27% Households 18,579 20,827 2,246 2.31% Median Age 50.2 52.4 2.2 0.86% Average Household Size 2.33 2.33 0.00 0.00% Households by Income Household <$15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$34,999 $35,000-$49,999 $50,000-$74,999 $75,000-$99,999 $100,000-$149,999 $150,000-$199,999 $200,000+ Median Household Income Average Household Income Per Capita Income $75,020 $107,248 $45,851 2016 Number Percent 18,579 100% 1,257 6,8% 1,207 6.5% 1,818 9.8% 2,229 12.0% 2,776 14.9% 2,321 12.5% 3,781 20.4% 1,040 5.6% 2,150 11.6% $75,020 $107,248 $45,851 $84,866 $120,581 $51,598 Data Note: Income reported for ]uly 1, 2021 represents annual income for the preceding year, expressed in current (2019) dollars, including an adjustment for inflation. Source: u. ce. ciious Bureau, - - 2UlU J11111I II llaly Elle 1. CSfI fUf elG$l5 IUr 20 16 dfld 'LULL. June 23, 2016 a 2021 Number Percent 20,827 100% 1,295 6.2% 1,505 7.2% 1,147 5.5% 1,571 7.5% 3,590 17.2% 2,815 13.5% 4695 22.5% 1,457 7.0% 2,750 13.2% $84,866 $120,581 $51,598 Data Note: Income reported for ]uly 1, 2021 represents annual income for the preceding year, expressed in current (2019) dollars, including an adjustment for inflation. Source: u. ce. ciious Bureau, - - 2UlU J11111I II llaly Elle 1. CSfI fUf elG$l5 IUr 20 16 dfld 'LULL. June 23, 2016 a JOHN 14r BU kEAL ESTATE CONSULT - .. - Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 3 mile radius Prepared by Esri 2016 Households by Income and Age of Householder <25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ HH Income Base 446 1,762 2,397 2,866 3,459 4,237 3,410 <$15,000 53 155 141 141 248 188 332 $15,000-$24,999 31 108 120 132 155 323 337 $25,000-$34,999 70 202 228 227 239 308 545 $35,000-$49,999 72 279 312 287 293 438 548 $50,000-$74,999 77 294 347 396 433 679 550 $75,000-$99,999 39 245 362 396 500 549 229 $100,000-$149,999 78 331 488 682 771 883 549 $150,000-$199,999 12 69 158 228 239 227 107 $200,000+ 14 79 241 377 582 642 215 Median HH Income $49,154 $59,382 $77,648 $89,116 $91,616 $81,835 $47,967 Average HH Income $69,823 $80,435 $104,416 $118,968 $128,693 $121,255 $79,046 Percent Distribution <25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ HH Income Base 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% <$15,000 11.9% 8.8% 5.9% 4.9% 7.2% 4.4% 9.7% $15,000-$24,999 7.0% 6.1% 5.0% 4.6% 4.5% 7.6% 9.9% $25,000-$34,999 15.7% 11.5% 9.5% 7.9% 6.9% 7.3% 16.0% $35,000-$49,999 16.1% 15.8% 13.0% 10.0% 8.5% 10.3% 16.1% $50,000-$74,999 17.3% 16.7% 14.5% 13.8% 12.5% 16.0% 16.1% $75,000-$99,999 8.7% 13.9% 15.1% ,13.8% 14.5% 13.0% 6.7% $100,000-$149,999 17.5% 18.8% 20.4% 23.8% 22.3% 20.8% 16.1% $150,000-$199,999 2.7% 3.9% 6.6% 8.0% 6.9% 5.4% 3.1% $200,000+ 3.1% 4.5% 10.1% 13.2% 16.8% 15.2% 6.3% Data Note: Income reported for July 1, 2021 represents annual income for the preceding year, expressed in current (2019) dollars, including an adjustment for inflation. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri Forecasts for 2016 and 2021. June 23, 2016 JOHN I,", BU4"r'�;ouseholcl REAL ESTATE CONSULTwo Income Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 3 mile radius Prepared by E, 2021 Households by Income and Age of Householder <25 25-34 35-44 4S-54 55-64 65-74 75+ HH Income Base 447 1,898 2,613 2,805 3,810 5,137 4,117 <$15,000 60 167 138 125 230 204 371 $15,000-$24,999 44 146 143 141 177 405 448 $25,000-$34,999 48 134 129 119 133 200 385 $35,000-$49,999 46 188 201 168 194 327 447 $50,000-$74,999 86 370 449 427 525 928 805 $75,000-$99,999 45 301 442 425 583 639 329 $100,000-$149,999 88 397 588 707 929 1,158 828 $150,nnn-$199,999 15 95 224 277 327 343 178 $200,000+ 16 99 299 416 710 883 326 Median HH Income $55,570 $69,720 $87,003 $99,807 $102,052 $91,900 $60,180 Average HH Income $75,963 $89,493 $118,043 $132,584 $143,339 $135,438 $93,589 Percent Distribution <25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ HH Income Base 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% <$15,000 13.4% 8.8% 5.3% 4.5% 6.0% 4.0% 9.0% $15,000-$24,999 9.8% 7.8% 5.5% 5.0% 4.6% 7.9% 10.9% $25,000-134,999 10.7% 7.1% 4.9% 4.2% 3.5% 3.9% 9.4% $35,000-$49,999 10.3% 9.9% 7.7% 6.0% 5.1% 6.4% 10.9% $50,000-$74,999 19.2% 19.5% 17.2% 15.2% 13.8% 18.1% 19.6% $75,000-$99,999 10.1% 15.9% 16.9% 15.2% 15.3% 13.4% 8.0% $100,000-$149,999 19.7% 20.9% 22.5% 25.2% 24.4% 22.5% 20.10/ $150,000-$199,999 3.4% 5.0% 8.6% 9.9% 8.6% 6.7% 4.3% $200,000+ 3.6% 5.2% 11.4% 14.8% 18.6% 17.2% 7.9% Data Note: Income reported for July 1, 2021 represents annual income for the preceding year, expressed in current (2019) dollars, including an adjustment for inflation. Sour= U.S.e sus Bureau,e sus 2010 JuFninal y File 1. Esrl FureCdSIS for 2016 and 2021. June 23, 2016 JOHN 144 BU Number of Households _ Worth Profile 2016 Net Worth by Age of Householder <25 25-34 35-44 kEAL ESTATE CONSULTma 55-64 65-74 75+ Total 446 1,762 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 2,866 3,459 4,237 Prepared by Esn <$15,000 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 922 732 531 474 177 Ring: 3 mile radius $15,000-$34,999 108 249 239 199 126 44 73 $35,000-$49,999 15 129 133 92 85 2016-2021 2016-2021 Summary Census 2010 2016 2021 Change Annual Rate Population 37,262 43,406 48,569 5,163 2.270/c Median Age 47.0 50.2 52.4 2.2 0,86% Households 15,957 18,579 20,827 2,248 2.31% Average Household Size 2.33 2.33 2.33 0.00 0.000/0 2016 Households by Net Worth 2,178 Median Net Worth Number Percent Total $154,979 $250,001 $250,001 18,579 100.0% <$15,000 $108,415 $455,690 $840,187 3,291 17.7% $15,000-$34,999 1,038 5.6% $35,000-$49,999 544 2.9% $50,000-$74,999 953 5.1% $75,000-$99,999 713 3.8% $100,000-$149,999 1,266 6.8% $150,000-$249,999 1,827 9.8% $250,000-$500,000 2,731 14.7% $500,000+ 6,217 33.5% Median Net Worth $225,504 Average Net Worth $1,418,016 Data Note: Net Worth is total household wealth minus debt, secured and unsecured. Net worth includes home equity, equity in pension plans, net ,,quity in vehicles, IRAs and Keogh accounts, business equity, interest-earning assets and mutual fund shares, stocks, etc. Examples of secured debt clude home mortgages and vehicle loans; examples of unsecured debt include credit card debt, certain bank loans, and other outstanding bills. •orecasts of net worth are based on the Survey of Consumer Finances, Federal Reserve Board. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri Forecasts for 2016 and 2021. June 23, 2016 Number of Households 2016 Net Worth by Age of Householder <25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Total 446 1,762 2,397 2,866 3,459 4,237 3,410 <$15,000 225 922 732 531 474 177 230 $15,000-$34,999 108 249 239 199 126 44 73 $35,000-$49,999 15 129 133 92 85 52 37 $50,000-$99,999 38 183 451 327 205 202 260 $100,000-$149,999 21 79 186 264 244 295 177 $150,000-$249,999 20 87 205 296 362 402 455 $250,000+ 19 114 451 1,159 1,964 3,065 2,178 Median Net Worth $14,867 $14,341 $56,524 $154,979 $250,001 $250,001 $250,001 Average Net Worth $74,236 $108,415 $455,690 $840,187 $1,733,392 $2,724,829 $1,489,740 Data Note: Net Worth is total household wealth minus debt, secured and unsecured. Net worth includes home equity, equity in pension plans, net ,,quity in vehicles, IRAs and Keogh accounts, business equity, interest-earning assets and mutual fund shares, stocks, etc. Examples of secured debt clude home mortgages and vehicle loans; examples of unsecured debt include credit card debt, certain bank loans, and other outstanding bills. •orecasts of net worth are based on the Survey of Consumer Finances, Federal Reserve Board. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri Forecasts for 2016 and 2021. June 23, 2016 JOHN 14-t, BU Retail - P . - Profile kEAL ESTATE CONSULT 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 3 mile radius . Prepared by Summary Demographics 2016 Population 43,406 2016 Households 18,579 2016 Median Disposable Income $59,338 2016 Per Capita Income $45,851 NAILS Demand Supply Retail Gap Leakage/Surplus Number of Industry Summary (Retail Potential) (Retail Sales) Factor Businesses Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink 44-45,722 $945,844,573 $420,892,257 $524,952,316 38.4 133 Total Retail Trade 44-45 $854,232,354 $392,109,139 $462,123,215 37.1 91 Total Food & Drink 722 $91,612,219 $28,783,118 $62,829,101 52.2 42 NAICS Demand Supply Retail Gap Leakage/Surplus Number of Industry Group (Retail Potential) (Retail Sales) Factor Businesses Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers 441 $203,782,764 $4,819,011 $198,963,753 95.4 4 Automobile Dealers 4411 $160,303,025 $1,141,304 $159,161,721 98.6 1 Other Motor Vehicle Dealers 4412 $29,927,418 $2,622,011 $27,305,407 83.9 1 Auto Parts, Accessories & Tire Stores 4413 $13,552,320 $1,055,695 $121496,625 85.5 2 Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores 442 $26,772;513 $5,798,254 $20,974,259 64.4 6 Furniture Stores 4421 $15,672,028 $4,722,707 $10,949,321 53.7 2 Home Furnishings Stores 4422 $11,100,485 $1,075,547 $i0,024,938 82.3 4 Electronics & Appliance Stores 443 $36,166,483 $6,456,867 $29,709,616 69.7 8 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores 444 $44,721,093 $18,739,200 $25,981,893 40,9 12 Bldg Material & Supplies Dealers 4441 $39,588,926 $11,524,792 $28,064,134 54.9 7 Lawn & Garden Equip & Supply Stores 4442 $5,132,166 $7,214,408 -$2,082,242 -16.9 5 Food & Beverage Stores 445 $155,405,645 $105,755,178 $49,650,467 19.0 11 Grocery Stores 4451 $137,212,580 $101,749,796 $35,462,784 14.8 7 Specialty Food Stores 4452 $11,197,885 $2,005,564 $9,192,321 69.6 2 Beer, Wine & Liquor Stores 4453 $6,995,180 $1,999,818 $4,995,362 55.5 2 Health & Personal Care Stores 446,4461 $53,944,347 $15,132,577 $38,811,770 56.2 Gasoline Stations 447,4471 $57,412,715 $0 $57,412,715 100,0 Clothing & Clothing Accessories Stores 448 $45,256,255 $2,377,534 $42,878,721 90.0 - Clothing Stores 4481 $32,246,523 $2,253,043 $29,993,480 86.9 6 Shoe Stores 4482 $5,398,512 $0 $5,398,512 100.0 0 Jewelry, 1_uggagP & Leather Goods Stores 4493 $7;611,219 $0 $7;611,219 100.0 0 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores 451 $20,707,847 $20,121,884 $585,963 1.4 9 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Musical Instr Stores 4511 $15,086,683 $19,183,642 -$4,096,35S -12.3 6 Book, Periodical & Music Stores 4512 $5,621,163 $938,243 $4,682,920 71,4 3 General Merchandise Stores 452 $149,572,377 $200,313,205 -$50,740,828 -14.5 6 Department Stores Excluding Leased Depts. 4521 $108,962,831 $123,463,717 -$14,500,886 -6.2 4 Other General Merchandise Stores 4529 $40,609,546 $76,849,487 -$36,239,941 -30.9 2 Miscellaneous Store Retailers 453 $39,212,647 $9,195,799 $30,016,848 62.0 14 Florists 4531 $1,726,950 $880,799 $846,151 32.4 3 Office Supplies, Stationery & Gift Stores 4532 $7,533,997 $3,942,932 $3,591,065 31.3 3 Used Merchandise Stores 4533 $3,605,018 $277,969 $3,327,049 85.7 3 Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers 4539 $26,346,682 $4,094,098 $22,252,584 73.1 4 Nonstore Retailers 454 $21,277,670 $2,850,127 $18,427,543 76.4 3 Electronic Shopping & Mail -Order Houses 4541 $16,871,457 $2,764,596 $14,106,861 71.8 3 Vending Machine Operators 4542 $492,255 $0 $492,255 100.0 0 Direct Selling Establishments 4543 $3,913,958 $0 $3,913,958 100.0 0 Food Services & Drinking Places 722 $91,612,219 $28,783,118 $62,829,101 52.2 42 Full -Service Restaurants 7221 $51,642,614 $17,352,688 $34,289,926 49.7 25 Limited -Service Eating Places 7222 $33,854,614 $10,927,748 $22,926,866 51.2 14 Special Food Services 7223 $1,429,673 $98,035 $1,331,638 87.2 1 Drinking Places - Alcoholic Beverages 7224 $4,685,318 $404,646 $4,280,672 84,1 2 Data Note: Supply (retail sales) estimates sales to consumers by establishments. Sales to businesses are excluded. Demand (retail potential) estimates the expected amount spent by consumers at retail establishments. Supply and demand estimates are in current dollars. The Leakage/Surplus Factor presents a snapshot of retail opportunity. This is a measure of the relationship between supply and demand that ranges from +100 (total leakage) to -100 (total surplus). A positive value represents 'leakage' of retail opportunity outside the trade area. A negative value represents a surplus of retail sales, a market where customers are drawn in from outside the trade area. The Retail Gap represents the difference between Retail Potential and Retail Sales. Esri uses the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) to classify businesses by their primary type of economic activity. Retail establishments are classified into 27 industry groups in the Retail Trade sector, as well as four industry groups within the Food Services & Drinking Establishments subsector. For more information on the Retail MarketPlace data, please click the link below to view the Methodology Statement. http://www, esri. com/library/whitepapers/pdfs/esri-d ata -retail -marketplace. pdf So • Esr and Tnfnn Retail MerketPlace 2016 Release 1 (2015 data in 2010 geography) !'. Copyright I..fogroupAll - ___.__. __.. ....._ _... _ .._...,. ..... ....., �..�� ..,......�........ _ �_.. �......... ..� �.. �,. .....N,�y��. �v�u .i �rvyiuu N, rrInc.., lights r civ June 23, 2016 JOHN �j� BU Retail - P. _ Profile REAL ESTATE CONSULT 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 3 mile radius Leakage/Surplus Factor by Industry Subsector Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores Electronics & Appliance Stores Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores Food & Beverage Stores Health & Personal Care Stores Gasoline Stations Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book, and Music Stores General Merchandise Stores Miscellaneous Store Retailers Nonstore Retailers Food Services & Drinking Places Prepared by Esri 0 20 40 60 80 100 Leakage/Surplus Factor Leakage/Surplus Factor by Industry Group Automobile Dealers Other Motor Vehicle Dealers Auto Parts, Accessories, and Tire Stores Furniture Stores Home Furnishings Stores Electronics & Appliance Stores Building Material and Supplies Dealers Lawn and Garden Equipment and Supplies Stores Grocery Stores Specialty Food Stores Beer, Wine, and Liquor Stores Health & Personal Care Stores Gasoline Stations Clothing Stores Shoe Stores Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Stores Book, Periodical, and Music Stores Department Stores (Excluding Leased Depts.) Other General Merchandise Stores Florists Office Supplies, Stationery, and Gift Stores Used Merchandise Stores Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers Electronic Shopping and Mail -Order Houses Vending Machine Operators Direct Selling Establishments Full -Service Restaurants Limited -Service Eating Places Special Food Services Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages) -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Leakage/Surplus Factor Source: Esri and Infogroup. Retail MarketPlace 2016 Release 1 (2015 data in 2016 geography) Copyright 2016 Infogroup, Inc. All rights reserved. June 23, 2016 JOHN It;', BUkNS Tapestry REAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 Prepared by E 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 3 mile radius Top Twenty Tapestry Segments Rank Tapestry Segment 1 Silver & Gold (9A) 2 Golden Years (913) 3 Green Acres (6A) 4 Old and Newcomers (8F) 5 In Style (5B) Subtotal 6 The Great Outdoors (6C) 7 Middleburg (4C) 8 Exurbanites (1E) Subtotal Total Top Ten Tapestry Segments Site vs. U.S. Exurbanites (1E) Middleburg (4C) The Great Outdoors (6C) In Style (5B) Old and Newcomers (8F) Green Acres (6A) Golden Years (9B) Silver & Gold (9A) 0 2016 Households Cumulative Percent Percent 34.5% 34.S% 28.6% 63.1% 11.2% 74.3% 9.5% 83.8% 5.5% 89.3% 89.3% 2.3% 5.1% 94.4% 3.0% 97.4% 2.6% 100.0% 10.7% 100.0% 2016 U.S. Households Cumulative Percent Percent 0.8% 0.8% 1.3% 2.1% 3.2% 5.3% 2.3% 7.6% 2.3% 9.9% 9.90/0 1.6% 11.5% 2.8% 14.3% 1.9% 16.2% 6.3% 16.2% 5 10 15 20 25 30 Percent of Households by Tapestry Segment Index 4545 2,131 351 407 243 Site U.S. 330 107 135 617 Data Note. This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The index is a comparis• of the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source; Esr l June 23, 2016 c E o, V) tn Q) Q) CL JOHN 14-1, BURNS IZFAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 3 mile radius 2016 Tapestry Indexes by Households Index 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 H AtrN }te: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source: Esri Prepared by Esri 2016 Tapestry Indexes by Total Population 18+ Index 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 June 23, 2016 JOHN 14' BURNS _ Segmentation (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTINGArea Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 Prepared by E 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 3 mile radius Tapestry LifeMode Groups 2016 Households 2016 Adult Population Number Percent Index Number Percent Index Total: 18,579 100.0% 35,544 100.00/0 1. Affluent Estates 489 2.6% 27 1,020 2.90/o 28 Top Tier (1A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Professional Pride (113) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Boomburbs (1C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Savvy Suburbanites (1D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Exurbanites (1E) 489 2.6% 135 1,020 2.9% 147 2. Upscale Avenues 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 Urban Chic (2A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Pleasantville (26) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Pacific Heights (2C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Enterprising Professionals (2D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% - 0 3. Uptown Individuals 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 Laptops and Lattes (3A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Metro Renters (313) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Trendsetters (3C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 4. Family Landscapes 564 3.0% 41 1,132 3.2% 41 Soccer Moms (4A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Home Improvement (46) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Middleburg (4C) 564 3.0% 107 1,132 3.2% 11 S. GenXurban 1,019 5.50/0 47 1,966 5.5% 50 Comfortable Empty Nesters (5A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 In Style (5B) 1,019 5.5% 243 1,966 5.5% 263 Parks and Rec (5C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Rustbelt Traditions (5D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Midlife Constants (SE) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 6. Cozy Country Living 3,035 16.3% 134 6,193 17.4% 146 Green Acres (6A) 2,083 11.2% 351 4,398 12.4% 375 Salt of the Earth (6B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 The Great Outdoors (6C) 952 5.1% 330 1,795 5.1% 332 Prairie Living (6D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Rural Resort Dwellers (6E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Heartland Communities (6F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 7. Ethnic Enclaves 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 Up and Coming Families (7A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Urban Villages (715) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 American Dreamers (7C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Barrios Urbanos (7D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 Valley Growers (7E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Southwestern Families (7F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% n Data Note: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The index is a comparis of the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source: tsri June 23, 2016 JOHN 14-. BURNS_ (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING• Segmentation _ 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 3 mile radius _ Prepared by Esri Tapestry LifeMode Groups 2016 Households 2016 Adult Population Number Percent Index Number Percent Index Total: 18,579 100.0% 35,544 100.00/0 S. Middle Ground 1,758 9.50/0 86 3,036 8.50/0 84 City Lights (8A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 Emerald City (8B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 Bright Young Professionals (8C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Downtown Melting Pot (8D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Front Porches (8E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Old and Newcomers (8F) 1,758 9.5% 407 3,036 8.5% 425 Hardscrabble Road (8G) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 9. Senior Styles 11,714 63.0% 1085 22,197 62.4% 1249 Silver & Gold (9A) 6,407 34.5% 4,545 11,625 32.7% 4,748 Golden Years (913) 5,307 28.6% 2,131 10,572 29.7% 2,504 The Elders (9C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Senior Escapes (9D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Retirement Communities (9E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Social Security Set (9F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 10. Rustic Outposts 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 Southern Satellites (10A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0,0% 0 Rooted Rural (10B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Diners & Miners (10C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 'own the Road (10D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 -al Bypasses (10E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 11. Midtown Singles 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.0% 0 City Strivers (11A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Young and Restless (11B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Metro Fusion (11C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Set to Impress (11D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 City Commons (11E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 12. Hometown 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 Family Foundations (12A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 Traditional Living (12B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Small Town Simplicity (12C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Modest Income Homes (12D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 13. Next Wave 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 International Marketplace (13A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Las Casas (13B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 NeWest Residents (13C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Fresh Ambitions (13D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 High Rise Renters (13E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 14. Scholars and Patriots 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 Military Proximity (14A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0,0% 0 College Towns (14B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Dorms to Diplomas (14C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Unclassified (15) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 ata Note: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The Index is a comparison 'the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source: Esri June 23, 2016 JOHN Ij- BUkNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTINGArea Segmentation Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 Prepared by E, 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 3 mile radius Tapestry Urbanization Groups 2016 Households 2016 Adult Population Number Percent Index Number Percent Index Total: 18,579 100.0% 35,544 100.0% 1. Principal Urban Center 0 0.06/0 0 0 0.06/0 0 Laptops and Lattes (3A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Metro Renters (313) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Trendsetters (3C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Downtown Melting Pot (81)) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 City Strivers (11A) 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.0% 0 Ne West Residents (13C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% n Fresh Ambitions (13D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 High Rise Renters (13E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 2. Urban Periphery 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.06/0 0 Pacific Heights (2C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Rustbelt Traditions (5D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Urban Villages (7B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 American Dreamers (7C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Barrios Urbanos (7D) 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.0% 0 Southwestern Families (7F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 City Lights (8A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Bright Young Professionals (8C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Metro Fusion (11C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Family Foundations (12A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Modest Income Homes (12D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% International Marketplace (13A) 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.0% t Las Casas (13B) 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.0% 0 31 Metro Cities 2,777 14.9 % 81 5,002 14.10/6 83 In Style (513) 1,019 5.5% 243 1,966 5.5% 263 Emerald City (813) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Front Porches (8E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Old and Newcomers (8F) 1,758 9.5% 407 3,036 8.5% 425 Hardscrabble Rnad (8r) n n.no n n n. no/ 0 Retirement Communities (9E) 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.0% 0 Social Security Set (9F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Young and Restless (11B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Set to Impress (11D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 City Commons (11E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 Traditional Living (12B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 College Towns (14B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Dorms to Diplomas (14C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Data Note: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The index is a comparisr of the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ In the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source: Esri June 23, 2016 JOHN 14�, BURNS RZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING• _ Segmentation _ Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 Prepared by Esrl 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 3 mile radius Tapestry Urbanization Groups 2016 Households 2016 Adult Population Number Percent Index Number Paraent Index Totals 18,579 100.0% 35,544 100.0% 4. Suburban Periphery 12,203 65.7% 207 23,217 65.3% 203 Top Tier (1A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Professional Pride (1B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Boomburbs (1C) 0 0.(1% 0 0 0.0% 0 Savvy Suburbanites (11)) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Exurbanites (1E) 489 2.6% 135 1,020 2.9% 147 Urban Chic (2A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Pleasantville (2B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Enterprising Professionals (21)) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Soccer Moms (4A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Home Improvement (4B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Comfortable Empty Nesters (5A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Parks and Rec (5C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Midlife Constants (5E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Up and Coming Families (7A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Silver & Gold (9A) 6,407 34.5% 4,545 11,625 32.7% 4,748 Golden Years (913) 5,307 28.6% 2,131 10,572 29.7% 2,504 The Elders (9C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Military Proximity (14A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 S. Semirural 564 3.0% 32 1,132 3.2% 35 "ddleburg (4C) 564 3.0% 107 1,132 3.2% 113 3rtland Communities (6F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 alley Growers (7E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Senior Escapes (9D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Down the Road (10D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Small Town Simplicity (12C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 6. Rural 3,035 16.3% 95 6,193 17.4% 103 Green Acres (6A) 2,083 11.2% 351 4,398 12.4% 375 Salt of the Earth (613) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 The Great Outdoors (6C) 952 5.1% 330 1,795 5.1% 332 Prairie Living (61)) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Rural Resort Dwellers (6E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Southern Satellites (10A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Rooted Rural (10B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Diners & Miners (10C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0% 0 Rural Bypasses (10E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Unclassified (15) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 ata Note: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The index is a comparison f the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source: Esri June 23, 2016 JOHN 14z, ,BUkNS kEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Market Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 4 mile radii Prepared by E, 4 miles Population Summary 2000 Total Population 29,966 2010 Total Population 56,333 2016 Total Population 65,648 2016 Group Quarters 292 2020 Total Population 73086 2016-2021 Annual Rate 2.i7% % Household Summary 2000 Households 12,663 2000 Average Household Size 2.34 2010 Households 24,975 2010 Average Household Size 2.24 2016 Households 28,965 2016 Average Household Size 2.26 2021 Households 32,285 2021 Average Household Size 2.25 2016-2021 Annual Rate 2.19% 2010 Families 17,198 2010 Average Family Size 2.67 2016 Families 19,848 2016 Average Family Size 2.69 2021 Families 22,034 2021 Average Family Size 2.69 2016-2021 Annual Rate 2.11% Housing Unit Summary 2000 Housing Units 16,818 Owner Occupied Housing Units 64.50/c Renter Occupied Housing Units 10.8% Vacant Housing Units 24.7% 2010 Housing Units 34,555 Owner Occupied Housing Units 54.8% Renter Occupied Housing Units 17.5% Vacant Housing Units 27.7% 2016 Housing Units 39,312 Owner Occupied Housing Units 53.0% Renter Occupied Housing Units 20.7% Vacant Housing Units 26.3% 2021 Housing Units 43,484 Owner Occupied Housing Units 53.0% Renter Occupied Housing Units 21.2% Vacant Housing Units 25.8% Median Household Income 2016 $73,278 2021 $83,537 Median Home Value 2016 $389,349 2021 $400,712 Per Capita Income 2016 $47,360 2D21 $53,324 Median Age 2010 50.1 2016 52.7 2021 55.2 Data Note: Household population includes persons not residing in group quarters. Average Household Size is the household population divided by total households. Persons in families include the householder and persons related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. Per Capita Income represents the income received I all persons aged 15 years and over divided by the total population. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Census 201.1 Summary F forecasts for 2016 and 2021 E-sil cullverled Census 2000 data Into 2010 geography. June 23, 2016 JOHN BUF\NS RZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 4 mile radii Prepared by Esri 4 miles 2016 Households by Income Household Income Base 28,965 <$15,000 7.0% $15,000 - $24,999 6.2% $25,000 - $34,999 9.4% $35,000 - $49,999 12.1% $50,000 - $74,999 16.1% $75,000 - $99,999 12.8% $100,000 - $149,999 18.7% $150,000 - $199,999 5.9% $200,000+ 11.8% Average Household Income $107,728 2021 Households by Income Household Income Base 32,285 <$15,000 6.4% $15,000- $24,999 6.8% $25,000 - $34,999 5.3% $35,000 - $49,999 7.7% $50,000 - $74,999 18.0% $75,000 - $99,999 13.8% $100,000 - $149,999 21.0% $150,000 - $199,999 7.3% $200,000+ 13.5% Average Household Income $121,356 2016 Owner Occupied Housing Units by Value Total 20,837 <$50,000 1.9% $50,000 - $99,999 1.9% $100,000 - $149,999 4.0% $150,000 - $199,999 5.5% $200,000 - $249,999 10.5% $250,000 - $299,999 7.6% $300,000 - $399,999 21.0% $400,000 - $499,999 13.9% $500,000 - $749,999 19.2% $750,000 - $999,999 6.6% $1,000,000 + 8.1% Average Home Value $475,491 2021 Owner Occupied Housing Units by Value Total 23,067 <$50,000 0.7% $50,000 - $99,999 0.8% $100,000 - $149,999 2.4% $150,000- $199,999 4.4% $200,000- $249,999 11.8% $250,000 - $299,999 10.0% $300,000 - $399,999 19.7% $400,000 - $499,999 14.0% $500,000 - $749,999 20.2% $750,000 - $999,999 7.7% $1,000,000 + 8.2% Average Home Value $494,008 ata Note: Income represents the preceding year, expressed in current dollars. Household income includes wage 0nd salary earnings, interest dividends, net rents, pensions, SSI and welfare payments, child support, and alimony. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary, File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021 Esri converted Census 2000 data into 2010 geography. June 23, 2016 JOHN 144 -,:BURNS FZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING •rket Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 4 mile radii Prepared by E• 4 miles 2010 Population by Ape Total 56,333 0 - 4 4.1% 5- 9 5.2% 10- 14 5.5% 15-24 92% 25-34 82% 35-44 10.9% 45- 54 13.6% 55-64 15.4% 65-74 16.3% 75-84 9.1% 85+ 2.7% 18 + 81.6% 2016 Population by Age Total 65,649 0-4 3.8% 5 - 9 4.6% 10- 14 5.0% 15-24 92% 25-34 8.3% 35-44 99% 45- 54 12.1% 55-64 15.8% 65-74 18.0% 75 - 84 10.09 85 + 3.20% 18 + 83.5% 2021 Population by Age Total 73,085 0 - 4 3.6% 5 - 9 4.3% 10-14 47% 15-24 B2% 25-34 8.4% 35-44 98% 45 5d - '" "' 10.7% SS - 64 15.7% 65-74 19.7% 75-84 11.2% 85+ 3.6% 18 + 84.5%- 2010 Population by Sex Males 26,794 Females 29,539 2016 Population by Sex Males 31,321 Females 34,327 2021 Population by Sex Males 34,956 Females 38,130 Source: U.S. Census Bureau; Census 2w 511mmary RIP 1 F—i fnraractc fnr 7n1F. and 7n)1 r— u;-'e.i Ce. 'S 2nnn A.— i— —n y`ny. uphy June 23, 2016 JOHN 14- BURNS Market (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 4 mile radii Prepared by Esri 4 miles 2010 Population by Race/Ethnicity Total 56,333 White Alone 92.6% Black Alone 2.5% American Indian Alone 0.1% Asian Alone 1.6% Pacific Islander Alone 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 1.9% Two or More Races 1.3% Hispanic Origin 12.2% Diversity Index 32.6 2016 Population by Race/Ethnicity Total 65,649 White Alone 91.1% Black Alone 3.0% American Indian Alone 0.1% Asian Alone 1.9% Pacific Islander Alone 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 2.2% Two or More Races 1.6% Hispanic Origin 14.8% Diversity Index 37.8 2021 Population by Race/Ethnicity Total 73,087 White Alone 89.8% Black Alone 3.5% American Indian Alone 0.1% Asian Alone 2.3% Pacific Islander Alone 0.0% Some Other Race Alone 2.5% Two or More Races 1.8% Hispanic Origin 16.8% Diversity Index 41.9 2010 Population by Relationship and Household Type Total 56,333 In Households 99.5% In Family Households 82.8% Householder 30.3% Spouse 25.6% Child 23.0% Other relative 2.6% Nonrelative 1.4% In Nonfamily Households 16.7% In Group Quarters 0.5% Institutionalized Population 0.1% Noninstitutionalized Population 0.4% ,ata Note: Persons of Hispanic Origin may be of any race. The Diversity Index measures the probability that two people from the same area will be from different race/ ethnic groups. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021 Esri converted Census 2000 data into 2010 geography. June 23, 2016 JOHN 14-, BUR`NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Market 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 4 mile radii Prepared by E• 4 miles 2016 Population 25+ by Educational Attainment Total 50,825 Less than 9th Grade 2.3% 9th - 12th Grade, No Diploma 2.8% High School Graduate 20.8% GED/Alternative Credential 2.0% Some College, No Degree 19.1% Associate Degree 9.7% Bachelor's Degree 26.7% Graduate/Professional Degree 16.50/6 2016 Population 15+ by Marital Status Total 56,850 Never Married 21.9% Married 58.8% Widowed 7.8% Divorced 11.5% 2016 Civilian Population 16+ in Labor Force Civilian Employed 95.0% Civilian Unemployed 5.0% 2016 Employed Population 16+ by Industry Total 26,277 Agriculture/Mining 0.6% Construction 7.8% Manufacturing 3.2% Wholesale Trade 2.5% Retail Trade 11.60 Transportation/Utilities 3.20% Information 1.4% Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 9.0% Services 58.4% Public Administration 2.3% 2016 Employed Population 16+ by Occupation Total 26,275 White Collar 68.8% MananAmant/B icinccc/Financial 21.6% Professional 19.5% Sale) 13.9% Administrative Support 13.9% Services 19.8% Blue Collar 11.3% Farming/Forestry/Fishing 0.3% Construction/Extraction 4.3% Installation/Maintenance/Repair 1.5% Production 1.9% Transportation/Material Moving 3.4% 2010 Population By Urban/ Rural Status Total Population 56,333 Populatlon Inside Urbanized Area 94.0% Population Inside Urbanized Cluster 0.3% Rural Population 5.7% Snurrne - - -11 S Census Rn fo c 20 n Su Lila 1 i F. Esri converted CeihuS 2000 uata into 20iu geograpny. June 23, 2016 JOHN 14' . BURNS REAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 4 mile radii 2010 Households by Type Total Households with 1 Person Households with 2+ People Family Households Husband -wife Families With Related Children Other Family (No Spouse Present) Other Family with Male Householder With Related Children Other Family with Female Householder With Related Children Nonfamily Households All Households with Children Multigenerational Households Unmarried Partner Households Male-female Same-sex 2010 Households by Size Total 1 Person Household 2 Person Household 3 Person Household 4 Person Household 5 Person Household 6 Person Household 7 + Person Household 2010 Households by Tenure and Mortgage Status Total Owner Occupied Owned with a Mortgage/Loan Owned Free and Clear Renter Occupied 2010 Housing Units By Urban/ Rural Status Total Housing Units Housing Units Inside Urbanized Area Housing Units Inside Urbanized Cluster Rural Housing Units Prepared by Esri 4 miles 24,975 25.3% 74.7% 68.9% 58.2% 16.5% 10.6% 2.8% 1.6% 7.8% 5.2% 5.8% 23.6% 2.1% 5.3% 4.6% 0.7% 24,975 25.3% 46.9% 12.2% 9.6% 4.0% 1.3% 0.5% 24,975 75.8% 48.8% 27.0% 24.2% 34,555 93.0% 0.3% 6.7% Data Note: Households with children include any households with people under age 18, related or not. Multigenerational households are families with 3 or more parent - Ad relationships. Unmarried partner households are usually classified as nonfamily households unless there is another member of the household related to the ouseholder. Multigenerational and unmarried partner households are reported only to the tract level. Esri estimated block group data, which is used to estimate polygons or non-standard geography. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri forecasts for 2016 and 2021 Esri converted Census 2000 data into 2010 geography. June 23, 2016 JOHN 144 , BUkNS !ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Market 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Rings: 4 mile radii Top 3 Tapestry Segments 2016 Consumer Spending Apparel & Services: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Education: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Entertainment/Recreation: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Food at Home: Total IT Average Spent Spending Potential Index Food Away from Home: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Health Care: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index HH Furnishings & Equipment: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Personal Care Products & Services: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Shelter: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Support Payments/Cash Contributions/Gifts in Kind: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Travel: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs: Total $ Average Spent Spending Potential Index Prepared by E•' 4 miles 1. Silver & Gold (9A) 2. Golden Years (913) 3. Green Acres (6A) $78,270,835 $2,702.26 134 $54,707,490 $1,888.74 134 $118,004,625 $4,074.04 140 $194,978,997 $6,731.54 135 $121,727,707 $4,202.58 136 $225,383,432 $7,781.23 147 $71,768,888 $2,477.78 14 $30,565,421, $1,055.25 144 $622,628,766 $21,495.90 138 $102,224,423 $3,529.24 152 $79,087,561 $2,730.45 147 $41,908,165 $1,446.86 140 Data Note: Consumer spending shows the amount spent on a variety of goods and services by households that reside in the area. Expenditures are shown by broad budget categories that are not mutually exclusive. Consumer spending does not equal business revenue. Total and Average Amount Spent Per Household represent annu figures. The Spending Potential Index represents the amount spent in the area relative to a national average of 100. Source: Consumer Spending data are derived from the 2013 and 2014 Consumer Expenditure Surveys, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Esri. Source; U.S. Census Bu eau, Census 2010 Summary rile 1. Esri Furecasts Fur 2016 and 2021 Esri converted Census 2000 data into 201U geography. June 23, 2016 JOHNrious - .. Income Profile R.EAL ESTATE CONSULT 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 Prepared by Esrl 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring; 4 mile radius 2016-2021 2016-2021 Summary 2016 2021 Change Annual Rate Population 65,648 73,086 7,438 2.17% Households 28,965 32,285 3,320 2.19% Median Age 52.7 55.2 2.5 0.93% Average Household Size 2.26 2.25 -0.01 -0.09% 2016 2021 Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent Household 28,965 100% 32,285 100% <$15,000 2,036 7.0% 2,073 6.4% $15,000-$24,999 1,800 6.2% 2,206 6.8% $25,000-$34,999 2,728 9.4% 1,727 5.3% $35,000-$49,999 3,500 12.1% 2,494 7.7% $50,000-$74,999 4,651 16.1% 5,818 18.0% $75,000-$99,999 3,699 12.8% 4,466 13.8% $100,000-$149,999 5,426 18.7% 6,765 21.0% $150,000-$199,999 1,695 5.9% 2,372 7.3% $200,000+ 3,430 11.8% 4,364 13.5% Median Household Income $73,278 $83,537 Average Household Income $107,728 $121,356 Per Capita Income $47,360 $53,324 Data Note: Income reported for July 1, 2021 represents annual income for the preceding year, expressed in current (2019) dollars, including an adjustment for inflation. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri Forecasts for 2016 and 2021. June 23, 2016 JOHN 144-, BU F�EAL ESTATE CONSULT - .. Income Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius prepared by Er 2016 Households by Income and Age of Householder <25 25-34 3544 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ HH Income Base 580 2,472 3,374 4,369 5,654 6,766 5,750 <$15,000 64 210 203 212 403 331 612 $15,000-$24,999 37 137 156 184 242 487 557 $25,000-$34,999 88 271 306 317 366 503 877 $35,000-$49,999 94 370 418 416 467 733 1,002 $50,000-$74,999 116 457 534 666 791 1,140 947 $75,000-$99,999 54 365 533 651 836 851 408 $100,000-$149,999 93 433 635 962 1,174 1,317 812 $150;000-$199;999 17 107 228 360 412 387 184 $200,000+ 18 120 361 601 963 1,016 350 Median HH Income $51,059 $61,101 $77,466 $88,179 $90,034 $79,424 $46,602 Average HH Income $70,349 $82,353 $106,248 $121,065 $129,497 $120;228 $77,028 Percent Distribution <25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ HH Income Base 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% <$15,000 11.0% 8.5% 6.0% 4.9% 7.1% 4.9% 10.6% $15,000-$24,999 6.4% 5.5% 4.6% 4.2% 4.3% 7.2% 9.7% $25,000-$34,999 15.2% 11.0% 9.1% 7.3% 6.5% 7.4% 15.3% $35,000-$49,999 16.2% 15.0% 12.4% 9.5% 8.3% 10.8% 17.4% $50,000-$74,999 20.0% 18.5% 15.8% 15.2% 14.0% 16.8% 16.5% $75,000-$99,999 9.3% 14.8% 15.8% 14.9% 14.8% 12.6% 7.1% $100,000-$149,999 16.0% 17.5% 18.8% 22.0% 20.8% 19.5% 14.10/ $150,000-$199,999 2.9% 4.3% 6.8% 8.2% 7.3% 5.7% 3.29/L $200,000+ 3,1% 4.9% 10.7% 13.8% 17.0% 15.0% 6.1% Data Note: Income reported for July 1, 2021 represents annual income for the preceding year, expressed in current (2019) dollars, including an adjustment for inflation. Source: S Census Bureau,- 2010 S. • __ a, y File , E--: cast_ for 2016 and 2021 June 23, 2016 JOHN BU REAL ESTATE CONSUI-Tnw- - .. Income Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius Prepared by Esri 2021 Households by Income and Age of Householder <25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ HH Income Base 573 2,706 3,667 4,204 6,100 8,053 6,982 <$15,000 71 227 198 179 362 346 691 $15,000-$24,999 50 181 181 183 266 597 748 $25,000-$34,999 55 174 174 162 203 325 634 $35,000-$49,999 60 254 266 238 305 540 830 $50,000-$74,999 127 574 661 676 905 1,495 1,379 $75,000-$99,999 63 458 650 684 946 1,061 604 $100,000-$149,999 106 532 771 1,003 1,395 1,717 1,240 $150,000-$199,999 20 153 318 428 551 584 318 $200,000+ 21 152 448 650 1,168 1,388 538 Median HH Income $57,466 $71,484 $86,599 $99,013 $101,416 $90,518 $58,265 Average HH Income $77,220 $92,257 $120,205 $135,140 $145,180 $135,517 $91,414 Percent Distribution <25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ HH Income Base 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% <$15,000 12.4% 8.4% 5.4% 4.3% 5.9% 4.3% 9.9% $15,000-$24,999 8.7% 6.7% 4.9% 4.4% 4.4% 7.4% 10.7% $25,000-$34,999 9.6% 6.4% 4.7% 3.9% 3.3% 4.0% 9.1% $35,000-$49,999 10.5% 9.4% 7.3% 5.7% 5.0% 6.7% 11.9% $50,000-$74,999 22.2% 21.2% 18.0% 16.1% 14.8% 18.6% 19.8% $75,000-$99,999 11.0% 16.9% 17.7% 16.3% 15.5% 13.2% 8.7% $100,000-$149,999 18.5% 19.7% 21.0% 23.9% 22.9% 21.3% 17.8% $150,000-$199,999 3.5% 5.7% 8.7% 10.2% 9.0% 7.3% 4.6% $200,000+ 3.7% 5.6% 12.2% 15.5% 19.1% 17.2% 7.7% Data Note: Income reported for July 1, 2021 represents annual income for the preceding year, expressed in current (2019) dollars, including an adjustment for inflation. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File 1. Esri Forecasts for 2016 and 2021. June 23, 2016 JOHN folk -,, ,BUR REAL ESTATE CONSUL' 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 Prepared by E 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius Data Note: Net Worth is total household wealth minus debt, secured and unsecured. Net worth includes home equity, equity in pension plans, net equity in vehicles, IRAs and Keogh accounts, business equity, interest-earning assets and mutual fund shares, stocks, etc. Examples of secured det include home mortgages and vehicle loans; examples of unsecured debt include credit card debt, certain bank loans, and other outstanding bills. Forecasts of net worth are based on the Survey of Consumer Finances, Federal Reserve Board. R-ource-_ U.S. Censussus Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File .. EGri Forecasts .'or 2011. and 1 arc i. June 23, 2016 2016-2021 2016-2021 Summary Census 2010 2016 2021 Change Annual Rate Population 56,333 65,648 73,086 7,438 2.170/c Median Age 50.1 52.7 55.2 2.5 0.93% Households 24,975 28,965 32,285 3,320 2.190/0 Average Household Size 2.24 2.26 2.25 -0.01 -0.090/0 2016 Households by Net Worth Number Percent Total 28,965 100.00/0 <$15,000 4,719 16.3% $15,000-$34,999 y 1,487 5.1% $35,000-$49,999 819 2.8% $50,000-$74,999 1,444 5.0% $75,000-$99,999 1,110 3.8% $100,000-$149,999 ',915 6.6% $150,000-$249,999 2,870 9.9% $250,000-$500,000 4,545 15.7% $500,000+ 10,055 34.7% Median Net Worth $253,799 Average Net Worth $1,486,526 Number of Households 2016 Net Worth by Age of Householder <25 15-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Total 580 2,472 3,374 4,369 5,654 6,766 5,750 <$15,000 284 1,190 995 768 755 305 42" $15,000-$34,999 134 357 332 278 192 70 124 $35,000-$49,999 25 177 189 141 135 86 66 $50,000-$99,999 54 289 615 488 342 317 450 $100,000-$149,999 27 134 266 352 381 450 305 $150,000-$249,999 31 129 314 482 571 636 707 $250,000+ 27 196 662 1,860 3,279 4,901 3,675 Median Net Worth $15,514 $16,493 $59,026 $175,032 $250,001 $250,001 $250,001 Avp.mne Net Wnrth $77 Sol -i Q13n 001 rnz 7F�7 $5 , "895 452 ki 794 y ,� � V�,..�,48 2 o-7 723 F9, per, � , �i $ ror, �i,479,I00 Data Note: Net Worth is total household wealth minus debt, secured and unsecured. Net worth includes home equity, equity in pension plans, net equity in vehicles, IRAs and Keogh accounts, business equity, interest-earning assets and mutual fund shares, stocks, etc. Examples of secured det include home mortgages and vehicle loans; examples of unsecured debt include credit card debt, certain bank loans, and other outstanding bills. Forecasts of net worth are based on the Survey of Consumer Finances, Federal Reserve Board. R-ource-_ U.S. Censussus Bureau, Census 2010 Summary File .. EGri Forecasts .'or 2011. and 1 arc i. June 23, 2016 JOHN j4'&.,,BU Ketail - P . - Profile R,EAL ESTATE CONSULT 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius Prepared by Esri Summary Demographics 2016 Population 65,648 2016 Households 28,965 2016 Median Disposable Income $58,680 2016 Per Capita Income $47,360 NAICS Demand Supply Retail Gap Leakage/Surplus Number of Industry Summary (Retail Potential) (Retail Sales) Factor Businesses Total Retail Trade and Food & Drink 44-45,722 $1,508,132,217 $1,031,247,437 $476,884,780 18.8 271 Total Retail Trade 44-45 $1,362,168,211 $979,379,322 $382,788,889 16.3 179 Total Food & Drink 722 $145,964,005 $51,868,115 $94,095,890 47.6 92 NAICS Demand Supply Retail Gap Leakage/Surplus Number of Industry Group (Retail Potential) (Retail Sales) Factor Businesses Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers 441 $325,260,501 $15,220,422 $310,040,079 91.1 8 Automobile Dealers 4411 $255,682,299 $8,160,304 $247,521,995 93.8 2 Other Motor Vehicle Dealers 4412 $47,976,740 $5,685,829 $42,290,911 78.8 4 Auto Parts, Accessories & Tire Stores 4413 $21,601,462 $1,374,288 $20,227,174 88.0 2 Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores 442 $42,712,345 $8,256,226 $34,456,119 67.6 13 Furniture Stores 4421 $25,011,098 $5,277,083 $19,734,015 65.2 3 Home Furnishings Stores 4422 $17,701,246 $2,979,143 $14,722,103 71.2 10 Electronics & Appliance Stores 443 $57,638,905 $13,467,983 $44,170,922 62.1 13 Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores 444 $71,821,057 $35,214,875 $36,606,182 34.2 23 Bldg Material & Supplies Dealers 4441 $63,622,010 $26,739,461 $36,882,549 40.8 15 Lawn & Garden Equip & Supply Stores 4442 $8,199,046 $8,475,415 -$276,369 -1.7 8 Food & Beverage Stores 445 $247,366,088 $187,293,241 $60,072,847 13,8 22 Grocery Stores 4451 $218,382,894 $178,607,098 $39,775,796 10.0 11 Specialty Food Stores 4452 $17,814,022 $5,170,035 $12,643,987 55.0 7 Beer, Wine & Liquor Stores 4453 $11,169,172 $3,516,108 $7,653,064 52.1 3 Health & Personal Care Stores 446,4461 $86,164,693 $35,284,728 $50,879,965 41,9 21 Gasoline Stations 447,4471 $91,437,181 $5,992,267 $85,444,914 87.7 2 Clothing & Clothing Accessories Stores 448 $72,079,224 $7,621,988 $64,457,236 80.9 19 Clothing Stores 4481 $51,333,669 $5,174,921 $46,158,748 81.7 16 Shoe Stores 4482 $8,587,588 $885,833 $7,701,755 81.3 2 Jewelry, Luggage & Leather Goods Stores 4483 $12,157,968 $1,561,234 $10,596,734 77.2 2 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores 451 $32,983,621 $22,619,068 $10,364,553 18.6 15 Sporting Goods/Hobby/Musical Instr Stores 4511 $24,053,386 $21,543,333 $2,510,053 5.5 12 Book, Periodical & Music Stores 4512 $8,930,235 $1,075,735 $7,854,500 -78.5 3 General Merchandise Stores 452 $238,232,272 $206,571,921 $31,660,351 7.1 10 Department Stores Excluding Leased Depts. 4521 $173,602,054 $123,600,677 $50,001,377 16.8 4 Other General Merchandise Stores 4529 $64,630,219 $82,971,244 -$18,341,025 -12.4 6 Miscellaneous Store Retailers 453 $62,578,750 $435,302,284 -$372,723,534 -74.9 24 Florists 4531 $2,762,859 $1,559,057 $1,203,802 27.9 4 Office Supplies, Stationery & Gift Stores 4532 $12,018,981 $5,126,884 $6,892,097 40.2 8 Used Merchandise Stores 4533 $5,742,728 $850,342 $4,892,386 74.2 6 Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers 4539 $42,054,182 $427,766,000 -$385,711,818 -82.1 6 Nonstore Retailers 454 $33,893,575 $6,534,318 $27,359,257 67.7 8 Electronic Shopping & Mail -Order Houses 4541 $26,934,206 $5,290,966 $21,643,240 67.2 5 Vending Machine Operators 4542 $783,392 $0 $783,392 100.0 0 Direct Selling Establishments 4543 $6,175,977 $1,241,618 $4,934,359 66.5 2 Food Services & Drinking Places 722 $145,964,005 $51,868,115 $94,095,890 47.6 92 Full -Service Restaurants 7221 $82,274,730 $32,951,038 $49,323,692 42.8 61 Limited -Service Eating Places 7222 $53,955,128 $18,271,663 $35,683,465 49.4 28 Special Food Services 7223 $2,269,314 $110,724 $2,158,590 90.7 1 Drinking Places - Alcoholic Beverages 7224 $7,464,834 $534,691 $6,930,143 86.6 3 Data Note: Supply (retail sales) estimates sales to consumers by establishments. Sales to businesses are excluded. Demand (retail potential) estimates the expected amount spent by consumers at retail establishments. Supply and demand estimates are in current dollars. The Leakage/Surplus Factor presents a snapshot of retail opportunity. This Is a measure of the relationship between supply and demand that ranges from +100 (total leakage) to -100 (total surplus). A positive value represents 'leakage' of retail opportunity outside the trade area. A negative value represents a surplus of retail sales, a market where customers are drawn in from outside the trade area. The Retail Gap represents the difference between Retail Potential and Retail Sales. Esri uses the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) to classify businesses by their �mary type of economic activity. Retail establishments are classified Into 27 industry groups in the Retail Trade sector, as well as four industry groups within the Food .rvices & Drinking Establishments subsector. For more information on the Retail MarketPlace data, please click the link below to view the Methodology Statement. ,ttp ://www. esri. com/1 ibrary/whitepapers/pdfs/esri-data-reta il-marketplace. pdf Source: Esri and Infogroup. Retail MarketPlace 2016 Release 1 (2015 data in 2016 geography) Copyright 2016 Infogroup, Inc. All rights reserved. June 23, 2016 -, ill:1.. I JOHN 14. BUR (ZEAL ESTATE CONSUL 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius Leakage/Surplus Factor by Industry Subsector Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers Furniture & Home Furnishings Stores Electronics & Appliance Stores Bldg Materials, Garden Equip. & Supply Stores Food & Beverage Stores Health & Personal Care Stores Gasoline Stations Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores Sportinq Goods, Hobby, Book, and Music Stores General Merchandise Stores Miscellaneous Store Retailers Nonstore Retailers Food Services & Drinking Places Prepared by -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 Leakage/Surplus Factor Leakage/Surplus Factor by Industry Group Automobile Dealers Other Motor Vehicle Dealers Auto Parts, Accessories, and Tire Stores Furniture Stores Home Furnishings Stores Electronics & Appliance Stores Building Material and Supplies Dealers Lawn and Garden Equipment and Supplies Stores Grocery Stores Specialty Food Stores Beer, Wine, and Liquor Stores Health & Personal Care Stores Gasoline Stations Clothing Stores Shoe Stores Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Stores Book, Periodical, and Music Stores Department Stores (Excluding Leased Depts.) Other General Merchandise Stores Florists Office Supplies, Stationery, and Gift Stores Used Merchandise Stores Other Miscellaneous Store Retailers Electronic Shopping and Mail -Order Houses Vending Machine Operators Direct Selling Establishments Full -Service Restaurants Limited -Service Eating Places Special Food Services Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages) -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 10, Leakage/Surplus Factor Source: Esri and infogroup. Retaii riarketPiace 2016 Release i (2015 data In 20i6 geography) Copyright 2016 lnfogroup, Inc. iii rights reserved. June 23, 2016 JOHN BURNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius Top Twenty Tapestry Segments Rank Tapestry Segment I Silver & Gold (9A) 2 Golden Years (9B) 3 Green Acres (6A) 4 Old and Newcomers (8F) 5 Middleburg (4C) 75.5% Subtotal 6 Exurbanites (1E) 7 The Great Outdoors (6C) 8 In Style (56) 9 Bright Young Professionals (8C) 10 Retirement Communities (9E) 16.2% Subtotal 11 Rural Resort Dwellers (6E) 12 Home Improvement (413) Subtotal Total Top Ten Tapestry Segments Site vs. U.S. Retirement Communities (9E) Bright Young Professionals (8C) In Style (513) The Great Outdoors (6C) Exurbanites (1E) Middleburg (4C) Old and Newcomers (8F) Green Acres (6A) Golden Years (913) Silver & Gold (9A) 0 5 2016 Households 90.3% Cumulative Percent Percent 36.8% 36.8% 28.0% 64.8% 10.7% 75.5% 6.1% 81.6% 4.6% 86.2% 86.2% 4.1% 90.3% 3.9% 94.2% 3.5% 97.7% 1.2% 98.9% 0.6% 99.5% 13.3% 2.3% 0.5% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.5°/a 100.0% Prepared by Esri 2016 U.S. Households Cumulative Percent Percent 0.8% 0.80/0 1.3% 2.1% 3.2% 5.3% 2.3% 7.6% 2.8% 10.4% 10.4% 1.9% 12.3% 1.6% 13.9% 2.3% 16.2% 2.2% 18.4% 1.2% 19.6% 9.2% 1.0% 20.6% 1.7% 22.3% 2.7% 22.4% 10 15 20 25 30 35 Percent of Households by Tapestry Segment Index 4851 2,090 334 261 163 ■ Site ■ U.S. 210 252 156 53 46 49 3 447 ata Note: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The index is a comparison r the percent of households or Total Population 18+ In the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source: Esri June 23, 2016 JOHN BUPNS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Tapestry• • Area Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius Prepared by E- 2016 Tapestry Indexes by Households 2016 Tapestry Indexes by Total Population 18+ Index 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 v c C CL E a V 2 a c H yes the of the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Saul ce: Cs{ i Index 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 June 23, 2016 JOHN BUF�NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 Prepared by Esri 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius Tapestry LifeMode Groups 2016 Households 2016 Adult Population Number Percent Index Number Percent Index Total: 28,965 100.0% 54,821 100.0% 1. Affluent Estates 1,184 4.1% 41 2,423 4.4% 43 Top Tier (1A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Professional Pride (iB) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 Boomburbs (1C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Savvy Suburbanites (1D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Exurbanites (1E) 1,184 4.1% 210 2,423 4.4% 227 2. Upscale Avenues 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 Urban Chic (2A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Pleasantville (213) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Pacific Heights (2C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Enterprising Professionals (2D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 3. Uptown Individuals 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 Laptops and Lattes (3A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Metro Renters (3B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Trendsetters (3C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 4. Family Landscapes 1,350 4.7% 63 2,625 4.8% 62 Soccer Moms (4A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 ",)me Improvement (4B) 13 0.0% 3 31 0.1% 3 Idleburg (4C) 1,337 4.6% 163 2,594 4.7% 168 S. GenXurban 1,019 3.S% 30 1,966 3.6% 33 Comfortable Empty Nesters (5A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 In Style (513) 1,019 3.5% 156 1,966 3.6% 170 Parks and Rec (5C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Rustbelt Traditions (5D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Midlife Constants (5E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 6. Cozy Country Living 4,374 15.10/0 123 8,901 16.2% 136 Green Acres (6A) 3,095 10.7% 334 6,584 12.0% 364 Salt of the Earth (6B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 The Great Outdoors (6C) 1,134 3.9% 252 2,085 3.8% 250 Prairie Living (6D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 Rural Resort Dwellers (6E) 145 0.5% 49 232 0.4% 45 Heartland Communities (6F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 7. Ethnic Enclaves 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 Up and Coming Families (7A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Urban Villages (76) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 American Dreamers (7C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Barrios Urbanos (713) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Valley Growers (7E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Southwestern Families (7F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 ata Note: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The index is a comparison ,f the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source: Esri June 23, 2016 ,JOHN j4',: BUk S kE_AL ESTATE CONSULTING Segmentation 6 • O Pro Data Note: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The index is a comparisr of the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source: Fc June 23, 2016 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 Prepared by E- 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius Tapestry LifeMode Groups 2016 Households 2016 Adult Population Number Percent Index Number Percent Index Total: 28,965 100.0% 54,821 100.0% S. Middle Ground 2,099 7.2% 66 3,689 6,70/o 65 City Lights (8A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Emerald City (813) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Bright Young Professionals (8C) 341 1.2% 53 653 1.2% 59 Downtown Melting Pot (8D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Front Porches (8E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Old and Newcomers (8F) 1,758 6.1% 261 3,036 5.5% 275 Hardscrabble Road (8G) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 9. Senior Styles 18,939 65.4% 1125 35,217 64.2% 1285 Silver & Gold (9A.) 10,663 36.8% 4,851 19,463 35.5% 5,154 Golden Years (9B) 8,114 28.0% 2,090 15,467 28.2% 2,375 The Elders (9C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Senior Escapes (9D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Retirement Communities (9E) 162 0.6% 46 287 0.5% 51 Social Security Set (9F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 10. Rustic Outposts 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 O Southern Satellites (10A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Rooted Rural (106) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Diners & Miners (10C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Down the Road (10D) 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.0% 0 Rural Bypasses (10E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% r 11. Midtown Singles 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% O City Strivers (11A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Young and Restless (118) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Metro Fusion (11C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 Set to Impress (11D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 City Commons (11E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 12. Hometown O 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 O Family Foundations (12A), 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Traditional Living (12B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0°/a n Small Town Simplicity (12Q n n.o oi: n n n,n% n Modest Income Homes (12D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 13. Next Wave 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 O International Marketplace (13A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Las Casas (13B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 Ne West Residents (13C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Fresh Ambitions (13D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 High Rise Renters (13E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.00/0 0 14. Scholars and Patriots 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Military Proximity (14A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 College Towns (14B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Dorms to Diplomas (14C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Unclassified (15) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Data Note: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The index is a comparisr of the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source: Fc June 23, 2016 JOHN 141. BUF�NS (ZEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Tapestry Segmentation _ _ Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 Prepared by Esri 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius Tapestry Urbanization Groups 2016 Households 2016 Adult Population Number Percent Index Number Percent Index Total: 28,965 100.0% 54,821 100.00/0 1. Principal Urban Center 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.00/0 0 Laptops and Lattes (3A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Metro Renters (3B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Trendsetters (3C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Downtown Melting Pot (8D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 City Strivers (11A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 NeWest Residents (13C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Fresh Ambitions (13D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 High Rise Renters (13E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 2. Urban Periphery 341 1.2% 7 653 1.2% 7 Pacific Heights (2C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Rustbelt Traditions (5D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Urban Villages (7B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 American Dreamers (7C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Barrios Urbanos (7D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Southwestern Families (7F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 City Lights (8A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Bright Young Professionals (8C) 341 1.2% 53 653 1.2% 59 Metro Fusion (11C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 -'mily Foundations (12A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Jest Income Homes (12D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 _nternational Marketplace (13A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Las Casas (13B) 0 0.00/0 0 0 0.0% 0 3. Metro Cities 2,939 10.10/0 55 5,289 9.60/0 57 In Style (513) 1,019 3.5% 156 1,966 3.6% 170 Emerald City (8B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Front Porches (8E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Old and Newcomers (8F) 1,758 6.1% 261 3,036 5.5% 275 Hardscrabble Road (8G) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Retirement Communities (9E) 162 0.6% 46 287 0.5% 51 Social Security Set (9F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Young and Restless (11B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Set to Impress (11D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 City Commons (11E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Traditional Living (12B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 College Towns (14B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Dorms to Diplomas (14C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 ita Note: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The index is a comparison the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. Source: Esri June 23, 2016 JOHN BURNS DEAL ESTATE CONSULTING Tapestrye Segmentation • Area Profile 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 9 Prepared by E, , 7165 Immokalee Rd, Naples, Florida, 34119 Ring: 4 mile radius Tapestry Urbanization Groups 2016 Households 2016 Adult Population Number Percent Index Number Percent Index Total: 28,965 100.0% 54,821 100.0% 4. Suburban Periphery 19,974 69.0% 217 37,384 68.20/a 212 Top Tier (1A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Professional Pride (113) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Boomburbs (1C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Savvy Suburbanites (ID) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Exurbanites (1E) 1,184 4.1% 210 2,423 4.4% 227 Urban Chic (2A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Pleasantville (213) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Enterprising Professionals (2D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Soccer Moms (4A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Home Improvement (413) 13 0.0% 3 31 0.1% 3 Comfortable Empty Nesters (SA) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Parks and Rec (5C) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Midlife Constants (5E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Up and Coming Families (7A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Silver & Gold (9A) 10,663 36.8% 4,851 19,463 35.5% 5,154 Golden Years (913) 8,114 28.0% 2,090 15,467 28.2% 2,375 The Elders (9C) 0 0:0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Military Proximity (14A) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 S. Semirural 1,337 4.6% 49 2,594 4.70/a 52 Middleburg (4C) 1,337 4.6% 163 2,594 4.7% 168 Heartland Communities (6F) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% Valley Growers (7E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% Senior Escapes (9D) 0 0.0% 0 0 010% 0 Down the Road (10D) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Small Town Simplicity (12r_) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 6. Rural 4,374 15.10/0 88 8,901 16.20/a 96 Green Acres (6A) 3,095 10.7% 334 6_,584 12.0% 364 Salt of the Earth (6B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Tho Great niifrinnrr (rC) 1�13d 3.94! 252 V ',^85 3.8°� 250 Prairie Living (6D) 0 0,0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Rural Resort Dvvcllcrs (6E) 145 0.50/0 49 232 0,4% 45 Southern Satellites (10A) U 0.01/0 0 0 0.0% 0 Rooted Rural (10B) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Diners & Miners (10C) 0 O.D% 0 0 0% 0 Rural Bypasses (10E) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Unclassified (15) 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0 Data Note: This report identifies neighborhood segments in the area, and describes the socioeconomic quality of the immediate neighborhood. The index is a comparis• of the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the area, by Tapestry segment, to the percent of households or Total Population 18+ in the United States, by segment. An index of 100 is the US average. June 23, 2016 EXHIBIT "V" ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT LOGAN/IMMOKALEE GMPA GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT June 2016 Prepared For: Immokalee Road Associates LLC. 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Suite 400 Sunrise, Florida 33323 (954) 753-1730 Prepared By: Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 274-0067 Project No. 13GLH2170 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Introduction... --- ........................................................................................................1 2.0 Vegetation Associations and Land Uses............................................................................1 3.0 Soils...................................................................................................................................3 4.0 Jurisdictional Wetlands ................................... 5.0 Listed Species.................................................................................... 6.0 Archaeological and Historical Resources....... ................. ..........4 ...................4 7.0 References..........................................................................................................................5 Table 1 Table 2. Table 3 LIST OF TABLES Existing Land Use and Cover Summary ................... Page ..................1 SoilsListed by the NRCS......................................................................................3 SFWMD Wetland Acreages by FLUCFCS Code.......... ii ........................4 LIST OF EXHIBITS Page Exhibit 1. Project Location Map......—.—.— ........ i ... ................ . ........... EI -1 Exhibit 2. FLUCFCS and Wetlands Map...........................................................................E2-1 Exhibit 3. Aerial with FLUC.FCS and Wetlands Map ........................................................ E3-1 Exhibit4. Soils Map .......................................... ......................................................... ...... E4-1 Exhibit 5. Listed Species Survey Report....................:..................................................._.._E5-1 id 1.0 INTRODUCTION The following information regarding site conditions and environmental considerations has been prepared for the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment for the Logan/Immokalee GMPA parcel (Project). The 19± acre Project site is located in Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (Exhibit 1). More specifically, it is found at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard and is located approximately 1.4 miles east of Interstate 75. The property is bound by Immokalee Road to the north, Logan Boulevard and a landscaping nursery to the west, and a landscaping nursery to the east and south. Saturnia Lakes residential development is located to the southeast of the Project site. The Project site is comprised primarily of forested uplands and wetlands that have been disturbed by the invasion of varying levels of exotic vegetation. 2.0 VEGETATION ASSOCIATIONS AND LAND USES The existing land uses on the Project site include a combination of disturbed land and forested uplands and wetlands with varying degrees of exotic infestation. The vegetation associations for the property were delineated using January 2016 rectified color aerials (Scale: 1" = 100'). These delineations were classified based on the nomenclature of the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) Levels III and IV (Florida Department of Transportation 1999). Level IV FLUCFCS was utilized to denote disturbance and hydrologic conditions. "E" codes were used to identify levels of exotic species invasion (i.e., Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius)). AutoCAD Map 3D 2015 software was used to determine the acreage of each mapped polygon, produce summaries, and generate the final FLUCFCS map (Exhibits 2 and 3). A total of nine vegetative associations and land uses (i.e., FLUCFCS codes) were identified on the property. The dominant habitat type on the property is Pine, Disturbed (FLUCFCS Code 4159) with various levels of exotic coverage (i.e., E1 and E3). This vegetative community accounts for 43.4 percent of the property (8.09± acres). Exotic vegetation documented on-site includes, but is not limited to, Brazilian pepper, melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), and earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis). The degree of exotic infestation ranges from 0 to 100 percent cover. Table 1 summarizes the FLUCFCS acreages and a brief description of each of the FLUCFCS classifications follows the table. Table 1. Existing Land Use and Cover Summary FLUCFCS Code Description Acreage Percent of Total 241 Tree Nursery 0.91 4.9 4119 El Pine Flatwoods, Disturbed 0-24% Exotics) 1.64 8.8 4159 E1 Pine, Disturbed 0-24% Exotics 4.56 24.5 J Table 1. (Continued) FLUCFCS Code Description Acreage Percent of Total 4159 E3 Pine, Disturbed 50-75% Exotics 3.53 18.9 4281 E3 Cabbage Palm H dric 50-75% Exotics 0.20 1.1 619 E4 Exotic Wetlands, Disturbed 76-100% Exotics 4.12 22.1 6219 E3 Cypress, Disturbed 50-75% Exotics 0.21 1.1 6249 E3 Cypress/Pine/Cabbage PalmDisturbed (50-75% Exotics) 2.99 16.0 740 Disturbed Land 0.48 2.6 Totals 18.64 100.0 Tree Nurse fFLUCFCS Code 241 A tree nursery is located on the western portion of the Project site. This area consists primarily of planted date palms (Phoenix dactylifera) and queen palms (Syagrus romanzoffiana). Pine Flatwoods Disturbed 0-24% Exotics FLUCFCS Code 4119 E1 This upland habitat is located in the eastern portion of the property. The canopy is dominated by slash pine (Pinus elliottii), along with scattered cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) and earleaf acacia. The sub -canopy vegetation includes cabbage palm, along with rusty lyonia (Lyonia fruticosa), saw palmetto (Serenoa repens), and scattered Brazilian pepper. The ground cover is dominated by saw palmetto, with lesser amounts of bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), greenbrier (Smilax auriculata), and caesarweed (Urena lobata). Pine Disturbed 0-24% Exotics FLUCFCS Code 4159 E1 This upland habitat occupies the south-central portion of the property. The canopy and sub -canopy are dominated by slash pine with scattered melaleuca, earleaf acacia, cabbage palm, rusty lyonia, Brazilian pepper, myrsine (Rapanea punctata), and strawberry guava (Psidium cattleianum). The ground cover is dominated by species typical to disturbed areas, such as muscadine grape, poison ivy, greenbrier, spermacoce (Spermacoce verticillata), caesarweed, and bracken fern. Additional ground cover species including little blue maidencane (Amphicarpum muhlenbergianum), gulfdune paspalum (Paspalum monostachyum), Boston fern (Nephrolepis sp.), and swamp fern (Blechnum serrulatum) occur in lesser amounts. Pine Disturbed 50-75% Exotics FLUCFCS Code 4159 E3 This upland habitat is similar to FLUCFCS Code 4159 E1 but with a higher concentration of Brazilian pepper in the sub -canopy and melaleuca and earleaf acacia in the canopy. Cabbage Palm, Hydric.(50-75%o Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4281 E3) This wetland habitat is located near the southeast corner of the property. The canopy is dominated by cabbage palm, along with very scattered slash pine. The sub -canopy is dominated by Brazilian pepper, with scattered cabbage palm and citrus (Citrus sp.). The ground cover is dominated by swamp fern. 2 Exotic Wetlands Disturbed 76-100% Exotics FLUCFCS Code 619 E4 This wetland habitat occupies most of the northeastern portion of the property. The canopy and sub - canopy are dominated by exotics such as melaleuca, earleaf acacia, Brazilian pepper, and strawberry guava. Scattered native species present include widely scattered bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), cabbage palm, myrsine, and cocoplum (Chrysobalanus icaco). The ground cover is dominated by swamp fern with scattered sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), muscadine grape, and greenbrier. Cypress, Disturbed 50-75% Exotics FLUCFCS Code 6219 E3. This wetland habitat is located near the northeast corner of the property. The canopy is dominated by bald cypress with cabbage palm and melaleuca. The sub -canopy vegetation consists of Brazilian pepper, earleaf acacia, and cabbage palm. The ground cover is mostly open with scattered swamp fern, sawgrass, gulfdune paspalum, muscadine grape, poison ivy, and caesarweed. Cypress/Pine/Cabbage Palm Disturbed 50-75% Exotics FLUCFCS Code 6249 E3 This wetland habitat is found in the northwest portion of the property. The canopy is dominated by slash pine with bald cypress, melaleuca, and earleaf acacia. Brazilian pepper dominates the sub - canopy stratum, along with scattered laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) and buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis). The ground cover vegetation commonly includes swamp fern, along with scattered greenbrier and muscadine grape. Disturbed Land FLUCFCS Code 740 This upland land use is located along the south property line. The canopy and sub -canopy strata are mostly open, with widely scattered earleaf acacia and Brazilian pepper growing along its northern edge. The herbaceous ground cover is dominated by species typical of disturbed areas including beggar -tick (Eiden pilosa), spermacoce, muscadine grape, common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), poinsettia (Poinsettia cyathophora), and flatsedge (Cyperus ligularis). 3.0 SOILS The soils for the property, per the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly the Soil Conservation Service), are shown on Exhibit 4 and listed in Table 2. The "Hydric Soils of Florida Handbook" (Florida Association of Environmental Soil Scientists 1995) lists Holopaw Fine Sand, Limestone Substratum (No. 2); Basinger Fine Sand (No. 17); and Holopaw and Okeelanta Soils, Depressional (No. 23) as hydric soils. Table 2. Soils Listed by the NRCS _,Mapiiink Unit Description' H dric/Non-H dric* 2 Holopaw Fine Sand, Limestone Substratum Hydric 17 Basinger Fine Sand Hydric 23 Holopaw and Okeelanta Soils, De ressional H dric *Per the "Hydric Soils of Florida Handbook" (Florida Association of Environmental Soil Scientists 1995). 4.0 JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS The subject property was reviewed for state wetland jurisdiction using the "Delineation of the Landward Extent of Wetlands and Surface Waters" (Chapter 62-340, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.)). The Project site contains 7.52± acres of South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) jurisdictional wetlands. The SFWMD jurisdictional wetland areas consist of Cabbage Palm, Hydric (50-75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4281 E3); Exotic Wetlands, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 619 E4); Cypress, Disturbed (50-75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6219 E3); and Cypress/Pine/Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (50-75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6249 E3). The SFWMD jurisdictional wetlands are shown in Exhibits 2 and 3. The wetlands by FLUCFCS code are summarized in Table 3. Table 3. SFWMD Wetland Acreages by FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Code Description Acreage 4281 E3 Cabbage Palm, Hydric 50-75% Exotics 0.20 619 E4 Exotic Wetlands, Disturbed 76-100% Exotics) 4.12 6219 E3 Cypress, Disturbed 50-75% Exotics 0.21 6249 E3 Cypress/Pine/Cabbage Palm, Disturbed 50-75% Exotics 2.99 Total 7.52 5.0 LISTED SPECIES A listed species survey was conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. on the Project site on June 15, 2016. No listed wildlife species were observed during the listed species survey. However, one state -listed plant species, the cardinal airplant (Tillandsia fasciculata), was observed scattered throughout the Project site. The listed species survey methodology and results are provided as Exhibit 5. 6.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES There are no known archaeological or historical sites present within or in the vicinity of the Project site. 4 7.0 REFERENCES Florida Association of Environmental Soil Scientists. 1995. Hydric Soils of Florida Handbook, Second Edition. Victor W. Carlisle, Ed. Florida Department of Transportation. 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. Procedure No. 550-010-001-a. Third Edition. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Draft Standard Local Operating Procedures for Endangered Species Wood Storks. South Florida Ecological Services Office. EXHIBIT 1 PROJECT LOCATION MAP MM1111A EEF171'- sil qj _1A 77 L -L 4 '0' PROJE�CT L��O)CA�T�10�N Zffii S, q'_ SEC 28, TWP 48 S,ray E RNG 26 E 'K •33 OL, rr F iT 4 NO 4z 5A ��VAHD F. qj.$CA HAM)me( 17' I RM. t)t: 41� A qm AWNVY ;L 01.3� t NSOM i� -�yi:iw 4f V -%ANOA% EXHIBIT 2 FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAP -IMMOKALEE RD- W W W W W W W W W W W W w W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W i W 619 E4 W W W w W W w w w Z W W W W W W Y W W W W W W W (4.12 Ac. J W W m W W W W W m W W W W W W W W W W W W W w W W Z Q O W w W W W O W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W J tl W W WW W W W W Y W W W w W 4 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W w W i W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 6219E3 W W W W O W W W W W W W W W W W W W (O.2I Ac.±) w W W W W W W W Y W W W W W W W W W W W W v .v ✓ W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W w W W W W W w6249E3 W W w W W W W W W W w W W W W w W W W W W W W (2.99 Ac.±) W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W w W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W w W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 4119E1 W w w w W W (0.29 Ac.±) W W W W W W W 241 (0.91 Ac.±) 4119E1 4159E3 (0.15 Ac.±) (3.53 Ac.±) 4159E1 (4.56 Ac.±) 740 (0.48 Ac.±) 4119E1 (1.20 AC.±) w . 4281E3 (0.20 Ac.±) 'N W W - NOTES NOTES P/L 1 SCALE: I"= 100' PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER GLHOMES DRAWING No. 2013-91 18 ACRE LOGAN_IMMOK,DWG DATED JUNE 13, 2016. FLUCFCS LINES ESTIMATED FROM I"=200' AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS AND LOCATIONS APPROXIMATED. FLUCFCS PER FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCFCS) (FOOT 1999), UPLAND/WETLAND LIMITS HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED BY ANY REGULATORY AGENCY AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. n 13RAVN BY DATE ' T.S. 6/14/16 FLUCFCS PASSARELLA LOGAN/IMMOKALEE GMPA % OF rtsvlfivavar DATE CODES DESCRIPTIONS ACREAGE TOTAL LEGEND: 241 TREE NURSERY 0.91 Ac.± 4.99/o 4119 E1 PINE FLATWOODS, DISTURBED (0-24% EXOTICS) 1.64 Ac.± 83% W SFWM:) JURISDICTIONAL 4159 E1 PINE, DISTURBED (0-24% EXOTICS) 4.56 Ac.± 24.5% W WETLANDS (7.52 Ac.±) 4159 E3 PINE, DISTURBED (50-75% EXOTICS) 3.53Ac. ± 16.9% 4281 E3 CABBAGE PALM, HYDRIC (50-75% EXOTICS) 0.20 Ac.± 1.1% 619 E4 EXOTIC WETLANDS, DISTURBED (76-100% EXOTICS) 4.12 Ac.± 22.1% 6219 E3 CYPRESS, DISTURBED (50-75% EXOTICS) 0.21 Ac. --t 1.1% 6249 E3 CYPRESS/PINE/CABBAGE PALM, DISTURBED (50-75% EXOTICS) 2.99 Ac. ± 16.0% 740 DISTURBED LAND 0.48 Ac.± 2.6% TOTAL 18.64 Ac.± 100.0% w . 4281E3 (0.20 Ac.±) 'N W W - NOTES NOTES P/L 1 SCALE: I"= 100' PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER GLHOMES DRAWING No. 2013-91 18 ACRE LOGAN_IMMOK,DWG DATED JUNE 13, 2016. FLUCFCS LINES ESTIMATED FROM I"=200' AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS AND LOCATIONS APPROXIMATED. FLUCFCS PER FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCFCS) (FOOT 1999), UPLAND/WETLAND LIMITS HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED BY ANY REGULATORY AGENCY AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. n 13RAVN BY DATE ' T.S. 6/14/16 13620 Metropolis Avenue suite 200 PASSARELLA LOGAN/IMMOKALEE GMPA DRAWING No 13GLH2170 rtsvlfivavar DATE No EXHIBIT 2 S J. 6/14/16 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 Phone (239) 274-0067 Fax (239) 274-0069 rt--& ASSOCIATES z FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAPSHEET DATE EXHIBIT 3 AERIAL WITH FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAP IRM21 Ir 4' - ir SCALIER bIL)E4, Z -t3 7N., (L 12 Ac P. 41, 6 2 COE 3 (0 21 Ac WWW�WyY Nk I 40 Im '16 T a A* 4119E' 211 0- C 91 Ac -.:t) % 'p Ale -him A . �11 OAF V W40 t 6 21 IIE 3 (0 21_yiA 4,c Lr 7L EXHIBIT 4 SOILS MAP EXHIBIT 5 LISTED SPECIES SURVEY REPORT LOGAN/IMMOKALEE GMPA PARCEL LISTED SPECIES SURVEY REPORT June 2016 INTRODUCTION This report documents the results of the listed species survey conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. (PAI) on June 15, 2016 for the Logan/Immokalee GMPA Parcel (Project). The purpose of the survey was to review the Project area for plant and wildlife species listed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC), the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as endangered, threatened, species of special concern, or commercially exploited. The 19± acre Project site is located in Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (Figure 1). More specifically, it is found at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard and is located approximately 1.4 miles east of Interstate 75. The property is bound by Immokalee Road to the north, Logan Boulevard and agricultural activities to the west, and agricultural activities to the east and south. Saturnia Lakes residential development is located to the southeast of the Project site. The Project site is comprised primarily of forested uplands and wetlands that have been disturbed by the invasion of varying levels of exotic vegetation and disturbed land. METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS Literature Review The listed plant and wildlife species survey included a literature search for local, state, and federal listed species and an on-site review conducted on June 15, 2016. The literature search found no documented occurrences of listed wildlife species within the Project site. The property is not located within the designated critical habitat areas for any listed wildlife species. Further details regarding the literature search results and survey methodology are as follows: The literature search involved an examination of available information on protected species in the Project's geographical region. The literature sources reviewed included the FWCC Florida's Endangered and Threatened Species (2011); Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies (Runde et al. 1991); USFWS Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in the Southeast Region (1987); the Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan (Logan et al. 1993); the Landscape Conservation Strategy Map (Kautz et al. 2006); and the USFWS and/or the FWCC databases for telemetry locations of Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), bald eagle, red -cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) (RCW), Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus), and wading bird rookeries, such as the wood stork (Mycteria americana), in Collier County. The results of the literature search found no documented occurrences of listed wildlife species on-site (Figure 2). E5-1 The wildlife agencies' database information is updated on a periodic basis and it is current through different dates, depending on the species. The FWCC information is current through the noted dates for the four following species: Florida panther telemetry — June 2015; bald eagle nest locations — August 2015; black bear telemetry — August 2015; and RCW locations — August 2015. The closest documented bald eagle nest is CO -049 which is located approximately 2.1 miles to the northwest of the site and was last active in 2013. No bald eagle nests were identified within the Project limits. The nest distance is beyond the USFWS and the FWCC recommended 660 - foot buffer protection zone for active and alternate bald eagle nests. The bald eagle is not a listed species, but is protected under the Golden and Bald Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. No RCW colonies or cavity trees have been documented within the Project area, per the FWCC's database (Figure 2). The USFWS considers suitable habitat for RCW to include any forested community with pines in the canopy that encompasses more than ten acres (i.e., includes both on- and off-site). Although the Project area does have canopy pine trees, no live slash pine (Pinus elliotti) cavities were observed during the survey and no sightings were documented in the area. The RCW is a state and federally listed endangered species. The literature search confirmed that the Project is located within the 30 kilometer (18.6 miles) Core Foraging Area of one documented wood stork rookery (No. 619018) (Figure 3). However, the Project contains dense forested wetland habitat types that preclude access for wading birds, including wood storks. No wood storks or other listed wading bird species were observed on- site. In addition, there was no reference in the atlas to any breeding colonies located on or adjacent to the Project site. The wood stork is listed as federally threatened by the FWCC and threatened by the USFWS. The FWCC database contains no documented Florida black bear radio -telemetry locations on- site or within the vicinity of the Project area (Figure 2). The site's relatively small size and densely urban surroundings do not lend it support as suitable habitat for this species. The Florida black bear is not listed by the FWCC or the USFWS. However, the FWCC has specific management activities for this species. A review of FWCC records found that no Florida panthers are documented within the Project site or in the immediate vicinity (Figure 2). The property is located outside of both the primary and secondary zones of the USFWS panther Focus Area, and no Florida panther telemetry points have been documented on-site or within the Project's general vicinity (Figure 4). The Florida panther is listed as federally endangered by the FWCC and endangered by the USFWS. One listed plant species was observed during the June 15, 2016 listed species survey. The listed plant species observed is described in the Field Survey section below. E5-2 Field Survey The property was surveyed on June 15, 2016 for wildlife species listed by the FWCC as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern; and by the USFWS as endangered or threatened. The property was also surveyed for plant species listed by the FDACS as endangered, threatened, or commercially exploited. In addition, the property was surveyed for the bald eagle and/or their nests since they are protected under Florida Administrative Code 68A- 16.002 and the BGEPA. The June 15, 2016 field surveys were conducted by qualified ecologists walking meandering transects spaced approximately 100 feet apart (Figure 5). The site was inspected for listed plant and wildlife species as well as their signs (e.g., burrows, tracks, scat, scratches, etc.). At regular intervals the ecologists stopped, remained quiet, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. The weather during the survey was seasonal with temperatures in the upper 80s to low 90s, clear skies, and winds ranging from five to ten miles per hour. The survey began at approximately 9:30 a.m. and ended at approximately 3:00 p.m. No listed wildlife species were documented on the Project site during the survey. One state listed plant species was observed on-site during the listed species survey, the cardinal airplant (Tillandsia balbisiana). The locations of the observed cardinal airplants are depicted on Figure 5. The cardinal airplant is listed as endangered by the FDACS. SUMMARY The literature search found no documented occurrences of listed wildlife species within the Project site. There was one state listed plant species observed on the Project site during the June 15, 2016 listed species survey. The cardinal airplant is listed as threatened by the FDACS. No listed wildlife species were observed utilizing the Project site during the survey. E5-3 REFERENCES FWCC. 2011. Florida's Endangered and Threatened Species. Official Lists, Bureau of Non - Game Wildlife, Division of Wildlife. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Tallahassee, Florida. Kautz, R., R. Kawula, T. Hoctor, J. Comiskey, D. Jansen, D. Jennings, J. Kasbohm, F. Mazzotti, R. McBride, L. Richardson, K. Root. 2006. How much is enough? Landscape -scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation, Volume 130, Issue 1, Pages 118-133. Logan, Todd, Andrew C. Eller, Jr., Ross Morrell, Donna Ruffner, and Jim Sewell. 1993. Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan South Florida Population. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Gainesville, Florida. Runde, D.E., J.A. Gore, J.A. Hovis, M.S. Robson, and P.D. Southall. 1991. Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies, Update 1986 - 1989. Nongame Wildlife Program Technical Report No. 10. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region. E5-4 � ..Tii•u�f+nrn[Ixu � .fU15 'A YF v ..l �•cQr. '� w• � i ` �%TtARyIP, •N IF �t c, 't iFj7,7 �, s� � x l o' _ � •, �I - ;'t 7. `7ifi o�rS ; .. Rte. °�'� ENnR f)Aa R r' � q f A{�p jr t' •� •1 �" tt� 1 �t � �m 1 a L� �!p: f'ONLT APP. L'E�DR� _ I Tom• '�'d � r, :PD�`Rtics r. �4��,yS' .-O YN rl. ;•�:, ' p�di;::::� " _ � •I$S Y s.y H � 6of �x ti p I v . ,VJILGF[]Wl 1 � ��1.' ti 4SI, U may•' _ fir � � - sr T• r�t �n� . ,a [� - � ,,� :� ► ^°�' f sYn e;yrf R a ��((ff �II1[!f'l�G�Wy,,eLY MC TOR• - .�y EXIT ' �}�J F'ER ['L D A!�! n ��h� • �� MM FE ❑ .�- kp �1R y m I• 'AL LIM: U A:SS;LN r 7 y •. ��ri ' h � rS, ',.��lon,�ra.Anl ks•i;N ■ 4 .Y/ � Ci��t� .-:L .��.�•�/. L �A ta`[ jgasr wr 3� ° �'1�µ- ^ r•Rr eL I r PROJECT LOCATION O r V awk'?IY I� w. FY-{Iry.SF?ANiSH 1pAKN rAr :I• I. • " x [- �•-. *.- ►i1 �'.: _ i - :F '�'.��: � f ;IZE MAIiEIi U(l �Y Y� � _ �M1S,n.R• � - _ u � .. ; s, yam, r rC 'p�5 Val L W� to - '• � L'•r �.. I ❑SI S '� _'a te---�;"•`' ! xc'r 4F�r11 •[fl['N .y "'I`.. 1 :Ap +U 1 I .p• f •rFrJL 4rpiillr:.Cln �!� •',�EZA`'Yp`�7 �Pp '• * =�F:NGI.ISH�13AKyl V.•. /[�� 1!{/S�E� ,?�qy I mil 'j{�I �'. sS ya:ma++ 7f� 2 �.-�' ;fi. CJs. .. �i.{rd �' •�5S-"ryil�'+1 �IfNi ^ ..i, "I �1 �: �w� � VA t4��HHk�.1 iY1 F.ACFl1i1t1 _ 7�ccC'F+�' yy Y P 9 �ti •.GE° pp,C i nil �T`_. i '3�# i•: •'s{ V Sl0 �. •L.-.v .µ :i��f,�. k��•R ��L�� .�A B[3435��l7Vr:i �_ _=�r.IH AVf NNW- ! -��-�, 1�L �: C - �� opp��TT �xiot—•�� S.r ;� a�rr .ruv t� _ yy � . � �"1�� , •� ��d;,3K'!�. kA`•• i' '�i S a �` :1>• _ G -r�i Ii AVf. j W.�:�- .•.c., _.ur.: a .n. „N,.-:.;,,•� ;�-�:.�-.. E �N� [!} .rfi r +� ; me _ }. • �_: •i �:'i5 .�p�ry r�I.-/ -� r {��_ '1Fr1f nit L: 'J W. • •�[' wr• ypfrANGF flA � f r- -.r. � - _. -. -. a, ..- •_ �. �,�psdl-s:::=t� S1 llAHlLlii'�R{ � '�. � - _ � �• -, ' y i ^.• N �. L� t-K' ,-+p ••�A•TJ, .• �i[.'>h !� •�YEAKWU11-fl-illt. '111. r7t'f YL'Y 5 tY �. �•?- y �.°� ., O( yp• ��iLL• ''�;Ei..r� •'(.�F.. N. _ ..�7lipt�l]-H,Ai[iL jW' ?? •� R,�. �d f) _ _ ZHI iNTERS+Hhr y 'iN '��fi{r �L-•1- SrF :�-1Ii ='•.'�•. ,�•.: �.s a-. '��' ` �7`r :...' . �.;i ilrl tiLN' '. it- fi•. � 1�•. .: I��.Nr i 341 • - _�: _ . r - _ ..: . -• •y �S:fr j.0 . Ri•1'p.r„ - �SANDALWnDCt11;N { t„y. h1Al10Gd NY•'Kr[]f;f .1I� r S; _ ti". w', UaE tY ❑ 6oNrrASEACH RD • I. I �.z -�.------------- -s•--J i 4 N PROJECT LOCATION VANDERBILT BEACH RD J 0] Z Q C1 O J LEGEND 2 LOGAN/IMMOKAtE€ GMPA Vr BALD EAGLE NEST • FLORIDA PANTHER TELEMETRY A FWCC BLACK BEAR LOCATIONS - FWCC RCW LOCATIONS 1 S 0 1 2 Miles NOTES: EAGLE NEST LOCATIONS WERE ACQUIRED GOLDEN GATE BLVD FROM THE FWCC AUGUST 2015, BLACK BEAR LOCATIONS WERE ACQUIRED FROM THE FWCC AUGUST 2015 AND IS CURRENT TO 2007 PANTHER TELEMETRY WAS ACQUIRED FROM THE FWCC SEPTEMBER 2015 AND IS CURRENT TO JUNE 2015 RED COCKADED WOODPECKER LOCATIONS WERE ACQUIRED PER THE FWCC AUGUST 2015. PINE RIDGE HU A& A T.S. ilSl ❑�6/17/iE 16 PASSARELLA - FIGURE 2. DOCUMENTED OCCURRENCES OF LISTED SPECIES IL1iEwti S.J. 6/17/16 ^�ASSOCIATES LOGAN/IMMOKALEE GMPA pENSRl1 S1ATE0 ' 4 I j} s _j 4 � r PROJECT LOCATIOCOLUER J j FIGURE 3. FLORIDA WOOD STORK NESTING COLONIES AND 18.6 MILE CORE FORAGING AREAS LOGAN/IMMOKALEE GMPA LEGEND 18-6 Mile Care Forgging Areas 619M ti ti 0 2 4 Miles NOTE: FLORIDA WOOD STORK NESTING COLONIES WERE AC OUIRED FROM THE USFWS AUGUST 2015 T.S. 6/17/16 PAS SARE LLA S.J. 6/17/16 ��„ D Dw« AssOCIATESu7, BON ITAtaEACH RD TERRY ST ` I PROJECT LOCATION Z J a i Y Cy a VANDERBILT BEACH RD - 0 R ❑ E � S(r b 11{ 1 l 01 I E FIGURE 4. PANTHER ZONES LOGAN/IMMOKALEE GMPA LEGEND LOGAN/IMMOKALEE GMPA PANTHER ZONES PRIMARY ZONE SECONDARY ZONE 0 1 2 Miles NOTE: PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ZONES WERE ACQUIRED FROM (KAUTZ ET AL 2006) T.S. 6/17/16 rv1� QAT1 PAS SAKE LLA S.J. 6/17/16ATE"11c.&A550CIATES='REVISED DATE � / s ne .r . V R _ a..� • F� �r +k -SCALE. V = 100' "dj •� r4 -tilt v ck 44 It— Am 13 Arse tL ,,..if '� . ;�} tom` �•w^' •f t� ,` � }1r E �, ►."� f , �,r_ y :� ^� .''a Ir f r _� �� L IkWO r �.� r��.% .� •;:fes l �b,� • !r r�� C� r :�1.. i� ir, fry r P � �- r it } �'�{ i� • n Y1 pet �J' si, i1' ~gyp • ¢' r.61` PC 40 lz • i f `�* "!?� Tom"— a 4�s�• ` K ,- �•. _ ��+'f��' -° �_kF,. +� .. '"�`' ' r�� a. ► t� �• : `r4 't'�',I;r - - + •tiiea ,.r y- � LSF+ �y •r •� �. A �•'�- • T ■. • � � �,�+4`� � 1A� .4 •.air � �r ►• J � 1•yT�r$_'� �- �� r • �� r _ •hl fir: �'r r� TTS -y- _ . t.�. .}-r• :,ry �s' • . ri--ti t r �' 'r •I, i i• 7 y ' j' + ~. r'{,�. � t`�r,��.7 � � � - r.* 'iaP�• • y��y �Tc� y � . F. - s r A!r" 'gip• � lM f Y, ' � • - 51- +� '' ' r, n tO t ^M ^1�� rte. �.�. �� _.• + -f . r �<AA ,. tic,`'. • y• { L ,s •,.y• IL •CARDINAL ,1 4 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF WALKED ins`; trTRANSECTS NOTES - AERIAL •V'' • '.yam - .y �rA PHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHCOLLIERr• R•' ERTY 0'' 1 �} r " �4% yAPPRAISER'S OFFICE WITH A FLIGHT DATE EXHIBIT "W" NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY ANALYSIS C�, rct, P (", Neighborhood Compatibility Analysis This application proposes to create the Logan / Immokalee Commercial Intill Subdistrict, a new Future Land Use classification. The proposed sub -district will allow for a mix of commercial uses. The proposed subdistrict language will permit retail, office, medical office, financial institutions and similar uses that are currently permitted by right and/or conditional use within the C-1 through C-3 zoning district with limited C-4 uses being allowed. Policy 5.4 of the Growth Management Plan requires that "New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code". The purpose of this analysis is to .outline the elements of the proposed amendment that promote the compatibility of the proposed land use with surrounding properties. As stated in the Growth Management Plan Consistency Analysis (Exhibit Y), the proposed project is bordered on the North by Immokalee Road, a 6 -lane arterial roadway and on the West by Logan Boulevard, which has been improved at the intersection with Immokalee Road to a 4 -lane condition but tapers to 2 -lanes as you travel south. Across Logan Boulevard lies vacant land as well as Estates zoned residential development. To the east of the subject property lies vacant Agricultural land and approximately 800 feet east is the entrance to Saturnia Lakes, a residential community. To the South of the subject property is an Agricultural operation inclusive of a nursery, landscape business and associated uses. To the southeast is Saturnia Lakes, a.residential development which contains the nearest residential units in proximity to the subject property. When looking at the location of commercial projects in proximity to residentially zoned and developed land, certain safeguards and conditions must be employed to achieve compatibility. First among those is the limitation of land uses that could be deemed noxious and therefore inconsistent when located in proximity to existing residences. In developing the GMPA language for this infill subdistrict, land use restrictions were developed based on similarly situated, approved commercial districts and subdistricts throughout Collier County. By limiting the list of permitted uses through this GMPA to predominantly C-1 through C-3 uses with limited C-4 uses being allowed, a higher standard of compatibility can be created. Another key measure of compatibility is intensity. The proposed limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial uses on parcels totalling ±18.6 acres provides for a lower intensity development to serve the surrounding community (5,376 sq. ft. / acre), lessening compatibility concerns for the adjacent properties. This reduction in project size via the square footage limitation will serve to limit external impacts. It is fairly typical to see retail commercial projects develop at intensities of 7,500 square feet to 10,000 square feet per acre, depending on site plan constraints and specific land uses. By limiting the overall square footage in the GMP, the scale of the development is limited, providing for improved compatibility. As stated in the GMP, "Superior Urban Design is (therefore) promoted by carefully managing road access, avoiding strip commercial development, improving overall circulation patterns, and providing for community focal points." This project effectively manages access to Immokalee Road and Logan Blvd. by pushing the access points away for the intersection. Furthermore, the project provided interconnects for both existing and future development to the south and to the east to help reduce the number of curb cuts and intersections on Immokalee and Logan in the future resulting in better managed road access and improved capacity. The design of the project also incorporates a strong focal point at the intersection of Immokalee and Logan which will help provide a sense of place as demonstrated on the projects MCP. Additionally, through the use of courtyards, open walkways and a focus on the internal -� r pedestrian experience, this project typifies many of the elements present in superior urban design projects. The focus on the human scale results in a project that is more compatible with the neighboring properties through a reduction in scale and implementation of project design elements. Another element that can improve compatibility between uses is increased setbacks and buffering. A significant factor in the proposed development is the placement of a native vegetative buffer and water management lake to the rear of the property to provide substantial buffering and distance from the commercial development to the nearest home in Saturnia Lakes. As evidenced by the MCP, a distance of approximately ±340 feet exists between the commercial development and the southeast corner of the subject property. Of this distance, ±125 feet will be comprised of a proposed native vegetation preserve which consists of Pine Flatwoods with minimal exotic vegetation requiring removal. Additionally, Saturnia Lakes has a native planted area of approximately 1 �0 feet from the common corner point to the nearest lot line. These factors combine to result in a distance of approximately 470 feet from the proposed commercial development to the nearest residential lot, with ±250 feet or so of that being comprised of native plantings and preserves. This condition for exceeds the minimum buffering- requirements contained in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) and compares very favorably as compared to similarly situated commercial properties that are adjacent to residentially zoned or developed properties. As also stated in the GMP consistency analysis, many matters pertaining to compatibility such as noise, lighting, buffering, etc. are most appropriately addressed at the zoning stage where specific development standards are most appropriately applied. An application for CPUD rezone will be filed to run concurrently with the GMPA and will contain additional protections and safeguards that will serve to enhance and clarify with a greater specificity how the project proposes to further improve compatibility with adjacent properties. EXHIBIT "X" GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY NARRATIVE Growth Management Plan Consistency Narrative This application proposes to create the Logan / Immokalee Commercial Infill Subdistrict, a new Future Land Use classification. The proposed sub -district will allow for a mix of commercial uses. The proposed subdistrict language will permit retail, office, medical office, financial institutions and similar uses that are permitted by right and/or conditional use within the C-4 zoning district. The proposed limitation of 100,000 square feet of commercial uses on parcels totalling 18.6 acres provides for a lower intensity development to serve the surrounding community, lessening compatibility concerns for the adjacent properties. A PUD rezone will be submitted for concurrent review with the GMP application to address additional site specific design considerations. The proposed subdistrict is consistent with the following key Growth Management Policies and Objectives: OBJECTIVE 5: In order to promote sound planning, protect environmentally sensitive lands and habitat forested species while protecting private property rights, ensure compatibility of land uses and further the implementation of the Future Land Use Element, the following general land use policies shall be implemented upon the adoption of the Growth Management Plan. Policy 5.4: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). Res Ponce: This GMP Amendmenf is. proosin a m aximu m of 1 00 0 s uare feet of retail and office land Uses on 18.6 acres_. By limlfing the size to 100,000 square feet, or 5,376 sa. ft. per acre. the overall intensity of this development is significantly lower than thot permitfed on similarly sized commercial zoned or desLctnation parcels throughout Collier County. The oroposed promect is bordered on the North b Immokalee Road, a 6_ lane arterial roadway and on the West by Logan Boulevard. which has been imoroved of the interseciion with Immokolee Road to a 4 -Ione conditlon_but but to 2 -lanes as you travel souih. AcrosLLogan 13oulevard lies vacant land as well as Estates zoned residential development. To the east of fhe_subect property lies vacant Agricultural land and or)broximatefY 800 feet east is the entrance to Saturnia Lakes a residential community- To the South of the sublec# property is an A ricultural operation inclusive of a nursery, landscape business and associated uses. To the southeast is residential development that isr)art of the Saturnia Lakgs.development which is the closest residential development to the_prapertY. While most matters pertaining to compatibility address. matters such as noise, lighting, buffering, etc. are most o2l2rQpriately addressed at the zoning stage, a Master Concept Plan has been included vvefh fhis ap-pliggtion th f shows the intended size, scale ond Io ation of develo m n that is p[pol2osed for the site. A key factor in the proposed clevelopment i I the placement of a nQflve ve e alive buffer and water ana ement lake to the rear of the rpror)erfv to provide substantial ufferlrig and dist nce for the (4 Stante4 commercial development to the_near�st_ LQme--in $aturnia_Lakes. As shown on the MCP, a distance of amroxirnafely_340 feet exists between the commercial development and the southeast corner of the subiegt property. Of this distance. 125 feet will be comprised of a proposed native vegetation preserve which consists of Pine Flalwoods with minimal exotic vegetgtion requiring removal. Additionally, Saturnia Lak s has a n five Ignfe area of a pgroxim tely 130 f eel from the common corner ooint to fhe nisrest loo line. These factors combine to result in a distance of approximately 470 feet from the proposed pommercial develoramenf to the nearest residential lot, with 250 feet or sn of chat being, comprised of native plantings and preserves. An application far-CPUD rezone will be filed to run concurrently with the GMPA and will contain additional pratE�ctions and safeguards that will serve to enhance and clarify with a greater specificity_tile .proiecfs �-oaioaI!UliIv with cidiacent oro er lied, OBJECTIVE 7: In an effort to support the Dover, Kohl & Partners publication, Toward Better Places: The Community Character Plan for Collier County, Florida, promote smart growth policies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects, where applicable. Response: A part of the move toward implementafion of smart growth policies incltodes the rplacemenf of commercial and residenfial_land usesfn rono_t_e_ihe_r duction_or elimination of vehicular use where ra ti I. Bas d on the market stud rovided this area which has a significant number of r id nfial units in the 3 -mile Primary Service Area is underserved by the existing commercial developments both today and in the foreseeable future. By locating new commercial Igi)d uses in near proximity to existing homes Collier CQMniya red c v icl it 5 traygil d (VMT's) for certain uses and basic needs, Increased gccgss rand convenience of comi-nercial goods is a sound planning principal in the reduction of VMT's_ and fherefore a commensurale reducfion in greenhouse oases. The p_roposgd land uses„ 'in, INS loco tion will serve to prornote 221prt growth principals in support of Objective 7, Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to korriirrg caneclui and arterial roads, except where rio such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. Resr)onse: This GMPA Incorporates a Masfer Conceal Plan that show5 connections on collet-lor or arterial midways Including-Immokalee Rood and Lagan Boulevard. Additionally, the project is providing two interconnections to prooerfies to the east and south with the snecific intont of Wentia[ly reducing the number of direct connections to Immokalee Road and, Logan Boulevard in the future. Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. Res onset The MCP include with this a licafion ptovides for access through the woleci from Logan Boulevard to ImmokaWe Road via interna[ drives wit out creating a 'raceway' style connection around Meja posed development. Access is provided over and through the proiggf tg enhgnce connectivity. (3 Stantec Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. Vigor se: Please seethe_above response for Policv 7.1 that demonstrated consistency with this r)olicv as wdl_-Q Policy 9_.3 of the Transportation Element. The project has provided connection points to all odiacent properties where it is feasible to do so; Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. ResoQoLe: The proposed development is designed to meet the demand in the marketplace for neighborhgod style retail uses which will serve the nearby communities and ultimately the adjacent properties should they develop with residential uses. This cgnier has been specifically desiangd to provide a very walk=ll_e environment with features thaf provide visual and aesthetic interest. These elements will be explained inti more detail in the proposed CPUD by provided details on the planned sidewalk connections internal to the project and the pedestrian and bicycle access points that will connect to the exisfina sidewalks along b th Immokalee Road and an Boulevard in order to more fully demonstrate compliance with lhis Policy. ORDINANCE NO. 17 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY FROM URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, TO URBAN COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, LOGAN BOULEVARD/IMMOKALEE ROAD COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM OF 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS LEASABLE FLOOR AREA FOR SPECIFIC COMMERCIAL USES; AND FURTHERMORE, RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF IMMOKALEE ROAD AND LOGAN BOULEVARD IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 18.6± ACRES. [PL20160001100] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et seq., Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, formerly the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Petitioner, Immokalee Road Associates, LLC, has initiated this amendment to the Future Land Use element; and WHEREAS, Collier County transmitted the Growth Management Plan amendments to the Department of Economic Opportunity for preliminary review on May 16, 2017, after public hearings before the Collier County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners; and [16 -CMP -00971/1372939/1 1 Words underlined are additions; Words stmek thfough are deletions *** *** *** ***area break in text PL20160001100/CP-2016-2 11/16/17 ®� WHEREAS, the Department of Economic Opportunity reviewed the amendments to the Future Land Use Element to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted its comments in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County, has 180 days from receipt of the Comments Report from the Department of Economic Opportunity to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendments to the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of these amendments, including the following: the Collier County Staff Report, the documents entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendments and other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the public hearings of the Collier County Planning Commission held on November 16, 2017, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on December 12, 2017; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The amendments to the Future Land Use Element attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, are hereby adopted in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, and shall be transmitted to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be 31 days after the state land planning agency notifies the local government that the plan amendment package is complete. If timely challenged, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its [16 -CMP -00971/1372939/1] 2 Words underlined are additions; Words staek through are deletions * * * * * * * * * * * * are a break in text PL20160001100/CP-2016-2 11/16/17 �� effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the state land planning agency. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super -majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of 2017. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: _ Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: Scott A. Stone Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A [16 -CMP -00971/1372939/1] 3 PENNY TAYLOR, Chairman Words underlined are additions; Words stfusk thfough are deletions * * * * * * * * * * * * are a break in text PL20160001100/CP-2016-2 11/16/17 ©6j Adoption Exhibit EXHIBIT "A" FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT PL20160001100/C P-2016-2 Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: ***** *** *** ** text break C. URBAN - COMMERCIAL DISTRICT [Page 10] *** *** *** *** *** text break *** ** *** *** *** 9. Livingston RoadNeterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict 10. Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict 11. Orange Blossom/Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict 12. Davis — Radio Commercial Subdistrict 13. Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** I. URBAN DESIGNATION [Page 25] *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** Urban designated areas will accommodate the following uses: *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** b. Non-residential uses including: *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the ...Urban Commercial District, ...Commercial Infill Subdistrict, Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict; Orange Blossom/Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict, Logan Boulevard/ Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict, in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay; and, as allowed by certain FLUE policies. *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** C. Urban — Commercial District [Page 671 *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** 13. Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict This Subdistrict consists of ±18.6 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses derived from the permitted and conditional uses of the C-3 zoning district may be allowed, with a maximum of 45,000 square feet of building area for each use. The Subdistrict allows only those uses limited to the following: a. Accounting, Auditing, and Bookkeeping services (SIC 8721), b. Apparel & accessory stores (SIC 5611 — 5699), c. Auto and home supply stores (SIC 5531, except tire dealers. and tire. batterv. and accessory dealers — retail), d. Banks, credit unions and trusts (SIC 6021 — 6062), e. Barber shops (SIC 7241, except for barber schools), f. Beauty shops (SIC 7231, except for beauty schools), 1 06 Words underlined are added; words stFUGk t#rGugh are deleted. J Adoption Exhibit PL20160001100/C P-2016-2 g. Computer and computer software stores (SIC 5734), h. Dance studios, schools, and halls (SIC 7911 except dance halls and discotheques), i. Drug stores (SIC 5912), j. Drycleaning plants (SIC 7216 non -industrial drycleaninq only), k. Eating places (SIC 5812, except dinner theaters, drive-in restaurants, industrial feeding, contract feeding, food service, institutional, and theaters, dinner), I. Food stores (SIC 5411 – 5499, except Convenience food stores), m. Hardware stores (SIC 5251), n. Health services, offices and clinics (SIC 8011 – 8049), and home health care services (SIC 8082), o. Home furniture and furnishings stores (SIC 5712 – 5719), p. Household appliance stores (SIC 5722), q. Insurance carriers, agents and brokers (SIC 6311-6399, 6411), r. Medical equipment rental and leasing (SIC 7352), s. Musical instrument stores (SIC 5736), t. Paint stores (SIC 5231). u. Personal services, miscellaneous (SIC 7299), v. Photographic studios, portrait (SIC 7221), w. Physical fitness facilities (SIC 7991), x. Radio, television and consumer electronics stores (SIC 5731), y. Real Estate agents and managers (SIC 6531), z. Record and prerecorded tape stores (SIC 5735), aa. Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores (SIC 5261), bb. Retail services – miscellaneous (SIC 5921, 5941 – 5949, 5992, 5994 – 5999, except auction rooms, awning shops, fireworks, building materials, gravestones, hot tubs, monuments, pawn shops, swimming pools, tombstones and whirlpool baths), cc. Security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges and services (SIC 6211, 6282), dd. Schools and Educational services (SIC 8299 only), and ee. Wallpaper stores (SIC 5231). The following uses shall not be allowed: a. Any use which is not identified above. *** *** *** *** *** text break FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES [Page 144] *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** Hibiscus Residential Infill Subdistrict Map Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Davis – Radio Commercial Subdistrict Map Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map 2 Words underlined are added; words 6tFYGkt#reugh are deleted. 06J EXHIBIT A PETITION PL20160001100 / CP -2016-2 LOGAN BLVD./IMMOKALEE RD. COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA O Ej �.y y. J! j TT I -T'-'v tLiLi Immokalee RD -- ---------- - SUBJECT SITE -_- -- — I PL2016-1100 I CP -2016-2 / 1 i I i i i I , II-- >\ I I 6 I I T LEGEND PREPARED BY: GIS/CAD MAPPING SECTION 0 360 GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 720 1,440 Feet ®SUBDISTRICT DATE: 3/2017JL- UPI I VL&1 I bNi1 I sUSi1 5611 ! Stl91 ! b6Y1 $Ufl j ° ARM m F 9 >sii R : y a -0,4 o 9 OCnpCp Asci- z zy c� N O` G M> 31 c$ Z N N $e-o N m. o CO)C M ooa° r °OQ?I q o o o S S91 I S Z91 I C,y 59►1 SLV1 391 ° ARM m F 9 >sii R : f $e-o o y ooa° r °OQ?I q o o o 0 0 S S91 I S Z91 I C,y 59►1 SLV1 391 - 1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to approve the single petition within the 2016 Cycle 2 of Growth Management Plan Amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for review and Comments response, for an amendment specific to the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict in the southeast quadrant of the Immokalee Road (CR 846) ‒ Logan Boulevard intersection. (Transmittal Hearing) (CP-2016-2/PL20160001100) OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners (Board) to approve the single petition in the 2016 Cycle 2 of amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. CONSIDERATIONS: Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government’s adopted Plan.  Collier County Resolution 12-234 provides for a public petition process to amend the GMP.  The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), sitting as the “local planning agency” under Chapter 163.3174, F.S., held their Transmittal hearing for the 2016 Cycle 2 petition on April 6, 2017 (one petition only, CP-2016-2/PL20160001100).  This Transmittal hearing for the 2016 Cycle 2 considers an amendment to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). The GMP amendment requested is specific to a site comprising approximately 18.64 acres and located in the southeast quadrant of the Immokalee Road (CR 846) ‒ Logan Boulevard intersection , in Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. The property has approximately 606 feet of frontage on Immokalee Road and 875 feet of frontage on Logan Boulevard. Petition CP-2016-2/PL20160001100 seeks to establish a new Subdistrict in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) text, and Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), to allow 100,000 square feet of commercial development comprised of uses allowed in the C-3, Commercial Intermediate, zoning district. (As submitted, the petition includes some uses from the C-4, General Commercial, zoning district, and data and analysis pertaining to the C-4 range of uses. However, just prior to, and at, the Collier County Planning Commission hearing, the list of requested uses was restricted to only certain C-3 uses.) The following findings and conclusions result from the reviews and analyses of this request:  The property is currently zoned “A” and undeveloped.  There are no known historic or archaeological sites on the subject property.  Impact from the development will affect a State listed plant ‒ the cardinal airplant ‒ which has been identified in several locations on site, including within the preserve identified on the proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) master concept plan. Specific requirements for retention/relocation of protected plants are contained in the Land Development Code (LDC) as provided for by the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME).  The infrastructure needed to serve the development can be provided without related levels of service or concurrency concerns. Though traffic generated by the new development will impact Immokalee Road, west to I-75 and east to Collier Boulevard, and Logan Boulevard, south to Vanderbilt Beach Road ‒ it does not create any additional adverse impacts at buildout. Adverse - 2 - conditions are attributable to background traffic growth. Development will require the construction of new right turn lanes at the Logan Boulevard and Immokalee Road project access points, as well as a southbound left turn lane at the Logan Boulevard access point.  There is capacity on County roadways to accommodate this development within the 5-year plan, therefore the development is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element. However, staff notes that Immokalee Road is projected to fail the required Level-of-Service (LOS) past the current 5-yer plan projections. Staff is diligently working on various network improvements such as the recently approved authorization to reinitiate the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension project which will serve as a parallel corridor within the network.  The property, along with the surrounding area, is currently designated in the GMP for residential development ‒ as well as uses generally allowed throughout the Urban designated area such as essential services, community facilities, recreation and open space uses, etc. This petition introduces new commercial development, uses and activities to a location where commercial development is not now planned.  Based on data and analysis submitted for the amount of existing and potential commercial development within the study area for the subject property, the need for the full range of commercial development contemplated by this amendment, as submitted, has not been demonstrated. Only those uses for which a demand was demonstrated should be included in this Subdistrict. Further, only those uses appropriate for an upscale commercial development - as committed to at the Neighborhood Information Meeting – should be included. See staff’s recommended Subdistrict text.  A correlating, companion PUD rezone has been submitted, and will be considered subsequent to, or concurrent with, the Adoption phase of this GMPA petition.  The applicant made formal commitments to the site design, architectural features, and particular tenant types presented in their Neighborhood Information Meeting to ensure a “high -end”/upscale project. These commitments should be appropriately addressed as part of the companion PUD rezone, not this GMP amendment. The data and analysis provided for the amendment generally supports the proposed changes to the FLUE, as recommended by staff. Additional staff analysis of this petition is provided in the CCPC Staff Report. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impacts to Collier County result from this amendment, as this approval is for the Transmittal of this proposed amendment. Petition fees account for staff review time and materials, and for the cost of associated legal advertising/public notice for the public hearings. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of the proposed amendment by the Board for Transmittal and its submission to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity will commence the Department’s thirty (30) day review process and ultimately return the amendment to the CCPC and the Board for Adoption hearings tentatively to be held in September and October of 2017. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment is authorized by, and subject to the procedures established in, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, the Community Planning Act, and by Collier County Resolution No. 12-234, as amended. The Board should consider the following criteria in making its decision: “plan amendments shall be based on relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the plan amend ment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue.” s. 163.3177(1)(f), F.S. - 3 - In addition, s. 163.3177(6)(a)2, F.S. provides that FLUE plan amendments shall be based on surveys, studies and data regarding the area, as applicable including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of non- conforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns with antiquated subdivisions. And FLUE map amendments shall also be based upon the following analysis per Section 125.3177(6)(a)8.: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires a majority vote for Board approval. [SAS] However, please note if approved today, this petition will require an affirmative vote of four when it returns for the adoption hearing of the GMP amendment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: That the CCPC forward petition CP-2016-2/PL20160001100 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval of the petition with the specific revisions to the applicant’s proposed Subdistrict text to limit commercial uses to those for which supportable demand has been demonstrated by the petitioner’s data and analysis, would be characteristic of an “upscale” project, and for proper code language, format, clarity, etc. as contained in the staff report to the CCPC. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard this petition at their April 6, 2017 meeting. In days previous to this hearing, Comprehensive Planning staff collaborated with other participating staff and the applicant, and prepared an Addendum to the CCPC Staff Report that provided a revised version of Subdistrict provisions – list of uses more limited, and square feet limitations added. This version was revised once again regarding allowable uses, with the resulting recommended provisions being presented during this hearing. Discussion took place by the CCPC about limiting the commercial uses in this Subdistrict to select uses from the C-3, Commercial Intermediate, zoning district, intended to provide clear provisions for formalizing the PUD documents and developing the project. This approach also recognized that developer commitments were made and would be fully addressed in the PUD. - 4 - Two speakers made presentations in the CCPC hearing, both in support of the proposal. The CCPC forwarded petition CP-2016-2/PL20160001100 to the Board with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (vote: 7/0), per the staff recommendation and other items discussed. (The CCPC-recommended Subdistrict text is reflected in the Resolution Exhibit “A”.) Commissioners discussed the previously-recommended removal of Subdistrict provisions that reference the C-3 zoning district. Staff believes such reference is important to preparing the companion PUD provisions and implementing development within the Subdistrict, and should remain. Staff intends to address this matter at the Adoption hearing. Commissioners asked staff to review again the uses allowed to ensure the applicant’s uses intended for this development are not omitted, and the exceptions and uses not allowed provide the proper support to the companion PUD. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS: To transmit petition CP-2016-2/PL20160001100 to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity per the CCPC recommendation. Prepared by: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner, and David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section, Zoning Division Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 1 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: April 6, 2017 SUBJECT: PETITION CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] ELEMENT: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT APPLICANTS/OWNERS/AGENTS: Immokalee Road Associates, LLC ‒ Kevin Ratterree 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Suite 400 Sunrise, Florida 33323 Tim Hancock, AICP Bruce Anderson, Esq. Stantec Cheffy Passidomo, PA 5801 Pelican Bay Blvd., Suite 300 821 5th Avenue South Naples, Florida 34108 Naples, Florida 34102 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property comprises approximately 18.64 acres and is located in the southeast quadrant of the Immokalee Road (CR 846) ‒ Logan Boulevard intersection. The property has approximately 606 feet of frontage on Immokalee Road and 875 feet of frontage on Logan Boulevard. The property lies within the Urban Estates Planning Community, in Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to establish a new Subdistrict in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) text, and Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) by: 1) Amending Policy 1.1 Urban ‒ Commercial District to add the Logan Boulevard / Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict name where District and Subdistrict designations are identified, Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 2 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict 2) Amending Urban Designation provisions to add the new Subdistrict name where various Subdistricts that allow non-residential uses are listed, 3) Amending the Urban – Commercial District to add the new Subdistrict provisions, 4) Adding the title of the new Subdistrict map to the itemized Future Land Use Map Series listing, and 5) Amending the Future Land Use Map to depict the new Subdistrict, adding a new Future Land Use Map Series inset map that depicts the new Subdistrict. The Subdistrict language proposed by this amendment is found in Resolution Exhibit “A”. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petition is proposed to allow for new commercial development, up to a maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. If approved for Transmittal, a Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezone will become a companion item for consideration along with the adoption of this amendment at a later date. STAFF ANALYSIS: SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Existing Conditions: Subject Property: The 18.64-acre subject property is currently undeveloped and zoned A, Rural Agricultural district. The current Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, and allows single-family residential development; recreation and open space uses; 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; a variety of agricultural uses; and essential services. Surrounding Lands: North: Land to the north of the subject property, across Immokalee Road (a 6-lane divided arterial roadway) and an east-west drainage canal, is zoned Olde Cypress PUD and H.D. Development PUD, and both approved for and containing residential development. Further to the northwest lies the Longshore Lake PUD ‒ developed residentially. The Future Land Use designation for these land areas to the north is the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. East: Land immediately east of the subject property is zoned A, Rural Agricultural, and partially developed with a single-family residence. Further east (and adjacently southeast), land is zoned Rigas PUD (Saturnia Lakes subdivision) ‒ developed with a residential community. Still further east, land is zoned Heritage Greens PUD ‒ developed with a residential community; then Laurel Oak Elementary School and Gulf Coast High School on land zoned RSF-3, Residential Single Family district. The Future Land Use designation for these land areas to the east is the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. South: Land immediately south of the subject property is zoned A, Rural Agricultural, and partially developed with a commercial plant nursery. Further south, land is zoned Rigas PUD (Saturnia Lakes subdivision) ‒ developed with a residential community. The Future Land Use designation for these land areas to the south is the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 3 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict West: Land to the west of the subject property, across Logan Boulevard (a 2-lane undivided collector roadway) is (a thin strip) zoned A, Rural Agricultural and undeveloped. Then further west, land is zoned E, Estates, and contains an undeveloped parcel, two churches and a fire station – all fronting on Immokalee Road; south of those parcels is land characterized by single-family residences and residential lots. These E-zoned parcels are within the Golden Gate Estates subdivision. The Future Land Use designation for these land areas to the west and southwest is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict for the thin strip, then the Estates Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict. [The Golden Gate Estates parcels fall under the jurisdiction of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP)]. In summary, the current zoning, and existing and planned land uses, in the area immediately surrounding the Subdistrict property are primarily suburban- and estate-type residences or residential lots in all directions. Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent Requirements for Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments are noted in Chapter 163, F.S., specifically Sections 163.3177(6)(a) 2. and 8.: Considerations required for the adoption of a comprehensive plan amendment are listed below. 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. It is incumbent upon the petitioner to provide appropriate and relevant data and analysis to address the statutory requirements for a Plan amendment, then present and defend, as Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 4 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict necessary, that data and analysis. Petition Exhibit “BB” (Statutory Compliance for Plan Amendments) addresses these requirements. BACKGROUND, CONSIDERATIONS AND ANALYSIS: This report addresses the minimum amount of [commercial] land needed to accommodate anticipated growth based on projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. This is accomplished through the analysis of the subject property and the surrounding area that includes inventorying the supply of existing commercially-developed and potential commercially- developable land, determining population growth, estimating the amount of commercial development that population will demand, and determining whether the Future Land Use Plan allocates a shortage of commercial land, a sufficient amount, or an excess amount over what is needed to accommodate growth. Both the petitioner and County staff analyze the marketplace, and any similarities and differences are identified and assessed. The County has long relied on the Guidelines for Commercial Development [a localized guide to developing market studies based on ULI standards] to utilize historic data and statistical information about the different types of commercial centers in the County and to provide the figures for determining further demand. The petitioner, in comparison, utilizes a different methodology to analyze the amount of commercial land needed. The two approaches markedly differ, as reported in the following sections. Commercial Analysis Commercial Development: Characteristics of the area immediately surrounding the subject property do not reveal a trend toward commercial development. Existing and planned land uses in the area are primarily suburban- and estate-type residences or residential lots in all directions, and a plant nursery. Within four miles from the subject property, commercial development is evident, including the following approved projects: ♦ Olde Cypress PUD/DRI commercial component (165,000 sq. ft./12.5 ac.) [0.55 mile east at the Immokalee Road – Preserve Lane intersection] ♦ Quail II PUD commercial component (184,000 sq. ft.) [0.65 mile west at the Immokalee Road – Palazzo Drive intersection] ♦ Southbrooke Plaza PUD (40,000 sq. ft. professional and general offices /5.2 ac.) located mid- block, on the south side of Immokalee Road and north side of Autumn Oaks Lane [0.7 mile west] ♦ Rigas PUD commercial component (10,000 sq. ft.) in the Saturnia Lakes subdivision [southeast via Saturnia Lakes Boulevard] ♦ Malibu Lake PUD (330,000 sq. ft./37.1 ac.) in the southeast quadrant of Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict (Activity Center no. 4) [1.2 miles west] ♦ Northbrooke Plaza PUD (270,000 sq. ft./29.9 ac.) in the northeast quadrant of Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict (Activity Center no. 4) [1.2 miles west] [application materials undercount this commercial square footage as 95,739 ‒ staff calculates 99,614 sq. ft. (an increase of 3,875 sq. ft.)] ♦ Heritage Bay PUD/DRI commercial component (230,000 sq. ft./73.5 ac.) [2.0 miles east] ♦ Island Walk PUD/DRI commercial component (21,000 sq. ft./15 ac.) [2.5 road miles south] Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 5 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict The above-listed sites are located within the primary and secondary market areas described in the Market Analysis submitted by the petitioner, and currently provide a total of nearly 1,220,000 sq. ft. of commercial use opportunities in the [Urban Land Institute (ULI)-defined] Neighborhood Center, Community Center, and Regional Center development categories. Approximately 1,522,630 sq. ft. of existing commercial development (on 206.09 ac.), and another, approximate 690,000 sq. ft. of vacant land zoned commercial (on 69.06 ac.), are found within a 3-mile radius of the proposed Subdistrict. The amount of existing and zoned commercial space found within a 3-mile radius of the proposed Subdistrict totals 2,212,630 sq. ft. on 275.15 ac. Approximately 2,163,692 sq. ft. of existing commercial development (on 342.56 ac.), and another, approximately 827,900 sq. ft. of vacant land zoned commercial (on 82.79 ac.), are found within a 4-mile radius of the proposed Subdistrict. The amount of existing and zoned commercial space found within a 4-mile radius of the proposed Subdistrict totals 2,991,592 sq. ft. on 425.35 ac. Sources: December 2015 Planned Unit Development (PUD) Master List (prepared and maintained by the Collier County Transportation Planning Section and the Collier County Appraiser’s Parcel and Building Footprint GIS databases) Generally, commercial development within a community can be categorized as strip commercial, neighborhood commercial, community commercial, regional commercial, and so forth, based upon shopping center size, commercial uses, and population/area served. Based on specific studies and/or demographic data for an area, such as population, income, household size, percentage of income spent on retail goods, etc., an analyst is able to estimate supportable commercial square feet for different commercial intensities for that geography by shopping center type. The petitioner asserts this site will be developed with a Community Shopping Center. Petitioner’s Retail Market Analysis: The firm of John Burns Real Estate Consulting conducted a Retail Market Analysis and Strategic Assessment, dated October, 2016, independently analyzing market conditions for this petition (Exhibit “V”). This analysis provides context for assessing a specific selection of goods and services’ requirements of the emerging population within the market area identified. The Analysis provides the following data and analysis: Staff includes those sections from the Analysis providing the pertinent parts of the data and analysis. Section 2, Executive Summary defines a Primary Market Area (PMA) covering a radial 3.0 miles ‒ and a Secondary Market Area (SMA) covering a radial 4.0 miles ‒ from the subject property. A PMA represents the geographical area in which the population constitutes the customer pool and influences commercial activities. A SMA represents the extended geographical area in which the population may choose to shop at this location as a second choice and has less influence. This section identifies the type of retail commercial center intended for development as a Community Center providing a selection of retail uses and office uses. These select commercial uses comprise only a segment of the entire range of uses that are allowed in the C-4, General Commercial zoning district. This section summarizes how population and household figures and retail demand were calculated for the current year and years 2021 and 2026. A proprietary Retail GAP Analysis identifies an existing shortage of retail commercial space, and indicates a current demand for approximately 894,884 sq. ft. of additional retail commercial floor space for the segment of Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 6 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict commercial uses studied. The additional retail commercial floor space increases to 1,240,092 sq. ft. in 2021; and to 1,555,807 sq. ft. in 2026. This section summarizes how the supply of existing and vacant commercial properties were inventoried, how occupancy and vacancy rates were calculated, and how accounts for vacant properties in their demand calculations were calculated. On average, shopping centers in the PMA are 98 percent occupied; development of these vacant parcels adds more than 720,000 sq. ft. of retail commercial floor space to the supply. The Summary concludes the subject property lies in a residential area experiencing higher-than- average growth, where there is an existing shortage of retail commercial space and ample demand for additional retail opportunities. Section 5, Retail Demand Analysis provides the following figures:  The PMA has an estimated current population of 43,406, and SMA current population of 65,648 [occupying 18,579 and 28,965 households, respectively].  The PMA has a projected population of 47,645 [± year 2021], and SMA projected population of 72,059 [occupying 20,393 and 31,794 households, respectively].  The PMA has a projected population of 51,409 [± year 2026], and SMA projected population of 77,753 [occupying 22,005 and 34,306 households, respectively]. The GAP analysis calculates demand on the difference, or “gap”, which may exist between the level of spending evident at different retail establishments and the potential spending by the emerging population within the market area. People in the PMA spend more than $413M at select types of area retail businesses, while the analysis suggests they possess the potential to spend an additional $263M. These spending habits are not attributed to effects of the National or loc al economy, personal preferences during recovery from the Great Recession, or the typical and cyclic changes in the marketplace; they are attributed to the undersupply of retail commercial space that impedes this potential spending from being realized. The retail demand analysis suggests the PMA will support an additional 894,884 sq. ft. of commercial uses in this market segment at this time; and the subject property allotment [capture] of this commercial space ranges from 141,599 to 223,721 sq. ft. These figures are based on the preparer’s conservative (15%) and optimistic (25%) capture rates. The retail demand analysis suggests the PMA will support 1,240,092 sq. ft. of commercial by 2021; the subject property allotment [capture] of this commercial space ranges from 186,014 to 310,023 sq. ft.; will support 1,555,807 sq. ft. of commercial by 2026; and the subject property allotment [capture] of this commercial space ranges from 233,371 to 388,952 sq. ft. Analysis provided in the Retail Market Analysis is a methodology that targets only certain types of businesses and suspends our reliance on the objective population-based demand methodology – to rely on the subjective consumer spending potential-based methodology. Section 6, Current Commercial Inventory lists commercial leasable floor areas for commercially developed properties located in the PMA. Approximately 1,304,744 sq. ft. of commercial floor area are summarized in the page 37 table and itemized through page 48. This commercial floor area figure compares with the 1,522,630 sq. ft. derived from County sources. If the PMA were being considered alone, the 218,000 sq. ft. discrepancy between the two figures would be of concern. But when leasable floor areas for commercially developed properties located in both the PMA and SMA, then the discrepancy between the two figures is much smaller. The inventory also lists commercial leasable floor areas for commercially developed properties located in the SMA. Approximately 824,090 sq. ft. of commercial floor area are summarized in Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 7 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict the page 50 table and itemized through page 53. Together with the PMA, the combined commercial floor area figure of 2,128,834 sq. ft. compares with the 2,163,692 sq. ft. derived from County sources. This 35,000 sq. ft. discrepancy is not so concerning. [Staff surmises that the reduction in the discrepancy between the two figures may be attributable to differing methods utilized to count these square footages at locations located on the boundary between the radial 3- and 4-mile areas.] Section 7, Future Commercial Inventory lists commercial floor areas for potential commercially developable properties located in the PMA. Approximately 720,862 sq. ft. commercial floor area, on 27.82 ac. are summarized in the page 56 table and itemized through page 59. Three key commercial nodes are inventoried for potentially developable properties, as follows: 1) Immokalee Road at I-75 (Activity Center no. 4), 2) Immokalee Road at CR-951 (Activity Center no. 3), and 3) Va nderbilt Beach Road at CR-951. Section 8, Demographic and Employment Trends provides population numbers and density, and population projections for the PMA and SMA. This section also provides the “household” figures associated with these populations and, median age statistics and distributions. This section provides the general employment figures for, and identifies top private employers in, the Naples [Census] Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), and job loss and gain information in specific income sectors. Median household incomes are reported, along with income growth projections. Median net worth figures are reported. These populations are further grouped through “Tapestry” segmentation, based on their socioeconomic and demographic composition. This market area reveals a prominence of the “senior lifestyle” and “country living” groups – composing approximately three-quarters of the population. The Appendix provides the demographic and employment figures used to conduct an (ESRI) analysis for further defining the Subdistrict’s market area – as used in the main sections of the Retail Market Analysis. Staff Assessment of Petitioner’s Retail Market Analysis The market areas described in the Retail Market Analysis submitted with this petition and available County resources are used to conduct an assessment of the proposal, with the following results: The County’s Guidelines for Commercial Development [the localized guide to developing market studies based on ULI standards] utilize information about the different types of retail commercial centers in the County for this assessment and derive the figures for:  An 11-acre land area and an 110,734 sq. ft. building dimension for a Neighborhood Center (8.45 sq. ft. per capita), and  A 28-acre land area and a 257,668 sq. ft. building dimension for a Community Center (7.48 sq. ft. per capita). The above floor area figures are the average sizes of Neighborhood and Community Centers in existence (developed) in Collier County. This means some Centers are larger, and some smaller, than these County-wide averages; that is, there is a range in size of each type of Center. Each type of Center is classified based upon size as well as uses. Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 8 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict The per capita figures provided by the County Guidelines are the multipliers applied to the population estimates and projections to determine demand for retail development in this market area. Demand in year 2016 for commercial development in the proposed Subdistrict’s PMA is calculated to be 324,677 sq. ft. (for Community Center commercial space), and 366,781 sq. ft. (for Neighborhood Center commercial space), while the County’s PUD Master List reports approximately 2,212,630 sq. ft. of existing and potential commercial space is available in the PMA. The PMA currently provides 219% more than the 691,458 sq. ft. of commercial space needed to serve the estimated current population of 43,406. In contrast, the petitioner ’s retail demand analysis suggests the SMA will readily support 248,018 sq. ft. of commercial space. Approximately 2,991,592 sq. ft. of existing and potential commercial space is available in the SMA that currently provides 186% more than the 1,045,772 sq. ft. of commercial space needed to serve the estimated current population of 65,648. The market demands of the population projected for the proposed Subdistrict’s PMA in year 2026 increase to 384,539 sq. ft. (for Community Center commercial space), and 434,406 sq. ft. (for Neighborhood Center commercial space), while approximately 2,212,630 sq. ft. of existing and potential commercial space will still be available in the PMA. The PMA currently provides 170% more than the 818,945 sq. ft. of commercial space needed to serve the projected year 2026 population of 51,409. In comparison, the petitioner ’s retail demand analysis determined the PMA will support 311,161 sq. ft. of commercial space by 2026. Approximately 2,991,592 sq. ft. will still be developed or available in the SMA even if no additional commercial land is approved – providing 141% more than the 1,238,604 sq. ft. of the commercial space needed to serve the projected year 2026 population of 77,753. The three key commercial nodes inventoried by the Market Analysis for potentially developable properties were Immokalee Road at I-75 (Activity Center no. 4), Immokalee Road at CR-951 (Activity Center no. 3), and Vanderbilt Beach Road at CR-951. One other key commercial location in the PMA was not inventoried – the Immokalee Road at Airport Road (Activity Center no. 1). As a result, the petitioner’s Retail Market Analysis and Strategic Assessment inventory does not fully represent the potential for additional development at other key locations. Staff estimates that this under-count may be by as much as 107,000 sq. ft. Staff also notes that the potential commercially developable properties’ floor area figure will increase by 50,000 sq. ft. upon the approval of a (unrelated party’s) GMP amendment proposed for the Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, bringing the amount of potentially developable commercial space at existing properties up to approximately 770,862 sq. ft. Note how, at this point in the Analysis, the figures above for the supply of commercial space derived from County resources appear far greater than demand will ever support. The petitioner ’s retail demand analysis, however, applies a retail GAP analysis to arrive at commercial demand figures for a specific selection of commercial uses based on PMA per capita incomes and this population’s propensity toward spending more on certain goods and services than they are currently spending. Applying additional GAP analysis to the PMA population identifies the potential for an estimated 38.9 percent more to be spent on these specific market segment retail expenditures [pg. 26 table]. One exception to this spending “gap” is at General Merchandise Stores, where this population actually spends within the market area more than expected. These results indicate that no additional commercial square footage need be allocated to General Merchandise Stores. Acknowledging the GAP analysis, and applying the additional 38.9% demand [as an average] to the demand figures reached utilizing the County’s Guidelines for Commercial Development, then the demand figures increase to 960,435 sq. ft. of commercial space needed to serve the estimated current PMA population of 43,406; with 1,452,577 sq. ft. of commercial space needed to serve Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 9 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict the estimated current SMA population of 65,648. 1,137,514 sq. ft. of commercial space is needed to serve the projected year 2026 PMA population of 51,409; with 1,720,421 sq. ft. of the commercial space needed to serve the projected year 2026 SMA population of 77,753. These GAP-affected demand figures for the select commercial uses do not surpass the amounts of existing and potential commercial space already available in this market area for the entire range of retail uses. Note here how the figures derived above for the supply of commercial space still appear far greater than demand will ever support. Utilizing the County Guidelines for Commercial Development, one finds that the market area provides an oversupply of the 1,521,172 sq. ft. of existing and potential commercial space needed to serve the estimated current population. In applying the petitioner’s GAP analysis, one may determine that the market area population’s demand for the select commercial uses is underserved by 894,884 sq. ft. of commercial space. This assessment lends support to the Analysis’ proposition that a need is evident for a future land use change to introduce additional commercial acreage and land uses to this area, and that this location is appropriate to fulfill the need. Appropriateness of the Site and the Change: The FLUE primarily directs new commercial development into Mixed Use Activity Centers, and gives preference to commercial expansion adjacent to both Mixed Use Activity Centers and other commercial designations when additional demand can be demonstrated. The Activity Centers in Collier County are comprehensively planned to provide ample commercial development opportunities. These planned locations are purposely sized and spatially arranged to encourage and support a healthy business environment countywide, and to discourage and avoid over commercialization and strip development. The adopted Future Land Use Map of the FLUE illustrates an arrangement of designated Activity Centers spaced approximately two miles apart in that portion of the County west of I-75, and approximately four miles apart in that portion of the County east of I-75. The subject property is not located within or adjacent to an Activity Center or other commercially- designated land. Logan Boulevard is not planned as, or intended to develop as, a commercial corridor. This amendment introduces new commercial development, uses, and activities to a location where commercial development is not now planned, consequently extending the impact of commercial development to a larger planning area. Whether the designation of the isolated property for commercial development impacts the stability of established residential and other noncommercial uses in the area ‒ and the viability of those yet to be developed ‒ is a valid concern. However, there is presumed to be some positive impact in having shopping (and employment) opportunities located closer than presently exists. Environmental Impacts: An Environmental Report, dated October 2016, prepared by Passarella and Associates, Inc. was submitted with this petition (Exhibit “W”). Environmental review specialists with Collier County’s Development Review Division, Environmental Planning Section reviewed these documents and provided the following comments: Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 10 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict The subject Property is 18.6 acres in size and vegetated with pine, cypress, and cabbage palm type environments. Portions of the site, particularly at the north end, are significantly invaded with exotic vegetation, primarily with Melaleuca, earleaf Acacia, and Brazilian pepper. Canopy of native vegetation on site is dominated with that of slash pine. A listed species survey was conducted on June 15, 2016. No listed wildlife species were observed on the subject property. One state listed plant, cardinal airplant (Tillandsia fasciculata), was identified in several locations on site, including that within the preserve identified on the master concept plan (proposed PUD Master Plan) provided with the application. Specific requirements for retention/relocation of protected plants are contained in Section 3.04.03 of the Land Development Code (LDC) as provided for by the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 7.1.6. A letter from the Florida Department of State dated June 22, 2016 states that the proposed project is unlikely to affect historic properties but includes a provision for unexpected finds of prehistoric or historic artifacts. A similar provision concerning accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites is included in CCME Policy 11.1.3. The provision is also included in Section 2.03.07 E of the LDC. The subject property is not located in any County well field protection zones. Although not required at time of proposed amendment to the GMP, a master concept plan (proposed PUD Master plan) showing the location, acreage, and configuration of the proposed preserve and other uses identified for the site is provided with the application. Preserves which are linear in shape as identified on the master concept plan are discouraged by Section 3.05.07 H.1.b of the LDC. The majority of the preserve although does meets the minimum requirement for width of preserves. Specifically, sites of this size are required by the LDC to have preserves an average of 30 feet in width but no less than 20 feet in width. The location of the proposed preserve can be supported by the preserve selection criteria in Section 3.05.07 A of the LDC since it is located adjacent to the proposed stormwater lake and in proximity to existing Open Space/Preserve within the adjacent Saturnia Lakes subdivision, therefore providing use of the area as a corridor for wildlife. The proposed GMP amendment will have no effect on the requirements of the CCME although the amount of native vegetation required to be retained on this site will change since the amount of native vegetation required to be retained on a site is dependent in part on the uses allowed for a site, for example whether developed as residential or commercial. According to the environmental data provided for the project, approximately 13.29 acres of native vegetation occur on site. If developed for residential as currently allowed by the GMP, 3.25 acres of preserve (25 percent of the native vegetation present on site) is required to be retained. If developed as commercial as proposed, 1.99 acres of preserve (15 percent of the native vegetation on site) is required to be retained. In addition, the PUD as proposed will allow for about half of the preserve to be taken off-site, leaving at least one acre of preserve to remain on site as allowed by the LDC. There is a proposed LDC amendment in the current amendment cycle which will further limit the amount of native vegetation (preserve) allowed to be provided for off-site. However, if the PUD application is already submitted, then the current, pre-amendment LDC standards will apply. [Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist Environmental Planning Section Development Review Division] Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 11 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Impact Analysis, Including Transportation Element Consistency Determination: Stantec Consulting Services submitted a Transportation Impact Statement, dated June 23, 2016 and amended to October 11, 2016 (Exhibit “R”). Collier County Transportation Planning staff reviewed this petition and provided the following analysis: The project’s area of influence was determined to be Immokalee Road east and west of Logan Boulevard. The analysis studied:  Immokalee Road, from Livingston Road (west) to Wilson Boulevard (east);  Logan Boulevard, from Immokalee Road (north) to Pine Ridge Road (south);  Vanderbilt Beach Road, from Livingston Road (west) to Collier Boulevard (east); and,  Collier Boulevard, from Immokalee Road (north) to Vanderbilt Beach Road (south). Fully 80% of traffic accessing the property comes from Immokalee Road (40% southbound from west; 40% southbound from east), and 20% from traffic on Logan Boulevard (15% northbound from south; 5% southbound from north). The proposed development project would generate 6,791 daily gross new trips (2-way) and 599 PM Peak Hour gross new trips routed through two access points; a full-movement access located at the southernmost point on Logan Boulevard, and a right-in/right-out access located at the easternmost point on Immokalee Road. Traffic generated by the new development will impact Immokalee Road, west to I-75 and east to Collier Boulevard, and Logan Boulevard, south to Vanderbilt Beach Road ‒ but does not create any additional adverse impacts at buildout. Adverse conditions are attributable to background traffic growth. Development will require the construction of new right turn lanes at the Logan Boulevard and Immokalee Road project access points, as is a southbound left turn lane at the Logan Boulevard access point. There is capacity on our roadways to accommodate this development; therefore, the development is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element. [Michael Sawyer, Project Manager Transportation Planning Section] Public Facilities Impacts: Stantec Consulting Services submitted a Public Facilities Impact Analysis, dated March 15, 2017 (Exhibit “SS”), dated October 2016 (Exhibit “L”), and a Proximity to Public Facilities Map, dated September 2016 (Exhibit “K”). Collier County Public Utilities Department, Planning and Project Management Division staff reviewed this petition and provided the following analysis: No issues or concerns have been identified regarding impacts upon potable water, wastewater, solid waste, drainage, park and recreational facilities, schools, or EMS and fire protection services.  Potable Water System: The subject project lies in the County’s Potable Water Service Area and development will be served by Collier County potable water services. The anticipated average daily demand for potable water for the commercial project is 17,500 gallons per day (gpd) [23,625 gpd “Peak”]. Collier County has sufficient capacity to provide water services.  Wastewater Collection and Treatment System: The subject project lies in the North County Water Reclamation Service Area and development will be served by Collier County wastewater collection and treatment services. The anticipated average daily demand for Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 12 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict wastewater collection and treatment for the commercial project is estimated at 12,500 gallons per day (gpd) [16,875 gpd “Peak”]. Collier County has sufficient capacity to provide wastewater services.  Solid Waste Collection and Disposal: The solid waste disposal service provider is Collier County Solid Waste Management. The 2016 AUIR notes that the County projects more than 50 years of remaining landfill capacity.  Stormwater Management System: The 2016 AUIR does not identify any stormwater management improvement projects in the vicinity of the subject property. Future development will comply with the SFWMD and/or Collier County rules and regulations that assure controlled accommodation of stormwater events by both on-site and off-site improvements.*  Park and Recreational Facilities: No impact on the demand for park facilities result from the proposed commercial development.  Schools: No impact on the demand for public school facilities result from the proposed commercial development.  Emergency Medical (EMS) and Fire Rescue Services: The subject property is located within the Greater Naples Fire Rescue District, with District Station 73 located at 14575 Collier Boulevard. EMS services are provided by Collier County, with Medic Station 42 located at 7010 Immokalee Road. The proposed commercial development is anticipated to have no significant impacts on these safety services. 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 Monday, March 6, 2017, 5:30 p.m. at St. Monica’s Episcopal Church, located at 7070 Immokalee Road. Approximately 55 people other than the application team and County staff attended ‒ and heard the following information: The agent representing this petition (Tim Hancock) introduced other members of the application team present, including applicant, Kevin Ratterree and Michael Friedman (of GL Commercial) and transportation planner, Jeff Perry (of Stantec). He also introduced staff Planners representing Collier County ‒ Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner and project coordinator for the GMP amendment petition, and Daniel Smith, AICP, Principal Planner and project coordinator for the companion PUD rezone petition. The proposed GMP amendments and PUD rezone were described to the group, including the intensity of potential future uses allowed in the C-4, Commercial General zoning district. The agent reviewed the GMPA consideration schedule, and the protracted timeline involved with applications for PUD zoning, followed by development orders, before actual construction could begin. Kevin Ratterree introduced himself and provided an overview of the project. With its location fronting two major roadways, he addressed specific vehicular access points, turning maneuvers, and the potential for road improvements to both Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. GL Homes has developed a number of residential communities in this area but residents are without high-end commercial offerings nearby. This development provides these opportunities, characterizing their plans as high-end by design through limitations on scale and size (including a prohibition on any individual business from occupying more than 45,000 sq. ft.). Commercial floor space is allocated 33,000 sq. ft. to the anchor grocery store, 44,000 sq. ft. to retail shops and 27,000 sq. ft. to outlot business. Building styles will notably contain enhanced elements of woodwork and stonework, landscaping will be supplemented with additional “greenery”, and vehicular and pedestrian areas will be enhanced with “pavers” – all parts of their effort to provide Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 13 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict upscale amenities. [Staff notes, these design elements will need to be addressed at part of the PUD rezone stage, in PUD documents.] Their development schedule anticipates primary construction (non-outlots) to be completed in one phase, with the anchor grocer to open its doors in early 2019. The term “high-end” was used a number of times by the presenters to describe the select types of businesses to which they are interested in attracting. The application team presented a selection of businesses they are focused-on, such as upscale grocery stores, restaurants, and the targeted retailers. Attendees questioned how the developer can ensure that the development would be “high-end” businesses. Mr. Ratterree explained how this could be accomplished through the “design” of the development. When asked to elaborate, he detailed some characteristics that serve to identify the shopping center’s upscale design; such as additional landscaping, water features, enhanced signage, and so forth. He also described commercial uses that were previously identified as having concerns, including automobile gas stations, 24-hour convenience stores, movie theaters, and adult entertainment. The proposal presents these uses as prohibited uses, along with discount and resale stores, and uses that produce loud noises. The applicant committed to the site design, architectural features, and particular tenant types presented here (and that may be codified in the PUD document) to ensure a “high-end”, or upscale, project. [Staff notes, these commitments will need to be addressed at part of the PUD rezone stage, in PUD documents.] Jeff Perry provided an explanation of transportation impacts and how the project is designed to accommodate traffic. He explained “capture” and “pass-by” traffic, and how they’re considered when gauging traffic impacts. More discussion surrounded traffic concerns, as the subject property is located at the Immokalee – Logan intersection. Attendees also identified awkward traffic maneuvers created by the median design along Immokalee Road, particularly for traffic accessing Saturnia Lakes (restricted to left - in/right-in/right-out) and Heritage Greens (restricted to right-in/right-out), and by vehicles using the small number of dedicated turn lanes to perform U-turns. Mr. Hancock and Mr. Ratterree discussed the LDC deviations being requested; for allowing the oversize project identification sign planned for visual exposure at the intersection, for allowing ground signs for businesses located on outlots (as these “outlots” will not be separately owned, but will remain under the control of the developer with land leases to the individual lessors/ stand- alone businesses), and for additional square footage of on-building business signage. Specific lighting fixtures and a lighting plan were discussed. Attendees presented and generally discussed their concerns with traffic (especially the area of influence studied, inconvenient access points, and differing peak traffic times for different area land uses). More than one speaker described the advantages of the commercial project being within convenient walking distance of their homes. They described the inconvenient distances they now travel to dine at upscale restaurants or shop in upscale establishments. Nearly everyone agreed that another drive-through (fast food) restaurant is unwanted; while drive-through facilities for other businesses were not ruled out. Speakers questioned what they could expect in the project’s enhanced landscaping. Besides preserving the maximum amount of natural vegetation (in the buffer areas), information about additional plantings was not detailed. Formal landscaped areas internal to the project can be expected as they appear in images presented here. Additional screening/buffers would be considered for the terminal ends of Autumn Oaks Lane and Hidden Oaks Lane, across Logan Boulevard. The application team clarified that they are committing to the County’s “preservation” requirements – including providing for a portion of this preservation off-site. Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 14 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Additional discussion took place regarding traffic concerns, with at least one person asking if design plans for the project may include a parking structure. This would reduce the amount of paved and impermeable surfaces dedicated to parking, and avoid the need for larger water retention areas, accommodations for additional run-off, and other compensating measures. This conventional shopping center parking arrangement is not thought to be pedestrian friendly. The application team explained how the basic parking lot is in balance with the economics associated with the size and scale of the project. The information meeting was completed by 7:05 p.m. The applicant transcribed the full proceedings of this meeting, and that transcript, along with their PowerPoint presentation and presentation notes, and other NIM-related materials have been copied and are provided as an appendix to this Staff Report. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The reviews and analyses of this petition provide the following findings and conclusions:  The property is currently zoned “A” and undeveloped.  There are no known historic or archaeological sites on the subject property.  Impact from the development will affect a State listed plant ‒ the cardinal airplant ‒ which has been identified in several locations on site, including within the preserve identified on the proposed PUD master concept plan. Specific requirements for retention/relocation of protected plants are contained in the LDC as provided for by the CCME.  The infrastructure needed to serve the development can be provided without related levels of service or concurrency concerns. Though traffic generated by the new development will impact Immokalee Road, west to I-75 and east to Collier Boulevard, and Logan Boulevard, south to Vanderbilt Beach Road ‒ it not create any additional adverse impacts at buildout. Adverse conditions are attributable to background traffic growth. Development will require the construction of new right turn lanes at the Logan Boulevard and Immokalee Road project access points, as well as a southbound left turn lane at the Logan Boulevard access point.  There is capacity on our roadways to accommodate this development, therefore the development is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element.  The property, along with the surrounding area, is currently designated in the GMP for residential development ‒ as well as uses generally allowed throughout the Urban designated area such as essential services, community facilities, recreation and open space uses, etc. This petition introduces new commercial development, uses and activities to a location where commercial development is not now planned.  Based on data and analysis submitted for the amount of existing and potential commercial development within the study area for the subject property, the need for the full range of commercial development contemplated by this amendment has not been demonstrated.  The methodology used in the petition, along with the data and analysis submitted for the amount of existing and potential commercial development, indicates the need for General Merchandise Stores has not been demonstrated.  Not all commercial uses allowed in the C-4, General Commercial zoning district were analyzed and not all uses analyzed were demonstrated to have supportable demand. Only those uses for which a demand was demonstrated should be included in this Subdistrict. See staff’s recommended subdistrict text. Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 15 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict  A correlating, companion PUD rezone has been submitted, and will be considered subsequent to, or concurrent with, the Adoption phase of this GMPA petition.  The applicant made formal commitments to the site design, architectural features, and particular tenant types presented in their Neighborhood Information Meeting to ensure a “high- end”, or upscale, project. These commitments should be appropriately addressed as part of the companion PUD rezone, not this GMP amendment. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: A copy of this Staff Report was provided to the Office of the County Attorney and has been approved as to form and legality. The criteria for land use map amendments are in Sections 163.3177(6)(a)2. and 8., Florida Statutes. This staff report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office on March 22, 2017. [SAS] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP-2016-2 /PL20160001100, 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 does recommend approval with revisions to the Subdistrict text as depicted below ‒ to limit commercial uses to those for which supportable demand has been demonstrated by the petitioner’s data and analysis, and for proper code language, format, clarity, etc.: Note: Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted – as proposed by petitioner; words double underlined are added, words double struck through are deleted – as proposed by staff. Italicized text within brackets is explanatory only – not to be adopted. 13. Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict [Page 67] This Subdistrict consists of ±18.6 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. The Subdistrict allows only those uses permitted by right and by conditional use within the C-4, Commercial General, Zoning District, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of the this Subdistrict. , as follows: Auto supply stores (SIC 5531), [Petitioner’s Automotive Parts & Accessories, Tire stores (NAICS 4413)] Home furniture and furnishing stores (SIC 5712 – 5719), [Petitioner’s Furniture & Home Furnishing stores (NAICS 4421, 4422)] Computer and computer software stores (SIC 5734), Household appliance stores (SIC 5722), Radio, television and consumer electronics stores (SIC 5731), Record and prerecorded tape stores (SIC 5735), Videotape rental (SIC 7841), [Petitioner’s Entertainment, Electronics & Appliance stores (NAICS 44311, 44312, 44313)] Lumber and other building materials dealers (SIC 5211), Hardware stores (SIC 5251), Paint stores (SIC 5231), Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores (SIC 5261), Wallpaper stores (SIC 5231), [Petitioner’s Building Materials, Garden Equipment & Supply stores (NAICS 4441, 4442)] Food stores (SIC 5411 – 5499), Liquor stores (SIC 5921), except Convenience stores, [Petitioner’s Food & Beverage stores (NAICS 4451, 4452, 4453)] Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 16 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Pharmacies and Drug stores (SIC 5912), Cosmetics and Beauty supply stores (undetermined SIC), Optical goods stores (undetermined SIC), Food (Health) supplement stores (undetermined SIC), Medical equipment rental and leasing (SIC 7352), [Petitioner’s Health & Personal Care stores (NAICS 44611, 44612, 44613, 44619)] Apparel & accessory stores (SIC 5611 – 5699), Shoe stores (undetermined SIC), Jewelry stores (undetermined SIC), Luggage and Leather goods stores (undetermined SIC), [Petitioner’s Clothing & Clothing Accessory stores (NAICS 4481, 4482, 4483)] Musical instrument stores (SIC 5736), Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops (SIC 5941), Hobby, toy and game stores (undetermined SIC), Book stores (SIC 5942), [Petitioner’s Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book, Music stores (NAICS 4511, 4512)] Retail - miscellaneous (5921 ‒ 5963, 5992 ‒ 5999) including Florists, Pet and pet supply stores, and Art dealers only, [Petitioner’s Miscellaneous Store Retailers (NAICS 4531, 4532, 4533, 4539)] Eating and drinking establishments (SIC 5812, 5813) including food service contractors, caterers, and mobile food services, [Petitioner’s Food Service, Eating & Drinking Places (NAICS 7223, 7224)] Personal and Business services (SIC 5812, 5813), and [Petitioner’s Services (NAICS 7221, 7222)] Stationary stores (SIC 5943), Gift, novelty, and souvenir shops (SIC 5947), Used merchandise stores (SIC 5932). [Petitioner’s Office Supply, Gift, Used Merchandise Stores (NAICS 45321, 45322, 45331)] The following uses permitted by right or by conditional use within the C-4 district in the Land Development Code shall not be allowed:  Gasoline service stations (SIC 5541), [Petitioner’s Automotive Gas Stations (NAICS 44711, 44719)]  Automotive vehicle and equipment dealers (SIC 5511 --5599), and  Department stores (SIC 5311), General merchandise stores (SIC 5331 – 5399) including warehouse clubs. [Petitioner’s (NAICS 4521, 4529)] IF the Planning Commission chooses to recommend transmittal as proposed by the petitioner, staff recommends the following revisions to the applicant’s proposed Subdistrict text (for proper code language, format, clarity, etc. only – not intended to change allowable uses, intensities, development standards or other items of substance): Note: Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted – as proposed by petitioner; words double underlined are added, words double struck through are deleted – as proposed by staff. 13. Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict [Page 67] This Subdistrict consists of ±18.6 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. The Subdistrict allows those uses permitted by right and by conditional use within the C-4, Commercial General, Zoning District, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of the this Subdistrict. Development within this Subdistrict is encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district which must contain development and design standards to ensure that all commercial uses will be compatible with the neighboring uses. Agenda Item 9.A ‒ 17 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict This Subdistrict is intended to serve the surrounding residential uses within a convenient travel distance to the subject property. Bicycle and pedestrian access to the adjacent properties will be pursued to the extent feasible and practical to encourage increased bicycle and pedestrian use. The maximum total development intensity allowed is 100,000 square feet of gross floor area. [Remainder of page intentionally left blank] Agenda Item 9. ‒ 1 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict STAFF REPORT ADDENDUM COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: April 6, 2017 SUBJECT: PETITION CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] ELEMENT: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT This addendum serves to provide a revised recommendation in addition to the Staff Report provided for petition CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100. Following the initial Staff Report’s approval and distribution, staff determined that sufficient revisions to staff’s recommended Subdistrict provisions where to be expected. By collaborating with Zoning Section staff, the applicant, and key members of the application team, Comprehensive Planning drafted revised Subdistrict provisions – with particular attention given to the commercial uses. These collaborative revisions differ from Subdistrict provisions initially recommended in the distributed Staff Report, and are listed below. REVISION RECOMMENDATIONS:  Provide Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes where previously shown as “undetermined”,  More specifically identify those uses not allowed that are identified in the companion Planned Unit Development (PUD PL20160001089) documents as “prohibited uses” (i.e. used merchandise stores, drinking establishments); and add use-specific exceptions to more-general listings, including deference to the higher specificity achievable in PUDs,  Add uses to the list of those uses not allowed to identify those uses considered to be unsuitable for this upscale retail, office, medical and financial project by other parties providing input,  Add uses to the list of those uses not allowed to distinguish office and clinic intensity uses from laboratory intensity uses,  Add specific uses to the list of those uses allowed, including medical & dental offices, fitness facilities, and personal and business services, which are categorically proposed non-retail uses that were not part of the application’s Retail Market Analysis,  Move or add specific uses to the list of those uses allowed to identify uses that would be characteristic of an upscale retail, office, medical and financial project, and move or add specific uses to the list of those uses not allowed to identify uses that would be uncharacteristic of an upscale retail, office, medical and financial project, and Agenda Item 9. ‒ 2 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict  Revise specific listings where the LDC language has been updated with more-recently adopted terms (i.e. “facilities”) in order to adequately address all such uses, whether identified by old or new terminology. The following, revised recommendation reflects the results of these collaborative efforts. THE REVISED RECOMMENDATION, PROVIDED IN AN EDITED, EXHIBIT “A” FORMAT: Note: Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted – as revised from the initial recommendation in the distributed Staff Report. 13. Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict [Page 67] This Subdistrict consists of ±18.6 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. The Subdistrict allows only those uses permitted by right and by conditional use within the C-4, Commercial General, Zoning District, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict, as follows: Auto supply stores (SIC 5531), Home furniture and furnishing stores (SIC 5712 – 5719), Computer and computer software stores (SIC 5734), Household appliance stores (SIC 5722), Radio, television and consumer electronics stores (SIC 5731), Record and prerecorded tape stores (SIC 5735), Videotape rental (SIC 7841), Lumber and other building materials dealers (SIC 5211), Hardware stores (SIC 5251), Paint stores (SIC 5231), Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores (SIC 5261), Wallpaper stores (SIC 5231), Food stores, except Convenience stores (SIC 5411 – 5499), Liquor stores (SIC 5921), Pharmacies and Drug stores (SIC 5912), Cosmetics and Beauty supply stores (SIC 5912), Optical goods stores (SIC 5995), Food (Health) supplement stores (SIC 5499), Medical equipment rental and leasing (SIC 7352), Health services, offices and clinics (SIC 8011 ‒ 8049), Dance studios and schools, except dance halls (SIC 7911), Personal services (SIC 7922), Physical fitness facilities (SIC 7991), Apparel & accessory stores (SIC 5611 – 5699), Shoe stores (SIC 5661), Jewelry stores (SIC 5944), Luggage and Leather goods stores (SIC 5948), Musical instrument stores (SIC 5736), Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops (SIC 5941), Hobby, toy and game stores (SIC 5931), Book stores (SIC 5942), Retail - miscellaneous (5941 ‒ 5949, 5992 ‒ 5999) including Florists, Pet and pet supply stores, and Art dealers only, except those uses determined to be uncharacteristic of, or inconsistent or incompatible with the uses, intensities, development standards or other measures, as determined in consideration of the rezone of the property, and limited in the provisions thereof, Eating and drinking establishments (SIC 5812, 5813) including food service contractors, caterers, and mobile food services, Drycleaning plants, non-industrial only, except rug cleaning, collecting and distributing agencies, drapery drycleaning (SIC 7216), Photographic studios, portrait (SIC 7221), Beauty shops (SIC 7231), Barber shops (SIC 7241), Agenda Item 9. ‒ 3 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Accounting, Architectural services, Auditing, Bookkeeping services (SIC 8721); Management services (SIC 8741, 8742), Insurance carriers, agents and brokers (6311—6399, 6411), Operators of nonresidential buildings (SIC 6512), Real Estate agents and managers (SIC 6531), Personal and Business services (SIC 5812, 5813), and Banks, credit unions and trusts (SIC 6011 – 6099), Schools and Educational services (SIC 8299 only), and Stationary stores (SIC 5943), Gift, novelty, and souvenir shops (SIC 5947). Used merchandise stores (SIC 5932) The following uses shall not be allowed:  Gasoline service stations, and other Facilities with fuel pumps (SIC 5541),  Automotive vehicle and equipment dealers (SIC 5511, 5521, 5599), except auto supply stores (SIC 5531),  Department stores (SIC 5311), General merchandise stores (SIC 5331 – 5399) including warehouse clubs,  Food stores (SIC 5411) Convenience stores only,  Drinking establishments (SIC 5813),  Medical and dental laboratories (SIC 8071, 8072),  Boat dealers (SIC 5551), Motorcycle dealers (SIC 5571), Recreational vehicle dealers (SIC 5561),  Lumber and other building materials dealers (SIC 5211),  Hotels, Motels, and other lodging places (SIC 7011),  Motor freight transportation and warehousing, all (SIC 4225), and  Used merchandise stores (SIC 5932). THE REVISED RECOMMENDATION, PROVIDED IN A “CLEAN” FORMAT: 13. Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict [Page 67] This Subdistrict consists of ±18.6 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. The Subdistrict allows only those uses permitted by right and by conditional use within the C-4, Commercial General, Zoning District, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended, in effect as of the date of adoption of this Subdistrict, as follows: Auto supply stores (SIC 5531), Home furniture and furnishing stores (SIC 5712 – 5719), Computer and computer software stores (SIC 5734), Household appliance stores (SIC 5722), Radio, television and consumer electronics stores (SIC 5731), Record and prerecorded tape stores (SIC 5735), Videotape rental (SIC 7841), Hardware stores (SIC 5251), Paint stores (SIC 5231), Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores (SIC 5261), Wallpaper stores (SIC 5231), Food stores (SIC 5411 – 5499), except Convenience stores, Liquor stores (SIC 5921), Agenda Item 9. ‒ 4 ‒ CP-2016-2 / PL20160001100 Immokalee Road Associates: Establishing the Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Pharmacies and Drug stores (SIC 5912), Cosmetics and Beauty supply stores (SIC 5912), Optical goods stores (SIC 5995), Food (Health) supplement stores (SIC 5499), Medical equipment rental and leasing (SIC 7352), Health services, offices and clinics (SIC 8011 ‒ 8049), Dance studios and schools, except dance halls (SIC 7911), Personal services (SIC 7922), Physical fitness facilities (SIC 7991), Apparel & accessory stores (SIC 5611 – 5699), Shoe stores (SIC 5661), Jewelry stores (SIC 5944), Luggage and Leather goods stores (SIC 5948), Musical instrument stores (SIC 5736), Sporting goods stores and bicycle shops (SIC 5941), Hobby, toy and game stores (SIC 5931), Book stores (SIC 5942), Retail - miscellaneous (5941 ‒ 5949, 5992 ‒ 5999), except those uses determined to be uncharacteristic of, or inconsistent or incompatible with the uses, intensities, development standards or other measures, as determined in consideration of the rezone of the property, and limited in the provisions thereof, Eating establishments (SIC 5812) including food service contractors, caterers, and mobile food services, Drycleaning plants, non-industrial only, except rug cleaning, collecting and distributing agencies, drapery drycleaning (SIC 7216), Photographic studios, portrait (SIC 7221), Beauty shops (SIC 7231), Barber shops (SIC 7241), Accounting, Architectural services, Auditing, Bookkeeping services (SIC 8721); Management services (SIC 8741, 8742), Insurance carriers, agents and brokers (6311—6399, 6411), Operators of nonresidential buildings (SIC 6512), Real Estate agents and managers (SIC 6531), Banks, credit unions and trusts (SIC 6011 – 6099), Schools and Educational services (SIC 8299 only), and Stationary stores (SIC 5943), Gift, novelty, and souvenir shops (SIC 5947). The following uses shall not be allowed:  Gasoline service stations, and other Facilities with fuel pumps (SIC 5541),  Automotive vehicle and equipment dealers (SIC 5511, 5521, 5599), except auto supply stores (SIC 5531),  Department stores (SIC 5311), General merchandise stores (SIC 5331 – 5399) including warehouse clubs,  Food stores (SIC 5411) Convenience stores only,  Drinking establishments (SIC 5813),  Medical and dental laboratories (SIC 8071, 8072),  Boat dealers (SIC 5551), Motorcycle dealers (SIC 5571), Recreational vehicle dealers (SIC 5561),  Hotels, Motels, and other lodging places (SIC 7011),  Lumber and other building materials dealers (SIC 5211),  Motor freight transportation and warehousing, all (SIC 4225), and  Used merchandise stores (SIC 5932). 170306_0020 Page 2 of 33 Tim Hancock: Well, my iPhone time I have 5:32 and I think that's official. My name's Tim Hancock with Stantec. We do have a microphone available, but can everyone hear my voice okay? Audience: Yes. Tim Hancock: Okay, great, sometimes the microphone actually makes it a little bit worse, but if you have any problem hearing or understanding me or any of the presenters, please just raise your hand, let us know, and we'll either speak up or use the microphone. I'm with Stantec, I'm the planner for this project. I have the pleasure of work with GL in bringing this project to [inaudible]. Before starting the presentation, a couple of quick safety items. In the event that we had to evacuate the building for any reason, the exit is to your rear, there also is one down this hallway, and one out this way as well. Not that I expect that to happen, this is not Naples High School, but we should be okay nonetheless. Also, for you comfort and convenience, restrooms are down this hallway, you don't need to raise your hand and you don't need my permission, please help yourself if you need to use the facilities. I want to introduce members of our team that are here this evening with. With Geo, we have Mr. Kevin Ratterree here in front, some of you have met him before. We also have Mr. Michael Freedman. We've got a couple other folks with GL, but we've told them we wouldn't make them say anything, so I'm not going to introduce them. We also have with Stantec, Mr. Jeff Perry who's in charge of our transportation planning. Jeff has the unenviable position of talking to you about [inaudible 00:01:57] go and why. Wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy, but Jeff prepared the analysis and calculations in helping to determine the potential traffic impact from the project. In addition to making a presentation, he also is here to answer any questions you may have. We also have reviewers with Collier County. The way this process works is, we develop and file an application, that application is then reviewed by up to 14 or 15 county departments simultaneously. We have two applications going forward and they're both running concurrently, at the same time. The first one is an application to amend the Collier county growth management plan. Now, the growth management plan is an umbrella plan helps determine where particular types of land usage makeup. For example, it may designate that commercial is appropriate here, residential here, industrial here. As the county evolves and changes, that plan gets amended periodically. Sometimes it's amended by the county, sometimes it's amended by private land owners. So we have filed an application to amend the plan, to take this 18.6 acre parcel and designate it from what it is currently, urban residential, to what's call a commercial infill subdistrict. That application, the lead reviewer for that is Mr. Corby Schmidt, who has got his hand up over there. Corby works for Collier County, so I'd just like to tell you, if you have any 170306_0020 Page 3 of 33 problems with your commissioners, talk to Corby. Oh I'm sorry. I meant if you love your commissioner, please talk to Corby. We are blessed with a good board, but anyway, Corby is in the comprehensive planning department, they handle the growth management plan side of things. The second application we have is a rezone application. If the growth management plan is an umbrella that says these are the types of usage you can have, and I'm being very simplistic in this, the rezone delves into the details. What are the setbacks, what are the building heights, what does it look like, what are the specific usage you can have, and what are some of the usage you can't have? So the zoning works with the growth management plan, in concert, they have to be consistent with each other, and there's a separate county department that reviews zoning applications. Our lead planner on that is Mr. Daniel Smith. Speaker 3: That's me and if you have any questions, call Corby. Tim Hancock: Right. Speaker 3: My card is out there, too. Me and Corby's card is out there. Tim Hancock: Both Corby and Daniel did leave their cards out there, I have a stack of mine as well afterwards if you want them, if you're trying to see who has the best hand with your cards at the end of the night, feel free to come ask me for that, as well. I'll kind of give you an overview. The process going forward is that the growth management plan amendment tracks a little bit ahead of the zoning. The reason is that the growth management plan amendment has two cycles. One is, it gets reviewed by the local governing bodies and then it's transmitted to the State Department of Economic Opportunity for review. They then send it back and there's a second hearing for ultimate decision or adoption of that amendment. The zoning only has one set of hearings. So the growth management plan will actually have a hearing for transmittal, when it comes back, both the growth management plan and the zoning will be heard at the same time. So tonight's presentation deals with both applications because really, we need to look at them together. One of them allows certain broad land, set of land uses and the other one delves into the details, together they'll give you a clear picture of exactly what is that's being requested [inaudible 00:05:38]. As you came in, there was a sign in sheet, if you did not sign in, please do so. It helps us be able to record how many people were here and if you raised your hand and said, "My name's John Smith and I've got a question," if I have your information at the end, I can circle back to you through that contact sheet. So if you didn't sign in, please do so before you leave tonight. Also on the table is a copy of the exact wording of the growth management plan amendment that we have requested and also is a copy of what's called the commercial planning unit 170306_0020 Page 4 of 33 development, or CPUD document, that's the zoning document, that's the one with all the more meaty details in it. That is still in draft form, by the way, we have made one submittal to the county and gotten comments back, we're working on a re-submittal on that. So the growth management plan amendment is pretty close to what we're going to see going forward. The CPUD document may have a few more changes that go into it. With that, I'm going to turn this over to Mr. Kevin Ratterree who is going to walk you through the presentation for the project. Then Mr. Perry is going to give you a little bit of transportation information. I'm going to wrap up with a few more comments, and we're going to do our absolute best to have this wrapped up and get you out of here, back home where we all want to be. Mr. Ratterree? Kevin Ratterree: Thank you. Okay thank you Tim. Can everybody hear me? Audience: Yes. Kevin Ratterree: For those of you that don't know me, my name is Kevin Ratterree and I'm with GL Homes, I work out of the corporate office [inaudible 00:07:07]. I work out of the corporate office over on the east coast of Florida. I have been dealing with the GL Naples division since its inception, I was part of the team that made the decision to move to GL from the east coast over to the west coast. I was intimately involved with the initial Saturnia Lakes project. I was intimately involve with the Riverstone and obviously with Stone Creek, so I've had a lot of history with GL relative to this particular corridor and know a lot about how these approvals came about and the history of those. Instead of you trying to remember how to spell my last name, I'm just going to tell you I have business cards up here, but just think battery, Ratterree, for pronunciation which one of my kids' teachers came up with that. If you want to spell it, think Tallahassee, you're probably going to be pretty good. A lot of doubles in there. Let me start off by saying, some you I recognize, I have been doing this traveling road show for a while on this project. We have already presented it to Longshore Lakes, Old Cypress, Saturnia Lakes, Riverstone. Part of this process, this neighborhood information process, it's a little bit broader scale in getting to a few more areas and geographic components that we haven't gotten to in terms of the overall presentation. If you could, I know some of you have questions, if you could just kind of let me get through the presentation, I found a lot of times I answer your question as I go through. Then at the end, we're all here to answer your questions as best we can. If you ask a question we don't know the answer to, we'll take your name down and we'll get back to you when we get an answer to that question. So just wanted to kind of go through that. Let me start off with, that name, Naples Garden Shops, that's not going to be the name. So the first slide in our presentation is wrong and the reason it's wrong is because we have been told by Collier County that we cannot use the name Naples Garden Shops. Naples and garden has been too used over here, so we 170306_0020 Page 5 of 33 need to come up with another name. So Michael Freedman over here will take you to dinner if you want to give us a name and we end up using that name, we will be happy to have Michael take you dinner on his tab. We'll be coming up with another name as we discuss this project with the project planners and in- house folks about it. Let me just start off by geographically orienting everybody. This area in pink is the 18.6 acre site that's the subject of the application. This is Logan boulevard right here, this is Immokalee road right here. The estates are over here. The area in blue is owned by Oakwood Park West, is the legal name, you may know it more as Landscape Workaholics, LRM, Cullen Walker, who operates his landscape maintenance service company out of this property here and also owns this piece of property here. Mr. Walker also owned this little triangular piece right here which was .99 acres in size, we bought that from Mr. Walker so it is part of the GL Homes ownership, it's part of that the GL homes buildership, it makes up the 18.6 acres. The reason we bought it relates to access, which will be my next slide, but I wanted to kind of bring everybody up to speed with what you're looking at here. Again, Mr. Walker here, Raymond Cleary owns this piece of property here. Some of you may be aware that they have initiated some discussions about doing a kind of group living facility, ALF type facility on that site, but it has nothing do with our particular application. This is the main entry for Saturnia Lakes right here, that's one of the northerly pods of Saturnia Lakes. Geographically, everybody good? Everybody got what we're talking about here? Okay, so instead of spending a lot of time trying to figure out the site plan, I'll get to that in a minute. I brought this up to talk about access. We have two points of proposed access to the site. One on the far easterly side of the site, fronting on Immokalee, that will be a right in, right out only. So if you're traveling eastbound on Immokalee, you will be able to take a right into the shopping center. If you're in the shopping center, you'll be able to take a right out of the shopping center. You bypass the Saturnia lights because there's no left turn. If you wanted to back west, you would go to the next U-turn and take a U-turn. The second point of ingress and egress is right here, it's on the extreme, and I'm going to call it western side, southern side is across on Logan Boulevard. That triangular piece that I was referring to earlier is that piece of property right there. The reason we bought it from Mr. Walker was to get that access point as far south as we possibly could with the goal of having a left turn in movement. So if you're traveling on Logan boulevard, you would be able to take a left and go into the center. It would have its normal right out, it would have its normal right in. There is also discussion with Collier County about the possibility of a left out. That left out depends entirely on whether Logan stays as a two lane road or whether Logan ultimately gets built as a four lane road. We as GL, for those of you who don't know the history, that built Logan Boulevard for the county, many years ago, a little over $10 million, a little spare change for what we had going on at the time. The whole point of that is that left out is a possibility while it is a two 170306_0020 Page 6 of 33 lane section, but they're kind of giving us warning that the left out will probably go away if in fact they end up four lane in that roadway. Our project is not tripping the need for the four lane, but the county at least has expressed some interest in making sure that we understand from an access standpoint the left out could go away. So that's the ingress, egress. If you notice right here on the plan, there's a little arrow that goes to the east and there's a little driveway connection that goes here. As part of our discussion with Mr. Walker to buy that acre piece of property, that triangular piece, we also wanted to set up future access to his properties so that in the event. Mr. Walker decides to convert use, his access would be a connection point to right there, so that we would have one common point of ingress and egress versus multiple curb cuts along the roadway. That's really designed to kind of control the flow of traffic from those several properties so that they're all coming in and out at one geographic location. Audience: Can you start over? Because everyone from Riverstone got sent to the wrong location. Can you kind of recap what you just said? Kevin Ratterree: Yeah, okay. Everybody here love what we're doing? Audience: [crosstalk 00:14:22] Kevin Ratterree: Did I summarize it good for you? Audience: [crosstalk 00:14:30] Kevin Ratterree: All right, I'm going to do it really quickly, if you don't mind, okay? This is the 18.6 acre site that's located on the southeast corner of Immokalee and Logan. Access, one access point on Immokalee on the far east side and one access point on Logan on the far west side up against Logan boulevard. That's as far as I've gotten so far. A little more detail that I did and I'll do that after the meeting with you, if you don't mind. This is the overall plan of development. You may remember, for those of you that have been around for a while, that a couple years ago there was an application filed to change the land use on this property and seek commercial zoning on it, and the rumor going around was that Lowe's was the interested tenant for the site. So Saturnia Lakes, Old Cypress, and a couple other communities were very fearful of that application. I don't want to speak for you guys, but there was a lot of concern regarding that potential type of use. What we're trying to do is bring in a very high end neighborhood scale shopping center. What I mean by that is, what we're trying to do is make sure it is a grocery anchored shopping center. That it's not designed to accommodate and we are put in restrictions to preclude those big box tenants, like the Lowe's and the Home Depots of the world, need to be able to fit on a commercial property. 170306_0020 Page 7 of 33 So when I say neighborhood scaled center, the prior application is seeking over 200,000 square feet of commercial space. We are going to limit this site to 100,000 square feet maximum retail site. We are also going to limit the scale of the users, that no individual tenant can be over 45,000 square feet. The purpose of that is to make sure that a Walmart, a Target, a Lowe's, a Home Depot, all of those guys that need 75,000, 80,000, 100,000 plus, they can't locate on this center. Again, the purpose of this is to accommodate the grocery anchor on a neighborhood scale setup. In sales, in Saturnia Lakes, in Riverstone, in Stone Creek, we have received a lot of feedback over the years about there not being a higher end shopping center that's designed to cater to some of the higher end neighborhoods that are in this geographic area. With all due respect to Target down the street, and some of those other users, it's really been something that we have heard on our sales floor that we really want to see something that has a nice grocery store, it's got great elevation, it looks good, it has restaurants that we want to go to, those types of things. So again, the whole purpose of this application is to bring in that neighborhood scale shopping center. From the site plan, what you'll see again is the grocery anchor, this is a Immokalee, this is Logan, we have put in the main retention area on the extreme southern side of the site. The reason for that because if you recall from the earlier graph that is Mr. Walker's property right there, but catty-corner to over here is Saturnia Lakes, so we were trying to provide as much spatial separation between Saturnia Lakes and where our buildings would start. In doing that, we had kept that retention area, and a native preserve area, and a buffer along that southern, eastern, and western side. Again, the access on Immokalee here, the access on Logan, this being local retail, local restaurant space, and then we're going to try anchor this corner with two restaurant pads, and I've got some elevations to show you if we get through this process. Again, goal number one is to limit the scale and size, we've done that by limiting ourselves to 100,000 square feet. Goal number two was to make sure that we couldn't accommodate, nor would we allow, a Home Depot or Lowe's scale tenant in this space. Again, talking about spatial separation, this is that cul de sac in Saturnia Lakes, it's about 575 feet to the western side of that rear grocery store and about 525 feet from the eastern side of that store, just to give you a spatial separation. This is the first of our elevations, again, disregard that name for a minute. I had a little fun with this, [inaudible 00:19:12], these mountains back here [crosstalk 00:19:15], but they're here. [crosstalk 00:19:21] Some of our rendering guys have a little fun sometimes, but this whole [inaudible 00:19:28] was designed to give you orientation and scale. The pointer would be sitting at the corner of Logan and Immokalee. So I referenced earlier those two restaurant pads in that corner leg, those are those two restaurant pads, and directly across is the grocery 170306_0020 Page 8 of 33 anchor. So you get a scale, it's kind of set on a diagonal, which is a little different than a traditional shopping center. Again, part of that is designed to kind of create that neighborhood scale that we're trying to accommodate with this application. This is some of the local retail space. What you'll notice here is we're spending a lot of time with the elevations of this site, coloring, we're carrying a lot of stonework, we're carrying a lot of woodwork, we're making these part of the application so that they're part of the review. Then we need a little bit of flexibility depending how and what tenants we get in here, but the overall scale and scheme of this is being set not only the land use amendment process, but the zoning process. Same picture, a little bit higher elevation. Again, notice try to deal with the pedestrian scale here, a lot of landscaping, a lot of greenery, and again the elevations to give you an idea of what we're trying to accomplish here. A lot of paver work. Again, all of that is designed to bring that upscale amenity to the area. This is that corner, so the grocery store is going to be way over here to the right, this is that corner over on Immokalee road side. Again, trying to accommodate that local retail, local restaurant space. Again, you'll notice we're spending a lot of time with a little open space area, pedestrian scale, walk ability of the overall center. This is the grocery store front. So, somebody's going to ask me, or all of you are going to ask me, who are your tenants going to be? Okay. Let me start with the big one, which is the grocery anchor. We are under a confidentiality agreement with one of those four right there, okay? All right? So, everybody hear me? That will give you an idea of the grocery anchor. Audience: When you say confidentiality agreement, is this a signed deal that you're saying is absolutely 100% done that is going to be one of those four candidates? Kevin Ratterree: It is. Already gone through their real estate committee, their real estate committee has approved, the paperwork is being executed as we speak. Before this thing is finally approved, that will be an ink deal. [crosstalk 00:22:09] Audience: [crosstalk 00:22:09] [inaudible 00:22:12] Kevin Ratterree: If you wouldn't mind, let me just get through the presentation and I'll get the questions in the end just to get you a little sporadic. All right, so let me go back to restaurants. Michael Freedman who Ken introduced is the VP of promotion for GL. Michael is the guy that does all of our leasing for GL's commercial centers, and don't let the name GL Homes confuse you, we are both a residential home builder, Saturnia Lakes, Riverstone, Stone Creek, we are also a commercial 170306_0020 Page 9 of 33 builder. We have a commercial division, we've got several centers on the east coast of Florida, this is our first foray over on the west coast. Michael's been the guy that's been dealing with all these folks. When you ask those questions later, I'm going to let Michael answer those because he's the guy that's been dealing with them. Since we have done the neighborhood information meetings that we had with the communities, we have received at least 20 inquires from people that know somebody, who know somebody, that was at that meeting who had called us an inquired about leasing spacing in the center. So there are the tenants that Michael is trying to get to, again, retail down at the bottom, but again, the whole thing is premised on that grocery store anchor. Okay, this is probably the slide that most people want to spend a little time on. In addition to the 100,000 square foot cap, the 45,000 square foot max per tenant, one of the things that we get a lot of feedback on is, "Well, are you going to allow," I'm sorry for doing this to you, WaWa in here, "Are you going to allow WaWa in your center? Are you going to have 24 hour fuel and convenience store? Are you going to have a theater? Are you going to have adult entertainment? Are you going to have ..." Start going down the list of all these things that folks have concern about being potentially located in proximity to the neighborhood. So what we have done as part of this process, is we have then included a list of uses that will be prohibited so that they are, by zoning development order, restricted on the property, we cannot cite them on the site. We have provided that as part of our CPUD application. It's a little hard to see it at that you're at, but just to run through them, discount dollar stores, the Dollar Tree, Family whatever, those types of uses will not be allowed. Those types of uses that create loud noises, we get a lot of people concerned about, "Are you going to have a bar in here that's going to have live music?" The answer is no, we're restricting both bars and we're restricting uses that generate loud music. Sound is regulated by the Collier County code, I've been asked especially in prior meetings, we are going to add outdoor seating areas. If you've been to a restaurant with outdoor seating areas a lot of times have speakers outside where they pipe in music. The music is not so loud that you can't have your conversation while you're eating dinner with your family. So the idea is we're going to ask ambient music allowed for the outdoor seating areas, but you would not have live entertainment or anything like that outdoors that would create the type of music that would be objectionable to you in the immediate area. Manufacturing facility, that's kind of a no-brainer. Dry cleaners, a lot of people have concerns about dry cleaners, especially areas that have well proximate to it, they're worried about chemicals potentially getting in their well system. Car washers, tire stores, automobile repair, those guns that they use to take tires off are some of the loudest things out there, you can hear those things for miles, so it's prohibited for those reasons. Salvation Army, Goodwill, again, they all do great services for the community, but those are the types of uses that are being prohibited. 170306_0020 Page 10 of 33 Surplus stores, overstock stores, stores that you see that typically are bigger box type users with [inaudible 00:26:10]. Amusement center, carnivals, laser tag, trampoline facilities, those are all prohibited under our application as well. Massage parlor, kind of goes without explanation, but there it is. Adult bookshop, adult movie theater, mortuary, funeral parlor, coin operated laundry, cocktail lounge, bar, tavern, night club, cinema, or theater. It's an interesting one because I get a lot of people that would say, "We would love to have a theater pretty close to our house," and then you have a lot of people that say, "I would hate to have a theater close to my house." Generally, those uses are very intense on Friday and Saturday nights, they go to early hours of the morning, there's a lot of traffic trips attributed to them, so we have just decided to prohibit that use in the center. So those of you that wanted to have a movie theater there, my apologies, but those are the types of things that we're trying to do to keep the scale of this down to a neighborhood center. Bowling alley, pool hall, skating rink, animal raising and storage facility. You saw earlier about PetSmart, it's not designed to be overnight boarding or that type of facility, but a retail store like a PetSmart would be something that would be allowed. Hotels, motels, lodging facilities, again prohibited. With all due respect to where we are, churches would be prohibited. [inaudible 00:27:35], sorry, but churches would be prohibited. Gun range, occult sciences, I don't know what those are, but okay. Nursing home, old age center, tobacco store, hookah lounge, electronic cigarettes, all of those things are just things that we have prohibited through this application and inclusive of what will be gas station, convenience store, gas sales, we're not going to have any of that. Let's spend a little time with buffers, I don't know that it's necessary to go through it unless I get a question, but these are some examples of some buffers. I think the best way to talk about what we do in terms of buffering is, go and drive down communities and see what we do. We have always been known to be a landscape heavy company, sometimes we get complaints in our communities that we were too landscape heavy, but we really try to do as much landscape ... This is a commercial center, so obviously visibility's important, but obviously we're trying to do this in an upscale manner, so the landscaping that we do will be. This is an actual picture, this our Canyon Town Center over on the east coast. For those of you who happen to be over there, I would encourage you to take a drive by and see what we do from a commercial ... It's off of the Florida turnpike's Florida Beach boulevard. Just head west, you're going to run right into it. This is a shopping center we built back in 2005, Mike? Michael F.: Eight. Kevin Ratterree: 2008, I was close. It's anchored by a Publix, but just to give you an idea of scale and elevation, it's got a Panera Bread in it here, that's the Publix corner over there. There's the Publix elevation there. They have [inaudible 00:29:19], and a Wells Fargo. This is an actual picture as well, yes the grass is actually that green. I 170306_0020 Page 11 of 33 don't know why, but it is that green. This is an actual aerial photograph of the shopping center. This is a main street right here, this is the Publix anchor over here. This is part of a civic site that we gave to Palm Beach County. There's an amphitheater back here that events are held at and we built in soccer fields as kind of a temporary because the kids are having a hard time getting of the soccer fields out there. When the county builds this park over on this property, they'll get rid of that soccer field, but it's something we did as part of the overall site. Tim can probably get into a little more detail of this, if necessary, but I want to talk about subdistrict because one of the questions that I get a lot is, "If we allow this to be approved, does that mean that everybody next to us, the barn doors open, and now suddenly everybody can come in and request a commercial designation?" It's a very important question I want to make sure we spend a little time talking about. First off, anybody can come in and file an application with Collier county to change land usage, it's the right of any property on Earth to do that. So I can't preclude Mr. Walker or Mr. [Courier 00:30:37] or anybody coming in and making an application. What we tried to do when we set this application was to set it up as an infill subdistrict and that's important because what we want to have a property owner do is go through the entitlement process, very similar to what we're doing, where they have to go through public hearings, they have to do community meetings, they don't have to labor of information meetings. You want to be involved in the process, you want to know what's going on. What we did with the subdistrict was we set it up where this particular standard right here, on one side [inaudible 00:31:17] commercial side is not [inaudible 00:31:19] urban commercial district. What that really means is, if we got commercial on this property, the adjacent property, just a commercial designation, the adjacent property could come in and seek commercial zoning without going through the land use amendment process because there's a standard in Collier County development regulations that allows that to happen. However, by creating this as a subdistrict, we have preempted that property owner's right to do that, they would have to go through the same process that we go through relevant to notice to homeowners and request that through a public [inaudible 00:31:56] process. Lighting, we've got our lighting plan. The Collier County standard is zero foot candles when you get off the property. We've done a lot of [inaudible 00:32:09] plan to show that. We're hitting zero foot candles on the adjacent property. This is done, just for an example of the lighting fixture. These are the new state of the art LED lighting fixtures that are going in. The whole purpose of those is really refine the light and direct it down so that you don't have a lot of ambient light coming out. [inaudible 00:32:28] be able to see the light. If you're across the street and you're staring at a shopping center, you're going to be able to see the light. The question is, is the light getting to you? That's spill over in the foot candles. You can see light, but the question is, is it spilling over to the point 170306_0020 Page 12 of 33 where you're being lighted by the light. The answer is, that standard of Collier County, is to get to 0.00 foot candles on the property. Here's an example of that. These are much taller LED fixtures, but if you'll notice, very bright around the base of them, but as you get off the light fixture itself it gets very dark very quickly. Okay, I'm going to turn it over to Jeff, let him talk about the traffic a little bit. I know that's probably a good bit of the questions that are going to come up tonight, so I'm going to let Jeff handle that. Then I'll be back up to kind of summarize and get questions. Jeff Perry: [inaudible 00:33:21] Okay. Good evening. For the record, my name is Jeff Perry, a transportation planner with Santec consulting. I prepared the traffic analysis for this particular project for both applications. As Kevin and Tim said, there are two companion applications moving together. There will actually be a third analysis that will be required by the county. You have one for the conference of planning, you have one for zoning analysis, and then you also have one for the actual site development plan. When this project, if it's approved, it moved forward through site development plan review where we get down really down into the weed about engineering and the very fine details of a site design, building permits, there's a traffic stuff that's done, again. That's important because if there is any lag between a project's zoning approval and when the site plan approval comes in, you want to make sure that the site plan zoning analysis, traffic analysis, is up to date. That it's the most current available the time, that analysis of is done in a timely fashion. When we do an analysis like this, we follow the county's regulations, there is a standard set of guidelines, we establish a study area, look at the different roadways that are likely to be impacted by a particular project and we do what's called trip generation. We look at the project form the standpoint of the amount of development that's being proposed. We can then use national standards for determining how many trips will generated to and from a project. In the case of residential, we know that residential projects are generators. When a 100 units, or 1,000 units or developed, people move into those homes, they are generating traffic. It's brand new trips, coming and going to their homes. Commercial on the other hand is what we call attractors. They are the places where people go to. The people that leave their home and go to the grocery store, or go to work, go to an office, they are actually going to that destination or to that attractor. Commercial shopping centers of this type, neighborhood commercial centers, also have the advantage of capturing traffic that's already on the roadway. So we see that there's traffic moving along Immokalee road, this is Logan Boulevard here and the shopping center here. There's traffic already on Immokalee road. As it passes by the shopping center, on your way home from work to get to your residence, you stop at the grocery store. You stop at the drug store, or whatever it is that you want to stop at. It's called a pass by trip, so it's not generating new 170306_0020 Page 13 of 33 trips. There are some employment numbers, people that are working here are coming from their home, they're going to a particular place, but generally speaking, a project like this is capturing quite a bit of traffic along the existing route, and especially during the peak hour. When we analyze traffic, the county is most concerned about the peak hour of the day, which in also every case, is the evening. It just so happens on Immokalee road the AM peak hour of background traffic, the current volumes, are a little bit higher in the morning going inbound, going towards Naples, than they are in the afternoon going out. But generally speaking, generators, those that are generating traffic, are generating either in the morning or in the afternoons. Attractors like shopping centers typically have a much higher PM peak traffic, there's very little activity going on here at 7:00, 8:00 in the morning. You have some grocery stores that might be open at that hour, but many of the retail establishments, small offices that might be in there, are not open at that particular hour in the day, so people are not coming in and out of the shopping center in the morning. So we're required to look at the evening, PM peak hour, how many trips will come into and out of the site relative to the amount of traffic on a particular road. These particular numbers ... This traffic analysis is available in the public record, we can get you copies of it if you're interested in the entire report. We've analyzed the traffic signals, we've analyzed the amount of traffic coming into and out of the site. We've estimated, with all these little blue arrows, the amount of traffic that will go in each direction because obviously as Kevin had said, there's a right in and a right out on Immokalee road. We're proposing right out, left out, left in, and right in on Logan boulevard, so we've assigned what we believe is a distribution of traffic in each of these movements in each of these directions. There will be some people that will be coming down on Immokalee road westbound and will want to make a U-turn and come back around into the shopping center. There will be others that will want to come down here and use the access off of Logan. So we tried to account for all of the movements that will people will make into and out of the shopping center. These numbers, the red numbers, are the numbers that are the total driveway volumes so that includes the trips that are already on the roadway that someone stops and says, "Oh, I'm going to go into Publix," got a call, turn and go into the grocery store get a quart of milk and then turn around and come back out once they get whatever it is you need. So these are the active driveway volumes. That's not the net new traffic that would ultimately be added to the roadway. These are the volumes on the roadways today. In the morning, and this is a peak hour, there's 2,200 vehicles an hour traveling on Immokalee road westbound. In the evening, a little bit less than that, about 1,900 vehicles per hour traveling in that direction. Our traffic, as you can see, is 124, 173 coming in and turning in this way. The total numbers, as I said, are the driveway volumes coming in. A small fraction of the amount of traffic that is currently on the road and some of 170306_0020 Page 14 of 33 that traffic that is currently in this, what we call the travel screen, this numbers up here, will actually be showing up in these numbers in the driveways because they'll be turning in off of a driveway. We've conducted the analysis for the county. Our analysis shows that there is existing failures at the intersections, the volumes on the roadways are not significant enough to require additional travel lanes on the roadways, but we do know that there are problems at some of the intersections. The county is aware of these problems. The problems are not caused by this particular project. The county is currently pursuing a study of the entire corridor of Immokalee road to try to identify what improves are ultimately going to be needed and then using their impact fees and assessments of individual projects, determine what improves have to be constructed and who has to pay for them. So when this project comes in for its site development plan, we'll go back through another analysis and if there's a proportionate share or some improvement that the county feels is the responsibility of this developer, then they would contribute that particular portion to fixing one or more of these intersection problems. These are problems that exist today that are not the responsibility of this developer so we have to assume that the county's going to fix these in the future, but if the developer is contributing any deficiencies, then they are required, any developer, is required to pay a proportionate share to remedy that particular problem. I think that's it. We will answer any questions a little bit later. Kevin Ratterree: Michael told me I needed to clarify my statement on the massage parlors. Not a frequenter of massage parlors, so Massage Envy is different than a massage parlor. That's the way he's tried [crosstalk 00:41:42]. Before we get to questions, there are these things called deviations. Deviations are, code says you can do this, you request a deviation to allow you to do this. We do a lot of deviations when we deal with our residential PUDs and I'll have Tim come up here and go through those really quickly. It's kind of a standard procedure that we have to ask for them, but we have to kind of inform you what those deviations are. A lot of it relates to the signage on the corner, trying to make sure we can accommodate that signage and that it has that scale to it, but I'm going to let him go through them real quick. Tim Hancock: [inaudible 00:42:29] Okay, it'll be little more helpful with this slide to discuss this with you. As Kevin said, again, for those of you who came in late, my name is Tim Hancock with Stantec, I'm the planner for this project. There are, in our current document, there are a total of three deviations being requested. The deviations are form what's called the land development code. That is, in essence, the rules and regulations of development for Collier County. Just like any code, it's not really a one size fits all. One of the nice things about a planning unit development or a PUD, which is this project is, is that we can tailor the land uses, we can tailor the standards to meet an intended result. That's really what the deviations do, is they take what you've seen here today and they make sure 170306_0020 Page 15 of 33 that's what you're going to get. So let me go over these quickly and most of them deal with signage. The first deviation on our document dealt with parking. Well, that deviation actually is going to go away. The reason is because GL has reduced the square footage to 100,000 square feet or less, normally a parcel of this size would have 150,000 square feet or more. Because of that, there's no squeeze on parking, there's no parking issues. So deviation number one in the document is going to go away, we don't need to talk about that. Deviation number two is really about the exhibit that you see here. This is a project identification sign. Collier County code really isn't set up for most projects to have these. As a matter of fact, how many of these have you seen Collier County that are not in a residential development? Not many, but it's a very key feature for the aesthetics and the treatment you see here, that tells you, you have arrived somewhere special. So rather than just having grass and a lake, we think this project identification sign is important. We're asking, and by the way, this doesn't identify any of the businesses in here, it's simply the project name, which again, for those of you who showed up late, it will not be Naples Garden Shop or Naples Village Shops, we're having to go back to the drawing board because we're using some overused names. So there's a contest out there, if anyone comes up with a name, see Michael. He doesn't have to have dinner with you if you win the contest, you can go on your own. This project identifier, we had a deviation that says, "Yes, we can do this," because the code really doesn't allow for that type of signage. The second deviation ... Let's see. In most shopping centers, and you've probably heard them called out parcels. Usually when you have a building along the perimeter of the project, they design these ... We do this from a fit standpoint as, you put this out parcel here, and then this one, and this one, and this one. You just line them up like soldiers. The reason is, you normally carve out a piece of property and you sell the land itself fee simple to whoever's going to develop it. Each of those out parcels is allowed to have what's called a ground sign, which is, I believe, it's 12 feet in the code, maybe eight feet. Because it is not our intent to carve out and sell out parcels, it is actually GL's intent to lease the pads so that we can have this nice continuous flow of parking and not break every little site up, which really makes it harder to walk from one to the other, and just gives you more of what I call a campus effect where you can move freely on the site. When you break it into out parcels, you lose some of them. Once we're no longer carving out parcels, the county code doesn't let us have those little ground signs. So our deviation is to ask for the ability for each one of these buildings to have one ground sign out here, eight feet tall, no more than 60 square feet in size. Very small, very low profile, but again, very important in order to get quality tenants in these buildings, they really have to have their ground signs. So just because we're not breaking them into out parcels, we have to request a deviation for that. 170306_0020 Page 16 of 33 Deviation number goes away, number two and three I just described to you. We did discover a third deviation for the grocery anchor here. For the size that we have planned, the county allows 200 square feet of total signage on the front of that grocery anchor. Picture a Publix, if you will, and they normally have like Publix, then they have pharmacy, and something else over here, they kind of break it up into three pieces. Because we're doing a little smaller anchor here, we don't have enough frontage ... We can have our 200 square feet, but we can't break it into three pieces that when you add them up, then they make 200 square feet. We met with the sign reviewer today at the county, we're requesting a deviation so that we're not going to have any more signage than we're allowed by code, we just want to be able to have those little signs that the grocery anchor may need in order to advertise the total business that its performing. So that's the third deviation. None of them terribly significant, most of them are signage and aesthetics. There are things that are very important to the folks, the high end businesses, that are looking to go here, and things that we think don't attract them. As a matter of fact, we think many of the deviations will add to the aesthetics of the project. Those are the deviations as we've had them, but last thing I want to mention is, the zoning is still in process. So as we go forward and we resubmit, there will be minor changes to the zoning. Now, the things that you have been told tonight, things such as no massage parlors, and I've got to figure how to allow Massage Envy, but not have a massage parlor, I'm not sure how we do that, but we'll figure that out. Those things are commitments that we've made to you and we're not going to waver in those, but there may be things that get added and taken out through the process of reviewing the staff. If any time in this process you want to know what's in there, all you have to do is call or email me, I will send you the document. I have my business cards here when you leave. Everything we submit is public record, you can call Mr. Smith or Mr. Schmidt and they'll provide it to you, or call me and I'll provide it to you. When I do, I usually copy them anyway so that they know that we're responding to those things. So if you have any questions after you leave here today, we remain available throughout the process to address those questions. What I'd like to do now is, is turn it back over to Kevin. He gets all the hard questions, but if you have any easy ones, I'll be over there. Kevin Ratterree: Tim, thanks. [inaudible 00:49:34] Assuming that the application's approved and we continue through this process, our goal is deliver the grocery pad first quarter of 2019, so that's the anticipated timing. Somebody's going to ask me, "Well, GL Homes gets it approved and then they flip it, sell it to somebody who builds it." First off, I've been with GL for 18 years, we've never sold a single piece of property, we are going to develop them, we are not a seller. We have a complete division that is designed for the purpose of leasing and operating commercial 170306_0020 Page 17 of 33 shopping centers Our intent and our end product will be a center built by GL, a center maintained by GL, a center operated by GL. So if anybody's concerned about building a high quality center, we are. Why are we going to be concerned about that? Because we're selling right up the street Stone Creek, we want to utilize this center as an amenity to the folks that are coming onto our sales floor. So understand from our perspective, this is a GL center, this is not an approval that gets done and then flips to somebody else. So understand that from [inaudible 00:50:51]. Finally, lastly, as Tim said, please, by all means, if you have any questions that didn't get answered, you think of something at night, if you're like me you wake up at 3:00 in the morning and go, "Ah, totally forgot that," just send us an email and we'll get an answer back to you ask quickly as we can. All right, questions. Let me see if I can do this in a framework that is logical. People are going to raise their hands, I'm not being gender specific or color specific, or I like you, I don't like you, I'm just going to do them as I go along. If you just ask your question and we'll see what we can do to answer it. Yes, sir? Speaker 7: You said first quarter 2019 for the pad for the grocery store, is that the first one, the last one, the middle one? Kevin Ratterree: That's the first one. Speaker 7: Okay. It'll all be built at one time though? Kevin Ratterree: Yeah. The goal is to get the grocery, and we're going to build everything at the same time, but our target is to get that grocery pad up. Yes, ma'am? Second row. Sorry, I'll get you. Speaker 8: Okay, my concern is traffic. We live in [inaudible 00:51:53] and stranger danger is leaving our community, I wonder that when you did your analyzing, I have several questions. First of all, did you consider the schools that are there? Number one. The other thing was, when we talked to the police officers who have come into our community, they constantly tell us the lights are on timers, however, they never consider the fact that there's a right on red at the corner of Logan and Immokalee. So even though that light may change and become red and gives us an opportunity to cross three lanes, which they tell us is illegal, but if that's the only way we get to get inside, the fact that it's right on red deters us from ... Again, we still have traffic coming through. So I guess my question to you is, was that looked at, at all? Or are you just concerned with the area from Logan and Immokalee? Jeff Perry: The answer is yes ... The answer is no, we did not look at that far off away from the project. Once the traffic gets into the travel stream, depending on how much traffic is being generated, and I can share with you some of the numbers up there, 133 trips, stuff like that, the county only requires us to go so far because after that, it attenuates off, some of it goes into Saturnia Lakes, some of it goes a 170306_0020 Page 18 of 33 little further, goes into another driveway. It ultimately gets reduced. So a much larger project, for instance, the project that Kevin mentioned that previously had been [inaudible 00:53:35] here, 200,000 square feet would generate twice as much traffic and this would. The traffic analysis would have extended out a little further, it would have looked a little bit further, perhaps to the next intersection beyond. But once you get to a certain point, the amount of traffic that's being added to the travel stream no longer becomes an issue as far as levels of service. Not withstanding your problem of getting into and out of the projects, and we've seen that on Saturnia Lakes, we've seen it in just countless situations where the access connections that don't have a traffic signal, don't have the luxury of having a traffic signal, have to deal with median openings that divert traffic, that only allow you one way in and one way out to have to make a right turn and go down, make a U-turn- Speaker 8: We only have one in and out, that's all. We don't have the [inaudible 00:54:31] like Saturnia Lakes can get out on Logan or Immokalee- Jeff Perry: Right. Speaker 8: We have no choice. Jeff Perry: The county's cover their ears. The county's responsibility to main the level of service of the roadway, it is not to make your access convenient. They need to make sure that your access is safe, so they don't want to put you in harm's way, but the access into and out of a project is regulated by access management standards. Not everybody can have a full median opening, not everybody can have a traffic signal, so there are standards that are adopted, and when these projects are developed, you have to live with those particular standards. As inconvenient as it might be to be able to get into and out of a project, those are based on the standards that we're faced with. We would love to be able to provide much more convenient interconnections for projects when we sponsor these projects to the county, but their responsibility is the mainline, your movements along the major highways. Speaker 8: My concern isn't convenience, my concern is safety. There are a lot of accidents in that area and you're talking schools, you're talking [inaudible 00:55:42]- Jeff Perry: Right. Speaker 8: There are accidents there all the time. Jeff Perry: The county's traffic operations staff looks at those accidents, they get accident reports, crash reports from all the accidents, from all the crashes. They look at the crash reports, if there are geometric problems with an intersection, or with a turn lane, or something like that, they can take steps to correct it. More often 170306_0020 Page 19 of 33 than not, crashes are not caused by geometric or engineering problems, they're caused by driver behavior. The county's response to those kinds of changes is to, in fact, limit some of the movements that are causing the problems. For instance, if there's a connection that allows you to cross over three lines of traffic and it becomes a problem, becomes a crash problem, the county can close that access so that you have to turn right and go down, make a U-turn, and make some other movements to get into and out of a project. So, the problem that we have is that everybody would love to have the most convenient, safe access connections that they can, into and out of a development, but often times what you get is not convenient. It's supposed to be safe, it's designed to be safe, driver behavior plays a big role in whether or not you have crashes at a particular area. The amount of traffic that this project is generating is, to use the term, dropping the bucket from the amount of traffic that is on this road today and is going to grow from projects further east, that are going to be developed, that are going to come into I-75 and so forth. What this development does, what this commercial development does, is gives people today, leaving Saturnia Lakes, or leaving one of the other developments in this particular area, have to travel three, four, or five miles to get to a grocery story. You won't have to do that with a neighborhood center like this. Likewise, people traveling that long distance along the road will not have to stop at one other place or go out of their way, they'll be able to stop at this particular commercial, if they need to stop and get groceries or something like that. That's a long winded answer, but- Speaker 9: [crosstalk 00:57:57] If you pull and if you want to go west, you go up a short distance and make the U-turn . Speaker 8: [inaudible 00:58:02] the school. Speaker 9: [crosstalk 00:58:05] Speaker 8: I was just saying, are all of these cars who are going to pull out of there, they're going to have to go that same U-turn to head west, so it will be that much busier for [inaudible 00:58:15]. Speaker 9: [crosstalk 00:58:17] Jeff Perry: No, hold on for a second. Yeah. Speaker 9: [crosstalk 00:58:20] Jeff Perry: Please, here's what ends up happening, if everybody starts talking over each other, it's complete anarchy. Based on the conversation, understand what people do from a traffic pattern standpoint, what you're referring to is 170306_0020 Page 20 of 33 somebody who's going east, to go west. Now, think about your driving pattern. If you're going west, what exit are you going to go out of? The logical exit is that you're going to come out on the Logan boulevard side, take a right, and go up to a signalized intersection to take your left. Very few people, there will be some, again, driver patterns are driver partners, that will take a right out and then try to get over to whatever will be the first legal U-turn that they can make, to do a U-turn. Most people who go ... I go to pretty much the same grocery store, the same several grocery stores every time I shop, I know the traffic pattern in terms of how it works best for me, being able to get in and out. So folks that are traveling west, or folks that are going to Old Cypress, or Riverside, or Stone Creek, they're going to do this movement here. There's going to go come and do this or they're going to come out and do that because that is going to be the most convenient and it's going to be the safest. So to just kind of expand the [inaudible 00:59:52] of your comment. Speaker 9: That makes sense. Jeff Perry: Okay. Yes, ma'am? Speaker 10: Yes. With the traffic study, do you take into consideration that there is a proposed school coming in Stone Creek that will cause a lot of bus traffic, school children on buses, this is already ... Immokalee Road is already very heavily traffic and the school and all the new cars from Stone Creek, was that in to the study? Jeff Perry: It is. The background traffic, what we call background traffic, not related to this particular project, is in the existing numbers as well as in our forecast. So when we analyze something five years out into the future, or 10 years out into the future, we have to grow the traffic or inflate the traffic numbers to represent traffic from developments that are outside the area that are traveling along the roadway. This traffic is going to grow 2% per year or 3% per year, whatever the number happens to be based on historical trends and modeling. Those numbers are all considered in the analysis. Speaker 10: So the school was in it? Jeff Perry: Yes. Speaker 10: The new school? Jeff Perry: Also, keep in mind, this is an important thing that people sometimes don't think about in terms of shopping centers, hours. So school has a peak time at around, I'm going to say, just to be conservative, 6:30 to 8:30, okay? This is a peak time for a school. Well most of the tenants in a shopping center are not open yet. If you have a coffee shop, they will be open, grocery probably is open, they probably open at 7:00 or 8:00 in the morning, but all your local retail, unless you're restaurants, they generally don't open that early in the morning. So it's a little bit off an off peak to peak review that you need to be thinking about. Then 170306_0020 Page 21 of 33 in the afternoon, the peak time of a school is a little earlier in the afternoon than the peak time the county uses in terms of the PM peak hour which is generally 4:00 to 6:00, that time frame, most schools are out and have completely dissipated by then. Again, just something to think about. We did take it into account there is a little bit of different in peak hour traffic, but we were ... [inaudible 01:02:12] that school site was part of our [inaudible 01:02:16] approval to dedicate that school site to Collier, I'm not aware that that school's been funded yet, but Collier County, to my knowledge, has not been funded, so they would have to put that in their five year capital plan, they would have to do the construction drawings, they would have to do all that. It's years off in terms of the planning provided for that, but even if it were there, it's going to be a little bit different peak hours in terms of the peak hour of the shopping center compared to the peak hour of the elementary school. Yes, sir? Speaker 11: There's a school being built by Stone Creek, north of us. Jeff Perry: There is a school site dedicated to the Collier County school district, it's secured. If you've been out to Stone Creek and you go into Stone Creek, you take a left off of Logan boulevard, the school site is directly north of that, a vacant piece of property that is part of Collier County's obligation in the project [inaudible 01:03:09] approval process which we've dedicated that school site potentially for a future school. Somebody's going to ask me about Logan boulevard? Speaker 11: Is it a high school, a middle school? Jeff Perry: It's an elementary school. Audience: Elementary school. Jeff Perry: Hold on one second, let me just address the Logan boulevard thing for a second. Somebody's going to ask me what's the timing of Logan boulevard? The answer is, we have to have that road [inaudible 01:03:30] when we reach 297 certificates of occupancy in Stone Creek and we have to build it within one year of starting construction. So it is not imminent, imminent, but it's on the horizon. That's something that over the next couple of years, that link between Bonita Beach and Immokalee is going to be built. Somebody is going to ask me, is it going to be a four lane section? That one I can definitely say no because when Old Cypress first dedicated the right of way they only dedicated 60 feet for the future roadway, so there's not enough right of way for a four lane section to be built. Now, the county could have the right to come in and condemn property and do all that, but the whole ... If you've been part of that public participation in the discussion on Logan boulevard, that [inaudible 01:04:20] had been planned to be a two lane road. Yes ma'am, over here? 170306_0020 Page 22 of 33 Speaker 12: I have a question, so what about Logan boulevard between Immokalee and Vanderbilt? Is there a plan or availability to widen that? Jeff Perry: There is right of way available, the road was designed ... Yep, I'm going to take the blame for it, you can blame me for a few things out here, but Logan boulevard was built by GL, we obtained the right of way for the construction of Logan, for that length of Logan, so [inaudible 01:04:46], there's right of way for a four lane section. It's actually design to accommodate a four lane section. It is not funded by Collier County, there's nobody on the book who has the obligation to four lane it, but it has the potential of being four laned. Speaker 12: In this development, you said this is [inaudible 01:05:07] owned by GL homes- Jeff Perry: Yes. Speaker 12: And operated by GL homes? Jeff Perry: Yeah, Immokalee Road Associates LLC is a affiliated entity of GL. Speaker 12: Do they have other commercial properties? Jeff Perry: Yes, we do. Yes, sir? Speaker 13: You mentioned high end a few times, so would it be like a smaller version of Mercado's? Jeff Perry: I'm going to let them speak to you about that. Kevin Ratterree: It won't be sort of Mercado, effectively it's a mix of these projects, residential and I think they have an office there, it's going to be a neighborhood shopping center, we're going to aim for the higher end restaurants, [inaudible 01:05:44] restaurants that you stop in front, but no, it won't be a full mixed use project. Speaker 13: Because I have a house in Old Cypress and for me to get out of my development, by the time you get to Mercado's [inaudible 01:05:53]. So obviously we know [inaudible 01:05:56], there is traffic, and because of that I think it's cool if there's that kind of, if we could have that smaller venue closer- Speaker 14: Yeah, if I could piggy back on his question, I live in Saturnia Lakes and this is going to put a lot of stuff within a walk from me. So it's going to get me out of my car a lot, do I really have to wait until 2019 to get it? [crosstalk 01:06:22] Speaker 13: [inaudible 01:06:27] I don't need to go there for lunch, but a cool place to go to have a nice dinner, without having to go to fifth avenue, which I could fly a plane down to, or or just, to me, is more convenient because of the traffic. When you say high end, I think that's a cool, it's like a fresh market, it tells us what it is. Whether a Whole Foods, [inaudible 01:06:49] a Publix, like a smaller [inaudible 170306_0020 Page 23 of 33 01:06:51], would be a hell of a lot more convenient than driving to the East Springs or down the 41. Kevin Ratterree: Right, and again, to reiterate again something I said earlier today to you that may have come in late. That was really the driving force behind us buying the property and assembling with Mr. Walker's acre, is to try to come in and do a very high end shopping center because we were hearing the same thing that you're saying, from the folks that were buying from us. Speaker 13: [crosstalk 01:07:17] Kevin Ratterree: That's great, but I have to drive 25 minutes to get to a reasonably good restaurant or whatever, I'd like to have something a little more convenient. So that was a driving force [crosstalk 01:07:31]. That is how long it takes us to get through a regulatory approval process. It is what it is, for those of you have been around a GL homes project, you know we build relatively fast. Speaker 13: Yeah, that's for sure. Kevin Ratterree: So when we get the ability to go, we're going to go. If we get the ability to go. Speaker 13: Super. Kevin Ratterree: Cool, yes ma'am. Speaker 15: In the list of [inaudible 01:07:50] uses, you keep driving around the term high end, high end, high end, and I understand that's what you want, but reality is something different as to who wants this shopping center and who wants to be there. The two restaurant pads that you had [inaudible 01:08:06], is there any way for you to guarantee us that that's not going to be a fast food, a drive through Starbucks, a Chipotle, a Taco Bell, something like that? I don't think we need any more of that. Speaker 13: We might need Starbucks. Speaker 15: I don't. Kevin Ratterree: [crosstalk 01:08:30] This is the part of the meeting where people start getting mad at each other. [crosstalk 01:08:34] Speaker 13: I do have a second question to follow. Kevin Ratterree: So everybody has their own opinions of what they like. Some people like Chipotle, some people like [inaudible 01:08:41], some people like Starbucks, some people like Dunkin Donuts. Our site plan is not set up to have fast food, drive through, on those front outposts. The goal is to have sit down restaurants. 170306_0020 Page 24 of 33 We haven't gotten into the leasing process with those restaurants yet because we have this approval process in front of us. Speaker 13: That's your goal, but I'm saying, you're trying to get the neighborhoods approval or support, and I'm saying you're saying high end, but you're not saying, but we won't take a McDonald's, we won't take a Burger King. Kevin Ratterree: There's a ton of leases out there and we don't know who they are yet- Speaker 13: But you decide who's going to be in the shopping center. Kevin Ratterree: Absolutely. Speaker 13: That's my point. So in the [inaudible 01:09:23] uses, and you say it's going to be high end, maybe it should say, we won't. Tim Hancock: I'm sorry, if I may, I think this is where I come in. This is a zoning process and zoning has certain criteria that it can and cannot apply. In the zoning document, to say that we will not have this brand name is not something that is either typical and may not even be [crosstalk 01:09:49]. So, [inaudible 01:09:51]. [crosstalk 01:09:56] We get into another problem when you say, we don't want a drive through. [inaudible 01:10:00] dry cleaners has a drive through. Panera Bread, do you like Panera bread? Speaker 13: They're like a Target. Tim Hancock: That isn't the question, my question is, do you like Panera Bread? Speaker 13: Yes. Tim Hancock: If they have a drive through, do you like them less? Speaker 13: Yes. Tim Hancock: Because Panera now has drive throughs. So we get into this really strange conversation, so I just want to ... We're dealing with land use right now- Speaker 13: [crosstalk 01:10:21] community and the community know honestly what's going to be there. Tim Hancock: Right, understood, so what I'll tell you is, the way in which we're going to ensure quality is through high end site design at this stage. I have done hundreds, I have not had developers, at this stage, showing the degree of architecture that you see here. Usually it's very speculative at this stage, they don't even know what the buildings are going to look like. I think what you're seeing is the commitment. They even asked to put the elevations in the zoning document and we were told that you can't, but you can make it an exhibit at the hearing, so they're willing to 170306_0020 Page 25 of 33 commit to what you see here, which is high end. I just wanted to kind of give you a framework, there are things we can commit to, and the things in the zoning document are difficult to [inaudible 01:11:13] commit to, so I just don't want it to appear that they're being difficult, we do have [inaudible 01:11:17]. Speaker 13: So what you're saying is, it could end up being a fast food restaurant, right? Kevin Ratterree: The site design of the two pads is not fast food, the site design doesn't show a fast food lane, it shows a sit down restaurant- Speaker 13: [crosstalk 01:11:32] [inaudible 01:11:34]. Kevin Ratterree: Okay. If the center was 100% leased before we started, we already be out of business. That's not how centers operate. The goal, number one, is to get the grocery anchor locked in, and Michael, as I said earlier, before we go through the final approval process, that grocery anchor will be ink. Whether or not they will allow us to say who it is, that's up to them, but one of those four will be ink signed, sealed, and delivered before. Rule number one is getting the high end grocery anchor. Then we start dealing with, now we know who that is, all the other retail guys start to fall in place, all the other restaurant guys start to fall into place. We're not going to lease a center that's going to be crappy little uses because it's just going to be a detraction from what we're trying to accomplish, which is to have a high end center. I understand your concern, but we wouldn't be doing the detail, and the commitment, and the things that we're doing if we weren't convinced and we know that we're going to get those type of tenants here because we've been getting the calls from the tenants that are interested in coming to the center, already, and we have to tell them, we're not ready and we're not to that stage yet. We have to get to a point where we're farther along in the approval process. Yes, sir? Speaker 16: Yes, when you looked at the traffic pattern, [inaudible 01:12:59]? Kevin Ratterree: I'm sorry. Speaker 16: [crosstalk 01:13:02] Kevin Ratterree: The answer is yes. If you're showing a drive through, you would have to [crosstalk 01:13:08]- Speaker 16: So if you did [crosstalk 01:13:10] drive through, [inaudible 01:13:12]- Kevin Ratterree: Revised traffic. Speaker 16: [crosstalk 01:13:15] 170306_0020 Page 26 of 33 Kevin Ratterree: What was the question? Speaker 16: If the study is based on not a drive through restaurant, then if they did lease to a fast food restaurant, I assume the traffic patterns would increase. Kevin Ratterree: It's use is going to be determined at the [S and P 01:13:38] for transportation, so I wouldn't be able to answer that question until ... That would be something you would be welcome to give me a call, my card is out there, and I can put you in with our transportation [inaudible 01:13:53]. Speaker 16: Okay. Yeah. Kevin Ratterree: [inaudible 01:13:58] showing it on the [SDP 01:14:00], your traffic has to account for it. Jeff Perry: That's that third analysis I was talking about. Kevin Ratterree: Right. Speaker 16: [inaudible 01:14:06] Speaker 17: As far as Saturnia Lakes, on the south and the southeastern [inaudible 01:14:14], it is a [inaudible 01:14:22] space. What is the size of the trees you're putting in there so we can ... That is still fairly close to the homes on those two streets, what is the level of foliage that's going to be there to have kind of a [crosstalk 01:14:38]. Kevin Ratterree: That whole green area right there is set up to be a preserve, so the existing vegetation that's there remains, we just pull out the exotic vegetation, the material that we have to take out, so the existing native vegetation that's there will remain. Speaker 17: Okay. Preserves don't last forever, is there something [inaudible 01:14:57] with the regular PUD, you can't plant in there unless you get special permission and everything. If that dissipates or goes away, [crosstalk 01:15:07] Kevin Ratterree: We can certainly- Tim Hancock: Yeah. Once something is designed a native preserve, fire county standards require that all three strata be present, ground cover, mid story, and canopy. If over the course of time one of those strata were to be adversely impacted, for whatever reason, you have to replant. So yes, ma'am, the [crosstalk 01:15:31]. Speaker 17: So now we can set our camp is 60 feet, is that what those trees are out there now or what? [crosstalk 01:15:38] 170306_0020 Page 27 of 33 Tim Hancock: Most of what you see there that are on canopy are pines and their canopy can start as low as 15 or 20 feet and go up to 60 or more. So yes, that's what I would call canopy in that area. The mid story in there is also a place that is very thick as well. Then the one thing you don't see in that is, on the back side of that, across the lake, we also will have some buffering there as well. So we'll be doing even more than what would be ... This one doesn't quite show it, that southeast corner, actually the lake shape is a little bit different, we have it cut at an angle to allow for more native vegetation there closer to the residences. Speaker 17: And there'll be additional plantings that you put in there? Tim Hancock: [crosstalk 01:16:21] What's there has done a great job over the last century. Speaker 17: Yeah. Tim Hancock: So we want to leave as much of that as we can. Speaker 17: That's what I was concerned about. The other thing that I do want to say to people in here, I've known Kevin and dealt with Kevin and GL Homes for the last six years, and they are [inaudible 01:16:39] Saturnia and they are people with integrity and they stand behind their word. They're not going to sell [inaudible 01:16:46] because they still want to build in Naples and I know they've got other property down on Immokalee, they're not going to shaft people in the neighborhood. They're here to be a partner and I applaud them for it. They stand behind their word and [inaudible 01:17:03]. Kevin Ratterree: I think that's the first time I've heard that kind of testimonial in 27 years. Thank you. Speaker 17: Thank you. Kevin Ratterree: I take back all the other [inaudible 01:17:14]. Yes, ma'am? Speaker 18: We've all seen developments and construction projects that have failed in these last few years, I'm thinking Vanderbilt Galleria, but what you can tell us about this one that we can have confidence? Building on your point here that that's not going to be happening here. Kevin Ratterree: So the primary driver of the shopping center being the grocery, they typically like to locate with about 10,000 residents at a minimum. So if you take this broad area, east of 75, up to [Veneta 01:17:50] Beach, south of Vanderbilt, eat to wherever you want to go, you have on Publix [inaudible 01:17:58] area. So, most people [crosstalk 01:18:02]. West of 75. Most people don't like to deal with the interchange, most people feel that's a natural buffer, but if you add up the amount of residential units now and in the future, there's a significant need for more grocers. Obviously that debatable, how far you want to drive, where you want to drive, and what store you want to go to, but in that general vicinity 170306_0020 Page 28 of 33 there's one primary grocery story in Collier county. So we've had a significant amount of interest from multiple grocers, as I said, one of those four, we could probably swap out most of them for interest level. So we think that that would be the driving force of the shopping center. Most shopping centers feed off of the grocery store. If you look at this overall market as a whole, it's probably 98% leased, it's very, very vacancy. Anywhere you go on Immokalee, especially the Publix, both public centers, [inaudible 01:19:04], so we feel good about the market from the demand side. Tim Hancock: The other thing you mentioned is you mentioned Galleria shops. I want to point something out to you. After Gallerias shops at the ... Are familiar with the intersection at [inaudible 01:19:18] and [inaudible 01:19:19] road? Speaker 18: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Tim Hancock: On that southeast corner, that center struggled. The reason it struggled was, when I originally designed it, it looked like this. Somebody took it, and what they did was, to maximize the square footage they started putting buildings in front of buildings, in front of buildings. If you've ever been in there, you notice you can stand in front of retail shopping, you can't see anything but the building? Speaker 18: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Tim Hancock: So because of the high intensity of square footage per acre, and poor visibility, who wants to put their business money in there when they can go somewhere that has got great visibility? When GL first brought this project to me, I looked at 18 acres and thought, "Oh, they're going to be building about 150,000 square feet." It's 100,000 square feet. What you get with this lesser square footage is, you get view windows, openings, a sense of air and light, these are the things that help centers sustain and maintain a high rent such as what [inaudible 01:20:15] are looking for. I don't want to Kevin's economics, but I can tell you, the lower intensity of this, the less square footage, is a premium development. So the one you sited specifically suffered from just the opposite. So from a planning standpoint, that's something I see as being significantly different about this project. Kevin Ratterree: Yes, ma'am. Speaker 19: Yeah, I might have missed this at the beginning. On the traffic flow questions, first question is, at what time was that traffic flow, what month of the year was that done? Number one. Number two, I know you sort of compartmentalized the area of your traffic flow, however, our [inaudible 01:20:59] between Collier and [inaudible 01:21:02] going in where the Oaks Farms and that sort of tricky traffic signal and what's going to be happening there, we're already jammed up and can't even turn out of Logan sometimes through a whole light because they're in the middle of the road, and you say, "Well that's people, they're not driving right," but this is a very significant thing already. We're adding another one, and 170306_0020 Page 29 of 33 for a two lane road that can never be anything but a two lane road, for all the community, [inaudible 01:21:31] Riverstone, that poses a potential jam up on what we already have. Jeff Perry: Well to answer you first question, the traffic numbers that I displayed there were peak seasonal, daily volumes ... I'm sorry, peak season, peak hour volumes in each direction. So those are, for lack of a better term, the worst traffic of the year, basically, going in the morning peak hours and in the afternoon peak hours. Some roads have midday peaks, typically there's a high peak in the morning and a high peak ... Especially on a commuter route like Immokalee road, serves a tremendous amount of development, residents, east of Collier, east of here certainly, and east of Collier, that are traveling inbound to get to I-75 or to get into Naples or to take other routes. There will be some improvement as the network expands, as construction on 951 south of [inaudible 01:22:36] road, all the way down to Green Boulevard, once that's completed, a lot of people are diverting, so there's ... Traffic sort of seeks its own level. In this particular instance, keep in mind that we're not adding a significant amount of new traffic during these worst hours of the day. That we're talking about if the number was 126 or 130, it's about two vehicles per minute, one every 30 seconds, leaving the driveway. You could sit here for a minute, or 30 seconds and say, "Oh, there goes another car," and 30 seconds from now we could say, "There goes another car." We're not talking about a significant amount of traffic here. We're talking about a lot less traffic than had previously been proposed for this particular site. The type of use we have here is the perfect type of use for this particular location. This is use is absent anywhere between I-75 and 951. Kevin Ratterree: Jeff, to add on to something you said earlier, regardless of whether this project moves forward or not, isn't the county doing a study on Immokalee at those points right now? Jeff Perry: Right. Kevin Ratterree: To look at improvements and modifications, and this project will be, if it goes forward, will be a part of some of those improvements [crosstalk 01:23:55] - Jeff Perry: Right. The county understand that there's problems on this particular roadway, starting at I-75, even west of I-75, and they will look at these individual intersections, try to figure out what needs to be done, we've given them some hints in our analysis as to what we think needs to be done to solve their problem, the existing problem that needs to be corrected. If there is contribution that has to be made by this developer, or another developer, impact fees are paid by developers, whether they're commercial or residential, to add capacity to the roadway system. So all of these kind of things are in play. Doesn't help you tonight or tomorrow morning when you try to get out of your driveway, to get 170306_0020 Page 30 of 33 out onto the roadway, you're still dealing with all of that background traffic that is not associated with this particular project. Fortunately, we're not adding a significant amount of traffic to the travel street, and part of the traffic that we are capturing here is already on the roadway. It's you driving past this intersection, on your way home you stop to go to the grocery store or stop for happy hour, or whatever you want to do, this is the place where you would be able to do that without having to go all the way to 951 and turn around, and go all the way back down Saturnia Lakes to go into your development. Speaker 19: So for the [inaudible 01:25:17] this is not part of the traffic statement [crosstalk 01:25:20]- Jeff Perry: We did not have to- Speaker 19: [crosstalk 01:25:20] Jeff Perry: No, we did not have to go beyond I-75 to look at the traffic impacts. Speaker 19: And that's [inaudible 01:25:28]. But you're not hitting the traffic that you got [inaudible 01:25:31] for dinner. You got that with your dinner, you go [inaudible 01:25:35]. [inaudible 01:25:37] that traffic that's on the other side of I-75? To me, [inaudible 01:25:40] go to dinner here than the traffic going out that way. [crosstalk 01:25:45] Jeff Perry: Yes, sir? Speaker 20: Yeah, I wondering if you had considered a site design that included a parking garage? The reason I ask is that with a parking garage, you wouldn't need so much of the site dedicated to parking and impermeable asphalt and paved over surfaces that require large water retention areas, a lot of run off, and parking lots are not exactly pedestrian friendly either. I mean, two of the six buildings in the site design are adjacent to each other, they do not require crossing a parking lot, but the other four buildings are surrounded by parking lots and require walking across a parking lot to get to them. Jeff Perry: It's not economically viable typically for a shopping center to put a parking garage in a situation like this. We're already pretty under density as these guys alluded to with our square footage. We're trying to make parking be convenient for all the uses. So we do have those uses and we do have parking accessible to all those buildings, and to not be a parking disaster as I think the Galleria may have been. Speaker 20: Yeah. 170306_0020 Page 31 of 33 Jeff Perry: We're balancing the economics of the project along with convenient parking in close proximity- Speaker 20: Yeah. I just like to add quickly that one of the things that people like about a place like Mercado's, as someone else was saying earlier, is that it's walkable, it's not a strip mall with giant parking lots, that's why people like going there, walking around, saying things that [inaudible 01:27:33]. Makes it more of a destination rather than just a shopping center where you drive to and [crosstalk 01:27:40]. Jeff Perry: Mercado's a great project, no doubt about it, but it's a totally different animal than this from the density, and the masses that they have. This is a suburban shopping center with surface parking. We are taking that and trying to take it to the other level where it is a destination with higher end restaurants, with an upper end grocer, but it is still a suburban shopping center that is balancing parking needs. Kevin Ratterree: I kind of joke, this is kind of like Mercado and a public shopping center having a baby. You've got a little bit of both in there. Speaker 20: Yeah, exactly. [crosstalk 01:28:20] Kevin Ratterree: Doesn't it? Speaker 20: [crosstalk 01:28:21] a strip mall. Kevin Ratterree: Yeah, it doesn't, it's a different design. The truth is, Mercado's require a huge number of rooftops within their proximity plus a resort [inaudible 01:28:32]. You can't drop a Mercado in the middle of suburbia and be successful. I've watched it happen and fail in a lot of [inaudible 01:28:42]. So you have to be ... The demographics have to match a project and I think that's [crosstalk 01:28:45]. Speaker 21: A couple questions for the folks, particular in Oaks. We've worked really hard in the last 15, 18 years to make sure none of our streets got connected to Logan boulevard. So first question is, no connectivity to Logan for those streets, particular Autumn Oaks, Hidden Oaks, Golden Oaks, and- Kevin Ratterree: We're not proposing any changes to access on our western [crosstalk 01:29:09]- Speaker 21: Second part, the Logan interchange there, you're not proposing a light at this time, at all, at that in/out on Logan? Kevin Ratterree: No, we don't think we're going to meet the spatial separation to even have a light, it's going to be too close. Speaker 21: Okay, and last question on that, again, for that last stretch there, once it gets the site plan approval and everything, we would be particularly concerned about 170306_0020 Page 32 of 33 some screening and other buffers as much as possible because Autumn, Hidden, and Golden are ones that are exposed most to Logan and uses along here. Kevin Ratterree: I'm happy to have a conversation with you about that. There's two ways you can skin a cat, sorry for that analogy, I don't have a cat. Speaker 21: Or you wouldn't have said that. Kevin Ratterree: Obviously, visibility is important for a shopping center, you want people to kind of be able to see it. It may be something we can do, some landscaping on your side- Speaker 21: Okay. Kevin Ratterree: Of the lines, so to speak, but that would be the other way to skin the cat. Speaker 21: Gotcha. Kevin Ratterree: Yes, ma'am? Speaker 22: Nobody has mentioned this, but I've refrained from [inaudible 01:30:18] Old Cypress, and she is just delighted with the fact that she could probably be able to walk. Kevin Ratterree: Or ride a bike. Speaker 22: Or ride a bike. [crosstalk 01:30:30] Kevin Ratterree: Ma'am. Speaker 23: Nobody thinks ever thinks about the pedestrian that's walking in those parking lots. I saw one of your photographs where you had a wide walkway with [inaudible 01:30:48] either side, that would be great. You could walk on the walkways instead of dodging cars that are backing up. Kevin Ratterree: Right. [crosstalk 01:30:59] Speaker 23: Yeah. Kevin Ratterree: That's designed to be a walkway that connects here, all the way to here- Speaker 23: Yeah. Kevin Ratterree: And the only place that you have breaks in that walkway is that connection right there, that's that [inaudible 01:31:10] there, and then obviously the drive over here. The whole purpose of that is to give you a safe place to be able to walk from one side to the other only crossing the street twice. Yes, ma'am? 170306_0020 Page 33 of 33 Speaker 24: When I bought my home in Riverstone, I was very happy that there is a large preserve. I was told that that is because of the migration of the birds, that it's very important environmentally. I was just wondering if you had enough of a preserve area. You have all this asphalt that [inaudible 01:31:43] water, the groundwater supply, and I just think that Collier County needs to be more understanding of these preserve for the future generations more of land for the animals and for the water supply. Kevin Ratterree: What I would say to you, I am the last person you should direct that question to because if you look at the design of Riverstone and you look at the design of Stone Creek, about a third of each of those properties was set aside for low light and for preservation. So we have spent a considerable amount of our development area, in Collier county, setting up additional preserve area. What you see here complies with the Collier County code, it complies with all the standards that we're required to do, but as a developer, I think those two projects alone give you the idea of the commitment that we made to participate in those low [inaudible 01:32:51] concepts and preservation of that area. That's a lot of property that we gave up, developable property, for those preservation areas. So realize that I'm the last person because I get a lot of heat from my corporate office about the amount of land we had to set aside for environmental purpose and we did exactly that. Speaker 24: Is that what's required? Are you just doing what's required? Are you doing any more than what's required? Kevin Ratterree: On this site, we're doing what's required in terms of preservation, correct. Off site purchase, [inaudible 01:33:20]. Tim Hancock: We've been at this for 90 minutes, I promised when we started that I would try my best to get you back where you want to be, home. There are my business cards and [inaudible 01:33:35] business cards out on the table. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact any of us. We want to be conduits of information for you. On behalf of GL and everyone present, we want to thank you very much for your time tonight. [crosstalk 01:33:50] How did we do? If you rate this transcript 3 or below, this agent will not work on your future orders RESOLUTION NO. 17- 8 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY FROM URBAN, MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, TO URBAN, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, LOGAN BOULEVARD/IMMOKALEE ROAD COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM OF 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA FOR USES ALLOWED BY RIGHT AND BY CONDITIONAL USE IN THE C-4, GENERAL COMMERCIAL, ZONING DISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORDIA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF IMMOKALEE ROAD AND LOGAN BOULEVARD IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 18.6± ACRES. PL20160001100] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Immokalee Road Associates, LLC, requested an amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series to redesignate lands to the Urban, Commercial District, Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict; and WHEREAS, on April 6, 2017, 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 a q` , 2017 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 16-CMP-00971/1332622/1]129 4/12/17 Page 1 of 2 Words underlined are added,words struckgh have been deleted. 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 this day of f`f____ 2017. ATTE . ,R ; ., BOA' D • ,OUNTY COMMISSIONERS DW i T E 'BROCK, CLERK COLL,- ' . TY, FLORI ofrlioart_ BY: t.,&(',11 ._ i p y Clerk Penny Tr, ChaigestastoChattrnarrs signature only.-,-, , Appved as to form and legality: A7---u ..,,,,...,(7 Scott A. Stone, Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A—Proposed Text Amendment& Map Amendment 16-CMP-00971] 129 4/12/17 Page 2 of 2 Words underlined are added,words struckough have been deleted. 0 P L20160001100/C P-2016-2 EXHIBIT "A" FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: text break *** ** *** *** ** C. URBAN - COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Page 11] text break *** ** *** *** ** 9. Livingston RoadNeterans Memorial Boulevard Commercial Infill Subdistrict 10. Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict 11. Orange Blossom/Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict 12. Logan Boulevard/Immokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict text break * * ** *** *** ** I. URBAN DESIGNATION text break *** *** *** *** ** C. Urban — Commercial District text break *** *** *** *** *** Logan Boulevard/lmmokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Page 67] This Subdistrict consists of±18.6 acres and is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard. A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area for commercial uses may be allowed, with a maximum of 45,000 square feet of building area for each use. The Subdistrict allows only those uses limited to the following: Accounting, Auditing, and Bookkeeping services (SIC 8721), Apparel & accessory stores (SIC 5611 — 5699), Auto and home supply stores (SIC 5531, except tire dealers, and tire, battery, and accessory dealers — retail), Banks, credit unions and trusts (SIC 6021 — 6062), Barber shops (SIC 7241, except for barber schools), Beauty shops (SIC 7231, except for beauty schools), Computer and computer software stores (SIC 5734), Dance studios, schools, and halls (SIC 7911 except dance halls and discotheques), Drug stores (SIC 5912), Drycleaning plants (SIC 7216 non-industrial drycleaning only), 1 Words underlined are added; words struck-through are deleted. P L20160001100/C P-2016-2 Eating places (SIC 5812, except dinner theaters, drive-in restaurants, industrial feeding, and theaters, dinner), Food stores (SIC 5411 - 5499, except Convenience food stores), Hardware stores (SIC 5251), Health services, offices and clinics (SIC 8011 - 8049), and home health care services SIC 8082), Home furniture and furnishings stores (SIC 5712 - 5719), Household appliance stores (SIC 5722), Insurance carriers, agents and brokers (SIC 6311-6399, 6411), Medical equipment rental and leasing (SIC 7352), Musical instrument stores (SIC 5736), Paint stores (SIC 5231), Personal services, miscellaneous (SIC 7299), Photographic studios, portrait (SIC 7221), Physical fitness facilities (SIC 7991), Radio, television and consumer electronics stores (SIC 5731), Real Estate agents and managers (SIC 6531), Record and prerecorded tape stores (SIC 5735), Retail nurseries, lawn and garden supply stores (SIC 5261), Retail services - miscellaneous (SIC 5921, 5941 - 5949, 5992, 5994 - 5999, except auction rooms, awning shops, building materials, gravestones, hot tubs, monuments, pawn shops, swimming pools, tombstones and whirlpool baths), Security and commodity brokers, dealers, exchanges and services (SIC 6211, 6282), Schools and Educational services (SIC 8299 only), and Wallpaper stores (SIC 5231). The following uses shall not be allowed: Amusements and recreation services (SIC 7999), Automotive vehicle and equipment dealers (SIC 5511), Bowling centers (SIC 7933), Coin operated amusement devices (SIC 7993), Drinking places (SIC 5813), Educational services (SIC 8221 and 8222), Food stores (SIC 5411, Convenience food stores only), Gasoline service stations, and other Facilities with fuel pumps (SIC 5541), General merchandise stores (SIC 5331 - 5399, including warehouse clubs), Homeless shelters, Hospitals (SIC groups 8062 - 8069), 2 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. P L20160001100/C P-2016-2 Medical laboratories (SIC 8071), Membership sports and recreation clubs (SIC 7997), Motion picture theaters (SIC 7832), Social Services (SIC 8322 — 8399), Theatrical producers and miscellaneous theatrical services (SIC 7922), Used merchandise stores (SIC 5932), and Vocational schools (SIC 8243 — 8249). text break *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE MAP SERIES Page 144] text break ** * * * *** Hibiscus Residential Infill Subdistrict Map Vincentian Mixed Use Subdistrict Map Davis — Radio Commercial Subdistrict Map Logan Boulevard/lmmokalee Road Commercial Infill Subdistrict Map 3 Words underlined are added; words struck through are deleted. I EXHIBIT A PETITION PL20160001100/ CP-2016-2 LOGAN BLVD./IMMOKALEE RD. COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT 0, i1 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA i # e 111P 1..1iii001,, A 2 kw Sitik il IF fr iit ii% 1,0•0**44, ii t4 1„, omm t 1'11 0 0.. 0//1 11111111111It, j ti011w.* NSA I -Il, I1111111, s. j11I1111111l al x111111111 a Immokalee RD SUBJSITEECT - 1 1 41/*PL2016-1100 / CP-2016-2 A 1 AIA V:21 4I% 4R H 4 441 '. 01 el iity illpor V> III 1_ mr I 1 4 vOlial ISrvie 04 AN 46 4111P AIM aw 411110- 1 111,,,„ l II III 1C LEGEND PREPARED BY:GIS/CAD MAPPING SECTION 0 360 720 1,440 Feet rA SUBDISTRICTGROWTHMANAGEMENTDEPARTMENT DATE:3/2017 IIIIIIIII S still Sb51 SISI SIVS1ISti91ISu91ISL91sy9ttitJofin0,ii :,_.;_jr,,,,,,,,:—€ 7 '—'---.1 —0 TIP,a$9 W suPlle. r T mT.O6 51 C 21o9rNrl si /OHip Z N144l • j o cn=cDim> ° C N myNrip1iSIIAcmmIllPiiiir11sIII1 {cat g423Itw 73 I71N mR. s • m I! r j> $C o.. Ir 71l'11 A 11111111111mII11 Im e711-- g IIIII 11111111111 1 Oma• 3 wn. A i m '" F f T o i / mai w ms8.pmsm II II i1i111 IMJ. g m n " d i. qjAiii3i slow J Hflt cF % ryil a $ % g w iz -m^ F O M = g g p 0,34 o s i i sus mriEliiF,1 IF P ;E_< 1' 1a 110voli11 ® 11 _11=1'111 m ag g wA 3 i w i i o 1 €l° a s i c i v ii a§I i ci 111 4s r is $ wI' oRa' g ii Hr 5' e qi = w il ' " o s @;:,!::•-•!!1 m g F,i3i_N 1 . m Y 11- 'F I, w i I Iasi iir i I a g r =c i a a $g a — a R A OM- 1]-0 1 ;11 —III m P s5 0 1I< BROWNRD COUNTY 3 z LH 3 $ D D a DnDE COUNTY 9 €-; i F. s L i 8 m0 m p o 1 y> p g g 8 w w E3 y 3 " '-" i 'L S i 3 i C 3 3 3 S 3 i 3 3 $ i , $ g 3 m0 = g m 0 " '—" 2 ' ri v 0 ri-IPI 55 w e § ni oiai o.ao Qo iii'oQ ooao.2E o°oho 0040 ac oo'o l0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2ANoRvo =o tiNi p a 1 .1 3 PUAm a N u o $ A a ro LH m m u u s w w _ p1_4 V vi ii w w u N o i SCSI I SZS1 I S'S1 I SOS1 I S641 S841 SL41 I S941 I WY NAPLESNEWS.COM 1 MONDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2017 1 17A� NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE(S) Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a Public Hearing on December 12, 2017 commencing at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL The purpose of the hearing is to consider: AN ORDINANCE OFTHE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAAMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES BY CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY FROM URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT, TO URBAN COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, LOGAN BOULEVARDMVIMOKALEE ROAD COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW A MAXII UM OF 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS LEASABLE FLOOR AREA FOR SPECIFIC COMMERCIAL USES; AND FURTHERMORE, RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF IlVIMOKALEE ROAD AND LOGAN BOULEVARD IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 18.6± ACRES. [PL201600011001 AN ORDINANCE OFTHE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDAAMENDI NG ORDINANCE NUMBER 200441, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPDD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE LOGAN/ IMMOKALEE CPDD, TO ALLOW A MAKOMUM OF 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS LEASABLE FLOOR AREA FOR SPECIFIC COMMERCIAL USES, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF IMMOKALEE ROAD AND LOGAN BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 18.6± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PROJECT LOCATION 1-75 lmmokalee RD r < o � o U cc o m � r w � p v Z v N w�E S All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed ORDINANCE(S) will be made available for inspection at the GMD Department, Zoning Division, 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 Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, 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 GMD Department, Zoning Division. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to December 12, 2017 will be read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners 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 proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PENNY. TAYLOR, CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: Martha Vergara, Deputy Clerk November 27, 2017 ND -1835301