GG MSTU Agenda 02/20/2018
Page 1 of 1
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION M.S.T.U.
3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 103
Naples, FL 34112
AGENDA
FEBRUARY 20, 2018
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ATTENDANCE
Advisory Committee Patricia Spencer – Chair (10/06/2021)
Herman “Skip” Haeger – Vice Chair (10/06/2018)
Ron Jefferson (10/06/2018)
Paula Rogan (10/06/2019)
Florence “Dusty” Holmes (10/06/2021)
Staff Dan Schumacher, Harry Sells - Project Managers
Landscape Mike McGee – Landscape Architect
Pending – Landscape Maintenance
Pending – Irrigation Maintenance
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JANUARY 16, 2018
VI. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE REPORT –
Ground Zero Landscaping, LLC is awarded the Landscape bid, PO requested.
Irrigation bids are being evaluated
VII. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT’S REPORTS – MCGEE & ASSOCIATES –
Tropicana Boulevard (Summary, Detail), Sunshine Boulevard (S, D)
Coronado Parkway & Hunter Boulevard (S, D)
Collier Boulevard (S, D), Golden Gate Parkway (S, D)
VIII. PROJECT MANAGER’S REPORT –
A. Budget Report
B. Irrigation – Coronado & Hunter Conduits –
Installation awarded to Stahlman-England Irrigation, contract in Procurement Div.
C. Stormwater Refurbishment – Status update
D. Quotes
IX. OLD BUSINESS
A. Golden Gate City: Walking Assessment & Workshop, Jan 11th or 12th
B. Canal Bridge Fencing (Golden Gate Pkwy)
X. NEW BUSINESS
A. Stormwater Utility
B. White Paper – Golden Gate Master Plan Re-study; Dec 19, 2017
XI. PUBLIC COMMENTS
XII. ADJOURNMENT
NEXT MEETING:
MARCH 20, 2018 AT 4:30PM
GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER
1
GOLDEN GATE M.S.T.U. ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
3299 East Tamiami Trail, Suite 103
Naples, FL 34112
January 16, 2018
MINUTES
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 4:30 P.M. by Ms. Spencer. Attendance was called and a quorum was
established.
II. Attendance: Patricia Spencer, Chairman; Herman Haeger, Vice Chairman (Excused); Ron Jefferson;
Paula Rogan (Excused); Dusty Holmes
County: Dan Schumacher, Project Manager
Others: Michael McGee, McGee & Associates; Wendy Warren, Jurisolutions
III. Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
IV. Approval of Agenda
Ms. Spencer moved to approve the Agenda of the Golden Gate Advisory Committee as submitted.
Second by Ms. Holmes. Carried unanimously 3 - 0.
V. Approval of Minutes: November 21, 2017
Ms. Spencer moved to approve the minutes of the November 21, 2017 meeting as presented.
Second by Mr. Jefferson. Carried unanimously 3 - 0.
VI. Landscape Maintenance Report – Hannula Landscaping & Irrigation
Status Update
Mr. Schumacher reported:
Hannula Landscaping & Irrigation’s contract expired January 14, 2018. Mr. Hannula has
notified the County he is terminating all roadway contracts the end of January.
Requests for Quotes (RFQ’s) for Landscape Maintenance services were submitted on January
12, 2018 to five vendors on County contract.
The lowest qualified bidder will be awarded the contract with the bids due on January 23, 2018.
2
VII. Landscape Architect’s Report – McGee & Associates
Mr. McGee submitted the “Landscape Observation Report: - FY 17-18, January 2018” for
information purposes noting the monthly detailed report should be referenced for hurricane Irma tree
and shrub damage and corresponding recommendations.
Tropicana Boulevard
Turf contains large amount of broadleaf sedge type weeds and is showing stress from
insufficient irrigation.
The HydroPoint WeatherTrak data was 86,035 gallons for December 2017.
Mr. Schumacher will investigate the system to ensure the recommended ¾” coverage, or
approximately 140,000 gallons, is in effect.
Coronado Parkway and Hunter Boulevard
Hunter Boulevard
Median #1: Proposal requested for Alexander Palm and Juniper plants damaged by an auto
accident.
Median #6: Recommend replacement of Oak Tree destroyed by auto accident. A new
frond has emerged on the fourth Alexander Palm Tree from the north end. Treat with
fungicide, fertilize and monitor health.
Median #10: Alexander Palm and fourteen Big Rose damaged by auto accident.
Median #11: Silk Floss Tree removed due to auto accident
December 2017 water usage registered 188,832 for both roadways.
Mr. McGee recommends a “median renovation proposal” be submitted by the landscaper awarded
the contract for the Golden Gate M.S.T.U.
Sunshine Boulevard
18th Place SW: An auto accident damaged 10 – 15 plants (photo depicted). Proposal
requested for removal of Bougainvillea and replanting of median with Perennial Peanut
“Eco Turf” variety in one-gallon size. Hand watering may be required.
Water usage was estimated at 123,630 gallons for December 2017, acceptable usage as
evidenced by the better condition of the turf.
Collier Boulevard Part A & B - (an arterial roadway maintained by Road Maintenance Division)
A major renovation is recommended resulting from Irma storm damage.
Water usage meter readings for Part B, assumed to be inaccurate, were reported to Liz
Soriano, Supervisor – Road Maintenance Landscape Operations.
Golden Gate Parkway - (an arterial roadway maintained by Road Maintenance Division)
Pump stations have been replaced in all three locations; meter readings should be more
accurate.
VIII. Project Manager’s Report
A. Budget Report
Mr. Schumacher summarized the Golden Gate MSTU Fund Budget 153 dated January 16, 2018
noting:
FY18 Ad Valorem property tax revenue budget is $376,900.00 of which $309,759,15 has
been collected.
Total revenue FY18 is $735,800.00 including investment interest, transfers and contributions
(minus a 5% reserve of $18,900).
3
For FY-18 the Millage rate is 0.5000., or $0.50 per $1,000 of property taxable value per
annum.
FY18 planned Operating Expense Budget is $340,800. Current commitments total $109,126;
expenditures $12,987.71.
Uncommitted Operating Expense funds available are $218,685.74.
Hannula Landscaping & Irrigation has invoiced $9,073.78 against Purchase Orders totaling
$40,000. The balance of funds remaining on settlement of all invoices will be consolidated
by the budget department with Mr. Schumacher’s input.
A Purchase Order will be written for light outage replacement on Sunshine Boulevard
pending receipt of requested Lumec LED part numbers and quotes from Graybar for the LED
lamp fixture and Hart’s Electrical for the installation.
Improvements General Fund of $345,200. (Line 31) is reserved to finance special projects
subject to review and approval of the County accounting office.
Total available balance less committed expenses totals $606,188.
B. Irrigation – Coronado & Hunter Design – Conduit
Mr. Schumacher noted:
The irrigation system is not functioning as intended and Staff recommends installation of
HydroPoint controllers.
An “Invitation to Bid” (ITB) was re-distributed by the procurement office to qualified
bidders for installation of the irrigation control system valve wiring and conduits on
Coronado Parkway and Hunter Boulevard.
One bid was received from Stahlman-England Irrigation, Inc. in the amount of $143,800.
During Committee discussion the following was addressed:
Purchase of a HydroPoint Controller at an estimated cost of $20,000.00 would establish a
uniform Irrigation system which will be easy to manage and monitor.
Mr. McGee recommended additional funds be approved by the committee in the event
re-boring is required (the existing two inch sleeves for wiring were installed in 2009).
“As built” plans will be reviewed to locate the bores.
Mr. Schumacher will apprise the Committee of any project developments outside the scope
discussed.
Mr. Jefferson motioned to approve the irrigation control system valve wiring, conduits and
controller project for Coronado Parkway and Hunter Boulevard be funded from Line 31,
Improvements General, of the Golden Gate M.S.T.U. budget for an amount Not To Exceed
$175,000.0. Second by Ms. Holmes. Carried unanimously 3 – 0.
C. MSTU Priorities (Commissioner Saunders)
Mr. Schumacher distributed a recap of the Golden Gate Beautification M.S.T.U. Advisory
Committee’s Priorities submitted to Commissioner Saunders assistant. A Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) meeting is scheduled for January 23, 2018 to review projects.
Mr. Jefferson received a copy of a letter expressing the desire for more open communication with
the Golden Gate Civic Association and the Golden Gate Beautification M.S.T.U. He will forward
the document to Mr. Schumacher who will then distribute it to the Beautification Committee
members.
4
D. Golden Gate Master Plan
Mr. Schumacher distributed maps of the “Golden Gate Area Master Plan Update: 3 Areas”
and “Golden Gate City Area Future Land Use Map and Zoning Overlay” referenced at the
December 2017 meeting where renovation and improvement plans for the Landscape Beautification
Master Plan were discussed.
E. Quotes
None
IX. Old Business
A. Golden Gate City: Walking Assessment & Workshop, Jan 11th or 12th
Mr. Schumacher distributed the Golden Gate City Transportation Map with red lines designating
existing sidewalks.
Mr. Jefferson reported on the workshop meeting he attended January 11, 2017 noting the three
projects undertaken for Golden Gate include Stormwater, Walkability and the Master Plan.
Residents’ concerns expressed during the Walkability Assessment Workshop identified vehicle sight
line visibility over medians and difficulty of navigation walking in the northwest section of the city
due to the presence of canals.
Mr. Jefferson noted projects undertaken by the M.S.T.U. beautification committee must be in
compliance with County safety standards including maintaining landscaping on medians at heights
specified by code.
B. Stormwater Refurbishment – Project Schedule
Mr. Schumacher distributed a time line for the Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project
Northwest Quadrant, Golden Gate City. The work is intended to improve stormwater flow, help to
alleviate flooding and to address safety issues. It is scheduled to start in the February/March 2018.
Project completion is targeted for August/September 2018.
C. Santa Barbara & Golden Gate Refurbishment – Dec 7th Public Information Mtg. (PIM)
Mr. Schumacher reported a public meeting was held December 7, 2017 to discuss Landscape
Beautification Master Plan projects for Santa Barbara and Golden Gate.
.
D. Canal Bridge Fencing (Golden Gate Pkwy)
Mr. Jefferson suggested planting Palmettos to camouflage the bridge fencing given the plant is
traditional in Golden Gate landscaping and drought tolerant.
X. New Business
A. Stormwater Utility
The Stormwater Utility project proposal will be presented to the Board of County Commissioners
in spring 2018.
XI. Public/Board Comments
Daytime Irrigation
Members reported the irrigation system on Coronado Parkway medians was operating in the afternoon
the day of the meeting.
Nomination of Officers
Mr. Schumacher will research the date as specified in the Bylaws for nomination and election of
officers to the Committee.
5
There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned
by the Chair at 5:30 P.M.
GOLDEN GATE MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE
________________________________
Patricia Spencer, Chairman
The Minutes were approved by the Committee on _________________________, 2018 as presented ____,
or as amended ____.
NEXT MEETING: FEBRUARY 20, 2018 – 4:30 PM
GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER
4701 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
NAPLES, FL 34116
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist Page 1 of 1
5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. O. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101
Phone (239) 417-0707 * Fax (239) 417-0708
LC 098 * FL 1023A
Project: GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Tropicana Blvd.
Project Manager: Collier County Public Services Division, Public Transportation & Neighborhood Enhancements Department
Consultant: McGee & Associates Consultant’s Representative: Michael A. McGee, rla, isa
Contractor: ______________________________ Contractor’s Representative: _____________________
Report Period: FY 17-18 February 2018 Report No.: Three
AC - Indicates major items recommended to be discussed by Advisory Committee, S - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by staff,
C - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by Contractor
MAINTENANCE ITEM
Observation date: 2/09-12/18
AC S C R SUMMARY OF MONTHLY
MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Refer to monthly report for detailed information
TREES
X X See monthly detailed report for post hurricane Irma damage and recommendations.
SHRUBS, ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
& GROUND COVERS
X X Dwarf Fakahatchee and some Bougainvillea beds need renovation. See monthly
detailed report for post hurricane Irma damage and recommendations.
TURF Turf areas are appearing dry, but it is only a result of the large number of weeds and
the wintering of the weeds and turf.
IRRIGATION X The water use total per WeatherTrak data was 91,484 gallons for January.
WEED CONTROL X No major issues observed in plant beds. Turf contains large amount of broadleaf and
sedge type weeds. Any control to remove these weeds will result in large bare turf
areas.
UNDERSTORY PRUNING X No major issues observed
DISEASE AND PEST CONTROL X No major issues observed
FERTILIZATION X No major issues observed
ACCENT/STREET LIGHTING X Light #2 median #6 south end destroyed due to auto accident
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist
5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. O. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101
Phone (239) 417-0707 * Fax (239) 417-0708
LC 098 * FL 1023A
Project: GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Tropicana Blvd.
Project Manager: Collier County Public Services Division, Public Transportation & Neighborhood Enhancements Department
Consultant: McGee & Associates Consultant’s Representative: Michael A. McGee, rla, isa
Contractor: _______________________________ Contractor’s Representative: _____________________
Report Period: FY 17-18 February 2018 Report No.: Three
AC - Indicates major items recommended to be discussed by Advisory Committee, S - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by staff, C - Indicates items recommended to be
addressed by Contractor
Contractor is requested to address items as soon as possible and indicate in RESPONSE/COMMENTS column when items are addressed. Please return electronic copy to our office
prior to next month’s MSTU site review and meeting. Note: Copy picture out of comment boxes and then paste to additional sheet if picture is desired in larger size.
LOCATION/WORK
AREA
AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Observation date: 2/09-12/18 MONTHLY ADDRESSED
All locations: X X 3 Recommended all Sabal palms be pruned at this time and have any lower and/or loose
frond boots removed from the trunks.
X X 3 All areas could use topdressing of a 2” layer of mulch.
X X 3 All paver areas need to be pressure washed.
Median #1 X X 3 First Oak tree needs structural and corrective pruning.
X 3 Remove Sabal palm volunteers in Bougainvillea shrubs.
Median #2 X X 3 (3) Oaks need minor dead branch pruning.
Pedestrian shelter at 31st Ave. SW X 2 Pedestrian Rest Shelter metal roof and facia has been damaged because of hurricane
Irma.
Median #3 Bridge X 2 The southbound inside bridge wall has painted graffiti on it.
X X 3 North end Oak needs minor dead branch pruning.
Median #4 X X 3 At address 3048: Juniper plants have been runover and damaged and brown foliage
needs to be removed. Provide count for replacements. 3 gal. size plants.
X X X 3 At address 3000: (1) crape myrtle has been removed and (1) is in decline. Recommended remove existing (1) crape myrtle and
replant with (2) new ‘Muskogee’ Crape myrtle
X X 3 At address 2930: Prune dwarf Fakahatchee plants and provide count for replacements.
3 gal. size.
X X X 3 At address 2930: (2) orchid trees lifted and leaning. Recommend removal and replacement with (2) new
‘Natchez’ crape Myrtle.
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Tropicana Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 2 of 3
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
X X 3 At address 2900: Oak needs minor dead branch pruning
X X 3 At address 2896: Prune dwarf Fakahatchee plants and provide count for replacements.
3 gal. size.
X X 3 At address 2896: Holly tree has been damaged. Remove and replace.
X X X 3 At address 2884: Orchid tree dead. Remove and replace with Jacaranda tree as per
previous reports.
X X 3 At address 2860: Provide count of missing dwarf Bougainvillea for replacements. 3 gal.
size.
X X 3 At address 2836: Prune dwarf Fakahatchee plants and provide count for replacements.
3 gal. size.
X X 3 At Pump station: (1) Tabebuia tree ‘Ipe’ has been damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 3 At Pump station: Prune dwarf Fakahatchee plants and provide count for replacements.
3 gal. size.
Pedestrian Shelter at 28th Ave. SW
Median #5 X X 3 At address 2690: (1) Sabal palm damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 3 At address 2672: Prune dwarf Fakahatchee plants and provide count for replacements.
3 gal. size.
X X 3 At address 2672: (1) Holly tree damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 3 At address 2654: East side of bed along back of curbing has been washed out due to
storm flooding. Re-mulch area along back of curbing. Prune dwarf Fakahatchee plants
and provide count for replacements. 3 gal. size.
X X 3 Turf are just north of 2654 has flood rutting damage. Backfill and re-sod.
X X 3 At address 2697: Sabal palm damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 3 At address 2600: Oak 18” caliper, 50% damaged in main trunk from broken off large
branch.
Recommend removal and replace.
X X X 3 At address 2600 & 2733: Bougainvillea bed on east side has washed out area due to
storm flooding. Backfill area along back of curbing. Recommend removing
Bougainvillea due to poor performance and replace with double centerline row of
variegated Schefflera Arboricola, 3 gal. size.
X X 3 At address 2582: Holly tree has upper trunk damaged. Needs structural and corrective
pruning to regrow new main leader.
X X 3 At address 2582: Prune dwarf Fakahatchee plants and provide count for replacements.
3 gal. size.
X X 3 At address 2560: (2) beds for dwarf Fakahatchee need to be pruned and count made
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Tropicana Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 3 of 3
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
foe replacements. 3 gal. size.
X X 3 At address 2530: Jacaranda tree needs structural and corrective pruning.
QUARTERLY ADDRESSED
Accent/Street Lighting X Light #2 in median #6 has been destroyed due auto accident.
X Light #12 in median #1 needs the fixture realigned.
Lighting Disconnect & Sensor
Locations
East R/W between 13th Ave. & PL. Lighting Disconnect & Sensor
West Alley off 28th Ave. SW Lighting Disconnect & Sensor
West R/W in Alley between G.G. Pkwy. & 26th PL. SW, Lighting Disconnect & Sensor
West R/W at corner of 30th PL. SW & Tropicana Lighting Disconnect & Sensor
Fertilizations: X X Refer to schedule.
Irrigation: X The water use total per WeatherTrak data was 91,484 gallons for January.
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist
5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. O. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101
Phone (239) 417-0707 * Fax (239) 417-0708
LC 098 * FL 1023A
Project: GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Sunshine Blvd.
Project Manager: Collier County Public Services Division, Public Transportation & Neighborhood Enhancements Department
Consultant: McGee & Associates Consultant’s Representative: Michael A. McGee, rla, isa
Contractor: __________________________ Contractor’s Representative: _____________________
Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
AC - Indicates major items recommended to be discussed by Advisory Committee, S - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by staff,
C - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by Contractor
MAINTENANCE ITEM
Observation date: 2/09-12/18
AC S C R SUMMARY OF MONTHLY
MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Refer to monthly report for detailed information.
TREES X X See monthly detailed report for post hurricane Irma damage and recommendations.
SHRUBS, ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
GROUND COVERS
X X X 14 18th Pl SW. - Auto accident damaged 10-15 plants (photo) Recommend removing all the
Bougainvillea and replant median with Perennial Peanut “Ecoturf” verity in 1 gal. 12”
o.c., 36” offset from back of curbing. If all is not approved then recommend doing area
of damaged Bougainvillea. In either case hand watering will be required so it should be
included in the proposal.
TURF Turf areas are appearing dry, but it is only a result of weeds and the wintering of the
weeds and turf.
X 23 There exist multiple areas of declined or missing turf throughout the medians
containing turf. A replacement program should be developed and submitted.
M&A: 10/07/16 As soon as cool weather permits an
application of broadleaf weed control should be applied,
and a multi-month program implemented.
IRRIGATION X X The water use total was estimated at 108,004 gallons for January.
WEED CONTROL X No major issues observed in plant beds.
UNDERSTORY PRUNING X No major issues observed
DISEASE AND PEST CONTROL X No major issues observed
FERTILIZATION X Refer to schedule for requirements.
Commented [MAM1]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist
5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. O. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101
Phone (239) 417-0707 * Fax (239) 417-0708
LC 098 * FL 1023A
Project: GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Sunshine Blvd.
Project Manager: Collier County Public Services Division, Public Transportation & Neighborhood Enhancements Department
Consultant: McGee & Associates Consultant’s Representative: Michael A. McGee, rla, isa
Contractor: ______________________________ Contractor’s Representative: ______________________
Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
AC - Indicates major items recommended to be discussed by Advisory Committee, S - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by staff, C - Indicates items recommended to be
addressed by Contractor
Contractor is requested to address items as soon as possible and indicate in RESPONSE/COMMENTS column when items are addressed. Please return electronic copy to our office prior to
next month’s MSTU site review and meeting. Note: Copy picture out of comment boxes and then paste to additional sheet if picture is desired in larger size.
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Observation date: 2/09-12/18 MONTHLY ADDRESSED Please provide responses as will review, ongoing,
completed or proposal to be submitted. Once submitted
provide proposal number and date and any notation
deemed important.
All locations X X 3 Recommended all Sabal palms be pruned at this time and have any lower and/or loose
frond boots removed from the trunks.
X X 3 All beds could use two inch layer of mulch.
Median #1 X 3 Review Plumbago shrubs for water stress and/or insects.
X 9 There exist considerable areas within the turf invested with weeds and/or dead spots.
X 21 On the north end about 60 L.F. of Juniper has been damaged. It appears to have been
run over. Prune out damaged and dead foliage. (Photo)
X 34 Two Juniper plants have been damaged and need to be replaced with 3 gal. size.
Median #2 X X 3 At address 2052: Juniper runover. 4-5 plants damaged. Review to remove damaged or
dead and provide count for replacements. 3 gal. size.
X X 3 At address 2184 & 2160: Plumbago shrubs are in poor condition. Review for insects
and/or water stress.
X 3 At address 2172: Remove damaged braces from Silk floss tree.
X X 3 At address 2224: (1) Tabebuia ‘Ipe’ has lifted and needs to be reset. (1) Tabebuia ‘Ipe’
has been removed. Recommend replacement.
The Tabebuia if reset could use additional soil backfill
around base to cover exposed root system.
X X 3 At address 2184: (1) Tabebuia ‘Ipe’ has lifted and needs to be reset.
X X 3 At address 2160: (2) Tabebuia ‘Ipe’ have been removed. Alternate tree type could be considered (e,g, Crape myrtle)
X X 3 At address 2112: (1) Golden Tabebuia damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 3 At address 2112: (2) Tabebuia ‘Ipe’ damaged. Remove and replace. Alternate tree type could be considered (e,g, Crape myrtle)
X X 3 At address 2101: (1) Golden Tabebuia damaged. Remove and replace.
Commented [MM1]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Sunshine Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 2 of 4
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
X 10 Prune dead and/or brown foliage out of Juniper plants all locations
X 10 Address 2112: Replant (13) dwarf Bougainvillea ‘Helen Johnson’ 3 gal. size at location
where water service repair occurred.
X 17 At address 2236: Dead turf area on east side of median apparently due to irrigation
coverage issue. (5' x 40')
X 18 At address 2190- 2196: Dead turf area on east side of median apparently due to
irrigation coverage issue.
X 20 At address 2224 & 2236: Dead turf area on east side of median apparently due to
irrigation coverage issue.
M&A: 7/13/16 Proposals being solicited. M&A: 8/8/16
Replacements approved and installation being scheduled
X 24 At addresses 2184 & 2160: Two Plumbago beds are water stressed. Recommend
adding two sprinkler heads on risers and with rebar supports in the center of the beds.
Sprinklers should have 4' by 15' center strip nozzles.
X 27 At address 20th Ct. SW: 3' x 30' turf area is in decline with dead areas. Review for
replacement.
M&A: 9/17/15 It is indicated this turf area decline is due to
grubs. Recommend to treat entire median for grubs and
review all other turf areas.
X 44 At address 2274: Replace auto accident damaged Juniper on south end of median. M&A: Appears 3-3 gal. plants will be needed. M&A: 7/8/14
another accident has occurred in same location. Approx. 50
L.F. of Juniper damaged. Review and remove damaged and
provide count for replacements. M&A: 11-11-15 Review
area and provide count for replacement Juniper 3 gal.
size.(photo)
Median #3 - Pump Station
Location- 5 hp, 6” well, VFD
X X 3 At address 1991: Reset Tabebuia ‘Ipe’.
X X 3 At address 1960: Oak tree needs structural and corrective pruning.
X X X 3 At address 1944: (2) Tabebuia ‘Ipe’ damaged. Remove and replace. Alternate tree type could be considered (e,g, Crape myrtle)
X 3 At address 1944: (1) Silk Floss tree has upper trunk damage. Structural and corrective
pruning needed to regrow main leader.
X X X 3 At address 1945: (2) Tabebuia ‘Ipe’ damaged. Remove and replace. Alternate tree type could be considered (e,g, Crape myrtle)
X X 3 At address 1936: Oak tree needs structural and corrective pruning.
X X 3 At address 1900: Oak tree needs structural and corrective pruning.
X 4 Address 1991: Tabebuia tree staking has come apart and need to be removed or reset.
X 5 Address 1960 to 1944: Bougainvillea shrubs have been runover. Prune out damaged
wood and provide count for replacements.(photo)
X 6 Prune dead and/or brown foliage out of Juniper plants all locations
Commented [MAM2]:
Commented [MM3]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Sunshine Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 3 of 4
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
X 19 There are multiple areas of turf that are dead and/or declining with bare spots .
X 28 At address 1900: 10' x 15' turf area is in decline with dead areas. Review for
replacement.
X 37 Light pole accident on south end of median. Multiple Juniper have been run over and
are damaged and broken. Prune out damaged foliage and branches and review in 30
days for replacements.
M&A: 12-12-14 Damaged plants have been removed. M&A:
11-11-15 Review Juniper for replacement count and submit
estimate.
Median #4
Median #5 X X 3 Oak trees need structural and corrective pruning.
X 4 Prune Oak tree branches away from light poles.
Median #6 X 10 Address 1750: Remove (3) declined dwarf Bougainvillea and replant (3) dwarf
Bougainvillea ‘Helen Johnson’ 3 gal. size. Review existing soil and plant roots for any
issues.
X 15 At address 1771: Cut surface circling root. Cut to remove or cut minimum 1-inch wide
section out of the center of the root.
X 20 Previous light pole accident has left some dead and damaged Juniper plants. Provide
count and replacement proposal. (5-6) 3 gal. size replacements.
18th Place SW Median X X X 15 Auto accident damaged 10-15 plants (photo) Recommend removing all the
Bougainvillea and replant median with Perennial Peanut “Ecoturf” variety in 1 gal. 12”
o.c., 36” offset from back of curbing. If all is not approved then recommend doing area
of damaged Bougainvillea. In either case hand watering will be required so it should be
included in the proposal.
18th Ave. S.W. Median
QUARTERLY ADDRESSED
Accent/Street Lighting
Lighting Electric Meters &
Irrigation Controller Electric
Source Locations
Lighting Electric Meter 2271 Sunshine Blvd., 1 SUN, Alley off 23rd Ave. SW
Lighting Electric Meter & Irrigation Controller Electric, 1995 Sunshine Blvd., 2 SUN,
Alley off 20th PL. SW
Lighting Electric Meter 4642 18th Pl. SW, 3 SUN, North R/W
Fertilizations: X Refer to schedule.
Irrigation: The water use total was estimated at 108,004 gallons for January.
Commented [MAM4]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Sunshine Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 4 of 4
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist Page 1 of 1
5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. O. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101
Phone (239) 417-0707 * Fax (239) 417-0708
LC 098 * FL 1023A
Project: GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. and Hunter Blvd.
Project Manager: Collier County Public Services Division, Public Transportation & Neighborhood Enhancements Department .
Consultant: McGee & Associates Consultant’s Representative: Michael A. McGee, rla, isa
Contractor: __________________________ Contractor’s Representative: ______________________
Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
AC - Indicates major items recommended to be discussed by Advisory Committee, S - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by staff,
C - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by Contractor
MAINTENANCE ITEM
Observation date: 2/09-12/18
AC S C R SUMMARY OF MONTHLY
MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Refer to monthly report for detailed information
TREES X X X See monthly detailed report for hurricane Irma damage and recommendations.
X X 4 Hunter Median #6 So. End: Live Oak tree destroyed by auto accident. Recommended
replacement with same height and caliper tree. (photo)
X 5 Fourth Alexander palm from the north end has died. Please review for possible cause.
Replacement should include fungicide soil drench.
M&A: New frond has emerged. Treat with fungicide
and fertilize with 4 lbs. 13-3-13 palm special fertilizer.
X 9 Hunter Blvd. Med. #10: 1 Alexander palm and 14 Big rose damaged due to auto accident.
X 10 Hunter Blvd. median #11: Floss Silk tree removed due to auto accident. (photo)
X 11 Auto accident damage in Hunter Blvd. median #1. A proposal for replacements has been
requested. Alexander palm & Juniper damaged.
SHRUBS, ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
& GROUND COVERS
X 22 Review beds for replacements. A comprehensive project length estimate should be
developed.
Estimate #15-3309 12/15/15 submitted and under
review. M&A: 2/14/17 New proposal being generated.
IRRIGATION X January water use meter readings indicate 338,551 gallons used for both roadways.
WEED CONTROL X No major issues observed
UNDERSTORY PRUNNING X No major issues observed
DISEASE AND PEST CONTROL X 6 No major issues observe with regards to pest control, but a comprehensive review is
needed to determine what is causing the overall decline and death of the flax lily plantings.
Soil and plant analysis are recommended, along with no more spraying of herbicide around
any Flax lily plants and the pull back of mulch away from the plant bases and any mulch
piled within the plants themselves.
FERTILIZATION X Review schedule & see detail report for recommended additional palm fertilization
locations.
Commented [MM1]:
Commented [M&A2]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist
5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. O. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101
Phone (239) 417-0707 * Fax (239) 417-0708
LC 098 * FL 1023A
Project: GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. and Hunter Blvd.
Project Manager: Collier County Public Services Division, Public Transportation & Neighborhood Enhancements Department
Consultant: McGee & Associates Consultant’s Representative: Michael A. McGee, rla, isa
Contractor: _________________________ Contractor’s Representative: _____________________
Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
AC - Indicates major items recommended to be discussed by Advisory Committee, S - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by staff, C - Indicates items recommended to be
addressed by Contractor
Contractor is requested to address items as soon as possible and indicate in RESPONSE/COMMENTS column when items are addressed. Please return electronic copy to our office prior to
next month’s MSTU site review and meeting. Note: Copy picture out of comment boxes and then paste to additional sheet if pic ture is desired in larger size.
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Observation dates: 2/09-12/18 MONTHLY ADDRESSED Please provide responses as completed, ongoing or
proposal submitted and any notation deemed important.
Coronado Pkwy. - All locations X 3 Remove Alexander palm seed stalks.
X X 3 All palms need storm damaged fronds removed.
X X 3 All canopy type trees need minor broken branches removed.
X X 10 A comprehensive review is needed to determine what is causing the overall decline
and death of the flax lily plantings. Soil and plant analysis are recommended, along
with no more spraying of herbicide around any Flax lily plants and the pull back of
mulch away from the plant bases and any mulch piles within the plants themselves.
M&A: Soil samples are being collected and submitted for
analysis by staff.
X X X 12 The contractor has had issues keeping the Mimiosa plantings free of weeds and
looking good. On Hunter Blvd. in median #5 one section of the Mimosa has been
removed do to weeds. Based upon the past issues it is recommend that all locations of
the Mimosa plantings on Coronado and Hunter be removed and the areas replanted
with Perennial Peanut “Ecoturf” variety in 1 gal. 18” o.c., 36” offset from back of
curbing. Contractor could provide a shared cost proposal. The recommendation would
help both party’s resolve the appearance issue for the District and the added weed
removal labor required by the contractor.
M&A: Based upon the regrowth of the Mimosa it is
recommended that the Mimosa not be removed and
continue to maintain the existing Mimosa. M&A:
12/11/17 Remaining mimosa in median #5 on Hunter and
in median #10 on Coronado need to be removed and
Perennial Peanut planted.
Median #1- Pavers 3 Pressure cleaning recommended
Median #2- Pavers 3 Pressure cleaning recommended
Median #3 X 5 Recommend applying 10 pounds of 13-3-13 palm fertilizer to the three Foxtail palms
as soon as possible.
M&A: 12/11/17 Application of palm tree minor nutrients
is needed.
X X 41 Review and treat Bulbine and Society garlic plants for fungus. M&A: 7/8/14 There are (7) Society garlic plants that are
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. & Hunter Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 2 of 11
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
dead and need to be replaced. 1 gal. size. M&A: 10-16-14
There are (25) Bulbine that are dead and/or missing. It is
recommended to remove all remaining and replant areas
with Blueberry Flax Lily, 1 gal. size, provide counts. M&A:
7/13/16 Base upon establishment of remaining Society
Garlic and Bulbine plants it is recommended to replace
the missing plants. M&A: 1/9/17 Due to decline it is
recommended to removal all Society Garlic & Bulbine
plants and replant areas with Perennial Peanut. M&A:
12/11/17 both ends have been palnted with Perennial
Peanut. Remaining middle area need Bulbine removed
and additional Perennial Peanut added.
Median #4 X 15 East end: Auto accident, (9-10) plants damaged and need to be removed and replaced.
(photo)
M&A: 10/7/16 Recommend cutting back and removing
damaged foliage in order to try and grow back remaining
plants.
X X X 14 (13) Additional Big Rose plants are declined, dead or missing in the median as a result
of pest (e.g. snails) and/or disease.
M&A: 12/11/17 All Big Rose crown of thorn have been
leaned over or damaged by the storm. Recommend
cutback to 8-inch level and review for new growth in
three months.
Median #5 X 21 Monitor second Alexander palm from the west end of median it has no apparent
terminal frond showing.
M&A: 4/12/16 recommend trying to remove frond crown
shafts with pole saw, so to open up forming fronds. M&A:
8/8/16 Why was palm tree removed? M&A: 10/7/16
Recommend replacement of Alexander palm, 10 ft. clear
trunk ht. min. A soil treatment for fungus should occur
prior to replanting and after replanting.
Median #6 X X X 3 (1) Oak tree removed. Recommend replacement.
X X X 3 Big Rose crown of thorn directly under Oak tree received complete storm damage and
it is recommended to remove all and replant with 3 gal. size yellow African Iris.
Replacement count needed. Iris to be 4-foot off back of curb and 3-foot on center.
X 38 On east end one (4) (5) (8) Big Rose recently planted crown of thorn are dead and/or
missing and need to be replaced.
X X 36 For a second time the westernmost Alexander palm has been hit by an auto. It is 2/11/15 M&A: (5) 1 gl. Big Rose plants are needed. M&A:
Commented [MM1]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. & Hunter Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 3 of 11
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
recommended not to replace this palm. Close off bubbler and review Big Rose crown
of thorns for replacements (8 +/-).
4/15/15 Contractor is trying to locate a nursery supplier.
M&A: 06/11/15 Please update status of plants being
located or grown.
Median #7 X X 3 (1) Crape myrtle removed. Recommend replacement.
X X 3 Provide count to replace missing Juniper plants on east end bed. 3 gal. size.
X X 5 Prune out dead foliage and remove dead plants within the Juniper beds. Recommend
providing counts and proposal for replacements.
X 7 On west end, south side auto damaged in Juniper and Coontie beds. Review to remove
damaged and dead foliage and/or plants. Recommend replacement proposal be
prepared and submitted.
Median #8 X X 5 Prune out dead foliage and remove dead plants within the Junipers. Recommend
providing counts and proposal for replacements.
Median #9 - Pavers
Median #10 X X 3 At address 5256: Sabal palm leaning. Reset.
3 At address 5273: (2) Jatropha removed. Consider replacement with alternate plant (e.g. Crape
Myrtles) or leave unplanted and increase shrub or ground
cover plantings.
X X X 3 At address 5301: (2) Jatropha removed. Consider replacement with alternate plant (e.g. Crape
Myrtles) or leave unplanted and increase shrub or ground
cover plantings.
X X X 3 At address 5327: (2) Jatropha removed. Consider replacement with alternate plant (e.g. Crape
Myrtles) or leave unplanted and increase shrub or ground
cover plantings.
X X 3 East end Mimosa plantings have been over taken by weeds. Recommend removal and
replant area with Perennial Peanut.
X 35 Provide estimate to replace missing Society garlic plants. (6) (25+/-) 1 gal. size. M&A 9/17/14: Remove all non-Society Garlic plants and
provide count for replacements. Plants to remove have
dark green foliage and white flowers or seed pods on
them.
X 48 At address 5291: Eight dead Coontie/Zamia need to be replaced. Please provide
replacement plants at 3 gal. container size 16” ht./spr. One dwarf Bougainvillea ‘Helen
Johnson’ plant is missing. Replant with 3gal size.
Hannula 1/10/14: Estimate #14-0006 submitted. Staff
approved 1/13/14. M&A: 10/12/15 Revised proposal
would be needed.
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. & Hunter Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 4 of 11
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
X 49 At address 5254: Five dead Coontie/Zamia need to be replaced. Please provide
replacement plants at 3 gal. container size 16” ht./spr.
Hannula 1/10/14: Estimate #14-0006 submitted. Staff
approved 1/13/14. M&A: 10/12/15 Revised proposal
would be needed.
Median #11 Bridge X 9 On west side of bridge review Flax lily plants for replacements and add Sand Cordgrass
plants to existing bed to replace missing Flax lily plants.
M&A: 6/12/17 remove dead foliage out of Flax lily plants.
Median #12 X X 3 (6) Big Rose crown of thorn are missing. Recommend replacement.
X 17 One Alexander palm on the east end of the median has been cut off at ground level.
Replacement is recommended.
M&A: 10/7/16 Recommend replacement of Alexander
palm, 10 ft. clear trunk ht. min.
X 37 Auto accident (1) Alexander palm needs to be replaced. (photo) Provide estimate for replacement. M&A: 4/12/16 It was
observed that one additional Alexander palm has been
removed from the east end of the median. Unless there
is some unknown reason it is recommended to replace
this additional palm. M&A: 10/7/16 Recommend
replacement of Alexander palm, 10 ft. clear trunk ht. min.
Median #13 X 33 (8) missing Society garlic plants. Provide estimate for replacements at 1 gal. size. M&A
5/14/15: Additional plants are declining and/or missing
review and provide count for replacements.
Median #14 X 5 Remove dead foliage out of Flax lily plants.
X 25 There are (8) dead and/or declining Flax lily plants. Remove all dead foliage and
declining plants and provide count for replacements.
X 33 Alexander palm destroyed due to auto accident. (photo) M&A: 06/11/15 update status of replacement. M&A:
10/7/16 Recommend replacement of Alexander palm, 10
ft. clear trunk ht. min.
Hunter Blvd. - All locations X 3 Remove Alexander palm seed stalks.
X X 3 All canopy type trees need minor broken branches removed.
Median #1 X 12 Auto accident, Proposal being prepared. (Photo) M&A: 10/7/16 Proposal submitted and replacement
scheduled.
Median #2 X 14 See recommendations for "All Locations" above.
X 34 (3) Big Rose plant is dead. Provide estimate for replacement at 1 gal. size. M&A:
4/15/15 Contractor is trying to locate a nursery supplier.
Median #3 X X X 3 Median received additional flooding during storm and planting bed soil has been
removed. All shrub or ground cover plantings need to be removed. Median will need
Commented [MAM2]:
Commented [MM3]:
Commented [MM4]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. & Hunter Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 5 of 11
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
an additional 4 to 6-inch layer of soil added prior to any renovation planting work.
Existing Alexander palms and Crape myrtles need additional soil placed around
exposed root systems as soon as possible.
X 14 (3) (5) Big Rose plants are declined, dead and/or missing that appears to be from pest
or disease.
X 43 9/13 roadway flooding washed away soil, uprooted plants and left plants with root
exposure. The current estimated plant lose is south end 30 Lantana, 54 Big Rose and 4
Blueberry flax lily plants will need to be replaced. Due to past flooding additional top
dress soil will need to be applied to some areas in the median when replanting.
Hannula: Revised estimate #13-3405 submitted on
12/20/13, M&A: Estimate pending Committee approval.
M&A: 4/15/15 Replanting project on hold until storm
water system improvements are completed.
X 45 Lantana plantings being removed and replaced with Juniper, Big Rose or Flax lily due to
prior flood damage.
Hannula: Revised estimate #13-3405 submitted on
12/20/13, M&A: Estimate pending Committee approval.
M&A: 4/15/15 Replanting project on hold until storm
water system improvements are completed.
Median #4 X 3 Perennial Peanut has been planted in the north end of median.
X 5 Fourth Alexander palm from the north end has died. Please review for possible cause.
Replacement should include fungicide soil drench.
M&A: Do not remove Alexander palm. New Frond has
emerged from the bud. Treat with fungicide and fertilize
with 4 lbs. 13-3-13 palm special fertilizer.
X 15 (10) Big Rose plants are declined, dead and/or missing that appears to be from pest or
disease.
X 46 9/13 roadway flooding washed away soil, uprooted plants and left plants with root
exposure. The current estimated plant lose is south end 30 Lantana plants will need to
be replaced. Due to past flooding additional top dress soil will need to be applied to
some areas in the median when replanting.
Hannula: Revised estimate #13-3405 submitted on
12/20/13, M&A: Estimate pending Committee approval.
M&A: 10-16-14 It is recommended to remulch median it
did not get washed over in the last flood event. M&A:
4/15/15 Replanting project on hold until storm water
system improvements are completed.
Median #5
Pump station – Median #5, 7.5
hp, 8” well feeds Hunter &
Coronado, Irrinet in median
controls Piccolos
X X X 3 North end Oak tree removed. Recommend replacement.
X 12 South end bed of the Mimosa has been removed do to weeds. The north bed has been
flush cut to the ground to address weeds. Based upon the past issues it is recommend
M&A: 12/9/16 Mimosa beds have been prepared for
planting of Perennial peanut. M&A: 1/9/17 The north end
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. & Hunter Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 6 of 11
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
that all locations of the Mimosa plantings on Coronado and Hunter be remov ed and
the areas replanted with Perennial Peanut “Ecoturf” variety in 1 gal. 18” o.c., 36” offset
from back of curbing. Contractor could provide a shared cost proposal. The
recommendation would helping both party’s resolve the appearance issue for the
District and the added weed removal labor required by the contractor.
area of Mimosa needs to be retreated with herbicide.
M&A: 7/10/17 The north and south end areas of Mimosa
needs to be retreated with herbicide before any
plantings.
X 47 Due to the poor performance, it is recommended to remove remaining Coontie plants
on each side of the pump station and then install (8) 7 gal. ‘Helen Johnson’ dwarf
Bougainvillea shrubs. 5 to the south and 3 to the north. Review and treat Coontie for
scale insects. Please provide replacement plants at (8) 3 gal. container size 16” ht./spr.
Hannula: Revised estimate #13-3405 submitted on
12/20/13, M&A: Estimate pending Committee approval.
M&A: 10-16-14 It is recommended to replant this median
with dwarf Bougainvillea as planned. It was not washed
over during the street flooding. Update estimate for
replanting. M&A: 4/15/15 please update status of
replacement recommendation. M&A: 03/09/16 Median
replacement plantings on hold until after storm water
project completion.
Median #6 X 3 Perennial Peanut planted on south end.
X X 3 At address 2164: Reset Jatropha tree.
X X 3 At address 2116: Reset Oak.
X X 3 At address 2100: Reset Oak.
X X 3 At address 2090: Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 3 At address 2072: Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
X X X 3 At address 2018: (1) Jatropha removed. Consider replacement with alternate plant or leave
unplanted and increase shrub or ground cover plantings.
X X 4 Live Oak tree destroyed by auto accident. Recommended replacement with same
height and caliper tree. (photo)
Commented [MM5]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. & Hunter Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 7 of 11
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
X 5 Remove dead foliage and stalks from Paurotis palms. Recommend thinning of clumps.
X 41 At address 2036: Auto accident. (23) (6) (2) Firebush and one Crape myrtle damaged
and need to be replaced. (photo)
M&A: 4/15/15 Recommend Crape myrtle replacement go
forward. M&A: 10/7/16 Some plants have regenerated
and only (2) plants maybe needed.
X 48 9/13 roadway flooding washed away soil, uprooted plants and left plants with root
exposure. The current estimated plant lose is south end 60 Lantana, @ 2148 24-Muhly
grass, @ 2116 50-Muhly grass, @ 2100 14-Helen Johnson Bougainvillea and 6-Ms. Alice
Bougainvillea plants will need to be replaced. Due to past flooding additional top dress
soil will need to be applied to some areas in the median when replanting.
Hannula: Revised estimate #13-3405 submitted on
12/20/13, M&A: Estimate pending Committee approval.
M&A: 4/15/15 Replanting project on hold until storm
water system improvements are completed.
X 48 At address 2148-2164: Due to 9/13 flooding Muhly grass planting will need to be
reviewed for replacements. Due to past flooding additional top dress soil will need to
be applied to some areas in the median when replanting.
Hannula: Revised estimate #13-3405 submitted on
12/20/13, M&A: Estimate pending Committee approval.
M&A: 4/15/15 Replanting project on hold until storm
water system improvements are completed.
X 48 At address 2100-2116: Due to 9/13 flooding Muhly grass planting will need to be
reviewed for replacements. Due to past flooding additional top dres s soil will need to
be applied to some areas in the median when replanting.
Hannula: Revised estimate #13-3405 submitted on
12/20/13, M&A: Estimate pending Committee approval.
M&A: 4/15/15 Replanting project on hold until storm
water system improvements are completed.
X 46 At address 2072: Due to 9/13 flooding Muhly grass planting will need to be reviewed
for replacements. Due to past flooding additional top dress soil will need to be applied
to some areas in the median when replanting.
Hannula: Revised estimate #13-3405 submitted on
12/20/13, M&A: Estimate pending Committee approval.
M&A: 4/15/15 Replanting project on hold until storm
water system improvements are completed.
X 46 At address 2090-2100: Remove remaining Coontie and replant with (12) ‘Helen
Johnson’ dwarf Bougainvillea 3 gal. size. (5) Coontie are missing and/or dead and need
to be replaced. 3 gal. size plants.
Hannula: Revised estimate #13-3405 submitted on
12/20/13, M&A: Estimate pending Committee approval.
M&A: 4/15/15 Replanting project on hold until storm
water system improvements are completed.
Median #7 X 35 Review and treat as needed Big Rose plants for fungus and/or insect (i.e leaf spot,
snails)
M&A: 10-16-14 Treat all plants for snails. Snails were
found in multiple plants. (10) plants are dead or heavily
damaged. M&A: 4/15/15 Retreat plants for snails and
treat for leaf spot fungus. M&A: Comments were
accidentally removed from last report. M&A: 12-10-15
There is active snails in crown of thorn and plant damage
Commented [MAM6]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. & Hunter Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 8 of 11
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
has occurred. M&A: 2/10/16 Plant replacement is
needed. M&A: 7/13/16 See recommendations for "All
Locations" above. M&A: 10 plants are dead and/or
missing, 4 plants have been partially run over by auto.
M&A; 12/11/17 Based upon current storm damage to
crown of thorn it is recommended to removal all crown
of thorn and replant median with one centerline row of
yellow African Iris plants, 3 gal. size. Recommend
providing count and proposal.
Median #8 X At address 5201: Alexander palm removed due to auto accident. Replacement
recommended. (photo)
X X 3 At address 5281: (1) Oak tree reset.
X X X 3 (1) Jatropha removed. Consider replacement with alternate plant or leave
unplanted and increase shrub or ground cover plantings.
X X 3 At address 5301: Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 3 At address 5325: Oak tree reset.
3 (1) Jatropha removed. Consider replacement with alternate plant or leave
unplanted and increase shrub or ground cover plantings.
X X 3 At address 5375: Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
X X X 3 (1) Jatropha removed. Consider replacement with alternate plant or leave
unplanted and increase shrub or ground cover plantings.
X X 3 At address 5395: Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 3 At address 5250: Previous report Sabal palm removed. Remove and replace.
X X 3 At address 5241: Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
X X X 3 On east end remove remaining Flax lily and add Bougainvillea Silhouette from
westernmost Alexander palm to existing Bougainvillea. 3 gal. size. Provide count and
proposal recommended.
X 3 At address 5281: prune dead foliage out of Paurotis palms.
X X X 3 At address 5375: Remove storm damaged Big Rose crown of thorn and replant area
with yellow African Iris. 3 gal. size. Provide count and proposal recommended.
X 5 At address 5345: Auto accident in Muhly grass bed. 7 plants need to be replaced.
Review irrigation heads and regrade area at planting.
Commented [MM7]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. & Hunter Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 9 of 11
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
X 5 At address 5375 thru 5395: 8 Big Rose crown of thorn are dead and/or missing due to
disease and/or insects.
X 8 At address 5261: One dead Sabal palm to be removed and reviewed for cause of
decline before replacing.
X 12 3rd Alexander palm from the west end has died. Based upon review of the palm it is
suspected it was due to bud and/or root rot. Replacement is recommended, but after
removal an application of soil fungicide should be applied prior to replanting and then
followed up with an additional application after palm has be fully watered into place.
Min. replacement palm size should be 10 ft. clear trunk.
X 16 Remove dead foliage in Flax lily plants on north west end of median.
X 17 At address 5241: (6) Bougainvillea 'Miss Alice" are missing and it is recommended to
replace them at a 3 gal. size plant.
X 25 On east end remove dead foliage in Flax lily bed and provide count for replacements. M&A: 7/13/16, 1/9/17 There are (12-15) (50+/-) declined,
dead and/or missing plants to be replaced.
Median #9 X X X 20 17 – Big Rose crown of thorn have been partially up rooted due to recent storm winds
and/or fallen trees. It is recommended to dig, replant and hand water in plants. Cut
back plants as required in order for plants to stand upright. 1 – Big Rose plant has been
broken at base and needs to be replaced.
M&A: Additional storm damage to the crown of thorn
has occurred. Recommend removal of all plants and
replant median with dwarf Bougainvillea ‘Helen Johnson’
in 3 gal. size containers. Provide count and proposal
recommended.
X 47 See COMMENTS column. At address 5481: Review Lantana on west end for
replacements. 8 – plants need to be replaced. 4 – white, 4 – Lavender. 3 – gal. or 8”
basket size if available.
M&A: 12 -12 1-13 If the Lantana plantings are to be
replaced then it is recommended the median be
replanted with Big Rose Crown of thorn.
Hannula 1/10/14; Estimate #14-0007 submitted
01/10/14. Staff approved 1/13/14. It is recommended to
remove Lantana due to poor performance and replace
with Big Rose Crown of thorn. M&A: 10-16-14 It is
recommended to replant this median with Big Rose as
planned. M&A: provide estimate to remove Lantana and
install (119) 1 gal. size Big Rose crown of thorns. M&A:
4/15/15 Contractor is trying to locate a nursery supplier.
M&A: 06/11/15 Please update status of plants being
located or grown. M&A: 10/12/15 If Big Rose plants
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. & Hunter Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 10 of 11
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
cannot be secured within the next 30 days it is
recommended to provide an estimate using Blueberry
Flax Lily.
Median #10 X X X 3 Recommend removal of crown of thorn and replant areas with Perennial Peanut.
X 9 The 3rd Alexander palm from east end was removed due to auto accident, along with
(14) Big Rose crown of thorns.
X 38 See COMMENTS column. (5) Big Rose crown of thorn are dead and/or missing. Review
and provide replacements.
M&A: 10-16-14 Treat plants for snails. (13) plants are
now dead and need to be replaced. M&A: 11-13-14
Snails are still present and active. (18) plants are now
dead or declined and need to be replaced. 1 gal. size.
M&A: 2-14-17 It is recommended based upon the recent
auto accident on the east end, along with the Big Rose
that are missing on the west end due to snail damage,
that each end have all the existing Big Rose be removed
from the ends of the median up to the second palm trees
and then replanted with Perennial Peanut. Based upon
the contractor having responsibility to replant the west
end with Big Rose replacements another shared cost
proposal could be provided for the planting of the
Perennial Peanut on the west end of the median. If
possible, any existing Big Rose plants could be relocated
to other medians where missing plants exist. It is
recommended to prepare and submit a proposal for this
work.
Median #11 X X 3 35 -40 Society Garlic plants are missing. Replacement recommended.
Median #12 X 23 (1) Flax Lily and (1) Alexander palm is missing from west end of median.
QUARTERLY ADDRESSED
Fertilization: X Refer to schedule.
General Irrigation: X February combined water use is estimated at 338,551 gallons used.
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Coronado Pkwy. & Hunter Blvd. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 11 of 11
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist
5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. O. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101
Phone (239) 417-0707 * Fax (239) 417-0708
LC 098 * FL 1023A
Project: GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Collier Blvd. Part A & B
Project Manager: Collier County Public Services Division, Public Transportation & Neighborhood Enhancements Department.
Consultant: McGee & Associates Consultant’s Representative: Michael A. McGee, rla, isa
Contractor: Commercial Land Maintenance Contractor’s Representative: Robert Kindelan, Gary Gorden
Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
AC - Indicates major items recommended to be discussed by Advisory Committee, S - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by staff, C - Indicates items recommended to be
addressed by Contractor
MAINTENANCE ITEM
Observation date: 2/09-12/18
AC S C R SUMMARY OF MONTHLY
MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Refer to monthly report for detailed information.
TREES X See monthly detailed report for hurricane Irma damage and recommendations. Substantial renovation is recommended.
X X 15 Declined Slash pine tree in median #11 needs to be reviewed for removal. Recommend replacement with Floss Silk tree.
SHRUBS, ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
& GROUND COVERS
X Post storm Irma it is recommended a major renovation take place.
X 12 Recommend removing remaining crown of thorn on the north end of medians #1 and
south end of median #2 and replace with Perennial Peanut.
X 14 Auto accident damaged Big Rose crown of thorn in north end of median #5.
X 14 Remove dead and prune out brown foliage out of Juniper plants on south end of median
#5 and north end of median #4. Replacements recommended. 3 gal. size
X 17 Many of the Juniper plant beds contain multiple dead foliage areas that need to be
removed.
X 25 Review beds for replacements. A roadway length estimate should be developed.
TURF X X Turf areas are appearing dry, but it can also be the result of weeds and the wintering of
the weeds and turf.
X 23 Turf areas containing weeds and/or previously water stressed and in decline should be
reviewed for weed control treatment and/or replacements.
IRRIGATION X New pump stations installed in both Part A & B.
WEED CONTROL X No major amounts of weeds observed in plants.
UNDERSTORY PRUNNING X No observed issues.
DISEASE AND PEST CONTROL X No observed issues.
FERTILIZATION X No observed deficiencies.
MULCH X Review for topdressing bare areas.
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist
5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. O. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101
Phone (239) 417-0707 * Fax (239) 417-0708
LC 098 * FL 1023A
Project: GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Collier Blvd. Part A & B
Project Manager: Collier County Public Services Division, Public Transportation & Neighborhood Enhancements Department.
Consultant: McGee & Associates Consultant’s Representative: Michael A. McGee, rla, isa
Contractor: Commercial Land Maintenance Contractor’s Representative: Robert Kindelan, Gary Gorden
Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
AC - Indicates major items recommended to be discussed by Advisory Committee, S - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by staff, C - Indicates items recommended to be
addressed by Contractor
This report is prepared strictly to provide recommendations only and in no manner is to imply any authorization to the Contra ctor or its Sub-Contractors to perform services for Collier County.
Contractor is requested to address items as soon as possible and indicate in RESPONSE/COMMENTS column when and which items are corrected.
Please return electronic copy to our office prior to next month’s MSTU site review and meeting.
Note: Copy picture out of comment boxes and then paste to additional sheet if picture is desired in larger size.
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Observation dates: 2/09-12/18 MONTHLY ADDRESSED
Median# 66, 67 & 68 X X 3 It is recommended, post hurricane Irma that a complete renovation review take place to
fully access the existing condition of the plants and to provide a plan for renovation to
occur.
X 10 Magnolia trees need to have the dead branches removed and then the trees need to
have an organic soil top dress added around the root zone (2 to 3 -inch depth) and
additional 12-4-8 fertilizer applied at a rate of 1 pound of fertilizer per inch of trunk
caliper.
M&A: Post hurricane Irma remaining Magnolia trees should
be reviewed for removal or treatment as listed.
Median# 66 - 74 X 3 Planting beds could use top dressing of mulch. M&A: 5/10/16 Bare ground is present along perimeter of
many planting beds.
Part “A” - West R/W Sign Area
Median #66 (M.P. #3) X X 3 (3) Magnolia trees have been removed by hurricane. Remove and replace. M&A: 12/11/17 Consider replacement with alternative tree
such as Crape myrtle.
3 (1) Sabal palm has been damaged. Remove and replace.
3 (1) Oak have major main trunk damage and should be removed and replaced.
X 34 Recommend removing Thryallis shrubs and install Sand Cordgrass. M&A: 12/11/17 Post Irma storm has created worst
conditions and renovation is recommended.
Median #67 (M.P. #4) X X 3 (3) Oak trees have been damaged. Remove and replace. (1) Oak which is still standing
has major main trunk damage and needs to be removed.
3 (1) Sabal palm damaged. Remove and replace.
3 (7) Magnolia trees have been damaged. Remove and replace. M&A: 12/11/17 Consider replacement with alternative tree
such as Crape myrtle.
3 (2) Maple trees have been damaged. Remove and replace. M&A: 12/11/17 Consider replacement with alternative tree
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Collier Blvd. A & B Report Period: FY17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 2 of 4
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
such as Crape myrtle.
X X 3 Multiple Juniper plants on the north median end are missing.
X X 36 Recommend removing two remaining beds of Red Fountain grass and replant areas with
Silver Saw palmetto’s.
Median #68 (M.P. #5) X X 3 Multiple Juniper plants on the south median end are missing.
X X 3 (3) Oak trees damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 3 (3) Magnolia trees damaged. Remove and replace. M&A: 12/11/17 Consider replacement with alternative tree
such as Crape myrtle.
X X 9 Dead Sabal needs to be removed. (photo) M&A: 2/14/17 Tree removed and location staked.
X X 11 Remove existing stump of removed tree located on north south side of first Sabal palm
group. (photo)
M&A: 2/14/17 Tree removed and location staked.
X X 16 North end east side auto accident in Big Rose Crown of thorn (10-15) damaged
X X 20 Review Big Rose crown of thorn on north end for snail activity and/or auto damage.
X X 39 Prune back the deadwood within the Magnolia at the northernmost end. (photo) M&A: Review Magnolia tree appears to be declined enough
for removal. M&A: 10/7/16 Tree cut down. M&A: 11-5-16
Tree stump needs to be removed and replacement
considered. M&A: 2/14/17 Tree removed and location
staked. M&A: 12/11/17 Consider replacement with
alternative tree such as Crape myrtle.
Median #69 (M.P. #6) – Paved
separator
Part “B” - Median# 70 - 74 X X 3 It is recommended, post hurricane Irma that a complete renovation review take place to
fully access the existing condition of the plants and to provide a plan for renovation to
occur.
Median #70 (M.P. #7) X X 3 At address 11655: (1) Tabebuia trees needs to be reset.
X X 3 Understory plantings need to be reviewed for replacements. On south end Flax lily and
Plumbago shrubs could be removed and the areas replanted with yellow African iris.
X X 3 Planting beds could use mulch. Bare ground is present along perimeter of many
planting beds.
X 40 Juniper bed on south end of median contains dead plants and brown foliage. Remove
both and provide count for replacements.
Median #71 (M.P. #8) X X 3 At address 11845: Add (2) Crape myrtles.
X X 3 Understory plantings need to be reviewed for replacements. Flax lily, Plumbago and
Thryallis shrubs could be removed and the areas replanted with yellow African iris.
X X 41 Juniper bed on south end of median contains dead plants and brown foliage. Remove
both and provide count for replacements.
X X 44 Plant replacements are needed in multiple areas. Hannula 12/20/13: An estimate cannot be submitted without
knowing the recommended species for replacement and a
Commented [MM1]:
Commented [MM2]:
Commented [MM3]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Collier Blvd. A & B Report Period: FY17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 3 of 4
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
plant count. M&A 1-15-14: Please call our office to schedule
an on-site meeting to review median.
Median #72 (M.P. #9) X X 3 Understory plantings need to be reviewed for replacements. Flax lily, Plumbago and
Thryallis shrubs could be removed and the areas replanted with yellow African iris.
X X 3 At address 12025: (2) Oak trees damaged. Remove and replace. (1) Tabebuia trees
needs to be reset. (1) Tabebuia tree damaged. Remove and replace.
M&A: 12/11/17 Consider replacement with alternative tree
such as Crape myrtle.
3 At address 12045: (1) Tabebuia tree damaged. Remove and replace. M&A: 12/11/17 Consider replacement with alternative tree
such as Crape myrtle.
X X 50 Review Juniper on north and south end for replacements due to auto damaged. Hannula 12/20/13: Plant count is needed by next drive
through
Median #73 (M.P. #10) X X 3 At address 12135: (1) Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
3 At address 12125: (1) Oak trees damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 45 Review south end Juniper bed for replacements.
X X 44 Turf areas need to be reviewed for dead areas that need to be replaced. Provide proposal with square footages per median.
Median #74 (M.P. #11) X X 3 At address 12225: (1) Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
3 At address 12215: (2) Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
3 (1) sabal palm damaged. Remove and replace.
X X 15 On north end one of two Slash pines is declining and removal is recommended. M&A: Recommend replacement with Floss Silk tree. M&A:
12/11/17 One tree damaged and needs to be removed. The
other tree remains, but should be removed.
X X 17 Median turf areas have dead spots from previous water stressed.
X X 40 Remove dead Indian hawthorn plants and replace. (8) 3 gal. size.
X X 44 Turf areas need to be reviewed for dead areas that need to be replaced. Provide proposal with square footages per median.
West R/W X X 19 Tree branches are below ten feet over sidewalks.
Irrigation: X X New pump stations installed in both Part A & B.
Part A Pump Station- Median 67 (M.P.#4), New pump station installed 1/18, 5 hp, 6” well, VFD, Motorola Scorpio controller S3406, Electric
meter on west R/W at pump station
Part B Pump Station-Median 74 (M.P. #11), New pump station installed 1/18, 7.5 hp, 6” well, VFD, Motorola Scorpio controller S3405 & S3408 , Electric Meter West R/W adjacent to Median #9 Address
#12225
QUARTERLY ADDRESSED
Part “A” - West R/W Sign Area
Part “A” Medians #66 thru 68 X X 44 These medians need to have renovation plantings. The future roadway construction
appears to be more than10 years out.
Hannula 12/20/13: An estimate cannot be submitted without
knowing the recommended species for replacement and a
plant count, Area(s) must be white lined during drive-
through upon acceptance of estimate. M&A 1-15-14: Please
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Collier Blvd. A & B Report Period: FY17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 4 of 4
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
call our office to schedule an on-site meeting to review
medians.
Part “B” - West R/W Areas
Part “B” Medians #70 thru 74 X 24 Multiple medians and multiple beds need plant replacements.
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist
5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. O. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101
Phone (239) 417-0707 * Fax (239) 417-0708
LC 098 * FL 1023A
Project: GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Golden Gate Pkwy.
Project Manager: Collier County Public Services Division, Public Transportation & Neighborhood Enhancements Department
Consultant: McGee & Associates Consultant’s Representative: Michael A. McGee, rla, isa
Contractor: Commercial Land Maintenance Contractor’s Representative: Robert Kindelan, Gary Gordon
Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
AC - Indicates major items recommended to be discussed by Advisory Committee, S - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by staff, C - Indicates items recommended to be
addressed by Contractor
MAINTENANCE ITEM
Observation date: 2/09-12/18
AC S C R SUMMARY OF MONTHLY
MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Refer to monthly report for detailed information.
TREES X See detailed monthly report for tree issues and post hurricane Irma damage and
recommendations.
SHRUBS & ORNAMENTAL GRASSES X X Torpedo grass weed is still present in multiple beds.
X X Multiple grass beds have missing plants.
GROUND COVERS X X Blueberry Flax lily and Liriope beds throughout the medians contain excess amounts of
Torpedo grass weeds. Recommend ongoing program of hand removal and/or treatment
until removed.
TURF X X All turf has dead areas and broadleaf weeds due to previous water stress in Medians #15 -
21 are the worst.
X M&A: 8/13/15 Replacements being addressed in turf renovation plans.
IRRIGATION X All pump stations are operational with meter readings. Combined water use for January
was 868,558 gallons.
WEED CONTROL X X Turf weeds and Torpedo grass weed in excessive amounts throughout medians.
UNDERSTORY PRUNNING X X No observed issues.
DISEASE AND PEST CONTROL X X No observed issues.
FERTILIZATION X X No observed deficiencies.
HARDSCAPE ELEMENTS X X 24 The Advisory Committee installed Mr. Farrow and Mr. Melchore memorial plaque and base
need to be cleaned, repainted and the pavers repaired so that memorial is secure.
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
Design * Environmental Management * Planning * Arborist
5079 Tamiami Trail East / P. O. Box 8052 Naples, Florida 34101
Phone (239) 417-0707 * Fax (239) 417-0708
LC 098 * FL 1023A
Project: GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Golden Gate Pkwy.
Project Manager: Collier County Public Services Division, Public Transportation & Neighborhood Enhancements Department
Consultant: McGee & Associates Consultant’s Representative: Michael A. McGee, rla, isa
Contractor: Commercial Land Maintenance Contractor’s Representative: Robert Kindelan, Gary Gordon
Report Period: FY 17-18 February 2018 Report No.: Three
AC - Indicates major items recommended to be discussed by Advisory Committee, S - Indicates items recommended to be addressed by staff, C - Indicates items recommended to be
addressed by Contractor
This report is prepared strictly to provide recommendations only and in no manner is to imply any authorization to the Contractor or its Sub -Contractors to perform services for Collier County.
Contractor is requested to address items as soon as possible and indicate in RESPONSE/COMMENTS column when and which items are corrected.
Please return electronic copy to our office prior to next month’s MSTU site review and meeting.
Note: Copy picture out of comment boxes and then paste to additional sheet if picture is desired in larger size.
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Observation dates: 2/09-12/18 MONTHLY ADDRESSED
Post Hurricane Irma Damage
Median #15 – 21 X 10 Turf has dead areas due to being previously very water stress.
Median #12 – 29 (3-19) X 42 Medians that contain turf areas. M&A: 02-13-14 The broadleaf weed treatment program
needs to continue for all turf areas. M&A: 12-12-14 It is
estimated that all median with turf have broadleaf
weeds within over 75% to 90% of the turf areas. M&A:
06/11/15 Turf replacement planning is in process.
Multiple medians have been reviewed for replacement
by County staff and the Contractor. An on-site meeting
was held and the following issues were discussed. The
broadleaf weed coverage within the turf areas has
improved, but many median turf areas still need review
for replacement of the turf. It is also recommended that
all planting beds be reviewed with regards to the turf
edges being too close to the plants causing a conflict to
occur between the plants, mowers and edger’s. If the
turf is too close then it is recommended to remove one
or two strips of turf with a sod cutter so to expand the
plant bed and create a open mulch area between the
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Golden Gate Pkwy. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 2 of 8
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
plants and turf. In some locations this type of turf
removal may result in a turf area that is too small to
mow between the back of curb and the plants. It is
recommended that these small turf areas be removed
entirely and the areas be mulched. There will also be
areas between planting beds that will become smaller
turf areas and it may be better to remove these small
turf areas and expand the plantings from the existing
beds to cover these areas where the turf is removed
thus tying the planting beds together. M&A: 8/13/15
Plan preparation is underway for turf renovations in all
medians. M&A: 10/15/15 Sod Renovation plan
completed and submitted. Contractor has been
contacted to prepare proposal/estimate. M&A: 12-10-15
Staff response was waiting on proposal from contractor
and 2016 rainy season.
Median #32 (1) X 41 West end: Indian hawthorn shrubs have multiple dead and/or missing plants. Provide
count of dead, missing or declining plants. If over 50 percent of plants are found to be
dead missing or declining then it is recommended the area be renovated with
Blueberry Flax lily 1 gal. size 36” o.c., 48” over back of curbing and other plants.
M&A: 7/9/14 There are over 50 plants that are dead,
missing or in decline that need to be removed. Provide
proposal to remove existing plants and install Flax lily 1
gal. size
Median #31 (2) X 42 Review Juniper on east end: Provide count of declined, missing or damaged Juniper
due to pedestrian traffic. Approx. (4) plants have brown foliage and (4) plants are
damaged.
Median #30 (2A) (Pavers only)
Median #29 (3) X 33 Transplanted Carissa plants are in transplant shock and water stress. Increase
irrigation if it is not already.
2/11/15 M&A: Some plants have turned brown due to
transplant shock. Review for removal if stems are not
alive. M&A: 4/15/15 Dead transplanted Carissa have
been removed. Please update status of any
replacements. M&A:8/13/15 Replacements being
addressed in turf renovation plans.
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
Median #28 (4) X (1) Sabal palm at the lift station is leaning due to previous Irma storm and should be
reset.
X X 3 At address 4149: Ligustrum tree damaged. Remove and replace.
X 21 East end bed: On west end one dead Pine tree needs to be removed.
X 43 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Golden Gate Pkwy. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 3 of 8
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Median #27 (5) X 41 East end: 3 (5) (10) – Flax lily are dead or missing. Replace with 1 gal. size.
X 43 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
Median #26 (6) X X 3 West end bed: (8 – 10) Thryallis shrubs missing. M&A: 12/11/17 recommend replanting per pervious
renovation plan or with yellow African iris. 1 gal. size.
X X 3 Existing large Pine tree was damaged and removed. Recommend replacement with
palm species due to median width.
X 27 West end bed: Liriope contains large amount of Torpedo grass weed. M&A: 11/11/15 The torpedo grass is taking over the
Liriope plants.
X 33 West end bed: (5) Dead and/or missing Flax lily plants. Install 1gal. size.
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
Median #25 (7)
Pump Station- Median #25 (7) east
end, 15 hp , 8” well, VFD, Motorola
Scorpio controller S3405-operates
G.G. Pkwy. Medians 22-32 (1-10)
X X New pump station has been installed and operational.
X 33 Transplanted Carissa plants west of pump station are in transplant shock and water
stress. Increase irrigation if it is not already.
2/11/15 M&A: Some plants have turned brown due to
transplant shock. Review for removal if stems are not
alive. M&A: 4/15/15 Dead transplanted Carissa have
been removed. Please update status of any
replacements. M&A:8/13/15 Replacements being
addressed in turf renovation plans.
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
Median #24 (8) X 21 Bahia turf placed in median after Traffic signal installation should be removed and area
mulched. Median never contained turf and if it remains irrigation should be reviewed to
see if there is proper coverage.
M&A. 03/09/16 Remove Bahia grass and extend Flax lily
plants in 1 gal. size.
X 50 Provide count to fill in missing Liriope plants in middle area of median. Hannula 1/13/14: Estimate #14-0005; submitted 1/10/14.
Pending fund 111 staff approval, M&A 4/13/16: An
updated proposal should be submitted.
Median #23 (9) X X 3 At address 4463: (1) Sabal palm and (1) Bottle brush trees were damaged. Remove
and replace Sabal.
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
X 58 Damaged area has grown over with native grasses and weeds. Apparent auto damage
to turf on west median end. Provide proposal for repair and replacement. (photo)
Plant material to be replaced; sod will not be replaced.
Hannula 1/13/14: Estimate #14-0005; submitted 1/10/14.
Pending fund 111 staff approval, M&A:8/13/15
Replacements being addressed in turf renovation plans.
Median #22 (10) X X 3 On west end (1) Oak damaged. Remove and replace.
X 26 2nd bed from east end: Yellow Iris have torpedo grass within them.
X 27 East end bed: Juniper Parsoni bed is missing (2) plants. Replace with 3 gal. size.
Commented [s21]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Golden Gate Pkwy. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 4 of 8
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
X 30 The invasive exotic Wedelia is taking hold again in the east end turf area. Treat to
remove.
M&A: 5/11/15: Continue treatments. M&A:8/13/15
Replacements being addressed in turf renovation plans.
X X 33 Median is in need of renovation due to amount of missing plants in multiple beds. M&A:8/13/15 Replacements being addressed in turf
renovation plans. See Median #12-29 comments above.
X 36 West end bed: Remove flagged declining Pine tree.
X 36 West end bed: (10) Juniper parsoni are missing. Replace with 3 gal. size. M&A:8/13/15 Replacements being addressed in turf
renovation plans. See Median #12-29 comments above.
X 41 East end bed: 3 – White African Iris are dead or missing. Replace with 1 gal. size. M&A: 8-14-14 (3) more additional Iris have declined or
have died. M&A: 11-13-14 There are only (3) remaining
Iris and (2) of those are in decline. It is recommended to
remove the Iris and install a planting of Variegated
Arboricola 'Trinette’ in a three row planting. (45) 3 gal.
size plants would be required. These Iris were originally
planted by the Contractor as a bed expansion.
M&A:8/13/15 Replacements being addressed in turf
renovation plans.
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
X 16 West end turf area: Area has grown over with native grasses and weeds. Previously
water stressed and/or chinch bug damage. Review irrigation coverage and treat as
required. Remove dead turf and resod. (photo)
Hannula: 11-12-13 On monthly schedule. Hannula's
1/13/14: 1st Treatment Completed on 12/2/13; 2nd
Treatment Scheduled for 01/20/14. 12/27/14 Irrigation
coverage reviewed; irrigation coverage is fine. Estimate
#14-0005; submitted 1/10/14. Pending fund 111 staff
approval
Median #21 (11) X 8 African Iris beds need to have dead foliage removed.
X 9 The east end Flax lily plants are declining and dying. M&A:8/7/17 Bare areas of missing plants exist in the Flax
lily bed.
X 34 On the west end of the median there is a pile of construction debris/dirt & rocks at the
back side of the pavers that has been overgrown with weeds. Please review and
provide comments as to how this happened and who may have caused this.
M&A:8/13/15 Being addressed in turf renovation plans.
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
X 60 East end bed: Flax lily has Torpedo grass in them. Continue to remove and treat
Torpedo grass in Iris plants.
Hannula: 11-12-13 On weekly schedule. Hannula
1/13/14: Fucilade to be applied during next herbicide
application on Jan 20th 2014, M&A: 4-12-14 Continue to
review and hand remove Torpedo grass. M&A; 5-14-14
Still minor amounts of Torpedo grass exist. Continue to
review, treat, and hand remove.
Commented [s22]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Golden Gate Pkwy. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 5 of 8
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
Median # 20 (12)
Pump Station- Median #20 (12)
west end, 15 hp, 8” well, VFD,
Motorola Irrinet controller #34-
operates G.G. Pkwy. Medians 21-
15 east side of canal, (11-18) &
Hunter Blvd. & Coronado Pkwy.
X X New pump station in operation.
X 8 Fakahatchee grass and African Iris beds need to have dead foliage removed. Coontie
for insect issues.
X 27 Auto accident on west end bed south side. 3 or 4 Big Rose plants damaged. M&A: 9/17/15 Remove damaged plants. M&A: 10/15/15
Replacements needed. M7A: 03/09/16 There are now 22
dead, missing and/or declining plants. Unsure of the
cause, because it could be due to previous cutback,
vehicular or work within the area.
X 27 Three (3) Fakahatchee grass beds are or have been damaged by insects and the
foliage is typically all brown. Recommend heavy cutback and then retreat for insects.
Any completely dead plants should be replaced with 3 gal. size plants.
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
Median #19 (13) X X 17 On the west end south side there are two variegated Pittosporum shrubs that were
damaged during the traffic signal installation. removal & replacement is recommended.
X X X 17 Previous water stress issues have created dead turf areas.
X 42 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
Median #18 (14) X X 3 (1) Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
X X X 17 Previous water stress issues have created dead turf areas.
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
X 45 Turf areas look very bad. Unless an auto accident is to blame the Contractor needs to
address this bad turf area that was under its maintenance. (photo)
Hannula 1/13/14: Estimate #14-0005; submitted 1/10/14.
Pending fund 111 staff approval. M&A:8/13/15
Replacements being addressed in turf renovation plans.
Median #17 (15) X X X 17 Previous water stress issues have created dead turf areas.
X 21 At address 4930: Large turf area dead due to water stress from no irrigation coverage. M&A: 4/13/16 The area of turf lost due to lack of water
has increased throughout the median.
X 27 One (1) Fakahatchee grass bed has been damaged by insects and the foliage is
typically all brown. Recommend heavy cutback and then retreat for insects. Any
completely dead plants should be replaced with 3 gal. size plants.
M&A: 4/13/16 Plants are water stressed.
X 29 Turf area on south side of median at Sabal palm has had the turf killed by some
chemical. Review and submit proposal for replacement.
M&A:8/13/15 Replacements being addressed in turf
renovation plans.
X 33 2nd bed from west end: Remove remaining Pittosporum and Indian hawthorn shrubs
and then expand adjacent Flax lily plants. (60) 1 gal. size.
M&A:9/17/15 Replacements being addressed in turf
renovation plans. M&A: 3/13/17 Dead plants removed.
Commented [s23]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Golden Gate Pkwy. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 6 of 8
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
Median #16 (16) X X X 17 Previous water stress issues have created dead turf areas.
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
Median #15 (17 – East of canal) X X X 17 Previous water stress issues have created dead turf areas.
X X 30 Existing Liriope and Big Rose bed sustained damage. Big Rose plants and Ligustrum
tree has been cut back or removed. It is recommended to remove remaining Big Rose,
Liriope and Ligustrum tree stump and then expand Flax lily plants to the west. It is
estimated about (75) 1 gal. plants will be needed. Review and provide plant count
based upon 36-inch on center spacing and 36 inch offset from back of curbing. bed
preparation should be included to lower existing grade below curbing so that mulch can
be retained.
Recommend providing proposal to proper County staff.
See Median #12-29 comments above. M&A:8/13/15
Replacements being addressed in turf renovation plans.
X 44 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
X 50 4th bed from east end: Expand Flax lily bed into area of removed plants. Remove all
Indian hawthorn plants. (photo)
Hannula 7/16/13: County postponed replacements until
Oct. 2013., M&A: 9-12-13 Provide proposal to staff for
replacements. M&A: 12-12-13 (1) Indian hawthorn still
needs to be removed at base of Oak tree. Hannula
1/13/14: Indian hawthorn removed.
Median #15 (17) (Old #18 –West of
canal)
X 33 Review Flax lily plants and provide count of dead or missing plants. 1 gal. size. M&A: 4/15/15 Flax lily: Treat for rust disease with
systemic type chemical. Treat for root rot and snails.
Remove dead foliage within and around base of plants.
In the future reduce mulch in contact and inside of Lily
plants. Existing mulch depth and caking is not permitting
water to penetrate into the soil. Interior sides of plants
are dry below mulch.
Median #14 (#19 – Paver only)
Median #13 (18) (Old #20) X X 2 On east end: (1) Mahogany tree had a large lower branch break off and the main trunk
has been damaged as a result. Based upon the main trunk damage it is recommended
the tree be considered for removal because of the long-term potential of the main trunk
rotting from standing water and debris. The tree will try to compartmentalize around the
damaged area, but we feel it will have weaken the main trunk to a point of possible
major failure in the future.
X X 3 At address 5251: (1) Oak tree damaged. Remove and replace.
3 At address 5229: Sabal palm leaning and needs to be reset.
X 41 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
Median #12 (19) (Old #21, Sign)
Pump Station- Median #12 (19) (Old
#21) east end bed, 7.5 hp, 6” well,
New pump station installed and operating.
Commented [s24]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Golden Gate Pkwy. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 7 of 8
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
VFD , Motorola Scorpio controller
S3401-operates G.G. Pkwy.
Medians 11-15 west side of canal
(19-22).
X X 19 One Silver saw palmetto is dead in the planting bed behind the sign and should be
replaced with a 10gal. size plant.
X 41 Turf areas in need of replacement. See Quarterly Addressed section for comments. M&A: 06/11/15 See Median #12-29 comments above.
Median #11 (20) (Old #22)
Irrigation General: X All pump stations have been replaced.
QUARTERLY ADDRESSED
All medians with turf: X 42 Turf areas in need of replacement. Provide proposal to show required turf replacement
square footage for each median. M&A: 06/11/15 See
Median #12-29 comments above. M&A: 8/13/15 Plan
preparation is underway for turf renovations in all
medians.
Median #23 (9) X 46 3rd bed from east end: Add 12- 3 gal. Fakahatchee grass in middle of bed. Hannula 7/16/13: County postponed replacements until
Oct. 2013., M&A: 9-12-13 Provide proposal to staff for
replacements. Hannula 1/13/14: Estimate #14-0005;
submitted 1/10/14. Pending fund 111 staff approval. See
Median #12-29 comments above.
X 66 The Mr. Farrow and Mr. Melchore memorial plaque and base need to be cleaned and
base repainted. (photo)
M&A:8/13/15 Pavers around the Memorial plaque have
settled and broken away from pattern. Pavers need to be
reset.
Median #17 (15) X 45 2nd bed from west end: Remove declining Variegated Pittisporum and Indian
hawthorn shrubs and replant area with Blueberry Flax Lily. 60 – 1 gal. plants will be
needed to expand westward from existing Flax lily bed.
Hannula 7/16/13: County postponed replacements until
Oct. 2013., Removal on schedule to completed by
9/15/13., M&A: 11-13-14 remove all Pittosporum shrubs
and then replant with Flax lily. Provide proposal.
Hannula 1/13/14: Estimate #14-0005; submitted 1/10/14.
Pending fund 111 staff approval, M&A: 4-12-14 Remove
additional dead and dying variegated Pittosporum
shrubs. See Median #12-29 comments above. M&A:
3/13/17 Dead plants removed. M&A: 2/12/18 Alternate
plant choice instead of Lily could be yellow African Iris.
Commented [mam5]:
McGee & Associates
Landscape Architecture
GOLDEN GATE BEAUTIFICATION, M.S.T.U. Location: Golden Gate Pkwy. Report Period: FY 17-18, February 2018 Report No.: Three
Page 8 of 8
LOCATION/WORK AREA AC S C R MAINTENANCE SERVICES OBSERVATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS RESPONSE or COMMENTS
GOLDEN GATE MSTU
FUND 153
FEBRUARY 20, 2018
FY18Vendor Item PO# Budget Commitments Expenditures
Budget
Remainder
1 CUR AD VALOREM TAX (376,900.00)$ -$ (326,368.40)$ (50,531.60)$
2 DEL AD VALOREM -$ -$ (10.65)$ 10.65$
3 OVERNIGHT INTEREST -$ -$ (587.31)$ 587.31$
4 INVESTMENT INTEREST (1,000.00)$ -$ (1,552.13)$ 552.13$
5 INTEREST TAX COLLECTED -$ -$ (14.59)$ 14.59$
6 INS CO REFUNDS -$ -$ -$ -$
7 REVENUE STRUCTURE (377,900.00)$ -$ (328,533.08)$ (49,366.92)$
8 CARRY FORWARD GEN (376,800.00)$ -$ -$ (376,800.00)$
9 CARRY FORWARD OF ENCUMBERED AMT -$ -$ -$ -$
10 NEG 5% EST REV 18,900.00$ -$ -$ 18,900.00$
11 TRANSFERS & CONTRIB (357,900.00)$ -$ -$ (357,900.00)$
12 TOTAL REVENUE (735,800.00)$ -$ (328,533.08)$ (407,266.92)$
13 ENG FEES OTHER McGee & Assoc. Annual Consultant 4500183111 30,000.00$ 24,040.00$ 3,680.00$ 2,280.00$
14 INDIRECT COST REIMBURS Collier County Indirect Cost Direct Pay 8,900.00$ 4,450.00$ 4,450.00$ -$
Hannula Landscape Landcape Incedentals 4500171934 1,727.27$ (1,727.27)$
Hannula Landscape Pest Control 4500183754 258.75$ 1,661.75$
Ground Zero Landscape Incidentals PO Req#10259235 25,000.00$
15 Hannula Landscape Landscape Incidentals 4500183435 2,471.91$ 5,528.09$
LANDSCAPE INCIDENTALS 40,000.00$ 29,457.93$ 5,462.57$ 5,079.50$
Ground Zero Landscape Maintenance PO Req#10259235 100,000.00$
16 Hannula Landscape Landscape Maintenance 4500183435 30,055.57$ 23,944.43$
OTHER CONTRACTUAL 201,300.00$ 130,055.57$ 23,944.43$ 47,300.00$
POST FREIGHT -$ -$ 1.44$ (1.44)$
17 ELECTRICITY FPL Electricity 4700003506 3,000.00$ 2,270.03$ 879.97$ (150.00)$
18 RENT EQUIPMENT J.M Todd Lease - Copier TBD 300.00$ -$ -$ 300.00$
19 INSURANCE GENERAL Collier County Insurance General Direct Pay 500.00$ 250.00$ 250.00$ -$
Florida Irrigation Systems Irrigation Parts 4500182192 961.45$ 1,038.55$
Road & Bridge Access to R& B ICC Pro IGC 156.20$
20 SPRINKLER SYSTEM MAINT 15,000.00$ 961.45$ 1,194.75$ 12,843.80$
21 MULCH Forestry Resources Mulch 4500182194 16,000.00$ 10,000.00$ -$ 6,000.00$
22 LIGHTING MAINTENANCE 10,000.00$ -$ -$ 10,000.00$
23 LICENSES AND PERMITS Road & Bridge Access to R& B ICC Pro IGC 4,000.00$ -$ 4,000.00$
24 OTHER MISCELLANEOUS Juristaff Transcriptionist 4500182195 3,500.00$ 2,785.69$ 214.31$ 500.00$
25 OFFICE SUPPLIES Staples Supplies 4500182958 300.00$ 183.76$ 16.24$ 100.00$
J.M Todd Copier - CPC monthly 4500182934 202.42$ 97.58$
J.M Todd Copier - CPC lease 4500182947 133.06$ 133.06$
26 COPYING CHARGES 300.00$ 335.48$ 230.64$ (266.12)$
27 FERT HERB CHEM Florikan Fertilizer 4500182193 7,300.00$ 2,000.00$ -$ 5,300.00$
28 OTHER OPERATING SUPPLIES United States Flags Flags Visa Payment 200.00$ -$ 81.60$ 118.40$
29 OTHER TRAINING EDUCATIONAL 200.00$ -$ -$ 200.00$
30 OPERATING EXPENSE 340,800.00$ 206,789.91$ 40,405.95$ 93,604.14$
31 IMPROVEMENTS GENERAL 345,200.00$ -$ -$ 345,200.00$
32 CAPITAL OUTLAY 345,200.00$ -$ -$ 345,200.00$
33 REIMBURSEMENT FOR STAFF SUPPORT 36,300.00$ -$ -$ 36,300.00$
34 Budget Trans from Appraiser 4,000.00$ -$ 1,052.56$ 2,947.44$
35 Budget Trans from Tax Collector 9,500.00$ -$ 6,777.37$ 2,722.63$
36 TRANSFERS 49,800.00$ -$ 7,829.93$ 41,970.07$
37 TOTAL BUDGET 735,800.00$ 206,789.91$ 48,235.88$ 480,774.21$
Total Available Balance 480,774.21$
797,305,507 FY 10 Final Taxable Value (2009) Plus Commited And Not Spent 206,789.91$
548,992,684 FY 11 Final Taxable value (2010)
478,980,702 FY 12 Final Taxable Value (2011)Estimated Cash 687,564.12$
516,253,177 FY 13 Final Taxable Value
533,888,677 FY 14 Final Taxable Value
575,541,732 FY 15 Final Taxable Value
611,031,317 FY 16 Final Taxable Value
673,743,701 FY 17 Final Taxable Value
753,770,378 FY 18 July Taxable Value 637,032.52$
11.88% Adj. 17 to 18
FY 18 FY 17
Millage 0.5000 0.3692 Maximum = .5000
Extension 376,885 248,746
Property Tax Limitation Impact
FY 18 Gross Taxable Value 753,770,378
Minus: New Const. Annex.13,167,640
Plus: Amendment #1 TV Component 0
Adj. Taxable Value 740,602,738
17 Levy 248,746
Rolled Back Rate (less Amend. One)0.3359
Estimated Cash Less
Uncollected Ad Valorem Taxes
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy
White Paper
Prepared by the Growth Management Department,
Community Planning Section Staff
December 2017
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 1 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy
Table of Contents
Page
Section 1: Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………1
Section 2: Background………………………………………………………………………………………….4
Section 3: Public Outreach, Data and Analysis………………………………………………………10
Section 4: List of Initial Recommendations……………………………………………………….…73
Appendix A: Public Outreach………………………………………………………………………………78
List of Figures Page
Figure 1: Golden Gate Master Plan Update 3 Areas………………………….……………….….2
Figure 2: Golden Gate Area South Blocks……………….………………………………….………….5
Figure 3: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Developed/Vacant Parcels………….……….…….6
Figure 4: Golden Gate Western Estates Developed/Vacant Parcels…………….………...7
Figure 5: Golden Gate City Aerial……………………………………………………………………….….8
Figure 6: Golden Gate City Vacant Parcels………………….……………………………………..….9
Figure 7: Golden Gate City Residential Parcels…….………………………………………………11
Figure 8: Golden Gate City Future Land Use Designations……………………………………12
Figure 9: Proposed Golden Gate City Future Land Use Designations…………………….14
Figure 10: Golden Gate City Redevelopment and Renewal Focus Area………………..15
Figure 11: Golden Gate City Activity Center Aerial……………………………………………….16
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 2 of 220
Figure 12: Golden Gate City Planned Transportation Improvements…………………….21
Figure 13: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Distribution of Residential Development…26
Figure 14: Golden Gate Western Estates Distribution of Residential Development..27
Figure 15: Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Study Area…………………………………28
Figure 16: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Neighborhood Centers…………………………….30
Figure 17: Neighborhood Center at Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevard……….…….31
Figure 18: Immokalee Road and Oakes Boulevard Interface……………………………….32
Figure 19: Area 1 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional
Uses…………………………………………………………………………………………………….33
Figure 20: Area 2 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional
Uses………….…………………………………………………………………………………………34
Figure 21: Area 3 Conditional Uses, Commercial and Potential Areas for Conditional
Uses………….…………………………………………………………………………………………35
Figure 22: Long Range Transportation Plan Highway Cost Feasible Plan………………42
Figure 23: Long Range Transportation Plan Needs Assessment…………………………...43
Figure 24: Long Range Transportation Plan New Bridges..……………………………………44
Figure 25: North Golden Gate Estates Flowway Restoration Project……………………52
Figure 26: Belle Meade Area RESTORE Project Area…………………………………………….53
Figure 27: Golden Gate Eastern Estates Non-Conforming Lots…………………………….55
Figure 28: Golden Gate Western Estates Non-Conforming Lots…………….…………….56
List of Tables
Table 1: Watershed Management Plan Initiatives……………………………………………….60
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 3 of 220
Section 1: Introduction
This White Paper provides a conceptual framework to address elements of the Golden Gate Area
Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy. The GGAMP is a separate element within the County’s
Comprehensive Plan. This framework serves as a vehicle to further vet and inform staff, community
leaders and the public in advance of the specific language that will be incorporated into the
transmittal documents for Growth Management Plan amendment, and the public hearing process.
The GGAMP is the second of four restudies focused on eastern Collier County, as directed by the
Board of County Commissioners (Board) on February 10, 2015. Focus areas of all four restudies
include complementary land uses and economic vitality, including housing affordability,
transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship. As the staggered restudies unfold,
relationships and synergies between the study areas are identified and maximized.
The Community Planning staff in the Zoning Division of the Growth Management Department
provide this document to describe the history and status the GGAMP (Section 2), the planning
process, outreach, data and analysis (Section 3) and the list of Initial recommendations (Section 4).
Appendix A includes the full documentation of the public outreach process and resu lts.
The Golden Gate area includes three diverse geographic areas: the eastern or rural Estates (east of
County Road 951), the western or urban Estates (West of County Road 951) and Golden Gate City,
an unincorporated area. With these differences in mind, public outreach was designed and pursued
along these three geographic lines. However, this report will generally follow a format that separates
Golden Gate City from both Estates areas. As understood from public outreach, the eastern and
western estates have a great deal in common. Where differences exist, they are described in Section
3. Golden Gate City is fundamentally different than either of the Estates areas.
The basic structure of the current GGAMP is divided into two main parts: The Goals, Objectives and
Policies (GOPs) section and the Land Use Designation Description section. The former section sets
forth vision, values, requirements and aspirations; the latter describes specific subdistricts and their
land uses within the GGAMP. Both sections guide the Code of Ordinances and Land Development
Code in enactment and updated amendments.
As a non-substantive consideration, staff proposes that the GOPs and Land Use Descriptions remain
as the organizational framework, but within two parts. One part will be the Golden Gate Estates, the
other will be Golden Gate City. In this way, the GOPs pertaining to these very different areas will
lend more geographic clarity.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 4 of 220
As with all restudy efforts, the fundamental premise is that any proposal for amendment to the
existing Plan must reflect the goals and vision of residents and stakeholders. Residents responded
well to outreach efforts and provided a foundation built on community vision and individual
preferences. Non-resident stakeholders include interests that extend beyond the boundaries of the
Golden Gate. For example, public water utilities in Collier County and City of Naples draw potable
water from beneath the Golden Gate Estates area. The issues and potentials involved in water must
be considered, along with other shared policy matters.
Note on terminology in this White Paper: As shown on Figure 1, the Estates area east of Collier Blvd.
(C.R. 951) will be alternatively described as the eastern Estates or the rural Estates; the Estates area
west of Collier Blvd. will be alternatively described as the western Estates or the urban Estates.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 5 of 220
Throughout this White paper are several figures or maps used for reference. These are also
maintained in PDF format on our website, so that the public may view and zoom in, as needed, with
greater picture clarity: http://www.colliergov.net/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning-
division/community-planning-section/golden-gate-area-master-plan-restudy/library.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 6 of 220
Section 2: Background
History of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan
The Golden Gate area was first conceived, platted and developed by the Gulf American Land Corp.
Development began in the late 1950’s and the subdivision was approved by the Board of County
Commissioners in 1960. By 1965, 90% of the land was platted and marketing was well underway.
The Estates portion of Golden Gate comprised 163 square miles (111,000 acres), nearly 8% of the
County’s total land area, and was believed to be the world’s largest subdivision. It included 813 miles
of roadway (mostly lime rock) and 183 miles of canal to drain the area for habitability. Prior to
development, the area was regularly inundated by several feet of water during the wet season. The
Estates subdivision included mostly 1.25, 2.5 and 5 acre parcels. It was intended to include single
family, multi-family and commercial land uses, but was rezoned into low-density single family
residential uses in 1974. By 1982, the minimum (legal conforming) lot size for all areas of the Estates
became one unit per 2.25 acres.
In 1983, the County entered into a settlement agreement with Avatar Corp., the successor to the
defunct Gulf American Land Corp. By that time, leaders recognized additional acreage and funds
would be needed to provide public services. The agreement included the provision of 1,062 acres
under County ownership to be managed for the purposes of recreation, utilities, community services
and essential services. The land was also provided as a source of funds to construct the facilities.
Prior to 1991, the Golden Gate area was governed by the County’s Future Land Use Element (FLUE),
part of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) first adopted in 1989. As mandated by the first GMP,
the unique characteristics of the area were recognized in 1991 by the adoption of the Golden Gate
Area Master Plan (GGAMP), a separate element in the Collier County Growth Management Plan.
Citizens and County leaders recognized the unique quality of the area, and gave special
consideration to natural resources, land use, water management and public facilities, as identified
by a Citizen’s Steering Committee.
In doing so, former Objective 1, Policies 1.1 and 1.3 and Future Land Use Maps for Golden Gate were
superseded. Nevertheless, other Goals, Objectives and Policies in the FLUE remain applicable to the
Golden Gate area.
In 1996, the Board adopted the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) for Collier County. As a result
of that effort, the original Master Plan was replaced by a new G GAMP, pursuant to Ordinance 97-
64.
In 2001, the Board directed a restudy of the GGAMP, undertaken by the Golden Gate Area Master
Plan Restudy Committee. The Committee met on more than twenty occasions between June 2001
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 7 of 220
and June 2003 and proposed amendments to the Board for consideration in two phases. The stated
goal of this restudy was to guide future decision making in a manner that balances the residents’
need for basic services with natural resource and preservation concerns.
Importantly, many of the topics heading todays restudy were closely reviewed by the Committee:
commercial uses, conditional uses, rural character and transportation. Subsequently, amendments
to the GGAMP were adopted in 2003 and 2004, reflecting community vision for the future of th e
area.
Since the 1990’s, the State of Florida had been purchasing parcels in the South Golden Gate
Estates/NRPA area. Under
the Florida Forever and
Save our Everglades
programs, Picayune Strand
State Park was envisioned
and pursued, along with
significant restoration
activity. The acquisition
process was completed
around 2006. Since then,
miles of roadway and canals
have been recontoured and
three large pump stations
and levies installed, with
the aim of rehydration to
restore natural sheetflow
for the benefit of wetlands,
aquifers and estuaries,
under the direction of
South Florida Water
Management District and
the Army Corps of
Engineers. Accordingly, as
shown in green on Figure 2,
approximately 39,000 acres
that comprised the “south
blocks” are no longer part
of the Golden Gate Area
Master Plan.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 8 of 220
Current Conditions
Following the completion of the purchase and assemblage of Southern Golden Gate Estates by the
State of Florida, the remaining area of the rural Golden Gate Estates remains at approximately
58,000 acres. The
urban Estates comprise
about 8,300 acres and
Golden Gate City
approximately 2,500
acres. The
characteristics of these
areas vary greatly.
The rural Estates
retains the most “rural”
character of the three
areas, given its size and
residential distribution.
Because of the
development pattern
and changes in
condition over the past
5 decades, flooding,
wildfire and wildlife
conditions play a more
important role in
eastern Estates
residents’ lives as
compared to the urban
area.
As of 2016, the rural
Estates was nearly 50%
built out, as shown in
Figure 3, with a higher
concentration of
dwelling units located
nearest the urban area.
The population
projection for 2016 was
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 9 of 220
approximately 32,000 persons. For several decades, this area has been described as a de facto
“affordable” housing area, given the land costs in comparison to urban locations. Though its
developers built canals to “drain” and lower the water table, remnant wetlands remain on a
significant portion of
the eastern Estates,
including areas within
the Horsepen Strand
flowway.
Meanwhile, the pace
of development
remains high in the
eastern Estates. In
fact, building permits
issued in this area
increased from 273 to
408 year to year, as
measured second
quarter, 2016 to 2017.
In contrast to the
rural, eastern Estates,
the western Estates is
more associated with
the urban area,
although large lots
predominate. This
relatively smaller area
is in closer proximity
to goods, services and
job opportunities.
Because of its
location, it is closer to
build-out with 86% of
the lots developed,
leaving only 14% vacant as of 2016.
Figure 4 illustrates the number of residential parcels developed and the number of parcels vacant.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 10 of 220
Golden Gate City is at the heart of the GGAMP. As illustrated on Figure 5, the City comprises a
denser population in close proximity to a mix of uses which include commercial, office, schools and
parks. Although some canals create impediments, and some infrastructure needs improvement, the
City is well connected to support a more walkable and bikeable community. Creating a vibrant,
walkable community has been identified as a top priority by its residents.
The projected 2016 population of Golden Gate City was 24,000. Golden Gate City has a unique
demographic; different than what is typically found in urban Collier County. The average age of its
residents is 30, compared to 47 county-wide. There are 42% more persons per household (3.38 v.
2.38) and 65% less median household income ($40,000 v. $66,000).
Nearly all parcels within Golden Gate City have existing development, however a few parcels remain
vacant. Figure 6 shows the current vacant parcels, along with the underlying land use designation.
Several vacant parcels exist in both residential and commercial designations. Many of the existing
residential and business structures date back to the 1960’s with land values exceeding structure
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 11 of 220
values. In addition, some of the larger commercial parcels within the Activity Center are now vacant
big-box retailers. These circumstances are a foreshadowing of future redevelopment.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 12 of 220
Section 3: Public Outreach, Data and Analysis
The Golden Gate area includes three diverse geographic areas: the eastern or rural Estates (east of
County Road 951), the western or urban Estates (West of County Road 951) and Golden Gate City,
an unincorporated area. With these differences in mind, the restudy effort included public outreach
and planning analysis along these three geographic lines.
This Section provides information reflective of the unique conditions of Golden Gate City and the
Estates. As understood from public outreach, the eastern and western estates have a great deal in
common and are discussed in this Section under the same Golden Gate Estates heading. Where
differences exist, they are described. The focus areas of complementary land use and economic
vitality, transportation and mobility, and environmental stewardship are addressed under both
Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates.
The Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy public outreach process included extensive public
engagement. Residents and stakeholders were encouraged to provide input through multiple
platforms including eight public workshops, staff presentations to both the Golden Gate City Civic
Association and the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association, a user-friendly website with surveys, and
communications through email distribution lists with approximately 330 stakeholders. Appendix A
includes the public workshop summaries, polling and survey results, and other communications
from stakeholders.
The public workshops for both
Golden Gate City and the western
and eastern Estates kicked-off with a
visioning process. The intent was to
determine if any of the community
values had changed. The visioning
process lead to each community
developing their own vision
statements. These community-
defined vision statements should
provide guidance for implementing
planning goals, objectives and
policies. These are provided as a
preface to the following Golden Gate
City and Golden Gate Estates
sections.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 13 of 220
Golden Gate City
The residents of Golden Gate City created a vision statement during the public workshops. This vision
statement reflects the need for the County to adopt land use and transportation policies in the
Golden Gate Area Master Plan that are people-oriented and support economic development and
redevelopment. Each adopted policy should relate to and further the community’s vision. This vision
of a family-oriented community gives direction to consider residents of all ages, children, adults and
the elderly, and how they safely move about town, and what destinations are available to help them
thrive.
Golden Gate City Vision Statement
“Golden Gate City is a safe, diverse, family-oriented community that offers easy access to
education, parks, shopping and services within a vibrant, walkable community.”
Land Use and Economic Vitality
Within Golden Gate City there are numerous future land use designations ranging from single family
residential use to heavy commercial use. Golden Gate City is a true mixed-use community. Within
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 14 of 220
Golden Gate City’s four-square-miles, residents are in close proximity to schools, parks, goods and
services. The majority of Golden Gate City is designated as residential (approximately 2,255 acres).
Commercial areas (291 acres) are distributed throughout the community along the major arterials
including Golden Gate Parkway, Santa Barbara Boulevard and Collier Boulevard. To accommodate
both residential and commercial uses, the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map provides six
different commercial designations, each with different allowed uses, intensities and development
standards. Figure 7 shows the Golden Gate City areas designated residential in yellow , school sites,
and the six designated commercial or mixed-use areas.
The majority of Golden Gate City is designated residential as seen on Figure 8. Well established,
stable neighborhoods are the building blocks of any community and should be protected and
enhanced. According to the most recent Collier County Property Appraise rs information there are
approximately 7,887 residential units, which includes 4,213 single family homes and 3,674 multi-
family homes. The multi-family homes are condos, apartments, and a good number of duplexes. This
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 15 of 220
housing mix supports great diversity in housing choices within Golden Gate City and allows for aging
in place within the same community.
While the Golden Gate Master Plan offers a full range of commercial uses, many commercial areas
remain under-utilized. Some of the largest stores, including K-Mart and Sweet Bay, have recently
closed. During the public workshops, the majority of participants felt there isn’t a need for additional
commercial areas, but instead want to focus on redevelopment of the existing areas to bring in new
businesses, shops, restaurants and services.
Along with community public workshops, Collier County Community Planning staff organized a
workshop specifically for all property owners within a commercial land use designation. The purpose
of the workshop was to identify opportunities and constraints to developing commercial uses. In
addition to noting desires to unify and simplify the uses, design standards and processes throughout
the commercial designations, there was strong sentiment supporting the evaluation of
redevelopment programs and tools for Golden Gate City.
To set the stage for redevelopment and creating an authentic s ense of place, it is proposed to
simplify the commercial land use designations along Golden Gate Parkway, and provide consistency
in the mix of uses and development standards. The following modifications are proposed to the land
use designations and Future Land Use Map.
1. Modify the designation of the Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial
Subdistrict (shown on Figure 7 above) to redesignate it and make consistent with the Golden
Gate Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict. This change will simplify the effort to create
design themes and development standards to benefit the community’s desire for future
redevelopment that is vibrant and walkable.
2. Add two properties along Golden Gate Parkway, not currently included in this designation.
One property is at the northeast corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara, where
a CVS store is currently located. The second property is the Coral Palm Apartments located
between the Activity Center and the Downtown District . Including this property meets the
intent of creating a mixed-use corridor. The addition of these two properties is forward
looking to provide for greater development consistency along Golden Gate Parkway in the
event of future redevelopment.
3. The final proposed change is to include the Wheels BMX skate park and band shell within the
boundary of the Activity Center. The Activity Center provides many civic uses and including
this park is consistent with the mixed-use intent of the Activity Center. This will provide
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 16 of 220
greater certainty that the park is well connected into the Activity Center and a focal point for
community celebrations.
There are two policies in the current GGAMP that call for community-planning and neighborhood-
based planning programs, however, these policies have not been implemented. During the public
workshops, residents expressed a clear willingness to participate in the planning process for their
community. When asked, “would you be willing to participate in community -based planning
program?”, the majority of workshop participants were willing to engage in such a program.
Continued community participation will be needed for future planning efforts such as
redevelopment, urban design themes, development standards, and the creation of branding and
marketing materials.
To best facilitate community and neighborhood-based planning programs Collier County staff should
engaged with and support the established Golden Gate City Civic Association and the Municipal
Services Taxing District (MSTU), utilizing these established groups to involve residents in future
planning efforts. Working with these associations builds cohesion, recognition and support for
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 17 of 220
community leadership to continue their focus for improvements in Golden Gate City. It is proposed
to work within the established Civic Association and the MSTU, their leadership, administration and
outreach platforms, rather than creating a new community planning group administered by Collier
County staff as currently called for in the Master Plan.
Supporting Golden Gate City Redevelopment
Golden Gate City contains several commercial areas that are centrally located to the population. The
available acreage for commercial development is sufficient to support the residents of Golden Gate
City and the surrounding area; therefore, there is not a need to designate additional areas. Instead,
focus is needed within the current commercial areas. These areas are dated, auto-oriented and have
some significant “dark boxes” resulting from big box store closures. For the community vision to be
realized, redevelopment that is people-oriented is needed. The proposed areas to emphasize
renewal efforts are the Activity Center and along Golden Gate Parkway (Figure 10).
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 18 of 220
There are three distinct areas within the Activity Center; one is the civic area where the community
center, library and other civic uses are located, the second area is where the Winn-Dixie is located,
and the third area is where the vacant K-Mart building is located. Both the Winn-Dixie plaza and the
vacant K-Mart plaza each have a single owner, making these large aggregated parcels more viable
for redevelopment (Figure 11).
As developed, these three
areas within the Activity
Center do not interconnect or
relate to one another. They
were clearly developed
separately without a vision or
consideration for the whole.
This is a shortcoming of the full
potential of this Activity
Center. Moreover, the Activity
Center plazas were developed
in an auto-oriented pattern
with access and circulation
favoring the automobile. This
form of urban development,
also found along Golden Gate Parkway, creates impediments to the community’s desire to be a safe,
walkable, vibrant community. The typical auto-oriented pattern creates an “anywhere USA” and
lacks authentic community identity.
Opportunity Naples (2014) has been a guidepost for Collier County economic development.
Opportunity Naples found a need for shovel ready sites for target industries in Collier County. The
report also found “growth trends in Collier County’s age dynamics risk the future sustainability of
the local workforce. Collier County’s 25 to 44-year-old population is proportionally smaller than
every comparison area except Sarasota County, as is Collier’s percentage of 0 to 19-year-old
residents. Without an influx of younger workers migrating to the County or a spike in birth rates,
Greater Naples could face a significant shortfall of replacement workers for future retirees. Likewise,
there will be an occupational shortage in Collier County if qualified workers aged 24 to 44 are not
recruited to the area to replace retirees.” This age group, and most specifically the millennials, is
one of the most sought-after market segments. Fortunately for Golden Gate City the median age is
30, falling right into that desirable workforce age range.
Study after study shows millennials are increasingly choosing vibrant , healthy, walkable
communities and rejecting the automobile-centric land use patterns of the generations before them.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 19 of 220
Golden Gate City has the basis to be just the type of place the young workforce and their employers
are searching for. Further supporting mixed-use, allowing employment centers, and improving the
walking infrastructure can become an economic development strategy—a tool to retain and attract
a skilled workforce and to build a sustainable economic base.
To increase job opportunities within Golden Gate City, and provide nearly shovel ready sites, it is
proposed to add several specific land uses to the Activity Center designation. These uses support
target industries such as, advanced manufacturing, software development, and data and
information processing. To ensure a process to determine compatibility with the surrounding area,
these new uses within the Activity Center are proposed as conditional uses, hence nearly shovel
ready. Alternatively, the Board could allow these as permitted uses and promoted development
standards within the Land Development Code to address compatibility.
There are several redevelopment programs that could assist in furthering economic development
within Golden Gate City. Collier County uses two of these tools. First , the Community
Redevelopment Area (CRA). Collier County currently has two CRAs, one in Immokalee and one in the
Bayshore Triangle area. The establishment of a CRA is a very lengthy and bureaucratic process. At
the state legislative level, CRAs have recently come under scrutiny with some legislators supporting
their disbandment. The advantage of the CRA is the County’s administration, engagement and
oversight of the redevelopment area projects, along with Tax Increment Financing (TIF). However,
Golden Gate City’s demographic and economic profile is similar to that of Immokalee and Bayshore
and while a CRA may benefit Golden Gate City, it is likely to compete for grants with the other two
CRAs therefore inhibiting the potential of the all CRAs.
The second tool the County uses is the Innovation Zone. Ave Maria town centers are designated
Innovation Zones. The Innovation Zone, created by BCC Ordinance 2010-20, is a local TIF tool to
promote economic growth and diversity. Innovation Zones may be designated by the BCC through
the implementation of Economic Development Plans adopted by resolution for each Innovation
Zone. Per the Ordinance, “the use of available TIF revenues within an Innovation Zone as a dedicated
economic development tool and funding source enhance the general welfare of the County through
the advancement of new employment opportunities, the implementation of redevelopment
initiatives, the creation of new economic development opportunities and locations and the
expansion of existing employment centers.”
By permitting specific light industrial uses and employment centers for target industries within the
Golden Gate City Activity Center, there is a clear intent to promote economic growth in Golden Gate
City, thereby making the Innovation Zone an applicable and viable tool for redevelopment. As a local
tool, the BCC is able to designate Innovation Zones without State oversight. Measuring the pros and
cons of each redevelopment tool, it is proposed for the Board to designate an Innovation Zone which
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 20 of 220
encompasses the Activity Center and Golden Gate Parkway to promote economic growth and
redevelopment.
In the Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict there is a provision for a minimum project size of one
acre. Most parcels are half or a quarter of this size making it less feasible for the property owners to
develop or redevelop their properties under this requirement. It is proposed to remove this
limitation in effort to support the property owners desire to develop their property consistent with
the uses allowed. The Land Development Code may be revised as necessary to address any
development standards needed to support this change.
The Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, located along the western side of Collier Boulevard
between Golden Gate Parkway and Green Boulevard allows heavy commercial with some properties
presently zoned C-5, the most intense commercial district. Sustainable communities need
appropriate locations for heavy commercial zoning. This land use designation is well located and
there are no changes proposed. However, it should be noted that some homeowners located within
the western portion of this Subdistrict were very surprised to learn their home had a heavy
commercial land use designation. The previous restudy expanded this subdistrict boundary back into
a single-family neighborhood. Careful consideration should be given within the Land Development
Code to ensure design standards are in place so homeowners are not negatively impacted.
Growth Management Plan Policies
The following goals, objectives, policies and land use designations outline the land use provisions
currently adopted. The policies are relatively non-descript and do not necessarily form a clear the
direction for Golden Gate City. This outline is followed by policy recommendations proposed to
identify and further the community’s vision.
Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP
Goal 4:
To preserve and enhance a mix of residential and commercial land uses within Golden Gate City that
provides for the basic needs of both the local residents and the residents of the surrounding area.
Objective 4.1:
Provide for residential and commercial land uses that meet the needs of the surrounding area in the
development and redevelopment within Golden Gate City.
Policy 4.0.1:
Development and redevelopment with Golden Gate City shall be guided by the residential and
commercial needs of the surrounding area.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 21 of 220
Policy 4.1.1
Collier County shall develop an implementation schedule for the creation of a community-planning
program for Golden Gate City…
Policy 4.1.2
Collier County shall begin to examine, by holding community meetings, the feasibility of establishing
neighborhood-based planning programs within Golden Gate City that focus on the unique or distinct
features of the different portions of the community. While focusing on distinct areas within the
community, such neighborhood planning efforts as may be established shall not neglect Golden Gate
City as a whole.
Policy 4.1.3:
Collier County shall examine the feasibility of crafting land development regulations specific to the
Golden Gate City community. Such regulations shall focus on the unique circumstances of this
community.
Existing Non-residential Land Use Designations (synopsis)
High Density Residential Subdistrict
To encourage higher density residential and promote mixed -uses in close proximity to Activity
Centers, those residential zoned properties permitting up to 12 dwelling units per acre.
Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict:
The primary purpose of the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict is to encourage
redevelopment along Golden Gate Parkway in order to improve the physical appearance of the area
and create a viable downtown district for the residents of Golden Gate City and Golden Gate Estates.
Mixed-use Activity Center Subdistrict
The Activity Center designated of the Future Land Use Map is intended to accommodate commercial
zoning within the Urban Designated Area. Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in
character.
Golden Gate Urban Commercial In-fill Subdistrict
This Subdistrict is located at the southwest quadrant of C.R. 951 and Golden Gate Parkway.
Commercial uses are limited to low intensity and intermediate commercial uses similar to C-1, C-2,
or C-3 zoning.
Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict
The intent of the Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict is to provide Golden Gate City with an area
that is primarily commercial, with an allowance for certain conditional uses. Thy types of uses
permitted within this Subdistrict are low intensity retail, offices, personal services and institutional.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 22 of 220
The provisions of this Subdistrict are intended to provide Golden Gate City with a viable professional
office district with associated small-scale retail.
Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict
The primary purpose of the Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict is to encourage redevelopment
along Collier Boulevard in order to improve the physical appearance of th e area. This Subdistrict is
intended to allow a mix of uses, including heavy commercial within those areas presently zoned C-
5.
Recommended Policies
• Establish land use designations to protect established, stable, neighborhoods and provide
opportunity for redevelopment and renewal through development practices that promote
compatibility.
• Support redevelopment of Golden Gate Parkway to provide for a viable pedestrian
environment adding to the vibrancy and walkability of Golden Gate City.
• Add land uses within the designated Activity Center intended to promote job growth and
strengthen the economic health of Golden Gate City.
• Protect the land uses allowing for diversity of residential housing.
• Engage with the Golden Gate Civic Association and MSTU to further community planning
programs.
• Consider redevelopment tools such as an Innovation Zone to further economic development
and redevelopment strategies.
• Develop amendments to the Land Development Code to support and implement
redevelopment initiatives including incentives for building remodeling and renovation.
• Develop a branding and marketing plan for Golden Gate City.
• Ensure pertinent incentive programs are made available to those seeking business creation
and redevelopment opportunities in Golden Gate City.
• Modify the land use designations along Golden Gate Parkway to create a consistent
development pattern.
• Add target industry uses to the Activity Center.
• In the Santa Barbara Commercial District, remove the minimum project size of one acre.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 23 of 220
Transportation and Mobility
Golden Gate City has a well-connected neighborhood roadway network. However, nearly all streets
lack sidewalks or other infrastructure to support walking. This severely limits safe transportation for
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 24 of 220
children and those that don’t drive. During the public workshops, there were few complaints of
traffic congestion, apart from a few residents’ concern about peak-hour traffic on Santa Barbara
Boulevard at the Green Boulevard intersection. The primary transportation focus of residents is
improving walking, bicycling and transit access. This is reflected in the Golden Gate City vision
statement. It was reported during the public workshops that many Golden Gate City residents are
bicycling to work in the coastal area. Recognizing Golden Gate City is a family oriented community,
many of the citizens are not of driving age; rather, they are children and seniors that are no longer
driving trying to get to services, schools, parks and friends homes.
The 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Needs Assessment shows a needed demand to improve
Santa Barbara Boulevard north of Golden Gate Parkway, and that is the only roadway improvement
shown as “needed.”
The critical need for transportation improvements in Golden Gate City are those that s upport
walking, bicycling and transit. Figure 12 shows the existing sidewalk systems is limited to those areas
surrounding schools. A few planned sidewalk construction projects are mainly along arterial roads.
Very few streets have bike lanes. The Collier MPO has identified the transit need in Golden Gate City
by including a future transit transfer point, indicated with a blue circle in the center of Golden Gate
City.
Additionally, recognizing the transportation needs of pedestrians, the Collier MPO recently initiated
the Golden Gate City Walkable Community Study. This study will assess and prioritize pedestrian
facility needs for Golden Gate City based on quantitative and qualitative factors. This study will
provide guidance to improving the waling conditions in Golden Gate City. Further, it will help the
Golden Gate City achieve their vision of a safe, family-oriented community. Following completion of
the study and acceptance by the Collier MPO, the approved study recommendations should be
incorporated into the Golden Gate Area Master Plan.
Growth Management Plan Policies
The following goals, objectives, policies outline the related transportation provisions currently
adopted. This outline is followed by policy recommendations proposed to identify and further the
community’s vision.
Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP
Policy 6.2.3:
Sidewalks and bike lanes shall provide access to government facilities, schools, commercial areas
and the planned County greenway network.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 25 of 220
Objective 6.3:
Coordinate with local emergency services officials in planning and constructing road improvements
within Golden Gate Estates and Golden Gate City to ensure that the access needs of fire department,
police and emergency management personnel and vehicles are met.
Objective 7.3
Develop strategies through the County Growth Management Division – Planning and Regulation for
the enhancement of roadway interconnection within Golden Gate City and the Estates Area
including interim measures to assure interconnection.
Recommended Policies
• Support all transportation needs within Golden Gate City with an emphasis on walkability.
Walkability will be improved through the implementation of the recommendations of the
MPO’s Walkability Study.
• Within the Activity Center, maintain multiple connections to the surrounding neighborhoods
and through the Activity Center while providing safe and direct access to transit stops within
or adjacent to the Activity Center.
• Consider protecting alleys from vacating process where there is reasonable connection and
continuity for future pathway corridors.
• Initiate periodic speed studies in Golden Gate City and when appropriate, utilize traffic
calming measures and speed limit reductions to ensure a safe pedestrian environment.
Environmental Stewardship
The primary concern for potential environmental degradation in Golden Gate City is associated with
the many private wells and septic tanks. As reported by Collier County Utilities Department,
residences so near one another pose a significant risk of contamination to individual water wells or
supply-sources for the entire region. Private water wells and septic tanks age over time, have a
limited lifecycle, and have a wide disparity in the level of maintenance by various property owners,
affecting the life and functionality of the tanks.
Currently, only one complete quadrant of four within Golden Gate City has access to a treated
potable water supply from a private utility, Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA). At their
June 27, 2017 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners provided direction to County staff to
initiate a due diligence process and negotiate terms of acquisition of FGUA. Integrating the Golden
Gate City system into the Collier County Public Utilities system and expanding utility services to
homes and businesses within Golden Gate City provides a long-term strategy to address potential
environmental impacts and system reliability.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 26 of 220
Growth Management Plan Policies
While Golden Gate City doesn’t encompass significant natural resources, it is important to focus on
policies related to utilities for the reasons stated above. The adopted policies are related to the
Florida Governmental Utilities Authority. The proposed provisions reflect the County’s initiative to
assume responsibility of maintenance and expansion of utilities for Golden Gate City.
Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP
Objective 1.2:
Ensure public facilities are provided at an acceptable level of service.
Policy 1.2.3:
Consistent with Chapter 89-169, Florida Administrative Code, the Florida Governmental Utilities
Authority, or its successor, shall provide updated water and sewer service data to the Collier County
Water and Wastewater Authority on an annual basis.
Policy 1.2.4:
Due to the continued use of individual septic systems and private wells within a densely platted
urban area, the Florida Governmental Utilities Authority, or its successor, is encouraged to expand
their sewer and water service area to include all of that area known as Golden Gate City at the
earliest possible time.
Recommended Policy
• Maintain and expand sewer and water service in accordance with the Collier County Water
and Sewer District Implementation Plan.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 27 of 220
Golden Gate Estates
Golden Gate Eastern Estate Vision Statement
“The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an interconnected, low-density residential community with
limited goods and services in neighborhood centers, defined by a rural character with an
appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings.”
Golden Gate Western Estate Vision Statement
“Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density, large-lot residential neighborhood in a natural
setting with convenient access to the coastal area.”
Land Use and Economic Vitality
Within the GGAMP, there are Goals, Objectives and Policies (GOPs) as well as a Land Use Description
Section that pertain specifically to Estates land uses. This section describes the status, review and
community recommendations pertaining to GOPs and Estates land use descriptions, both east
(rural) and west (urban) of CR 951.
Generally, the land uses can be divided into these categories: Residential, Commercial and
Conditional. Additionally, policies related to public facilities, adjacent land uses and notice provisions
are considered.
Residential Land Uses
Golden Gate Estates is an area primarily intended for residential uses. Of the 66,000 acres that make
up today’s Golden Gate Estates, over 95% is reserved for residential use under the current plan. This
is consistent with Goal 5 of the GGAMP that balances the preservation of rural character, wooded
lots, the keeping of livestock, the ability to grow crops. wildlife activity and low density residential
with limited commercial and conditional uses.
As of 2016, the rural Estates residential lots total almost 24,000 in number. Approximately half have
been developed. Absent future changes in conservation of parcels for environmental or recreational
purposes, the current population of 31,100 can be expected to double by build-out.
Figure 13 shows the existing distribution of developed residential areas with in the rural Estates.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 28 of 220
By contrast, Figure 14 shows
the development of urban
Estates lots is much closer to
build-out. In this area, 86% of
the parcels have been
developed, leaving only 430
vacant parcels in this much
smaller portion of Golden
Gate Estates.
An analysis of building
activity in Golden Gate
Estates suggests that
development is currently
accelerating. When
comparing annual totals as
of second quarter, 2017 to
second quarter, 2016, permit
applications rose from 273 to
408, an increase of almost
50%. Taken together, 681
housing starts over this 2-
year period suggests
economic vigor in a post-
high foreclosure market.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 29 of 220
During public outreach, residents
and stakeholders did not
advocate any major changes in
residential land use. Most
individuals polled preferred to
maintain a low density residential
environment with few changes.
In fact, the Golden Gate Estates
Area Civic Association (GGEACA)
voiced the preference for a “low
density overlay” to protect its
character well into the future.
The minimum lot size would
remain unchanged, with the
possibility of recombining some
legal non-conforming (smaller)
lots. No new designations of
residential areas to
Neighborhood Centers were
suggested. The sole conversion of
residential areas endorsed by the
public was for office type
commercial along a short length
of Immokalee Road in the Urban
Estates and the possibility of non-residential land uses near the Randal Rd. curve on Immokalee Rd.
Residents were polled about some specific aspects of Residential land use. Polling questions
included allowing group homes as a permitted use and changing the rules surrounding home-based
businesses. Public sentiment was against any change in either topic area.
When asked about the desirability of allowing rental of guest houses, polls found mixed results. At
a public workshop held in November 2016, 56% of respondents were in favor. In contrast, only 26%
responded favorably at a February 2017 public workshop. Currently, there are approximately 700
guest homes in the Estates area. Based on the strong environmental preferences in response to
other issues, staff does not recommend guest house rentals, as it would tend to weaken the desire
to retain a lower density, lower impact community.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 30 of 220
Some requested changes, as described in the environmental portion below, relate the desire to
recombine legal non-conforming lots and to require or incentivize on-site stormwater retention and
other water-related initiatives to maximize water quality, percolation and floodplain protection.
Also, noted in the environmental section, are recommendations for strengthening wildfire
prevention and lighting standards. These provisions cross several land uses, including residential
land use.
Public Notice
Although the concept of strengthening various notice provisions was not queried or mentioned in
public outreach workshops, staff has observed one notice issue in the context of public petitions.
Currently, mailed notices are required in advance of Neighborhood Information Meetings (NIMs) as
well as certain public hearings. Where required, it would be beneficial for all involved to provide
notices along the entire length of dead-end Estates avenues or streets where a project makes direct
impact, if the length is greater than the required linear distance of 1,000 feet. (See Non-Residential
Uses/Notice provisions, below.)
Specific Property Re-designations
From time to time staff was queried about specific properties and whether there would be any
specific land use changes recommended. Staff understood its Restudy scope as one essentially
limited to universal principles- either in land use or other GOPs. However, it is always possible that,
during the Public Hearing process, public officials will endorse land use changes in a parcel specific
manner. For example, parcels
owned by the County may be
the subject of Board direction at
Transmittal to effect affordable
or senior housing needs, or to
accommodate other public uses
such as park and ride locations,
or other land uses. One specific
location that gained attention
following public outreach is the
area in the vicinity of the
Immokalee Rd. curve near
Randall Blvd. This is a location
where significant transportation
planning is underway, and the
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 31 of 220
area may be suitable for non-residential uses such as an activity center or other designation. The
recommendations below include this area as a future study area to det ermine appropriateness of
re-designation, following the completion of the Randall Blvd. and Oil Well Road Corridor Study. The
depiction of the future study area, below, extends from 33d Ave NE to properties west of Wilson
Blvd., and may be adjusted before the study begins. Staff recommends that the study commence
upon the completion of the Oil Well Rd. and Randall Blvd. transportation study.
Growth Management Plan Policies
Related Existing Provisions in GGAMP:
Designation Description/Residential Estates Subdistrict: Single family residential development is
allowed within this Subdistrict at a maximum density of one unit per 2.25 gross acres, or one unit
per legal non-conforming lot of record, exclusive of guest houses.
Objective 5.3:
Provide for the protection of the rural character of Golden Gate Estates.
Policy 5.3.0.1:
Rural character protection provisions shall provide for the preservation of such rural amenities as,
but not limited to, wooded lots, the keeping of livestock, the ability to grow crops, wildlife activity,
and low-density residential development.
Policy 5.3.2:
The Land Development Code shall continue to allow and further encourage the preservation of
native vegetation and wildlife indigenous to the Estates area.
Objective 1.4:
Provide a living environment within the Golden Gate area, which is aesthetically acceptable and
protects the quality of life.
Policy 1.4.0.1 Collier County shall provide a living environment that is aesthetically acceptable and
protects the quality of life through the enforcement of applicable codes and laws.
Policy 1.4.1: The County’s Code Enforcement Board shall strictly enforce the Land Development
Code and other applicable codes and laws to control the illegal storage of machinery, vehicles and
junk, and the illegal operation of commercial activities within the Golden Gate area.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 32 of 220
Recommended Policies
• See Non-residential Land Uses and Environmental Recommendations.
Neighborhood Centers and Non-residential Uses
Presently, there are three (3) Neighborhood Center designations in the Rural Estates and one (1) on
the eastern edge of the urban Estates. In addition to Neighborhood Centers, there are four (4)
mixed-use or commercial Sub-districts in the rural Estates and six (6) within the urban Estates. The
locations can be seen below in Figure 16.
During the public outreach meetings in the rural Estates and in the urban Estates, no new
Neighborhood Centers were suggested or desired. Rather, there was strong sentiment to increase
the availability of commercial uses in adjoining RFMUD and RLSA areas. In this way, the predominant
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 33 of 220
rural, residential character of the Estates could be maintained. Importantly, by placing office,
commercial, business and industrial parks in these adjoining Districts, shopp ing, employment and
entertainment opportunities would emerge in closer proximity to the Estates, and within easier
drive times. As noted in the Master Mobility Plan (2012), reverse trips and shorter trips (fewer
vehicle miles travelled) yield benefits to infrastructure demand, local economy, quality of life,
environmental protection and public safety.
Resizing the Neighborhood Centers
Although no new Neighborhood Centers were desired by the public, there was a clear desire by
those within the rural Estates that the three Neighborhood Centers should be “right-sized”, to
function appropriately within a rural context. For example, Figure 17 shows the three quadrants
within the Wilson Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard Center contains development areas of 8.45,
7.15 and 4.86 acres, as seen in the figure below. As stated by the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic
Association (GGEACA), these
Centers should be allowed
“sufficient (increased) area for
road development,
septic/wastewater treatment,
and water retention.”
Additional rationale would
include parking, future right-
of-way expansion and
effective buffering from
residential uses.
The GGEACA recommended an
80-acre maximum node for
each of the three rural Neighborhood Centers. This equates to a maximum of 20 acres per quadrant-
an important measure because at least 2 of the 3 rural Neighborhood Centers will not develop all 4
quadrants. In most instances 20 acres will not be required to build an efficient development area,
but can serve as a maximum under the Master Plan. Upsizing of any Neighborhood Center would
require a rezoning of the property. The maximum acreage per quadrant is not an entitlement but
allows the applicant to request zoning greater than the current Future Land Use Map would indicate,
under criteria, without a requirement to amend the GGAMP.
In all, there are 10 commercial or mixed-use subdistricts in Golden Gate Estates. For the most part,
these subdistricts emerged over the past 20 years through private plan amendment applications and
Board approvals. As noted, the scope of this Restudy does not include additional site-specific
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 34 of 220
recommendations. Further, stakeholders do not presently support additional site -specific
commercial designations.
Immokalee Rd./Oaks Blvd. Interface
There is one location within the urban Estates best described as a potential corridor re-designation.
This is an area along the Immokalee Road/Oaks Estates interface as shown in Figure 18. Currently
zoned uses among the 16 parcels located in this corridor include 2 com mercial uses (C-1), 8
conditional uses and 6 residential uses. One of the residential uses is entitled to a transitional
conditional use application. Another is a County-owned parcel for water retention. Thus, five parcels
could retain existing residential zoning or apply for a CU or rezone to C-1, under the
recommendation below.
When asked about additional conditional uses in the western Estates, a slight majority felt that
additional locations were not needed. However, when asked whether the Immokalee Road/Oaks
interface should have future land uses to include office and conditional uses, over 75% were in favor.
The public understood that a more unified planning approach to this corridor could result in better
outcomes, including access points and continu ity. For this reason, the recommendation below
suggests a FLUE designation that allows rezone applications for C-1 uses as well as conditional uses
in this corridor.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 35 of 220
Conditional Uses
Conditional use opportunities in Golden Gate Estates include churches, social and fraternal
organizations, child care
and adult day care centers,
private schools, group care
facilities (such as nursing
homes and assisted living
facilities) and model
homes. As conditional
uses, they are generally
appropriate if compatible
with neighboring uses, and
should be limited as to
location and number. A
GGAMP allowance for
conditional use provides a
right to seek approval, not
a right for the use at any
location. Typically, if
granted, conditional uses
are subject to numerous
conditions of development
and operation.
The GGAMP allows
conditional use
applications for properties
designated as residential.
However, the locational
criteria are extremely
limited, except for essential
services. The
Neighborhood Center
Transitional Conditional Use provisions allow such applications if immediately adjacent to a
designated Neighborhood Center (there are 4 in total). The Transitional Conditional Use provisions
allow applications for conditional uses if adjacent to some, but not all non -residential uses. In
addition, there are further restrictions along Golden Gate Parkway from Livingston to Santa Barbara
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 36 of 220
and on the west side of Collier Blvd. The limited availability for conditional use applications can be
gleaned from the analytic Figures 19, 20 and 21. The areas marked in yellow indicate conditional use
potential under the current GGAMP. Because Golden Gate Estates is 50% built out, it is likely that
additional locations would be useful for conditional uses as development progresses. With this in
mind, staff sought public feedback on the possibility of expanding location potentials.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 37 of 220
Arterial Intersections
Surveys in the rural Estates indicated a preference to allow some additional potential CU locations
if limited as to location and type. A majority stated that additional CUs should be allowed at more
locations, and specifically allowed at arterial intersections (described as 4 or more lane roads
intersected by 4 or more lane roads). Slightly less than half of those surveyed in the urban Estates
thought that CUs should be considered at major intersections (45% v. 50%). While suitability of land
use underlies this recommendation, we note that there is a possibility that the conversion of use
from residential to conditional use could potentially increase future ROW acquisition costs for future
road expansion. A compilation of the intersections that would qualify as include:
Rural Estates
• Everglades Blvd. and Oil Well Rd.
• Golden Gate Blvd. and Collier Blvd. (east quadrants)
• Vanderbilt Beach Rd. and Wilson Blvd. (future)
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 38 of 220
• Everglades Blvd. and Randall Rd. (future)
• Wilson Blvd. and Immokalee Rd. (future, south quadrants)
Urban Estates
• Logan Blvd. and Pine Ridge Rd.
• Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd. (west quadrants)
• Logan Blvd. and Vanderbilt Beach Rd. (future, SW quadrant only)
(Note: “future” designation derived from 2040 LRTP)
Based on this recommendation, a total of 6 quadrants in the rural Estates could qualify for CU
application, not considering current land uses at those locations. An additional 10 quadrants could
support conditional use applications in the rural Estates, based on improvements indicated in the
MPO’s LRTP. In the urban Estates, a total of 6 quadrants could qualify for CU application not
considering current uses. An additional quadrant could qualify based on the MPO’s LRTP.
Public opinion differed when individuals spoke about church uses. Opinions ranged from allowing
churches along major road corridors to eliminating any additional locations for churches.
Staff’s recommendation, below, is the addition of the major arterial intersections (as defined) as a
locational criterion for CU applications; plan language would allow parcel assemblage where
minimum ingress/egress requirements dictate. The CU applicant should demonstrate the need for
the requested acreage in the context of the intended use and facilities and ingress/egress
recommendations.
Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd. Special Provisions
As noted in the Related Existing Provisions section, below, there are special provisions related to
Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd. frontages. As described above, the only change to the Golden
Gate Parkway provisions would be a change allowing CU applications for properties located at the
corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Blvd. The two quadrants at that location are
currently zoned PUD or CU.
With respect to the Collier Blvd. Special provisions, the GGAMP currently requires adjoining
conditional uses on two sides, rather than the transitional conditional use provision requiring certain
non-residential uses on one side only. Staff observes that, during a public hearing for a zoning change
request at 13th Ave SW and Collier Blvd, a conditional use was not available under the GMP due to
this provision. However, the property in question was located next to an industrial type (PUD) use,
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 39 of 220
which could make a CU a suitable transition to adjoining residential. For this reason, the
recommendation below would remove the Collier Blvd. Special Provision. We also note that this
specific recommendation was not vetted during public outreach workshops. Accordingly, this fact
should be noted during the Transmittal process.
Communication Towers
Communication towers are listed conditional uses in Golden Gate Estates. As such, they are limited
to the locational criteria found in the Designation Description section. The available locations for cell
towers are extremely limited, as these are not “essential services” as defined in the Land
Development Code. As technologies quickly advance, the applications for communication
transmission devices may look considerable different in just a few years than they do today.
Individual consideration of proposed installations should be reviewed in each instance.
A solid majority of residents surveyed, both in the rural Estates and the urban Estates, indicated
dissatisfaction with existing cell service. Over 75% of the rural estates resident s surveyed believed
that communication towers should be conditional uses, available at any location in the Estates. The
recommendation below retains this land use as a conditional use, requiring application, notice and
public hearing, but available for application at any location in the Estates (at least 2.25 acres in size).
Conditional Use Acreage
At present, conditional uses are generally limited to 5 acres. Although not specifically queried in
public outreach, staff sees the 5-acre limitation as creating problems similar to the acreage
limitations within currently approved Neighborhood Centers. Th e issues noted there are adequacy
of stormwater retention, buffering, parking, roadway needs and septic provisions. In some cases,
the current 5-acre standard may prove sufficient. However, applicants may wish to request a greater
acreage. This request would remain subject to the public hearing requirements of the Conditional
Use, but the provision for greater acreage in the GGAMP would relieve the applicants from
amending the GMP to creating otherwise unnecessary sub-districts. Rather than suggesting 20 acres
as recommended by the GGEACA for Neighborhood Centers, a more modest 10 -acre maximum is
recommended. If embraced, staff also supports enhanced buffering requirements similar to those
required for the Neighborhood Centers.
Public Facilities
In addition to the growing transportation network in and near the Estates, numerous public facilities
serve Estates residents. The eastern Estates is served by: two high schools, several elementary and
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 40 of 220
middle schools; three fire stations; 2 EMS stations; Sheriffs stations; a library; community parks and
a regional park under design. Additional public facilities are planned to accommodate the growth in
population, as monitored by the County’s Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) and
coordinated through the Growth Management Department and associated County departments,
including the Collier County School District and independent agencies.
With regard to public facilities as a land use, members of the public stressed compatibility within a
predominantly residential area. Specifically, there is interest in developing rural architectural
standards for public buildings as well as other non -residential structures. A unified architectural
standard can provide a greater sense of identity to the Estates District. In addit ion, there is interest
in updating development standards such as setbacks and buffers, particularly as public uses intensify
at existing or future locations.
Firebreak Staging and Park and Ride
Park and ride facilities are essentially parking areas that can serve several purposes. As many rural
estates residents commute to the urban area for daily work, or for occasional shopping and
entertainment, a park and ride area can support voluntary ride sharing to and from proximate urban
locations. Ride sharing applications for mobile devices have emerged as a helpful tool for
commuters. At an appropriate time, bus/transit service could also serve these locations. The
importance of park and ride and ride sharing for community-wide benefits was underscored by the
Master Mobility Plan (accepted by Board, 2012) and by ULI in their review of housing affordability
(2017).
Additionally, as part of the initiative to support natural disaster prevention and response programs,
portions of these facilities could be used for staging equipment, vehicles and operations. Nearly 40%
of the citizens polled reported that they would consider using such facilities. It is suggested that the
County consider appropriate locations for these facilities, with locational criteria including direct
access to arterial roadways and buffering, and apply for Board approval through the Conditional Use
public hearing process.
Adjacent Future Land Use Districts
The eastern Estates is bounded by The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) on 2 sides and the
Rural Lands Stewardship Area (RLSA) on another. There are two essential parameters of interest to
eastern estates residents.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 41 of 220
First, residents are very enthusiastic about the possibility of more robust economic development in
the RFMUD and RLSA. Residents desire more proximate commercial areas for shopping and services,
and want employment opportunities. For these reasons, residents were highly supportive of RFMUD
Village centers, RLSA towns, and freestanding business and industrial park locations in these
Districts. The potential for eastern Estates residents to shop and work within shorter distances and
outside of the urban area is a great benefit to them, and this advantage redounds to County
taxpayers through reduced miles travelled, lower capital and maintenance costs for roads, and a
reduced carbon footprint.
Second, eastern Estates residents desire compatibility of uses where adjoining Districts develop
adjacent to the Estates. Enhanced buffers and setbacks are suggested at the interface of t hese
Districts. These development standards will be specified by LDC review and amendment, and
reflected in the Policies of the GGAMP.
Notice Provisions
Although not discussed in the Restudy outreach workshops, staff has observed past private petitions
that involved Estates re-designation and rezoning. In the Estates, written notice provisions related
to Neighborhood Information Meetings (NIMs) and public hearings extend 1,000 feet from the
property lines of the project (compared to 500 feet in the urban area). In reality, affected Estates
residential uses may extend the length of a dead-end street.
A typical dead-end street in the Estates is approximately one mile. Accordingly, many affected
residents are not provided with written notice. The recommendation associated with this topic
would require written notice beyond 1,000 feet, where traffic impacts can be reasonably
anticipated, as a result of the land use change, on a dead - end street or avenue in the Estates. In
such a case, notice should be provided along the entire length of the affected street or avenue.
Growth Management Plan Policies
Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP:
Objective 5.3:
Provide for the protection of the rural character of Golden Gate Estates.
Objective 1.2
Ensure public facilities are provided at an acceptable level of service
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 42 of 220
Goal 3:
To provide for basic commercial services for purposes of serving the rural needs of Golden Gate
Estates residents, shortening vehicular trips, and preserving rural character.
Existing Land Use Designations (synopsis)
Neighborhood Center Subdistrict:
Recognizing the need to provide basic goods, services and amenities to Estates residents,
Neighborhood centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future land use map. T he
Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The
designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning.
Conditional Uses Subdistrict:
Various types of conditional uses are permitted in the estates zoning district within the Golden Gate
estates area. In order to control the location and spacing of new conditional uses, one of the
following four sets of criteria shall be met:
a) Essential Services Conditional Use Provisions: …
b) Golden Gate Parkway and Collier Blvd. Special Provisions: …
c) Neighborhood Center Transitional Conditional Uses Provisions: …
d) Transitional Conditional uses: …
Recommended Policies:
• Protect the low-density character of the Estates by resisting private petitions to change the
GGAMP existing residential land use designations in the GGAMP, other than the limited
locations described below.
• Allow applications for rezoning to upsize existing Neighborhood Centers to accommodate
ingress and egress, parking, buffering, water management, well, septic or package plant
siting, future right-of way expansion or additional open space not to exceed 20 acres per
quadrant. This provision does not guarantee that upsizing will be granted, but provides an
opportunity to request commercial rezoning based on the above-stated needs.
• Allow conditional use or C-1 rezone applications for the Immokalee Rd. corridor (Oaks area).
This provision does not guarantee approval, but allows appl ication without amendment to
the GMP (5 parcels affected).
• Add an additional locational criterion for conditional uses to include major roadway
intersections, defined as the intersection of a 4-lane roadway (or greater) with a 4-lane
roadway (or greater), as identified in the Long-Range Transportation Plan.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 43 of 220
• Adjust the Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions to allow conditional use applications for
properties at the intersection of Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd.
• Adjust the Collier Blvd. Special Provisions to allow the same locational criteria as currently
allowed at other locations in Golden Gate Estates.
• Allow conditional use applications at any location (of at least 2.25 acres) in Golden Gate
Estates for the erection of communication towers, without need to amend the GGAMP.
• Develop architectural standards in the Land Development Code that apply to commercial,
conditional and public facility uses in the rural Estates to create coherence and area identity
that reflect the rural character of the area.
• Seek public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for “park and
ride” uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and
response program activities.
• In its review and adoption of GMP amendments to the RFMUD and the RLSA, the County
should reflect the need for appropriate buffers and setbacks from adjoining Golden Gate
Estates properties, with specific development standards in the LDC.
• Where GMP Amendments or Rezoning actions require written notice to homeowners within
a given distance of the subject parcel, notice requirements shall also be extended the length
of any dead-end street or avenue where a direct transportation or aesthetic impact can be
reasonably anticipated.
• Following the completion of the Randall Boulevard and Oilwell Road Corridor Study, the
Zoning Division shall evaluate the future land uses along Immokalee Road in the vicinity of
Randall Boulevard and Oil Well Road and make recommendations to the Board of County
Commissioners for any proposed changes to the future land use.
Transportation and Mobility
Estates residents expressed their views on several transportation-related topics. Among other
issues, peak hour conditions capture the attention of residents who face congestion on a recurring
basis. Beyond immediate concerns, the public expressed preferences for long term considerations.
These include bridge priorities, I-75 access, lime rock roads, route alternatives, greenways and
pathways, road design and park and ride facilities.
Many transportation projects are expressed in existing Plan language. Augmentation of these
provisions are suggested to convey preference and direction for future consideration. At the heart
of the transportation discussion is the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), adopted in 2015 by
the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Of note , as shown on Figure 22, within the
road network are planned improvements to Wilson Blvd. North and South, as well as the extension
of Vanderbilt Beach Rd. to 8th Ave, NE.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 44 of 220
The Collier MPO is
a federally
mandated and
federally funded
transportation
policy-making
organization and is
made up of
representatives of
local governing
bodies. The MPO
has the authority to
plan, prioritize, and
select
transportation
projects for federal
funding
appropriated by
the US Congress
through the US
Department of
Transportation,
Federal Highway
Administration and
Federal Transit
Administration.
In addition to
Estates residents,
Collier County
citizens, taxpayers
and visitors are also
stakeholders in the transportation and mobility concepts involving Golden Gate Estates. The synergy
expected between the surrounding Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District and Rural Land Stewardship Area
village and town development with the largely resident ial Estates area is a prime example. Retail,
service and job opportunities in and around future towns and villages will result in shorter trip
lengths for current and future Estates residents, when compared with trip lengths today. In addition
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 45 of 220
to shorter trip lengths, north-south and reverse direction trips, particularly at peak hours, will be a
positive factor in road infrastructure demand and resulting levels of service.
This synergy was also
highlighted in
recommendations in
the County’s Master
Mobility Plan (MMP),
accepted by the
Board in 2012.
Recommendation #3
in the MMP calls for
incentivized goods,
services and jobs in
Neighborhood
Centers, the RFMUD
Villages and the
Orangetree
Settlement area to
reduce the vehicle
miles travelled by
estates residents.
Mobility related to
the Estates is also
addressed by
Recommendation #9,
enhanced localized
connectivity through
bridges and other
connectors, and by
Recommendation
#13, development of
park and ride lots.
These concepts are further discussed below.
As noted on the 2040 LRTP cost feasible plan, the MPO has designated additional study areas in and
around the Estates. The Randall Rd./Oil Well Rd. study is currently underway. The North Belle Meade
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 46 of 220
study area is not yet funded. Staff recommends funding f or route alternatives study of the North
Belle Meade east/west corridors in order to accommodate area planning efforts in the North Belle
Meade Receiving area and to provide linkage for Estates residents travelling to south Collier County
and the urban area. Funding will need to be identified for alignment, design and ROW acquisition.
Bridge Connectivity within Golden Gate Estates
Existing GGAMP objectives stress the importance of increasing linkages within the local road system
to reduce traffic on
arterial roadways,
shorten trips and increase
overall road capacity. In
addition, coordination
with emergency services
officials is mandated for
County staff and MPO.
In August 2008, the
Collier County
Transportation Services
Division produced the
East of 951 Horizon Study
for Bridges. The study
included stakeholder
input from Emergency
service providers,
environmental groups
and other County
Divisions. The study
considered emergency
service response times,
evacuation needs, public
service efficiencies,
general mobility
improvements and public
sentiment. Design and cost considerations were components of the study, but costs have increased
significantly since that study was completed.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 47 of 220
The outcome of the study prioritized eleven bridge construction projects in eastern Golden Gate
Estates. Subsequently, three (3) bridges have been programmed :
• 8th St. NE at Cypress canal (fully funded)
• 16th St. NE at Cypress Canal (partially funded)
• 47th Ave NE at Golden Gate Canal (partially funded)
Staff is currently seeking full funding via gas tax revenue funding for the 16th St. NE and 47th Ave. NE
bridges. Each bridge costs approximately $8m to $9m (2016 figures) to construct.
During public outreach, the GGEACA urgently requested consideration for a fourth high pr iority
bridge, located at 10th Ave. SE at the Faka Union canal. This request was based on public safety
concerns, in the contexts of emergency response and emergency evacuation. The recommendation
was endorsed by North Collier Fire and Rescue. For this rea son, the initial recommendation below
calls for an update to the bridge study within the next 2 years. As of this writing, County staff has
begun planning for the public outreach associated with the updated study.
A provision currently in the GGAMP specifically calls for the construction of a north-south bridge on
23d St., SW, as one of three alternatives to address emergency evacuation. As emergency services
and evacuation concepts will be foremost in the bridge evaluation and update, this provision is
recommended for removal from the GGAMP.
Concerns were raised about the cost components of sidewalks and bike lanes on and leading to all
bridges, both with respect to right-of-way acquisition and construction. Therefore, the updated
study should include prioritization, design alternatives and cost components. The requirement for
sidewalks and bike lanes leading to new bridges should be reviewed in the context of the individual
bridge location.
Eight of the initial eleven bridges are depicted on Figure 24. Additional locations will be studied as
part of the Bridge Study Update.
I-75 Interchange
The GGAMP currently calls for coordination between the County and FDOT to implement a study of
a potential interchange “in the vicinity of I-75 and Everglades Blvd.” In 2012, the County petitioned
FDOT to consider an interchange through the submission of an Interchange Justification report (IJR).
At that time, FDOT concluded that it could not recommend forwarding the IJR to the federal Highway
Administration. Subsequently, the Board approved a course of action that would request emergency
access to I-75 (now approved), consider an updated IJR between 2020 and 2025, and to “continue
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 48 of 220
to work with FDOT, other permitting agencies and NGOs to complete an environmental impact
assessment and mitigation plan”. By the use of the term “in the vicinity of I-75 and Everglades Blvd.,
staff understands this as allowing alternative locations within Sections 31 through 34, T49 S, R28 E,
and proposes this specificity for the GGAMP.
Accordingly, the current GGAMP language should be updated to include the IJR submission in
coordination with the MPO and its LRTP, and continuation of environmental assessments in
coordination with all stakeholders, if feasible from a cost/benefit standpoint. It should be noted that
emergency (limited) access to I-75 was granted subsequent to the 2012 IJR submission.
In addition to I-75 access, concerns were raised by residents and by the GGEACA regarding traffic
conditions on Everglades Blvd. The residents and association would like to protect against the
possibility of expanding Everglades Blvd. beyond 4 lanes. For this reason, a recommendation appears
below to limit expansion of Everglades Blvd. to no more than 4 lanes, as shown on the 2040 LRTP
Needs Assessment.
At a GGEACA meeting in November 2017, it was suggested that the 4-lane design maximum apply
to all future roads to and through Golden Gate Estates. That idea does not appear as a
recommendation because its more appropriate path for consideration is through the Collier County
MPO.
Lime Rock Roads
The GGAMP calls upon the Transportation Department to explore alternative financing methods to
accelerate paving of lime rock roads in the Estates. As of 2016, there were 29 miles of unpaved roads
remaining in the Estates. At the current rate of nearly 3 miles per year, all lime rock roads would be
paved in approximately 10 years.
Residents have commented that an acceleration of paving may be more cost -efficient. Lime rock
roads require maintenance costs that may be somewhat higher than paved roads. Additionally, the
added ad valorem revenue potential from home values that appreciate due to improved road access
may also influence the cost/benefit assessment. Staff recommends that the County update the study
the relative costs and benefits of paving lime rock roads on an accelerated basis, and provide the
study result to the Board with 2 years of adoption.
More recently, the BCC embarked on a budgeting schedule that would provide sufficient funds over
a three-year period to complete the paving of lime rock roads. Accordingly, the recommendations
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 49 of 220
include an alternative recommendation that the County will budget for the completion of paving in
fiscal years 2018 through 2020.
Greenways
The GGAMP calls for a public network of greenway corridors that connect public lands and
permanently protected green space, emphasizing use by non-motorized vehicles and using the
existing or future public rights-of-way. The Collier MPO 2012 “Comprehensive Pathways Plan”
provides the vision for a Greenways and Trails Program as a separate network from the overall
Pathways Program. It notes that the provision of off -road facilities addresses safety and comfort
concerns of pedestrians and bicyclists. This would allow a more focused approach to greenways and
the identified entity to secure funding and expertise.
As noted in the public outreach surveys, a majority of citizens favor the retention of this concept to
create a greenways program. The GGAMP policy should be updated, however, to encourage
coordination between the County Parks and Recreation Division and the MPO to identify areas of
responsibility in planning, funding and implementation of a greenway plan.
Road Design
Eastern Estates residents commented on various aspects of road design for both new and expanded
roadways. As communicated through the GGEACA, preferences include a rural road design without
curbs and gutters, Florida Friendly (depressed) medians to the extent landscaping would be
employed, and a preference for eminent domain on one side of an existing local street rather than
partial takings on both sides. While these preferences are noted here, the MPO and the County
Transportation Division design with specific site requirements that vary from one location to
another. Moreover, these elements are best suited for review and public comment under the
statutory public vetting requirements of those agencies. As such, the GGAMP should remain silent
on these design preferences.
Park and Ride Lots
See Land Use/Non-residential Uses.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 50 of 220
GOAL 6:
To provide for a safe and efficient county and local roadway network, while at the same time seeking
to preserve the rural character of golden gate estates in future transportation improvements within
the golden gate area.
OBJECTIVE 6.1:
Increase the number of route alternatives for traffic moving through the Golden Gate Area in both
east-west and north-south directions, consistent with neighborhood traffic safety considerations,
and consistent with the preservation of the area’s rural character.
Policy 6.1.1:
In planning to increase the number of route alternatives through the Estates Area, the Collier County
Transportation Division will prioritize the following routes over other alternatives:
a. The extension of Vanderbilt Beach Road from its current terminus to DeSoto Boulevard.
b. The development of a north-south connection from the eastern terminus of White Boulevard
to Golden Gate Boulevard.
c. The development of a new east-west roadway crossing the Estates Area south of Golden Gate
Boulevard.
Policy 6.1.2:
Collier County shall continue to coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation to
implement a study of a potential interchange in the vicinity of I-75 and Everglades Boulevard.
OBJECTIVE 6.2:
Increase linkages within the local road system for the purposes of limiting traffic on arterials and
major collectors within Golden Gate Estates, shortening vehicular trips, and increasing overall road
system capacity.
Policy 6.2.1:
The County shall continue to explore alternative financing methods to facilitate both east- west and
north-south bridging of canals within Golden Gate Estates.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 51 of 220
Planning and right-of-way acquisition for bridges within the Estates Area local road system shall make
adequate provision for sidewalks and bike lanes.
Policy 6.2.3:
Sidewalks and bike lanes shall provide access to government facilities, schools, commercial areas and
the planned County greenway network.
OBJECTIVE 6.3:
Coordinate with local emergency services officials in planning and constructing road improvements
within Golden Gate Estates and Golden Gate City to ensure that the access needs of fire department,
police and emergency management personnel and vehicles are met.
Policy 6.3.1:
The Collier County Transportation Planning Section shall hold at least one annual public meeting with
Golden Gate Area emergency services providers and the local civic association in order to ensure
that emergency needs are addressed during the acquisition of right-of-way for design and
construction of road improvements.
Policy 6.3.2:
The Collier County Transportation Division shall continue to coordinate with Golden Gate Area
emergency services providers to prioritize necessary road improvements related to emergency
evacuation needs.
GOAL 7:
To protect the lives and property of the residents of the greater Golden Gate area, as well as the
health of the natural environment, through the provision of emergency services that prepare for,
mitigate, and respond to, natural and manmade disasters.
OBJECTIVE 7.2:
Ensure that the needs of all applicable emergency ser vices providers are included and coordinated
in the overall public project design for capital improvement projects within the Golden Gate Area.
Policy 7.2.1:
Preparation of Collier County’s annual Schedule of Capital Improvements for projects within the
Golden Gate Area shall be coordinated with planners, or the agents or representatives with planning
responsibilities, from the Fire Districts, public and private utilities, Emergency Medical Services
Department and the Collier County Sheriff’s Department to ensure that public project designs are
consistent with the needs of these agencies.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 52 of 220
Policy 7.2.2:
Planners, or the agents or representatives with planning responsibilities, from the Golden Gate Fire
Control and Rescue District, Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department and the Collier
County Sheriff’s Department will receive copies of pre-construction plans for capital improvement
projects in the Golden Gate Area and will be invited to review and comment on plans for the public
projects.
OBJECTIVE 7.3:
Develop strategies through the County Growth Management Division – Planning and Regulation for
the enhancement of roadway interconnection within Golden Gate City and the Estates Area,
including interim measures to assure interconnection.
Policy 7.3.1:
The Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services, the Collier County Transportation Division, Golden
Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, and other appropriate Federal, State or local agencies, shall
begin establishing one or more of the following routes for emergency evacuation purposes:
a. An I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard.
b. Improved emergency access from Everglades Boulevard to I-75.
c. Construction of a north-south bridge on 23rd Street, SW, between White Boulevard and Golden
Gate Boulevard.
Policy 7.3.2:
All new residential structures shall comply with NFPA (National Fire Protection Association,
Incorporated) 299 Standard for Protection of Life and Property from Wildfire, 1997 Edition, as
adopted by reference in the Florida Fire Code or the most recent edition.
Policy 7.3.3:
Modified portions of existing structures shall meet NFPA Standards through the adoption of
appropriate regulations in the County Building Codes.
Policy 7.3.4:
County-owned property within Golden Gate Estates shall be subject to an active, on-going
management plan to reduce the damage caused by wildfires originating from County-owned
properties.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 53 of 220
• The County Transportation Planning Section shall provide an update to the 2008 East of CR
951 Bridge Study with recommendations based on emergency response, evacuation times,
cost components and other considerations to the Board within 2 years of adoption of this
policy.
• Everglades Blvd. between Golden Gate Blvd. and I-75 shall not be expanded beyond 4 lanes.
• The County shall coordinate with FDOT and the MPO’s 2045 LRTP to submit a revised
Interchange Justification Report for an interchange at I -75 in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd
(T 49, R 28, S 31-34).
• The County will update and report on the timing of the paving of lime rock roads, including
a cost/benefit analysis for accelerated programming, within 2 years of adoption of this policy;
Alt.: The County will budget the full completion of the paving of lime rock roads in fiscal years
2018 through 2020.
• Planning, funding and implementation of potential greenway trails shall be coordinate d
under the MPO’s Comprehensive Pathways Plan in coordination with the County’s Parks and
Recreation Division.
• Seek public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for “park and
ride” uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and
response program activities.
• Encourage the MPO’s identification of funding sources for design and ROW acquisition of an
east-west arterial roadway into North Belle Meade to facilitate land use planning in that area.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 54 of 220
Watershed and Related Water Resource Topics
In 2011, the Board accepted the Collier County Watershed Management Plan (WMP), which was
developed over several years by staff and consultants. The WMP covered the major basins within
Collier County, including the Golden Gate/Naples Bay Watershed. The underlying study included an
evaluation of the surface
water and groundwater,
wetlands and related
environmental resources,
and the performance of the
current water management
facilities in providing the
desired levels of services for
flood control, water supply,
water quality and
environmental protection.
It recommended initiatives
that would serve as a guide
for staff in developing
policies, programs,
ordinances and regulations
for further consideration by
the Board. The major water
resource concerns
identified for the GGAMP
region include:
• Excessive fresh
water discharges
from canals into
Naples Bay
• Lack of appropriate
levels of flood
protection
• Pollutant loading
associated with
development and
land use activities
• Aquifer impacts due to reduced recharge and increased withdrawals
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 55 of 220
Notably, among the WMP ranking of projects for ben efit to cost ratio, the Golden Gate Estates
Flowway Restoration project scored highest.
Accordingly, the North Golden Gate Estates (NGGE) Flowway Restoration Project ensued. Its
purpose was to reconnect the primary wetland flowways in the Estates area, particularly the major
wetlands of Horsepen Strand and Winchester Head for eventual restoration of the flowway
connection from NGGE to the historic Henderson Creek/Belle Meade watershed as shown on Figure
25. The Study was completed in 2013, funded in part by FDEP and SFWMD.
As a result of the Study, the historic and remnant flowway connections were identified and a plan
was recommended. As a first phase of its implementation, 42 new culverts were installed in selected
sections of NGGE and the project was completed in August 2014. The study also yielded a conceptual
design for diversion of stormwater into North Belle Meade.
In 2016, as part of an application for BP settlement “RESTORE” funds, the Collier County
Comprehensive
Watershed Improvement
Plan was developed and
accepted by the Board.
This plan, co-sponsored
by Rookery Bay National
Estuarine Research
Reserve, outlines a
rehydration effort
designed to provide
greater balance between
the Rookery Bay and
Naples Bay estuaries,
through diversion of a
portion of Golden Gate
Canal flows to the Belle
Meade area. The
RESTORE funds are
intended to aid in design
and implementation of
the project. A depiction of the area in relation to watersheds appears in Figure 26.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 56 of 220
In 2017, as part of the implementation of a non-structural WMP recommendation, the Board
adopted newly revised surface water maximum allowable discharge rates, now applied to
development in 16 additional County basins, including the main Golden Gate Canal Basin. The
reduced allowable discharge rates convey County-wide benefits, but it should be noted that they do
not apply to single family parcels, such as those previously platted in Golden Gate Estates.
Additionally, the Board amended stormwater standard s in 2017, directly impacting Estates lot
development. The amendment requires a stormwater plan for all lots and provides a new threshold
for engineered plans based on percentage of impervious lot coverage. This addresses site specific
issues but does not address area-wide stormwater concerns.
The aquifers beneath the Estates provide potable water supplies to residents of the Estates, and to
customers of the two major public water utilities serving City of Naples and County residents. In
meetings with Golden Gate Estates residents and with the GGEACA, a strong preference emerged
regarding conservation principles related to the protection of water resources. Ideas and support
for those ideas included wetland preservation initiatives and aquifer health. Residents and
community leaders value the relationships among components of water policy: floodplain
management (dispersion and diversion), water quantity and quality, aquifer recharge, salt water
intrusion and estuary health. The following subsections reflect ideas and comments presented by
residents and considered by County staff. Necessarily, most of these ideas will require additional
study and debate, and therefore appear as aspirational recommendations.
Lot Combinations
Most of Golden Gate Estates was platted into 5 acre tracts by Gulf American Land Corporation (GAC),
the developer of the Estates, although many larger and smaller lots were also platted . The Land
Development Code currently allows lot splits into parcels no smaller than 2.25 acres with frontage
of at least 150 feet. However, that was not always the case. Smaller lot splits were allowed in the
past: prior to Oct. 14, 1974 in the former “Coastal Area Planning District” and prior to Jan. 5, 1982
in the former “Immokalee Area Planning District”. These legal non-conforming lots (sometimes
referred to as “band-aid lots”) abound in the Estates, both in the western area, Figure 27, and in the
eastern area, Figure 28. Of the 27,250 total parcels in the Estates, 7,275 are non-conforming. Of
those, 3,397 (nearly half) are not yet developed.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 57 of 220
Citizens and representatives of the GGEACA suggested that these lots might be re -combined, if
possible, through an incentive-
based system. The rationale behind
recombining these smaller lots
relates to water benefits-
watershed, floodplain, aquifer and
estuary related. It has been said by
a former District 5 Commissioner,
that protection of this low-density
area translates to a “County DRGR
(density reduction, groundwater
recharge) area without cost to the
County.” It follows that further
density reduction in the Estates can
enhance these benefits. Larger lot
sizes with relatively less impervious
area generate less run-off per lot,
and contribute to surface water
attenuation, water quality benefits,
floodplain storage capacity, aquifer
recharge and less flow or “pulse” to
canals and estuaries.
Ideas to incentivize small lot
recombination have included tax
incentives, impact fee reduction
and credits for stormwater
stewardship, if a stormwater utility
is created. Not all potential
solutions will suit every situation.
For example, it would be possible to recombine vacant parcels to create a larger parcel with any of
the above suggestions. On the other hand, combining a vacant 1.14-acre parcel with another
developed lot takes impact fee credits out of the equation.
Moreover, the legal and fiscal basis for implementing incentives requires further study and Board
direction. Ad valorem tax abatement would require a referendum before County voters. Impact fee
credits may necessarily require a study to keep overall impact fees in a neutral revenue position.
The costs and benefits of all incentives need further study to determine fiscal impact and
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 58 of 220
quantifiable benefits. For these reasons, the recommendation related to this initiative supports
further study within a defined time period to implement any incentives for recombination. Following
the study, if the Board directs
implementation, its provisions would
be contained in the Land Development
Code or Code of Ordinances.
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
credits in the Estates
Community Planning staff attended
numerous Comprehensive Watershed
Improvement Plan Ad Hoc Technical
Advisory Board (CWIP) meetings,
exchanging concepts related to the
existing TDR program (RFMUD) and
potential Golden Gate Estates
initiatives. One idea that gained
attention was the potential issuance of
TDR credits as part of a sale or
donation proposal for parcels within
current or future acquisition areas. The
examples of two specific wetland sites,
Red Maple Swamp and Winchester
Head within the Conservation Collier
acquisition areas were discussed and
studied. The “Gore” properties and
surrounding area could also be
considered.
The CWIP committee understood its role as a technical advisory committee, and not a policy advisory
committee. Accordingly, by motion at its March 7, 2017 meeting, CWIP recommended the concept
of using TDRs for acquisition of select wetland parcels as “consistent with CWIP goals in improving
the floodplain, surface hydrology, aquifer recharge and connectivity of the watershed”. In the
Committee’s view, a recommendation beyond consistency would have exceeded their scope.
In the meantime, the Board considered the idea of external (outside of RFMUD Sending lands)
sources of TDR credits at its RFMUD Workshops in January, May and June of 2017. Staff had
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 59 of 220
recommended a modest allowance of TDR credits as part of an acquisition program in Golden Gate
Estates, if the number of credits would have a nominal effect on overall TDR supp ly and price. Staff
also noted that implementation could be difficult within the same RFMUD currency or domain,
because property values are much different in the Estates as compared to RFMUD Sending Lands.
The Board did not reach any consensus on this issu e, but held it open for later discussion.
Given the complexity of the evaluation and completion of the RFMUD Restudy, staff is now of the
opinion that acquisition of Estates lots for stormwater benefits using RFMUD TDR credits should not
be pursued. As stated by some RFMUD stakeholders, a closed system, at least on the supply side,
should be more predictable while avoiding the dilution of currency to Sending Land owners.
One alternative is the further study of a second credit system, (Transfer of Developm ent Units or
TDUs), which could direct Estates density values to urban development. This could be considered in
the context of County (or other agency) ownership of quality wetland or high habitat value locations.
The related recommendation, below, suggests an evaluation in a timeframe directed by the Board.
Dispersed Water Management
The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association has also been in favor of the concept of dispersed
water management (DWM) as a means of attenuating stormwater to the benefit of residents. The
typical Estate lot is 660 feet deep, encouraging the owner to construct a home and accompanying
impervious areas (driveways, parking, etc.) close to the roadway. This leads to stormwater run -off
to roadside swales with eventual conveyance to the nearest primary or secondary canals.
Several recent studies (including the Watershed Management Plan (2011), have indicated that the
present system of conveyance and treatment of stormwater run -off in the Estates is deficient in
providing the desired levels of service for flood protection, water quality improvement, groundwater
recharge, fire protection and restoration of historic flowways. Protection of water resources in this
area is critical to the health of the public water supply, including wellfields for Collier County and the
City of Naples.
The road and drainage infrastructures have virtually eliminated some of the historic wetland
flowways, leading to exotic infestation, draw-down of the water table and severity of wildfires. As
the extent of impervious area continues to grow, the antiquated canals and swales cannot fully
accommodate runoff, leading to frequent nuisance flooding. Major structural modifications to the
current conveyance system does not appear feasible, either environmentall y, economically, or
socially (if private property rights are encroached).
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 60 of 220
DWM is a means to reduce the full impact of single family development on water resources and
management. To the extent that homeowners can attenuate stormwater runoff in quantity and
quality before it reaches swales and canals, the better County water goal s may be achieved. To be
sure, DWM is not a “one size fits all” solution. Parcels with very little wetlands on or nearby may be
able to detain some water toward the back of the lot, so long as detention is very temporary, its
elevation is sufficiently above the wet season water table and does not interfere with the proper
functioning of septic systems. Properties with high percentages of wetland areas might require an
engineered solution and/or an incentive-based approach to convey drainage easements to the
County at relevant locations.
The best proposal for DWM on single family Estates lots will be simple to understand and apply.
Consideration should be given to regulatory approaches (required detention or limited fill quantity)
and incentive-based approaches and whether to apply various rules to developed and undeveloped
properties. Among other ideas, abatement of stormwater utility billing can be considered. Study and
public input on a regulatory approach for new home construction should be included. The Restudy
recommends a formal study of solutions that will be equitable, reasonable in cost, and
understandable to land owners. The study feasibility should commence as funding becomes
available.
At its meeting on November 8, 2017, the Floodplain Management Advisory Committee found, by
motion, that DWM would be an important feasibility study for application to the Estates.
Potential of the C-1 Canal and other Golden Gate Canal Relievers
The GGEACA spoke in favor of further improvements to the connector C-1 canal. The C-1 connector
provides a 1.7 mile east-west link from the Golden Gate Main Canal to the Miller Canal. Due in part
to numerous crossings that have constrained its effectiveness, the C-1 has historically played a minor
role, serving as an equalizer depending on the head differential between the Golden Gate and Miller
Canals.
In view of its strategic location, improvements to the canal’s capacity could add operational
flexibility and allow Golden Gate Main outflows to be moved south by the Miller Canal. In addition,
this initiative would also require design and placement of an in-line gated structure to control flow
exchanges, and ensure that desired flow directions are achieved.
The concept of Aquifer Storage and Recovery systems was also encouraged by the GGEACA to divert
wet season flows from the Golden Gate Canal. This is another capital-intensive initiative, and the
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 61 of 220
County should continue to study costs, feasibility and possible implementation as a lon g-term
beneficial initiative.
Finally, flood control can be more
easily measured, predicted and
accommodated by coordinating
with the South Florida Water
Management District to review
their Level of Service Standards
for primary water management
canals within the County.
Educational Components
Many of the concepts noted
above or measures currently in
place should be augmented by
public education efforts where
possible. Residents, potential buyers and builders of single family homes in the Estates would be
well served by a better understanding of water-related issues and programs, and how these serve
their self-interests. Wetland maintenance, aquifer recharge, floodplain protection and Firewise
concepts should be stressed. As an example, builders and land owners should become aware of the
benefits of adding “freeboard” to building plans, which will provide even greater flood prevention
beyond current base flood elevations (BFE) standards, as well as providing National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) discounts in premium.
Other Watershed Management Plan Initiatives
The structural (S) and non-structural (NS) projects listed in the table below were derived during the
development of the County’s Watershed Management Plan, and have particular relevance to
Golden Gate Estates. These projects have the potential to benefit the Golden Gate Estates
community by addressing flood control, water supply, water quality, and environmental protection
and restoration.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 62 of 220
Table 1: Selected Structural (S) and Non-structural (NS) Water management Improvements in
GGAMP Recommended by WMP
Project Name Watershed Project Description Comments/Status
(S) North Golden Gate
Estates Flowway
Restoration Project
(Winchester Head and
Horsepen Strand)
Golden Gate Canal,
Naples Bay and
Henderson Creek – Belle
Meade
Reestablish habitat and
hydrologic connectivity
along two wetland strands
for eventual restoration of
the historic flowway to the
Rookery Bay Watershed
* Two feasibility and
modeling studies have
been completed; and, a
network of 42 culverts was
installed in project’s first
phase.
*Funding and evaluation
of other project segments
are needed
(NS) North Golden Gate
Estates Land
Acquisition for
Winchester Head
Wetlands Preservation
Golden Gate Canal,
Naples Bay & Faka Union
Canal
Multi-parcel (60 )
acquisition within the
Winchester Head area
*Land donations are
accepted through the
offsite preservation
provision of the LDC
*Funding for acquisition
and/or additional land
donations is needed
(S) Corkscrew Regional
Ecosystem
Watershed/East Bird
Rookery Swamp
Hydrologic Restoration
Enhancement
Golden Gate Canal &
Cocohatchee
Hydrologic restoration by
berm removal, vegetation
control, ditch blocks and
flowway redirection
*Project scope has been
defined
*Funding is needed
(S) Northern GGE, Unit
53 Acquisition and
Restoration
Golden Gate Canal &
Cocohatchee
Wetland restoration in the
area of Shady Hollow Rd.
Ext.and 38th Ave. N.W. Ext.
by berm removal and exotic
vegetation control
*Project scope has been
defined
*Funding for land
acquisition and restoration
is needed
(S) Golden Gate Canal
Water Quality
Improvements
Golden Gate Canal &
Naples Bay
Six Tracts conveyed by GAC
to Collier County totaling 33
acres, with 3,646 ft. of
frontage along the GG canal
system, to be used for
isolated water quality
treatment
*Funding for feasibility
study needed
(NS) Stormwater
Retrofit Project
All Watersheds Restoration and protection
of existing natural systems
by establishing retrofit
programs to address
existing developments,
public facilities and other
areas that lack treatment
*Retrofit options such as
sewer inlet protection,
debris collectors, and bio-
swales have been
identified by staff
*Pond inventory and SOPs
established for county
owned facilities
*County staff, in
cooperation with the
Water Symposium, to
monitor county
stormwater ponds and
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 63 of 220
establish Best
Management Practices.
*Ongoing efforts to
establish new programs to
meet project objectives
Project Name Watershed Project Description Comments/Status
(NS) Water Quality
Monitoring Program
All Watersheds Define water quality
conditions in estuaries and
along canal networks to
achieve greater distribution
in the groundwater
monitoring network
*Ongoing program that is
periodically reevaluated
and adaptively managed
by the County’s Pollution
Control staff. (Specific
recommendations for
monitoring completed in
2014)
(NS) Verification of No
Floodplain Impact
All Watersheds Implement requirement for
development to verify no
impact upstream and
downstream for the 100
yr./72-hr. design storm
event
*Modeling was used to
evaluate future
development alternatives
on DFIRM base flood
elevations (BFE) in GGE.
The analysis of future
build-out shows an
increase of BFEs in the
range of 0.25 – 0.5 feet
assuming current
development practices (fill
placement for SF homes).
This is well below the NFIP
threshold of 1 ft. increase.
*Consider implementation
(NS) Flood Protection
Levels of Service
All Watersheds Propose a standard 25-yr
design storm for drainage
on arterial roads and 10-yr.
design storm for collector
and neighborhood roads to
increase flood protection
levels of service
* SFWMD is modeling the
primary canal system
*County to follow with
modeling of the secondary
system
*Staff to continue to refine
concept for inclusion
within the planning
process for the CIP
(NS) Low Impact
Development (LID)
Program
All Watersheds Implementation of a LID
program that would apply
to all new development
countywide
*The Pollution Control
Section is developing a LID
manual to be used as a
technical working
document by the
community
At its November 8, 2017 meeting, the Floodplain Advisory Committee approved a motion in support
of the Watershed Plan Initiatives as important to include within the GGAMP. Related to that, the
GGEACA stressed the importance of hydrologic connections by suggesting that future acquisitions
by Conservation Collier should prioritize hydrological benefits above other review criteria. The
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 64 of 220
recommendations include language in support of these concepts, and staff believes that the
Conservation Collier recommendation should be fully vetted during the public hearing process.
Growth Management Plan Policies
Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP
OBJECTIVE 1.3:
Protect and preserve the valuable natural resources within the Golden Gate area.
Policy 1.3.0.1:
The County shall protect and preserve natural resources within the Golden Gate area in accordance
with the Objectives and Policies contained within Goals 6 and 7 of the Collier County Conservation
and Coastal Management Element.
Policy 1.3.1:
The Collier County Environmental Services Department shall coordinate its planning and permitting
activities within the Golden Gate Area with all other applicable environmental plannin g, permitting
and regulatory agencies to ensure that all Federal, State and local natural resource protection
regulations are being enforced.
Policy 5.3.2:
The Land Development Code shall continue to allow and further encourage the preservation of
native vegetation and wildlife indigenous to the Estates Area.
Policy 7.1.4:
The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and the Collier County Bureau of Emergency
Services shall hold one or more annual “open house” presentations in the Golden Gate Area
emphasizing issues related to wildfires, flooding, emergency access and general emergency
management.
Generally:
Conservation and Coastal Management Element
Capital Improvement Element
Stormwater Management Sub-element
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 65 of 220
Recommended Policies
• The County will continue to pursue the Watershed Management Plan initiatives as financial
and staff resources become available.
• The County will periodically coordinate with the South Florida Water Management District
to review the Level of Service Standards for primary water management canals within the
County.
• The County will encourage the combination of parcels less than 2.25 acres in size with
adjacent parcels, to preserve the low-density advantages within Golden Gate Estates. Within
2 years, GMD staff will recommend to the Board potential incentives to apply to developed
and undeveloped lots.
• The County will evaluate the potential for a second transfer of development units/rights
program (TDU) to transfer density from Estates lots to the urban area, and will consider
transfer of ownership options, in a timeframe directed by the Board.
• The County will commence a formal study on the feasibility of dispersed water management
(DWM) for single-family Estates lots, and determine whether a DWM initiative should be
voluntary or mandatory and the extent to which the program should apply to developed and
undeveloped properties.
• The County will continue to identify and implement educational opportunities related to
water resources for use by parcel owners, home owners, bu ilders, real estate professionals
and the public to aid in understanding and addressing the owner’s financial and personal
interests as well as area-wide impacts.
• Acquisitions of parcels in Golden Gate Estates by Conservation Collier shall be consistent with
Watershed Management Plan objectives, and shall prioritize hydrologic benefits above other
review criteria.
Wildfire Preparedness
According to the Florida Forestry Service, Fire has always been a natural occurrence in South Florida.
Sparked by lightning, wildfires cleared old brush and other fuels within forested areas. Biologists
know the value of these periodic burns, as habitat and other natural values become refreshed.
However, as population has moved further into the “wildlands” and development ha s dried the
landscape, wildfires emerge as a very serious threat to people and property. Golden Gate Estates is
situated within this urban/wildland interface.
Community leaders have been aware of this threat for many years. The “Firewise” standards created
for development in the Rural Fringe have been a part of the Land Development Code for well over
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 66 of 220
10 years. Policy provisions within the GGAMP are numerous, and have been part of the Master Plan
for many years (see existing provisions, below).
Concurrent with the GGAMP Restudy, the Board directed the Bureau of Emergency Services (BES)
to provide an overview and recommendations related to wildfire risks, responsibilities and funding.
In early 2017, current mitigation practices were outlined with recommendations for improvement.
It was noted that brush fire calls per year have reached an average of 130.
Springtime, 2017 came with hundreds of wildfires across the state, following a severe “dry season”
that resulted in
area-wide and
state-wide drought.
Collier County was
particularly hard
hit. A March
wildfire burned
over 7,000 acres in
Picayune Strand
State Forest. In
April, the “3d
Avenue Fire”,
stoked by high
winds, tore across
the North Belle
Meade area and
narrowly missed more developed portions of Golden Gate Estates. Thousands of acres burned,
thousands were evacuated, and seven homes were lost.
At the Board’s direction, a multi-agency technical working group was formed under the existing
structure of the Emergency Management Advisory Group. This working group was tasked with
making recommendations to the Board by September, 2017, to address priorities for bolstering the
County’s defenses against wildfires. It was noted that educational programs continue to provide
excellent resources for self-help in mitigating individual property risks. Likewise, the Florida Forestry
Service and the Independent Fire Districts, supported by mutual aid, were roundly applauded and
appreciated for the excellent work performed in response to these events.
While this working group has not reported its findings at time of this writing, funding issues in
support of landscape scale mitigation activities will be at the center of attention. Funding for fire
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 67 of 220
break creation and maintenance and for prescribed burn activities needs augmentation. Several
alternatives have been suggested to supply the Forest Service and Independent Districts with the
tools and resources for a higher level of safety, including a Golden gate “fire utility fee” through an
MSTU and general revenue funding.
Also under review will be Land Development Code standards and Collier County Water Sewer District
raw water access issues. Improvements to LDC language or permitting procedures are under review.
A number of strategically located raw water wells have already been retrofitted for Fire Department
use.
As stated by Mr. Dan Summers, Division Director, BES, a community-wide effort to improve wildfire
mitigation “is a marathon, not a sprint”. In other words, this is a hazard that must stay on the
County’s radar for continual opportunities to enhance and support wildfire mitigation for many
years to come. Continual opportunities should consider:
• Effective and fair funding options
• Resource readiness
• Clear legal and procedural boundaries
• Notifications and alerts
• Mutual aid agreements and Interlocal Agreements
• Educational components
• Land planning opportunities
Growth Management Plan Policies
Related Existing Provisions in the GGAMP:
GOAL 7:
To protect the lives and property of the residents of the greater golden gate area, as well as the
health of the natural environment, through the provision of emergency services that prepare for,
mitigate, and respond to, natural and manmade disasters.
OBJECTIVE 7.1:
Maintain and implement public information programs through the Collier County Bureau of
Emergency Services, Collier County Sheriff’s Department, Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue
District, and other appropriate agencies, to inform residents and visitors of the Greater Golden Gate
Area regarding the means to prevent, prepare for, and cope with, disaster situations.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 68 of 220
Policy 7.1.1:
The County, fire districts that serve the Golden Gate area, and other appropriate agencies, shall
embark on an education program to assist residents in knowing and understanding the value and
need for prescribed burning on public lands in high risk fire areas.
Policy 7.1.2:
The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services
shall actively promote the Firewise Communities Program through public education in Golden Gate
Estates.
Policy 7.1.3:
The Collier County Land Development Services Department of the Growth Management Division
shall evaluate the Land Development Code for Golden Gate Estates and shall eliminate any
requirements that are found to be inconsistent with acceptable fire prevention standards. This
evaluation process shall be coordinated with the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and
the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services.
Policy 7.1.4:
The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District and the Collier County Bureau of Emergency
Services shall hold one or more annual “open house” presentations in the Golden Gate Area
emphasizing issues related to wildfires, flooding, emergency access and general emergency
management.
OBJECTIVE 7.2:
Ensure that the needs of all applicable emergency services providers are included and coordinated
in the overall public project design for capital improvement projects within the Golden Gate Area.
Policy 7.2.1:
Preparation of Collier County’s annual Schedule of Capital Improvements for projects within the
Golden Gate Area shall be coordinated with planners, or the agents or representatives with planning
responsibilities, from the Fire Districts, public and private utilities, Emergency Medical Services
Department and the Collier County Sheriff’s Department to ensure that public project designs are
consistent with the needs of these agencies.
Policy 7.2.2:
Planners, or the agents or representatives with planning responsibilities, from the Golden Gate Fire
Control and Rescue District, Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department and the Collier
County Sheriff’s Department will receive copies of pre-construction plans for capital improvement
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 69 of 220
projects in the Golden Gate Area and will be invited to review and comment on plans for the public
projects.
OBJECTIVE 7.3:
Develop strategies through the County Growth Management Division – Planning and Regulation for
the enhancement of roadway interconnection within Golden Gate City and the Estates Area,
including interim measures to assure interconnection.
Policy 7.3.1:
The Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services, the Collier County Transportation Division, Golden
Gate Fire Control and Rescue District, and other appropriate Federal, State or local agencies, shall
begin establishing one or more of the following routes for emergency evacuation purposes:
d. An I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard.
e. Improved emergency access from Everglades Boulevard to I-75.
f. Construction of a north-south bridge on 23rd Street, SW, between White Boulevard and Golden
Gate Boulevard.
Policy 7.3.2:
All new residential structures shall comply with NFPA (National Fire Protection Association,
Incorporated) 299 Standard for Protection of Life and Property from Wildfire, 1997 Edition, as
adopted by reference in the Florida Fire Code or the most recent edition.
Policy 7.3.3:
Modified portions of existing structures shall meet NFPA Standards through the adoption of
appropriate regulations in the County Building Codes.
Policy 7.3.4:
County-owned property within Golden Gate Estates shall be subject to an active, on -going
management plan to reduce the damage caused by wildfires originating from County-owned
properties.
Recommended Policies:
• The County shall explore options for funding of wildfire prevention measures, including
funding support for the Florida Forestry Service and Independent Fire Districts, including but
not limited to a Golden Gate Estates MSTU and general fund revenue.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 70 of 220
• The County will review and update as necessary all interlocal agreements and mutual aid
agreements to assure coordination of legal, procedural and educational components of
Wildfire prevention.
• Update references to Independent Fire Districts.
Lighting Standards
A recent policy guide created at the request of the Board, entitled “Collier County Lighting
Standards”, describes the importance of proper lighting for the health and welfare of County
residents: “Well coordinated and designed lighting systems are an effective way to enhance the
feeling of security and comfort throughout the County.” This policy guide became effective in 2017,
and is intended to be updated periodically as standards and conditions change. It applies to County
facilities such as roads, parks, public facilities and utility sites and will be incorporated into new and
retrofitted lighting at all such locations. Consistency, economy and best management practices
(BMP’s) are underscored.
This policy guide mirrors a longstanding desire of Golden Gate Estates residents to protect their rural
environment from light pollution. It is important to Estates residents for environmental reasons-
both natural and human environments. Safety, aesthetics and the natural environment are fostered
by best management practices lighting standards.
Currently, the GGAMP provides specific guidance for street, parking and recreational lighting
including appropriate fixture types such as “low pressure sodium” lamps. Appropriate shielding is
also called out. These standards are well intentioned but in some cases limiting in that lighting
technology changes more frequently than the Master Plan.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 71 of 220
The desire for “dark sky” lighting standards in the Estates was strong- 90% of the public polled
supported “dark sky” lighting standards. The public was not polled as to a voluntary or a regulatory
approach.
Given the County’s leadership role in researching and updating standards for its own facilities, this
research can greatly benefit the Estates residents, both directly as public spaces are improved, and
as a template for broader application moving forward. As the County transitions its lighting at new
and renovated locations, more feedback and best practices can be discovered. In addition, a study
of commercial lighting county-wide is planned.
Given these advances, the recommended lighting policies for the Master Plan should reflect a
flexible and updated approach. Broad language may be most suitable. More specific provisions will
be incorporated into the LDC or referenced therein.
Growth Management Plan Policies
Related Existing provisions in the GGAMP:
Objective 5.1:
Provide for new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers.
Policy 5.1.1:
Consistent with public safety requirements, street, recreational and structure lighting within Golden
Gate Estates shall be placed, constructed and maintained in such a manner as to prevent or reduce
light pollution. In implementing this Policy, the County shall apply the following standards:
a. If a streetlight or an area light is required, it shall be of the type specified to protect
neighboring properties from direct glare. Area lighting shall be shielded such that direct
rays do not pass property lines. Low-pressure sodium lamps are encouraged while
halogen type lamps are discouraged.
1. Where required, the street lamp shall be of the high pressure sodium type and have
a “cobra head with flat bottom” style or be fully shielded so that light is directed only
downward. Street lamps shall be mounted on a wood pole at a height and wattage
recommended by the appropriate electric utility and as appropriate for a rural area.
2. Parking lot lamps shall be low-pressure sodium type lamps and shall be mounted so
that they point downward without direct rays extending past the parking lot, building
entrance, walkway or other area intended to be illuminated.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 72 of 220
b. Where lighting of recreational areas is required, such lighting shall be mounted so as to
focus illumination on the areas intended to be illuminated, and to limit th e amount of
light that extends outside of the intended area.
c. This Policy shall not apply to Tract 124 and the north 150 feet of tract 126, Unit 12, Golden
gate Estates, located in the southwest quadrant of the Wilson and Golden Gate
Boulevards Neighborhood Center.
Objective 5.3:
Provide for the protection of the rural character of Golden Gate Estates.
Recommended Policies:
• Eliminate the specificity found in Policy 5.1.1; consider standards for the LDC.
• County owned facilities shall comply with the Collier County Lighting Standards.
• The County shall continue to coordinate with FDOT and FPL to provide guidance and reach
agreement on roadway standards and security lights.
• The County will consider lighting standards for commercial and other non -residential uses,
and may provide specific Land Development Code standards for such uses within Golden
Gate Estates consistent with its rural character and specific lighting zone classifications
within.
• The County will consider lighting standards for residential locations within Golden Gate
Estates within the Land Development Code, and determine whether such standards will be
encouraged or mandatory and the extent to which they apply to new or existing residential
development.
Septic Tank Service
Golden Gate Estates is a very low density subdivision, where maximum allowed density is 1 unit per
2.25 acres. Given the cost and in-feasibility of supplying centralized water and wastewater service,
residential development relies on well and septic systems. Centralized service was considered during
the “East of 951 Services and Infrastructure Horizon Study” (2006). However, the estimated cost per
parcel for water and wastewater ($112,000) far exceeded the benefit.
Maintenance of septic systems in the Estates requires periodic pumping and removal of septage,
among other maintenance costs. Residents expressed the concern over cost of service and legal
disposal during the public outreach meetings, suggesting that the County should provide a
processing facility within Collier County to keep costs and compliance within check. In addition, the
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 73 of 220
transport of this material outside the County typically involves more road miles traveled compared
to in-County disposal.
In a broader initiative, Collier County has embarked on an initi ative to create a “Bio-solids
Management Facility” (BMF). The BMF would ideally result through solicitation for a build, design
and operate entity selected by the Board, providing efficient and compliant processing of bio -solids,
oils, grease, septage and similar by-products. The likely location for this facility would be the
Resource Recovery Business Park located near the landfill. The outcome of the BMF initiative is
expected to result in cost effective and environmentally sustainable treatment of these waste
streams, producing energy and high quality fertilizer by-products.
The BMF solicitation is currently in Step 2 of the solicitation, having narrowed the search to three
qualified forms. Step 2 proposals are due in 2017, and an award of contract is an ticipated in early
2018. The selected entity will operate the facility for a minimum of 25 years, and design the facility
so that it is expandable for future needs. Septage collection and treatment is part of the RFP; its
efficacy is yet to be demonstrated.
Growth Management Plan Policies
Related existing provisions in the GGAMP:
Objective 1.2:
Ensure public facilities are provided at an acceptable level of service.
Objective 1.3
Protect and preserve the valuable natural resources within the Golden Gate area.
Objective 5.2
Balance the provision of public infrastructure with the need to preserve the rural ch aracter of
Golden Gate Estates.
Recommended Policy:
• The County will continue to pursue a best management practices approach to making
septage treatment available within Collier County, as a component of bio -solid processing,
either directly or through a public private partnership.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 74 of 220
Preserve Exemption
Currently the GMP and LDC require a portion of the native vegetative present on property to b e set
aside as preserve when property is developed. Exceptions to this requirement include single -family
home sites situated on individual lots or parcels, single lot splits or where property is used for
agricultural purposes. Subdivision of land into three or more lots or parcels requires approval of a
subdivision plat, which in turn triggers the requirement for a preserve, among other requirements.
As the platting of the Golden Gate Estates predated this requirement, no preserves were required
as part of its establishment.
There are a limited number of lots within the Golden Gate Estates subdivision (depicted as the
Estates Designation on the County’s Future Land Use Map (FLUM)) which could be divided into three
or more lots, each a minimum of 2 ¼ acres size. Analysis by staff shows a total of 75 lots remaining
in the Estates Designation, north of I-75, which could be subdivided as such (6.75 acres or more).
These lots range from 6.78 acres to 12.97 acres, with all but two of these lots less than ten acres in
size.
Lot splits allow 2 parcels from a single tract, and because a re -plat is not required, lot splits fall
squarely within the exemption to a required “preserve” area. Environmental staff believes it
excessive to require small preserves for the remaining few lots that could be subdivided into three
or more 2.25 acre single family lots. If subdivided as such, preserve requirements for all but two of
these would be less than 1.33 acres, assuming they were entirely covered with native vegetation.
Long term viability of these preserves is also a concern given their small size and location within a
large single-family subdivision, with no other preserves or greenways to provide connection.
Moreover, preserve exemptions for a limited number of 3 way splits would be consistent with the
requirements of all other (12,000+) undeveloped Estates parcels.
Related existing provisions in the GGAMP:
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 6.1.1: “…native vegetation shall be
preserved through the application of the following minimum preservation and vegetation retention
standards and criteria…except for single family dwelling units situated on individual parcels…”
Note; As interpreted by the LDC, “the single-family exception is not to be used as an exception from
any calculations regarding total preserve area for a development containing single family lots” (Sec.
3.05.07 B).
Recommended Policy:
• The subdivision of tracts 13 acres or less in size within Golden Gate Estates shall not trigger
preserve requirements under CCME Policy 6.1.1.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 75 of 220
Section 4: List of Initial Recommendations
A. Golden Gate City
1. Land Use and Economic Vitality
• Establish land use designations to protect established, stable, neighborhoods and provide
opportunity for redevelopment and renewal through development practices that promote
compatibility.
• Support redevelopment of Golden Gate Parkway to provide for a viable pedestrian
environment adding to the vibrancy and walkability of Golden Gate City.
• Add land uses within the designated Activity Center intended to promote job growth and
strengthen the economic health of Golden Gate City.
• Protect the land uses allowing for diversity of residential housing.
• Engage with the Golden Gate Civic Association and MSTU to further community planning
programs.
• Consider redevelopment tools such as an Innovation Zone to further economic development
and redevelopment strategies.
• Develop amendments to the Land Development Code to support and implement
redevelopment initiatives including incentives for building remodeling and renovation.
• Develop a branding and marketing plan for Golden Gate City.
• Ensure pertinent incentive programs are made available to those seeki ng business creation
and redevelopment opportunities in Golden Gate City.
• Modify the land use designations along Golden Gate Parkway to create a consistent
development pattern.
• Add target industry uses to the Activity Center.
• In the Santa Barbara Commercial Subistrict remove the one acre project minimum.
2. Transportation and Mobility
• Support all transportation needs within Golden Gate City with an emphasis on walkability.
Walkability will be improved through the implementation of the recommendations of the
MPO’s Walkability Study.
• Within the Activity Center, maintain multiple connections to the surrounding neighborhoods
and through the Activity Center while providing safe and direct access to transit stops within
or adjacent to the Activity Center.
• Consider protecting alleys from vacating process where there is reasonable connection and
continuity for future pathway corridors.
• Initiate periodic speed studies in Golden Gate City and when appropriate, utilize traffic
calming measures and speed limit reductions to ensure a safe pedestrian environment.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 76 of 220
3. Environmental Stewardship
• Maintain and expand sewer and water service in accordance with the Collier County Water
and Sewer District Implementation Plan.
B. Golden Gate Estates
1. Land Use and Economic Vitality
• Protect the low-density character of the Estates by resisting private petitions to change
existing residential land use designations in the GGAMP, other than the limited locations
described below.
• Allow applications for rezoning to upsize existing Neighborhood Centers to accommodate
ingress and egress, parking, buffering, water management, well, septic or package plant
siting, future right-of way expansion or additional open space not to exceed 20 acres per
quadrant. This provision does not guarantee that u psizing will be granted, but provides an
opportunity to request commercial rezoning based on the above-stated needs.
• Allow conditional use or C-1 rezone applications for the Immokalee Rd. corridor (Oaks area).
This provision does not guarantee approval, but allows application without amendment to
the GMP (5 parcels affected).
• Add an additional locational criterion for conditional uses to include major roadway
intersections, defined as the intersection of a 4-lane roadway (or greater) with a 4-lane
roadway (or greater), as identified in the LRTP.
• Adjust the Golden Gate Parkway Special Provisions to allow conditional use applications for
properties at the intersection of Golden Gate Pkwy. and Santa Barbara Blvd.
• Adjust the Collier Blvd. Special Provisions to allow the same conditional use locational criteria
as currently allowed at other locations in Golden Gate Estates.
• Allow conditional use applications at any location in Golden Gate Estates for the erection of
communication towers, without need to also amend the GGAMP.
• Develop architectural standards in the Land Development Code that apply to commercial,
conditional and public facility uses in the rural Estates to create coherence and area identity
that reflect the rural character of the area.
• Seek public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use approval, for “park and
ride” uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency prevention and
response program activities.
• In its review and adoption of GMP amendments to the RFMUD and th e RLSA, the County
should reflect the need for appropriate buffers and setbacks from adjoining Golden Gate
Estates properties, with specific development standards in the LDC.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 77 of 220
• Where GMP Amendments or Rezoning actions require written notice to homeowners wit hin
a given distance of the subject parcel, notice requirements shall also be extended the length
of any dead-end street or avenue where a direct transportation or aesthetic impact can be
reasonably anticipated.
• Following the completion of the Randall Bou levard and Oilwell Road Corridor Study, the
Zoning Division shall evaluate the future land uses along Immokalee Road in the vicinity of
Randall Boulevard and Oil Well Road and make recommendations to the Board of County
Commissioners for any proposed changes to the future land use.
2. Transportation and Mobility
• The County Transportation Planning Section shall provide an update to the 2008 East of CR
951 Bridge Study with recommendations based on emergency response, evacuation times,
cost components and other considerations to the Board within 2 years of adoption of this
policy.
• Everglades Blvd. between Golden Gate Blvd. and I-75 shall not be expanded beyond 4 lanes.
• The County shall coordinate with FDOT and the MPO’s 2045 LRTP to submit a revised
Interchange Justification Report for an interchange at I -75 in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd
(T 49, R 28, S 31-34).
• The County will update and report on the timing of the paving of lime rock roads, including
a cost/benefit analysis, within 2 years of adoption of this policy. Alt.: The County will budget
the full completion of the paving of lime rock roads in fiscal years 2018 through 2020.
• Planning, funding and implementation of potential greenway trails shall be coordinated
among the County’s Parks and Recreation Division and the MPO.
• The County will consider public acquisition of appropriate parcels, with conditional use
approval, for “park and ride” uses, to serve private carpooling, public transit and emergency
prevention and response program activities.
3. Environmental Stewardship
Water Resources
• The County will continue to pursue the Watershed Management Plan initiatives in Golden
Gate as financial and staff resources become available.
• The County will periodically coordinate with the South Florida Water Management District
to review the Level of Service Standards for primary water management canals within the
County.
• The County will encourage the combination of parcels less than 2.25 acres in size with
adjacent parcels, to preserve the low-density advantages within Golden Gate Estates. Within
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 78 of 220
2 years, GMD staff will recommend to the Board potential incentives to apply to developed
and undeveloped lots.
• The County will evaluate the potential for a second transfer of development units/rights
program (TDU) to transfer density from Estates lots to the urban area, and will consider
transfer of ownership options, in a timeframe directed by the Board.
• The County will commence a formal study on the feasibility of dispersed water management
(DWM) for single-family Estates lots, and determine whether a DWM initiative should be
voluntary or mandatory and the extent to which the program should apply to developed and
undeveloped properties.
• The County will continue to identify and implement educational opportunities related to
water resources for use by parcel owners, home owners, builders, real estate professionals
and the public to aid in understanding and addressing the owner’s financial and personal
interests as well as area-wide impacts.
• Acquisitions of parcels in Golden Gate Estates by Conservation Collier shall be consistent with
Watershed Management Plan objectives, and shall prioritize hydrologic benefits above other
review criteria.
Fire Control
• The County shall explore options for funding wildfire prevention measures, including funding
support for the Florida Forestry Service and Independent Fire Districts, including but not
limited to a Golden Gate Estates MSTU and general fund revenue.
• The County will review and update as necessary all interlocal agreements and mutual aid
agreements to assure coordination of legal, procedural and educational components of
Wildfire prevention.
• Update references to Independent Fire Districts.
Lighting
• Eliminate the specificity found in Policy 5.1.1; consider standards for the LDC.
• County owned facilities shall comply with the Collier County Lighting Standards.
• The County shall continue to coordinate with FDOT and FPL to provide guidance and reach
agreement on roadway standards and security lights.
• The County will consider lighting standards for commercial and other non -residential uses,
and may provide specific Land Development Code standards for such uses within Golden
Gate Estates according to its overall rural character and specific lighting zone classifications
within.
• The County will consider lighting standards for residential locations within Golden Gate
Estates within the Land Development Code, and determine whether such standards will be
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 79 of 220
encouraged or mandatory and the extent to which they apply to new or existing residential
development.
Other
• The County will continue to pursue a best management practices approach to making
septage treatment available within Collier County, as a component of bio -solid processing,
either directly or through a public private partnership.
• The subdivision of tracts 13 acres or less in size within Golden Gate Estates shall not trigger
preserve requirements under CCME Policy 6.1.1.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 80 of 220
Appendix A
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy
Public Outreach
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 81 of 220
Introduction
The Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) public outreach process included extensive public
engagement. Residents and stakeholders were encouraged to provide input through multiple
platforms including eight public workshops, staff presentations to both the Golden Gate City Civic
Association and the Golden Gate Estates Civic Association, a user-friendly website with surveys, and
communications through email distribution lists with approximately 330 stakeholders.
As the GGAMP has the three distinct areas of Golden Gate City, the Eastern Estates (east of Collier
Boulevard) and the Western Estates (west of Collier Boulevard), staff focused outreach to provide
individual attention to each area. In this way, staff was able gauge the public’s perspective on unique
differences in values and priorities. In part, these values can be visualized with the outcome of the
first set of workshops where staff engaged the stakeholders to envision the future. A series of
questions were asked through surveys that were distributed during the workshops and were posted
on the dedicated GGAMP restudy website. The following word clouds summarize the values and
expectations of those who participated in the process.
The surveys and word clouds formed the basis for the communities’ vision statements. Staff first
drafted the vision statements based on information provided, and at following public workshops the
participants refined the statements. The goals, objectives and po licies of the GGAMP should
recognize and implement these vision statements.
Golden Gate City Vision Statement
“Golden Gate City is a safe, diverse, family-oriented
community that offers easy access to education,
parks, shopping and services within a vibrant,
walkable community.”
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 82 of 220
Golden Gate Eastern Estate Vision Statement
“The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an
interconnected, low-density residential community
with limited goods and services in neighborhood
centers, defined by a rural character with an
appreciation for nature and quiet
surroundings.”
Golden Gate Western Estate Vision Statement
“Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density,
large-lot residential neighborhood in a
natural setting with convenient access to
the coastal area.”
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 83 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan
Eastern Estates - Introduction
Public Workshop, April 20, 2016
As guests of the Golden Gate Estates Area
Civic Association
Introduction:
At the invitation of the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association (GGEACA), Collier County planning
staff introduced the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy which will result in an update
to the GGAMP. The purpose of the staff presentation was to identify the major components of the
GGAMP, and particularly as it pertains to the Eastern Estates (east of CR 951) area. Emphasis was
placed on major themes and the idea that visioning for the future should consider many factors as
they contribute to the well-being of the next generation.
Meeting Summary:
Michael Ramsey, President of the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association opened the meeting.
He greeted elected and appointed County and District officials, as well as various candidates fo r
County Commission Districts 5 and 3. Approximately 125 community members or stakeholders
attended the meeting.
Mr. Ramsey described the purpose of the meeting as an introduction of the Golden Gate Area
Master Plan update process, and asked residents to not get sidetracked with other specific topics
that are not a part of the GGAMP. As an example, the issue of fracking should not be discussed, as
it is not a Master Plan concept.
Commissioner Tim Nance provided an overview of GGAMP in the context of other P lanning
Restudies and the importance to the Golden Gate area residents. He reminded the group of the
relevance of the “green map”, in that 0ver 75% of the County’s area is already in conservation status,
and that the Rural Fringe Receiving Areas are among the last development areas left in the County;
they can complement the Estates if carefully planned. He indicated that all four Restudy areas would
consider the same important elements to help achieve consistency between Restudies: land use;
transportation/mobility; water; environment; and economic vitality. He reported that an Oversight
Committee has been appointed to help direct public involvement, consistency, sustainability and
economic vitality, and introduced Jeff Curl, the Oversight Committee member representing the
Golden Gate area.
Community Planning Manager Kris Van Lengen provided a PowerPoint presentation, and stated that
this would be the first of several GGAMP meetings, and that this first meeting is in the nature of an
introduction. Content includes an update of relevant issues in the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 84 of 220
Restudy, concepts currently embedded in the GGAMP, and finally a high-level visioning exercise for
the future of the Eastern Estates.
Consistent among all Restudies is the planning wheel- a process matrix that describes present plans,
public outreach, staff data and analysis, development of alternatives, republication, ultimately with
recommendations that reflect stakeholder consensus, and finally re -initiation of public outreach.
The process may include several turns if the “wheel” prior to formal public hearings.
A reflection of the current
progress of the Rural Fringe
Restudy included the fact
that there was broad support
among stakeholders to
incentivize uses that are not
presently adopted- most
particularly free-standing
employment centers and
sports venues. GGEACA and
attendees were encouraged
to attend future Rural Fringe
meetings- as close neighbors with commercial and mobility issues; they are true stakeholders in that
process. The nexus among three Restudy areas, all within 3 miles of North Golden Gate Estates, was
also noted, highlighting the total commercial activity in the area that would benefit the Estates while
adding no further Golden Gate Estates Neighborhood Centers. A balance is needed among all
commercial centers and activities.
The discussion on current GGAMP provisions began with an overview of currently scheduled
meetings, which will be rotational among Eastern Estates, Western Estates and Golden Gate City. A
brief history described the major Restudy between 2001 and 2003 as well as the several private
Growth Management Plan amendments that followed. Key features of the current GGAMP, as
pertain to the Eastern Estates, were listed under the matrix described by Commissioner Nance.
Interpreting the current goals of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan as it relates to the Estates, an
“existing vision” was derived and described as a low density residential community with rural
character, limited commercial services, safe and efficient roadways, and emergency services
coordination.
Principal Planner Anita Jenkins provided an interactive visioning session. She began by describing
the nature and purpose of a community vision: what the community should look and feel like af ter
implementation, as envisioned by residents. After discussing the purpose, Ms. Jenkins challenged
the audience to complete brief answers or descriptions to a number of visioning questions: How
does the Eastern Estates complement the County as a whole, what is it the best location for, what
would you like to read in the newspaper about the area, 10 years from now, what things would you
suggest to improve the area?
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 85 of 220
Individual slips were distributed throughout, and attendees wrote their visions in answer t o these
questions. A total of 45 full sets of questionnaires were returned. A summary of the written
comments can be found here. It was announced that the questions would be available on the web
site as a survey questionnaire for those that wished to provide input in that manner.
Following the exercise, participants were encouraged to share their ideas. Various themes emerged,
particularly the preservation of the rural character of the Eastern Golden Gate area. Some spoke in
support of a sense of place, including renaming/rebranding the Eastern Estates and the streets,
creating institutional and commercial architectural standards that are more suitable for the rural
character. Other areas of importance were protecting important watershed areas, and creating
greenways.
Residents also wanted to discuss the Rural Lands West project, the Habitat Conservation Plan and
noted fracking was a concern. Commissioner Nance addressed these topics and noted other venues
and agencies will be covering these issues more thoroughly.
The Community Planning agenda item on Golden Gate Area Master Plan introduction, concluded at
8:40; the GGEACA meeting agenda items resumed at this time.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 86 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan
Western Estates - Introduction
Public Workshop, May 11, 2016, 6:30 PM
Golden Gate Community Center
Introduction:
Collier County planning staff provided an introduction to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan
(GGAMP) restudy which will result in an update to the GGAMP. The purpose of the staff presentation
was to identify the major components of the GGAMP, particularly as it pertains to the Western
Estates (west of CR 951) area. Emphasis was placed on major themes and the idea that visioning for
the future should consider many factors as they contribute to the well -being of the next generation.
Approximately 60 people attended.
Meeting Summary:
Greg Ault, Principal, AECOM, as consultant for public outreach, began by discussing his role in the
process and the importance of area-wide planning as we think about future generations. He
introduced his staff and County staff, and described his favorable impressions of the area from the
point of view of a non-resident.
Community Planning Manager Kris Van Lengen provided a PowerPoint presentation, and stated that
this would be the first of several GGAMP meetings, and that this first meeting is in the nature of an
introduction. Content includes an update of relevant i ssues in the four area Restudies, concepts
currently embedded in the GGAMP, and finally a high level visioning exercise for the future of the
Western Estates.
Consistent among all Restudies is the planning process - one that looks at current provisions and
conditions, asks what can be improved, alternatives for improvement, and ultimate decision-making
by the Board of County Commissioners. Important focal points include permitted land uses,
transportation issues, environment, and economic vitality. Citizens were encouraged to use on-line
resources to supplement their understanding and provide input when surveys become available.
Mr. Van Lengen presented the idea to study GGAMP in three separate segments: Eastern Estates,
Western Estates and Golden Gate City. There were no objections raised to this approach.
The history of the GGAMP was discussed, including the fact that ten amendments to the plan have
occurred since the last major restudy was completed in 2003. After describing the organization of
the GGAMP document, it was noted that the major provisions related to Goals, Objectives and
Policies were identical to those of the Eastern Estates; low density, rural character, infrastructure
and emergency services needs. Residents might consider whether they wish to emphasize a unique
vision and goals. Unlike the Eastern Estates (approximately 50% built out), the Western Estates is
88% built out.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 87 of 220
With respect to Land uses, permitted uses and conditional uses were described. Also noted was the
special language in the GMP
describing the limitation on
additional conditional uses along the
Golden Gate Parkway.
The vast majority of the citizens who
attended appeared to live within
close proximity to Golden Gate
Parkway. Accordingly, there was
significant comment from the
attendees related to the fact that
they do not wish to change any of
the current land use restrictions
related to Golden Gate Parkway. Mr.
Greg Ault asked for a show of hands
in favor of no change to the land
uses on the Parkway. There was
nearly unanimous agreement, as
shown in the photos below and by
virtue of the responses received in
the visioning session.
Principal Planner Anita Jenkins
provided an interactive visioning
session. She began by describing the
nature and purpose of a community vision: what the community should look and feel like after
implementation, as envisioned by residents. After discussing the purpose, Ms. Jenkins challenged
the audience to complete brief answers or descriptions to a number of visioning questions: How
does the Western Estates complement the County as a whole, what is it the best location for, what
would you like to read in the newspaper about the area, 10 years from now, what things would you
suggest to improve the area?
Individual slips were distributed throughout, and attendees wrote their visions in answer to these
questions. A total of 45 full sets of questionnaires were returned. A summary of the written
comments is shown below. It was announced that the questions would be available on the web site
as a survey questionnaire for those who wished to provide input in that manner.
Attendees expressed a strong desire to maintain the low-density residential character of
their neighborhood with no commercial uses. Below is a summary of questionnaire
responses:
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 88 of 220
I. The Western Estates will be Distinctive for:
Large lots near town with quiet, open and peaceful character
Rural beauty with traditional neighborhoods consisting of dead -end streets where
neighbors know one another
No commercial uses or special uses, maintaining uncluttered thoroughfares
Natural habitat with areas for wildlife and environmental protection
Single-family living for local working families
Agriculturally and livestock friendly per allowances
II. The Western Estates will be a premier location for:
Peaceful living with private single-family homes
Beautiful gateway to the City of Naples
Quiet estates residential living
Family and neighborly atmosphere safe for children
Low traffic
Small town feel
Wildlife and agriculture
A remote animal services substation to support domestic animals found in the area
Accessible to services while maintaining a rural character
Well maintained infrastructure
A predominantly residential community with supporting uses including senior
housing along arterials.
Maintain distinction from Golden Gate City
III. How does the Western Estates area complement Collier County?
Untouched and quiet nature maintains the charm of Naples area
A respite from commercial blight
Peaceful living close to town
Provides a non-gated, peaceful, estates-living neighborhood between the City of
Naples and Golden Gate City
Serves as the gateway to Naples
Gives long-term residents a place to raise generations
Maintains the value of environmentally friendly neighborhood with little
commercial uses
Unit 29 should be its own neighborhood, rather than part of Western
Estates
Clean, crime-free area
Maintains true to the existing master plan
Provides affordable living for year-round residents
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 89 of 220
High value residential housing with limited commercial and special uses
Desire to be the “Pine Ridge Estates” of the area
IV. What is the full potential for your community?
Safe, cohesive neighborhood for families
Desire to maintain privacy
Maintain the existing character, no need for further enhancements or
intrusions
For the area of Unit 29 to be sub divided into its own area similar to Pine
Ridge Estates
Commercial and additional uses will only destroy the potential
Country living close to town
Enhance the “Gateway to Naples”
Most desired residential acreage in Collier County
Ability for growth of environmental protection services
Addition of public services including parks and libraries with small,
neighborhood commercial development to support local neighborhood
V. Reading the newspaper in 10 years, what would the headline say about the
Western Estates?
“One of the best places to retire with friendly people”
“Unique and faithful community that supports the integrity and charm of
Naples”
“A great and convenient place to live”
“We are not a part of Golden Gate City”
“Local homeowners rejoice over being left alone”
“A pearl of beauty that truly complements Collier County”
“A wonderful residential community to live in”
“Commissioners gave in to their supporters and turned it into another
Pine Ridge Road”
“This community stayed the same”
“Premier Estates living 3 miles from the beach”
“Beautiful corridor to the City of Naples”
“Excellent quiet location close to town provides solitude from busy work
life”
Depends on how much “commercial” money changes hands with
commissioners
“This master plan has not changed in 50 years. What a wonderful place”
Hardly anything- this area is quiet.
“Estate living still exists”
“Close to everything in town while maintaining privacy”
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 90 of 220
VI. What three things would really improve the future of the Western Estates?
Not amending the master plan
No commercial uses
Maintain privacy
Maintain traffic flow without addition of lights or stops
Enhance Golden Gate Parkway west of I-75 into a lush landscaped corridor
serving as gateway to Naples
Uncouple the 4-block area from the GGAMP
Increase wall height for I-75 to reduce noise permeation
Enforce existing laws and ordinances
Small localized sub-neighborhoods with neighborhood commercial
development that supports rural areas
Establish additional wildlife and environmental preservation areas
Provision of public services and access to schools, museums, parks, etc.
To never build a RaceTrac in our area
Create a name/identity for our neighborhood
Re-study traffic impacts of I-75 interchange
Consider traffic light at 66th Street SW
Water feature at SW corner of Golden Gate Pkwy and Livingston is a very
welcome, positive feature
Sidewalks
Nature conservancy
Community gardens
The workshop concluded at 8:35 p.m.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 91 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan
Golden Gate City - Introduction
Public Workshop, June 8, 2016
Golden Gate Community Center
Introduction:
The Collier County Community Planning staff provided an introduction to the Golden Gate Area
Master Plan (GGAMP) restudy, which will result in an update to the GGAMP. The purpose of the staff
presentation was to identify the major components of the GGAMP, particularly as it pertains to
Golden Gate City and environs. Emphasis was placed on major themes and the idea that visioning
for the future should consider many factors as they contribute to the well-being of the next
generation. The meeting was noticed and 3 electronic signboards were placed in collector roadways
in the City for a period of three days. Approximately 25 people attended.
Meeting Summary:
Community Planning Manager Kris Van Lengen provided a PowerPoint presentation, and stated that
this would be the first of several GGAMP meetings, and that this first meeting is in the nature of an
introduction. Content included an overview of all area restudies, concepts currently embedded in
the GGAMP, and finally a high level visioning exercise for the future of Golden Gate City.
The presentation explained
the interrelationships
between studies and the
timing of each. Discussion
also included the process,
identifying current plan
provisions of importance to
the community, identifying
opportunities for
improvement and
incorporating the
community’s vision and values to bring forward to the Board for its consideration. The role of the
Growth Management Oversight Committee was also covered.
The discussion on current GGAMP provisions began with an emphasis on website content and
various opportunities for interaction and input and an overview of currently scheduled meetings,
which will be rotational among Eastern Estates, Western Estates and Golden Gate City.
A brief history described the major Restudy between 2001 and 2003 as well as the several private
Growth Management Plan amendments that followed. Key features of the current GGAMP, as
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 92 of 220
pertain to Golden Gate City, were described under the 2 major portions of the GMP: Goals,
Objectives and Policies, and Land Use Designations. Interpreting the current goals of the Golden
Gate Area Master Plan as it relates to the Golden Gate City, an “existing vision” was derived and
described as a recognition of distinct neighborhood areas within the City, the value of sub-area plans
along with City-wide plans, consideration of a GG City Land Development Code, the importance of
connections to the greater Naples area, and a reference to utilit y expansion.
Various Land Use categories were described and discussed, most notably the Mixed -Use Activity
Center, the Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict and the Santa Barbara Commercial
Subdistrict. The Golden Gate Parkway entryway into the City was also discussed. Questions and
comments related to GMP and zoning overlays followed.
Of note were comments related to the desire for a focal point within the Activity Center or nearby,
roadway concerns and beautification.
Principal Planner Anita Jenkins provided an interactive visioning session. She began by describing
the nature and purpose of a community vision: what the community should look and feel like after
implementation, as envisioned by residents. Key subject areas are land use, transportation,
environment, economic and social activity and identity.
After discussing the purpose, Ms. Jenkins challenged the audience to complete brief answers or
descriptions to a number of visioning questions: How does Golden Gate City complement the County
as a whole, what is it the best location for, what would you like to read in the newspaper about the
area 10 years from now, what things would you suggest to improve the area?
Consultants from AECOM also provided examples of streetscapes, walkability and City entryway
features to stimulate imaginations. Overall, citizens seemed most interested in enhanced
community facilities, infrastructure, and expression of art and culture native to the area. Specifically,
a recommendation was made to extend the private utilities water to greater portions of the City
(not wastewater), small business incubation, international food and arts locations, and the use of
existing canals for recreation such as kayak and paddleboard.
Individual slips were distributed throughout, and attendees wrote their visions in answer to these
questions. A total of 35 questionnaires were returned. Below is a summ ary of questionnaire
responses:
I. Golden Gate City will be known for:
Cleanliness
Affordability
New Growth and Development
Celebrated Diversity
Safety
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 93 of 220
II. Golden Gate City will be a great location for:
Raising Families
Affordability
Community Services
Mobility
Recreation
III. How does Golden Gate City complement Collier County?
Diversity
Center of Activity
Accessibility to workforce
IV. What is the full potential for your community?
Unifying to accomplish goals
A place of flourishing families, business, and community services
Safe and effective for all modes of transit
A downtown destination
V. Reading the newspaper in 10 years, what would the headline say about the Western
Estates?
Clean safe and friendly with a lush landscape
Third fastest growing city in the state of Florida
Golden Gate notes first million-dollar home sale
A great place to raise a family
Number one most inviting community
Golden Gate wins state championships in sports, music, arts and more
More full-ride scholarships provided to residents per capita than anywhere in
Florida
Community rallies to improve image
The remarkable turnaround and revitalization of Golden gate
The city that met the needs of its people
VI. What three things would really improve the future of Golden Gate City?
Code enforcement
Safety of mobility (pedestrian, bicyclists)
Infrastructure
Creation of a CRA
Reduced public transit headways
Creation of a community trolley
Lighting
Preservation of green space
Increased homeownership
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 94 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan
Golden Gate City
Public Workshop, October 13, 2016
Golden Gate Community Center
Introduction:
The GGAMP Restudy- Golden Gate City Public Workshop was attended by several Golden Gate
residents, county staff members, and local elected officials. The client team introduced the
current GGAMP and presented a draft vision statement derived from the results of resident
visioning questionnaires and surveys. Finally, an aud ience polling session was conducted to
obtain attendee feedback.
Meeting Summary:
Attendees revised the draft vision statement to read:
“Golden Gate City is a safe , diverse, family-oriented community that offers easy
access to education, parks, shopping and services within a vibrant, walkable
community.”
Audience polling was conducted to obtain additional feedback in a manner that did not require
attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience
polling are attached.
Dialogue included:
• active code enforcement day and night as opposed to the current complaint -driven
code enforcement model
• safety for all dimensions of Golden Gate City
• additional lighting
• limits to additional density
• concern for the limited service area of potable water infrastructure and high costs
associated with water infrastructure within existing service area
o representatives of FGUA cited need to maintain and repair existing aging
infrastructure prior to expanding service areas
o understanding the importance of this discussion, the Golden Gate Civic Association
offered to invite FGUA to a future civic association meeting where they could fo cus
on the infrastructure concerns specifically
• desire for additional distribution of commercial in the north area of Golden Gate City
(Green Boulevard)
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 95 of 220
• support for enhanced and uniform development rules for commercial and mixed -use areas
• additional entertainment and recreation options for young adults
• support for citizen-driven planning efforts.
Golden Gate City Workshop: 10/13/2016
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Do you live in Golden Gate City No
Yes
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Which option best represents your
relationship to Golden Gate City?
Resident
Business Owner
Developer/ Representative
Elected Official
Other
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How Satisfied are you with the
locations of existing commercial uses
in Golden Gate City?
How satisfied are you with the
potential locations of commercial uses
in Golden Gate City?Very Unsatisfied
Somewhat Unsatisfied
Not Sure
Somewhat Satisfied
Very Satisfied
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 96 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Do you support a more uniform set of
development rules for commercial or mixed-
use areas?
Do you agree with existing policies about
citizen-driven planning efforts?
Would you volunteer one evening per month
to serve on a planning committee?
Do you have adequate health care resources
in Golden Gate City?
Do you think Golden Gate City should have
its own unique standards for architecture or
landscaping?
No
Not Sure
Yes
0%20%40%60%80%100%
What type of commercial use is most
needed in Golden Gate City?
Retail
Personal Services
Dining
Offices
Other
0%20%40%60%80%100%
What type of institution is most
needed in Golden Gate City?
Government Services
Places of Worship
Adult and Child Care Centers
Other
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 97 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Should home-based businesses change in
any way in Golden Gate City?
Expanded
Reduced
Stay the Same
Not Sure
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How often do you walk to get somewhere in
Golden Gate City?
Never
Monthly
Weekly
Daily
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Do you have school-aged children that
walk or ride bikes to school?
No
Yes
I don't have children
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Of the following options, what is your
top priority for improvement in Golden
Gate City?
Street Lighting
Traffic Calming
Sidewalks
Bike Routes/ Lanes
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 98 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Have you ever used Collier Area Transit (CAT)
service?
No
Yes
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How satisfied are you with the current
CAT routes?
How satisfied are you with the current
CAT service times and schedule?
How satisfied are you with gateway
design for Golden Gate City along
Golden Gate Parkway?
Very Unsatisfied
Somewhat Unsatisfied
Not Sure
Somewhat Satisfied
Very Satisfied
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 99 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan
Golden Gate Western Estates
Public Workshop, October 20, 2016
Golden Gate Community Center
Introduction:
The GGAMP Restudy-Golden Gate Western Estates Public Workshop was attended by several
Western Estates residents, county staff members, local elected officials, as well as developers and
their representatives. The client team introduced the current GGAMP. Greg Ault presented a draft
vision statement derived from the results of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. Finally,
an audience polling session was conducted to obtain attendee feedback.
Meeting Summary:
Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, provided an overview of the Western Estates in the context of
the entire GGAMP and the urban area of Collier County. He noted the Western estates is a little
more than 10% of the area and population or the Eastern Estates, but is 86% developed compared
to 47% in the East. Also discussed was the structure and content of the Master Plan.
Permitted and conditional uses were reviewed, and the locational restrictions for conditional uses
were presented. Attendees agree that the corridor along the south side of Immokalee Rd. should be
unified under a designation allowing C-1 uses. The concept of additional CU locations at major
intersections was presented, along with incentive-based lot combinations.
Attendees revised the draft vision statement to include the terms “natural”, “large-lot/estate-lot”,
“limited-commercial/non-commercial” to read:
“Golden Gate Western Estates is a low-density large-lot residential neighborhood in a
natural setting with convenient access to the coastal area.”
Audience polling was conducted to obtain additional feedback in a manner that did not require
attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience
polling are attached.
Dialogue included:
• requests for transparency in notifications of conditional uses
• requests for information regarding future plans for county-owned parcel at Vanderbilt and
Collier Blvd
• outlook and vision for attendees with properties fronting major arterials as well as the
I-75 interchange is very different than others
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 100 of 220
o higher noise levels
o higher traffic
o less desirable to residential buyers
o the word “commercial” is undesirable, but residents need the services that
commercial brings with it
• desire to incorporate pedestrian/bike trails/passive recreation using creative thinking with
limited R.O.W.
• lack of traffic lights along Golden Gate Parkway makes left turns difficult during rush hours
• existing Parks & Recreation facilities’ programming is at maximum capacity and unable
to accommodate all desired users
• call to resist external pressure to change or develop further
• desire for more inclusive dialogue relating to areas outside of the Golden Gate Parkway
corridor
• strong opposition to any commercial uses
• concern for poor or lack of cellular reception in the Western Estates
• mixed support to allow rental of guest homes
• strong support for incentivized voluntary small-lot combination program
• desire for the recognition of smaller “sub-areas” that comprise Western Estates
Golden Gate Western Estates Workshop: 10/20/2016
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Do you live in Golden Gate Western Estates?No
Yes
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 101 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How long have you lived in Golden
Gate Western Estates?
Less than 1 Year
1>5 Years
5>10 Years
10>20 Years
Over 20 Years
I don't live in GG City
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Which option best represents your
relationship to Golden Gate
Western Estates?
Resident
Business Owner
Developer/ Representative
Elected Official
Other
0%20%40%60%80%100%
What type of commercial use is most
needed in the Western Estates?
Retail
Personal Services
Dining
Offices
Other
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Should home-based businesses change in
any way in the Western Estates?
Reduced
Stay the Same
Not Sure
Expanded
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 102 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How satisfied are you with the
locations of existing commercial uses
in or near the Western Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
availability and locations of social
organizations in or near the Western
Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
availability and locations of child care
and adult day care in or near the
Western Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
availability and locations of religious
institutions in or near the Western
Estates?
How satisfied are you with cellular
reception/service in or near the
Western Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
availability and locations of group
housing options for seniors or persons
with special needs in or near the
Western Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
availability and locations of assisted
living facilities and nursing homes in
or near the Western Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
neighborhood identity for the
Western Estates?
Very Unsatisfied
Somewhat Unsatisfied
Not Sure
Somewhat Satisfied
Very Satisfied
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 103 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Do you support office uses at major
intersections?
Do you support conditional uses at major
intersections?
Do you support conditional uses at any other
locations not currently allowed?
Would you support office or conditional uses
along Immokalee Road?
Would you support an Interchange Activity
Center at the intersection of Golden Gate
Parkway and I-75?
Should there be a change to allow rental of
your guest house?
Should there be a change to allow rental of
your guest house? (Do-over)
Would you be in favor of a voluntary "small
lot combination" incentive program?
Would you volunteer one evening per month
to serve on a planning committee for the
Golden Gate Area?
Do you agree that raising livestock and crops
should be allowed in the Urban Estates?
Do you have adequate access to
neighborhood parks in or near the Western
Estates?
Do you have adequate access to public
spaces in or near the Western Estates?
Do you have adequate access to ped/bike
trail system in or near the Western Estates?
No
Not Sure
Yes
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 104 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Would you consider a voluntary
association for the Western Estates?
No
Not Sure
Yes, sub-areas
Yes , as a whole
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How often do you walk to another
destination?
Never
Monthly
Weekly
Daily
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How do your school-aged
children get to school?
Bus
Car
Bike or Walk
I don't have school-aged children
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How do you feel about existing public
street lighting in the Western Estates?
Not Enough Light
Perfect Amount
Too Much Light
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 105 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Of the following options, what is your
top priority for improvement in the
Western Estates?
Street Lighting
Traffic Calming
Sidewalks
Bike/Ped Trail System
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 106 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan
Golden Gate Eastern Estates
Public Workshop, November 3, 2016
UIFAS Center
Introduction:
The GGAMP Restudy-Golden Gate Eastern Estates Public Workshop was well-attended by
approximately 130 Eastern Estates residents, stakeholders, and county staff members. The client
team introduced the current GGAMP and presented a draft vision statement that was produced as
a result of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. An audience polling session was then
conducted to obtain additional feedback.
Meeting Summary:
Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, provided an overview on the Master Planning process,
demographics of the area, existing public facilities, existing approved GMP locations for
Neighborhood Centers and
conditional uses, and
coordination with the
RFMUD restudy in
providing nearby
opportunities for retail,
service and jobs for Estates
residents. Transportation
study areas were discussed
as were watershed and
other environmental
topics.
The following draft vision statement was presented to workshop attendees:
“The Golden Gate Eastern Estates is an interconnected, low-density residential community
with limited goods and services in neighborhood centers, defined by a rural character with
an appreciation for nature and quiet surroundings.”
Upon presenting the draft vision statement, attendees were asked to provide feedback and
potential revisions. Responses included the following terms and subject areas:
• No interference
• Nature/natural/environment/park/recreation
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 107 of 220
• Family-oriented
• Health and safety
• Code enforcement
• Rural/country-living
• Protection of natural character
• Desire for services including: postal, medical, governmental, community and recreation
• Access to retail goods and personal services
• Desire to change the wording “limited” presented within the draft
• Acknowledgment of watershed/sheetflow
• Sidewalks, bus stops, and refuge for school-aged children
Audience polling was conducted to obtain additional feedback in a manner that did not require
attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions in a group setting. Results of the audience
polling session are attached.
Additionally, attendees were encouraged to provide additional comments and feedback using
written comment cards. Dialogue and comments received during and after the polling session
included:
• desire to preserve foliage on properties and only clearing necessary areas for wildfire
protection
• concern for the high volume of heavy equipment operating within and traveling through the
Eastern Estates
• mixed support for additional conditional uses including churches and assisted living facilities
general satisfaction with availability/locations of social organizations
mixed satisfaction with availability/locations of child care/adult day care,
religious institutions, group housing options, assisted living facilities,
general dissatisfaction with cellular reception/service
• desire for roadway expansion and additional connectivity to the west
• mixed support for additional commercial land designations, with general support for small
shopping centers as opposed to large centers
• call for effective code enforcement
• desire for equestrian and other recreational trail networks
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 108 of 220
• request to prohibit fireworks and pyrotechnics in an effort to protect wildlife and prevent
wildfires
• requests for improved drainage
• strong support for an I-75 interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Boulevard
• general support for industrial areas or business parks to provide jobs and support trade near
to the Eastern Estates
• strong support for non-residential architectural standards specific to the Eastern Estates
• support to allow rental of guest houses
• overwhelming support for an incentivized small-lot combination program
• general support for an incentivized transfer of ownership program
Golden Gate Eastern Estates Workshop: Instant Polling Results, 11/03/2016
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Do you live in Golden Gate Eastern Estates?No
Yes
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How long have you lived in Golden
Gate Eastern Estates?
Less than 1 Year
1>5 Years
5>10 Years
10>20 Years
Over 20 Years
I don't live in GG City
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 109 of 220
(This space intentionally left blank.)
80%85%90%95%100%
Which option best represents your
relationship to Golden Gate Eastern
Estates?
Resident
Business Owner
Developer/ Representative
Elected Official
Other
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 110 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How satisfied are you with the
locations of existing commercial uses
in or near the Eastern Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
potential locations of commercial uses
in or near the Eastern Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
availability and locations of social
organizations in or near the Eastern
Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
availability and locations of child care
and adult day care in or near the
Eastern Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
availability and locations of religious
institutions in or near the Eastern
Estates?
How satisfied are you with cellular
reception/service in or near the
Eastern Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
availability and locations of group
housing options for seniors or persons
with special needs in or near the
Eastern Estates?
How satisfied are you with the
availability and locations of assisted
living facilities and nursing homes in
or near the Eastern Estates?
Very Unsatisfied
Somewhat Unsatisfied
Not Sure
Somewhat Satisfied
Very Satisfied
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 111 of 220
(This space intentionally left blank.)
0%20%40%60%80%100%
What type of commercial use is most
needed in the Eastern Estates?
Retail
Personal Services
Dining
Offices
Other
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 112 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Should there be a larger commercial center
central to the Eastern Estates?
Should there be more neighborhood
commercial centers throughout the Eastern
Estates?
Do you want specific architectural standards
for non-residential uses in the Eastern
Estates?
Should there be a change to allow rental of
your guest house?
Would you use a Transit Park & Ride or Ride
Sharing Facility?
Do you support an I-75 connection in the
vicinity of Everglades Boulevard?
Watershed Concept 1: Would you support an
incentive to owners who wish to combine a
1.14-acre lot with an adjoining lot?
Watershed Concept 2: Would you support a
voluntary transfer of ownership program for
undeveloped parcels identified by a
watershed committee?
Should there be usable public spaces in the
Eastern Estates?
Should there be trails and greenways in the
Eastern Estates?
No
Not Sure
Yes
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 113 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Is there a need for an industrial area or
business park to provide jobs and
support trade in or near the Eastern
Estates?
No
Not Sure
Yes, nearby- not in
Yes, in the Estates
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Should home-based businesses change in
any way in the Eastern Estates?
Reduced
Stay the same
Not Sure
Expanded
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Should potential Conditional Use
applications change in any way in
the Eastern Estates?
Allow everywhere
Allow along arterials
Only at select locations
Only certain kinds at additional
locations
They should not change
Not Sure
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 114 of 220
Golden Gate City
Commercial Property Owners Meeting
February 16, 2017
2800 N. Horseshoe Drive
Introduction:
To better understand the Golden Gate City commercial properties opportunities and
constraints, a public workshop was scheduled specifically for these property owners. Staff
mailed a meeting notice to all owners of record with property designated existing o r future
commercial use. The meeting was well-attended by approximately 60 property owners, various
county department staff members, the Chamber of Commerce, Economic Development staff,
and County Commissioner Burt Saunders.
Meeting Summary:
Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, provided an overview of the Master Plan restudy process.
Anita Jenkins, Principle Planner, discussed the previous Golden Gate City public workshops and
specifically the vision statement the Golden Gate residents drafted for their community.
Staff described the different
commercial land use districts
within Golden Gate City and how
it these districts applied to their
property. To invite discussion
related to improvements that
could be made to the Master
Plan, staff asked questions
related to future plans for
commercial properties, and
what obstacles in
redevelopment had been
identified. Property owner’s
provided the following comments:
▪ Wants to redevelop within the next five years (Santa Barbara district) to do medical.
o Problem is traffic safety concerns along Santa Barbara,
o LDC requires project minimum of 1 acre rather than 1 parcel.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 115 of 220
o It would be helpful if the rezoning to commercial happened because properties
are being advertised as residential rather than commercial.
o Would like to build more duplex or triplex; city water is not available but would
like it to be.
o Thinks septic is a good optional because of the cost to install central sewage
• Development standard and setbacks need to be amended to accommodate change from
residential to commercial.
• Plan for affordable housing in the in the residential area in the Golden Gate City.
o When rezoning property it was discussed how to capture pass by traffic to be
viable commercial. What happens to the displaced people when switching from
residential to commercial?
o Vertical mixed-use was discussed and identified as an option to maintain
residences within commercial properties.
• Golden gate parkway discussion that nobody is required to redevelopment the property.
Can it be kept as residential if the owner does not live in it? Big concern so that owners
can keep property regardless of who lives there.
• Concerns about too many parcels changing from residential to commercial which will
entail to pushing out those who want to stay residential.
• If a CRA what percent would go into the pool?
o It varies as the property values increase. Sliding scale based on the value of the
property.
• How many properties would have to agree to transfer from residential to commercial in
Golden Gate section.
o Mike Bosi, Zoning Director, discussed possible restrictions for creating a PUD.
Parcel number would vary based on the LDC codes such as parking and square
footage.
• Traffic control to protect residents if conversation rate increased.
• Would like more cafés and restaurants in Golden Gate City.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 116 of 220
• Realtor participating in the meeting provided perspective that if a community is more
mixed-use the property values will increase
• Promote remodeling without putting restrictions, better to let the owner based their
remodels based off being grandfathered in rather than having to meet current LDC codes.
• Discussion how the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce can help Golden Gate City by
promoting pad ready sites on their website.
• Commissioner Saunder’s provided concluding remarks encouraging redevelopment of the
Golden Gate City commercial areas and mentioned the potential for utility conversion and
state funding to help off-set costs.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 117 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan
Golden Gate Eastern Estates
Public Workshop, February 22, 2017
UIFAS Center
Introduction:
The GGAMP Restudy-Golden Gate Eastern Estates Initial Recommendations Public Workshop
was attended by approximately 31 Eastern Estates stakeholders, and county staff members. The
client team introduced the current GGAMP and presented a revised vision statement that was
produced as a result of resident visioning questionnaires and surveys. An audience polling
session was then conducted to obtain level of support for existing and newly recommended
GGAMP policies specific to the Eastern Estates.
Meeting Summary:
Kris Van Lengen, Planning Manager, presented information on the status of the restudy, prior
meetings, area demographics and key topic areas. Anita Jenkins, Principal Planner, presented
results of visioning from prior meetings, including the community’s consensus on its distinctive
qualities.
Audience polling was conducted to obtain level of support for potential new policies and existing
policies in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions
in a group setting. Results of the audience polling session are attached.
Additionally, stakeholders were encouraged to provide comments and feedback through written
comment cards and group dialogue. Dialogue and comments received during and af ter the
polling session included:
• Conditional Uses at arterial intersections
o Desire to preserve arterial intersections for potential future commercial as opposed to
conditional uses since they are the most desirable to commercial property developers.
o Need for larger conditional use parcels to be compatible with the surrounding
community.
• Transportation and mobility
o Desire for an increased rate of road paving.
o Concern for increased congestion on Everglades Blvd with a potential I-75 interchange.
o Increased need for designated refuge/waiting areas for students waiting for school
buses.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 118 of 220
o Desire for the interchange to be aligned with RFMUD receiving areas due to future
increased population densities.
o Concern for the future character of streets adjacent to a potential interchange.
o Desire to limit access to or from the interchange.
• Desire for larger buffers and setbacks for non-residential uses.
• Need for appropriate lighting at rural intersections, without over-lighting entire corridors.
• Need for reflective street signage and way finding
o Strong concern for an increase of built guest homes and the overall effects on the
community and population density if a policy were changed to allow for the lease of
guest homes as well as adverse impacts on infrastructure, watershed, and code
enforcement.
o Desire to make senior centers and wellness centers a conditional use.
Golden Gate Eastern Estates Workshop – Instant Polling Results: 02/22/2017
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Which option best represents your
relationship to Golden Gate Eastern
Estates?
Resident
Business Owner
Developer/ Representative
Elected Official
Other
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Do you live in Golden Gate Eastern Estates?No
Yes
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 119 of 220
(This space intentionally left blank.)
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How long have you lived in Golden
Gate Eastern Estates?
How long have you lived in Golden
Gate Eastern Estates? (do-over)
Less than 1 Year
1>5 Years
5>10 Years
10>20 Years
Over 20 Years
I don't live in GG City
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 120 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Retain existing policy allowing for
livestock and crops.
Retain existing policy to preserve the
rural character of the Eastern Estates.
Add new provision to allow Conditional
Uses at arterial intersections.
Add new provision to allow Conditional
Uses at arterial intersections. (do-over)
Add new provision to allow Group
Homes (7-14 people).
Add new provision to allow
communications towers.
Accommodate growing demand for
employment, goods, services, and
entertainment with provisions adjacent
to the Estates.
Neighborhood centers may be
increased in size to accommodate
stormwater, septic and buffer
requirements.
The County will develop rural
architectural standards for commercial
and institutional development in the
Estates.
Retain existing policy to pave lime rock
roads.
Strongly Disagree
Somewhat Disagree
Not Sure
Somewhat Agree
Strongly Agree
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 121 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Retain existing policy to schedule (or
update) and fund bridge improvements.
Retain existing policy to create a
greenway plan.
Retain existing policy to increase north-
south and east-west route alternatives.
Retain existing policy to coordinate a
future I-75 interchange in the vicinity of
Everglades Boulevard.
The County will update setback and
buffer standards for non-residential uses
in the Estates and for adjoining uses in
the RFMUD and RLSA.
Retain existing policy to conduct wildfire
mitigation education and prevention
programs.
Retain existing policy that the County
will consider incentives for wetland
preservation.
Retain existing policy that the County
will encourage "dark sky" lighting
standards.
The County will promote the
combination of 1.14-acre or similar
"small lots" into adjoining lots through
incentives
The County will consider a TDR program
for natural resource protection.
Strongly Disagree
Somewhat Disagree
Not Sure
Somewhat Agree
Strongly Agree
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 122 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
The County will consider dispersed
water storage and watershed
connectivity to, through, and from the
Estates.
The County will continue efforts to
support independent fire districts and
Florida Forestry Service in public
education, planning, and resourcing
related to wildfire prevention and
response.
The County shall continue to work
toward the goal of providing a septic
disposal facility located in Collier
County.
The County will create new lighting
standards within the LDC.
Do you support the ability of owners to
rent/lease their guest homes.
Strongly Disagree
Somewhat Disagree
Not Sure
Somewhat Agree
Strongly Agree
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 123 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan
Golden Gate City
Public Workshop, April 26, 2017
Golden Gate Community Center
Introduction:
The GGAMP Restudy Golden Gate City Initial Recommendations Public Workshop was attended by
approximately 10 Golden Gate City stakeholders, and county staff members. The county staff
introduced the current GGAMP and public outreach to-date. An audience polling session was then
conducted by the client team to obtain level of support for existing and newly recommended GGAMP
policies specific to Golden Gate City. Areas of focus included complementary land uses, economic
vitality, transportation and mobility, and environment.
Meeting Summary
Audience polling was conducted to obtain consensus for potential new policies and existing
policies in a manner that did not require attendees to self-identify with their answers or opinions
in a group setting. Additionally, stakeholders were encouraged to provide comments and
feedback through group dialogue. Dialogue during and after the polling session included:
• Code Enforcement
─ While discussing the information on page 10 of the PowerPoint, some of the attendees
recommended that code enforcement be added as an additional “focus” idea. Some of
the attendees were concerned with the way that environmental code – such as the
removal of invasive trees – is enforced.
• Architectural Review
─ Some of the attendees voiced that they would like to establish a review board to oversee
architectural standards.
• Stormwater improvements.
─ After the conclusion of the meeting, there was discussion of opportunities in future
construction for stormwater systems improvements.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 124 of 220
Golden Gate City Workshop – Initial Recommendations: 04/26/2017
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Do you live in Golden Gate City?No
Yes
0%20%40%60%80%100%
How long have you lived in Golden
Gate City?
Less than 1 Year
1>5 Years
5>10 Years
10>20 Years
Over 20 Years
I don't live in GG City
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Which option best represents your
relationship to Golden Gate City?
Resident
Business Owner
Developer/ Representative
Elected Official
Other
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 125 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Commercial sub-districts should be simpler
and more cohesive, emphasizing mixed-use
and supporting redevelopment
opportunities. (do-over)
Mixed-use provisions and Land
Development Code standards should strive
for uniformity
The County should consider one or more
zoning overlay(s) to reduce the cost and
complexity of individual rezone petitions.
Consider provision in zoning overlay to
allow property improvements even if not
to some of today's development standards
(ex: parking, landscape, setback, etc.)
Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict:
Remove prohibition on rental housing.
Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict:
Promote mixed-use standards, including
vertical mixed-use.
Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict:
Remove prohibition on rental housing.
Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict:
Promote mixed-use standards, including
vertical mixed-use.
Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict:
Remove 1-acre rezone requirement.
Golden Gate Professional Office
Subdistrict: Promote mixed-use standards,
including vertical mixed-use.
Disagree
No Opinion
Agree
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 126 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Golden Gate Professional Office
Subdistrict: Expand uses to C-3
(commercial) and residential.
Golden Gate Professional Office
Subdistrict: Increase height to allow 3
stories adjacent to Golden Gate Parkway.
Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict:
Should the boundaries of the Subdistrict be
expanded?
Collier Boulevard Commercial Sub-District:
Do you agree with the uses within this
Subdistrict?
Collier Boulevard Commercial Sub-District:
Should certain light industrial uses be
allowed if adding jobs to GG City?
Enhance community participation in area
and sub-area planning through a county-
fostered initiative with the ultimate goal of
self-sustained community planning.
Enhance community cultural assets,
international focus, and community
identity.
Adopt appropriate tools for business
enhancement, such as incubators or
accelorators.
Explore feasibility of CRA, Business
Improvement District (BID), or Innovation
Zone within Golden Gate City.
Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict:
Retain Plan language related to pedestrian
connectivity and alternative modes of
transportation.
Disagree
No Opinion
Agree
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 127 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Identify and prioritize traffic-calming
locations.
Express need to conduct a pedestrian
bridge connectivity study over canals.
Study potential for utility service
conversion from Florida Government Utility
Authority to Collier County Water Sewer
District.
Continue canal/outfall water monitoring
for surface and groundwater
contamination as it relates to septic.
Seek appropriate grant funding
opportunities for conversion of septic to
sewer service.
Continue stormwater outfall and
connectivity improvements for flood
control.
Develop a program requiring removal of all
exotic vegetation using Golden Gate City as
a pilot.
Disagree
No Opinion
Agree
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 128 of 220
0%20%40%60%80%100%
Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict:
Should the Uses include "light industrial" if
compatible with neighborhood?
No
No Opinion
Yes
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 129 of 220
Correspondence Regarding Golden Gate City
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 130 of 220
Office of Business and Economic Development
Research Memo: (April 18, 2017)
Golden Gate Area Master-Plan (GGAMP)1
Overview:
Collier County’s Economic Development is inclusive of Golden Gate City particularly with
respect to retail and commercial business. However, various sources reveal that there is limited
Industrial land which has been retarding the County’s capabilities for investment attraction and
expansion 2. This update provides a great opportunity to create an environment to bring more
development to the area covered by the Golden Gate Area Master-Plan (GGAMP).
Big Boxes are increasingly becoming vacant big–box stores i.e. ‘dark boxes’3 at a time when the
GGAMP remains heavily focused on Commercial use. Commercial Zoning is defined by Florida
statutes4, to include activities predominantly connected with the sale, rental and distribution of
products or performance of services while industrial-use means activities connected with
manufacturing, assembly, processing, or storage of products. Industrial-use facilitates greater
value-added activities associated with improved jobs and wages, while lower value-added
investments usually promoted by commercial use activity, are generally subject to greater job
termination, and this seems the opposite of the vision for the GGAMP. Industrial areas would
indeed serve as a major economic boost for the county and in the Golden Gate area. However,
industrial zoning would require buffers and other ways to separate business use from the
residential areas. Heavy industrial-use has been associated with negative community impacts
including environmental pollution. Proposing Mixed-use, or allowing certain light-industrial 5
uses as a conditional-use would be a great way to update the GGAMP. Conditional-use would
allow for county staff to review and ensure that each proposed use will not negatively impact the
surrounding neighborhoods.
The main objectives for Golden Gate City could be further promoted and facilitated where the
GGAMP includes mixed use and conditional use zoning that promotes light-industrial-uses and
business parks in Goals 4 and 5 of the plan. This could also enable greater investments in some
of Golden Gate City’s currently unused and underutilized ‘big-box’ spaces e.g. Sweet Bay, Sears
and K-Mart.
Points:
• The 44 respondents included in the GGAMP survey 6 indicated they wanted Golden Gate
City to:
o facilitate new business as a top priority for improving Golden Gate City’s future;
1 http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=66933
2 http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=764
3 http://ilsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/bbtk-factsheet-blight.pdf
4 https://floridaldr.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/relevant-florida-statutes-definitions.pdf
5 Light or limited industrial zoning is intended for lands appropriate for low-intensity, light and medium industrial
activities. Typical uses include assembly and fabrication industries, warehousing, distribution centers,
administrative offices, and business support services that typically do not cause noise, air, or water disturbances or
pollution. (see http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fairfield/html/Fairfield25/Fairfield2506.html retrieved April
18, 2017. 6 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/17Yols-i6vU-QMxD6RLNvPoW6NbkZFNfjwGJzBWWRgBo/viewanalytics
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 131 of 220
Office of Business and Economic Development
o be distinctive for middle-class workers and new growth;
o be a premier location for investment;
• The Office of Business and Economic Development(OBED) reviewed the GGAMP and
encourages more mixed or conditional-use zoning that promotes light-industrial activities
and business parks. Goals 4 and 5 could be revised to include specific reference to
advanced manufacturing, including automated apparel, light assembly and 3D printing, as
well as call centers.
• Several large retailers, including Payless, K-Mart, Sweet Bay and Sears are closing a
significant number of stores in Collier County. That provides an opportunity for timely
amendment to the Land Development Code (LDC) development standards and permitted
uses that could help to bring new businesses to the area. For example, Sears in Chicago
has repurposed a 127,000 square-foot store into a multitenant data center 7. This could be
replicated in Golden Gate City if developers were allowed the proposed flexibility in
development standards. Currently, there is vacant commercial and retail space, and a
revision to the LDC to include mixed or conditional-use developments that promote light-
industrial activities and business parks could help to meet resident’s needs. Throughout
the nation, transforming plaza districts to mixed-use developments is a growing trend
(see http://newsok.com/article/5545159 and http://mixeduse.sochaplazas.com/work/ ).
Revising the GGAMP to allow such transitions could help improve the area’s economic
competitiveness. Some tracts within Golden Gate Area are designated as Historically
Underutilized Business (HUB) Zones and mixed-or conditional-use could aid in their
development.
Action:
OBED to-
• coordinate with Zoning Division, GGCRA-MSTU and other affected parties at meetings
prior to the public workshops this summer to work on discussions and drafting
considerations for incorporating greater mixed-and conditional-uses that promotes light-
industrial use and business park activities in Goals 4 and 5 of the GGAMP; and
• participate in the GGAMP Public Workshops.
7 http://www.triplepundit.com/2013/06/former-sears-kmart-stores-become-data-centers/
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 132 of 220
1
From:Michael Currier <mcurrier@govmserv.com>
Sent:Monday, October 17, 2016 11:10 AM
To:VanLengenKris
Cc:Donna Lizotte; Ron Jefferson; JenkinsAnita
Subject:RE: Golden Gate City and FGUA
Attachments:GG-MAP SERVICE AREA-W & WW-UPDATED_2011.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Kris:
I am not aware of FGUA sponsored line extensions since purchase in 1999. The most recent line extensions were
constructed and paid by development; Publix on CR 951 and Collier schools.
From: VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2016 11:29 AM
To: Michael Currier
Cc: Donna Lizotte; Ron Jefferson; JenkinsAnita
Subject: Golden Gate City and FGUA
Hello Michael:
Many thanks to you and Donna for attending the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy public workshop last evening. I
appreciate that you shared maps of your served area for water and wastewater service in Golden Gate City. I have two
follow-up requests:
1. Can you provide those maps in PDF format so that the detail and color is more evident?
2. Can you share any examples of extending service to new street areas and how it worked out? For example,
number of new residences included, cost per customer for impact fee and connection charge, etc.? Have you
made any new connections in the past 10-20 years either in GG City or in your Service area just west in GG
Estates?
Thanks for helping us understand the underlying issues and business plans of FGUA, and thanks too for planning to meet
again with residents at an upcoming Golden Gate Civic Association meeting.
Respectfully,
Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP
Community Planning Manager
Zoning Division, Collier County
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
(239) 252-7268
www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send
electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 133 of 220
1
From:DelateJoseph
Sent:Friday, October 07, 2016 1:00 PM
To:MoscaMichele
Cc:JenkinsAnita; VanLengenKris
Subject:RE: GG City improvements
Attachments:GoldenGateCityStormwaterDrainageSystemImprovementPlan_CurrentConditions_2016.pdf;
Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_NE1.pdf; Golden Gate City
Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project_NW1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage
Improvement Project_SE1.pdf; Golden Gate City Stormwater Drainage Improvement
Project_SW1.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
This is a multi- year project that may take 20 years from start to finish.
It is a maintenance project to replace the stormwater pipes and catch basins (stormwater inlets) in the 4 square mile GG
City only.
There are no ponds or new improvements planned.
The total estimated construction cost is $15M in 2012 dollars.
This amount obviously will be higher by the time is fully constructed due to inflation, construction cost increases, etc…
The design costs are approximately 15-20% so that would add an approximate $3M to the 2012 total.
Funding will be in small amounts as it is available and budgeted on a yearly basis.
The County has requested a $1M FLA legislative earmark for this upcoming session but that is only a possibility of
receiving funding.
Attached are maps of the 4 Quads plus a relatively recent current conditions map that is mostly up to date.
As a side note, we like to call it stormwater management, not drainage or flood control, even though the graphics say
otherwise.
Thank you.
From: MoscaMichele
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 2:04 PM
To: DelateJoseph
Cc: JenkinsAnita; VanLengenKris
Subject: RE: GG City improvements
Hi Joe,
The County’s Community Planning staff would like information about the stormwater improvements slated for Golden
Gate City (refer to below email). I provided them with the below excerpt/information from a recent presentation given
by Jerry. In addition, the 2016 AUIR identifies funding for the project in fiscal years 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021 for “DC”
– design, permitting, and construction.
GG City Outfall Replacements
Proposed Funding in FY 17: $500,000
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 134 of 220
2
Four-square-mile area of Golden Gate City
Replacement and improvements to existing aging infrastructure:
Replaced old catch basins with ditch bottom inlets with grates
Installation of sumps at catch basins
Re-grading and sodding of swales to prevent erosion
When you have a moment, would you please provide Kris with the requested map(s) or graphics and any other pertinent
project details.
Thank you,
Michele
Michele R. Mosca, AICP
Principal Planner
Growth Management Department
Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees & Program Management Division
2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104
tel. 239.252.2466
From: VanLengenKris
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 11:40 AM
To: MoscaMichele
Cc: JenkinsAnita
Subject: GG City improvements
Hi Michelle:
You mentioned the outfall replacement project for GG City stormwater, ($.5m, FY 17). Do you have a map of the
improvement locations, or graphics from studies to show improvement areas in flood control for certain blocks? Also,
are there any other future stormwater improvements in the next 5-10 years?
Thanks,
Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP
Community Planning Manager
Zoning Division, Collier County
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
(239) 252-7268
www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send
electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 135 of 220
1
From:VanLengenKris
Sent:Thursday, February 02, 2017 3:08 PM
To:'Sandra Mediavilla'
Cc:JenkinsAnita
Subject:RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan
Attachments:text GGAMP City Downtown Center Comm Sub.pdf; FLUM Downtown Commercial
Subdistrict.pdf
Hello Sandy:
Thank you for your inquiry. I am attaching language and a reference map currently contained in our Comprehensive Plan
within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan section. This material dates back to 2004. The Subdistrict containing your
address is called Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict.
We are in the process of a “restudy”, which means we want to obtain public comments and make changes reflecting
public consensus and changed conditions. The area shaded on the map indicates one of many Subdistricts that was
identified more than 10 years ago for redevelopment. You can read the language describing the intent.
The Future Land Use (FLU) designation is a bit different than zoning. I believe your property is zoned residential.
Nevertheless, the FLU would give a property owner the right to request a zoning change, subject to compatibility with
surrounding areas and other considerations.
As you will be unable to attend the meeting, please feel free to let me know whether you agree with this designation. I
infer from your comments that you would prefer that addresses along 23d Ave SW not be a part of this FLU designation.
Please feel free to confirm or expand.
We will provide written comments to the hearing bodies after we assemble initial recommendations for change.
Meanwhile, please feel free to contact me with further questions and comments.
Very truly yours,
Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP
Community Planning Manager
Zoning Division, Collier County
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
(239) 252-7268
www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies
From: Sandra Mediavilla [mailto:SandraMediavilla@napleslaw.us]
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 2:04 PM
To: VanLengenKris <KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net>
Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan
Kris: I am a property owner within the City area of Golden Gate. I received your letter yesterday regarding the GGAMP
and informing me of the meeting to be held on February 16, 2017 at 5:30 pm.
Unfortunately, I work until 5:30 therefore will not be able to attend the meeting. But let this email serve as my
comments on the information contained in your letter.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 136 of 220
2
Your letter indicates that my property (which is clearly residential) is “allowed to have commercial uses”. I am hopeful
you are not referring to the residential portion of Golden Gate City. I live at 4340 23rd Ave. SW. I have owned the house
and resided in the house since 1976. While the entire area and population of Golden Gate City has greatly changed over
my 41 years in the area, I cannot and will never agree to this residential area becoming in any way commercial.
I am hopeful that when you refer to “commercial property owners”, you are referring to those areas of the City which
are already commercial in nature, i.e. 951, the Parkway, Santa Barbara Blvd. etc. I cannot imagine that any portion of
the residential areas of the City of Golden Gate would be deemed or somehow turned into a commercial area. As it is
now, I live in an area which is now filled with people who are not of the nature as when I first moved into this
neighborhood. If I were able to afford it, I would remove myself from this area to an area more to my liking.
If this is not the case, please let me know and I will see if I can get the time off to attend your meeting in person.
I look forward to hearing back from your office.
Thank you.
Sandy
Sandra B. Mediavilla
Florida Registered Paralegal
Parrish, White & Yarnell, P. A.
3431 Pine Ridge Road, Suite 101
Naples, FL 34109
Phone: 239-566-2013
Fax: 239-566-9561
E-mail: SandraMediavilla@napleslaw.us
Both Sandra Mediavilla and Parrish, White & Yarnell, P.A. intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This
message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized
disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please permanently dispose
of the original message and notify Sandra Mediavilla immediately at (239) 566-2013. Thank you.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 137 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 138 of 220
Correspondence Regarding Eastern Golden Gate Estates
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 139 of 220
1
From:MottToni
Sent:Friday, April 01, 2016 5:28 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Cc:DowlingMichael
Subject:1983 Agreement - GAC Land Trust
Attachments:1983 Agreement.pdf; Reserved and Available List with Folio 2016.xlsx
Follow Up Flag:Flag for follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Hi Kris,
Sorry I missed your call. Please find attached the 1983 Agreement between Avatar Properties Inc,
f/k/a GAC Properties Inc. and Collier County. Michael Dowling is the liaison with the Golden Gate
Land Trust Committee. Also attached is the list of remaining properties. I’ll be out of the office next
week Monday through Wednesday and perhaps we can meet and discuss and questions you may
have after that. Just let us know. Thanks
Toni A. Mott
Toni A. Mott, Manager, SR/WA
Collier County Real Property Management
3335 Tamiami Trail East - Suite 101
Naples, FL 34112
Telephone Number: 239-252-8780
Fax Number: 230-252-8876
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send
electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 140 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 141 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 142 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 143 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 144 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 145 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 146 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 147 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 148 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 149 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 150 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 151 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 152 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 153 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017 Page 154 of 220
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
A B C D E F G H I J
March 29, 2016 GAC Land Sales
PHASE UNIT TRACT LEGAL ACRES OR BK/PG RESERVED FOR PER ACRE APPRAISED VALUE FOLIO NUMBER
I 7 81 All of Tract 81 9.11 1257/794 Parks and Recreation (3 - 2016)$50,000 $455,500 36915200008
I 20 2 All of Tract 2 8.78 1257/794 School Board $40,000 $350,800 37590080008
I 195 85 All of Tract 85 4.77 1257/794 School Board $38,000 $181,260 45967400009
I 95 53 W 180 3.92 1257/794 School Board (3 - 2016)$60,000 $235,200 41824360008
I 96 121 All of Tract 121 4.52 1257/794 School Board (3 - 2016)$60,000 $271,200 41887560007
III 67A 110 All of Tract 110 1.49 1361/2029 North Naples Fire and Rescue $9,000 $13,410 40120440005
II 93 48 W105/W180 1.17 1361/2019 Greater Naples Fire and Rescue $10,000 $15,900 41714000009
II 93 48 E75/W180 1.14 1361/2019 Greater Naples Fire and Rescue $10,000 $11,400 41713880000
I 14 127 All of Tract 127 5.77 1257/1757 Future Marketability $50,000 $289,500 37289560004
I 17 89 All of Tract 89 4.62 1257/1757 Future Marketability $50,000 $250,000 37445840005
I 24 97 All of Tract 97 5 1257/1757 Future Marketability $50,000 $250,000 37807880001
I 49 126 All of Tract 126 5.61 1257/1757 Future Marketability $34,000 $190,740 39271840002
I 18 55 All of Tract 55 4.43 1257/794 Future Marketability $50,000 $250,000 37493920003
II 78 116 E75/W180 1.17 1361/2019 Future Marketability $9,000 $10,530 40749320001
II 78 116 E75/E150 1.17 1361/2019 Future Marketability $9,000 $10,530 40749320001
II 78 158 All of Tract 158 6.66 1361/2019 Future Marketability $9,000 $56,070 40752400002
III 42 1 All of Tract 1 7.38 1361/2029 Future Marketability $14,000 $103,320 38840040001
50 66 S 105, S 180 1.59 Available 39326920000
51 3 N 75, N 150 1.17 Available 39380200009
51 35 S 75 / S 150 1.13 Available 39384040003
73 59 E 75 / W 180 1.14 Available 40474920006
73 83 E 75 / W 150 1.14 Available 40476840003
73 103 S 75 / S 150 1.17 Available 40478280001
47 52 W 105 / W 180 1.59 Available 39145640008
Total Acres 85.64Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper12/19/2017Page 155 of 220
1
From:Heidi Liebwein <heidi.liebwein@sbcglobal.net>
Sent:Wednesday, January 13, 2016 2:08 AM
To:VanLengenKris
Subject:Golden Gate Growth Management meeting at Collier Extension
Good morning,
During the meeting it was said we were to go on the website and provide feedback. I tried and was not successful as to
where, so I am sending my thoughts in this email.
I do not think you should build in Golden Gate, the people who bought out there were aware of the drive when they
bought out in Golden Gate. IF they are willing to accept being very rural and the drive in to retail stores, then that is
how they wanted it, or they would not have bought out so far.
Please do not build in Golden Gate.
Thank you,
Heidi Liebwein
Property owner in GG
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 156 of 220
1
From:Susie Mahon <susiemahon@comcast.net>
Sent:Wednesday, October 05, 2016 9:40 PM
To:GGAMPRestudy
Subject:Future of Golden Gate Estates
We won't be able to get to the meeting tomorrow evening but wanted to give our input. We would love it if Green Blvd
could be extended to 16th. We live at what used to be at the corner of White Blvd and 23rd street sw - but now it's a
"sweeping curve". Drivers love to speed around that curve and there have been several accidents - they don't all show
up in accident reports because they're mostly one car accidents - people being stupid and running into our fence or
mailbox- then they leave. The traffic on this corner is really bad especially between 3 and 6 pm - it's very difficult to get
out of our driveway safely during that time. Is there a way to reroute the landscape trucks and trailers? - all the
landscape companies out here seem to have grown by leaps and bounds - Stahlmans, Renfroe and Jackson, Case and
then there's American Farms - some of their trucks are now double semis. The 45 mph speed limit is way too fast when
they're going around this curve and many times people are passing each other on the curve or when they straighten out
in front of our house. Also, all these trucks are going to tear the roads up.
Also, would it be possible to widen the lanes on White Blvd a little- some of the vehicles/ trucks are so wide they hardly
fit in the lane.
Thank you, Charlie and Susie Mahon
Sent from my iPhone
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 157 of 220
1
From:Ron and Lilianne <militorl@rogers.com>
Sent:Tuesday, October 11, 2016 4:50 PM
To:GGAMPRestudy
Subject:Future of Rural Golden Gate
Good afternoon
Thank you for the invitation to the community meeting held October 6th. Unfortunately we are in
Canada right now and could not attend. We own a home at 4325 10th St. N.E. which intersects with
47th Ave N.E.
47th Ave is a well travelled street that runs off of Immokalee Road. In term of safety, this is a very
narrow street with many children meeting their school buses every weekday morning. Many parents
can be seen waiting at each corner with their kids in the car because it is not safe for them to wait for
the school bus on the side of the road.
The entrance to our neighborhood where 47th intersects with Immokalee needs a face-lift. It would
be very nice to see nice landscaping and lighting on both corners to welcome residents and guests
coming into the area
Thank you
Sincerely
Ron and Lilianne Milito
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 158 of 220
1
From:castillaglass120@gmail.com
Sent:Friday, September 30, 2016 12:05 PM
To:GGAMPRestudy
Subject:Future Plan recommendation
Please open I-75 and Everglades Exit the ramp is there, we need acces
Thank you
Angel and Ingrid Castilla
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 159 of 220
1
From:Octavio Sarmiento Jr <sammyosjr@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, September 21, 2016 5:06 PM
To:JenkinsAnita
Cc:Kitty Paz
Subject:PARADISE FACILITIES
Attachments:BROSURE_0301.pdf; collier_2016_sde031519696081546.jpg; EMAIL_0305.pdf; LETTER_
0304.pdf; patio and legalization-Model.pdf 1 (6 files merged) (2).pdf; PROPERTY
APPRAISER_0302.pdf; SURVEY.pdf
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Hi Anita, How are you?
Hope you are doing well, we spoke on the phone few times in reference of a Church and
now we also have this other Project that we had start prior, We are now also informing
you of the intend and plans of Extension to the Existing Home Care Facility.
I am attaching letter, documentation of the Home Care Facility, Parcel ID, Site Plan,
Additions and Expanding Plans and more, so you can be aware of our intentions. Plans of
expanding and adding from Six Residents to a total of 14 Residents and we love for you
to add us and help us, so we can count with you and the County to be part of this new
changes to the Golden Gate Master Plan, that will allow us to Expand. We like obtain
that window of opportunities and continue our project, which then will continue with SDP
building permits and others.
Let me know if there is anything else you may need from us.
My best Regards
Thank you
Octavio
OCTAVIO SARMIENTO JR
ASSA-AGENCIAS SARMIENTO S.A
Permit Consultant
239-601-0485
sammyosjr@yahoo.com
www.permitandplans.com
1100 Commercial Blvd #118
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 160 of 220
1
From:JenkinsAnita
Sent:Thursday, October 06, 2016 7:55 AM
To:ScottTrinity; WilkisonDavid
Cc:VanLengenKris
Subject:FW: Future of Golden Gate Estates
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
FYI - sharing issues identified
-----Original Message-----
From: Susie Mahon [mailto:susiemahon@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 9:40 PM
To: GGAMPRestudy
Subject: Future of Golden Gate Estates
We won't be able to get to the meeting tomorrow evening but wanted to give our input. We would love it if Green Blvd
could be extended to 16th. We live at what used to be at the corner of White Blvd and 23rd street sw - but now it's a
"sweeping curve". Drivers love to speed around that curve and there have been several accidents - they don't all show
up in accident reports because they're mostly one car accidents - people being stupid and running into our fence or
mailbox- then they leave. The traffic on this corner is really bad especially between 3 and 6 pm - it's very difficult to get
out of our driveway safely during that time. Is there a way to reroute the landscape trucks and trailers? - all the
landscape companies out here seem to have grown by leaps and bounds - Stahlmans, Renfroe and Jackson, Case and
then there's American Farms - some of their trucks are now double semis. The 45 mph speed limit is way too fast when
they're going around this curve and many times people are passing each other on the curve or when they straighten out
in front of our house. Also, all these trucks are going to tear the roads up.
Also, would it be possible to widen the lanes on White Blvd a little- some of the vehicles/ trucks are so wide they hardly
fit in the lane.
Thank you, Charlie and Susie Mahon
Sent from my iPhone
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a
public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 161 of 220
1
From:ScavoneMichelle
Sent:Wednesday, October 19, 2016 4:07 PM
To:militorl@rogers.com
Cc:VanLengenKris; WilkisonDavid; JenkinsAnita; ScottTrinity; KhawajaAnthony; AhmadJay;
WilkisonDavid; PutaansuuGary; LulichPamela
Subject:RE: TO 6153 / RE: Future of Rural Golden Gate
Mr. and Mrs. Milito,
Thank you for providing your comments. We appreciate your input. Staff will be reviewing all input
received and forwarding to appropriate staff for future planning and programming as funding availability
permits.
On behalf of Staff,
Michelle Scavone, GMD Operations Coordinator
From: Ron and Lilianne [mailto:militorl@rogers.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 4:50 PM
To: GGAMPRestudy
Subject: Future of Rural Golden Gate
Good afternoon
Thank you for the invitation to the community meeting held October 6th. Unfortunately we are in Canada right now and could
not attend. We own a home at 4325 10th St. N.E. which intersects with 47th Ave N.E.
47th Ave is a well travelled street that runs off of Immokalee Road. In term of safety, this is a very narrow street with many
children meeting their school buses every weekday morning. Many parents can be seen waiting at each corner with their kids in
the car because it is not safe for them to wait for the school bus on the side of the road.
The entrance to our neighborhood where 47th intersects with Immokalee needs a face-lift. It would be very nice to see nice
landscaping and lighting on both corners to welcome residents and guests coming into the area
Thank you
Sincerely
Ron and Lilianne Milito
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send
electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 162 of 220
1
From:Jayne Sventek <jsventek1@hotmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, February 16, 2017 6:27 AM
To:GGAMPRestudy
Subject:Possible improvements
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Good morning...
Thanks for the update on the meeting, unfortunately, I have out of town guests coming that day. If things change we
hope to attend.
My question concerns cell phone towers, which I have been questioning for over fifteen years for our area. It doesn't
matter if it is ATT or VERIZON, our area which is directly off 951 between Pine Ridge and Vanderbilt, have limited cell
signal.
In fact, we built in 1990 and not much has changed near us. When we pass Logan and head towards 951 on Pine Ridge
Road, passing Temple Shalom, the signal has always cut out and becomes garbled. My friends know my location while
driving when I am on the phone as I pass. Also, the fairly new Publix at 951 and Pine Ridge, is known for no signal once
you step inside. Even our street has limited cell reception and we have a unit in our home from ATT to boost cell
strength. It is a microcell tower, they call it. I have contacted at numerous times, both cell companies and they inform
me a tower is governed by county rules and regulations. They can only be installed on a school, fire station etc grounds.
This needs to be looked into and see what areas need the tower, not the best spot for the tower, held by the county. I
welcomed one on my nearly three acres years ago.
I am not sure if this issue is on the agenda, but needs to be looked into. Come and ride with me for a day and hear how
bad the signal is. Is there an agenda at this point, you may send to residents? Thank you and I wait to hear from your
office. Have a great day.
Mrs. Patrick B. Sventek
4680 First Avenue SW
Naples, FL
Sent from my iPad
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 163 of 220
1
From:Michael R. Ramsey <michael.r.ramsey@embarqmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, February 09, 2017 2:05 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Cc:JenkinsAnita; Jflan241@aol.com; petergaddy@gmail.com; 'Tim Nance'
Subject:RE: Estates bridges
The 3 bridges that went through the MPO and were approved for funding and construction, were in the original bridge
study from the E of 951 Horizon Report and recommended by all Emergency Response Agencies are:
1. 8th St. NE at Cypress Canal
2. 16th St. NE at Cypress Canal
3. 47th Ave NE at Golden Gate Main Canal
As these 3 bridges move through engineering and permitting they have acquired more construction cost and it appears
that we may get only 1. The extra costs are coming from items such as sidewalks and tiebacks causing additional
permitting costs especially in mitigation
The #4 bridge needed is a t 10th Ave SE over the Faka Union Canal. This bridge is needed because south of the
Golden Gate Blvd the residents on Desoto and Everglades do not have the ability to have Emergency Agencies respond
to them in 8 minutes. In many cases the response time is 15 minutes or more. Second there is only 1 evacuation route
on for residents of Desoto. This bridge would allow more evacuation options for residents of both Everglades and
Desoto south of Golden Gate Blvd. Third the Bridge would allow more access to Palmetto Elementary School as an
Evacuation Shelter.
Ramsey
From: VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 8:50 AM
To: Michael R. Ramsey
Cc: JenkinsAnita
Subject: Estates bridges
Mike:
At last night’s meeting, you mentioned “three bridges” that the GGEACA determined to be high safety/evacuation
related. The first one you previously provided to me: 10th Ave SE between E’glades and De Soto.
Can you please identify the others. We plan to speak with Transportation Dept. about a number of issues, and would like
full input and clarity on the GGEACA recommendation.
Thanks,
Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP
Community Planning Manager
Zoning Division, Collier County
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
(239) 252-7268
www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 164 of 220
1
From:Carol Pratt <tjack730@aol.com>
Sent:Saturday, June 17, 2017 6:43 PM
To:GGAMPRestudy
Subject:Wildlife and Greenway
To All Whom This Concerns:
Although wildlife and green spaces weren’t the biggest consideration in GGE community development, it was prominent
none-the-less (in the “clouds”, these were some of the larger words).
With the many road extensions and expansions slated in future development, now is the time to make plans for wildlife,
which many of us in GGE value and consider a quality of life issue.
Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension (VBX) has been continually moved forward on the list of projects in the county. Do you
know existing natural wildlife corridors will cross this road once it is extended? I hope the county will plan for wildlife
underpasses on VBX, and also consider other safeguards to protect the multitude of species which inhabit this area,
including protected species such as fox squirrels, gopher tortoises, and Florida Panthers.
For all future roads, plans should include the safeguarding of wildlife with underpasses, fences, through education, etc.
As you well know, it is easier and more cost effective to get ahead of something like this, then to try to fix something
later.
Currently, Jim Flanagan (Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association, of which I am also a member) and I are trying to get
signage to warn drivers to be on the lookout for bears, panthers, and other wildlife on the roadways. This will also
inform newcomers of the existence of bears and panthers in the county, which still comes as a surprise to many GGE
residents. Signage of this nature should be a part of the Master Plan.
A greenway has been brought up many times in the discussion of the Master Plan. A bicycle and pedestrian trail could be
made alongside VBX. An independent trail is what I am suggesting - not a narrow path which is actually part of the road.
I hope you will put, or keep, wildlife conservation as a part of the GGE Master Plan. If you need more information on
anything I have written, please let me know and I will provide it. It has been my experience that the majority of people
living in GGE want wildlife as part of their community.
Thank you for considering my thoughts and suggestions.
Sincerely,
Carol M. Pratt
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 165 of 220
The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc.
PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002
Estates-Civic.org
11-02-16 GGEACA Board Meeting Discussion –
Rural Golden Gate Estates Issues Growth Management Plan Update
November 2, 2016
Kris VanLengen
Collier County Growth Management Department
Growth Management Plan ReStudy Manager
GGAMP ReStudy - Rural Estates
Mr. VanLengen,
The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association held a working session on 10-08-16 in preparation
for providing input to the GGAMP ReStudy. The following concepts were presented for discussion
and reviewed at our 11-02-16 GGEACA Board Meeting. We present them to you for discussion and
incorporation with the public comments for the GGAMP ReStudy.
Further consideration and discussion is also suggested for the challenges and opportunities to allow
for “agricultural past-times” and agricultural-related “eco-tourism” in the rural areas.
As well, further definition and discussion of home-based businesses and recognizing the impacts to
neighbors and infrastructure for certain business operations.
The following concepts are consistent with a low-density, low-impact, rural residential community.
Further definition of “rural character” and “self-sustainability” will help better define the concepts of
community character and practical application that many people who consider Golden Gate Estates
their home and why they moved here. The large-lot, low-density woodlands/agricultural environment
associated with this unique place is rare among community choices - such is rare in Florida real estate
as well as across the United States - and what makes Golden Gate Estates so desirable.
Thank you for your leadership in this effort and the opportunity to provide input to the future of our
community through the GGAMP ReStudy and the overall Comprehensive Growth Management
ReStudy
Respectfully,
Mike Ramsey, President
Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association
On behalf of the Board of Directors
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 166 of 220
02 November 2016
Page 2
The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc.
PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002
Estates-Civic.org
A. Complementary Land Uses
1.) Formal Low Density Overlay for the Rural Estates – eliminate densification of E zoning
Benefits: * DRGR/Watershed over 90,000 acres at no cost to the taxpayer
Complimentary to Corkscrew Community and Sending lands in
RFMUD and RLSA
• Well Field Protection – county and municipal (Naples)
• Community Character
• Secondary habitat transition between Conservation land and development
2.) Incentivize the recombination of 1.14 acre lots (legal non-conforming)
Development credit (voluntary TDR program) for use in urban density and infill?
See also GGWIP
3.) Update LDC regarding compatibility requirements, setbacks, and buffers for all non-residential
uses in the Estates including but not limited to Convenience Commercial, Churches, Schools,
utilities.
4.) Update LDC regarding land clearing regulation and setbacks, for all uses to be consistent
with Wildfire safety and management recommendations established by the Collier County Fire
Districts and the Florida Forest Service. 30 feet of defensible space and acceptable setbacks for
all Estates lots to allow access of emergency vehicles and equipment
Consideration: Completion of the Estates Community Wildfire Protection Plan
5.) Establish appropriate Setbacks and Buffers and compatibility standards for all adjacent
RFMUD and RLSA land uses. Previously recommended changes permitting non
residential land uses in the RFMUD must be applied so as to preserve the rural residential
character of Golden Gate Estates. To that end, it will be essential to establish appropriate
buffers and transitional uses, together with appropriate controls over the location of utility
service lines and transportation corridors. To achieve these goals the following
recommendations are submitted:
a.) Projects directly abutting residential property shall provide, at a minimum, a one-hundred
(100) foot wide buffer in which no parking or water management uses are permitted. Twenty-
five (25) feet of the width of the buffer along the developed area shall be a landscape buffer
type C as outlined in the LDC. A minimum of fifty (75) feet of the buffer width shall consist
of retained or created native vegetation and must be consistent with appropriate subsections of
the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The 100 foot buffer shall not be part of a
setback, but will be a separately platted tract. Setbacks shall be a minimum of 50% of the
height of any structure other than single family.
b.) A solid masonry or concrete wall 8’ high and on a 3’ berm at the development (RFMUD)
side of the 100’ buffer shall be required. The buffer area shall be supplemented where needed
to assure an 80% opacity is reached within one year.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 167 of 220
02 November 2016
Page 3
The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc.
PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002
Estates-Civic.org
c.) All lighting shall be consistent with the Dark Skies initiative. Parking lot lighting shall be
restricted to bollards except as may be required to comply with lighting standards in the Land
Development Code (Ordinance #04-41, as amended) and other governing regulations.
d.) Rural roadways as typically used within the Golden Gate Estates neighborhoods shall not
be used for access or utility conveyance to any new development. Appropriate truck route
management tools need to be employed to limit Community impact from adjacent
development.
All adjacent RFMUD and RLSA residential and commercial uses should be considered.
6.) Develop Rural Architectural Standards
7.) Develop Rural Median Landscape Standards
B. Transportation and Mobility -Roads
1.) Complete the study for a New I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of Everglades Blvd.
Consideration: Restricting expansion of Everglades Blvd. to 4 lanes to service Estates needs.
RLSA growth Management planning should address appropriate right of way and developer
contribution to meet RLSA transportation needs for the predicted population growth (est.
300,000+) in this planning area. No unreasonable impact on the established low density
Estates.
2.) Prioritization of the improvement of Wilson Boulevard North to commercial services, and the
Wilson Extension south to White Lake Boulevard to link Golden Gate Estates to North Belle
Meade Receiving lands and future economic development. Provide a needed road corridor to the
north, south, and west. Wilson-Benfield Corridor Study.
3.) Extend White Lake Boulevard east to the proposed new I-75 Interchange in the vicinity of
Everglades Blvd.
4.) Complete the Green Boulevard Extension Study to identify an East-West corridor
linking North Belle Meade Receiving lands to CR 951 and points west.
Consideration: Extension of Golden Gate Parkway rather than Green Blvd., to improve
connectivity and reduce the need for excessive Eminent Domain through the Estates.
5.) Complete the Randall Boulevard Extension Study to identify an East-West corridor to
the RLSA. S Curve Concept review.
Consideration: Improvements to intersection of Randall Blvd and Immokalee Road are a
critical infrastructure need and the choke-point of Randall/Oilwell/Immokalee Rd. Consider
an emergency declaration to accelerate needed improvements at this intersection due of
impending transportation failures.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 168 of 220
02 November 2016
Page 4
The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc.
PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002
Estates-Civic.org
C. Economic Vitality – Commercial Development
1.) Commercial Goods, Services, Jobs for the Estates provided primarily from zoning in
adjacent areas including: Orange Tree PUD, RFMUD Receiving Lands (846 Partners, N.
Belle Meade), and RLSA (Rural Lands West)
2.) Possible focused Commercial Overlay within the Estates adjacent to existing
Commercial in the Randall Blvd. / Oil Well Rd. area east to the intersection of Wilson
Blvd. and Immokalee Rd.
* Along Randall Blvd. adjacent to Publix (already zoned/)
* Randall Curve / Golden Gate Land Trust 40 acre parcel across from Orangetree
* Wilson Blvd. / Immokalee Rd. intersection
3.) Update Standards/Size of Convenience Commercial parcels in the Estates to provide
sufficient (increased) area for road development, septic/wastewater treatment, and water
retention
D. Environmental Stewardship / Watershed Management
Water Resources Management:
1.) Incentivize single family Water retention/detention and Dispersed Water Storage in the
Estates to retain / detain storm water and promote groundwater recharge. Ponds, swales, other
2.) Support completion of the North Golden Gate Watershed Improvement Plan.
GGWIP to improve drainage, support aquifer recharge, integrate with Picayune restoration.
3.) Consideration of ASR Wells in Receiving lands, especially Sec15 T49S R27E to retain/detain
water from the Golden Gate Main Canal.
4.) Development of the C-1 Connector Canal and weirs to divert storm water east from the Golden
Gate Main Canal to points south and east.
5.) Update regulation of impervious surface/percolation on different size Estates Lots.
a. Special treatment (more restrictive) for legal, non-conforming 1.14 acre lots
6.) Review impacts and unintended consequences of a recent Ordinance (1 acre impervious rule)
requiring berming and containment of water on residential properties as this impedes natural
sheetflow. Intent of ordinance may have an urban coastal zone purpose and intent, however rural
woodlands interface functions differently
7.) Plan for County Septic Disposal Facility to facilitate proper maintenance and legal disposal of
septic waste and encourage responsible, legal management of waste from private on-site sewage
treatment and disposal systems.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 169 of 220
02 November 2016
Page 5
The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc.
PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002
Estates-Civic.org
Environmental/ Conservation:
1.) Develop policies that discourage the migration of climax predators from conservation lands
and RFMUD and RLSA Sending lands into the residential interface in Golden Gate Estates
other and adjacent areas.
2.) Consider the development of a Voluntary TDR program and Bank to facilitate the transfer
process of development credits granted for the recombination of 1.14 acre lots and wetland lots
that are fundamentally unbuildable and included in the GGWIP overlay
3.) Consider Dark Sky lighting standards for rural areas for lighting at transportation infrastructure,
commercial development centers, conditional use areas, and for residential standards.
4.) Consider planning for future landfill in RLSA area given the planned population, proximity of
waste disposal to eastern-drifting center of the County’s residential population, and expected life
and capacity of existing Collier County landfill.
General Perspectives for Consideration:
General recognition, distinction and acknowledgement that one size does not fit all relative to
County-wide application of standards of law and community character.
Consideration: Urban Coastal Zone functions differently than eastern rural areas, and as such,
review processes for growth management plan changes and Land Development Plan changes
should take into consideration the local application and applicability and evaluate for
unintended consequences and diverging, inconsistent and incongruent intents of such changes.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 170 of 220
The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc.
PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002
Estates-Civic.org
28 November 2016
Kris VanLengen
Collier County Growth Management Department
Growth Management Plan ReStudy Manager
GGAMP ReStudy - Rural Estates
RE: Follow up on 02 November 2016 letter regarding GGAMP
Mr. VanLengen,
The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association have received more input after the 03 November
2015 GGAMP workshop regarding the Eastern Golden Gate Estates future growth.
Thank you for your leadership in this effort and the opportunity to provide input to the future of our
community through the GGAMP ReStudy and the overall Comprehensive Growth Management
Restudy.
Respectfully,
Mike Ramsey, President
Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association
On behalf of the Board of Directors
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 171 of 220
28 November 2016
Page 2
The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association Inc.
PO. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116-6002
Estates-Civic.org
Surface Water Management / Drainage
This is considered to be the highest priority for determination for the Rural Estates and is dependent on the water
management through and around the N Belle Meade Area of the RFMUD. The continued buildout of the Rural
Estates and the RFMUD north of I-75 and west of the RLSA, will significantly increase impervious surface area
and storm water runoff. Concurrently, there is concern for protecting groundwater recharge for the multiple
areas that depend on Rural Estates groundwater resources. This issue directly effects future Residential property
protection, Economic Development, Water Resources, Wildfire Protection and Transportation Design. The
planning effort that needs to be undertaken would update the drainage of water from the Rural Estates to the
Henderson Creek Canal. Both Marco Island Utilities and Rookery Bay are looking for more water.
Economic Diversification / Development
This would be the second prioritization after future surface water management has been reviewed. Economic
Diversification / Development within the Rural Estates is small commercial nodes at selected intersections with
each node totaling approximately 80 acres maximum. Planning of the Rural Estates nodes and zoning will be
significantly influenced by the larger commercial diversification / development in the adjacent areas of the
RFMUD and RLSA. The Rural Estates seeks coordination of with the RFMUD and RLSA with the larger
commercial areas. Also, the design, planning and zoning for the Rural Estates Small Commercial Node areas
with be greatly influenced by drainage and ground water availability.
Transportation Design
These would the 3rd area of Prioritization after Surface Water Management and Economic Diversification /
Development have been reviewed. These are to be added to the recommendations in the First Letter of 02 Nov
2016. These recommendations should be added to the GGAMP for Rural Estates because they are not discussed
or transmitted in any other part of planning for the Rural Estates. These recommendations are not to replace the
MPO efforts.
a. No expansion of roads from 2 lane to 4 lane, East of Everglades Blvd.
b. Prioritize transportation design that moves traffic North and South within the Rural Estates.
a. Prioritize installing a bridge on 8th St. SE @ Frangipani.
c. Prioritize expansion of Randall Blvd, 2 lanes to 4 from Immokalee Road to Everglades
d. Do not allow "S" curve from Randall to Oil Well.
e. Prioritize Future I-75 interchange at or east of Desoto Blvd.
f. No more "chicanes" or other traffic slowing designs that prevents school buses or other vehicles from safely
traveling a 2 lane road in opposite directions.
Cell Towers
More locations should be identified for Cell Tower Construction. Residents favor improving cell tower
coverage. Prioritizing land zoning for this development is needed.
1 acre Impervious Rule
This rule was imposed on residential development in the Rural Estates without study or discussion. This rule
requires singly family lot owners to implement surface water retention if the amount of impervious surface on
their lot exceeds 1 acre. This rule needs to be eliminated. The impacts of these rule are:
a. Significant increase to the road drainage swales
b. Significant increase to the Big Cypress Basin Canals without planning
c. Ecolcogical damage to adjacent wetlands by drying them out, preventing water flow.
d. Significant increase in wildfire danger by draining wetlands faster in the dry season.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 172 of 220
Collier Soil & Water Conservation District Dennis P. Vasey, Chairman
14700 Immokalee Road, Suite B
Naples, Florida 34120-1468
February 17, 2017
Mr. Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager
County Manager's Office
3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 202
Naples, FL 34112-5746
Dear Mr. Ochs,
The Board of Supervisors believes that wetland parcels constitute a valuable resource for carbon
sequestration. Ecosystem enclosures 1, 2 and 3, attached.
The District has a keen interest in parcels purchased to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife,
plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the residents of Collier County. Specifically, the
Board of Supervisors believes that Conservation Collier Program parcels, when evaluated for their carbon
sequestration value, could serve as a bank for funding maintenance and salaries, annually, and provide a
substantial water quality and incentive opportunity for mitigation purposes in response to code
enforcement and permit activity.
The District reviewed the "Wetlands and Climate Change" article in light of using county-owned
Conservation Collier Program wetland parcels to provide Transfer of Development Rights incentives from
a "Bank." To create the Bank would require a list of Conservation Collier Program wetland parcels. Once
provided, the District would create and manage, under an Interlocal Agreement, a log of wetland
sequestration value, prepare documents of sale of whole or fractional share sales, and undertake
monitoring activities.
Sincerely,
Dennis P. Vasey
Attachments:
a/s
Cc: The Honorable Penny Taylor, Chairman, 3299 E Tamiami TRL, STE 303, Naples, FL 34112
Mr. Steve Carnell, Department Head, Public Services Department, 3299 E Tamiami TRL, Naples, FL
34112
Vacant
Group 1
Nancy Richie
Group 2
Dennis P. Vasey
Group 3
Clarence Tears
Group 4
Rob Griffin
Group 5
Web Site: http://www.collierscd.org
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 173 of 220
NORTH COLLIER FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT
BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS
M. James Burke Christopher L. Crossan Norman E. Feder J. Christopher Lombardo John O. McGowan
February 14, 2017
Leo Ochs, County Manager
Collier County Manager’s Office
3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 202
Naples, FL 34112
Mr. Ochs:
Please allow this letter to evidence the support of the North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District
for the approval and construction of the following bridges currently contained in the Golden Gate
Estates Bridges project:
10th Avenue S.E. between Everglades and Desoto
8th Street N.E. from Golden Gate Blvd. to Randall Blvd.
16th Street N.E. from Golden Gate Blvd. to Randall Blvd.
47th Avenue N.E. from Immokalee Road to Everglades Blvd.
The connectivity that these bridges would increase public safety with enhanced mobility allowing
for faster response times for emergency services (EMS, Fire, CCSO) and improved evacuation routes
during hurricanes, wildfires or other natural disasters. These bridges are supported by both the
Horizon Study and the Bridge Study (2009).
We ask that Collier County Growth Management seriously consider approving these bridges within
the Golden Gate Estates Bridges project which will assuredly enhance life safety for the residents
and communities in the area.
Sincerely,
James Cunningham
Fire Chief
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 174 of 220
Correspondence Regarding Western Golden Gate Estates
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 175 of 220
1
From:Chris Henning <chenning@continentalfin.com>
Sent:Wednesday, May 10, 2017 4:06 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Cc:rrosin@peat.com; ELLEN ROSENBERG (ellenrosenbergdesign@gmail.com)
Subject:RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy.
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
Mr. Van Lengen:
To carry forward from our previous discussion, we own 2 parcels in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan- Urban Estates.
These parcels are 6715 Golden Gate Parkway (currently a residence) and the approximately 7 acre parcel (as referenced
here- the “Undeveloped Parcel”) at the north-west corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Blvd.
Our objective with these parcels is to develop a commercially-viable project.
Our group purchased the Undeveloped Parcel in 2007 with the intention of building a medical office building for Anchor
Health. At the time, one of the partners formerly associated with our group, Paul Zampell, was in the process of building
a medical office for Anchor Health on 951. Paul believed that Anchor wanted to proceed with our parcel as well.
Unfortunately, after acquiring the Undevleoped Parcel, Anchor Health, the prospective tenant, decided that it no longer
wanted to expand its office locations and withdrew from the project.
Having lost our intended tenant and unable to locate an alternate medical office user, we ordered a market study which
identified healthcare as a use which would generate sufficient demand to support development. We incurred significant
architectural and planning costs in the course of coming up with a mix of assisted living, memory care, skilled nursing,
and independent living units on the property. The PUD did not support alternate healthcare uses so we sought zoning
relief which ultimately was tabled shortly before Mr. Joseph Rosin, Mr. Zampell’s original partner, passed away.
The Undeveloped Parcel is one of 2 parcels designated as Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict on the
“Future Land Use Map.” Note that though referred to as “Future” on the map, it is the land use zoning currently in place
for the undeveloped parcel. We are limited to a single story structure of not more than 35,000 square feet, and the only
permitted use is for medical office. Unfortunately, the limitations imposed make this parcel nearly impossible to develop
and none of the prospective purchasers who have contacted us, are interested in the current zoning.
We would like to develop this property for commercial purposes consistent with other properties in the area, such as
the CVS across the street from us. The corner parcel across from us to the south on Golden Gate has, to our knowledge,
been acquired with the intention of commercial development. As more residents move to the area, it is only natural that
signalized corner parcels such as ours be developed with retail uses to support them.
We appreciate your consideration and would request either that the Commercial Infill Subdistrict restrictions be
changed, or that the Development Parcel be moved to a new designation that would allow for more commercial options
than currently exist.
Should you have any suggestions in terms of participating in the general master plan review process that is going on,
please let us know.
Sincerely,
Chris Henning III
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 176 of 220
2
847-291-3700
From: VanLengenKris [mailto:KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net]
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 3:43 PM
To: chenning@continentalfin.com; rrosin@peat.com
Cc: jenglish@barroncollier.com; dgenson@barroncollier.com; JenkinsAnita
Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy.
Chris and Robert:
We discussed a property of interest to you approximately 2 months ago. It is located in a future land use designation:
Golden Gate Estates Commercial Infill Subdistrict. It is zoned PUD, and located in the northwest quadrant of the Santa
Barbara and Golden Gate Parkway intersection.
As an update, we began a series of public outreach meetings, all introductory in nature, pertaining to Rural Estates,
Urban Estates and GG City. We will resume in the fall with topics more granular in nature, such as comp plan and zoning
subdistrict overlays. A meeting summary of the Urban Estates introductory meeting can be found at:
http://www.colliergov.net/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/community-planning-section/golden-gate-
area-master-plan-restudy/public-workshops .
1. My notes indicate that you were considering sending an e-mail at some point to express your points of view.
2. I thought you might be interested to know that we met with Barron Collier engineers/planners, who expressed an
interest in development in the SW quadrant of the same intersection. In case you think there might be
commonality of interest or perspective, I have copied them on this e-mail and you may wish to contact them
directly.
Sincerely,
Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP
Community Planning Manager
Zoning Division, Collier County
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
(239) 252-7268
www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a
public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 177 of 220
1
From:WeeksDavid
Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2015 6:13 PM
To:wconfoy@comcast.net
Cc:VanLengenKris
Subject:RE: MEETING
Mr. Confoy,
How about June 24 at 3:00pm? I would be joined by colleague Kris van Lengen, Community Planning
Manager.
David Weeks
David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager
Collier County Government, Growth Management Department
Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104
phone: 239-252-2306; E-fax: 239-252-6689
email: davidweeks@colliergov.net ; website: www.colliergov.net
From: wconfoy@comcast.net [mailto:wconfoy@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 1:55 PM
To: WeeksDavid
Subject: FW: MEETING
Dear David
Thank you for accepting this email requesting your time to visit with some of your fellow
Naples citizens for discussion of the upcoming review of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan.
Specifically we represent the neighborhoods that would be affected by any
change proposed to Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Rd. and Santa Barbara.
We hope to present our reasons for opposing such changes as not being in the best interests
of the surrounding Communities at large.
We have a roll up display showing each property owner along this gateway & will demonstrate
why the residents on both sides of the street wish it to maintain its residential character.
Many of us have lived here 20, even 30, years, have our families close-by & wish to maintain
the Master plan as it was written by the County.
Yes, it might be a bit early but the summer is upon us and our schedules never seem to be in sync.
Better to give you an early look see into what is ahead, than when it is right upon us.
We know that the outsiders are working towards the opposite goals & have been visiting persons
like yourself to support & endorse a re-zoning change—a change to which we are totally opposed .
Obviously we hope to show you why & solicit your support when the time arises.
Dan Brundage, Tom Collins & myself will attend; we sometimes have two others & will give you
their names when they confirm their availability to us.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 178 of 220
2
We are generally available any weekday in mid afternoon. Right now we can all be there this month
between the 23rd and the 29th in the mid to latter part of the afternoon. An hour or less is requested.
I don’t believe you would be disappointed in what we can show you.
Thank you
Bill Confoy-- 262-0802/ 643-0001
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send
electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 179 of 220
1
From:Carlos Vasallo <cvasallo@comcast.net>
Sent:Friday, October 21, 2016 4:18 PM
To:GGAMPRestudy
Subject:Western GG Ests
Hello
Thank you for the meeting last night and keeping us informed and involved.
I would like to know what the county's plan is for the property it owns at the southwest corner
of Vanderbilt Bch Rd & Collier Blvd.
Last night there was a question about a nature trail/bike path and lack of land for it. You
might recall when Collier Boulevard was expanded a few years ago a rec. path was added on
the East side of the CR951 canal using the easement. Some units, for example units #1, #2,
#95, & #32 have a canal at the end of the streets, using the existing canal easement a loop
could be built from Vanderbilt Bch Rd to Pine Ridge Road with a nature/bike path on both
sides so residents from both sides could use it.
Please add me to your email list for future meetings.
Thank you,
Carlos Vasallo
4381 5th Ave NW
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 180 of 220
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375
3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266
Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com
May 1, 2017
Mr. Kris VanLengen, AICP
Via Email: KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net
RE: Tracts 103 (east 180’), 119, and 120 Golden Gates Estates, Unit 26
Dear Mr. VanLengen:
We represent the property owner of the above referenced parcels located at the SW quadrant
of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and 13th Avenue S.W. The parcels total approximately
12.5 acres. This property had a pending Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) amendment in
2014, which the property owner requested it to be placed in abeyance, in order to participate in
the re-study process. An aerial location exhibit is attached for your convenience. We wanted to
provide you with some additional information regarding the parcel as a follow-up to our meeting
on April 4, 2017, which we believe will demonstrate that this property should be re-evaluated for
the potential of non-residential land uses as part of the re-study effort.
Under the current GGAMP, the site is designated Estates, and based on the existing criteria, the
site is only eligible for one dwelling unit per 2.25 acres. The site is ineligible for even Transitional
Conditional Uses. The property owner recognizes that the property’s proximity to the quasi-
industrial FP&L PUD, and the newly 6-lane segment of Collier Boulevard, renders it illogical and
incompatible for very low density residential uses. The property owner had previously proposed
to amend the GGAMP to re-designate this property as an additional Neighborhood Center, with
additional restrictions on buffer and setback standards for the 12.5+/- acre property.
It has been our consistent contention that the property is not appropriately designate for only
low-density residential dwellings due to the changing neighborhood conditions with the
expanded Collier Boulevard and the increasing number of vehicle trips that utilize this major
roadway corridor serving the eastern areas of Collier County. An economic analysis had also
been prepared in support of the amendment, which demonstrated that the demand for
additional office and retail services could be supported by the growing population of both Golden
Gate City and the Estates area east of Collier Boulevard. Additionally, with the then impending
expansion of Collier Boulevard to a 6-lane arterial roadway, additional pass-by trips were
anticipated, also contributing to the market viability for office, retail and service uses.
In our prior discussions with Growth Management staff, they were not supportive of an
amendment to the GGAMP that would result in retail and office development on this site. They
did; however, support an amendment that would re-designate this site as a Conditional Use Sub-
District which would then permit the owner to submit a Conditional Use for a variety of non-
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 181 of 220
Mr. Kris VanLengen
RE: Tracts 103 (east 180’), 119, and 120 Golden Gates Estates, Unit 26
May 1, 2017
Page 2 of 2
residential uses. Some of these land uses would include churches, schools, day care, group
housing/group care, private schools and social/fraternal organizations. In our most recent
discussions with you, you too acknowledged that the site may no longer be appropriately
designated to only permit low density residential development. In that meeting, we discussed
the possibility of possibly modifying the Transitional Conditional Use section of the GGAMP in
order to permit this property to qualify to apply for a conditional use. The GGAMP already
acknowledges that these conditional uses can be good transitions between non-residential and
residential land uses. We believe that a minor amendment to paragraph 3e), Special Exceptions
to Conditional Use Locational Criteria would be appropriate to specifically indicate that this
property would be eligible to seek a conditional use of the E, Estates zoning designation. The
amended language could read:
5. The east 180 feet of Tract 103, Tract 119 and Tract 120, Unit 26, Golden Gate Estates
are eligible for conditional uses as identified in Estates zoning district.
We would appreciate your consideration of this minor change to the GGAMP as you continue
your re-study efforts. We believe the unique location of this parcel adjacent to the existing FP&L
PUD, which permits not only electric generating substations, but also open equipment storage,
maintenance and fueling facilities and any other use deemed appropriate for FP&L (since the FPL
plant is no longer subject to local zoning restrictions) is incompatible with very low density
residential use. The property too, is located on a 6-lane arterial, which contributes to the
incompatibility of the site for residential use. Attached are photos of the FPL plant, the subject
property and its intersection on Collier Boulevard
Sincerely,
D. Wayne Arnold, AICP
Attachments
c: Via Email Larry Brooks
Bruce Anderson
GradyMinor File
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 182 of 220
1
From:Barbara Coen <barbcoen@comcast.net>
Sent:Tuesday, May 10, 2016 7:51 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Subject:RE: GG Master plan proposal. Keep the Estates Residential.
Dear Mr. Van Lengen,
I, too live on 68th Street S. W. and am VERY opposed to Edwin Koert's plan for my neighborhood. I would be at the
meeting tomorrow, but am in Kansas City dealing with family matters.
This man is only concerned about making a buck. He does not care at all about our residential neighborhood
I implore you to deny his request to re-zone so that he can make our neighborhood look like Pine Ridge Road. We are
not Miami, nor do we want to be!
You may contact me at: 239-777-4085 if you need more information.
Thank you for your time in this matter,
Barbara Coen
2780--68th Street S.W.
Naples, FL 34105
barbcoen@comcast. net
239-777-4085
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID
On May 10, 2016 3:51 PM, VanLengenKris <KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net> wrote:
Dear Ms. Turner:
Thank you for your interest and comment. We will preserve your comment related to Golden Gate Area Master Plan,
Western Estates. If you wish to be added to our distribution list for meeting announcements, etc., please let me know.
Respectfully,
Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP
Community Planning Manager
Zoning Division, Collier County
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
(239) 252-7268
www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 183 of 220
2
From: Angela Turner [mailto:ajturner37@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 3:33 PM
To: TaylorPenny <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; VanLengenKris <KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net>
Cc: barbcoen@comcast.net; Dan Dagnall <dan.dagnall@gmail.com>
Subject: GG Master plan proposal. Keep the Estates Residential.
After receiving a letter regarding a meeting planned for tomorrow to possibly re-zone our residential
neighborhood to commercial I submit the following letter and past correspondence. When
Commissioner Taylor was running for election she promised us that this would not happen. I am
hoping that that promise will be kept!
Golden Gate Master Plan. Keep the Estates Residential. Golden Gate Parkway.
We have previously objected to the proposed changes in making the area between Livingston and Santa Barbara with
ANY commercializations.
We built our home in 1989 and unlike Pine Ridge Road there are too many private homes that feed onto the Parkway.
Since exit 105 from 1-75 and the overpass was put in place it is almost impossible to get out of our street as it is,
especially in season. We have already had over 3 fatalities at the end of our street and when I wrote to the County to
request a light be put in place because of the gym and Bingo hall at the end of our street and the alterations to the
other streets that have to utilize ours to make UTurns to head west it is a nightmare. The County flat out said "no, a
stop light would cause more accidents".
We have too many families with young children and children who are now learning to drive to be put in danger. Again,
Golden Gate Estates was built for residential and it was well over 30 years ago. Too many families have taken stake in
their properties and homes to be violated by commercialization.
The investors who are attempting this change are not for the benefit of the residents...it's money for their pockets. The
apartment complex that was just built on the corner of the Parkway and Livingston should prove to be another traffic
nightmare.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 184 of 220
3
Subject: GG Parkway
From: ajturner37@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 19:37:33 -0400
To: fredcoyle@colliergov.net
Commissioner Coyle,
We, the residents off Golden Gate Parkway, recently received correspondence regarding a request to
re-zone the one mile radius that impacts our home. I wanted to share the most recent
correspondence from them and my response. I am afraid that many of our neighbors did not take
into consideration the initial letter that was sent and have not read it. This is very disturbing that
these people are trying to modify our existing peace and security.
Would you please take the time to read their proposal and let us know if there is anyway they can
actually achieve what they are asking for.
Thank you.
Angela Turner
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: Angela Turner <ajturner37@hotmail.com>
Date: June 4, 2014 at 7:25:06 PM EDT
To: "edwinkoert@msn.com" <edwinkoert@msn.com>
Subject: GG parkway
Not liking this at all. Your proposing to use our street as a major road
and a gas station. I need to know who on 68th Street SW responded
to your initial letter. I already tried for a light, as I mentioned before,
and the County flat out declined. Why would 68th Street SW want to
allow the traffic and further dis-value to our homes, not to mention
the safety of our children.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 185 of 220
4
Pine Ridge extension has all the stuff they need getting off I75. That
part is hideous. We have a beautiful landscaped exit as it is, it doesn't
need to be destroyed by adding anymore commerce to the frontage
and making our homes less attractive.
Closest gas stations are already good enough for those who choose
not to use the Pine Ridge amenities.
Why are you concentrating using 68th and 60th when you don't own
any properties at the "proposed" sites for first modifications. Mr.
Perrine is the realtor for the properties that were acquired and the
owners, as well as the original company that purchased the parcels
that Wildcat I and II, whom you are the trustee, now own, knew that
these were residential. Why is he putting his on the market for 4
million and 2 million with a description that says
"Possible commercial usage, ideal for gas station, church, retail
shopping, etc". Why is he lying. Putting that out as a possibility is
baiting a proposed buyer and misleading!
Your initial mailing would have been thrown away but I had the time
to actually open and read it. Maybe that is why you have not gotten
the responses. I am certain that NO ONE on our street is going to go
for these changes.
Angela Turner
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:36 PM, edwinkoert@msn.com wrote:
To all who has responded:
The purpose of our rezoning initiative is not to offend
anyone, but to inform all of the property owners
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 186 of 220
5
located within the GGPkwy geographic area of our
activities to have the corridor rezoned to a
commercial application. Believe me, your view "for or
against" our rezoning activity does not offend
me. Everyone has an opinion, and as such, yours, as-
well-as your peers, is just as important and will be
considered too.
I am an old Florida Boy from youth - 7-years (the East
coast - Hollywood / Ft. Lauderdale through high
school 1958) My homestead address is now a
retirement community off of I-75 Exit 240, known as
Sun City Center. However, I, as-well-as Brent have
two each 35-year old dogs in the hunt fronting
GGPkwy, and as such, I am in the Naples area quite
frequently. My specific properties are on the
West side of I-75, fronting GGpkwy, one on the North
side and one on the South side of GGPkwy. My foot
prints in the Naples area goes back to the early
sixties.
To assist you on Brent and my thoughts, I
am attaching two graphic diagrams. The
diagrams include all of the properties fronting the
East and West Side of I-75, including our suggested
modifications. The PDF diagrams can be enlarged by
increasing the zoom percent within the PDF. Also,
attached a a letter containing our thoughts on the
development of the area. You may wish to review
them, or discard them. While reading the WORD
document you may wish to have the diagrams
available. We do make the information available to
all.
As each of you are aware, initially, I released 700-
mailings. Currently, 16 of you have responded, and I
thank you for your input.
Sincerely,
Edwin H. Koert
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 187 of 220
6
239-289-4420
edwinkoert@msn.com
<GGPkwy - East Side of I-75.pdf>
<GGPkwy - West Side of I-75.pdf>
<GGPkwy -032414 - Hard look at the North and South
Sides.doc>
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 188 of 220
7
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 189 of 220
8
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 190 of 220
9
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 191 of 220
10
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 192 of 220
1
From:Elizabeth Foster <elizabeth@judithliegeoisdesigns.com>
Sent:Friday, October 28, 2016 12:22 PM
To:GGAMPRestudy
Subject:Fwd: Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study
Sent from my iPhone
Date: October 28, 2016 at 10:58:55 AM EDT
To: <GGAMPrestudy@colliergov.net>
Subject: Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study
To Planning and Zoning Division,
Regarding ongoing study of uses for Golden Gate Parkway from Santa Barbara
Avenue to Livingston Ave:
We request, to maintain rural character of this area, that existing zoning in this
area remain in place as currently in effect and no additional commercial use be
permitted.
Thank you,
Elizabeth Foster
2711 68th St. SW.
Naples FL34105
239-777.8818
Elifoster@hotmail.com
Right-click or
tap and hold
here to
download
pictures. To
help protect
your privacy,
Outlook
prevented
automatic
download of
this picture
from the
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 193 of 220
1
From:Barbara Coen <barbcoen@comcast.net>
Sent:Wednesday, September 28, 2016 8:16 AM
To:GGAMPRestudy
Subject:Golden Gate Area Master Plan restudy
To Whom it may concern:
I have lived on 68th Street S.W. since 1989. In that time, I have watched the construction of I-75 Exit
105, the Golden Gate bridge over Airport Road, and the development of a huge apartment complex on the
corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Livingston Road.
I love my residential area and I am against letting it be taken over by companies like Race Trac and
other commercial uses. I am also concerned about any more large apartment complexes being constructed
due to the already massive traffic concession that exists now.
I wish I could attend one of the three workshops to discuss my views, but I have conflicts all 3 dates
Thank you for your consideration of my opinions,
Barbara S. Coen
2780 68th Street S.W.
Naples, FL 34105
Phone: 239-777-4085
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 194 of 220
1
From:Tony Ojanovac <amoappraisals@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, May 11, 2016 7:04 PM
To:GGAMPRestudy
Subject:Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951)
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Completed
To Whom It May Concern,
I live 2830 66th St SW and attended a meeting held by Collier County on 05/11/2016 regarding the GGAMP.
I would like to be on record that I, along with the large majority of other at the above mentioned meeting, am NOT in
favor of making any portion of Golden Gate Parkway (between Santa Barbara Blvd & Livingston Rd) commercial. There is
no need whatsoever for this proposal, as there are plenty of commercial areas within one square mile of this area. In
addition, present traffic in this area is already heavy without potential commercial use parcels.
We want the GGAMP to remain as written, as the commissioners promised, and left alone.
Anthony M. Ojanovac
Cert.Res. RD7070
AMO Appraisals, Inc.
Sent from my iPhone
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 195 of 220
1
From:Daniel Jenkins <dwj2790@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, May 09, 2016 2:35 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Subject:Golden Gate Master Plan
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Mr. VanLengen,
I am writing you to express my strong opposition to any changes to the
Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate Parkway between
Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. I oppose the
commercialization of the Parkway or Apartments along the Parkway. I am
in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the
QUIET, RESIDENTIAL character of our neighborhood.
Thank You,
Daniel W. Jenkins
2718 68th ST SW
Naples, FL 34105
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 196 of 220
1
From:Kevin Keyes <kevinkeyes99@aol.com>
Sent:Thursday, June 02, 2016 6:00 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Subject:GGAMP
I wish to make known my opinion to any changes to the Golden Gate Area master plan along golden gate parkway
between Livingston road and Santa Barbara boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the parkway or apartments
along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the quiet, residential
character of our neighborhood.
Sent from my iPhone
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 197 of 220
1
From:eflenney@comcast.net
Sent:Tuesday, May 10, 2016 3:26 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Subject:Golden Gate Area Master Plan
This correspondence serves as my opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan
along Golden Gate Parkway, between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd.
I oppose any type of commercialization along the Parkway, or any type of apartments along the
Parkway.
I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" Residential zoning which protects the quiet, residential
character of my neighborhood; as it was meant to be.
Elizabeth Lenney
3220 66th Street SW
Resident at this address 21 years
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 198 of 220
1
From:boystravel17@comcast.net
Sent:Monday, July 11, 2016 3:26 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Subject:Commercialization of GG Parkway
Follow Up Flag:Follow Up
Flag Status:Flagged
We wish to make known our opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate area master plan along Golden Gate Parkway
between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose the commercialization of the Parkway or
apartments along the Parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which protects the quiet,
residential character of our neighborhood.
We are interested in receiving notices of future meetings.
Thank you,
Carmen and Jorge Lopez
2831 64th Street SW
Naples, FL 34105
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 199 of 220
1
From:Jo Gennis <josephinegg@yahoo.com>
Sent:Thursday, May 05, 2016 11:24 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Subject:GoldenGate Master Plan
This email is to notify you of my opposition to ANY changes in the Golden Gate Master Plan (along Golden Gate
Pkwy.,between Livingston Rd. and Santa Barbara Blvd.).
I oppose the commercialization and/or apartments along the Pkwy.
We must keep the "estates zoning" ( as promised ) to keep our neighborhood 100% residential. Currently, large single
family homes are being built and sold in this area. Many of the older homes have been upgraded. Children who grew up
here, are now adult homeowners. This is a prime residential area and we want to keep it that way.
Sincerely,
Larry & Josephine Gennis
2711 66 St. S.W.
Naples,Fl.34105
Sent from Jo's iPad
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 200 of 220
1
From:dapbrock@comcast.net
Sent:Thursday, May 05, 2016 5:56 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Cc:dapbrock@comcast.net
Subject:Golden Gate Area Master Plan - Opposition to Commercialization
We wish to make known our strong opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along
Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose the
commercialization of the Parkway or apartments along the Parkway. We are in favor of maintaining the
"Estates" Residential Zoning which protects the quiet residential character of our beautiful neighborhood.
Please keep us informed of any changes - proposed or otherwise - at the address below.
Thank you.
Derek and Pam Brock
2845 66th Street SW
Naples, Florida 34105
dapbrock@comcast.net
Derek- 239-404-3848 cell
Pam- 239-961-5136 cell
Sent from Xfinity Connect Mobile App
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 201 of 220
1
From:Whitney Murphy <wnofl@aol.com>
Sent:Monday, May 09, 2016 11:20 AM
To:VanLengenKris
Subject:Oppose Commercialization of Golden Gate Parkway
I wish to make known my strong opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate
Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. I strongly oppose the commercialization of the parkway or
apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" Residential Zoning which protects the quiet,
residential character of our neighborhood.
Please add me to the Collier County Government email list so that I may receive notices of future meetings regarding this
matter.
Thank you very much,
Whitney Murphy
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 202 of 220
1
From:ohmantrisha@aol.com
Sent:Thursday, June 02, 2016 6:08 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Subject:GGAMP
I wish to make known my opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate
Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the
parkway or apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which
protects the quite, residential character of our neighborhood.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 203 of 220
1
From:JenkinsAnita
Sent:Friday, May 13, 2016 8:23 AM
To:Tony Ojanovac
Cc:GGAMPRestudy; VanLengenKris
Subject:RE: Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951)
Tony,
Thank you for taking the time to attend the meeting and provide your written comments in the email below. Your
involvement is very much appreciated and your comments will certainly be maintained as part of the record. We have
added your email address to the distribution list and will notify you when the next public meeting is scheduled. In the
meantime, please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or would like additional information.
Sincerely,
Anita Jenkins, AICP
Community Planning Section
Collier County Growth Management Department
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
(239) 252-8288
www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies
-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Ojanovac [mailto:amoappraisals@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 7:04 PM
To: GGAMPRestudy
Subject: Golden Gate Area Master Plan west of Collier Blvd (CR951)
To Whom It May Concern,
I live 2830 66th St SW and attended a meeting held by Collier County on 05/11/2016 regarding the GGAMP.
I would like to be on record that I, along with the large majority of other at the above mentioned meeting, am NOT in
favor of making any portion of Golden Gate Parkway (between Santa Barbara Blvd & Livingston Rd) commercial. There is
no need whatsoever for this proposal, as there are plenty of commercial areas within one square mile of this area. In
addition, present traffic in this area is already heavy without potential commercial use parcels.
We want the GGAMP to remain as written, as the commissioners promised, and left alone.
Anthony M. Ojanovac
Cert.Res. RD7070
AMO Appraisals, Inc.
Sent from my iPhone
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a
public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 204 of 220
1
From:Lisa Pearl <lisampearl@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, May 11, 2016 1:24 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Cc:Lisa; Scott Pearl
Subject:Opposition to the commercialization of the parkway
Dear Kris,
We feel very strongly about voicing our opinion and concern for the proposed development along Golden Gate Parkway.
My family and I wish to make known our opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate area master plan along Golden
Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We fully opposed the commercialization of the
parkway or apartments along the parkway. We are in favor of maintaining the estates residential zoning which protects
the quiet residential character of our neighborhood.
Please protect our town and the families that have called Naples home for over 20 years.
Scott, Lisa, Zachary and Riley Pearl
2690 66th Street Sw
Naples, Fl 34105
Downing Frye Realty
239.248.2705
LisaMPearl@gmail.com
2014 / 2015 Platinum Award Winner
www.NaplesHomeSpecialist.com
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 205 of 220
1
From:Eric Solomon <elsolomon65@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, May 11, 2016 12:22 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Cc:Jessica Horowitz
Subject:Proposed Commercialization of Golden Gate Parkway
Dear Mr. VanLengen
We have lived at 2760 66th St SW, Naples since August 2013. One of the primary reasons we purchased that particular
piece of property was the longstanding developed residential nature of the community and its proximity to all Naples
has to offer.
It is important that our voices are heard at the County level. Unfortunately we are unable to personally attend tonight's
workshop regarding the commercial rezoning efforts due to prior commitments.
To be clear we wish to make it known that we vehemently oppose any changes to the Golden Gate Master Plan along
Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. We oppose commercialization of the
Parkway and/or apartments along the Parkway. We are in favor of maintaining the Estates Residential Zoning which
protects the quiet, residential character of our neighborhood.
We welcome all opportunity to be heard. If you wish to speak with us directly my cell number is (239) 293-7138 and
Jessica's is (239) 293-6954. You are of course also welcome to email us anytime and would be most appreciative if you
would include us on all correspondence pertaining to this matter on a go-forward basis.
Thank you for your time.
Eric Solomon & Jessica Horowitz
2760 66th Street SW
Naples FL 34105
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 206 of 220
1
From:VanLengenKris
Sent:Friday, May 13, 2016 9:25 AM
To:'Don Stevenson'
Cc:Mike Bosi (MichaelBosi@colliergov.net); JenkinsAnita; FrenchJames; SawyerMichael;
WilkisonDavid
Subject:RE: GGAMP zoning change to allow Commercial Development on Golden Gate Parkway???
Attachments:GGAMP Upcoming Workshops News Release final 4-20-16.pdf; Golden Gate Area Master
Plan 2nd Workshop News Release 5-11-16.pdf
Dear Mr. Stevenson:
Thank you for your interest in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy (“Restudy”). Your communication will be
retained for the record, and we will add your contact information to our e-mail distribution list.
The attached notices should help explain the nature of the Growth Management Plan Restudy. These notices were
provided as press releases to local news outlets and posted on the County’s website. At the request of several residents,
this notice was also e-mailed to those residents. As the Restudy ideally involves all 36,000 households in the Golden
Gate Area, it was not financially feasible to provide letter notices to all homes.
We were pleased to provide an introduction to the Restudy to a group of residents in the Estates area west of Collier
Blvd. on May 11, 2016. As you will note, the nature of the project is to examine all aspects of the current GGAMP,
determine whether its provisions reflect the values and vision of residents and stakeholders today, and provide
observations and recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners. We hope that you will visit our website
noted in the attachments, to be updated frequently, so that you can review the current plan provisions, communicate
with staff, and plan on attending future meetings as approved by the Growth Management Oversight Committee.
To our knowledge, there has been no recent rezone proposal for Golden Gate Parkway properties.
Yours,
Kris Van Lengen, JD, AICP
Community Planning Manager
Zoning Division, Collier County
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
(239) 252-7268
www.colliergov.net/GMPrestudies
From: Don Stevenson [mailto:Don@DonStevensonDesign.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 7:38 PM
To: VanLengenKris <KrisVanLengen@colliergov.net>
Cc: FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; HillerGeorgia <GeorgiaHiller@colliergov.net>; HenningTom
<TomHenning@colliergov.net>; TaylorPenny <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; NanceTim <TimNance@colliergov.net>;
FrenchJames <jamesfrench@colliergov.net>; SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>; WilkisonDavid
<DavidWilkison@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; WeeksDavid
<DavidWeeks@colliergov.net>; jenkinsanita@colliergov.net; BellowsRay <RayBellows@colliergov.net>
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 207 of 220
2
Subject: GGAMP zoning change to allow Commercial Development on Golden Gate Parkway???
Importance: High
Dear Kris,
I have been sent communications stating that the GGAMP is exploring a change in zoning to allow commercial
uses on Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. My personal home is located
on 66th street SW, literally one lot away from Golden Gate Parkway. My family an I are adamantly opposed to
any changes to current zoning of the parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. This topic has
come up previously by varied developers and we have opposed them every time they surface. I am not sure if
you are the person in charge of the upcoming workshop or not, but I received your name in connection with the
proposed workshop to discuss rezoning of the Master plan associated with the Golden Gate Parkway area
between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd.
I will be reaching out to all of my contacts in the Collier County Growth Management Division to voice my
opposition, as well as all of the county commissioners.
Over the last 20 years I have been involved in countless development projects, PUDs, SDPs Replats and
Rezones in Collier County, many of them residential and commercial rezoning projects, therefore I'm very
experienced in the process. For the record, No Public Notice was Mailed to my home address which indicates
that the public meeting may have not been properly advertised per the Collier County requirements. This is
extremely alarming to say the least, especially knowing that the various developers have been trying to sneak
this type of zoning change by the residents of this area for years now. I will be in adamant opposition to any
change to the parkway zoning, and use all my professional resources, my experience and my company resources
to make sure our neighborhood zoning remains unchanged. Commercial applications are not the right use for
this area, it is and always has been zoned residential and estates. The traffic impact study reports (TIS) for this
section go GG Parkway will also show the danger to the public if any commercial development is considered
for this area in question. Please help to keep our residential neighborhood and our children safe from the
dangerous traffic and social impacts of a change of this nature to the current zoning.
During the installation approval process of the I-75 Interchange installation in December of 2007 the
county commissioners adopted language into the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) that
specifically and undeniably restricts any new modifications of improvements of Commercial development
on the stretch of Golden Gate Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd. other than the
existing Center Point Church and The David Lawrence Center. Please review the Master Plan language
that was adopted in 2007 and forward this information to the county commissioners and your supervisors
for review.
Please keep my email on your communication list regarding any items or communication related to and
changes to the GGAMP between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Blvd.
Thank you for your time.
Don Stevenson, President
Don Stevenson Design, Inc.
Lotus Architecture, Inc.
AA#26001786
2950 Tamiami Trail N. Suite 16
Naples, FL 34103
Phone: 239-304-3041
Email: Don@DonStevensonDesign.com
Web: www.DonStevensonDesign.com
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 208 of 220
3
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 209 of 220
1
From:Angela Turner <ajturner37@hotmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, May 10, 2016 3:33 PM
To:TaylorPenny; VanLengenKris
Cc:barbcoen@comcast.net; Dan Dagnall
Subject:GG Master plan proposal. Keep the Estates Residential.
After receiving a letter regarding a meeting planned for tomorrow to possibly re-zone our residential
neighborhood to commercial I submit the following letter and past correspondence. When
Commissioner Taylor was running for election she promised us that this would not happen. I am
hoping that that promise will be kept!
Golden Gate Master Plan. Keep the Estates Residential. Golden Gate Parkway.
We have previously objected to the proposed changes in making the area between Livingston and Santa Barbara with
ANY commercializations.
We built our home in 1989 and unlike Pine Ridge Road there are too many private homes that feed onto the Parkway.
Since exit 105 from 1-75 and the overpass was put in place it is almost impossible to get out of our street as it is,
especially in season. We have already had over 3 fatalities at the end of our street and when I wrote to the County to
request a light be put in place because of the gym and Bingo hall at the end of our street and the alterations to the other
streets that have to utilize ours to make UTurns to head west it is a nightmare. The County flat out said "no, a stop light
would cause more accidents".
We have too many families with young children and children who are now learning to drive to be put in danger. Again,
Golden Gate Estates was built for residential and it was well over 30 years ago. Too many families have taken stake in
their properties and homes to be violated by commercialization.
The investors who are attempting this change are not for the benefit of the residents...it's money for their pockets. The
apartment complex that was just built on the corner of the Parkway and Livingston should prove to be another traffic
nightmare.
Subject: GG Parkway
From: ajturner37@hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 19:37:33 -0400
To: fredcoyle@colliergov.net
Commissioner Coyle,
We, the residents off Golden Gate Parkway, recently received correspondence regarding a request to
re-zone the one mile radius that impacts our home. I wanted to share the most recent correspondence
from them and my response. I am afraid that many of our neighbors did not take into consideration
the initial letter that was sent and have not read it. This is very disturbing that these people are trying
to modify our existing peace and security.
Would you please take the time to read their proposal and let us know if there is anyway they can
actually achieve what they are asking for.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 210 of 220
2
Thank you.
Angela Turner
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: Angela Turner <ajturner37@hotmail.com>
Date: June 4, 2014 at 7:25:06 PM EDT
To: "edwinkoert@msn.com" <edwinkoert@msn.com>
Subject: GG parkway
Not liking this at all. Your proposing to use our street as a major road
and a gas station. I need to know who on 68th Street SW responded to
your initial letter. I already tried for a light, as I mentioned before, and
the County flat out declined. Why would 68th Street SW want to allow
the traffic and further dis-value to our homes, not to mention the
safety of our children.
Pine Ridge extension has all the stuff they need getting off I75. That
part is hideous. We have a beautiful landscaped exit as it is, it doesn't
need to be destroyed by adding anymore commerce to the frontage
and making our homes less attractive.
Closest gas stations are already good enough for those who choose not
to use the Pine Ridge amenities.
Why are you concentrating using 68th and 60th when you don't own
any properties at the "proposed" sites for first modifications. Mr.
Perrine is the realtor for the properties that were acquired and the
owners, as well as the original company that purchased the parcels
that Wildcat I and II, whom you are the trustee, now own, knew that
these were residential. Why is he putting his on the market for 4
million and 2 million with a description that says
"Possible commercial usage, ideal for gas station, church, retail
shopping, etc". Why is he lying. Putting that out as a possibility is
baiting a proposed buyer and misleading!
Your initial mailing would have been thrown away but I had the time to
actually open and read it. Maybe that is why you have not gotten the
responses. I am certain that NO ONE on our street is going to go for
these changes.
Angela Turner
Sent from my iPad
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 211 of 220
3
On Jun 3, 2014, at 4:36 PM, edwinkoert@msn.com wrote:
To all who has responded:
The purpose of our rezoning initiative is not to offend
anyone, but to inform all of the property owners
located within the GGPkwy geographic area of our
activities to have the corridor rezoned to a commercial
application. Believe me, your view "for or against" our
rezoning activity does not offend me. Everyone has an
opinion, and as such, yours, as-well-as your peers,
is just as important and will be considered too.
I am an old Florida Boy from youth - 7-years (the East
coast - Hollywood / Ft. Lauderdale through high school
1958) My homestead address is now a retirement
community off of I-75 Exit 240, known as Sun City
Center. However, I, as-well-as Brent have two
each 35-year old dogs in the hunt fronting GGPkwy,
and as such, I am in the Naples area quite
frequently. My specific properties are on the
West side of I-75, fronting GGpkwy, one on the North
side and one on the South side of GGPkwy. My foot
prints in the Naples area goes back to the early sixties.
To assist you on Brent and my thoughts, I am attaching
two graphic diagrams. The diagrams include all of the
properties fronting the East and West Side of I-75,
including our suggested modifications. The PDF
diagrams can be enlarged by increasing the zoom
percent within the PDF. Also, attached a a letter
containing our thoughts on the development of the
area. You may wish to review them, or discard
them. While reading the WORD document you may
wish to have the diagrams available. We do make the
information available to all.
As each of you are aware, initially, I released 700-
mailings. Currently, 16 of you have responded, and I
thank you for your input.
Sincerely,
Edwin H. Koert
239-289-4420
edwinkoert@msn.com
<GGPkwy - East Side of I-75.pdf>
<GGPkwy - West Side of I-75.pdf>
<GGPkwy -032414 - Hard look at the North and South
Sides.doc>
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 212 of 220
5
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 213 of 220
6
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 214 of 220
7
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 215 of 220
8
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 216 of 220
1
From:vkeyes239@aol.com
Sent:Thursday, June 02, 2016 6:34 PM
To:VanLengenKris
Subject:GGAMP
I wish to make known my opposition to any changes to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan along Golden Gate
Parkway between Livingston Road and Santa Barbara Boulevard. I oppose the commercialization of the
parkway or apartments along the parkway. I am in favor of maintaining the "Estates" residential zoning which
protects the quite, residential character of our neighborhood.
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 217 of 220
1
From:Jim Duffy <jim@jimduffyconstruction.com>
Sent:Friday, October 28, 2016 10:59 AM
To:GGAMPRestudy
Subject:Western Golden Gate Estates Planning Study
To Planning and Zoning Division,
Regarding ongoing study of uses for Golden Gate Parkway from Santa Barbara Avenue to
Livingston Ave:
We request, to maintain rural character of this area, that existing zoning in this area remain in
place as currently in effect and no additional commercial use be permitted.
Thank you,
Gloria L. Cooley
James P. Duffy
2760 68th ST. SW
Naples FL34105
239-272-6881 Cell
Jamespduffy@comcast.net
Right-click or
tap and hold
here to
download
pictures. To
help protect
your privacy,
Outlook
prevented
automatic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
Avast logo
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 218 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 219 of 220
Golden Gate Area Master Plan Restudy White Paper 12/19/2017 Page 220 of 220